Is it Obama bashing, racist, or vetting the truth?

[henryclay]

This hits hard, and some people won't like it, but the facts are out there whether or not they are what we would like them to be. Rather than argue over whether those facts should be aired, someone should try to dispute them. . . . maybe blame it all on somebody else. , , , , Using THAT approach will make the facts go away, and the world won't be flat any more will it?

March 10, 2011 by Lloyd Marcus
Obama Calling Tea Party Racist Reveals A Far More Disturbing Reality
The Democrats and the liberal mainstream media sold the American people on Obama, "the man." Despite Obama's zero experience at running anything, they said a leader with his spirit and heart was "what we have been waiting for".

Fearful of criticizing our first black president, politicians politely say, "President Obama's policies have been unfruitful," while ignoring the huge elephant in America's living room.

The elephant of which I speak and America's major problem is "Obama, the man"; socialist, divisive and evil.

My dad says a snake can stay under water a very long time just like a fish. But eventually, it must come up for air. Why? Because, it is not a fish. It is a snake. Obama continues to come up for air revealing his true self.

More at: www.americanthinker.com/2011/03/obama_calling_tea_party_racist.html

For any who would like to diss the author, go here:

[deziloooooo]

Again a article from a conservative media source, dissing the President...opinion piece with little fact or discussion, and they use to give lakhota such a hard time because he posted so much from the Huff. Where are you getting all these from henry. wait, don't answer that there are so many there does not make it fact , just another anti rhetoric , yadda, yadda.

"The American Thinker "
Genre News, political commentary
Founded May 2005
Founder Thomas Lifson
Headquarters El Cerrito, California
Key people Thomas Lifson, Editor-in-Chief
Ed Lasky, News Editor

Launched November 2003
Current status Active

The American Thinker is a daily conservative internet publication dealing with American politics, foreign policy, national security, economics, diplomacy, culture, military strategy, and the survival of the State of Israel

[Shirina]

To be completely honest, I don't trust anything from the American Thinker. I've read too many ridiculously far-right fringy articles from that place, articles steeped in unproven conspiracy theories. Worse still, many articles from there openly insult liberals and Obama, causing one to wonder about their credentials, knowledge, and professionalism. American Thinker is just a glorified blog site, so quoting from there is like quoting someone else's message board post.

And why is it that "lefties" are told not to quote from Huffington Post or Media Matters (right Krickitt?) while conservatives continue to quote from American Thinker or Hot Air?

[henryclay]

Shirina, dear heart, you don't have to see the American Thinker site. You can see the article on the author's own web site if you are interested in it. www.lloydmarcus.com/

Of course if the idea is to dumpon the whole thing without knowing any more about it, , , , , that's a different matter entirely.

Which is it?

[deziloooooo]

Mar 10, 2011 19:47:16 GMT -5 Shirina said:

To be completely honest, I don't trust anything from the American Thinker. I've read too many ridiculously far-right fringy articles from that place, articles steeped in unproven conspiracy theories. Worse still, many articles from there openly insult liberals and Obama, causing one to wonder about their credentials, knowledge, and professionalism. American Thinker is just a glorified blog site, so quoting from there is like quoting someone else's message board post.

And why is it that "lefties" are told not to quote from Huffington Post or Media Matters (right Krickitt?) while conservatives continue to quote from American Thinker or Hot Air?

I posted it because I was not familiar with it, the organization however i did read about the one who wrote the article and have no problem with him at all. He is a black man, very conservative which is his right , as is my being middle to the left, and has written many articles for this particular publication. His biography is interesting.
-------------------------------------------------------
www.lloydmarcus.com/?page_id=4
----------------------------------------------------
I read his piece , have many reservations about it but it's his opinion, which he has a right to have, but not have to be thought of as the final , definitive word that I think Henry tries to get across in his posts.
-------------------
I would really be surprised if any one from the right on this zone would be as honest in describing leftest ideas with out constant dissing of the contents or the author and that is one of the main differences between most from the right from most of those from the left.{Hope you notice I said most, there are always exceptions}

[Shirina]

Shirina, dear heart, you don't have to see the American Thinker site. You can see the article on the author's own web site if you are interested in it.

Why would it matter if the author has the same article on his own site? If it was fit to be published on American Thinker, I have an inherent distrust of it. The articles there are so overtly biased and far-right-leaning that it constitutes a fringe element of media sources.

The elephant of which I speak and America's major problem is "Obama, the man"; socialist, divisive and evil.

And the above quote exemplifies precisely what I'm talking about. Once again, my point is proven for me.

[billisonboard]

Obama's inauguration brought tears to the eyes of millions of Americans. Blacks are only 12% of our nation's population, which means it took many million white votes to put Obama in the Oval Office. Thus, most of the American tears of joy were white. (from the link in the OP)

Let's check the logical processing of information by the author. That 12% represents 36 million people (including children). Obama received over 69 million votes. So clearly President Obama had non-blacks vote for him, putting him in office. Now, the tears in the eyes issue. People cried, granted. Millions? Okay, I will go with that. Remember, the claim that the author made was that "most" of the tears were "white" (we have to assume that he meant cried by whites). But realize, it is possible that 36 million plus Americans could have cried without a single white person crying. So the author used the fact that whites voted for Obama and the fact that people cried at his inauguration to make a totally illogical claim about the face of the majority who cried.

So what? If the author makes this sort of illogical analysis on such a simple matter, can we trust his analysis of President Obama's Presidency? I personally do not trust it or him.

[henryclay]

Shirina, the picture I am getting from your words is that you are offended because a black man, who is active in the Tea Party, took exception when another black man referred to the Tea Party as being founded on racist themes. Put another way, when the other black man said the Tea Party was a racist movement. Is it novel for a black person to have such a reaction, or is it just abhorent that his thoughts get published by a particular conservative outlet?

There are other conservative sites carrying the article, too. Are they all suspect?

[billisonboard]

Mar 10, 2011 21:00:22 GMT -5 henryclay said:

Shirina, the picture I am getting from your words is that you are offended because a black man, ...the other black man said the Tea Party was a racist movement. Is it novel for a black person to have such a reaction, ...?

Interesting that you have chosen to play the race card here. I read no indication that the author of the article was black posted by anyone prior to you mentioning it here. Whoops, I went back and actually read dezi's post and see he did mention it.

[henryclay]

bills, who can fault you for not opening even one link?

[deziloooooo]

Mar 10, 2011 21:07:28 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Mar 10, 2011 21:00:22 GMT -5 henryclay said:

Shirina, the picture I am getting from your words is that you are offended because a black man, ...the other black man said the Tea Party was a racist movement. Is it novel for a black person to have such a reaction, ...?

Interesting that you have chosen to play the race card here. I read no indication that the author of the article was black posted by anyone prior to you mentioning it here. Whoops, I went back and actually read dezi's post and see he did mention it.

I really try to be very open in my posting, many will disagree with my ideas and thoughts but will never consciously leave something out , even if it hurts my side of a issue. {I was surprised when I checked him , race of, out and he is a voracious writer, many articles, very anti Obama from the titles of, no didn't read any more , get the idea, yet impressive biography, I give him that}

[billisonboard]

Mar 10, 2011 21:10:49 GMT -5 henryclay said:

bills, who can fault you for not opening even one link?

henryclay,
In reply #6, I posted a part of the article you link in the OP. Not only did I open the link, I read the link. And not only read it, but took the time to seriously consider what the author wrote. (I did find his thought process lacking.)

Now, if you want to find me at fault for not reading dezi in detail - guilty.

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

I like this quote.... I am going to use it tomorrow at work, my management group are a bunch of numb-nuts:

My dad says a snake can stay under water a very long time just like a fish. But eventually, it must come up for air. Why? Because, it is not a fish. It is a snake.

[henryclay]

For al those liberals who consider us Conservative Republicans to be elitists and exclusive, let me introduce you to some of my friends.

[deziloooooo]

Mar 10, 2011 21:24:45 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Mar 10, 2011 21:10:49 GMT -5 henryclay said:

bills, who can fault you for not opening even one link?

henryclay,
In reply #6, I posted a part of the article you link in the OP. Not only did I open the link, I read the link. And not only read it, but took the time to seriously consider what the author wrote. (I did find his thought process lacking.)

Now, if you want to find me at fault for not reading dezi in detail - guilty.

Hey I'll take a occasional skim ..

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

The elephant of which I speak and America's major problem is "Obama, the man"; socialist, divisive and evil.

My dad says a snake can stay under water a very long time just like a fish. But eventually, it must come up for air. Why? Because, it is not a fish. It is a snake. Obama continues to come up for air revealing his true self.

It's not just Obama- it's a huge cadre of far left Democrats.

That's right, we see you, Democrats.

And with respect to Obama specifically, there's more to this snake than mere 'socialism'.

Read Dinesh D'Souza's "The Roots of Obama's Rage"

[Shirina]

Shirina, the picture I am getting from your words is that

I do not particularly wish to read authors who would call Obama a socialist, divisive, and evil.

The word "evil" is especially ridiculous, and that kind of rhetoric and flagrant appeal to emotion (rather than fact) has no place in objective writing.

And with respect to Obama specifically, there's more to this snake than mere 'socialism'.

Sometimes it's not the snake who thinks he's a fish. Sometimes a snake is simply called a fish because it better suits a particular agenda.

[ed1066]

Karma for you Henry. Another good source!

[henryclay]

Than kyu sir, and did you notice that in all the boos and hisses so far not a single person has remarked about Obama's racist labelling of the Tea Party or being called on it by yet another prominent black personality? I honestly thought that's where bills was going at first, but , , , , sigh , , , ,

[ed1066]

Than kyu sir, and did you notice that in all the boos and hisses so far not a single person has remarked about Obama's racist labelling of the Tea Party or being called on it by yet another prominent black personality? I honestly thought that's where bills was going at first, but , , , , sigh , , ,

Well, we'll have to keep waiting. Once you take their race card away, there's really nothing left except hate and bigotry...and we've seen plenty of that from the left these last few years, haven't we?

[hello fromWarsaw]

Hating haters? Pointing out racists is racism? You people are amazing....

[deziloooooo]

Mar 11, 2011 0:53:00 GMT -5 henryclay said:

Than kyu sir, and did you notice that in all the boos and hisses so far not a single person has remarked about Obama's racist labelling of the Tea Party or being called on it by yet another prominent black personality? I honestly thought that's where bills was going at first, but , , , , sigh , , , ,

Love it , Frick and Frack now appearing right here on our stage , lets have a great round of applause for them...

[billisonboard]

Mar 11, 2011 0:53:00 GMT -5 henryclay said:

Than kyu sir, and did you notice that in all the boos and hisses so far not a single person has remarked about Obama's racist labelling of the Tea Party or being called on it by yet another prominent black personality? I honestly thought that's where bills was going at first, but , , , , sigh , , , ,

How could I go there? I was too busy reading the quality of the author's thought process as expressed in his article. I had no clue what racial category he was born into. Maybe no one has commented on the fact the author is African-American, other than you, is that no one, other than you, considered race important to the issue. In fact, I would love for you to explain why it is significant.

[henryclay]

bills, are you saying it is not significant when the president of the United States can willy nilly call millions of Americans racists? Why is that not important but the author's analysis of the skin behind millions of teary eyes on inauguration day is enough for you to discredit him and his entire article?

Is it as was said, brought on by liberal bigotry and hatred for anything less than lauditory about Obama, or is it blind allegiance to an obviously imperfect messaih?

[privateinvestor]

Is it Obama bashing, racist, or vetting the truth?


Read more: notmsnmoney.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=politics&action=display&thread=4607#ixzz1GIfEl3CN


With the concerns today about a Tsunami, it is hard to care whether or not Obama is being racist of vetting the truth...

But with that being said, I believe Americans think Obama lacks an effective strategy for improving our economy. Obama has not convinced the public of his ability to implement an effective strategy to improve our long term prospects, and this lack of leadership is likely to be on his top hurdles to re election...IMHO

[billisonboard]

Mar 11, 2011 8:59:20 GMT -5 henryclay said:

bills, are you saying it is not significant when the president of the United States can willy nilly call millions of Americans racists? Why is that not important but the author's analysis of the skin behind millions of teary eyes on inauguration day is enough for you to discredit him and his entire article?

Is it as was said, brought on by liberal bigotry and hatred for anything less than lauditory about Obama, or is it blind allegiance to an obviously imperfect messaih?

First, here is the actually situation:

But Obama, in his most candid moments, acknowledged that race was still a problem. In May 2010, he told guests at a private White House dinner that race was probably a key component in the rising opposition to his presidency from conservatives, especially right-wing activists in the anti-incumbent "Tea Party" movement that was then surging across the country. Many middle-class and working-class whites felt aggrieved and resentful that the federal government was helping other groups, including bankers, automakers, irresponsible people who had defaulted on their mortgages, and the poor, but wasn't helping them nearly enough, he said.
...
A guest suggested that when Tea Party activists said they wanted to "take back" their country, their real motivation was to stir up anger and anxiety at having a black president, and Obama didn't dispute the idea. He agreed that there was a "subterranean agenda" in the anti-Obama movement—a racially biased one—that was unfortunate. But he sadly conceded that there was little he could do about it.

His goal, he said, was to be as effective and empathetic a president as possible for all Americans. If he could accomplish that, it would advance racial progress for blacks more than anything else he could do. www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/03/02/obama-says-race-a-key-component-in-tea-party-protests?PageNr=3

Is this "evil" as the author of the article in the OP suggests? Doesn't sound "evil" to me. Is the author credible? My analysis of his "white tears" suggests that he doesn't bother to be factual.

[henryclay]

Let me get this straight. Obama can repeatedly make comments containing his racist view of loyal Americans with a different political disposition and it is not worthy of note, but someone else can allude to the general support groups on inauguration day being of mixed ethnic backgrounds and you can find enough fault in it to denounce the entire effort?

Whew!!!!!!!!!

[billisonboard]

Mar 11, 2011 9:09:29 GMT -5 @privateinvestor said:

Is it Obama bashing, racist, or vetting the truth?


Read more: notmsnmoney.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=politics&action=display&thread=4607#ixzz1GIfEl3CN


With the concerns today about a Tsunami, it is hard to care whether or not Obama is being racist of vetting the truth...

But with that being said, I believe Americans think Obama lacks an effective strategy for improving our economy. Obama has not convinced the public of his ability to implement an effective strategy to improve our long term prospects, and this lack of leadership is likely to be on his top hurdles to re election...IMHO

I agree that Obama's re-election chances hinge on issues other than race.

[billisonboard]

Mar 11, 2011 9:36:18 GMT -5 henryclay said:

Let me get this straight. Obama can repeatedly make comments containing his racist view of loyal Americans with a different political disposition and it is not worthy of note, but someone else can allude to the general support groups on inauguration day being of mixed ethnic backgrounds and you can find enough fault in it to denounce the entire effort?

Whew!!!!!!!!!

Sorry but you aren't getting it straight. One needs to read what President Obama actually said and what the author of the article actually wrote.