If Republicans are racists and sexists then why no anti Condi Rice VP threads?

[code1211]

Did I miss it? Are there really very many "pro" Condi Rice for VP threads?

Frankly I think she'd be a great VP selection but she would certainly overshadow Romney in this year's election.

As for it being a "talking point"; it depends on the topic. The "birther" issue is unique to the first black president and a totally fabricated move by people like you. It wouldn't come up if Obama were white or not named "Barack Obama." Sorry, those are the facts and they are not in dispute.

It also might not have come up if Obama's own publicist had said himself that Obama was Born in Kenya.

'Born in Kenya': Obama's Literary Agent Misidentified His Birthplace in 1991 - ABC News

<snip>
Here's Obama's full bio from the 1991 brochure:

Barack Obama, the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review, was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii. The son of an American anthropologist and a Kenyan finance minister, he attended Columbia University and worked as a financial journalist and editor for Business International Corporation. He served as project coordinator in Harlem for the New York Public Interest Research Group, and was Executive Director of the Developing Communities Project in Chicago's South Side. His commitment to social and racial issues will be evident in his first book, Journeys in Black and White.
<snip>

It's an error and has been repudiated, the records are clear that he was born in Hawaii, and that birferism is a deliberate attempt to overthrow the constitutional process.

Anyone who supports birferism supports anti-American values.

Birferism and birfers are the issues now, and all of it must be investigated for any criminal or civil tort violations.

What was the cause of the error?

 

[code1211]

I have to ask. Are you even sure about what it is you are trying to say?

A racist blames his real shortcomings on the imagined restrictions of another.

What?

The " negative divisiveness" of " the Big O" is a figment of your imagination and an indication that you are intimidated by having an inspirational black man who actually has some authority.

You see a reaction to being discriminated against as the definition of racism.

Ridiculous take.

Do you not see the Big 0 as divisive? I cannot recall a single talk or speech that I have ever listened to by him when he is not blaming the troubles of one group on the activities of another group. That is divisive.

MLK always proclaimed very clearly that if you want something in your life to improve, you need to get to work and improve it.

The Big 0 always proclaims very clearly that the reason there is misery in the lives of some is that there are others who are causing that misery.

Do you see the difference?

MLK was saying that those to whom he spoke were powerful and competent. The Big 0 is telling his sheep that they are powerless and weak. MLK said that all have the power to control their own life. The Big 0 says that his sheep are controlled by others.

Can you name a racist who does not blame the target of his hatred for the ills that afflict him?

Discriminated against? In what way does this manifest itself? In what way does it keep a man of color from rising to the office of POTUS? Once there, he is free to achieve or to fail. If he is judged on the basis of his success or failure, that is not racism, but may be viewed as such by a racist.

At this point in our history, while there is still hate and race often directs that hate, the effects of discrimination are, more often than not, self inflicted.

Too much BS to take. Especially the shit regarding President Obama's speeches. You are clearly not paying attention.

One of us isn't, and that's a fact.

 

[code1211]

If selections are made absent racial considerations, that is just intelligent.

if selections are made due to racial considerations first and all else next, that is racism.

Which party is racist?

This is something that the left has been unable to refute. The left regularly and repeatedly makes decisions based on one race or sex to the point that they have had to redefine racism. You see it on this board here. I have been called a racist because I do not support hiring quotas. That's right, instead of being a racist by making decisions based on race, now racism is NOT taking race into account. The logical fallacy there is breathtaking.



Who has a National BLACK Caucasus? That's not racism because....
Well, no real reason, it not racists because they said so.

Liberals were repeatedly called racist for in any way attacking Herman Cain, during his 15 minutes of political fame.

Do you have a link for this?

 

[code1211]

Seriously, Dems are constantly crying about how racist and sexist Republicans are. But I've yet to even see a thread saying; 'please don't let that ****** bitch be our VP candidate.' Could it be that Republicans aren't racist and sexist?

Liberals crushed Rice with all kinds of racial filth. Including political cartoons depicting her in a most racially bigoted manner.

Cons would never do that to Obama.

I can see this happening, but, seriously, when the guy is doing such a complete job of undermining himself, why interfere?

 

[FA_Q2]

Seriously, Dems are constantly crying about how racist and sexist Republicans are. But I've yet to even see a thread saying; 'please don't let that ****** bitch be our VP candidate.' Could it be that Republicans aren't racist and sexist?

Republicans like Blacks who will lie for them.

And here we have another example of one of the racist left that wants to project their bullshit on others...

 

[code1211]

Liberals were repeatedly called racist for in any way attacking Herman Cain, during his 15 minutes of political fame.

Which was particularly idiotic given the fact Cain was utterly unqualified to be president.

Now hold on here... Cain's claim to the job is really exactly the same as Romney.

That they both understand the business climate and how to fix the economy and how to turn companies around.

And to give Cain credit, he started out as a poor black guy, and not a Rich son of a governor with Daddy's Rolodex to plumb for contacts.

Of course, that's not a qualification to be president. Business and Politics aren't even the same skill set.

But Romney doesn't want to talk about his only political office held... for some reason...

You've apparently never worked within a multi tiered corporation.

 

[OODA_Loop]

My gut tells me the President used being born in "Kenya" at some point much like Mrs. Warren used Native American ancestry and it has come back in both cases.

I would also have played the issue against my distractors exactly as he has now.

 

[code1211]

Did I miss it? Are there really very many "pro" Condi Rice for VP threads?

Frankly I think she'd be a great VP selection but she would certainly overshadow Romney in this year's election.

As for it being a "talking point"; it depends on the topic. The "birther" issue is unique to the first black president and a totally fabricated move by people like you. It wouldn't come up if Obama were white or not named "Barack Obama." Sorry, those are the facts and they are not in dispute.

It also might not have come up if Obama's own publicist had said himself that Obama was Born in Kenya.

'Born in Kenya': Obama's Literary Agent Misidentified His Birthplace in 1991 - ABC News

<snip>
Here's Obama's full bio from the 1991 brochure:

Barack Obama, the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review, was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii. The son of an American anthropologist and a Kenyan finance minister, he attended Columbia University and worked as a financial journalist and editor for Business International Corporation. He served as project coordinator in Harlem for the New York Public Interest Research Group, and was Executive Director of the Developing Communities Project in Chicago's South Side. His commitment to social and racial issues will be evident in his first book, Journeys in Black and White.
<snip>

Not that it ever was a question but the birth certificate came out over a year ago. Yet Stephanie (for one) is still bringing up the question on this forum.

And it only isn't the morons on this board....

To date, Mitt Romney is taking the endorsement of Donald Trump who is still trumpeting this patently false story.

The bad reputation the Republicans have with minorities is well earned.

What have the Republicans done to earn this reputation?

 

[LoneLaugher]

My gut tells me the President used being born in "Kenya" at some point much like Mrs. Warren used Native American ancestry and it has come back in both cases.

I would also have played the issue against my distractors exactly as he has now.

Your gut has a funny way of finding issue with the POTUS.

Do you mean "detractors". And what do you mean by playing the issue?

 

[code1211]

Did I miss it? Are there really very many "pro" Condi Rice for VP threads?

Frankly I think she'd be a great VP selection but she would certainly overshadow Romney in this year's election.

As for it being a "talking point"; it depends on the topic. The "birther" issue is unique to the first black president and a totally fabricated move by people like you. It wouldn't come up if Obama were white or not named "Barack Obama." Sorry, those are the facts and they are not in dispute.

Birther is just as unique as the people that called Bush a Nazi and wanted him killed but just continue basing your asinine generalizations on some random sliver of nuts to the extreme edge of the party....

Was that supposed to be English? Don't bother answering...nothing you say is interesting or factual.

No President in recent memory has ever had to defend their birth records except for this one; the black one. It is a manufactured topic that was never real news but was, never the less settled over a year ago.

Yet...

Romney is appearing with and embracing the endorsement of Donald Trump who is keeping the birther nonsense going. He could disavow this racist stance but he won't.

The reputation the GOP has with minorities is one they are carefully cultivating it would appear.

"The Donald" is not just some guy on the Bowery. He owns half of Atlantic City and if he wants a microphone, there are about 50 media outlets willing to give him one.

Romney is in an awkward position with this. As awkward as the one that the Big 0 is in with his old reverend.

The difference is that The Donald won't shut his yap and the reporters keep reporting on it. The stenographers are not mining the reverend Wright Story for all that it could yield if his former follower were a Conservative.

 

[bitterlyclingin]

When John Bolton resigned as US Ambassador to the United Nations, the last remaining Republican left the State Department. Condie Rice was still there as Secretary of State and George W Bush was still President.

 

[NoNukes]

Seriously, Dems are constantly crying about how racist and sexist Republicans are. But I've yet to even see a thread saying; 'please don't let that ****** bitch be our VP candidate.' Could it be that Republicans aren't racist and sexist?

Republicans like Blacks who will lie for them.

And here we have another example of one of the racist left that wants to project their bullshit on others...

Here is an example of someone who just spouts BS because they have nothing to say.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Your gut has a funny way of finding issue with the POTUS.

Do you mean "detractors". And what do you mean by playing the issue?

I find issue where I see it.

Those who threw it my face.....I would drag it out to make them look foolish, put out questionable proof to make it look more questionable and make the detractors spout off even more. Then my machine would promote the lunacy of it while incubating further seeds of doubt to promote it.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Or. Maybe you'd do what the POTUS did and just ignore it.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Or. Maybe you'd do what the POTUS did and just ignore it.

Presidentially yes. But I would joke and use comedy as means of interjecting it derisively at roasts, dinner parties , targeted audiences...etc.

 

[code1211]

Seriously, Dems are constantly crying about how racist and sexist Republicans are. But I've yet to even see a thread saying; 'please don't let that ****** bitch be our VP candidate.' Could it be that Republicans aren't racist and sexist?

Oh, so you guys would want a pro-affirmative action VP? Or a republican VP who advocates:


Same-sex civil unions, but not marriage. (Feb 2012)
Appointed State Department's first chief diversity officer. (Nov 2011)
Supports civil unions but not gay marriage. (Dec 2010)
Urges respect & sensitivity in same-sex marriage debate. (Jun 2006)
Advocates respect for all when discussing gay marriage. (Jun 2006)
Message of her candidacy: no ceiling for blacks. (Oct 2005)
Supports college affirmative action, as beneficiary herself. (Oct 2005)
National standards rather than local school curriculum. (Feb 2012)
Started after-school program in East Palo Alto.
Strong investment in renewable energy like wind and solar. (Feb 2012)
Reducing our reliance on oil; it distorts world politics.
Listen to other countries before pursuing US interests. (Feb 2012)
Development assistance should support US objectives. (Nov 2011)
Channel Arab Spring into positive development. (Nov 2011)
Limited role for government providing healthcare insurance. (Feb 2012)
Give people freedom to access their own healthcare. (Jun 2005)
Most illegal immigrants should be able to stay in the US. (Feb 2012)
Comprehensive immigration reform, while respecting law. (May 2008)
SOURCE

Except for the strong investment in wind and solar, it all looks fine to me.

Regarding that investment, some investment is fine. Exagerated and perverted in the way that obama has done it is a criminal digression from sanity.

 

[code1211]

Oh, so you guys would want a pro-affirmative action VP? Or a republican VP who advocates:


Same-sex civil unions, but not marriage. (Feb 2012)
Appointed State Department's first chief diversity officer. (Nov 2011)
Supports civil unions but not gay marriage. (Dec 2010)
Urges respect & sensitivity in same-sex marriage debate. (Jun 2006)
Advocates respect for all when discussing gay marriage. (Jun 2006)
Message of her candidacy: no ceiling for blacks. (Oct 2005)
Supports college affirmative action, as beneficiary herself. (Oct 2005)
National standards rather than local school curriculum. (Feb 2012)
Started after-school program in East Palo Alto.
Strong investment in renewable energy like wind and solar. (Feb 2012)
Reducing our reliance on oil; it distorts world politics.
Listen to other countries before pursuing US interests. (Feb 2012)
Development assistance should support US objectives. (Nov 2011)
Channel Arab Spring into positive development. (Nov 2011)
Limited role for government providing healthcare insurance. (Feb 2012)
Give people freedom to access their own healthcare. (Jun 2005)
Most illegal immigrants should be able to stay in the US. (Feb 2012)
Comprehensive immigration reform, while respecting law. (May 2008)
SOURCE

I like some of those positions, but certainly not all of them. The point would be that we judge people on their thoughts and actions and we're not debasing her gender or race.

Do you think that those above positions are conservative? Do you think someone running on those positions would win the republican primary?

What would make those positions Conservative or Liberal is the way they are implemented. The ones highlighted in RED are uniquely Conservative.

 

[code1211]

Seriously, Dems are constantly crying about how racist and sexist Republicans are. But I've yet to even see a thread saying; 'please don't let that ****** bitch be our VP candidate.' Could it be that Republicans aren't racist and sexist?

I don't think the GOP leadership is as radical as some of their coalitions.

Chaney is to the Right of Obama on gay marriage.

The Right hated the Clintons as much as they hate Obama.

Granted, the Southern Strategy (exploiting Civil Rights backlash) is what finally flipped the "Solid South", but I don't think racism is nearly as instrumental to electoral politics as it was back in the 60s and 70s.

That's kind of a lot of general points but okay. I would not pretend that there will never be racist Republicans. But the idea that the typical Republican lawmaker and typical Republican is doing things for racist reasons is absurd. We want people of all colors to embrace our values. Why? Because we believe in our values. We know that everybody doing what's right will make the world a better place.

Democrats on the other hand; they have to rely on us vs. them politics. They will always be making claims of racism b/c without it they can't count on the people they hold down to continue supporting them.

My father in law was a master electrician and a trade union guy who voted Democrat in every election in which he had the opportunity to participate.

He was as virulently racist as any human being could be. I was often left slack jawed after one of his diatribes on the topic. There was no race, religion or social class class from his derision.

It was really quite astonishing.

 

[code1211]

I don't think the GOP leadership is as radical as some of their coalitions.

Chaney is to the Right of Obama on gay marriage.

The Right hated the Clintons as much as they hate Obama.

Granted, the Southern Strategy (exploiting Civil Rights backlash) is what finally flipped the "Solid South", but I don't think racism is nearly as instrumental to electoral politics as it was back in the 60s and 70s.

That's kind of a lot of general points but okay. I would not pretend that there will never be racist Republicans. But the idea that the typical Republican lawmaker and typical Republican is doing things for racist reasons is absurd. We want people of all colors to embrace our values. Why? Because we believe in our values. We know that everybody doing what's right will make the world a better place.

Democrats on the other hand; they have to rely on us vs. them politics. They will always be making claims of racism b/c without it they can't count on the people they hold down to continue supporting them.

Republicans only demand to see the birth certificates of black Presidents....I'm sure thats a coincidence.

How many Presidents have the confusion and the reluctance to explain that this President has? Not a birther here. I just wondered what all the hullabaloo was and did a little digging.

Within a half hour or so I found the justification for the question and the resolution to the question.

Those who assert this concern are of the same ilk that assert that Bain was a company that sought to destroy companies. It's a glib assertion that only the ignorant will accept.

 

[code1211]

Republicans only demand to see the birth certificates of black Presidents....I'm sure thats a coincidence.

Yeah just like we never attack other presidents (Bill Clinton MIGHT disagree with you), plus I like to consider Obama half white, why do you only see one color with this president?

He's a black man. Just ask him. Why do they see any color at all? Or did they do the same thing to Bush and I just missed it?

And we saw John McCains, he had his ready, and just on the birth certificate issue alone, McCain was faster and more efficient, we might have been out of this crappy economy by now.

Maybe. We'd still be in Iraq though; that much is sure.

The Big was following the Bush Arranged SOFA and the iraqi Government demanded the exit of troops.

The Big 0 had very little to do with this.

His administration's bungling near the end combined with the obvious problems of conducting the occupation of a sovereign state helped the demand for removal of troops, but that was more a lack of action, not anything he actually did.

I understand his handicap came down a stroke during that period.