I think it's interesting...

[Yonivore]

...that none of the resident liberals in this forum are trying to carry Pelosi's water on how Obama's opponents are fomenting violence.

Good for you.

I think it fell flat elsewhere, as well. Except of course for Chris Matthews who tried to make the case it was right-wing rhetoric that drove Lee Harvey Oswald -- a lefty communist sympathizer -- to assassinate President Kennedy.

[Winehole23]

Unsurprising. I can't remember the last time anyone spoke up for Pelosi in this forum. I don't even think there was a first time. Not in the last year, at least.

Can you think of an instance, Yonivore?

[Yonivore]

Unsurprising. I can't remember the last time anyone spoke up for Pelosi in this forum. I don't even think there was a first time. Not in the last year, at least.

Can you think of an instance, Yonivore?
Nope but, since everyone was so quick to jump on the "you're a racist if you oppose Obama" and since everyone is bending into pretzels to defend ACORN, I thought it would be a knee-jerk reaction to pimp Pelosi's "opponents are going to get someone killed" rhetoric.

I'm glad it's not selling.

[Winehole23]

This is more prolepsis. You try to anticipate the objections of the other side in order to make them appear ridiculous, but a good deal of the time you are raising objections to complaints not made by actual posters in this forum.
.
A good example is Obama/racism. It hardly arises here apart from your proleptic dismissals of it. So we are left with the somewhat incongruous result that Yonivore is the main perpetrator of the meme that dissent from Obama is racist.

You, in the main, are responsible for the existence of this meme in SpursTalk.

Nice work.

[Yonivore]

This is more prolepsis. You try to anticipate the objections of the other side in order to make them appear ridiculous, but a good deal of the time you are raising objections to complaints not made by actual posters in this forum.
.
A good example is Obama/racism. It hardly arises here apart from your proleptic dismissals of it. So we are left with the somewhat incongruous result that Yonivore is the main perpetrator of the meme that dissent from Obama is racist.

You, in the main, are responsible for the existence of this meme in SpursTalk.

Nice work.
You must not pay too much attention to clambake...

Granted, he's only one poster but...I don't see anyone opposing the proposition raised by the left, in the media, either.

This forum isn't an isolated universe, we all bring premises from the media and other sources, into the room, and discuss them. The "opponents to Obama are racists" meme was begun by the left -- after imputing racism on Joe Wilson's "you lie" outburst -- it got when it was pimped to media by the Congressional left and then, that old windbag Jimmy Carter starts flatulating over it.

Forgive me for discussing a very relevant issue that was dominating the media at the time. Frankly, I think there were more than just clambake in here defending the notion, ridiculing me, and basically ignoring the obvious -- that it was as empty a claim as is Pelosi's current tack of claiming our opposition is going to lead to violence.

So, for the record, how much of the opposition to Obama and his policies do you attribute to racism?

[hope4dopes]

this is more prolepsis. You try to anticipate the objections of the other side in order to make them appear ridiculous, but a good deal of the time you are raising objections to complaints not made by actual posters in this forum.
.
A good example is obama/racism. It hardly arises here apart from your proleptic dismissals of it. So we are left with the somewhat incongruous result that yonivore is the main perpetrator of the meme that dissent from obama is racist.

You, in the main, are responsible for the existence of this meme in spurstalk.

Nice work. you lie

[George Gervin's Afro]

you lie

prove he's a liar or you're lying.

[Winehole23]

So, for the record, how much of the opposition to Obama and his policies do you attribute to racism?Not insignificant, but nowhere near a majority.

Stab in the dark, right?

I don't think it can be quantified.

[Winehole23]

you lieJust look at who starts the threads.

[Yonivore]

Not insignificant, but nowhere near a majority.

Stab in the dark, right?

I don't think it can be quantified.
You're right, it can't. But, what can be quantified is the percentage of Americans who think it has anything to do with racism.

Rasmussen put that at 12% the other day.

12%...that's fewer than even exist in the nutroots base of Democrats. So, not even all the rabid left believe it has anything to do with racism...

So, if you think it has anything to do with racism, you're in the 12%.

[hope4dopes]

Nope but, since everyone was so quick to jump on the "you're a racist if you oppose Obama" and since everyone is bending into pretzels to defend ACORN, I thought it would be a knee-jerk reaction to pimp Pelosi's "opponents are going to get someone killed" rhetoric.

I'm glad it's not selling.

I think they take their lead from the whitehouse.The whitehouse instead of debating the issues or recognizing actually who runs the country..just deny...and deny...and deny. There is no real political dissent in America we all love the president and his regime, Oh there are an incredibelly small band of RACISTS NAZIS,but if the president ignores them,and the Soros DNC ignores them,and if most importantly the Media ignores them, they just don't exist.Good luck trying to get that boat to float.
I think whinehole, and Lngrr. view themselves as the more polished of these clones and evaporate when the whitehouse's more clumsy and brutal repressions unfold. The chumps, and clams, and shastas are more the graffitti spraying brownshirt types who'll defend any and all,from the "it's patriotic to turn in your neighbor hotlines" to the "underage latina sex slave traffic is good for the American economy."

[Winehole23]

You must not pay too much attention to clambake...I don't.


Granted, he's only one poster but...I don't see anyone opposing the proposition raised by the left, in the media, either.You can also take that as posters being uninterested in the proposition, but I can see why you'd just assume people are being willfully perverse. It feeds your paranoia.


This forum isn't an isolated universe, we all bring premises from the media and other sources, into the room, and discuss them. The "opponents to Obama are racists" meme was begun by the left -- after imputing racism on Joe Wilson's "you lie" outburst -- it got when it was pimped to media by the Congressional left and then, that old windbag Jimmy Carter starts flatulating over it.Not sure I agree with your etiology. The meme goes all the way back to the campaign. You've been raising it here for at least a year now. Take off the blinders.


Forgive me for discussing a very relevant issue that was dominating the media at the time.Discussing? Spoiling for a fight is more like it.

It isn't dominating the media now. And it didn't dominate but for maybe a day or two. You're the one keeping it alive in SpursTalk now. I don't think you can stop.

You like to characterize anyone who disagrees with you as a brainwashed cultist. This is mainly what's this is about. You take some extreme case and impute it to everybody who diagrees with you.

Dishonest.


Frankly, I think there were more than just clambake in here defending the notion, ridiculing me, and basically ignoring the obvious -- that it was as empty a claim as is Pelosi's current tack of claiming our opposition is going to lead to violence.Weak. Name the names. I bet there aren't more than 3 or 4 posters here who fit the mold.

[Nbadan]

...Pelosi can suck my right nut....she lost my support when she refused to go after the Bush Administration for starting an illegal war of aggression...

[boutons_deux]

Pelosi's statement is irrelevant.

The hate, threats, gun-carrying, the evangelical End Times fantasies, God-hates-non-righties, and demagogery from the right will very probably end up in blood.

[Winehole23]

You're right, it can't. But, what can be quantified is the percentage of Americans who think it has anything to do with racism.

Rasmussen put that at 12% the other day.

12%...that's fewer than even exist in the nutroots base of Democrats. So, not even all the rabid left believe it has anything to do with racism...

So, if you think it has anything to do with racism, you're in the 12%.Disngenuous.

Just because I think racism can't be ruled out generically doesn't mean I think it applies to any particular case.

You're using indefinite pronoun reference to introduce claims I never made.

You can't help not cheating can you?

[Winehole23]

I think they take their lead from the whitehouse.The whitehouse instead of debating the issues or recognizing actually who runs the country..just deny...and deny...and deny. There is no real political dissent in America we all love the president and his regime, Oh there are an incredibelly small band of RACISTS NAZIS,but if the president ignores them,and the Soros DNC ignores them,and if most importantly the Media ignores them, they just don't exist.Good luck trying to get that boat to float.
I think whinehole, and Lngrr. view themselves as the more polished of these clones and evaporate when the whitehouse's more clumsy and brutal repressions unfold. The chumps, and clams, and shastas are more the graffitti spraying brownshirt types who'll defend any and all,from the "it's patriotic to turn in your neighbor hotlines" to the "underage latina sex slave traffic is good for the American economy."In just a few months, micca has gone from doing bad impersonations of what other posters say, to unconscious parodies of himself.

Nice work, micca!

[Yonivore]

Nevermind...

You can believe I pull issues out of my ass to post in here if you want, but, if I've raised the issue before it's because it was an issue in the media...

And, the current iteration lasted more than a week...beginning when Maureen Dowd got the bright idea to impute the word "boy" on the end of Wilson's two-word outburst and lasting through when Jimmy Carter rattled his old decrepit bones about it.

I was merely pointing out, by starting this thread, that the "opposition breeds violence" meme didn't seem to get the same boost. It was encouraging...

[Nbadan]

Pelosi's statement is irrelevant.

The hate, threats, gun-carrying, the evangelical End Times fantasies, God-hates-non-righties, and demagogery from the right will very probably end up in blood.

No shit...just wait till we creep closer to 2012....the wing-nuts are gonna break this shit up....I'm telling you, that's their goal - they want to succeed and create Jesus-land in the South so that when the Lord comes, he doesn't have to see them living along-side *shhh*liberals*shhh*...

[Yonivore]

Disngenuous.

Just because I think racism can't be ruled out generically doesn't mean I think it applies to any particular case.

You're using indefinite pronoun reference to introduce claims I never made.

You can't help not cheating can you?


Not insignificant, but nowhere near a majority.

Stab in the dark, right?

I don't think it can be quantified.
My question was how much of the opposition to Obama is racially motivated and that was your answer. I wasn't speaking about any particular case. I was speaking in generalities and this is what you said.

That you believe is isn't insignificant is telling. Don't you think? I do. I think it puts you in the 12% that believe the opposition to Obama is -- to some degree -- racially motivated.

How is that cheating?

[Winehole23]

The fact remains that here in SpursTalk nobody promotes the meme that dissent from Obama is racist so much as you.

It isn't even a contest.

And so far, you are the only promoter of the "opposition breeds violence" meme. (edit: we have some entrants below)

[Yonivore]

No shit...just wait till we creep closer to 2012....the wing-nuts are gonna break this shit up....I'm telling you, that's their goal - they want to succeed and create Jesus-land in the South so that when the Lord comes, he doesn't have to see them living along-side *shhh*liberals*shhh*...
Nevermind the only acts of violence to have occurred, thus far, have been committed by SEIU thugs against a town hall protestor, and some -- as yet -- unidentified Obama supporter that bit the finger off of another town hall protestor.

Nbadan, you're whack.

[Nbadan]

...bit the finger off a tea-bagger who punched him in the face....

[Yonivore]

The fact remains that here in SpursTalk nobody promotes the meme that dissent from Obama is racist so much as you.
The problem with your statement here is two-fold.

I don't post on what SpursTalk members are doing, I post on what is happening in the world with the intent of spurring debate in SpursTalk. I only bring it up because no one else does and I'm interesting in seeing how it bounces around in here.

Second, I'm not promoting the meme, I'm merely recording the meme exists in a universe much larger than SpursTalk.com.


And so far, you are the only promoter of the "opposition breeds violence" meme.
Again, I'm not promoting the meme as much as I'm interested in seeing how it is viewed in here. That it doesn't appear the lefties in SpursTalk have bitten on this one is encouraging and I said so.

If you'd let the matter drop, the thread would just roll of the page.

[balli]

Pelosi's statement is irrelevant.

The hate, threats, gun-carrying, the evangelical End Times fantasies, God-hates-non-righties, and demagogery from the right will very probably end up in blood.

This.

[Winehole23]

My question was how much of the opposition to Obama is racially motivated and that was your answer. I wasn't speaking about any particular case. I was speaking in generalities and this is what you said.The indefinite pronoun reference threw me off.


That you believe is isn't insignificant is telling. Don't you think? I do. I think it puts you in the 12% that believe the opposition to Obama is -- to some degree -- racially motivated.Yes. Some opposition to Obama is more bigoted than principled. Look at New jersey and tell me this isn't the case.

How can you rule it out? Just because Americans refuse to admit it to pollsters?

Weak.

[hope4dopes]

In just a few months, micca has gone from doing bad impersonations of what other posters say, to unconscious parodies of himself.

Nice work, micca!

Wow that was biting..
I think Pelois is like one of those inflatable punching clowns. The Soros wing that co-opted the DNC paint a big old bulls eye on her forehead,Then they try and create a consent like say..dissent is racist...or dissent is nazis....or dissent is the kkk
Then they wheel her out in front of the mike and she spews the propaganda.If she comes back in one piece they refine the propaganda, if she comes back torn up in little peices they go back to the drawing board and try and assasinate the voices of dissent.

[hope4dopes]

Bye the bye, if pelosi ever does come back in one piece all these people who are disowning her will have her on their shoulders.

[Yonivore]

...bit the finger off a tea-bagger who punched him in the face....
You're, of course, leaving out a lot of context. The MoveOn.org goon approached the victim and verbally threatened him. It is also reported the MoveOn.org thug is quite a bit younger than the victim's 65 years.

And, what did Kenneth Gladney do to get nearly killed by SEIU thugs?

[Winehole23]

The problem with your statement here is two-fold.

I don't post on what SpursTalk members are doing, I post on what is happening in the world with the intent of spurring debate in SpursTalk. I only bring it up because no one else does and I'm interesting in seeing how it bounces around in here.This is fair, to a point. Sure, there's a great big world to discuss. No problem there.

But your SOP is to take some extreme viewpoint and impute it to actual posters here, regardless of their actual views. This is belligerent, disrespectful and intellectually dishonest. And infuriating.

And you can't seem to stop doing it. You just did it to me, again.


Second, I'm not promoting the meme, I'm merely recording the meme exists in a universe much larger than SpursTalk.com.There's no difference. Recording is promoting. Even resisting the meme promotes it.


Again, I'm not promoting the meme as much as I'm interested in seeing how it is viewed in here. That it doesn't appear the lefties in SpursTalk have bitten on this one is encouraging and I said so.Dan and Manny bit, so have at. Looks like you have some help with this meme.

[Yonivore]

The indefinite pronoun reference threw me off.

Yes. Some opposition to Obama is more bigoted than principled. Look at New jersey and tell me this isn't the case.
Okay, I pulled up New Jersey on Google Earth and looked....didn't see anything. I'm kidding but, seriously, I don't know what you're talking about. What happened in New Jersey.

I even googled "New Jersey Racism Obama" and the first thing up was Maher's lame attempt to claim Drudge was imputing race in his headlines by putting "POLL HELL: OBAMA NEGS RISE" under a picture of Obama.

Why that came up with that google, I don't know...but, nonetheless, I wasn't able to inform myself about what you're talking. Do enlighten me.


How can you rule it out? Just because Americans refuse to admit it to pollsters?

Weak.
Frankly, I don't know why it's an issue. Obama won the election in spite of any racism. And, his policies are being opposed on the same grounds similar policies have been opposed when they were forwarded by white men (Kerry and Kennedy) and white women (Hillary).

Nothing, I've so far seen in this presidency, can be said to have been affected by racism. Period. That the issue gets raised only means, to me (and other people much smarter than me), the President's supporters don't have an argument that will justify the insanity of his proposals so, they impute racism on his opponents or, when that doesn't work, the claim the opponents are trying to foment violence.

[Yonivore]

This is fair, to a point. Sure, there's a great big world to discuss. No problem there.

But your SOP is to take some extreme viewpoint and impute it to actual posters here, regardless of their actual views. This is belligerent, disrespectful and intellectually dishonest. And infuriating.

And you can't seem to stop doing it. You just did it to me, again.

There's no difference. Recording is promoting. Even resisting the meme promotes it.

Dan and Manny bit, so have at. Looks like you have some help with this meme.
Look, I think we disagree on my motivation for bringing subjects up in here. There may be some desire, on my part, to provoke a response but, c'mon, isn't that what makes this place interesting?

And, to the extent I impute extreme viewpoints on posters, in here; if that's been done unfairly, I apologize. I'll try to do better in the future.

[Winehole23]

Wow that was biting...Whack the hornet's nest, reap the swarm.

[Winehole23]

If you start showing a little class to other posters, I'll start showing a little class to you, micca.

[boutons_deux]

"being opposed on the same grounds similar policies"

... that would hurt some corporations revenues.

[Yonivore]

And, about that "extreme viewpoint" phrase you posted, Winehole23. It may be extreme but these viewpoints are emanating from mainstream liberal politicians and media.

I think that to the extent such "extreme viewpoints" are given credence by the Majority leader in the Senate, the Speaker of the House, and a former President, they should rightly be painted on the remainder of the left political spectrum.

And, until the left stands up and refutes Reid, Pelosi, and Carter (and others), if you associate yourself in agreement with their other issues, you're going to get their extreme issues imputed into your motivations.

In simpler terms -- and on one particular issue -- if you support ObamaCare and don't refute the extreme viewpoints of major political supporters of his own party, then you can expect to be put in their bus. Sorry...

[Winehole23]

Look, I think we disagree on my motivation for bringing subjects up in here. There may be some desire, on my part, to provoke a response but, c'mon, isn't that what makes this place interesting?Fair enough. I like the rough and tumble too. It just seems the personalization goes overboard too often. I'm not innocent of that either, and to your credit, you've recognized that for yourself as well.


And, to the extent I impute extreme viewpoints on posters, in here; if that's been done unfairly, I apologize. I'll try to do better in the future.So will I.

Maybe I'm being too skeptical of you Yoni, but you just tried to dismiss me as a race-baiting nut. See what I mean?

[Cry Havoc]

I think the fact that Obama is a democrat has a lot more to do with the opposition than the fact that he is black.

However, I do agree with WH. It's a small number, but it's not insignificant. The fact that Obama is black just makes those that are racist (openly or closeted) a lot more vocal.

But really, what can you do, aside form educate? There will always be racism. There will always be bigotry. Yoni, what do you hope to accomplish from the discussion? I'm seriously asking, because I just try to ignore most of it.

[Yonivore]

Fair enough. I like the rough and tumble too. It just seems the personalization goes overboard too often. I'm not innocent of that either, and to your credit, you've recognized that for yourself as well.

So will I.

Maybe I'm being too skeptical of you Yoni, but you just tried to dismiss me as a race-baiting nut. See what I mean?
Not really -- and it would take me going back and navel-gazing my own posts -- but, instead, I'll accept the criticism, be more sensitive to it in the future and just say, Kum-bah-yah, dude.

[Winehole23]

And, about that "extreme viewpoint" phrase you posted, Winehole23. It may be extreme but these viewpoints are emanating from mainstream liberal politicians and media.The media reports the controversy. They also reported Obama's dismissal of the view that racism is the primary motivation for disagreement with him, but I don't see you giving that any oxygen.


I think that to the extent such "extreme viewpoints" are given credence by the Majority leader in the Senate, the Speaker of the House, and a former President, they should rightly be painted on the remainder of the left political spectrum.I disagree. Each person speaks for him/herself.


And, until the left stands up and refutes Reid, Pelosi, and Carter (and others), if you associate yourself in agreement with their other issues, you're going to get their extreme issues imputed into your motivations.
Many people on the left and in the media stood up to say Carter's comments were overblown.

Guilt by association is a logical fallacy, and you have done no more than infer my agreement with the Dems because I resist your unfair and sometimes very unreasonable characterizations.

For example, an anti-anti-communist wasn't necessarily a communist. Thinking the national security state and the military-industril complex represented a wrong turn for America doesn't make you pro-commie.


In simpler terms -- and on one particular issue -- if you support ObamaCare and don't refute the extreme viewpoints of major political supporters of his own party, then you can expect to be put in their bus. Sorry...What makes you think I support Obamacare?

I spoken out clearly against it, many times. I'm one of the people who prefers the cost of inaction.

See what I mean?

[Yonivore]

I think the fact that Obama is a democrat has a lot more to do with the opposition than the fact that he is black.
I think it's more than that.

He's not just any Democrat. He was judged to be the most liberal democrat in Congress -- based on his voting record.

He has historically associated with extreme left-wing activists and -- right or wrong -- is viewed as sharing their views.

His domestic policies, so far, live up to this view. Nationalizing the car companies, wanting to control energy through cap and tax, and this socialist approach to health care are all in line with the extreme ideology with which his opponents have viewed him.


However, I do agree with WH. It's a small number, but it's not insignificant. The fact that Obama is black just makes those that are racist (openly or closeted) a lot more vocal.
Really? Who has been more vocal due to their racism?


But really, what can you do, aside form educate? There will always be racism. There will always be bigotry. Yoni, what do you hope to accomplish from the discussion? I'm seriously asking, because I just try to ignore most of it.
Yes, there will always be racism and bigotry but, it's yet to have proven to have anything to do with the current opposition to Obama. But, it seems that instead of arguing the merits of any Obama initiative, his supporters would rather ascribe age-old boogey men "racism" and "violence" in an attempt to silence them.

To his opponent's credit, they don't seem to be cowed by the labels anymore and Pelosi, Reid, Carter, et. al. are increasingly seen as the instigators they are. That's a good thing.

Here's (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hgbvXT1pzalqgsKAEWJkqD2HVk6AD9APDLM00) an interesting article by the AP's Race and Ethnicity writer, Jesse Washington. It doesn't take either side but, instead, decries the use of racism in every context -- to the point it's lost all meaning. I think it's a fair article, even were it criticizes those with whom I agree.

Initially, I hoped to convince that racism doesn't play a part in the discussion but, I've given up on that. Now, I think we're just flaming each other.

[Winehole23]

Okay, I pulled up New Jersey on Google Earth and looked....didn't see anything. I'm kidding but, seriously, I don't know what you're talking about. What happened in New Jersey.

[QUOTE]There is a fair amount of political extremism among New Jersey voters, as there is everywhere right now. 21% of voters in the state don’t think Barack Obama is a natural born US citizen and 19% believe George W. Bush had advance knowledge of 9/11. 8% of voters go so far as to say they think Barack Obama is the Anti-Christ.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_NJ_916.pdf


Nothing, I've so far seen in this presidency, can be said to have been affected by racism. Period. Racism is dead? Really?


That the issue gets raised only means, to me (and other people much smarter than me), the President's supporters don't have an argument that will justify the insanity of his proposals so, they impute racism on his opponents or, when that doesn't work, the claim the opponents are trying to foment violence.There's no doubt this happens. But suggesting it is the only reason it happens is naive IMO. You continually suggest that racism is an exclusive fiefdom of professional race baiters. This is unrealistic, and your own race baiting -- echoing the continual crying of the right-wing blogosphere --proves it IMO.

[clambake]

i'm surprised you feel that way about me, yoni.

i can only comment about the one encounter with a black man that you described.

perhaps you should have provided us with more than this one instance. it would, maybe, take out some of the creepiness from all of your racist threads.

[Yonivore]

[quote=Yonivore;3697321]Okay, I pulled up New Jersey on Google Earth and looked....didn't see anything. I'm kidding but, seriously, I don't know what you're talking about. What happened in New Jersey.



http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_NJ_916.pdf
All that proves is New Jerseyans are idiots. Hasn't than been pretty much confirmed since they first reelected Lautenburg and that wig-wearer in prison? What was his name?


Racism is dead? Really?
Okay, I think it's this type of statements that personalize the argument and cause me to strike back but, I'll resist.

You've mischaracterized my statement, I said, "Nothing I've seen, so far in this presidency, can be said to have been affected by racism." That's a bit different.

In fact, in a response to Cry Havoc, I explicitly acknowledge racism exists.


There's no doubt this happens. But suggesting it is the only reason it happens is naive IMO. You continually suggest that racism is an exclusive fiefdom of professional race baiters. This is unrealistic, and your own race baiting -- echoing the continual crying of the right-wing blogosphere --proves it IMO.
You know, it's hard not to harp on this topic when you have the Congressional leaders of the Democrat Party advancing the idea.

And, again, you make a personal attack on my motivations. And, again, I'll refrain from returning the favor.

[Yonivore]

i'm surprised you feel that way about me, yoni.

i can only comment about the one encounter with a black man that you described.

perhaps you should have provided us with more than this one instance. it would, maybe, take out some of the creepiness from all of your racist threads.
See, here's a good example of fake humbrage, Winehole23.

[Winehole23]

Not really -- and it would take me going back and navel-gazing my own posts -- but, instead, I'll accept the criticism, be more sensitive to it in the future and just say, Kum-bah-yah, dude.No kumbayahs necessary. Nor any sensitivity. Just normal attention and civility to posters.

[Winehole23]

See, here's a good example of fake humbrage, Winehole23.I don't think I ever suggested you have the corner on it. Fake umbrage is the common currency of political discourse, emanating from all sides.

[clambake]

umbrage

[Yonivore]

umbrage
Whatever. Being the forum spellchecker doesn't pay well...you should probably seek other employment. I hear ACORN is hiring.

[jman3000]

Is Yonivore still mad he can't call black people "negro's"?

I've only heard a handful of people say that dissent is racist. Is some of the dissent racist? Yes. It seems people get their panties in a wad because they don't know the difference between "some" and "all".

[ChumpDumper]

Man, Yoni turned this into another race thread pretty quickly.

[clambake]

i can only comment about the one encounter with a black man that you described.
this is very telling, yoni.


perhaps you should have provided us with more than this one instance.
this is your only encounter, isn't it?

it would, maybe, take out some of the creepiness from all of your racist threads.
you should probably address these, yoni.

[Winehole23]

[quote=Winehole23;3697378]You've mischaracterized my statement, I said, "Nothing I've seen, so far in this presidency, can be said to have been affected by racism." That's a bit different.I don't think so. It's like saying racism exists, but none of it applies to Obama. Whence does your dead certainty about this arise?


And, again, you make a personal attack on my motivations. And, again, I'll refrain from returning the favor.On the contrary, it's a description of your behavior on this forum. You steer the conversation relentlessly toward race, even though you say it's a practical non-issue. You have been for some time.

I couldn't care less about your motivations, Yoni. It's your behavior that I take issue with.

[Yonivore]

[quote=Yonivore;3697390]I don't think so. It's like saying racism exists, but none of it applies to Obama. Whence does your dead certainty about this arise?
Again, you're not understanding what I said. Look, if it helps, I'll start with -- racism exists. There are people in this country who are racists and who don't like Obama being president because he is black. Now, having said that, there is nothing in the opposition to Obama -- that I've witnessed so far -- that can be attributed to racism.


On the contrary, it's a description of your behavior on this forum. You continually steer the conversation relentless toward race, even though you say it's a practical non-issue. You have been for some time.
Certainly, I do that in threads about race. Where else would I steer it?


I couldn't care less about your motivations, Yoni. It's your behavior that I take issue with.
I don't see you taking issue with others' behavior in here...why mine? There are certainly posters, in here, that have acted more -- whatever it is you don't like about my behavior -- than I have. It can't just be my behavior, I'm far from the worst.

[clambake]

yoni....pullover and get out........the wheels are coming off this baby!

[Yonivore]

yoni....pullover and get out........the wheels are coming off this baby!
I'm not driving the jalopy in which you've found yourself. Maybe after the smoke clears you'll see who. But, good luck!

[clambake]

I'm not driving the jalopy in which you've found yourself. Maybe after the smoke clears you'll see who. But, good luck!

go ahead, keep mopping.

you've missed several spots.

[Winehole23]

[quote=Winehole23;3697414]
Again, you're not understanding what I said. Look, if it helps, I'll start with -- racism exists. There are people in this country who are racists and who don't like Obama being president because he is black. Now, having said that, there is nothing in the opposition to Obama -- that I've witnessed so far -- that can be attributed to racism.How are you so certain about this?



Certainly, I do that in threads about race. Where else would I steer it?You start the most threads about race. Why?



I don't see you taking issue with others' behavior in here...why mine? There are certainly posters, in here, that have acted more -- whatever it is you don't like about my behavior -- than I have. It can't just be my behavior, I'm far from the worst.Maybe that's because you're focused too narrowly on my responses to your own posts. I dish out plenty to other boorish posters.

And, you're not as far from the being worst as you seem to think.

If I pick on you too much, that goes partly to the egregiousness of your example, and partly because you're articulate enough to carry on a conversation. Most of the hyperpartisan clowns on this board aren't. Consider that a feather in your cap.

[Yonivore]

[quote=Yonivore;3697429]How are you so certain about this?
Because it can so easily be attributed to other factors and can be compared to similar levels of opposition experienced in previous administration attempting similar initiatives who weren't black.

That's how I can be certain. How can you be certain race has anything to do with the opposition?


You start the most threads about race. Why?
Because, I think it's an important topic. Particularly when you have the Democrat Congressional leaders and a former Democrat President imputing the issue where it doesn't belong.


Maybe that's because you're focused too narrowly on my responses to your own posts. I dish out plenty to other boorish posters.
Maybe, I've never claimed to pay attention to individuals in here anyway. I can't tell you how many times I've had to run back and edit a post because I responded to the wrong poster. Frankly, I rarely respond to posters but to ideas in here. Lately, you're the exception because, in my attempt to improve my presence in here, I've actually engaged you on a personal level. I may come to regret that but, so far, it's not been particularly bothersome.


And, you're not as far from the being worst as you seem to think.
And, you complain about me making personal attacks?


If I pick on you too much, that goes partly to the egregiousness of your example, and partly because you're articulate enough to carry on a conversation. Most of the hyperpartisan clowns on this board aren't. Consider that a feather in your cap.
Don't blame me if I don't accept the backhanded compliment.

[ChumpDumper]

You know, Whenever I read any of Yoni's posts I'm starting to hear Monty Python's Spam song in my head with title word replaced by the word "race."

Race, race, race, race.

Race, race, race, race....

[Yonivore]

You know, Whenever I read any of Yoni's posts I'm starting to hear Monty Python's Spam song in my head with title word replaced by the word "race."

Race, race, race, race.

Race, race, race, race....
I wonder what that says about you.

[Yonivore]

So, riddle me this batmen...

If racism is an issue in the opposition to Obama's presidential agenda and policy initiatives, isn't that a big story worth discussing in here?

And, if racism isn't an issue but, race-baiting by leading Democrats is, isn't that a big story worth discussing in here?

If it were another formulation, it wouldn't be a topic at all. You can thank Maureen Dowd and Jimmy Carter for making race an issue. I had nothing to do with it.

[ChumpDumper]

I wonder what that says about you.It says that I noticed you are obsessed with race.

[Winehole23]

[quote=Winehole23;3697448]
Because it can so easily be attributed to other factors and can be compared to similar levels of opposition experienced in previous administration attempting similar initiatives who weren't black.

That's how I can be certain. How can you be certain race has anything to do with the opposition?I just claim it can't be ruled out. You claim it must be. That doesn't square too well with my own experience in this world.

I realize that's not an argument. It's really no more than a hunch, but in fairness, so is your own surmise.


Because, I think it's an important topic. Particularly when you have the Democrat Congressional leaders and a former Democrat President imputing the issue where it doesn't belong.Me, not so important. It's a useless distraction IMO, but you can't stop bringing it up.


And, you complain about me making personal attacks?Fair enough. I think your own carelessness about what you say and to whom you say it warrants the flames more than sometimes. But if you're turning over a new leaf, I'm willing to reign myself in...

...until you attack me again for claims I never made.


Don't blame me if I don't accept the backhanded compliment.I don't. But it's not so backhanded as you might think.

[Yonivore]

I just claim it can't be ruled out. You claim it must be. That doesn't square too well with my own experience in this world.
So, you impute it by inference...and, without any evidence other than your world view. That's precisely what Dowd and Carter did.


I realize that's not an argument. It's really no more than a hunch, but in fairness, so is your own surmise.
I disagree. I can point to volumes of news stories and opinion pieces that attack his policies on their merit. Not so much on racist opposition...or, evidence to that effect.


Me, not so important. It's a useless distraction IMO, but you can't stop bringing it up.
It's a distraction but, I'm not so sure how useless it would have turned to have been if the distraction had gone unchallenged. And, that my bringing it in here is viewed as a unimportant by you, doesn't change the fact that it was a much bigger story elsewhere. I merely brought it in here for discussion. If you didn't find it interesting or important, you could have simply left it alone.


Fair enough. I think your own carelessness about what you say and to whom you say warrants the flames more than sometimes. But if you're turning over a new leaf, I'm willing to reign myself in...

...until you attack me again for claims I never made.
Fair enough.


I don't. But it's not so backhanded as you might think.
Duly noted.

[Winehole23]

I disagree. I can point to volumes of news stories and opinion pieces that attack his policies on their merit. Not so much on racist opposition...or, evidence to that effectIf the media doesn't report it, it must not be true; if the media does, it must be veracious in some degree. Media reports=evidence.

What an odd position for you to take. You're saying that because media reports back you up, your inference isn't threadbare.

You don't seem to realize that people who take Jimmy Carter's view are equally justified to say the same. *Media reports* back them up, too.

[Yonivore]

If the media doesn't report it, it must not be true.

What an odd position for you to take.
I agree, it would be odd. but, it's not the position I'm taking...

If it were happening, this media would be reporting it. The two attempts they've made have failed to get traction with the American Public; pimping Maureen Dowd's imputation of "boy" into Joe Wilson's outburst and giving any credence to that old anti-semitic racist, himself, Jimmy Carter.

It's not happening. And, unless you can demonstrate it is, I don't think it helps your argument to just "speculate" that because racists exist, racism must be playing some role in the opposition to Barack Obama and his agenda.

[Yonivore]

If the media doesn't report it, it must not be true; if the media does, it must be veracious in some degree. Media reports=evidence.

What an odd position for you to take. You're saying that because media reports back you up, your inference isn't threadbare.

You don't seem to realize that people who take Jimmy Carter's view are equally justified to say the same. *Media reports* back them up, too.
Where do media reports -- other than just repeating Jimmy Carter's assertion -- back up the proposition that racism has played a role in Obama's opposition?

[Winehole23]

Where do media reports -- other than just repeating Jimmy Carter's assertion -- back up the proposition that racism has played a role in Obama's opposition?I don't claim they do.

I take issue your inference that because legitimate opposition to Obama exists and is documented -- and I am in that camp -- that this somehow disproves the possibility that some of that opposition is in bad faith.

The lack of documentation or media coverage *proving* racist opposition to Obama actually proves nothing, despite your pretense that it does.

[Yonivore]

I don't claim they do.

I take issue your inference that because legitimate opposition to Obama exists and is documented -- and I am in that camp -- that this somehow disproves the possibility that some of that opposition is in bad faith.
If the overt opposition is based on good argument such as you and I both agree, what does it matter the motivation of some forwarding the argument? Cannot a racist be right in arguing the Obama policies are ruinous without ascribing that opposition to his racism?

Because the argument exists outside the racist community would tend to marginalize and make moot, any racism that exists.

In other words, his policies are opposed by a whole wide spectrum of Americans. Yes, there may be racists in the mix but, because a vast majority of others have made sound arguments in opposition discounts the notion that racism has anything to do with it.

You seem to be implying that a racist cannot disagree except on racist grounds. If that were the case, and if it were due to racism alone they object, I doubt you'd see many people aligning themselves with that argument.

If there are racists that have coopted a legitimate criticism and are silently relishing the idea they're opposing Obama and they're racists. So what?


The lack of documentation or media coverage *proving* racist opposition to Obama actually proves nothing, despite your pretense that it does.
I disagree. I think if racism were a significant part of the equation, it'd be 24-7 on, at least, CNN.

Do you remember the MSNBC story that tried to impute race into the incident over the guy taking a gun to a town hall rally?

The media is trying to make it a racial issue. To their credit, the American people aren't buying it.

[Winehole23]

If the overt opposition is based on good argument such as you and I both agree, what does it matter the motivation of some forwarding the argument? Cannot a racist be right in arguing the Obama policies are ruinous without ascribing that opposition to his racism?Sure.


Because the argument exists outside the racist community would tend to marginalize and make moot, any racism that exists.I disagree about the mooting, but you have a point bout marginalization. I do think racism is a marginal issue wrt the topic.


In other words, his policies are opposed by a whole wide spectrum of Americans. Yes, there may be racists in the mix but, because a vast majority of others have made sound arguments in opposition discounts the notion that racism has anything to do with it.The devil can cite scripture too, or use it as a fig leaf. Undoubtedly.


You seem to be implying that a racist cannot disagree except on racist grounds. If that were the case, and if it were due to racism alone they object, I doubt you'd see many people aligning themselves with that argument.I don't think I implied any such thing. See above


If there are racists that have coopted a legitimate criticism and are silently relishing the idea they're opposing Obama and they're racists. So what?I have no problem with this. But we are very far now from the proposition that racism axiomatically doesn't attach to Obama.


I disagree. I think if racism were a significant part of the equation, it'd be 24-7 on, at least, CNN. Bad faith is unfalsifiable, and therefore unprovable. It's unsurprising that it receives no media coverage.


Do you remember the MSNBC story that tried to impute race into the incident over the guy taking a gun to a town hall rally?I don't watch much MSNBC. That said, there would seem to be inherent security issues with carrying firearms in the vicinity of the President.


The media is trying to make it a racial issue. To their credit, the American people aren't buying it.I agree. But you seem to give little credit to the majority of posters who've said as much here. And none whatsoever to Obama, who's said as much himself.

It seems to me that you've been the ST poster -- bar none -- most insistent on reducing political controversies to race. It's disingenuous. And disrespectful to posters who have legitimate grounds for disagreement with you.

[hope4dopes]

I think Whinehole must be a spin doctor for the Soros DNC.He's got the same hollow logic, the same narssistic blind spots, and the same moral confussion.

[mogrovejo]

All this racist stuff is immaterial. In the realm of political conversation, who makes the claim is irrelevant, what matters is the quality and validity of the claim. If a racist states "A", what matters is if "A" is true, valid, wise, bad, nonsensical, racist, etc. The ulterior motivations, characteristics or beliefs of the person advocating "A" don't matter. It's "A" that must be challenged or sustained, not its author. Following a different standard is adopting a fallacious behaviour and only serves to poison the debate.

People like Jimmy Carter, Chris Matthews et all are a disgrace to a civilized society.

[LnGrrrR]

Nope but, since everyone was so quick to jump on the "you're a racist if you oppose Obama" and since everyone is bending into pretzels to defend ACORN, I thought it would be a knee-jerk reaction to pimp Pelosi's "opponents are going to get someone killed" rhetoric.

I'm glad it's not selling.

How many people on this board defended ACORN's actions Yoni, regarding that prostitution thing? Not a one. A minority defended the organization itself, but not their actions.

The same goes for painting Obama opponents as racist. They're a small minority on the board.

Using the actions of a few to paint every liberal with the same brush is deceptive.

[LnGrrrR]

Granted, he's only one poster but...I don't see anyone opposing the proposition raised by the left, in the media, either.


I don't feel I have to defend views that aren't mine. Why should I? Do you defend right wingers who think that we should just nuke Afghanistan?

[LnGrrrR]

I think whinehole, and Lngrr. view themselves as the more polished of these clones and evaporate when the whitehouse's more clumsy and brutal repressions unfold. The chumps, and clams, and shastas are more the graffitti spraying brownshirt types who'll defend any and all,from the "it's patriotic to turn in your neighbor hotlines" to the "underage latina sex slave traffic is good for the American economy."

Yes, the people who are against torture, and for habeas corpus, are the ones supporting "brutal repressions".

Yes, the people who are against warrantless wiretapping are the same ones supporting "turn in your neighbor hotlines".

And of course, Winehole and I have long been a fan of the Latina sex slave traffic.

It's amazing how your mind works Micca.

[LnGrrrR]

I was merely pointing out, by starting this thread, that the "opposition breeds violence" meme didn't seem to get the same boost. It was encouraging...

That's because it's as much bullshit as the claim that by disagreeing with the Iraq War, one was somehow giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Two sides of the same coin.

[NoOptionB]

http://www.floppingaces.net/wp-content/uploads/bush_hitler.jpg


Pelosi is just playing the game. On the upside, at least she is transparent in that she sucks at it. :toast:lol

[Winehole23]

I think Whinehole must be a spin doctor for the Soros DNC.He's got the same hollow logic, the same narssistic blind spots, and the same moral confussion.More tired cliches, zero exposition, zero topical attention paid.

A very typical micca post, but mercifully brief, so thanks for that.