Republicans--are you this intimidated by the thought of the 1st WOMAN President?

[oreo]

The PROFESSIONAL POLITICAL CLASS--Carly crashes the Party!

 

[paulitician]

No.

 

[Mac1958]

After spending a lot of time on national political boards, including this one--plus social media outlets. Some of the comments I have been reading--(including comments from women who are honest enough to say that they're not certain if they're ready for the first woman President)

Easiest prediction of all time: Every disagreement or criticism of Clinton will be "because she's a woman".

Gawd.

Identity Politics is so freakin' tedious. And predictable.
.

Conservatives invite such rhetoric.

Look, every one of them swears that Obama was elected only because he was black. It seems as though they will say the same thing about Clinton except instead of black being the reason, it will be only because she was female.

If liberals shoot back that the criticisms are based only on race or gender; seems to me that turnabout is fair play. It would be really great if all parties stuck to issues instead of attributing motive to the other side's supporters. But we all know better.

Yeah, I get that. But at some point, one "side" or the other is going to have to be the adult and rise above this stuff.

Well, I guess it doesn't HAVE to happen, but it sure would be nice. If you're confident that you're right on the issues (and I think the Democrats are on a majority of them), then taking the high road and just being honest will work too.
.

 

[SwimExpert]

Exactly which candidate do you think is qualified?

Kasich.

 

[9thIDdoc]

"Republicans--are you this intimidated by the thought of the 1st WOMAN President?"

Well no, I think President Palin has a pretty nice ring to it.

 

[GHook93]

After spending a lot of time on national political boards, including this one--plus social media outlets. Some of the comments I have been reading--(including comments from women who are honest enough to say that they're not certain if they're ready for the first woman President) I remind them that if they're turning their backs on the most qualified candidate that is running (Carly Fiorina) that they may get their 1st woman President in Hillary Clinton anyway.

We see Republicans bouncing all around the 15 male candidates like they're on pogo sticks, while ignoring the most qualified candidate in this race, Carly Fiorina. 15 male candidates--(the first time in history this many have entered a Presidential race) to go after ONE woman. The debate stages resembles more of a beauty contest than a political debate Why? Because they're scared to death. Not necessarily because it's Hillary Clinton, but obviously more so--because she is a woman. They would have never entered this many into this race if the DNC popular was a male candidate.

Carly Fiorina is the most brilliant, the most articulate in this race. She can answer any question, she can slice and dice. She handles the left wing media like play dough in her hands. She has been referred to by Charles Krautghammer as "Reaganesk" who also stated she one the 1st debate. She could wipe clean Hillary Clinton in any debate. She wins conservative, independents and cross-over Democrats. IOW she could win it all. Yet yet she is put on IGNORE by all the pogo stick jumpers.

You know if the Republican Party can give us the 1st President that abolished 150 years of slavery in this country, they can sure as dam well give us the 1st woman President. Why would we want Democrats to hold that title?

Carly Fiorina is the only candidate in this race, that has been asked repeatedly if she would accept a Vice Presidential position. Here is her reply to that.

Carly Fiorina Zings Chris Wallace: Ask Me About Being VP When You Ask Everyone Else (Video) - The Gateway Pundit

Um Fiornia is rising like a star in the polls. After the next debate expect her to come in second behind Trump.

So NO we are not afraid of the first woman President.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[candycorn]

After spending a lot of time on national political boards, including this one--plus social media outlets. Some of the comments I have been reading--(including comments from women who are honest enough to say that they're not certain if they're ready for the first woman President)

Easiest prediction of all time: Every disagreement or criticism of Clinton will be "because she's a woman".

Gawd.

Identity Politics is so freakin' tedious. And predictable.
.

Conservatives invite such rhetoric.

Look, every one of them swears that Obama was elected only because he was black. It seems as though they will say the same thing about Clinton except instead of black being the reason, it will be only because she was female.

If liberals shoot back that the criticisms are based only on race or gender; seems to me that turnabout is fair play. It would be really great if all parties stuck to issues instead of attributing motive to the other side's supporters. But we all know better.

Yeah, I get that. But at some point, one "side" or the other is going to have to be the adult and rise above this stuff.

Well, I guess it doesn't HAVE to happen, but it sure would be nice. If you're confident that you're right on the issues (and I think the Democrats are on a majority of them), then taking the high road and just being honest will work too.
.

I tried that. I detailed that Obama's wanting to get out of unwinnable wars was better than McCain's wanting to stay there indefinitely. I detailed how Obama would be a change vs more of the same from McCain. I detailed how Obama bailed out GM instead of letting it fail and Romney wanted them to go through bankruptcy meaning that if you own a GM vehicle; getting factory parts would be difficult if not impossible, few would buy GM vehicles if they didn't know the dealership that sevices it would be around in a couple of years, and how keeping GM would help everyone from the gal on the assembly line to the salesperson at a dealership. All I got was "It was a favor to unions". Meaning that the RWNJs ignored that most of those who directly benefitted; the dealership mechanics, sales persons, porters, the guy who drives the trucks from the rail yard delivering the cars, the train company that delivers the cars to the depot, the spin off industries that sell the incredibly bright lights at every dealership, the guys who sell the car lots the balloons, the helium folks, all the way down to the finance and admin folks who never been in a union hall also kept their jobs.

It all fell on deaf ears.

So just to rattle the cages of the RWNJs here, I simply resort to the "you hate him because he's black" from time to time. On the rare ocassion I get a RW member who can have an honest conversation, I enjoy driving them to school. But that hasn't happened lately.

And by the way; it's not a "chicken and the egg" argument. Obama was elected because he was the better candidate, had better ideas, and ran a superior campaign. The excuses came up after that (i.e. his election was based on race). The return fire only came after the opening shots.

 

[oreo]

No.

Here is Carly Fiorina telling us the truth on Anchor Babies. Trump and Carson are out there campaigning as if they can sit down at a table and fix the U.S. Constitution with a swipe of a pen. In REALITY, Presidents have absolutely nothing to do with changing or adding Constitutional amendments.

How is the Constitution amended?
Article V of the Constitution prescribes how an amendment can become a part of the Constitution. While there are two ways, only one has ever been used. All 27 Amendments have been ratified after two-thirds of the House and Senate approve of the proposal and send it to the states for a vote. Then, three-fourths of the states must affirm the proposed Amendment.
Constitutional Amendments - How is the Constitution amended?

 

[tyroneweaver]

Carly Fiorina isnt qualified to run a car wash. Hillary Clinton is qualifed to run a chain gang, as long as she's part of it.

So Rabbi, when you due back in Bethlehem?

 

[MarcATL]

After spending a lot of time on national political boards, including this one--plus social media outlets. Some of the comments I have been reading--(including comments from women who are honest enough to say that they're not certain if they're ready for the first woman President)

Easiest prediction of all time: Every disagreement or criticism of Clinton will be "because she's a woman".

Gawd.

Identity Politics is so freakin' tedious. And predictable.
.

Conservatives invite such rhetoric.

Look, every one of them swears that Obama was elected only because he was black. It seems as though they will say the same thing about Clinton except instead of black being the reason, it will be only because she was female.

If liberals shoot back that the criticisms are based only on race or gender; seems to me that turnabout is fair play. It would be really great if all parties stuck to issues instead of attributing motive to the other side's supporters. But we all know better.

Yeah, I get that. But at some point, one "side" or the other is going to have to be the adult and rise above this stuff.

Well, I guess it doesn't HAVE to happen, but it sure would be nice. If you're confident that you're right on the issues (and I think the Democrats are on a majority of them), then taking the high road and just being honest will work too.
.

I tried that. I detailed that Obama's wanting to get out of unwinnable wars was better than McCain's wanting to stay there indefinitely. I detailed how Obama would be a change vs more of the same from McCain. I detailed how Obama bailed out GM instead of letting it fail and Romney wanted them to go through bankruptcy meaning that if you own a GM vehicle; getting factory parts would be difficult if not impossible, few would buy GM vehicles if they didn't know the dealership that sevices it would be around in a couple of years, and how keeping GM would help everyone from the gal on the assembly line to the salesperson at a dealership. All I got was "It was a favor to unions". Meaning that the RWNJs ignored that most of those who directly benefitted; the dealership mechanics, sales persons, porters, the guy who drives the trucks from the rail yard delivering the cars, the train company that delivers the cars to the depot, the spin off industries that sell the incredibly bright lights at every dealership, the guys who sell the car lots the balloons, the helium folks, all the way down to the finance and admin folks who never been in a union hall also kept their jobs.

It all fell on deaf ears.

So just to rattle the cages of the RWNJs here, I simply resort to the "you hate him because he's black" from time to time. On the rare ocassion I get a RW member who can have an honest conversation, I enjoy driving them to school. But that hasn't happened lately.

And by the way; it's not a "chicken and the egg" argument. Obama was elected because he was the better candidate, had better ideas, and ran a superior campaign. The excuses came up after that (i.e. his election was based on race). The return fire only came after the opening shots.

Powerful.

Sent from my SM-N910T3 using Tapatalk

 

[oreo]

Carly Fiorina isnt qualified to run a car wash. Hillary Clinton is qualifed to run a chain gang, as long as she's part of it.

So Rabbi, when you due back in Bethlehem?

Well you've got a big mouth--so why don't you tell us who you think is QUALIFIED? i hope you're not going to reference "community organizers."

 

[candycorn]

Carly Fiorina isnt qualified to run a car wash. Hillary Clinton is qualifed to run a chain gang, as long as she's part of it.

So Rabbi, when you due back in Bethlehem?

Well you've got a big mouth--so why don't you tell us who you think is QUALIFIED? i hope you're not going to reference "community organizers."

Do you really want someone's first government job to be President of the United States?

 

[Mac1958]

After spending a lot of time on national political boards, including this one--plus social media outlets. Some of the comments I have been reading--(including comments from women who are honest enough to say that they're not certain if they're ready for the first woman President)

Easiest prediction of all time: Every disagreement or criticism of Clinton will be "because she's a woman".

Gawd.

Identity Politics is so freakin' tedious. And predictable.
.

Conservatives invite such rhetoric.

Look, every one of them swears that Obama was elected only because he was black. It seems as though they will say the same thing about Clinton except instead of black being the reason, it will be only because she was female.

If liberals shoot back that the criticisms are based only on race or gender; seems to me that turnabout is fair play. It would be really great if all parties stuck to issues instead of attributing motive to the other side's supporters. But we all know better.

Yeah, I get that. But at some point, one "side" or the other is going to have to be the adult and rise above this stuff.

Well, I guess it doesn't HAVE to happen, but it sure would be nice. If you're confident that you're right on the issues (and I think the Democrats are on a majority of them), then taking the high road and just being honest will work too.
.

I tried that. I detailed that Obama's wanting to get out of unwinnable wars was better than McCain's wanting to stay there indefinitely. I detailed how Obama would be a change vs more of the same from McCain. I detailed how Obama bailed out GM instead of letting it fail and Romney wanted them to go through bankruptcy meaning that if you own a GM vehicle; getting factory parts would be difficult if not impossible, few would buy GM vehicles if they didn't know the dealership that sevices it would be around in a couple of years, and how keeping GM would help everyone from the gal on the assembly line to the salesperson at a dealership. All I got was "It was a favor to unions". Meaning that the RWNJs ignored that most of those who directly benefitted; the dealership mechanics, sales persons, porters, the guy who drives the trucks from the rail yard delivering the cars, the train company that delivers the cars to the depot, the spin off industries that sell the incredibly bright lights at every dealership, the guys who sell the car lots the balloons, the helium folks, all the way down to the finance and admin folks who never been in a union hall also kept their jobs.

It all fell on deaf ears.

So just to rattle the cages of the RWNJs here, I simply resort to the "you hate him because he's black" from time to time. On the rare ocassion I get a RW member who can have an honest conversation, I enjoy driving them to school. But that hasn't happened lately.

And by the way; it's not a "chicken and the egg" argument. Obama was elected because he was the better candidate, had better ideas, and ran a superior campaign. The excuses came up after that (i.e. his election was based on race). The return fire only came after the opening shots.

Well, I'm glad to see you say "...so just to rattle the cages of the RWNJs here, I simply resort to the "you hate him because he's black" from time to time".

This is obviously your choice, but you must know what it does. While there is, no doubt, some old fashioned racism out there, there is a great deal of frustration from perfectly decent people who disagree with the guy politically and also have to deal with having their cage rattled. To them, being called a racist isn't just a poke, it has real meaning.

Surely you know that calling someone a "racist" or inferring to any degree that someone only disagrees with someone else because they're black (and that happens all the time here) doesn't just derail the conversation, which is bad enough on such a critical issue, but it exacerbates, it inflames, it really does make things worse.

And this happens with such frequency that I have to sincerely wonder whether people who regularly play that game truly have any interest in improving race relations at all. And by the way, this ironically comes from people who display such great sensitivity when it comes to words that "offend". That one is clearly a one-way street.
.

 

[The Rabbi]

Carly Fiorina isnt qualified to run a car wash. Hillary Clinton is qualifed to run a chain gang, as long as she's part of it.

So Rabbi, when you due back in Bethlehem?

Aww did I hurt your feelings by pointing out your candidate is a total failure who should be slinging beer in a bar somewhere?
Good.

 

[MarcATL]

After spending a lot of time on national political boards, including this one--plus social media outlets. Some of the comments I have been reading--(including comments from women who are honest enough to say that they're not certain if they're ready for the first woman President)

Easiest prediction of all time: Every disagreement or criticism of Clinton will be "because she's a woman".

Gawd.

Identity Politics is so freakin' tedious. And predictable.
.

Conservatives invite such rhetoric.

Look, every one of them swears that Obama was elected only because he was black. It seems as though they will say the same thing about Clinton except instead of black being the reason, it will be only because she was female.

If liberals shoot back that the criticisms are based only on race or gender; seems to me that turnabout is fair play. It would be really great if all parties stuck to issues instead of attributing motive to the other side's supporters. But we all know better.

Yeah, I get that. But at some point, one "side" or the other is going to have to be the adult and rise above this stuff.

Well, I guess it doesn't HAVE to happen, but it sure would be nice. If you're confident that you're right on the issues (and I think the Democrats are on a majority of them), then taking the high road and just being honest will work too.
.

I tried that. I detailed that Obama's wanting to get out of unwinnable wars was better than McCain's wanting to stay there indefinitely. I detailed how Obama would be a change vs more of the same from McCain. I detailed how Obama bailed out GM instead of letting it fail and Romney wanted them to go through bankruptcy meaning that if you own a GM vehicle; getting factory parts would be difficult if not impossible, few would buy GM vehicles if they didn't know the dealership that sevices it would be around in a couple of years, and how keeping GM would help everyone from the gal on the assembly line to the salesperson at a dealership. All I got was "It was a favor to unions". Meaning that the RWNJs ignored that most of those who directly benefitted; the dealership mechanics, sales persons, porters, the guy who drives the trucks from the rail yard delivering the cars, the train company that delivers the cars to the depot, the spin off industries that sell the incredibly bright lights at every dealership, the guys who sell the car lots the balloons, the helium folks, all the way down to the finance and admin folks who never been in a union hall also kept their jobs.

It all fell on deaf ears.

So just to rattle the cages of the RWNJs here, I simply resort to the "you hate him because he's black" from time to time. On the rare ocassion I get a RW member who can have an honest conversation, I enjoy driving them to school. But that hasn't happened lately.

And by the way; it's not a "chicken and the egg" argument. Obama was elected because he was the better candidate, had better ideas, and ran a superior campaign. The excuses came up after that (i.e. his election was based on race). The return fire only came after the opening shots.

Well, I'm glad to see you say "...so just to rattle the cages of the RWNJs here, I simply resort to the "you hate him because he's black" from time to time".

This is obviously your choice, but you must know what it does. While there is, no doubt, some old fashioned racism out there, there is a great deal of frustration from perfectly decent people who disagree with the guy politically and also have to deal with having their cage rattled. To them, being called a racist isn't just a poke, it has real meaning.

Surely you know that calling someone a "racist" or inferring to any degree that someone only disagrees with someone else because they're black (and that happens all the time here) doesn't just derail the conversation, which is bad enough on such a critical issue, but it exacerbates, it inflames, it really does make things worse.

And this happens with such frequency that I have to sincerely wonder whether people who regularly play that game truly have any interest in improving race relations at all. And by the way, this ironically comes from people who display such great sensitivity when it comes to words that "offend". That one is clearly a one-way street.
.

Only in the addled rightwing Republican brain is being called racist WORSE than actual racism.

Sent from my SM-N910T3 using Tapatalk

 

[Mac1958]

Easiest prediction of all time: Every disagreement or criticism of Clinton will be "because she's a woman".

Gawd.

Identity Politics is so freakin' tedious. And predictable.
.

Conservatives invite such rhetoric.

Look, every one of them swears that Obama was elected only because he was black. It seems as though they will say the same thing about Clinton except instead of black being the reason, it will be only because she was female.

If liberals shoot back that the criticisms are based only on race or gender; seems to me that turnabout is fair play. It would be really great if all parties stuck to issues instead of attributing motive to the other side's supporters. But we all know better.

Yeah, I get that. But at some point, one "side" or the other is going to have to be the adult and rise above this stuff.

Well, I guess it doesn't HAVE to happen, but it sure would be nice. If you're confident that you're right on the issues (and I think the Democrats are on a majority of them), then taking the high road and just being honest will work too.
.

I tried that. I detailed that Obama's wanting to get out of unwinnable wars was better than McCain's wanting to stay there indefinitely. I detailed how Obama would be a change vs more of the same from McCain. I detailed how Obama bailed out GM instead of letting it fail and Romney wanted them to go through bankruptcy meaning that if you own a GM vehicle; getting factory parts would be difficult if not impossible, few would buy GM vehicles if they didn't know the dealership that sevices it would be around in a couple of years, and how keeping GM would help everyone from the gal on the assembly line to the salesperson at a dealership. All I got was "It was a favor to unions". Meaning that the RWNJs ignored that most of those who directly benefitted; the dealership mechanics, sales persons, porters, the guy who drives the trucks from the rail yard delivering the cars, the train company that delivers the cars to the depot, the spin off industries that sell the incredibly bright lights at every dealership, the guys who sell the car lots the balloons, the helium folks, all the way down to the finance and admin folks who never been in a union hall also kept their jobs.

It all fell on deaf ears.

So just to rattle the cages of the RWNJs here, I simply resort to the "you hate him because he's black" from time to time. On the rare ocassion I get a RW member who can have an honest conversation, I enjoy driving them to school. But that hasn't happened lately.

And by the way; it's not a "chicken and the egg" argument. Obama was elected because he was the better candidate, had better ideas, and ran a superior campaign. The excuses came up after that (i.e. his election was based on race). The return fire only came after the opening shots.

Well, I'm glad to see you say "...so just to rattle the cages of the RWNJs here, I simply resort to the "you hate him because he's black" from time to time".

This is obviously your choice, but you must know what it does. While there is, no doubt, some old fashioned racism out there, there is a great deal of frustration from perfectly decent people who disagree with the guy politically and also have to deal with having their cage rattled. To them, being called a racist isn't just a poke, it has real meaning.

Surely you know that calling someone a "racist" or inferring to any degree that someone only disagrees with someone else because they're black (and that happens all the time here) doesn't just derail the conversation, which is bad enough on such a critical issue, but it exacerbates, it inflames, it really does make things worse.

And this happens with such frequency that I have to sincerely wonder whether people who regularly play that game truly have any interest in improving race relations at all. And by the way, this ironically comes from people who display such great sensitivity when it comes to words that "offend". That one is clearly a one-way street.
.

Only in the addled rightwing Republican brain is being called racist WORSE than actual racism.

Are you quoting me?

Yes or no?
.

 

[MarcATL]

Conservatives invite such rhetoric.

Look, every one of them swears that Obama was elected only because he was black. It seems as though they will say the same thing about Clinton except instead of black being the reason, it will be only because she was female.

If liberals shoot back that the criticisms are based only on race or gender; seems to me that turnabout is fair play. It would be really great if all parties stuck to issues instead of attributing motive to the other side's supporters. But we all know better.

Yeah, I get that. But at some point, one "side" or the other is going to have to be the adult and rise above this stuff.

Well, I guess it doesn't HAVE to happen, but it sure would be nice. If you're confident that you're right on the issues (and I think the Democrats are on a majority of them), then taking the high road and just being honest will work too.
.

I tried that. I detailed that Obama's wanting to get out of unwinnable wars was better than McCain's wanting to stay there indefinitely. I detailed how Obama would be a change vs more of the same from McCain. I detailed how Obama bailed out GM instead of letting it fail and Romney wanted them to go through bankruptcy meaning that if you own a GM vehicle; getting factory parts would be difficult if not impossible, few would buy GM vehicles if they didn't know the dealership that sevices it would be around in a couple of years, and how keeping GM would help everyone from the gal on the assembly line to the salesperson at a dealership. All I got was "It was a favor to unions". Meaning that the RWNJs ignored that most of those who directly benefitted; the dealership mechanics, sales persons, porters, the guy who drives the trucks from the rail yard delivering the cars, the train company that delivers the cars to the depot, the spin off industries that sell the incredibly bright lights at every dealership, the guys who sell the car lots the balloons, the helium folks, all the way down to the finance and admin folks who never been in a union hall also kept their jobs.

It all fell on deaf ears.

So just to rattle the cages of the RWNJs here, I simply resort to the "you hate him because he's black" from time to time. On the rare ocassion I get a RW member who can have an honest conversation, I enjoy driving them to school. But that hasn't happened lately.

And by the way; it's not a "chicken and the egg" argument. Obama was elected because he was the better candidate, had better ideas, and ran a superior campaign. The excuses came up after that (i.e. his election was based on race). The return fire only came after the opening shots.

Well, I'm glad to see you say "...so just to rattle the cages of the RWNJs here, I simply resort to the "you hate him because he's black" from time to time".

This is obviously your choice, but you must know what it does. While there is, no doubt, some old fashioned racism out there, there is a great deal of frustration from perfectly decent people who disagree with the guy politically and also have to deal with having their cage rattled. To them, being called a racist isn't just a poke, it has real meaning.

Surely you know that calling someone a "racist" or inferring to any degree that someone only disagrees with someone else because they're black (and that happens all the time here) doesn't just derail the conversation, which is bad enough on such a critical issue, but it exacerbates, it inflames, it really does make things worse.

And this happens with such frequency that I have to sincerely wonder whether people who regularly play that game truly have any interest in improving race relations at all. And by the way, this ironically comes from people who display such great sensitivity when it comes to words that "offend". That one is clearly a one-way street.
.

Only in the addled rightwing Republican brain is being called racist WORSE than actual racism.

Are you quoting me?

Yes or no?
.

Yep.

Sent from my SM-N910T3 using Tapatalk

 

[Mac1958]

Yeah, I get that. But at some point, one "side" or the other is going to have to be the adult and rise above this stuff.

Well, I guess it doesn't HAVE to happen, but it sure would be nice. If you're confident that you're right on the issues (and I think the Democrats are on a majority of them), then taking the high road and just being honest will work too.
.

I tried that. I detailed that Obama's wanting to get out of unwinnable wars was better than McCain's wanting to stay there indefinitely. I detailed how Obama would be a change vs more of the same from McCain. I detailed how Obama bailed out GM instead of letting it fail and Romney wanted them to go through bankruptcy meaning that if you own a GM vehicle; getting factory parts would be difficult if not impossible, few would buy GM vehicles if they didn't know the dealership that sevices it would be around in a couple of years, and how keeping GM would help everyone from the gal on the assembly line to the salesperson at a dealership. All I got was "It was a favor to unions". Meaning that the RWNJs ignored that most of those who directly benefitted; the dealership mechanics, sales persons, porters, the guy who drives the trucks from the rail yard delivering the cars, the train company that delivers the cars to the depot, the spin off industries that sell the incredibly bright lights at every dealership, the guys who sell the car lots the balloons, the helium folks, all the way down to the finance and admin folks who never been in a union hall also kept their jobs.

It all fell on deaf ears.

So just to rattle the cages of the RWNJs here, I simply resort to the "you hate him because he's black" from time to time. On the rare ocassion I get a RW member who can have an honest conversation, I enjoy driving them to school. But that hasn't happened lately.

And by the way; it's not a "chicken and the egg" argument. Obama was elected because he was the better candidate, had better ideas, and ran a superior campaign. The excuses came up after that (i.e. his election was based on race). The return fire only came after the opening shots.

Well, I'm glad to see you say "...so just to rattle the cages of the RWNJs here, I simply resort to the "you hate him because he's black" from time to time".

This is obviously your choice, but you must know what it does. While there is, no doubt, some old fashioned racism out there, there is a great deal of frustration from perfectly decent people who disagree with the guy politically and also have to deal with having their cage rattled. To them, being called a racist isn't just a poke, it has real meaning.

Surely you know that calling someone a "racist" or inferring to any degree that someone only disagrees with someone else because they're black (and that happens all the time here) doesn't just derail the conversation, which is bad enough on such a critical issue, but it exacerbates, it inflames, it really does make things worse.

And this happens with such frequency that I have to sincerely wonder whether people who regularly play that game truly have any interest in improving race relations at all. And by the way, this ironically comes from people who display such great sensitivity when it comes to words that "offend". That one is clearly a one-way street.
.

Only in the addled rightwing Republican brain is being called racist WORSE than actual racism.

Are you quoting me?

Yes or no?
.

Yep.

Ah, so you're a blatant liar.

Plenty of that here, no big deal.
.

 

[MarcATL]

I tried that. I detailed that Obama's wanting to get out of unwinnable wars was better than McCain's wanting to stay there indefinitely. I detailed how Obama would be a change vs more of the same from McCain. I detailed how Obama bailed out GM instead of letting it fail and Romney wanted them to go through bankruptcy meaning that if you own a GM vehicle; getting factory parts would be difficult if not impossible, few would buy GM vehicles if they didn't know the dealership that sevices it would be around in a couple of years, and how keeping GM would help everyone from the gal on the assembly line to the salesperson at a dealership. All I got was "It was a favor to unions". Meaning that the RWNJs ignored that most of those who directly benefitted; the dealership mechanics, sales persons, porters, the guy who drives the trucks from the rail yard delivering the cars, the train company that delivers the cars to the depot, the spin off industries that sell the incredibly bright lights at every dealership, the guys who sell the car lots the balloons, the helium folks, all the way down to the finance and admin folks who never been in a union hall also kept their jobs.

It all fell on deaf ears.

So just to rattle the cages of the RWNJs here, I simply resort to the "you hate him because he's black" from time to time. On the rare ocassion I get a RW member who can have an honest conversation, I enjoy driving them to school. But that hasn't happened lately.

And by the way; it's not a "chicken and the egg" argument. Obama was elected because he was the better candidate, had better ideas, and ran a superior campaign. The excuses came up after that (i.e. his election was based on race). The return fire only came after the opening shots.

Well, I'm glad to see you say "...so just to rattle the cages of the RWNJs here, I simply resort to the "you hate him because he's black" from time to time".

This is obviously your choice, but you must know what it does. While there is, no doubt, some old fashioned racism out there, there is a great deal of frustration from perfectly decent people who disagree with the guy politically and also have to deal with having their cage rattled. To them, being called a racist isn't just a poke, it has real meaning.

Surely you know that calling someone a "racist" or inferring to any degree that someone only disagrees with someone else because they're black (and that happens all the time here) doesn't just derail the conversation, which is bad enough on such a critical issue, but it exacerbates, it inflames, it really does make things worse.

And this happens with such frequency that I have to sincerely wonder whether people who regularly play that game truly have any interest in improving race relations at all. And by the way, this ironically comes from people who display such great sensitivity when it comes to words that "offend". That one is clearly a one-way street.
.

Only in the addled rightwing Republican brain is being called racist WORSE than actual racism.

Are you quoting me?

Yes or no?
.

Yep.

Ah, so you're a blatant liar.

Plenty of that here, no big deal.
.

What's the lie exactly?

Sent from my SM-N910T3 using Tapatalk

 

[Mac1958]

Well, I'm glad to see you say "...so just to rattle the cages of the RWNJs here, I simply resort to the "you hate him because he's black" from time to time".

This is obviously your choice, but you must know what it does. While there is, no doubt, some old fashioned racism out there, there is a great deal of frustration from perfectly decent people who disagree with the guy politically and also have to deal with having their cage rattled. To them, being called a racist isn't just a poke, it has real meaning.

Surely you know that calling someone a "racist" or inferring to any degree that someone only disagrees with someone else because they're black (and that happens all the time here) doesn't just derail the conversation, which is bad enough on such a critical issue, but it exacerbates, it inflames, it really does make things worse.

And this happens with such frequency that I have to sincerely wonder whether people who regularly play that game truly have any interest in improving race relations at all. And by the way, this ironically comes from people who display such great sensitivity when it comes to words that "offend". That one is clearly a one-way street.
.

Only in the addled rightwing Republican brain is being called racist WORSE than actual racism.

Are you quoting me?

Yes or no?
.

Yep.

Ah, so you're a blatant liar.

Plenty of that here, no big deal.
.

What's the lie exactly?

Sent from my SM-N910T3 using Tapatalk

Post 195.

You lied.
.