Why is it now considered predjudiced criticize our President

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Well threads like this one are a train-wreck to begin with.

[Peikko 1,575]

So true, the OP made a statement that is untrue. Anyone can openly critisize Obama until the cows come home and it's not going to be considered racist, unless it actually is racist. Who knew?

Edited September 18, 2009 by Madame Cleo

[Danno 1,228]

####### Cheney

Tom DeLay

Again, we keep hearing Bush and other called people Unpatriotic or UnAmerican yet you can not even produce once quote with those words in it.

The only thing you are producing is attacks on some who wanted to strip funding from troops in the field.

Those type of acts were not even Called Unpatriotic.

Example:

Cheney said on Monday.

"When members of Congress pursue an anti-war strategy that's been called slow bleed, they're not supporting the troops, they're undermining them," Cheney said in a speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a pro-Israel lobbying group.

*Ahem*

I'll repeat myself. Only once.

Why do specific words need to be present when the implication of the quote has exactly the same meaning?

Pike you have not even showed one quote where it was "kinda" said.

The claim is; Bush (and others) called those who opposed the war "Unpatriotic".

I call B.S. on it.

[alienlovechild 75]

Why do specific words need to be present when the implication of the quote has exactly the same meaning?

Different terms carry can convey different meanings.

Blunt: You are an azzhole, Pike.

Diplomatic: You, sir, are an irritating individual that generates much dislike among some members of this forum.

If I solely said the second example you still can't claim I called you an azzhole when, in fact, I had not. If you shorten my phrase and claim that's my real meaning is I'm calling you an azzhole, that's up to you.

This is where you write. . . grow up, Dave (you azzhole). See, you do it all the time.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think you're reading what you want to, Danno.

When someone characterises opposition politicians as "being close to treason" for making public remarks about the war, what would you call it?

Scotch mist!?

Edited September 18, 2009 by Private Pike

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Why do specific words need to be present when the implication of the quote has exactly the same meaning?

Different terms carry can convey different meanings.

Blunt: You are an azzhole, Pike.

Diplomatic: You, sir, are an irritating individual that generates much dislike among some members of this forum.

If I solely said the second example you still can't claim I called you an azzhole when, in fact, I had not. If you shorten my phrase and claim that's my real meaning is I'm calling you an azzhole, that's up to you.

This is where you write. . . grow up, Dave (you azzhole). See, you do it all the time.

What a roundabout way to state the obvious. Different words have different meanings? No $hit!

Here's another obvious one - the absence of specific words doesn't mean that the same meaning can't be conveyed with different words.

I'm assuming that you have heard of a thesaurus. Synonyms?

[The_Dude 1,142]

i think it is only some people using race & prejudice as an argument... not all...

Absolutely true, but where are the heavy hitting voices on the left denouncing such inflammatory charges?

The strongest I have heard is the White-house denying it sees races as the motivator.

So it's the duty of the leadership of the DNC to denounce and address each and every fringe voice out there? Stop being such a hypocrit danno. I wouldn't expect the RNC to deal with every extreme right opinion out there, just the major ones, as the DNC and various figureheads in the Democratic party do.

You're full of it if you don't think that people weren't accused of being unpatriotic when they questioned the Iraq war during G.W. Bush's term.

Why don't we do it this way (since I am full of it).

For every person on the left you can find denouncing the Shrill charges of Racism. I will post 2 people on the right denouncingequally silly things as Obamas citizenship or the Birthcert. story.

Wanna play?

(didn't think so)

As for the unpatriotic thing....

We are not talking about "persons in general" (anyone off the street) making these kinds of statements.

I want you to show me national figures who claimed, opposing the war was unpatriotic.

And I will show you national democrats who are using the "racism charge".

For starters A Former President this week.

Again, show me a some national figures who said it was unpatriotic to oppose the war.

From Meet The Press, September 10, 2006.

...So you look at situation today in Afghanistan or even in Iraq, and you've got people who have doubts. They want to know whether or not if they stick their heads up, the United States, in fact, is going to be there to complete the mission. And those doubts are encouraged, obviously, when they see the kind of debate that we've had in the United States, suggestions, for example, that we should withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq, simply feed into that whole notion, validates the strategy of the terrorists.

Here is an article from the National Review http://www.nationalreview.com/frum/frum031903.asp

Nice try but I don't even see the word "Unpatriotic" in that conversation about striping funding from the troops......

or asking troops to risk life and limb when the Dems were talking about "excepting defeat"

and "getting out".

is that the best you have?

So you're down to arguing semantics? Seriously, you're looking for the the keyword to actually be said for it to count?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

What are you saying then Danno :whistling:

Please explain for the folks who don't speak in stereotypes or snatch words out of the air.

I guess in a nut Shell, this charge of "racism" is clearly a means to steer the conversation away from the topic at hand.

Q: But why should Americans pay for illegals healthcare.

A: you only ask that question because you are racist and want to see Mexican kids suffer from Polio in the street. Who proposes that?

Q: But how can we afford such a big program.. The numbers show a huge drain on the budget.

A: This is clearly a Racist question.... only a Racist would consider cost... when the program is so well-meaning.The proposal is deficit neutral and the President has said that he won't sign any bill that isn't.

Q: What about the concern the Obama's support in Afgh is slipping.

A. Actually what we have is, Racists who don't want a Black president to succeed where a White one didn't. Who has made such argument?

Q: Some people are concerned that Obama is now in charge of to much of the private sector.

A: The only people who feel that way are those who fear a Strong Black men. What private sector is the President in charge of?

Q; Some people are actually calling the President a Communist, how do you respond to that?

A:Communism is code word for RED, and that is a color just like Black. They are trying to make the Presidents Race the issue when he is just trying to help save this country. No response - it's a nonsense claim.

Q:The unemployment has climbed steadily since Obama has been in office, what does he plan to do to combat this growing problem?

A: The only reason that question gets asked is because people are Racists, when Blacks were without work in inner cites for decades, no one cared why else would they be asking now? The President has not once raised the expectation that unemployment would drop immediately after he takes office. He has consistently warned that unemployment will rise until months after the economy comes out of the recession.

on and on it goes.

You're so full of it, Danno. Show me one example where an argument on the merits against any of the President's policy proposals and initiatives was met with any response based on racism. Just one.

Now that Obamba is President if someone disagrees with some policy he has come up with they told "Oh, you are just being predjudiced"

Present us with one example where an argument against any of the President's initiatives that was made on merit was met with a response suggesting that the argument shows nothing but prejudice. One example. Then we'll talk. Until then, you're full of it.

Not even one example, fellas? Come on, show us that you have a case.

[rebeccajo 14]

I don't think it's any stretch of the imagination at all that racist attitudes are propelling a lot of current protests. I don't believe that everyone criticizing the President or his agenda is a racist. But you'd have to have your head in the sand to believe it doesn't play a role in some of what is going on.

What percent of Americans opposed to Obama are really racists in your opinion?

Also how many folks voted for Obama solely because he was black?

Since he won the election it's fair to say the second group outnumbered the first group but we never hear about that angle. If he wasn't black, people would be a lot more outspoken without the fear of getting labled "racist".

I have no idea the percentage. I just know they are out there. My Father is one of them. And a lot of his friends agree with him.

[The_Dude 1,142]

I don't think it's any stretch of the imagination at all that racist attitudes are propelling a lot of current protests. I don't believe that everyone criticizing the President or his agenda is a racist. But you'd have to have your head in the sand to believe it doesn't play a role in some of what is going on.

What percent of Americans opposed to Obama are really racists in your opinion?

Also how many folks voted for Obama solely because he was black?

Since he won the election it's fair to say the second group outnumbered the first group but we never hear about that angle. If he wasn't black, people would be a lot more outspoken without the fear of getting labled "racist".

I have no idea the percentage. I just know they are out there. My Father is one of them. And a lot of his friends agree with him.

Do they refer to the president as 'Obamer" or "Ovomit"?

[rebeccajo 14]

The wheels are turning but there is no track left...

I don't think it's any stretch of the imagination at all that racist attitudes are propelling a lot of current protests. I don't believe that everyone criticizing the President or his agenda is a racist. But you'd have to have your head in the sand to believe it doesn't play a role in some of what is going on.

What percent of Americans opposed to Obama are really racists in your opinion?

Also how many folks voted for Obama solely because he was black?

Since he won the election it's fair to say the second group outnumbered the first group but we never hear about that angle. If he wasn't black, people would be a lot more outspoken without the fear of getting labled "racist".

I have no idea the percentage. I just know they are out there. My Father is one of them. And a lot of his friends agree with him.

Do they refer to the president as 'Obamer" or "Ovomit"?

***.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Break down:

Conservatives always mean what liberals say they meant, even if the word wasn't used. Conservatives are always racist when they openly criticize a Liberal with power.

Liberals can change their argument from day to day regardless of terminology and meaning if it so suits them politically(they'll tell YOU what they meant and why). Liberals can never be considered racist.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Break down:

Conservatives always mean what liberals say they meant, even if the word wasn't used. Conservatives are always racist when they openly criticize a Liberal with power.

Liberals can change their argument from day to day regardless of terminology and meaning if it so suits them politically(they'll tell YOU what they meant and why). Liberals can never be considered racist.

Another paint-by-numbers argument.

Have another go, Joe.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Break down:

Conservatives always mean what liberals say they meant, even if the word wasn't used. Conservatives are always racist when they openly criticize a Liberal with power.

Liberals can change their argument from day to day regardless of terminology and meaning if it so suits them politically(they'll tell YOU what they meant and why). Liberals can never be considered racist.

Your attempts are sad.

Edited September 18, 2009 by Rob and Mel

[SteveLaura 0]

Let's make this simple.

Treason is generally considered to be:

a) Patriotic

b ) Unpatriotic

Doughnuts for all who wish to play.

Edited September 18, 2009 by SteveLaura