Ugh! Birthers....

[mimartin]

Still, I have great reason to doubt 99% of them would have voted for a conservative black candidate vs a white liberal, though the outcome of such a race would be interesting to see.

 

You are forgetting how many yellow dog democrats did not vote for Obama because he was African-American.

[Tommycat]

The demographics of the election were pretty clear. There was virtually no change in white voters' Democrat support. So while some Democrats may have voted Republican because he was black it can be inferred that many Republicans and independents also switched to voting Democrat for the same reason.

 

As for calling it racism, you did call it racism when there was no real reason to do so. And I did say people as in general. I did not say "I'm so sick of mimartin claiming racism at the drop of a hat" now did I. But it is more a general trend. We got a Black President, and suddenly every person who opposes him is called racist by the media, and in some cases the administration itself. I'm not out of line in saying it's been brought up enough to be silly. While I'm sure SOME people oppose him on race, others support him because of his race. Switch Obama for Bush and change racism to unpatriotic, and you get my drift.

 

Still, I have great reason to doubt 99% of them would have voted for a conservative black candidate vs a white liberal, though the outcome of such a race would be interesting to see.

I would have liked to see someone like Powell or Rice run. But sadly the last time Powell was thinking of running, he dropped out(I think it was 1996 and you should have heard just how racist the Democrats were back then).

[Totenkopf]

You are forgetting how many yellow dog democrats did not vote for Obama because he was African-American.

 

Actually, no, but since that # never comes anywhere NEAR 99%.....big deal. As I said earlier, you'll likely never be able to remove racism or bigotry (perceived or real) as a factor in any election or selection process. Not here or anywhere else in the world. In Barry's case, though, I'm sure most of the people who voted vs him did so b/c they saw him as anti-American, not African-American.

[mimartin]

I did not say "I'm so sick of mimartin claiming racism at the drop of a hat" now did I.

Well since I am the one that brought up race in this thread, I thought it was pretty clear you were singling me out.

 

No it does not come anywhere near 99%. But are you telling me, if the roles were reversed, if there had never been a white President and one was finally on the ballot you would not see a large majority of whites voting for that white nominee? Plus let’s put this in perceptive, African Americans have consistently voted for Democrats between 86-95% so we are only talking 14-4% above the norm. Kind of puts that 99% in perceptive, doesn’t it?

 

Also where are you getting the 99%, everything I read says Obama received 95% of the African American vote to McCain’s 4%. Also the election was not won because of the African American vote. Even with the high African-American turnout African-American voters still only made up about 13% of the voters (up from the norm of 11%). Frankly I believe the Hispanic vote of 66%, the under 30 vote 66% and the Women vote of 56% for Obama is what turned the election for President Obama.

[Jae Onasi]

Also, I am not implying that Republican or the right are racist; I am implying that this birther crap would have been dead on arrival had the President been white. That is not a Republican or Democratic issue; it is just a fact of racism in the country. I don’t really see how party affliction means someone is or is not a racist.

This issue came up with McCain, too, since he was born on an American base in Panama. He had to produce his birth certificate, too. While this was difficult because McCain was born approximately a year before paper, he did finally get one. While racism could be an issue in Obama's case, I still think, given the fact that it happened to both men and they happen to be different flavors, that it is more political than racial.

 

Right now it's a 'splinter section of the GOP' issue in Obama's case. In fact, there was talk in the Obama camp of letting this issue stay unresolved as long as possible to keep the GOP chasing wild geese instead of the real issues. With Donald 'Toupee-Tower' Trump picking up on it, however, I think Obama finally decided enough was enough. If anyone can market BS, Trump can, and I don't think Obama could afford Trump taking it any farther.

[Tommycat]

Well since I am the one that brought up race in this thread, I thought it was pretty clear you were singling me out.

It's all about you isn't it

 

No it does not come anywhere near 99%. But are you telling me, if the roles were reversed, if there had never been a white President and one was finally on the ballot you would see a large majority of whites voting for that white nominee? Plus let’s put this in perceptive, African Americans have consistently voted for Democrats between 86-95% so we are only talking 14-4% above the norm. Kind of puts that 99% in perceptive, doesn’t it?

There was a significant jump in black votes to Obama. Was there that same jump in white votes against Obama? No. it was a varying of one or two percentage points. In fact many of the Republicans I know pretty much stayed home. It isn't surprising that black voters tend to vote Democrat, since the likes of Sharpton and Jackson tend to label black Republicans "Uncle Tom"

Also where are you getting the 99%, everything I read says Obama received 95% of the African American vote to McCain’s 4%. Also the election was not won because of the African American vote. Even with the high African-American turnout African-American voters still only made up about 13% of the voters (up from the norm of 11%). Frankly I believe the Hispanic vote of 66%, the under 30 vote 66% and the Women vote of 56% for Obama is what turned the election for President Obama.

I don't think I said anywhere that the black vote won the election. I was pointing out(since you brought up race) that there was a significant uptick in the black vote for a black president. That is racism.

[mimartin]

It's all about you isn't it

I don't know, you were the one that took exception to what I wrote.

 

 

There was a significant jump in black votes to Obama.

Not really, if I discount the 99% that you did not reply where that number came from, and go with the 95% that I have read from multiple published sources, then it is within the norm as the Democrats usually get between 86-95% of the African-American vote. Now Obama did get 2% more African-Americans to the polls.

 

This issue came up with McCain, too, since he was born on an American base in Panama.

Yes, and when McCain the white guy produced his Birth Certificate the issue dropped, but when Obama released his perfectly legal Birth Certificate the issue did not drop. All we heard then was long form, long form.

[Tommycat]

I don't know, you were the one that took exception to what I wrote.

 

I took exception at you throwing the race card. Then proceeded to vent my frustration at how often that card is thrown for the smallest things. Don't like Obama? Race card. Don't like the health care bill? Race card. Don't like having taxes raised? Race card. Not a Democrat? RACE CARD! It's thrown out far too often, and you happened to be the most recent to throw the race card when it's not race so much as political.

 

Not really, if I discount the 99% that you did not reply where that number came from, and go with the 95% that I have read from multiple published sources, then it is within the norm as the Democrats usually get between 86-95% of the African-American vote.

 

Yes really when you include the 3% increase in the makeup of the total vote. I was going to link to it(since it was a Democrat's blog) but I'll concede that it was 96%. But with a significant jump in the volume of Black voters, does that not indicate racism?

 

 

Yes, and when McCain the white guy produced his Birth Certificate the issue dropped, but when Obama released his perfectly legal Birth Certificate the issue did not drop. All we heard then was long form, long form.

I don't know if you know this or not, but McCain didn't win the election. That may have been the reason it went away. Not to mention McCain's birth certificate was signed, whereas the one Obama produced was the unsigned one.

[mimartin]

1% to 3% is significant now? There was a larger increase in younger/first time voters than that. Ageism too?

 

 

Sorry the race issue may just be in my head, but I can only come to one of two conclusions, either race is involved in this entire birther melodrama, or a large percentage of Americans are just plain idiots. I just don’t know which one of those things are harder for me to swallow, but when 45% of Republicans and 43% of Americans were unsure between April 15th and 20th that the setting President of the United States had the legal authority to govern, there is a problem with either racism or stupidity in this country. Personally it may just be wishful thinking on my part hoping we are not that stupid.

 

whereas the one Obama produced was

perfectly legal, certified and acceptable birth certificate.

 

 

fixed

 

I don't know if you know this or not, but McCain didn't win the election.

Really I did not know that. I guess I'm just stupid, I should join the Republican party again. Fit right in.

[Tommycat]

Yes a change in the voter makeup of 3% is significant.

 

And I can understand the stupidity of people better than I can accept that much racism which is even more stupid... Heck ask around town to see how many people in your area even know who the VP is. To expect them to do even a little research into the birth certificate issue... It's pretty effin sad when even Rush was the voice of reason on the issue... When RUSH is telling people that Obama was born in the US, there's some pretty dim bulbs out there.

[Totenkopf]

No it does not come anywhere near 99%. But are you telling me, if the roles were reversed, if there had never been a white President and one was finally on the ballot you would not see a large majority of whites voting for that white nominee? Plus let’s put this in perceptive, African Americans have consistently voted for Democrats between 86-95% so we are only talking 14-4% above the norm. Kind of puts that 99% in perceptive, doesn’t it?

 

That's why I didn't make the argument that blacks were being racist in voting for BO. However, if that "first" black candidate had been Allen Keys or somone of a similiar bent, I doubt they'd have voted for him in such numbers. But they do tend to vote almost monolithically as a voting block, which if/when whites do they are called or implied to be racists by many a liberal social commentator/academic.

 

Also where are you getting the 99%, everything I read says Obama received 95% of the African American vote to McCain’s 4%. Also the election was not won because of the African American vote. Even with the high African-American turnout African-American voters still only made up about 13% of the voters (up from the norm of 11%). Frankly I believe the Hispanic vote of 66%, the under 30 vote 66% and the Women vote of 56% for Obama is what turned the election for President Obama.

 

The "near 99%" was meant to convey a huge disproportionate # of a group voting in one direction. You seemed to be implying that a significant # of white dems were primarily motivated by racial concerns and I was only pointing out that as a % it paled in comparison to the % of blacks who voted for BO simply b/c he was black. However, I wonder how many of the swing vote will go for BO in 2012 and how many will defect in disgust in a fit of buyer's remorse.

 

Also, weren't you overwhelmed with pride @ Trump's reticence to take credit for "resolving" this issue. Now, if only someone can bring Alex Jones around......

[Q]

I'm far more concerned about the three quarters of a trillion dollars of our money (which we don't have) that the president used to pay off the people who got him elected than the stupid "birther" issue.

 

And the race card has been played so much that, for better and for worse, nobody takes it seriously anymore.

[Tommycat]

perfectly legal, certified and acceptable birth certificate.

 

 

fixed

 

 

Really I did not know that. I guess I'm just stupid, I should join the Republican party again. Fit right in.

 

DON'T FIX WHAT I SAID! I said it as it was. McCain produced one that was signed. Obama produced one(at least publicly) that left his birth origin in question.

 

And besides, perfectly legal certified election results in 2000 didn't stop Democrats from screaming that Bush was never elected. So don't pretend that Republicans are the only stupid ones. My point about McCain(me being a smart alec aside) was that had McCain actually won the election then there would have been far more scrutiny on his birth origin by the ones who wished he hadn't won. Funny thing thinking about it though.. because even if Obama became invalidated by finding he wasn't legally allowed to be president, it would have simply just moved on to the next person in the chain of command... Biden. Even worse if McCain were elected and found to be ineligible... Palin... My guess to the thinking of those who want Obama not to be eligible(at least listening to the ones who called in to radio shows) was they thought it would invalidate the election results and McCain would win by default(though they would be wrong)... the other popular thought(as best as it could be labeled) was that it would preclude him from running again.

 

At any rate, I have a feeling that Obama knows that Trump isn't a serious candidate. So he could take up the issue and run with it without risking his election bid. And it's just extra publicity for Trump. And for those thinking that Trump really has a shot, you really have to look at his own statements. Obama would LOVE to run against Trump. He talks down the Chinese, but the Trump signature suit has a label of... "Made in China"

[Totenkopf]

Well, at least Pelosi is no longer in the line of succession....thank God.

[Working Class Hero]

Yeah, john boehner is so much better.

[mimartin]

DON'T FIX WHAT I SAID! I said it as it was. McCain produced one that was signed. Obama produced one(at least publicly) that left his birth origin in question.

 

It only left President Obama’s birth origins in question if someone did not want to believe legal proof. In other words it left his birth origin in question to complete idiots or racist that refused to see the truth. This would seem to make up 45% of the Republican Party and 43% of voting America. IT WAS JUST AS LEGAL AS THE ONE PRODUCED BY MCCAIN. The signature means about as much as a pimple on my butt. Certified is what matters.

 

Show spoiler

(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)

 

 

Also I will fix anything I want in my post (provided I did not fix it in a way that others would think the quoted member wrote it (in other words outside the quote)).

 

And the race card has been played so much that, for better and for worse, nobody takes it seriously anymore.

True, even when blatant racism is staring people in the face it is ignored in the name of politics as usual.

[Totenkopf]

True, even when blatant racism is staring people in the face it is ignored in the name of politics as usual.

 

Maybe if it weren't invoked so promiscuisly, like the proverbial boy who cried wolf, it might be taken more seriously and not as a scurriously utilized political ploy to smear rivals. As to the BC, until and unless someone proves it's fake/altered, it's the long form that people have been yelling for, so let's move on to other issues now.

 

Yeah, john boehner is so much better.

 

At least we know he's not crying crocodile tears. As corrupt as he is, I'd sooner have Charlie Rangel than that plastic fake pelosi in the LOS to be POTUS. John Boenher's virtue is that he's not pelosi.

[mimartin]

Maybe if it weren't invoked so promiscuisly, like the proverbial boy who cried wolf, it might be taken more seriously and not as a scurriously utilized political ploy to smear rivals.

You're right I don't know why anyone would cry about race in this day and age.

 

I could bring up others if you would like, but the others are way more offensive than this one.

 

As to the BC, until and unless someone proves it's fake/altered, it's the long form that people have been yelling for, so let's move on to other issues now.

Still want to give the idiots credibility I see.

[Q]

I'm seeing more and more crap like this on the internet every day. I believe that this pic and many, many like it are part of a backlash generated by relentless overplaying of the race card.

 

No matter how serious it may be, it's becoming apparent that racism is now regarded as little more than a joke by a large percentage of the population.

[mimartin]

I'm seeing more and more crap like this on the internet every day. I believe that this pic and many, many like it are part of a backlash generated by relentless overplaying of the race card.

You do know where Obama Bucks came from right?

 

It is from a Republican women's group from 2008 who thought this was good clean political fun. No racism here, no, no, no...

 

 

ADDON: THIS picture is not directed at Q. It is direct at America being blind to racism in this day and age. I really hope Q or anyone else did not take that it was directed at Q.

I publically apologize to Q if he took this as any criticism of him or his ideas. I think he knows me well enough to know I don’t judge people based on their political ideas or opinions.

 

 

[Liverandbacon]

Wow, this threads gotten... heated, in the time I've been gone. I'm exhausted right now from just getting back from a very long flight, so I won't weigh in on the whole argument about racism.

 

Personally, I don't care if any President is born in-country, as long as he's a US citizen, has clearly undivided loyalty to the US, and runs the government well, despite what the law says. Whether or not Obama fits that description (well, the last factor at least) is another debate entirely, so I won't talk about that here.

 

Of course, I might be biased in this regard, since I was born as a US citizen (and citizen of 3 other countries), but in the UK. While I have no interest in ever filling any political office, I find it absurd that I cannot be president, while someone who has done far less for this country can, just because they got expelled from the womb in a different geographical location.

 

Maybe people who have a problem with a leader should look for and point out real problems with how they run things. I've found doing that tends to convince other people to switch sides a whole lot better.

[Tommycat]

You do know where Obama Bucks came from right?

 

It is from a Republican women's group from 2008 who thought this was good clean political fun. No racism here, no, no, no...

 

 

Yeah, because none of the Dems ever used racist comments. I mean nothing like calling Colin Powell a house n****r. Or calling Condoleeza Rice a Mammy.

[mimartin]

Yeah, because none of the Dems ever used racist comments.

What is your point? Seriously do you have one or is your entire argument the equitant of I am rubber you are glue because I never wrote that racism had anything to do with party affiliation. I guess by your logic if someone does a morally reprehensible thing, it makes it fine for everyone to do that morally reprehensible thing. I assume I'm mistaken, but that is what your argument sounds like.

 

 

Since you did not bother to read it, I'll repeat myself again.

That is not a Republican or Democratic issue; it is just a fact of racism in the country. I don’t really see how party affliction means someone is or is not a racist.

[Tommycat]

But you're attributing racism to non-racial issues. I'm not pretending that there isn't racism. I'm saying that THIS instance is not so much about race as it is they don't like how the election went. Dems would likely have pushed for McCain to jump through the same hoops had he won the election. But he didn't, so the issue of his birth place went away as quickly as his campaign. If anything it's a fact about people not doing enough research or not bothering with boring things like facts. It's simply a vilification of the guy you didn't want to win. Race has nothing to do with the birther issue(or is so insignificant as to be a non-factor).

 

As a rule, I dislike racism altogether. The problem comes when people throw it out when it ISN'T racism. For example:

The Obama bucks: Racist.

The Obama whitehouse with the watermellon garden in front: Racist

Disliking Obama: Not racist.

Disliking Obama because he's black: racist.

Calling black Republicans "Uncle Toms": racist.

 

The issue started in the Democratic primaries. It started gaining momentum there. And like all good conspiracy theories, people who wanted to believe it, promoted it, even in the face of facts. Like those who believe that the WTC attacks were faked. Never mind that facts don't support your theory.

 

This was more political than racist. They didn't win. Both the people upset that Hillary didn't win and then the people upset that McCain didn't win. Simple. No need to pretend it's race. Maybe the reason I pointed to the racism in the Democrat party is that you somehow felt better thinking that 50% of the Republican party was racist than ill informed.

[mimartin]

So none of the birthers belief that Obama was not born in the United States comes has anything to do with race?

 

You cannot be serious.