I suppose viewed through that very narrow lens the Bush appointments are good, but if you really believe in checking excessive governmental authority they really are a nightmare.
If the Democrats can’t landslide the Republicans this year....
- Thread starter Chapdog
- Start date
I suppose viewed through that very narrow lens the Bush appointments are good, but if you really believe in checking excessive governmental authority they really are a nightmare.
Here is you another reason the election (and I predict the next 3 or 4 as well) will be close. I just got this email from my sister. Things like this get passed around in milliseconds and people like to believe them....many will. Has nothing to do with race. I am not saying that race won't play a factor in the upcoming election. Only a fool would say that. I am just saying that to explain a loss for Obama (which I still don't think will happen) people are going to have to point at a lot of things along with race.
Letter follows:
"President Bush did make a bad mistake in the war on terrorism. But
the mistake was not his decision to go to war in Iraq . Bush's mistake came
In his belief that this country is the same one his father fought for in
WWII. It is not.
Back then, they had just come out of a vicious depression. The country
was steeled by the hardship of that depression, but they still believed
fervently in this country. They knew that the people had elected their
leaders, so it was the people's duty to back those leaders.
Therefore, when the war broke out the people came together, rallied
behind, and stuck with their leaders, whether they had voted for them or not
or whether the war was going badly or not.
And war was just as distasteful and the anguish just as great then as
it is today. Often there were more casualties in one day in WWII than we
have had in the entire Iraq war. But that did not matter. The people stuck
with the President because it was their patriotic duty. Americans put aside
their differences in WWII and worked together to win that war.
Everyone from every strata of society, from young to old pitched in.
Small children pulled little wagons around to gather scrap metal for the war
effort. Grade school students saved their pennies to buy stamps for war
bonds to help the effort.
Men who were too old or medically 4F lied about their age or condition
trying their best to join the military.
Women doubled their work to keep things going at home. Harsh
rationing of everything from gasoline to soap, to butter was imposed, yet
there was very little complaining.
You never heard prominent people on the radio belittling the
President. Interestingly enough in those days there were no fat cat actors
and entertainers who ran off to visit and fawn over dictators of hostile
countries and complain to them about our President. Instead, they made
upbeat films and entertained our troops to help the troops' morale. And a
bunch even enlisted.
And imagine this: Teachers in schools actually started the day off
with a Pledge of Allegiance, and with prayers for our country and our
troops!
Back then, no newspaper would have dared point out certain weak spots
in our cities where bombs could be set off to cause the maximum damage. No
newspaper would have dared complain about what we were doing to catch spies.
A newspaper would have been laughed out of existence if it had complained
that German or Japanese soldiers were being 'tortured' by being forced to
wear women's underwear, or subjected to interrogation by a woman, or being
scared by a dog or did not have air conditioning.
There were a lot of things different back then. We were not subjected
to a constant bombardment of pornography, perversion and promiscuity in
movies or on radio. We did not have legions of crack heads, dope pushers
and armed gangs roaming our streets.
No, President Bush did not make a mistake in his handling of terrorism.
He made the mistake of believing that we still had the courage and
fortitude of our fathers. He believed that this was still the country that
our fathers fought so dearly to preserve.
It is not the same country. It is now a cross between Sodom and
Gomorra and the land of Oz. We did unite for a short while after 9/11,
but our attitude changed when we found out that defending our country
would require sacrifices.
We are in great danger. The terrorists are fanatic Muslims. They believe
that it is okay, even their duty, to kill anyone who will not convert to Islam.
It has been estimated that about one third or over three hundred million
Muslims are sympathetic to the terrorists cause... Hitler and Tojo combined
did not have nearly that many potential recruits. So... We either win it -
or lose it - and you ain't gonna like losing.
America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall, or
watching the movie stars.
Letter follows:
"President Bush did make a bad mistake in the war on terrorism. But
the mistake was not his decision to go to war in Iraq . Bush's mistake came
In his belief that this country is the same one his father fought for in
WWII. It is not.
Back then, they had just come out of a vicious depression. The country
was steeled by the hardship of that depression, but they still believed
fervently in this country. They knew that the people had elected their
leaders, so it was the people's duty to back those leaders.
Therefore, when the war broke out the people came together, rallied
behind, and stuck with their leaders, whether they had voted for them or not
or whether the war was going badly or not.
And war was just as distasteful and the anguish just as great then as
it is today. Often there were more casualties in one day in WWII than we
have had in the entire Iraq war. But that did not matter. The people stuck
with the President because it was their patriotic duty. Americans put aside
their differences in WWII and worked together to win that war.
Everyone from every strata of society, from young to old pitched in.
Small children pulled little wagons around to gather scrap metal for the war
effort. Grade school students saved their pennies to buy stamps for war
bonds to help the effort.
Men who were too old or medically 4F lied about their age or condition
trying their best to join the military.
Women doubled their work to keep things going at home. Harsh
rationing of everything from gasoline to soap, to butter was imposed, yet
there was very little complaining.
You never heard prominent people on the radio belittling the
President. Interestingly enough in those days there were no fat cat actors
and entertainers who ran off to visit and fawn over dictators of hostile
countries and complain to them about our President. Instead, they made
upbeat films and entertained our troops to help the troops' morale. And a
bunch even enlisted.
And imagine this: Teachers in schools actually started the day off
with a Pledge of Allegiance, and with prayers for our country and our
troops!
Back then, no newspaper would have dared point out certain weak spots
in our cities where bombs could be set off to cause the maximum damage. No
newspaper would have dared complain about what we were doing to catch spies.
A newspaper would have been laughed out of existence if it had complained
that German or Japanese soldiers were being 'tortured' by being forced to
wear women's underwear, or subjected to interrogation by a woman, or being
scared by a dog or did not have air conditioning.
There were a lot of things different back then. We were not subjected
to a constant bombardment of pornography, perversion and promiscuity in
movies or on radio. We did not have legions of crack heads, dope pushers
and armed gangs roaming our streets.
No, President Bush did not make a mistake in his handling of terrorism.
He made the mistake of believing that we still had the courage and
fortitude of our fathers. He believed that this was still the country that
our fathers fought so dearly to preserve.
It is not the same country. It is now a cross between Sodom and
Gomorra and the land of Oz. We did unite for a short while after 9/11,
but our attitude changed when we found out that defending our country
would require sacrifices.
We are in great danger. The terrorists are fanatic Muslims. They believe
that it is okay, even their duty, to kill anyone who will not convert to Islam.
It has been estimated that about one third or over three hundred million
Muslims are sympathetic to the terrorists cause... Hitler and Tojo combined
did not have nearly that many potential recruits. So... We either win it -
or lose it - and you ain't gonna like losing.
America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall, or
watching the movie stars.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
No Oncie, 'every single one' of us Republicans don't feel this way, just as 'every single one' of virtually ANY group, doesn't feel ANY way! Generally, when people speak for a group, it is an opinionated generalization based on life experience. 'Democrats favor helping the poor'... doesn't mean that every single democrat in America believes this.
I would venture to say, the vast and overwhelming majority of Republicans are not racist, and would not care if their candidate was black. As for Democrats, we are going to find out what they truly feel in this election. If they support Obama with any less real numbers than they supported Gore or Kerry, it will certainly tell the story. That's why I think all this hullabaloo is being raised now about his race, some of you KNOW your party is filled with closet racists, who aren't about to vote for the black man. So, you head of the inevitable result by attempting to put the yoke of racism on Republicans and blame them early on.... then when he loses, you can say "told ya so!"
I would like to think we live in a society that has moved beyond 1964, and where people faithfully follow the teachings of Dr. King, judging by content of character, rather than color of skin... but the constant obsession liberal dems seem to have with this man's skin color, leads me to believe we haven't... not all of us, anyway. And the most insidious thing is, the way you are going to try and blame lack of liberal support for Obama on republican 'racists' who didn't vote for him! That takes the cake!
As I said, if Obama loses by 1%...2%... no biggie... "he was just too liberal" is a great excuse, and everyone buys it! There is little or no 'racism' in how we voted, in that scenario. However, if he loses big... by 10% or more... something is not right, because we know from the past two elections, both sides have essentially the same percentage of voters. Now, McCain won't get all of Bush's voters, because McCain is not the Conservative that Bush was, so there will be some who don't vote or vote for Barr, whatever. Obama will have the same situation, so these conditions cancel each other out, and we are back to an even split.... unless the closet racist liberal elites can't bring themselves to pull the lever for the black man, when the curtain is closed. I think some of them are fully aware that might just be the case, and this perpetual obsession with his race, is an attempt to do damage control early.
Bush appointed a black man to the highest cabinet level position ever held by a minority, Secretary of State... a chicken bone and bad pacemaker away from the Presidency. AFTER he did this, he was re-elected with the largest number of votes ever received by any presidential candidate in history. It doesn't appear to me that "race" matters to republicans as much as it seems to matter to liberal democrats.
Racism isn't caused by liberals "constant obsession with racism." It's caused by people hating or otherwise feeling negatively about others simply because of their skin color.
Racism didn't disappear in 1964. Unlike you, I see racism across a broad spectrum of people; it is not party-specific, or region-specific, or demographically specific. That's why your claim that 'we don't care about the color of someone's skin' is ludicrous. There are millions of Republican racists, just as there are millions of Democrat racists.
I know you'd like us to just forget about it & ignore it, but racism is alive and well in America.
Oh - and your example of Bush appointing minorities is just stupid.
Racism didn't disappear in 1964. Unlike you, I see racism across a broad spectrum of people; it is not party-specific, or region-specific, or demographically specific. That's why your claim that 'we don't care about the color of someone's skin' is ludicrous. There are millions of Republican racists, just as there are millions of Democrat racists.
I know you'd like us to just forget about it & ignore it, but racism is alive and well in America.
Oh - and your example of Bush appointing minorities is just stupid.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Well, no it's really not 'stupid' at all, it's a valid point you can't refute... if that makes it 'stupid' in your book, so be it. The fact remains, had the Republican party been full of these 'racist' people, as your buddies want to claim, they would have never re-elected a man who was making high-level cabinet appointments to blacks, by the largest amount of support in the history of America. That just simply defies logic and reason.
I never said racism was dead, I fully believe there are a LOT of racist people in America.... problem is, most of them are 'closet racist' liberal democrats. They will talk a good talk, put on a good front, but deep inside their hearts, they hate black people and think they are inferior to white people. This perception of inferiority is the motivation for many liberal causes... we have to help the poor inferior black people, they are too ignorant to help themselves... they need us liberals to do it for them... to 'level the field'... because they are not as superior as we are.
Even your dramatic post about how racism is still prevalent in our society, is an indication of how much liberals depend on this perception... you NEED for America to be racist, so that liberal causes can 'save' us from it! So you keep perpetuating this belief that 'racism' is all around us, and you continue to dream up 'ways' to make things better for those 'poor ignorant black people' who can't help that they are being discriminated against. YOU are the problem! YOU are the reason 'racism' is still prevalent in our society today! Why? Because you can't politically afford to lose your Sacred Cow! America will never completely solve its racial divisiveness, because you won't allow that to happen, you can't afford to lose the issue.
"Well, no it's really not 'stupid' at all, it's a valid point you can't refute... if that makes it 'stupid' in your book, so be it. The fact remains, had the Republican party been full of these 'racist' people, as your buddies want to claim, they would have never re-elected a man who was making high-level cabinet appointments to blacks, by the largest amount of support in the history of America. That just simply defies logic and reason. "
It's stupid on a lot of levels.
A) While Bush appointed some minorities, who in America thinks that Gore or Kerry wouldn't have done the same?
B) Democrats are by far the more hated party by true racists, due to their support for affirmative action & inner city programs.
C) Not that many voters, and surely not that many who are dumb, which most racists are, think "cabinet positions" when casting a vote.
But this is Dixielogic, at its finest. Bush appointed blacks! Racists hate blacks! Therefore, racists would have voted against Bush because he appointed blacks!
You're a buffoon. A floundering, helpless, brain-dead buffoon.
Lots of Republicans are racists; lots of Democrats are racists. Deal with it.
It's stupid on a lot of levels.
A) While Bush appointed some minorities, who in America thinks that Gore or Kerry wouldn't have done the same?
B) Democrats are by far the more hated party by true racists, due to their support for affirmative action & inner city programs.
C) Not that many voters, and surely not that many who are dumb, which most racists are, think "cabinet positions" when casting a vote.
But this is Dixielogic, at its finest. Bush appointed blacks! Racists hate blacks! Therefore, racists would have voted against Bush because he appointed blacks!
You're a buffoon. A floundering, helpless, brain-dead buffoon.
Lots of Republicans are racists; lots of Democrats are racists. Deal with it.
ib1yysguy
Junior Member
Just one observation: the party that nominated a black guy is the racist party in Dixieland. The guy who's the running mate of the black guy is a racist in Dixieland. The people in Dixieland, USA, who enslaved and murdered black guys who vote solid Republican in Alabama (nearly) are mostly not racist.
These arguments are pretty fucked up, Dixie.
These arguments are pretty fucked up, Dixie.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
LOLzz... I know one more observation you missed... not one single person currently living in the South, republican or democrat, including the State of Alabama, ever enslaved a black man or knew of anyone who did.
Here is another observation for ya... the ONLY posters insinuating anything about this election being decided on race, are liberal democrats.
oooo...One more observation... Condi Rice is from Alabama, and had she ran for President, would have certainly carried the state of Alabama in a landslide.
You are actually helping prove my point. You continue to foment this image of the South as if it were 1964, or worse yet, 1860! Most people who are not ignorant, realize and understand the South is not the same as it was decades, indeed, centuries ago! The times have changed, the people have changed. But a political party that needs racial division, that perpetuates itself on the supposed disparity between blacks and whites, that feeds off the perceptions of racial divisiveness it conjures up, will continue to try and paint the South as it appeared in the past.
What is amazing is, you don't think this is obvious to the rest of the world.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
A) We are not having a debate on whether Bush, Kerry, or Gore were more favorable, or would have been more favorable, to blacks and minorities. The point of the Bush appointments was made in response to the false perception of the 'Racist Republican Nation', who certainly wouldn't have EVER supported a man who appointed blacks to ANY cabinet level position, if this false perception were true. Instead, not only did republicans support Bush for re-election, but did so in record setting numbers.
B) Most of the liberal democrat programs you speak of, were passed with the support of republicans, but they curiously all have something in common... they presume that blacks are inferior to whites and need some sort of government assistance. This attitude has been defined as 'liberal guilt' and it is just as racist as if you wore a sheet and burned crosses in yards. Black people are NOT inferior, they don't need hand outs, they needed barriers removed, and for the most part, they have been. They need the SAME opportunity as others, not FAVORABLE opportunity.
C) Most true racists are not dumb, they are ignorant. There is a difference. Ignorance is the source of their bigotry and hate, and they simply can't rationalize why the rest of the world doesn't see it their way. Intelligence and smartness have nothing to do with this, true racists can be quite clever and intellectual. They are smart enough, for example, to know how to hide behind a facade of perceptions and myths from the past, and claim to be above all of it, as they pass laws which further instill their racist philosophy.
Deal with THAT!
"They are smart enough, for example, to know how to hide behind a facade of perceptions and myths from the past, and claim to be above all of it, as they pass laws which further instill their racist philosophy. "
This is just your psychobabble bullshit - it has nothing to do with reality. It's a little "theory" you have built in your head, and it's based on nothing but the fact that you simply don't like liberals & liberalism. It's total crap.
You're a hack, anyway. I'm not the one trying to pretend that racism doesn't exist in both parties, in force. You're the one who thinks it's "mainly" intellectual liberals.
Wonder why?
This is just your psychobabble bullshit - it has nothing to do with reality. It's a little "theory" you have built in your head, and it's based on nothing but the fact that you simply don't like liberals & liberalism. It's total crap.
You're a hack, anyway. I'm not the one trying to pretend that racism doesn't exist in both parties, in force. You're the one who thinks it's "mainly" intellectual liberals.
Wonder why?
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Yes, even more activist conservative judges to slowly erode the rights they despise.
Epicurus
Reasonable
Oh put a sock in it.
You don't care because you're a gunless pussy, but I will be damned before I see the SCOTUS ignore the 2nd Amendment.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
I didn't pretend that either, perhaps you are imagining things?