Social Question

Dutchess_III's avatar

Do you feel that the unrelenting Obama-bashing by the vocal and racist minority is damaging to the USA?

Asked by Dutchess_III (37465points) July 14th, 2010

I do.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

295 Answers

Seek's avatar

Popcorn, anyone?

* leans back and watches *

cookieman's avatar

Yes…but I hope upon hope that the majority of Americans (or is that United Statesians?) are smart enough to make up their own minds about such things.

zenele's avatar

I’ll have some @Seek_Kolinahr – thanks.

Sits back, muches vulcan popcorn and waits for the fireworks – oh, it’s going to be loverly tonight.

Seaofclouds's avatar

I don’t think it’s just racist people. I get more chain e-mails from people that are Christian saying he is a Muslim and wants to destroy our country than I do from people that are racist. I know for a fact the people forwarding the e-mails to me aren’t racist.

zenele's avatar

@Seaofclouds You know I lurve you, dear (and how’s the soldier doing?) but I get more chain e-mails from people that are Christian saying he is a Muslim and wants to destroy our country than I do from people that are racist – sounds pretty racist, to me.

cookieman's avatar

@Seaofclouds: And how is that not racist?

Seaofclouds's avatar

@zenele and @cprevite To me racist is strictly about a person’s race. Hate of a person because of their religion is different term (which is escaping me at the moment). So I meant they don’t hate him because of his race. My point was I hear more about questioning his religion than I do his race.

@zenele He’s doing okay, having some problems with their electricity right now, but doing okay.

IchtheosaurusRex's avatar

I hope it will ultimately damage the Republicans, but so far, it appears to be working for them.

josie's avatar

What did you call that group of folks who bashed Bill Clinton. George Bush. I bashed both of those guys, and I have done my fair share of Obama bashing (which according to a recent Gallup poll is what 60% of Americans are doing these days, which would be a MAJORITY). Is this one of those “If you criticize a black president you are a racist” comments? If so, have the decency to say it to my face, not my avatar [which, come to think of it, is my face].
Anyway, the answer is, a little president bashing is a public service.

IchtheosaurusRex's avatar

@josie , I don’t think they’re talking about disapproval. They’re talking about this shit.

BTW – Gallup has more people approving of Big O than disapproving today, so i don’t know where you’re getting this 60% shit.

TexasDude's avatar

Everyone who does not support Obama is a teabagging racist who undermines America…

Everyone who does not support Bush is a terrorist supporting communist who undermines America…

Yup. Nothing new to see here. Move along…

josie's avatar

@IchtheosaurusRex I got the number wrong. Todays Gallup is 45% approval. I would be in the other 55%. Thanks for keeping me honest.

IchtheosaurusRex's avatar

@josie , they update it around 2:00 ET. But that wasn’t the point of my message.

tinyfaery's avatar

I think that certain people are just now showing their true colors. These people were around before Obama and they will be around when a white person is back in the White House.

josie's avatar

@IchtheosaurusRex
Oh.
I thought the point was in “this 60% shit”. Felt obligated to clear it up.

Cruiser's avatar

Time to face the facts, these lunatic thinkers as some like to characterize them are not really thinking anything unique many others here and around the world are also thinking. Obama has earned a lot of the questions people are and have been asking about the job he is or isn’t doing. Things were a mess, still are a mess and not looking to “change” anytime soon!

gemiwing's avatar

I don’t think it does the US harm. I think the constant focus on them by the media does harm by making their numbers appear larger. Hell, I cant say much on this because I sure as hell bashed G Dub when he was in office- US is still standing.

liminal's avatar

The polling seems to indicate that US residents are pretty closely divided down the middle over Obama’s performance: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html

I think the racist ignorant speak isn’t reflective of all who are opposed to Obama policy. Unfortunately, it is mostly what we hear about.

It is probably safe to say that people who don’t educate themselves with the facts (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/) of what Obama said he would do, and whether or not he is actually doing or not doing those things, perpetuates the stereotype that US citizens are unthinking loud mouths of no substance. Of course, this stereo-type hasn’t brought the kingdom to an end so far.

CMaz's avatar

Self expression is a beautiful thing.

Dutchess_III's avatar

I think the fact that Obama is black has a LOT to do with the criticism. It just wouldn’t be PC to come right out and say it, so they focus on other, even more stupid issues, such as he is supposedly a Muslim, wasn’t born in the USA, etc. Everything that has ever been emailed me saying that Obama did this, or Obama did that, I have quickly been able to determine that either it was an outright lie, or taken totally out of context. You clue people in though, and they just prefer to ignore it. They prefer to ignore the truth. I don’t know why….

As far as the “majority….” I think that you can have 5 people screaming their heads off, sending BS emails around, and have 15 others who are quietly doing their own research, and the 5 loud people are going to SEEM like the majority. So many people jump on the what appears to be the majority bandwagon just because the next guy is doing it. They don’t even know what they’re yelling about, they just figure that since “everyone else” is yelling “everyone else” must be right….

I think it’s really bad for the country. We need to unite, not divide.

@Cruiser Obama never promised a quick fix. You know, the economy is recovering, albeit slowly. The racists want to say, “Well, that’s in SPITE of Obama,” and that’s BS.

Dutchess_III's avatar

(BTW…where do they get those figures for the Gallup? I wanna vote!!)

josie's avatar

@Dutchess_III So clue me in. What makes the current ambitious, corrupt, dishonest, self serving president somehow better than all of the other ambitious, corrupt, dishonest, self serving politicians who became president in the past. What am I missing? I am willing to listen.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@josie My point is, no other president has ever been the focus of so much bashing, not even Bush. Obama is a hundred times better than Bush, yet no one was sending 30 stupid emails a day about Bush.

Also, of course he’s ambitious! I don’t think anyone would even consider running for the President of the United States unless he or she was ambitious! You say that like it’s a bad thing. It’s not.

What I’ve seen is that Bush gave the car giants a boat load of cash, and expected no accounting for it. Obama, on the other hand, loaned them money to get them out of the mess they were in and further said, “Since we loaned you this money we’re going to make sure you do the right thing with it,” and he did.

He turned the focus of the war away from Iraq, where it never should have been in the first place, and got it, and it’s purpose, back on track in Afghanistan where it was supposed to be. He pushed through the Health Care Reform (yay!) against all odds, when none of the other presidents before him that wanted that were able to do. There are a lot of things to admire in Obama.

Now, what proof do you have that he’s corrupt and dishonest? Again, just buzzwords to be passed around that have no substance.

mass_pike4's avatar

God is great. Beer is good. People are crazy. The End.

Dutchess_III's avatar

I wonder if the rest of the world is looking at us, listening to the insane rants, and just shaking their heads in pity at the ignorance of it all.

josie's avatar

@Dutchess_III I gotta give you points for effort and style. But somebody (not me, I do not have the desire or time at the moment) could come up with the counterpoint to your comments, and my attitude would be the same. What the hell is so great about a politician, that we (you and/or me) actually imagine that they can run our lives. It is one thing to administer a public protection agency, like government could be, and another all together to administer a public control agency which government is. How do people like politicians, who are generally regarded as worthless, weasle their way into a spot where they can run their con with impunity-in a democracy no less. Shame on us, I guess.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@josie Again, just words. Don’t mean nothin.

whitenoise's avatar

Obama a Muslim….? Now that I didn’t know!
No wonder the US are going down the drain. Next thing y’all do is elect a black president.

Hand me some of that popcorn please

edit:
Seriously, I feel this is the first time in a long while that the US has a president that actually seems motivated by intellect an a desire to do the right thing… as a result he is being frustrated by opposition in pretty much all his efforts. To use the (false) argument that he is Muslim as an indication to disqualify him is ridiculous. To call that non-discrimatory/racial is ludicrous. That muslim-statement is actually designed to trigger racial reactions of dislike. But hell…. what do I know, I am just an outsider looking in.

Ron_C's avatar

You can bash the guy for not doing enough or being too easy or harsh but to start calling names, accusing him of being anti-American and a traitor is what his predecessors did to those of us that didn’t agree with the party line. I would refuse to be like them but considering their leadership this vile campaign against the President is about what I would expect. They just can’t get past the fact that they are not in power and will do anything to get it back. For power they will damn an innocent man and ruin the country. Disgusting, I will never again vote for a Republican, at least until all of the current ones are dead or out of office.

IchtheosaurusRex's avatar

@josie , you’re the one who brought Gallup into this.

…a recent Gallup poll is what 60% of Americans…

Now, as you demonstrated earlier, Gallup does a presidential approval poll daily. The latest poll has him at 45% approve, 47% disapprove. Those numbers stink, but they don’t add up to 100 because 8% either have no opinion or can’t decide. In any case, the lowest rating he’s had in the last year is 44% So once again, where do you get this 60% SHIT?

plethora's avatar

Let’s keep in mind that Flutherites are a decidedly Liberal group. There is another point of view that is very prevalent today and Mr O is not our favorite guy for a host of reasons, race not being one of them.

ETpro's avatar

It’s nothing new. Back when the Kennedy Administration pushed ahead with the Civil Rights Act, Governor George Wallace of Alabama reacted with a fiery speech warning the freedom lovers out there to rise up, awaken, realize that bit by bit we are being made slaves to an overreaching Federal Government. Soon, soldiers would be on every corner, and dissidents would go to the gulag. Of course, that was 47 years ago, and it hasn’t even begun to happen. But that hasn’t stopped the cowering far right from bellowing about it all these intervening years.

Ronald Reagan actually mads an ad back in 1961 warning of the end of freedom. Michelle Bachmann just picked up on the same theme, seemingly oblivious to the fact they have been warning about it for 50 years and we are as free today as we were back in the 1960s, many of us are freer, in fact.

What is dangerous is that the din of the vast right wing noise machine now gives this paranoid, cowardice-driven insanity legs it never had before. Yes, it’s worrying. Even staunch conservatives like South Carolina’s Bob Inglis (93% conservative voting record) and Utah’s Senator Bob Bennett (84% conservative voting record) have been purged by the far right for the high crime of sometimes actually making sense when they talk. Apparently only a 100% record of following the far-right party line is good enough. No individual thought is allowed. If you think anythingt that the lockstep crowd doesn’t fully endorse, you have drunk the Koolaid and just don’t see the truth. That’s the stuff of fascism, folks. That’s permanent one-party rule, and it can only flourish under a brutal dictator. That’s what is at stake if we sniffle debate in favor of lockstep ideology-driven thought.

YARNLADY's avatar

They vowed they were going to take him down, and it looks like they are gaining.

plethora's avatar

@ETpro YIKES!!! The “vast right wing”? I think not. Our two party system works and when it swings too far either way, the bums get voted out….either party.

ETpro's avatar

@plethora I suspect you are playing coy. Surely you know what the phrase “vast right wing noise machine” means. But just in case you don’t, it refers to right wing talk radio and the growing right wing blogosphere and chain email network. There is no left-wing counterpart to Limbaugh, Beck, O’Reilley, Hugh Hewitt, Sean Hannity, Jon Arthur, Mark Levin, Michael Medved, Laura Ingraham, Neal Boortz and Michael Savage to name a few. And much of that crew is echoing the chant the Obama is a socialist, Marxist, Nazi who is enslaving America and all liberals are clueless and must be taken down.

plethora's avatar

@ETpro You know the characters better than I do. O’Reilly and Hannity are the only two I ever see and them not often. But, honestly, have never heard it called the “vast right wing noise machine”.

ETpro's avatar

@plethora Fair enough. So today you;earned a new phrase. Search the phrase and Google returns 122,000 hits. So a few people do use it. :-)
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS249&q=vast+right+wing+noise+machine&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

Dutchess_III's avatar

@YARNLADY My point: It looks like they are gaining. Key word is looks like simply because the rednecks make more noise than the educated so it looks like they’re gaining…...

ETpro's avatar

@YARNLADY They gained for a time, but the 20 percenters are a pretty constant demographic now. THey are the dittoheads that listen to the right-wing talk radio, read the right-wing blogosphere and forward the emails to their right-wing allies. And they are to same group that vehemently insist that anyone that reads real media and listens to any network TV has drunk the liberal Koolaid and has n idea what’s going on. Their numbers may be slowly eroding now as the Tea Party puts truly loony-tunes candidates up and they actually start talking about their agenda for the future of America.

rooeytoo's avatar

From my yankee perspective on the other side of the world, Obama is not being chastised or ridiculed or judged nearly as prevalently or harshly as Dubya was. So what the mean people say about his performance is not constantly making the news here (in Australia) nor does the average aussie dislike him as most seemed to with Bush.

And if you want to talk about president bashing, I agree that whomever is sitting in that oval office is going to be attacked, ridiculed, criticized and on and on. It comes with the territory, it is called freedom of speech. It is not inherently racist or sexist although it can be, it is just that people have to have someone to blame!

ETpro's avatar

@rooeytoo Check these:
http://blackbutchresistance.blogspot.com/
http://www.slate.com/id/2251669
http://washingtonindependent.com/31868/scenes-from-the-new-american-tea-party
http://chattahbox.com/us/2009/10/10/racist-n-word-sign-attacks-obamas-health-reform/
http://politicalhumor.about.com/b/2010/04/15/the-most-ridiculous-tea-party-protest-signs.htm

I grant you that I saw some disgusting signs at anti Bush rallies as well. I equally condemn that. But it was a far smaller movement than the Obama hate speech.

I don’t claim anyone has to like a president, but I do think in a democracy where the majority elected the nation’s Cheif Executive Officer, we owe him or her the respect due the office. Disagree with their policies, but avoid the name calling. And blatant lies like Obama’s a Marxist Nazi are particularly odious. That sort of propaganda based politics is the stuff tyranny is born from.

rooeytoo's avatar

@ETpro – honestly I saw material about Bush that was pretty bad too, the only difference is they didn’t have the race card to play. Some will consider this an inappropriate attitude but so be it, I am a lot more upset personally at the fact that Hilary was told to go home and iron Bill’s shirts and other sexist remarks. Sexism is still allowed, racism not, I think if I have to listen to dumb blond jokes, etc. and I survive, he will survive as well.

And as I said, he is not constantly in the news here for any reason as Bush was.

That’s all I can tell ya.

Dr_Lawrence's avatar

I think that it ultimately with damage any candidates for reelection whose behaviour and criticism of Obama is factually unsupportable and stridently abusive.When you hurl feces, it gets all over you. If you sound like those who hurl feces, the smell gets associated with you.

ETpro's avatar

@rooeytoo I really don’t care what…ism the protesters pick or whether they are from the right or the left. Attacking policies you think are bad for the country is vital for a democratic republic to keep correcting its course. Attacking the institutions, or spreading lies about the leaders is not alright. The more we turn to that, the more ungovernable we become as a people. And anyone who thinks government is, as Reagan said, “Not the answer to the problem, government is the problem.” should just move to Somalia. I’m sure they would find that a paradise being it has no government at all.

dynamicduo's avatar

Part of me notes that due to the racist undertones (and in some cases where it’s the main issue), it can be construed as being worse than the Bush-bashing that occurred for the previous years. And all the silly nonsense about him being a secret Muslim and calling him Osama is simply so obviously a cry to the “oh terrorists!” and “oh muslims!” nonsense that’s been embedded in many people’s minds for the past decade. But is it damaging to the USA? I don’t really think so. To me (a casual Canadian observer) America has long since been two polar opposite viewpoints shoved into one room. If I didn’t know all of the reasons they haven’t done and will never do so (goodbye superpower, goodbye revenue and control, hello China), I would be wondering why it hasn’t yet split into two nations, one conservative and one liberal. With this cycle of politics, liberals are more sensitive to what conservatives say. When Bush was in power, it was vice versa. There was a question in another community asking why Obama was called “Mr Obama” in papers when Bush was always called “President Bush” – guess what, the person was wrong, it’s common that all presidents are always called “Mr Presidentname” in the paper once “President Presidentname” is used at the start. So despite what might be true about people’s comments, and what might be true about people’s thoughts/analysis of those comments, it’s valuable to realize that one’s perception has likely switched a little bit from the last political cycle – maybe the Conservatives thought the same about the Iraq protests as Liberals think about the Tea Party protests.

plethora's avatar

@dynamicduo To me (a casual Canadian observer) America has long since been two polar opposite viewpoints shoved into one room

You are exactly right, and I have never heard it expressed that way. Two polar opposite viewpoints that have no common ground even at the most basic level of how we ought to be governed. Complete polarization on every issue.

Ron_C's avatar

@rooeytoo @ETpro from my prospective, Bush was attacked for what he did. Obama has not made mistakes even approaching the mistakes and war crimes of Bush.

The only think Obama’s opponents have is his race and made up issues. Of course, the longer Obama stays in office and listens to his chief of staff and treasury advisers, the greater his chances for making really big mistakes.

If he gets out of the wars and actually creates jobs, and gets the financial industry under control, the racial and personal attacks will increase because the real issue for his opponents is the fact that they are out of power. They don’t care about any of these other issues.

cookieman's avatar

@dynamicduo & @plethora: Our theme song then…

Clowns to the left of me
Jokers to the right
Here I am
Stuck in the middle with you

Dutchess_III's avatar

@ETpro I only looked through the first link. That was enough to turn my stomach. What do you want to bet that all of the protestors were (a Retired and living on Socialist Security or b) living on Socialist Worker’s comp. The don’t even know what the hell they’re talking about! Just marching around with racist, inflammatory signs, but not having anything of real substance to complain about.

There were valid criticism’s about Bush, but even then we weren’t literally flooded with propaganda about him. Some jokes, yes, but they had merit. Obama hasn’t done anything wrong.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Been thinking…. @dynamicduo I think we tried that “two nations” thing once. Didn’t turn out so good, did it!

We may have always been polar, but this IS different. I have never, in my life, declared a firm allegiance to any particular party, and most of the people that I know never have either. But now I’m firmly in the Democrat camp. The two major candidates in Kansas are both Republicans. I went and looked for a Democratic candidate, and actually found one. He’s of Indian (India) descent. He sounds level headed. He isn’t out bashing the heads of his competitors (like the two Republicans are doing to each other.) I’ll be voting for him solely because he isn’t a Republican. If I can figure out when the elections are…. : O. That’s not anything I would have particularly bothered with in the past.

Also, I have friends and acquaintances who NEVER got into politics before, but you mention “Obama” and the hatred just starts spewing out. It’s a little frightening, actually. They act like rabid, mindless animals.

I think the country was in almost total agreement that Bush sucked, but it had everything to do with his policy, and not with his race or religion or anything else. With Obama it’s different. The right wing has issues with everything BUT his policies.

It just astounds me that they can’t seem to comprehend how indefensible their arguments are, and they just keep recycling the same old, already-been-disproven BS…

plethora's avatar

@ETpro Don’t know where the links come from, but I can assure you that I abhor that kind of rhetoric as much as you do. It is insanity.

@Dutchess_III The right wing has issues with everything BUT his policies
I am both a conservative and a southerner, and I have never heard the race card mentioned by anyone I know or in anything I have read. I am just one person, but I do not see or hear or hold to any race issue with Obama. I do have issues with his policies…practically all of them.

Ron_C's avatar

@Dutchess_III I don’t know why you aren’t getting more great answer marks, I gave you one.

I too used to describe myself as a liberal Republican Democratic progressive Independent. It turns out that the Republican party of Lincoln and Eisenhower, and even Nixon has been co-opted buy radical reactionary elements, not unlike the National Socialist Party of Germany which they seem fond of painting Obama as a member. I guess it is classic misdirection. I noticed something else too. I am a frequent letter writer to our local newspaper and have never been rejected. The last time I wrote an anti-tea party letter, it was completely ignored. People ask me why I haven’t written to the newspaper, I have but I expect it goes promptly into the waste bin.

Progressive voices are being silenced, next step is direct action. I wouldn’t be surprised in in a year or two we end up being picked up by the police on trumped up charges. Especially if the tea party candidates make substantial gains in the next election.

This appears the final assault on our democracy started by Sen. McCarthy and made official policy by Reagan.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@Ron_C (Thank you! Good answer~)

@plethora Can you be a little more specific about which policies you disagree with? Do you disagree with his policy of getting the war back on track, and actively working on ending the war? Do you disagree with the loans he made to the car companies so our economy wouldn’t completely tank? Do you disagree with the steps he’s been taking to help our economy recover, although if the Dow is any indication it is working? What policies do you disagree with?

whitenoise's avatar

As @Ron_C said…. you deserve more lurve, @Dutchess_III <3
and you, @Ron_C, for pointing that out

Dutchess_III's avatar

Thanks @whitenoise! Actually, all my lurve is tied up with Val123…. But this has been an interesting ride! People are so much quicker to criticize and insult when you don’t have many points. Velly interesting! But…..

plethora's avatar

@Dutchess_III I do not disagree with his actively working on ending the wars, assuming he knows what he is doing, and given his dearth of experience both in military and in civilian top management, I have little confidence that he does.

The “loans” to the car companies were actually capital contributions by the government, effectively nationalizing our auto industry. He should not have touched either the car companies or Wall Street (and Bush bears some of the blame for that by starting it). The car companies would have filed for bankruptcy and continued to operate. The process of bankruptcy would have enabled the car companies to streamline their structure, particularly in regard to the unions. Union contracts would have been dramatically renegotiated to something in the realm of reality. What Obama did with his “loans” is fulfill his obligations to the auto unions, to which he was and is deeply in debt, and disable the auto industry from ever becoming profitable…..continually dependent upon government capital. (Please note, I am not anti-union. I think unions are essential for a proper balance between management and the workforce. The auto unions, however, have been riding the golden horse for way too many decades…and management too, for that matter).

I don’t think Obama has the faintest notion how to help the economy recover. I don’t even think he has the ability to evaluate the economic advice he gets. He is a foreigner to sound economic policy. He has never even held a job in the private sector, much less a position of significance. Being a Senator is not a job in the private sector. Without Obama, we would not be trillions upon trillions in debt.

I disagree with his immigration policy, his failure to enforce immigration laws, his push for amnesty. Our immigration mess is not anywhere near totally his fault. Congress (Dems and Repubs) have screwed over immigration policy since the mid-60s when they authorized a 400% increase in traditional legal immigration, which has, among many others ill effects, spawned the huge issue with illegal immigrants.

I disagree with the passage of ObamaCare. I think our health system needs drastic overhaul. Every bill Congress passes has “unintended consequences”, and they have already begun to manifest themselves….such as the expected decrease in primary care physicians just when we need dramatic increases.

Sooo…you asked and there ya go…for starters, but I won’t go on.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@plethora Thank you. But if filing bankruptcy is the easy answer, why aren’t Freddie Mac and Sally Mae doing it? Government is refusing to bail them out, and they’re hurting.

I can’t really respond to much of what you’re saying because much of it is opinion, such as you don’t think Obama has the faintest notion of how to help the economy. You can’t argue with anyone’s opinions, you can only disagree with them. From what I’m seeing he IS helping the economy to recover.

I also don’t know about the 400% increase in traditional legal immigration. Don’t know if that was a good thing or a bad thing.

plethora's avatar

@Dutchess_III Yes, those are my opinions and certainly subject to change. You asked what I disagreed with. As for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and Sally Mae, they are quasi-govt corporations and I am not sure they have the same right to bankruptcy as a public (or private) corporation. Since you brought them up, I will note that it was presidential action that put us in the mortgage/real estate mess we are in now.

Lyndon Johnson wanted to balance his budget in the 60s and so moved Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac off the govt balance sheet by making them govt owned corporations. Bill Clinton, then, by presidential decree dramatically lowered loan standards by declaring that “everyone should own a home” (sorry, I cannot document that, but will try to find it and do so).

Canada has turned out in this world wide crisis to have the strongest economy in the world. Canadian politicians do not think that every person should be able to afford a home. They think that only those with 20%-30% to put down are the ones who should own a home. Therefore, Canada, our neighbor, is not suffering a home mortgage crisis. If I may say so, Bill Clinton, (and I personally liked the guy), had no clue re economic realities.

Re immigration, this video (about 9 minutes, but critical to any debate on immigration) is not negative on the concept of immigration. It is very critical of our immigration policies. Made in 2006, so pre the current illegal immigrant debate. Anyway, i have shared this here in the past and got rants about racism, elitism, immigration bashing, etc. Got no idea where that comes from, but form your own opinion if you care to.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Wait….Freddy Mac was created in 1970, and Sallie Mae in 1972….so Johnson couldn’t have done anything with them.

I agree 100% that only those who qualify to own a home should own one. I believe that’s Obama’s belief too. He’s not going to let that crap happen again.

Ron_C's avatar

@plethora I noticed that you doubted that Obama knew what he was doing when it come to ending wars. The last person we had as president with real strategic military experience was Eisenhower. Carter was a Naval Officer in the Nuclear Power Program, more of an engineer than a military man. Nixon brought opened up China to the west. Carter got us briefly in and out of the conflict in Serbia. Bush have virtually no experience and neither did his advisers except for Powell and he quit in disgust. I don’t see how Obama could do worse. McCain had military experience crashing airplanes and being captured and he, according to his statements would have us build up forces in Afghanistan and probably attack Iran. I’ll take my chances with Obama. What he lacks in experience he compensates for in intelligence and wisdom.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@Ron_C standing ovation!!

plethora's avatar

@Dutchess_III Sorry, my mistake. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have both operated as government sponsored enterprises (GSE) since 1968. Here

plethora's avatar

@Ron_C As @Dutchess_III said earlier, it’s a matter of opinion. On all your references as well as mine, and we are both entitled to them.

I did not mean to imply that military experience is the key to ending wars. Mr Churchill, to my knowledge, had minimal military experience. He did have great wisdom, however.

Mr. Obama is indeed very intelligent. My opinion of his wisdom, however, is that it is nonexistent.

ETpro's avatar

@plethora Lots of people rail against Bush and Obama for Bush’s TARP and Obama’s stimulus and auto rescue.. But remembering back to late 2007 and 2008, the credit markets were frozen solid. Small and mediums sized businesses were laying off in droves because they could not borrow needed funds to operate. Every day’s news brought more bank failures and businesses closing. We were loosing 700,000 jobs a month. Lehman Brothers had gone bust. Citi, Bear Sterns, AIG, IndyMac, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, Washington Mutual and more were all in serious trouble. Had they all collapsed, the FDIC had nowhere near the assets to make their depositors good. Letting that happened would have triggered a domino collapse of the world-wide banking system exactly like what happened in the Great Depression. That would have meant a total shutdown of ,ost business with job losses in the millions per month for years—a dwindling spiral that only stops when everything hits bottom. I am damned glad Bush and Obama had sense enough not to let that happen.

All the conservatives shaking their fists at the government takeover would be looking for a rope to string up the president that sat back and let that happen.

plethora's avatar

@ETpro Perhaps so. That’s something we will never know. Trouble is once the govt starts propping up businesses that squander their owner’s capital by taking foolish risks, it’s hard to know where to stop…..as was evidenced by the fact that trillions and trillions of nonexistent dollars were thrown into the hole for one firm after another….all just “too big to fail”. (One result that we will all pay for is the inflation rate five years from now, which will be beyond our comprehension)

As for the FDIC, it has in reserves $1.25 (or less) for every $100.00 “insured”. The idea of the FDIC making good on deposits is a fairy tale. But it is a believable fairy tale, and therefore keeps our banking system moderately safe. The real role of the FDIC is to quickly close failing banks, stopping any outflow of deposits and then find a buyer for them, a task which it performs very well. It costs the government (you and me as taxpayers) nothing.

Instead of throwing our money at failing institutions, as it did, the govt should have let a couple fail, so that another healthy firm could pick up the pieces for next to nothing, just as the FDIC does with banks. That could have happened over and over without flushing trillions of devalued dollars down the drain.

And in the case of the auto companies, they would have survived with a chance of future profitability, which they do not have now that Obama paid his debt to the unions (the primary, if not the sole, motivation behind the nationalization of our auto industry) by taking over the auto companies….thus perpetuating grossly fat benefits to union workers. (And I am not anti-union. I am opposed, however, to the auto unions owning the president of the US)

Ron_C's avatar

@plethora Ford Motor Company did not take any government money. GMC did and it was a loan, they are paying it back. It is a typical conservative ploy to blame the unions.
I would say that your are anti union and considering the health care compromises and use of TARP funds, the president is certainly not in the pocket of unions. I doubt that he is in anybody’s pocket since his compromises piss of everybody.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Obama strikes me as a man who doesn’t compromise for personal gain. I don’t think he can be “bought.” That’s just my opinion.

plethora's avatar

@Ron_C I had a union as a client for 14 years. Great relationship with great people, so I am definitely not anti-union. It was a small union, so I got plenty of inside scoop on the practices of the auto workers union.

GMC would have been far better off to go through bankruptcy. The only entity that benefitted from a “loan” was the unions.

mattbrowne's avatar

Extremely damaging. Europeans politicians and friends of America are worried by the extreme behavior of these ultra-conservative fanatics and what this could mean for the long-term stability of the American democracy. The gap between this type of blatant hate mongering and real fascism seems to be shrinking.

My dear American friends, please be vigilant! Let’s remember Thomas Jefferson who said that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

I think the key strategy is finding a charismatic moderate Republican politician representing conservative voters. Ultra conservatives should not get any power in the GOP.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@mattbrowne It IS kind of frightening! Like the Republicans are losing their minds! They’ve turned into raving lunatics. I read in a local paper that one of our “independent” politician who is running for congress said that he’d cris-crossed the state hundreds of times. He said he heard over and over again, that people said they would NOT vote for a republican! I don’t know how true it is, but this is one woman who will NOT vote for a republican.

Man, our two republican Congressional nominees are slinging mud and dirt and shit all over each other. I think I said this above, but I found Roj Goya under the democratic (“independent”) ticket. Read up on him, liked what I saw. Tonight I saw his first commercial. He didn’t trash anyone. He listed his strong suits and the honorable things hes done since he’s been in office. Not taking bribes or money, for one thing. He’s got my vote. He’s also of Indian (India) descent. Another thumb against the racist who think only white males of European descent are fit to run America.

mattbrowne's avatar

@Dutchess_III – I think the best way to approach these lunatics is to ask the following 2 questions

1) Do you believe in freedom?
2) Do you believe that the American voters have the right to vote for a candidate you personally don’t support?

The answers will reveal whether they are in favor of democracy or totalitarian systems.

plethora's avatar

@mattbrowne @Dutchess_III I would suggest that the situation is not as bad as you fear. The government is now strongly in the hands of three left wing socialists, Obama, Pelosi and Reid. The 2010 congressional elections will very likely remove Pelosi as Speaker of the House with a Republican majority. The same may happen in the Senate. This clips Obama’s wings and restores some balance.

The US has a slightly to the right centrist populace. What you are seeing from the right is simply a reaction to the move to the left with the election of Obama and the ascent of Pelosi and Reid. Race is not an issue. Pelosi and Reid are both white.

Anytime our govt swings too far one way or the other, it corrects itself.

whitenoise's avatar

@plethora
You know, from my point of view, spreading misinformation is a form of manipulation that is sincerely frustrates democracy. Whether it is about the reasons to go to war, or about qualities of your opponent. I have seen a lot – too much – of that in the US recently. (I would add your referring to Obama as a socialist as one if them)
This does two things, to me as a foreigner:
decrease my respecforge the US as a functioning democracy.
Give the impression that the American populous is relatively stupid for putting up with such nonsense to such an extent that your media even stop functioning properly to appease their need for simplicity and affirmation if their beliefs.

mattbrowne's avatar

@plethora – Debates prove pretty much fruitless, when people start throwing around the word socialism without understanding what it means. So I got nothing more to add.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@mattbrowne re “1) Do you believe in freedom?
2) Do you believe that the American voters have the right to vote for a candidate you personally don’t support?” 100% of American’s will say yes to both. The one’s who are more totalitarian might add, “You can vote for whomever you want, but if you vote for Obama you will be destroying our country!” and this would open the door for another raging rant, none which is true or provable.

rooeytoo's avatar

Is it PC to bash the bashers?

plethora's avatar

@mattbrowne @whitenoise No offense to either of you. My impression is that you are both European. You may have a very clear and pure definition of socialism, and I would yield to your definition. May I suggest that we are talking about perceptions here, both when I use the term socialist and when you use the term “right wing extremist lunatics”. I have no doubt that, from your viewpoint, that is exactly what you would call what you may be seeing and, if possible, I would not mind seeing names attached.

From my perception, I am definitely seeing a President (and House Speaker and Senate leader) who is much farther to the left (toward socialism) than any president in modern history….and much farther than I would want to see the US go.

We really are not European here and tend to slug it out from more extreme viewpoints than Europeans do. There is no possibilty, for instance, that any of us here would tolerate the Communist party having a candidate in the race, as is true of Germany (I think). So I would suggest that you not worry yourselves too much about how we take our licks. We’ll survive….although I do welcome your comments on here.

whitenoise's avatar

Dear @plethora I haven’t used the term “right wing extremist lunatics”, yet. Thank you for being so condescending as to think you should explain that Europe isn’t the US.

Currently I am in the US, however.

My issue is: we share but one world, and I am worried about the anger that I see pop up in politics lately. Anger very often fueled by entitlement issues. People feel they have rights to everything and all and %%^E^ the rest. (Not saying that is you!!!)

The way the US is claiming its political position in the world and the ecological and economical footprint it has, that far exceeds its geopolitical borders, makes me worry when the US becomes such a place full of political anger.

I do worry, therefore, and I feel I have a right to express those worries, since it is my planet too. (And because I care a lot about the US, a country that I have come to love and respect over the years. For instance by spending a lot of time there.)

Today, on the radio, I heard people at fox compare Obama’s politics to those of Hitler. very insulting to those of us who have some recollection of the pain and suffering that was actually inflicted by Hitler, and utterly inapplicable to any modern political in the US by either political side.

ETpro's avatar

@plethora I’m not European and I know very well what socialisam means. You either don’t know what it means, or you are deliberately spreading disinformation in calling Obama, Pelosi and Reid socialists.

plethora's avatar

@whitenoise I see your point and I apologize for coming across as condescending. It was not intended, but i can see how it looked. Thanks. Sorry for attributing the “lunatic” quote to you or @mattbrowne. It was much earlier in the thread.

@ETpro Check a couple of posts above re “perspective”

mattbrowne's avatar

Socialism is based on disowning private business owners and transferring all ownership of the means of production to the state. Nothing like this is planned. Labeling Obama a socialist is cheap and dishonest right-wing polemics. It is wrong. And I do resent it. Likewise is it wrong to label McCain or Bush a fascist. We should be more careful with the choice of our words. This has nothing to do with a European or American perspective. Terms like socialism have a common definition. Trying to redefine them is absurd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

“Socialism is an economic and political theory based on public or common ownership and cooperative management of the means of production and allocation of resources. In a socialist economic system, production is carried out by a public association of producers to directly produce use-values (instead of exchange-values), through coordinated planning of investment decisions, distribution of surplus, and the use of the means of production.”

Socialism was very real in East Germany for more than 40 years and it was very unsuccessful. All the American politicians mentioned above are light years away from this. Nazism was very real in Germany for 12 years. Comparing Obama to Hitler is mean and disgusting and totally unacceptable. And it is an insult to the real victims of Nazism. I’ve got zero tolerance for anything like this.

Ron_C's avatar

Thank you @mattbrowne for making the distinction. The thing that made Hitler “socialist” was only the party name. He was really a corporatist dictator. Heads of industry were given leadership positions in government, large industries benefited because of changes in labor laws that essentially made workers part of the machine, a bit like the way big industry used undocumented immigrants. He ran the country like a business, with him as the CEO and even used slave labor to take up the slack when “loyal workers” were needed as cannon fodder. The military was run by the elite and even parts of the royalty.

Definitely nothing socialist about Hitler although he was a favorite of the American Right that looked with envy of his control of the German Empire.

ETpro's avatar

@plethora So if redefining ugly words somewhere in something you or someone else wrote makes them perfectly palatable, would it be OK to call you a shithead if I somewhere redefined that as any person who disagrees with me? Words have meanings. Redefining their real meaning somewhere in print doesn’t change what they really mean, and often readers will not have seen your redefinition. Obama, Pelosi and Reid may favor more social programs for the poor and disadvantaged than you do, but they are not socialists by any stretch of the imagination, and when Republicans label them that, they are lying.

@Ron_C Actually, Hitler was a socialist of the corporatist variety. He welcomed wealthy industrialists into his government to help him build up a massive war machine. He let them keep the profits, and destroyed unions to lower wages and entice the industrialists. He even provided them with slave labor to lower their costs. As Mussolini explained, “Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.”

But Nazism was no more a socialist movement to aid the poor than the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is democratic or for the people. Lesson? Never trust political movements that twist words to false meanings and run on lies. They do that to hide their real motives, which if known would stop them dead in their tracks. The socialism charges Republicans hurl around today are designed to cover the fact that they favor corporatism and have been pushing the USA toward it for the last 30 years.

In the roaring 20s, years of Republican help-the-rich policies had left the wealthiest 1/10th of 1% of Americans holding a huge share of the nation’s wealth, with the bottom 90% being where the money came from. That triggered the Great Depression, and wiped out much of the wealth the top 0.01% held. Progressive tax policies kept things in balance till Reagan’s election. He slashed taxes from 70% on very large incomes to 28%, and two things happened. The National Debt, which we had been paying down till that change, began to skyrocket. And the top 1/10th began their climb back to owning most of the nation’s wealth. They now hold more than they did in the roaring 20s. And again, the 90% have been where all the money came from. We’re wiping out America’s middle class. See this.

Today, half of America owns only 2.5% of the nation’s wealth. The top 1% owns a full ⅓ of it. That’s the Republican agenda that has to be covered by lies like calling any effort to stop the transfer of the nation’s wealth to the billionaires “socialism”..

plethora's avatar

@ETpro You may call me anything you like, but i will pay more attention if you read my posts first. I redefined nothing and stated explicitly that I owned the classiclal definition of socialism. I also specifically said that we have a president who leans more to the left (toward socialism) than any president in modern history and farther than I would like to see this country go. “Leaning toward” does not suggest pure unadulterated socialism. It speaks of a direction.

I read all of your links and, taken alone, they present a strong case. They also come from a definite bias. One of the things that absolutely baffles me is that this wealthy 1% seems to consistently vote Democrat. Strange behavior.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@plethora Do you feel he’s more Socialist than Roosevelt who brought us Social Security? What about Johnson, who brought us Medicaid? What about the guys who were president when we got the post office, public education, city workers? They were accused of being “Socialists” then, too, but no one would dream of getting rid of what they created for us.

All I’ve seen about Obama that could be considered “Socialist” is pushing through the Health Care Reform, and it’s about time the US got with the program. Our health care system was a disgrace.

ETpro's avatar

@plethora You are still dissembling. Leaning left is not the meaning of socialism. Socialism isn’t a philosophy of governing that favors doing things for disadvantaged people instead of constantly trying to help the wealthiest get richer. Socialism is an economic system. Here is what the dictionary says it means.

so·cial·ism
Pronunciation: \ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\
Function: noun
Date: 1837
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

The only thing that Obama has done that could be considered tending toward true socialism was the partial takeover of the GM and Chrysler. And that was done not by nationalizing them, but by loans which they are repaying. You might want to include TARP and the bank bailouts, but Bush actually did that. And neither Bush nor Obama took office hoping for a great opportunity to nationalize US industries. THey both did it because most economists were telling them they needed to do it to avoid a second Great Depression.

Being it was the deregulation happy right-wing that drove the economy into that ditch, it is despicable to use the reaction to it as an opportunity to lie about Obama’s political leanings. He was, is and will likely die a dedicated capitalist—just one who believes some regulation of business and some assistance for the poor are good for the country, not bad.

plethora's avatar

@Dutchess_III You are referring to our “ponzi scheme” social security system? If it were still the system FDR developed, it would be great. Unfortunately, the politicians of both parties have worked it over so well that it bears little resemblance to FDR’s vision. and is simply an income redistribution plan that depends on fewer and fewer workers to pay more and more dependents from one month to the next…..and will go broke unless we up the ante for the beleagured workers. At it’s inception, both FDR and the US Treasury vowed that SS payments would never be taxed. Well, leave it to the government to eventually ruin just about anything.

A perfect example of putting a good idea into the hands of politicians and the government for execution.

Oh, and USPS? It does a great job of delivering bushels of junk mail, without which it could not survive, according to a good sized city’s postmaster whom i know. For those who actually want something delivered in a timely manner and not lost, we go Fedex…a business model that works and is not saddled with union demands, including the impossibility of getting rid of dead ass employees.

plethora's avatar

@ETpro He was, is and will likely die a dedicated capitalist—just one who believes some regulation of business and some assistance for the poor are good for the country, not bad

We shall see!!

Definition #1 seems to work perfectly for Obama’s leanings.

ETpro's avatar

@plethora More dissembling doesn’t erase the previous attempts.

Social Security is not a Ponzi Scheme. Ponzi Schemes are set up to defraud people. Social Security has let hundreds of millions retire in dignity when they otherwise would have soon died of poverty. Bernie Madoff holds the world’s record for the longest running Ponzi scheme at 18 years. Most collapse within a year. Social Security has been running since 1935. That’s 75 years. The trust fund still has reserves to fully cover retirees till 2042. We need to increase the cap and quit the trust-find raiding that Reagan started and all presidents since him have followed; or after 2042 the fund will still pay retirees, but at a slightly reduced rate. Show me a Ponzi scheme that was set up to help hundreds of millions of people and did so for over 100 years.

But true to Republican form, the poor, those not fortunate enough to have great retirement funds or fat 401Ks all have to sacrifice so the top 1% can have a few billion more dollars to invest offshore. Anything else is not good for America, and certainly is not fair, or so the talking points go.

While I agree with you that unions have done much harm and have been aided in it by Democrats as much as Republican corporatists have been aided by Corporations, unions are not a bad thing any more than corporations are. They both need checks on their power so their greed doesn’t let them hurt people and ultimately kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.

Ron_C's avatar

@ETpro I am pretty sure that @plethora has bought the Tea Party talking points hook-line-and-sinker. The way the system works (it appears to me) is that the government comes up with a good program, Social Security, War on Poverty, Unemployment Compensation and the opposing party gets control and does everything they can to sabotage it.

Reagan saw this big pot of money setting around and he needed money to pay for a huge tax cut for the rich and his “Star Wars” program. He did the first big raid on social security. Then during the Bush administration the Republicans were having a hard time “privatizing” Medicare. So this time they dropped a poison pill into the program by adding a prescription program. That sounded good except they mandated, by law, that the program had to pay retail for the drugs. Thus perpetrating the myth that government can’t do anything and Medicare is too expensive at the same time they were paying a billion dollars a month on the war in Iraq (off the books).

I cannot believe that voters want to bring these people and policies back!

mattbrowne's avatar

I think it’s time to stop the Tea Party Express and refudiate their nonsense.

Express stupidity is still stupidity. Maybe those folks should take a History 101 textbook and Democracy 101 textbook with them. I say, good education should be available for everyone.

The “Tea Party” misnomer shows the profound and alarming ignorance of this dubious movement. The name “Tea Party” is of course a reference to the historic Boston Tea Party of 1773, a protest by American colonists against taxation by the British government when the colonists had no representation in the British Parliament (Wikipedia).

The US is a democracy and not a colony. The movement should know that politicians who are supporters of fiscal conservatism are actually part of the Senate and House of Representatives. They are a minority these days. The tea baggers haven’t understood democracy at all. They think that they are only represented if the President is a Republican who can rely on a Republican-dominated Senate and House of Representatives.

plethora's avatar

No offense fellas, but your baseline beliefs do astound me. FYI…I have no contact with Tea Party people and the only thing I know about them is what I catch on the news, usually online. I do, however, represent a conservative viewpoint that is quite foreign to you.

@ETpro Ponzi Schemes are set up to defraud people
Yes, they are when set up by individuals. That is their purpose. And they have relatively short lives. Their defining characteristic is that they use the actual funds of investors to pay “returns” to new investors. That is exactly the manner in which SS works now. That is not how it was set up. But that’s how it works now. It has continued as long as it has because you and I and all the other taxpayers keep it propped up.

Any talk of a trust fund is a fairy tale. The “trust fund” is just IOUs from the US Treasury. The US Treasury has already borrowed all the money and spent it on other ends. We are just hoping the Treasury can repay when needed. Btw, your figures are way out of date, re 2042.

@Ron_C One of the purposes of Reagan’s tax cuts was to reduce the amount of money Congress had to spend, rather naive of him I would admit. Congress, in fact, drove the deficit numbers by constantly pumping new programs that were not in the budget, in spite of the fact that there was no money for them.

It always seems to be a ploy of liberal rhetoric to blame the “rich”. You can tax the rich if you wish (would that be anyone making over $50,000/yr?) and I would not even object strongly to it if I didn’t know that money in the hands of liberal govt is even more wasteful than money in the hands of the “rich”.

IchtheosaurusRex's avatar

@plethora , I haven’t heard that take on Reagan’s tax cuts before. I thought the intent was to stimulate the economy by giving the beneficiaries of those cuts more money to spend. That was the thinking behind Obama’s tax cuts in the ARRA, anyway.

But Reagan was POTUS, and he had the power to veto those “new programs that were not in the budget.” Doesn’t that make him complicit in the increases?

I would, of course, have to pull up the budgets for all of those years to see where the money went. Reagan got massive increases in the defense budget in 1983. This drew a lot of fire from his own conservative base, e.g., this article from the Cato Institute. Of course, you can make a solid argument that the increase in defense spending was not only justified, but paid off enormously by forcing the Soviets to discontinue the arms race. But in purely budgetary terms, it did not make him popular – nor fiscally conservative.

IchtheosaurusRex's avatar

..and I should add, there was nothing naive about Reagan.

plethora's avatar

@IchtheosaurusRex Good observations, and yes, there was nothing naive about Reagan. I retract..:)

Ron_C's avatar

@plethora Yeah, I just read an article in the New Republic that said that the conservatives want to “starve the beast”. I it would make sense if they really did reduce spending BEFORE the tax cuts. For instance when we had a surplus, we should have cut taxes and kept spending at the same level. Instead, every time the Republicans come into office they cut taxes (mostly for the rich) and raise spending and start a war. Please explain how that is supposed to be good for the country. Ironically, they paid for the war wit supplements to the budget so that the real expenses were off the books.

Why would we ever want these guys back in office?

whitenoise's avatar

Am I mistaken, or was the reasoning, in the past, that of trickle-down-economics?

In all honesty….
I find it hard to swallow that some people’s [@plethora’s, that’s you ;-)] hustling of words and commonly accepted historic interpretations is sincere and not an intent to manipulate this discussion.

I feel there to be little respect for the concept of a “true, unbiased reflective”.

RANGIEBABY's avatar

To get right to the point, the answer to this question would be the same answer that would be given for the unrelenting bashing of President Bush. NO DIFFERENCE FOLKS.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@RANGIEBABY It’s been noted that this is vastly different than the occasional mumbling and head shaking and teasing that Bush got. He was bashed, but he proved that he deserved it. Even so I didn’t get 30 emails a day pouring out filth and lies on him. The only emails I ever got were harmless jokes at his expense. You didn’t get people claiming they were going to start another civil war during his tenure. It’s a totally different animal, and I really think it comes down the fact that there are still so many people, especially of the older generations, who can’t handle the fact that a black man holds the highest office in the land. They were raised to believe in the utter mental and intellectual superiority of White Males. Females, and persons of color were second class citizens. They just can’t handle it!

@plethora Another, obvious problem with SS is that the baby boomers are supporting the SS fund now. There are far more workers putting in than taking out. Another few years and that will be totally reversed. There will be more taking out than putting in, and that certainly isn’t Obama’s fault!

Dutchess_III's avatar

@mattbrowne ”....I think it’s time to stop the Tea Party Express and refudiate their nonsense.”.... ROFL!!!!!!!! It sounds like a perfectly good word to me, and to be honest, I wouldn’t have caught it myself!

FutureMemory's avatar

@plethora Anytime our govt swings too far one way or the other, it corrects itself.

Kind of like how the republicans were voted out of the white house in 2008? Folks, don’t delude yourselves, Obama being voted in was more about voting OUT the republicans than anything else.

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@Dutchess_III I couldn’t disagree with you more. I am of that older generation and I could care less what color a person is. That is a cop out when people like you don’t know what else to say. Also, PLEASE do not speak for me, I am quite capable of doing my own speaking.
Are you kidding, _It’s been noted that this is vastly different than the occasional mumbling and head shaking and teasing that Bush got. _ ? That is another thing people like you do, is minimize the other side and emphasis your own issues, when needed.
I don’t care what race our president is, I just want him to be AMERICAN in heart and soul. This guy is not, in my opinion.

FutureMemory's avatar

Don’t you know his middle name is Hussein?? Clearly he’s in league with bin Laden! Oh noes!!

ETpro's avatar

@plethora No, my friend. Look at what you wrote, “they use the actual funds of investors to pay “returns” to new investors” That is how a Ponzi scheme work. That is exactly backwards of how Social Security works. There, new investors revenues are used to pay the oldest investors. Social Security is not a Ponzi scheme. Calling it such is a error, and continuing in the error when it is made clear means it’s an intentional error. That is called a lie.

You further said, “Any talk of a trust fund is a fairy tale. The “trust fund” is just IOUs from the US Treasury. The US Treasury has already borrowed all the money and spent it on other ends. We are just hoping the Treasury can repay when needed. Btw, your figures are way out of date, re 2042.” That’s a lie too. The Social Security Trust Fund is explained here and you can see what value in securities the fund currently holds here.

I worry about political movements that base their appeal on lies. It always means that the true agenda they have in mind cannot be disclosed, or they would have no hope of foisting it off on a voting public. So they come up with a whole list of false statements and bogus issues to make it look like they are on the people’s side. The Republican Party of today is working for the interests of the corporatists and the very wealthy. Their smokescreen issues are designed to get people in the lower economic strata to vote to let them transfer wealth to the wealthy. I can prove it.

As to tax cuts to “starve the beast” here is the problem. Right now, if you eliminated the entire Federal Government outside of Defense and Entitlements, you still would not ballance the budget. With the worst oil spill in history, do we want to wipe out all regulation of all industry? Do we want to shut down the FAA, and NASA, and NOAA, and the Center for Disease Control, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and Homeland Security and on and on. With ⅓ of the nation’s bridges crumbling, is it a good time to wipe out the Transportation Department? Will the country run itself just fine with no government? Or would you kill Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and help for children of the poor so the rich can have yet another tax cut and gather in more billions to invest offshore? I am pretty sure you wouldn’t balance the budget by eliminating the Defense Department. I sure wouldn’t in today’s world. Reagan knew this when he cut taxes. There was no earthly way Congress could possibly cut enough to make his giveaway to the rich work. He didn’t care. He knew he’d be dead before the debt came due.

mattbrowne's avatar

@plethora – I’m glad that you have no contact with Tea Party people. And I have absolutely no problem with conservative viewpoints. We need both Republicans and Democrats in America. The Greens too. What we don’t need is ultra-conservative mudslingers. Everyone has the right to disagree with Obama. That’s democracy. Everyone has the right to come forward with alternative proposals. We can debate them.

But Obama is not a socialist. Period. It’s as simple as that.

Ron_C's avatar

@mattbrowne You can be sure that any group associated with Sarah Palin is well financed. She has become the de-facto voice of the movement and she is a political whore. The reason she quit as governor is because she found that she could make more money on the National stage. If liberals paid better, she would try to be a liberal spokesperson. The trouble is that there are too many intelligent people on the liberal side.

If you want to find a dummy, look deep into the far right.

plethora's avatar

@ETpro Read the first two paragraphs of your wikipedia quote very very carefully.

Paragraph 1 describes the use of contributions from one month to fund distributions of future months.

Paragraph 2 describes the IOUs. Govt securites which simply promise against the future ability of the govt to pay.

And then this

whitenoise's avatar

@plethora
It seems you’re just set on missing the point. Regardless of whether the finance structure of Social Security is open end or not, it is ridiculous to call it a Ponzi scheme.

A Ponzi scheme is a form of fraud. It is deliberately withholding information on the true nature of its financial setup from future participants, in order to defraud them to the soul benefit of the one that setup the scheme.

Social Security has no resemblance to such a setup, since its structure is widely known and it has been setup by the participants itself (that is, the US people.)

Calling social security a Ponzi scheme, just because you can find some similarities is silly. It is like saying that a surgeon is a butcher, because (s)he cuts. That your wife is a whore, because she has sex with you, or that @plethora is stupid, because he says some things that make no sense.

Again: the deliberate misuse of these terms is nothing but cheap propaganda.

To say – as some said – that having critiqued Bush at one moment means granting the political right a justification to just say about any which nonsense it wants, is also silly. (@RANGIEBABY). I have seen a lot of comments on double Ye, but none so vile as I’ve seen recently. Besides, george did some things that were debatable, such as take the country to war on dubious information.

But even if you’re right, @RANGIEBABY, then the dirt on the hands of others doesn’t make your hands clean

Dutchess_III's avatar

@RANGIEBABY Why would you say he’s not American in heart and soul? He was raised in America, by his mother, who was raised in the Heartland, with Bible Belt values. You can’t get much more American than Kansas! The only justification you can have in saying that is IF you actually believe that he wasn’t born in America (he was,) and he’s a Muslim (he’s not. He went to a Baptist church (I think it was Baptist) for 20 years) and if you believe all of the insane rumors that are spread about him. What is it about him that makes you feel he’s not “really” American? The fact that he had some education overseas? I, for one, appreciate his rounded education and his understanding of what things are like outside of our borders. Or is it because he visited Mosques? Are our Islamic-American’s not “real” Americans? What about our Jewish-Americans? Do you have to claim to be a Christian (which Obama IS) to be a “real” American? What constitutes a “real” American?

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@Dutchess_III First of all, I did not say he is not American as a fact, I said in my opinion he is not. I have not total fact to back that up nor do you to say for fact that he is. There have been many Americans born and raised in America that have turn on this country and joined the taliban. Would you say, you can’t get much more American than that also? You say he actually was born in America and that he is not a Muslim, like it is a fact. It is not a fact yet. Some of your questions are not pertinent to the issue, so I will pass on answering.
I see no difference between the bashing of Obama and President Bush.

ETpro's avatar

@plethora I believe @whitenoise has sufficiently refuted your continuation of the Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme lie. I won’t add any more.

@RANGIEBABY You have to close your eyes to a mountain of evidence in favor of ridiculous conspiracy theories to believe or even suspect that Obama was not born where his birth certificate says, in Hawaii. Even the Conservative Republican Governor of the state says she has reviewed it at the Hall of Records, and that is it an official Hawaii birth certificate in good order. Birthers have gone to court now 66 times, and even in the Supreme Court plus some of the most conservative Federal Districts in the nation, their win/loss record is 0 – 66. Every single case has been thrown out for want of evidence. All the evidence proves the President, like him or not, is a American Citizen with the legitimate right to serve.

How many courts need to review something before you are willing to accept that it’s a fact? Let me hazard a guess. One. Only it just has to side with your desired version of the truth no matter how many others dissent.

Ron_C's avatar

@RANGIEBABY the way I understand your argument is that you think Obama “might’ be a Muslim, therefore he can’t be pro-American.

I wonder if you know that Tomas Jefferson had a Koran which is now part of his historical library. Jefferson also took a bible where he cut out the religious dogma and tried to compile the ethical teachings of Jesus. I guess he was un american too.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@Ron_C Excellent points. Thing is, they were white males of European descent so whatever they did was OK.

Our only other option for President in that last election was McCain, and he definitely wasn’t born in the U.S.! But…since he’s a white male of European descent that would have been a non-issue had he been elected.

@RANGIEBABY You said, “I don’t care what race our president is, I just want him to be AMERICAN in heart and soul. This guy is not, in my opinion. I simply asked exactly WHY you have that opnion. I gave a few prompts, a few guesses as to why you would say that. You were supposed to respond with your own reasoning. If there was no doubt in your mind that he was a Christian, born in the U.S., would you still have a problem accepting him as the President? That’s what I’m looking for. What, besides these two issues makes him a non-American in your opinion?

plethora's avatar

@whitenoise @ETpro Again, no offense, but I am beginning to wonder if you guys can read. See link above “And then this”. I quote the last paragraph below from Cato Institute.

Just like Ponzi’s plan, Social Security does not make any real investments—it just takes money from later “investors,” or taxpayers, to pay benefits to earlier, now retired, taxpayers. Like Ponzi, Social Security will not be able to recruit new “investors” fast enough to continue paying promised benefits to previous investors. Because each year there are fewer young workers relative to the number of retirees, Social Security will eventually collapse, just like Ponzi’s scheme

“A Ponzi scheme is a form of fraud. It is deliberately withholding information on the true nature of its financial setup from future participants, in order to defraud them to the soul (sic) benefit of the one that setup the scheme.” EXACTLY LIKE SS DOES

“Social Security has no resemblance to such a setup, since its structure is widely known and it has been setup by the participants itself (that is, the US people.)” THE US PEOPLE DID NOT SET UP SS. CONGRESS SET IT UP AND CONGRESS HAS CHANGED IT NUMEROUS TIMES TO LESS AND LESS ADHERE TO ITS ORIGINAL OBJECTIVES.

Dutchess_III's avatar

What exactly are they “hiding” from us, @plethora? Logic will tell you that there won’t be the same amount of money for my generation in the retirement fund, as there was for the generations ahead of me. That’s not fraud. That’s simple math.

whitenoise's avatar

@plethora

RE
“THE US PEOPLE DID NOT SET UP SS. CONGRESS SET IT UP AND CONGRESS HAS CHANGED IT NUMEROUS TIMES TO LESS AND LESS ADHERE TO ITS ORIGINAL OBJECTIVES.”

I am beginning to wonder you really don’t like living in a democracy.

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@Dutchess_III I don’t care if someone was born and raised in the White House, it doesn’t mean you can be absolutely positively sure that someone is loyal to America. I believe that obama is a socialist at heart and could care less about the democracy of our country. I don’t have to prove anything to you just as you CAN’T prove anything to me. Besides this question is about the bashing of the president being damaging to the USA. The majority of the damage was done when obama went out of this country and bashed it himself and apologized for our country. People around the world know the American freedoms allow the people to say what they want about their president and basically pay very little attention to it. However, when the president himself bashes this country, that becomes a different matter all together.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Well, I think he is loyal. And furthermore, there ARE somethings that we’ve done that deserve an apology! And there we stand.

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@Dutchess_III I am glad you said you think, and that is your perfect right. Just as I think he is not. The fact is neither of us knows for sure, but it is out gut feeling from things we have seen or heard, which result in each of our opinions.
I don’t know of anything that we’ve done that deserve an apology, perhaps you can point out some of them for me.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Well, refer me to the comment in question, where Obama supposedly bashed his own (our) country. There are a lot of things that we have done wrong, starting the war in Iraq for one. The families of all those innocent people and children who died deserve an apology.

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@Dutchess_III I thought we were talking about obama not iraq or families and innocent people and children. I prefer to stick to the issue. I have to leave for a bit, but will be back later to read your reply.

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@Dutchess_III I forgot this:

“America is changing but it cannot be America alone that changes,” he said.

Addressing a crowd of some 2,000 mainly students from France and Germany, Mr Obama said: “In America, there is a failure to appreciate Europe’s leading role in the world.

“Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.”

Dutchess_III's avatar

@RANGIEBABY I was responding to your comment “I don’t know of anything that we’ve done that deserve an apology, perhaps you can point out some of them for me.”

Re Obama’s quotes. It’s all true. For example, there HAVE been times “where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.” The fact that you can’t handle a little bit of true criticism of us is a good example of American arrogance.

@plethora I’m not a big political person. Can you think of some example off the top of your head of things we did wrong, or things that bear out Obama’s comments, as Rangie listed above? Carry on. I’m out for the evening~

plethora's avatar

@Dutchess_III Well, I think he is loyal. And furthermore, there ARE somethings that we’ve done that deserve an apology! And there we stand

Just trying to address your question right above this post. I think that Obama is loyal to his own agenda, and we need look no further than his speaking out of two sides of his mouth on immigration, (just as John McCain is doing right now) not to mention his federal lawsuit against AZ. Whether Obama cares for it or not, it has the support of 73% (last figure I saw) of the American people.

As for whether the US has ever done anything wrong. Certainly it has, as has every other nation on earth. It is, however, the responsilbitliy of every country to defend itself and that includes maintaining strong diplomatic relationships with our friends. It is incredibly idiotic to go about the world apologizing to our enemies, which places those who are our friends in a rather shabby position for being our friends. I’m not sure Obama knows how to turn enemies into friends, but he surely knows how to turn friends into enemies.

The governments of this world do not make friends. They make strategic alliances. Obama seems bent on tearing down our most strategic alliances.

whitenoise's avatar

@plethora please elaborate

whitenoise's avatar

@RANGIEBABY what is wrong with Obama’s quote on Europe’s role?

ETpro's avatar

@plethora Sorry to be so late jumpng back in. About your claim that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme, a lie is a lie whether it is told by Joe Schmo or by the right-wing Cato Institute, that employs a team of PhD writers so they can take BS and Pile Higher & Deeper. Things having certain similarities does not make them one and the same. Social Security doesn’t Invest in the stock market because, as we just saw, 50% of the market’s value can disappear overnight. Had we slid into a Depression instead of borrowing $2 trillion to fix the GOP’s failed trickle down theory and deregulation, we would have now be in a depression and the stock market would have lost far more than 50% of its value.

The logic the Cato Institute is employing is as credible as saying that its authors eat food, and so do jackasses, so the authors are obviously jackasses. A lie is a lie is a lie and calling Social Security a Ponzi scheme is a lie.

Calling Obama a Socialist could possibly be true, because it goes to his inner beliefs, and we can’t know them. At best though, it shows you are talking out of school. But saying he is turning America into a socialist country is a clear lie. There is no truth in it. We do not all work for the government. If we were a socialist country, everyone in America would work for the government. We would have no private industry and no stock market.

It’s also incredibly idiotic to twist the President’s speeches into “Going around the world apologizing to our enemies.” That is simply not true either.

meagan's avatar

It isn’t harming us any more than the hate for George Dubya did.

plethora's avatar

@ETpro Have it your way, Big Guy. I couldn’t care less. And where did the railing about stocks come from? Did I say something about that? One question….if SS is so solid, why are we constantly having to fix it? Give me your pat answer on that, please.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@meagan I didn’t get emails professing the degree of horrible hatred toward Bush that I get toward Obama.

@plethora Well, as I said, if you do the math, simple math, we are looking at a problem for the upcoming retirement funds for future generations. They’re trying to find a way to “fix” that “problem” before it hits.

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@whitenoise I don’t think Obama should be criticizing the USA in Europe or anywhere else. He has turned his back on our allies and bows to people that wish us harm. He schoozes Iran. Bows to the King of Saudi. Promotes the Koran, laughs at the Bible.
OUT OF THE MOUTH OF OBAMA:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCAffMSWSzY&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi-V_ilJu0w&feature=related
Should I believe what he himself is saying, or what you are saying about him?

Dutchess_III's avatar

@RANGIEBABY Thought you and @plethora might appreciate this question. @ETpro I look forward to your input!

http://www.fluther.com/91358/what-would-be-some-benefits-in-allowing-amnesty-for-certain-undocumented/

Per the videos. Watched a bit of the first one, just long enough to see what I suspected I would see. Unrelated bits and pieces of every speech he ever gave that included some comment on the Muslims, taken out of context and put together to…IDK. Not sure! It’s really a long stretch to see where he “admits” he’s a Muslim. Being able to say something in the Muslim tongue doesn’t make one a Muslim, any more than me being able to say “Shalom!” makes me Jewish. And he has Muslims in his family. SO WHAT?! I probably have devil worshipers somewhere in my family. It’s a slander, @RANGIEBABY, and it IS damaging to this country. It’s damaging to our reputation. The rest of the world is thinking that you people have gone off the deep end, and they are worried.

whitenoise's avatar

@RANGIEBABY

With all possible respect, I will refrain from further comment on your posts.

Your reasoning is nonsensical and you’ve convinced me that you don’t look for open unbiased discussion.

I truly wish you more wisdom, somewhere down your path of life.

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@whitenoise Quite frankly I don’t need your approval or comments, as I believe you are too blind to see the facts. That is what you liberals do, when you don’t know what to say to defend your stand. You start calling names and try to discredit anyone that does not agree with you. The original question was, will this unrelenting bashing of obama hurt our country? I say no more than it did when you all were bashing George Bush. Why is bashing obama any worse, and how is it different?

meagan's avatar

@Dutchess_III Your friends are probably Republicans, then.
And ~emails~ aren’t what you should be so worried about.
If anything, you should be saying.. what are racist groups plotting because of this!? What will happen to our country!?

Rather than.. I’m getting unpleasant emails about the president.

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@Dutchess_III and it IS damaging to this country. It’s damaging to our reputation. The rest of the world is thinking that you people have gone off the deep end, and they are worried. If you think the people of this country criticizing their president is damaging to our reputation, then what do you think about Obama talking against our country does to our reputation and what the rest of the world is thinking. You can’t have it both ways.
As for your amnesty question. If you believe what you said, then why not give this country back to the Indians? They had it first. Amnesty to everyone that is here illegally is ludicrous. You have no idea who or what their intentions are. How about we just put an illegal or two in your house, you can support them, pay their medical, food bill, clothing bills, education and everything else they need to live. But, you cannot find out anything about them before they move into your home. Are you willing to do that?

Ron_C's avatar

@RANGIEBABY “Why is bashing Obama any worse, and how is it different?” Probably the main reason is in the way that they are bashing Obama. Bush was bashed based on facts, unwarranted tax cuts, failed regulation, one illegal war, two occupations, torture, spying on citizens, the list goes on. Obama bashing is based on Fox. The right wing propaganda network and patent liars like Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and court jester Michael Steele.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@meagan The sheer number and vicious tones of the emails are just one of the a yard sticks I use to compare what is being said about Obama vs the relatively mild dislike of Bush. And you’re right…what racist factions are out there arming themselves to do war against the United States because of all the BS and rumors they’ve been buying into? I would call that pretty damaging. Obama never talked against our country. He manned up and said, “We aren’t perfect, and we’ve done some crap in the past that we shouldn’t have done.”

@RANGIEBABY Re giving it back to the Indians is an old, old argument. Done deal. But there ARE government programs in place to compensate for the theft. If you looked at the bill you’ll see that it is NOT amnesty for everyone. It would only be for people who meet certain criteria. And I DID have the teenage son of an illegal immigrant (mom was a loser) in my house for almost a year, along with three other kids that were friends of my sons. Of all of the kids, Javier was the most dependable and hardworking. You are laboring under the stereotype and misconception of what amnesty is and what its purpose is. Do you honestly think that all of the Mexicans who are in this country are here for a free ride? Do you really believe that? All you have to do is open your eyes and look around. Look on the farms. Look in the fields. Look in the orchards. Look at the guys working in the sun on the roads. They work harder than most American’s would even dream of, because we’re too wonderful to do such menial, back breaking work.

Are you going to look at the question I asked or not?
http://www.fluther.com/91358/what-would-be-some-benefits-in-allowing-amnesty-for-certain-undocumented/

Ron_C's avatar

@Dutchess_III we aren’t “too wonderful to do such menial work”. We will not do menial work for slave wages. Why are they paying slave wages? Because they found people desperate enough to do it. I believe that if a company cannot exist with out slave labor, it does not deserve to exist.

All citizens deserve a job that can support them and their family without the threat of going homeless if a family member gets sick. I also believe that if a company hires an illegal worker, the company needs to be fined, the workers (all workers should be compensated to at least minimum wages, and the officers of the company should spend serious time in jail.

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@Ron_C lol, see all of you liberals are alike. You just can’t help yourselves. You can’t seem to make a statement without calling names, patent liars, court jesters. Sorry, I can’t stoop down to communicate with narrow minded individuals.

meagan's avatar

@Dutchess_III All I can say is that I’m sorry that you associate yourself with people like this. Maybe you should reply to these emails, telling them where they can put these ideas.

I didn’t vote for Barack. I particularly don’t like him. (Hell, he won’t even do the wave at baseball games!) But I pick my battles carefully. haha

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@Dutchess_III NO, I will not let you goat me into expanding your thread. You have your mind made up on the subject and so do I. I believe we both know where we stand on it. Thanks anyway.

Ron_C's avatar

@RANGIEBABY the truth is the truth, take it or leave it.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@Ron_C I was a little far reaching in my statement, because of course not ALL Americans are above hard work. Myself and my husband for one, and my kids for another. My son works for an independent contractor laying ATT line. This time of year the heat and the sun can be brutal. My daughter works in a factory, loading boxes. There is no AC in the factory. So, yeah, I should have qualified. I do think, however, if we managed to round up and ship 100% of the illegals home, we’d have a serious labor shortage in the manual work force.

@RANGIEBABY K. Out of everything I said, that’s the only thing you’re going to respond to? You’re not going to tell me that you believe all Mexicans are dirty, lying, lazy pigs? Oh well. Just thought you might be interested in seeing other sides to your argument, but guess not. I’m looking for a PDF of Obama’s version of amnesty. If it states right there that not everyone will be qualified for amnesty, and only those who have worked a certain number of years, contributing to the economy, would that change your mind?

@meagan It’s not JUST the emails. It’s every where. I did vote for Obama, and damn glad I did.

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@Dutchess_III Sorry to disappoint you, but I don’t think group of people are dirty, lying, lazy pigs. I haven’t even called Obama any names. So please don’t try to put words in my mouth. I have seen different sides to my opinions, that is how I come to conclusions. Believe it or not, I don’t just watch Fox News and agree with everything they say. Nor do I watch MSNBC and discredit everything they say. Just because you have your mind made up of whatever, does not make it factual or true,

Dutchess_III's avatar

@RANGIEBABY You said “Amnesty to everyone that is here illegally is ludicrous” Where did you get the idea that amnensty would be for “everyone”? Amnesty for everyone is NOT the intention. Amnesty for people who want to live here and are willing to work and contribute to the tax pool IS the intention. But you went further and said, “How about we just put an illegal or two in your house, you can support them, pay their medical, food bill, clothing bills, education and everything else they need to live.” which indicates to me that you have a preconceived notion of what amnesty will do, which is give a bunch of lazy free loaders a free ride.

If giving amnesty to those who are willing to work helped our economy, would you still be railing against it? Maybe you should do a little more intellectual research, such as reading the 2006 amnesty bill that I posted to see who will and who will not qualify, instead of feeding into the racist, paranoid frenzy that’s out there.

It’s all in how you choose to see it. And for reasons known only to you, which you can’t seem to support or vocalize (without sounding racist) you seem to be assuming a stereotype that’s going to be a burden on our welfare roles.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@RANGIEBABY PS. It’s “goad” not “goat.” As in it is not “I will not let you goat me into expanding your thread”

meagan's avatar

Sorry. But aren’t Americans already pissed off about US companies that choose to relocate and hire in places like India… because they’re taking away “American Jobs”?

How is it that hiring illegal aliens for “American Jobs” is any better? US Citizens will still be out of work. Its still “outside hire”.

The United States isn’t an orphanage.

I hate to sound like a bitch. But come on, now.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@meagan But there is a reason that you have so many Mexicans working the low paying jobs rather than the Americans. Too many Americans refuse to work their butts off for such low wages.

Also, If the qualifying currently undocumented people from Mexico were given amnesty, then they would be American Citizens. Just like my grandparents from Holland became American citizens, and my husband’s grandparents, from Greece, became citizens.

meagan's avatar

@Dutchess_III I’m sorry, but I know too many upstanding men that would lick toilets for a job if that meant feeding their families.
You’re stereotyping right now by saying that Americans are too lazy for hard labor.

But if Mexican people were given citizenship, there would be even MORE people living here which would make the job market even MORE aggressive. How do you add more people to the job pool to make more jobs? Its just taking away more for the families who are legally here.

Also, they’re working the low paying jobs because who is going to hire an illegal alien to be a Manager? How are they going to get great jobs without a college education? I can barely get hired without one. How can someone without American citizenship get one?
AND they’re getting hired for the low paying jobs because you can pay these people less. Its cheap labor.

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@Dutchess_III Thank you for the correction, I would never have known that if you hadn’t pointed it out. I guess some of us make mistakes, while others don’t.
Listen, you can call me anything you like, but I know I am not a racist and I don’t have to prove that to you or anyone. People will interpret things the why they want and there is nothing I can do or care to do about it.
How do you suppose he is going to separate the hard working illegals from the loafers? Those that employee them, are not going to admit it, because it is against the law. I happen to know an illegal woman, who is a dear friend of mine. She will not go to the authorities under any circumstances. She said she will wait until they find her and send her home or try to prove her employment. She works harder than any woman I know, but she is still illegal, and gets better than minimum wages. She does not pay taxes, so she is making even more than many.
@meagan I agree with everything you said.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@meagan If you read above you’ll see that I posted “I was a little far reaching in my statement, because of course not ALL Americans are above hard work. Myself and my husband for one, and my kids for another. My son works for an independent contractor laying ATT line. This time of year the heat and the sun can be brutal. My daughter works in a factory, loading boxes. There is no AC in the factory. So, yeah, I should have qualified. I do think, however, if we managed to round up and ship 100% of the illegals home, we’d have a serious labor shortage in the manual work force.”

They’re here working anyway. The only thing amnesty would do would force them to pay taxes, which would benefit everyone.

@RANGIEBABY You just made my point. You know an undocumented non-citizen who is an honest person (except for being in a country where she is not a citizen) and is hard working, but not paying taxes. Any reason we shouldn’t give her amnesty so that she WILL have to start paying taxes? What reason would you give for denying her amnesty?

plethora's avatar

Amnesty for illegal aliens is a just a smaller part of the bigger immigration problem. It’s not a matter “why would it hurt?” or “Couldn’t there be some benefit for amnesty for some?”

The immigration issue is set forth Here It’s about 9 minutes, but targets the issue perfectly. There is plenty of blame for left or right, Democrats or Republicans. In fact the 2nd worst enemy of truly beneficial immigration reform right now is John McCain. Obama being #1. But the issue has been screwed up since the mid-sixties. Watch this if you are interested.

Agree or disagree. I have nothing more to say beyond this.

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@Dutchess_III You my friend, are not seeing the big picture. Take a few minutes and watch and pay close attention to @plethora‘s post. Then come back and tell me again we should let honest hard working “illegals” just stay in this country. REFORM is needed NOW. By the time the government gets through screwing around with who is so called qualified and who isn’t, this country will be a third world country itself.
I did not make your point, the point I was making is she is taking a good paying job away and not paying her share of taxes, multiply that by thousands. Trust me, they are not only holding down the jobs in the fields, they are working in construction, automotive, etc. Send all of them home and let them apply to come back legally. Let our government put a cap on how many from anywhere total can enter per year.
Tell me, if the cougars are out killing off the dear population, shall we just let that happen, or shall we have a cougar kill of a certain number to put balance back in the animal world? Because that is exactly what is happening in the Sierra Nevada’s, since the not so smart Department of Fish and Game, had a doe kill a number of years back.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@RANGIEBABY Yes, multiply that by thousands (or millions) and think of the taxes we aren’t getting! What is the process of applying to get here legally, and why haven’t the more obvious intelligent immigrants not done that? Is Mexico not letting them out, or are we not letting them in? You’re taking the party line when you say REFORM is needed NOW. WHAT reform do you refer to??

AND IT’S “DEER” NOT “DEAR!”

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@Dutchess_III Sorry again, a bit rattled with grandchildren running all over the house. So “Miss Dutchess Dictionary”, Obviously you did not watch the you tube, immigration gumballs, Plethora sent you. I see no point in continuing this banter if you are walking down a narrow path with blinders on. You seem more hell bent on correcting me, and picking one single issue to base your opinion on.

ETpro's avatar

@plethora Regarding stocks, you said that Social Security was a Ponzi Scheme because they don’t actually invest the funds they take in in investment vehicles, and neither do Ponzi schemes. If that were true, it would mean that many of America’s largest, most respected businesses are Ponzi schemes, because they don’t invest their cash reserves in the market. It is not true. Social Security is in no way a Ponzi scheme.

@RANGIEBABY All the plans for amnesty that I have seen have a fair number of limitations. The person must be gainfully employed and paying their taxes. They must not have committed any other crimes than the original one of entering the country illegally. They must learn English if they don’t already know it, and must learn about our system of government. And they will be required to wait so that they do not get any preferential treatment over people who have applied for legal immigration to this country.

Personally, I think that deporting all who are here illegally now is impractical and ill advised. It would probably cost somewhere around a half a trillion dollars to round them all up, go through the legal proceedings, and suffer the economic impact of losing that many workers. Businesses in Phoenix are going bankrupt now due to Latinos fleeing before the new immigration law takes effect at the end of this month. And if we launched a mass deportation program, there would be heart-wrenching stories on the news every night of kids pulled out of high school or college weeks before graduation, kids whose parents may have broken immigration laws but who themselves are American citizens guilty of no crime. There would be pictures of families being torn apart. Politically, whoever launched such a program would pay a heavy price over time.

I think a comprehensive fix needs to seal the border first, make companies who, going forward, continue to hire illegals pay a price high enough to stop their doing it as a second part of the puzzle, but then provide a path to citizenship for those that qualify.

Finally, to all involved, when you catch yourself about to say all illegals do…, or all Mexicans think…, or all liberals always…, or all conservatives are a bunch of…; it would be a good idea to stop for a moment and realize that there are only a handful of stereotypes that are really true for all members of any group. Bigotry is thinking that a trait you have noticed in some, and that you don’t like, applies to ALL people of whatever kind you have in mind. Bigoted statements are almost always wrong.

Claiming all liberals do thus and so is particularly silly. Will Rogers quipped, I don[‘t belong to any organized political party, I’m, a Democrat.” There’s a great deal of truth in his joke. Liberals are a contentious lot. It’s hard to find a single thing upopn which they wil all agree.

Response moderated (Personal Attack)
Response moderated (Personal Attack)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
RANGIEBABY's avatar

@ETpro You are quite a double talker. Personally, I think that deporting all who are here illegally now is impractical and ill advised. It would probably cost somewhere around a half a trillion dollars to round them all up, go through the legal proceedings,
And the cost to do what you propose?, All the plans for amnesty that I have seen have a fair number of limitations. The person must be gainfully employed and paying their taxes. They must not have committed any other crimes than the original one of entering the country illegally. They must learn English if they don’t already know it, and must learn about our system of government. And they will be required to wait so that they do not get any preferential treatment over people who have applied for legal immigration to this country. Gainfully employed and paying taxes, what will it cost to check that out? Learn English, who will pay for that? Learn about our system of government (it is okay to commit a crime by entering the country illegally and be rewarded for it). And be required to wait, no preferentil treatment over people who have applied for legal immigration. Ha, they will be dead before their turn comes.
And just where are all of these people suppose to wait? Right here in the US, and it is not solving anything.
Are you really a citizen of the US or perhaps Mexico? You say, I think a comprehensive fix needs to seal the border first, make companies who, going forward, continue to hire illegals pay a price high enough to stop their doing it as a second part of the puzzle, but then provide a path to citizenship for those that qualify. WHAT ABOUT JOBS FOR OUR OWN CITIZENS?????
As I said in the last discussion you and I had, I can’t put it any simpler. Perhaps you can find somebody to read aloud what you wrote and you will realize your own contradiction.
Anything I have said about liberals, I stand on. Show me a liberal that hasn’t done anything I have said. You have not seen anything I have written saying “all illegals”
do or “all Mexicans” do is anything. I have said all you liberals are alike when it comes to…........ And I stand by that .

ETpro's avatar

@RANGIEBABY My English skills are quite fine, thank you. I see no double talk in anything you quote back to me. Did I say the approach I advocate would be cost free? Certainly not. But it would cost far, far less that a mass deportation, which would still involve virtually all the legal proceedings that my suggestion would require, and would have the massive added cost of finding, arresting and housing until deportation something on the order of 11 million people.

We wouldn’t need to pay for these people to learn English and US Government. They could be given temporary work permits and thus allowed to work outside the shadows and pay for doing any required classes. There would probably be a fine involved for having broken immigration laws, and that would help offset costs as well. You could try to fine those you deport, but the likelihood is that other than seizure of whatever assets they have, you would never collect it.

Working people are what America needs now to pull us out of a recession. It really doesn’t matter whether they are citizens, resident aliens, here on work permits or even illegals so long as they work, pay taxes, and go shopping. Getting rid of 11,000,000 consumers would NOT cause a great spike in business. It would hurt an already ailing economy and cause the loss of more jobs.

I am a citizen of the USA born in Norfolk VA. I served my country in the US Navy. My son is an army officer and deploys next week to Afghanistan. Can we not debate the best immigration policy without your feeling the need to denigrate my ability to read, my citizenship and my patriotism? Unless we can stick to debating policy, I want no more to do with this discussion with you. I will follow this thread, but not respond to personal attacks such as the above.

whitenoise's avatar

GA @ETpro have a drink and sit back. :-) You’ve at least tried to reason.

Dutchess_III's avatar

You know, everyone is yelling about them “taking” American jobs. However, my daughter signed up with a temp agency, and within two weeks she started working in an unconditioned factory, 2nd shift, packing boxes. Most of her co-workers are Mexican. The temp agency constantly advertises, but it seems for the most part, the Mexicans are the only ones who respond, at least to jobs that are hard work, uncomfortable, and don’t pay much. Where are all the Americans who are “willing” to do those jobs?

Dutchess_III's avatar

That was a very informative video @plethora. It did give me pause, and I agree. We do need to slow it down. Now I’m going to see what it would take to get legal entrance into the country…...or, hell, why don’t we just annex Mexico???!!!

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@ETpro I apologize if I offended you, but I don’t like it when people put words in my mouth especially when they are not true. Let me say this loud and clear I AM NOT PREJUDICE AGAINST ANY RACE. By the way, a great many of those illegals are sending most of what they earn back to Mexico to support their families. They are not spending the money here in the US, nor paying taxes. Perhaps my idea of solving the issue is not the best, but I don’t believe in your idea either. Let us step back and rethink the problem and maybe we can come up with something we both can agree on.

plethora's avatar

@Dutchess_III Thanks for taking a look at the video. For me it puts things in perspective. Illegal immigration is the tale wagging the dog. The real problem is mismanagement of legal immigration for decades now, in which the entire federal govt, all three branches and both parties, are complicit. If the federal govt had not mismanaged legal immigration we would not even have the illegal immigration issue. The whole damn thing is completely out of control, to the extent that we now have states passing laws (and I dont blame them) because the federal govt won’t step up to the plate. And now we are into my opinion….we have a president who exposes his ignorance by filing suit against a state. What a mess!!

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@plethora I think that pretty much says it all. Great Answer.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Well, guys, the Obama administration is challenging the constitutionality of the Arizona’s laws….if he feels something is genuinely unconstitutional, then he should challenge it, don’t you think? A federal judge will make the decision as to who is right and who is wrong.

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@Dutchess_III Ummm, about those federal judges, do you really trust them? Yes, I believe anything that is unconstitutional should be challenged, as long as the constitution is interpreted without bias.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@RANGIEBABY I understand why Az wanted to do what they did, and at first I was going “YAY!” But…as I thought about it, it would probably disintegrate into racial profiling and who knows what. I mean, if you, as a citizen, were minding your own business and some official suddenly demanded some sort of proof that you were a US citizen, wouldn’t that bother you? It just…sounds like what the Germans did to the Jews. I know it’s different, but it really makes me uncomfortable….Gosh. What if a fourth generation Mexican, such as one of my grandkid’s dad went to Mexico, could he expect to be hassled just because of his race. It just feels wrong.

And yes. I believe the majority of judges are good, honest people.

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@Dutchess_III As I understand it, it is against AZ law to approach anyone to demand anything without proper cause. And yes what you say would make me uncomfortable. I have spent a fair amount of time in Baja, both on land and on a yacht. On land they seem to be following us everywhere. We could always see a patrol car where ever we went. On the yacht, they would come aboard, walk through checking the boat from top to bottom at every port. When we arrived at our next port, and the next, they knew who we were and how many were suppose to be aboard.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@RANGIEBABY Yeah….but, it really wouldn’t take much to find “probable cause…” I don’t know what the answer is.

YOU WENT TO BAJA WITHOUT ME?????

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@Dutchess_III If the probably cause is good enough, so be it, but if it isn’t, I would bring it to the attention of the media until AZ corrects their policies.
I did :( You want to go next time, when it is safe?

Dutchess_III's avatar

Yes, but how many human civil rights would be trampled before the media steps in? We’re talking about individual miseries that may ruin their whole lives, and too late to salvage it when it finally DOES get fixed.

That’s what so much of this is about…not just a group of people, but individuals….

Of course I want to go next time when it’s safe!! Now that I know I’m safe with you!!

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@Dutchess_III I understand what you are saying, but with so much media attention on the state right now, if they dare do anything slightly wrong, it will not only be brought to the attention of the country, but more than likely will get blown out of proportion in favor of the offended.

Dutchess_III's avatar

So…as much as we are in favor of the “lock down” it will most likely fail due to civil rights scrutiny? Which, as we know, attorneys can turn into a money blood-bath to their benefit….

RANGIEBABY's avatar

@Dutchess_III I don’t think it would even require attorneys. Surprisingly, the people of this country will step forward to protect people mistreated.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@RANGIEBABY I have to disagree….people through out the ages have stepped up, and received nothing but a beating and a hanging until the Big Guy, the government, steps in and gives them rights. The march over William Pettis Bridge was a culmination of two, three hundred years of mistreatment (I dated a guy for a while…ok, off and on for 10 years, who was born and raised in Selma. He was 10 years old at the time of The March over the bridge from Selma to Montgomey, and he was there. In his words, “The first day the militia drove us off the bridge. I just have a memory of a horse charging down on me. The next day JFK said “Let those people walk!!” And the next day, the same people who drove us off the bridge guarded us while we walked” The Big Guys came in and changed everything…...) It can take a long time for mistreatment to come to the forefront and be addressed. Maybe only a few year for Az, but how many people will do some serious suffering before it’s fixed and Az’s new laws are repealed? It’s a stalemate at his point Unless we annex Mexico!!

Now, me to bed because I’m counting on Spell Check to make me coherent!

ETpro's avatar

@RANGIEBABY Apology appreciated and if I put words in your moth, I in turn apologize. That was never my intent, so if I did it it was only through my interpreting your words differently than you meant them. Yes, let’s do ruminate on it. I deeply sympathize with Arizona’s challenges with illegal immigration. The satate has the worst of it, though it is certainly a national problem.

@plethora and others who are angry at Obama for challenging the Arizona SB 1070. I think it is clearly unconstitutional and as such, the President had little choice given his oath of office. The constitution is very specific in assigning immigration law and enforcement to the Federal Government and the Constitution’s primacy clause means that states can’t individually step into the act and legislate immigration law.

On a practical note, since many driver’s licenses can be obtained without proof of citizenship, it means everyone traveling to Arizona must carry a Passport, or some other recognized proof of citizenship, or risk being jailed till they can prove they are in the US legally if they are pulled over for any infraction while in Arizona. Imagine the fun of having “Papers please” be the rule in all 50 states.

That said, the Federal government, particularly if it wins this suit, MUST step up to the plate and resolve the immigration mess. It can’t keep kicking that can down the road any more. That means Democrats and Republicans have to work together. And right now, I don’t think Obama or anyone else can force that to happen.

plethora's avatar

@ETpro No harm, no foul. We are both pretty competitive. I apologize for offensive remarks and will try to be more even tempered in the future.

I agree with your above post, assuming the AZ law is unconstituional. I’m not sure it is based on what I have been reading. I am a total layman when it comes to that. I need to go back and check.

ETpro's avatar

@plethora Thanks. Immigration law is assigned to the Federal Government, as is international trade and declarations of war. No state could decide unilaterally to invade Mexico, for instance, or to levy a tarrif on all goods coming in from Canada. But immigration law is one of the grey areas where past case law suggests that if states can show they have a compelling local interest that can’t be served by the Federal government, they can act at the state level. So there will be plenty to argue in court, and your guess is as good as mine where the chips may fall.

Ron_C's avatar

@ETpro & @plethora I have been following your discussions concerning immigration. Although it strays, slightly off this threads topic, I would like to add my take on your discussions.

To me, the real problem is jobs and salary. In the 80’s Reagan gave amnesty to undocumented immigrants, not because it was the right thing to do but because it put higher pressure on Unions. Those workers kept wages down, were willing to ignore labor and safety laws, and undermine all union progress. His law quieted activists and increased the Latino membership into the Republican party.

Subsequent enforcement of border laws were deemed unnecessary because they had a tendency to impede business and the constant flow of cheap labor further eroded industry salary rates. In that the Arizona law brought all of this back to the public’s attention, they are a good thing. On the other hand, enforcement of those laws will cause a huge surge in racial profiling no matter how law enforcement is trained. It will be like Afghanistan, you can simply denounce anyone that offends you and that person is in the position of having to defend their innocence or prove a negative which is very hard to do. It is very likely that Americans will find themselves deported to countries where they are complete strangers and without legal or family aid.

The real solution is to simultaneously seal the border and punish the employers that the real beneficiaries of the practice of hiring illegal workers. That includes business and private contractors. While this is going on, there needs to be an amnesty period for people to register with the Federal government to begin the process of integrating them into our society. You cannot, practically, deport 12 million people.

Real fines to businesses that hire and exploit the undocumented, should include lost wages, community damages, and excess profits resulting from unfair labor practices. They should also include federal jail time for the leadership that promoted hiring and slave wage salaries. The fact that some businesses will be ruined should not be a consideration. Legitimate businesses will fill the void, if one can truly exist.

To put this in context. this is Obama’s problem to fix, it is a problem inherited from administrations of Reagan on down. He probably won’t be able to fix all of it during his term(s) in office but he should be commended for starting. The people in Arizona should be commended for forcing the Federal government to act.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@ETpro “I think it is clearly unconstitutional and as such, the President had little choice given his oath of office.” Exactly. A judge may be forced to rule according to the law, not by his own opinion or personal choice.

plethora's avatar

@Ron_C That’s a very good post. GA!! I agree with just about every word. One comment. This problem started long before Reagan. It started in the 60s when Congress, both parties, increased legal immigration by 400%, thus opening our borders to far more immigration than the country could handle. If you are interested (9 min) Our illegal immigration issue is a byproduct.

Ron_C's avatar

@plethora Thanks, I wasn’t sure that we could ever come to an agreement I agree that irresponsible immigration quotas are a good part of the problem. Another one is that it is very easy for a company to hire professional staff from outside the country, claiming that the expertise in not available in the U.S. In fact, that is how my best friend (a Canadian) first came into this country. Although I am glad he is here, the exemption was total B.S.

Many Indian engineers are bought into this country under the same exemption. The real reason is that an engineer with their qualifications is not willing to work for the extremely low wage proposed.

I think that there should be a moratorium on all immigration until the current problem is solved. We need to put more pressure on the politicians to get the job done. They say that the delay is because of the election year. In that case, I would vote against most incumbents especially the Republicans that are holding things up just to make the Democrats look bad. I really hate that brand of politics. They compromise with the democrats, then arbitrarily vote against their own bill. This has to stop.

whitenoise's avatar

Somehow a thread on Obama’s treatment by vocal opponents has been hijacked into a xenophobic discussion.

plethora's avatar

@whitenoise OK, back to that. My opinion, as unpopular as it may be here, is that Obama earns what he gets. (Notice I said opinion).

@Ron_C Agreed again. I’d be 100% in favor of a moratorium until the problem is sorted out. I would even entertain a modified monitored amnesty for current illegals if we had a moratorium on further immigration, with particular attention to the heavy Muslim “trojan horse” immigration into all western countries.

whitenoise's avatar

Thanks @plethora. (And… I noticed :-)

The question, how I read it though, is not whether Obama deserved it or not, but rather whether it is detrimental to the U.S. of A.

And… risking a stalemate here… I feel that deliberate misinformation is a serious risk to any democracy. Especially when it is packed in gift wrapping,such as by nicely framed and cut video clips or tainted statistics that leave out vital information.

plethora's avatar

@whitenoise And I agree with you 100%. GA. I see those clips and they are ridiculously altered and inflammatory. That is clearly purposeful misinformation. Nonetheless, there are many who will latch on to anything that reinforces their biases. Frankly, I think both camps do it. I get a weekly newsletter from Barack himself (or so he says). Sometimes it’s Michelle. And I marvel at the spin he puts on issues. But no surprise. I might do the same in his place. Bottom line, I think the US will survive this type of mudslinging.

whitenoise's avatar

@plethora

My worries, as an outsider, looking in, are as follows:

The US is becoming more and more of a polarized nation, in which people take views like “You’re either with us or…” or “You don’t agree with me, so you must be wrong…”

The media in the US are very commercial and cater to a certain spectrum in the populous. They have become more and more active players in the political landscape and have become opinion leaders and creators rather than news reporters.

A lot of US people that I know, now only listen to news stations/sources that affirms their existing opinion. The right listens to their stations and the left listen to their own as well. They loose a common understanding of the world.

That creates a base for ‘anger politics’, where people have their own selected facts and effectively shield themselves from opposing views. It kills the basis for mutual understanding and pragmatic, best solutions for all.

This thread has been exemplary in that sense.

plethora's avatar

The media in the US are very commercial and cater to a certain spectrum in the populous. They have become more and more active players in the political landscape and have become opinion leaders and creators rather than news reporters

@whitenoise I could not agree with you more and it has been true for many years. I recently read a book on the Vietnam war (now with access to North Vietnamese records) and concluded that the media played a major role in losing the war. Interestingly (and this is an aside) the war was a military victory, but the media played a major role in painting it as a loss and thus it was freely handed over to the NV communists by Congress not honoring the treaty into which it had entered.

I digress. But it does show the dire role that the media can and does play.

FOX is often bashed, and sometimes with good reason. But the other networks simply ignore important news if it doesnt fit their agendas. I was delighted to see a couple of days ago, Luke Russert, son of the late Tim Russert, and a reporter for MSNBC, corner Charlie Rangel near his office and ask questions that Rangel considered offensive. The coup de gras was when Rangel suggested that MSNBC was not playing its usual cushy role in asking tough questions instead of easy questions.

Selectively ignoring news is every bit as bad as editorializing with biased opinions.

I truly have to wonder if Obama would have even been elected without the media’s Cinderella coverage.

Dutchess_III's avatar

He is the President of the United States of America, and he deserves the respect accorded to that office. You can disagree with him, you can dislike his policies, but the disrespect a faction of his own people show him IS damaging to us, in a lot of ways. It undermines the respect other nations have for us. It causes people who might be on the fence to fall on the Republican side just because of all the mud being thrown that they don’t have the independence or intelligence to judge the merit of themselves. We’re going to end up going into the next election as nothing but Nigger Haters (or Nigger Lovers) and Muslim Haters (or Muslim Lovers)....all of that is based on stupidity, not actually political value. And it’s dangerous. Do we really want to vote for the next President based on how much he hates Muslims, or on innuendo that we shouldn’t have a Black man being the president of the US? Because that’s what it’s coming down to.

Today I got another Obama bashing email, that the Muslims and Amish and other religious organizations, such as the Scientologist, people who don’t believe in doctors and hospitals as part of their religion, will be exempt from getting hit with Health Care penalties if they choose not to HAVE health care. Well, the emails I get always start with “I checked this on Snopes, and it’s true!!” Well, I did my own checking, and it’s a load of crap. Religious organizations have always gotten certain government exemptions! Always! Further, the Snopes link only said, that in the case of the Muslims, it would be possible, but unlikely since they don’t have a history of spurning Social Security nor a history of spurning medical help like the Scientologists. But….let’s pass this crap around as though it’s yet another affirmation that Obama is a Muslim, and giving them special treatment. It’s self destructive to our nation.

plethora's avatar

@Dutchess_III I am wondering where the racial stuff re Obama is coming from. I see plenty of emails about his policies, but never see one about his race. And the chairman of the RNC is a black man. Soooo….what gives?

Dutchess_III's avatar

It’s just there….It’s totally politically incorrect to bring it out blantently, but it’s there. And I really feel like so much of that is the actual basis for the way he’s reviled, like no other president has been. They just have to find another way, like calling him a non-American and a Muslim. Let me see what I can find.

ETpro's avatar

@plethora You are certainly entitled to your opinioin, as I am entitled to assail it with facts that contradict it. But since you are fixed in that opinion, truce.

On immigration, I agree.

If you aren’t seeing the racist email, you are fortunately not on the right far-right mailing lists. I am, just to keep up with what they are saying.

Even though this storry blew up in the race baiter’s face, look at the cartoon cariactures its three pages of answers attracted in one day.
http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/racist-in-obama-government-boasts-of-bigotry-should-the-naacp-follow-the-tea-parties-and-denounce/question-1112043/

I could link you to hundreds of such threads on www.Sodahead.com and all are replete with rampant racism and disgusting cartoons and Photoshop jobs.

Here is a list of far-right websites. Take a peak at what they are saying and how many are saying it.. http://www.publiceye.org/lnk_antidem.html

Its out there, my friend.

Ron_C's avatar

@plethora “I truly have to wonder if Obama would have even been elected without the media’s Cinderella coverage.” I would say that it wasn’t that Obama’s coverage was so good it was the fact that McCain couldn’t have picked a worse running mate.

I was trying to make up my mind between McCain and Obama so I had a choice between a relative new comer to politics or a 70 year old guy with a dingbat for a running mate. Frankly the idea of McCain becoming incapacitated in office and having Palin as his replacement quickly dumped me into the Obama camp. I even worked on his campaign, not because Obama was so good (although he does speak English) but Palin was and is so bad.

We have already had the soap opera version of the presidency with Jimmy Carter’s family, I am too old and not prepared for a Palin family in the White House.

Dutchess_III's avatar

I’m still looking..just got home again. Part of the reason I strongly feel that racism is at work @plethora, is simply the sheer amount of it that surrounds this president like no other. He uses the word “gyped.” He’s racist. A black woman gets railroaded and loses her job. He apologizes to her. “He wouldn’t have done that if she was white!” His pastor turned out to be a racist asshole, but it’s somehow Obama’s fault.

http://hubpages.com/hub/Obama-and-racism

http://creation.com/obama-racism-row

http://davidkchan.com/barack-obama-racism/

ETpro's avatar

@plethora “I truly have to wonder if Obama would have even been elected without the media’s Cinderella coverage.” Let us remember that before Obama won a string of early primaries, the Press had already anointed Hillary as heir apparent and sure fire victor regardless of the Republican contender. No, my friend, no sympathetic press gave Obama the White House. He won it fair and square against the famed Clinton machine. Once he cleared that hurdle, defeating McCain/Palin was a cakewalk.

plethora's avatar

@ETpro @Ron_C I yield. You’re both right!!

rooeytoo's avatar

Just goes to show you that those who claim America is racist, don’t have a clue. America chose a black man over a white woman. It’s not racist, it’s sexist!

whitenoise's avatar

@rooeytoo Haven’t you heard that obama is actually a covert Muslim woman? ;-)

rooeytoo's avatar

@whitenoise – and I bet she wears a burqua in the Lincoln bedroom.

whitenoise's avatar

@rooeytoo that I must see….

ETpro's avatar

@plethora Who are you, and what have you done with my contentious friend, @plethora ?

plethora's avatar

@ETpro

@plethora has gradually developed a new appreciation for Fluther and Flutherites, and has turned over a new leaf. He came here from AB where he was used to slugging it out with any and all.

This is an unusual forum of intelligent people in which all sides of meaningful ideas are discussed and examined. I am always interested in why people who believe differently than I believe the way they do. I kind of enjoy being in the minority too.

@FutureMemory made a positive comment on a thread a couple of weeks ago about my participation and suddenly a couple of things clicked and I began to have more appreciation for the thought processes behind differing positions.

So there ya go. Thanks for asking. I’m now the loyal opposition….:)

whitenoise's avatar

@plethora

re “I kind of enjoy being in the minority too.”
Then keep this our little secret… before you know it, there might be more like you ;-)

And for what it’s worth… I enjoy your being around as well.

Ron_C's avatar

@ETpro @plethora I think most of us came fro AB. I drop by there every once in awhile and it looks interesting but really slows down my computer. I have gotten used to this place and the people are pretty decent. I have only been disciplined (moderately) but the moderators don’t seem to follow you around or keep too tight a rein on the discussion.

Etpro’s right you, plethora, seem more agreeable these days. Where are you being held hostage?

Dutchess_III's avatar

Who all is from AB?

Ron_C's avatar

@Dutchess_III Answerbag was another site similar to this one. They “upgraded” it and ruined it for many of us.

whitenoise's avatar

Glad they (at AB) did…. i for one am happy y’all are here.

Ron_C's avatar

thanks, most of use are glad to be here.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@Ron_C I know who they are! I was here when they “invaded.” So many felt unwelcome that I made a home for them at JOE’s ning website, Inquire, because I knew exactly how they felt. I just wondered who, specifically here is an ex-AB’er.

Ron C is…Plethoria?

plethora's avatar

@Ron_C I can’t tell you. They will kill me if I do…:)

Actually, I got very frustrated with Fluther and its inhabitants and stayed away for a month or two except to drop in occasionally. When I dropped in, I stayed away from any controversial questions and found that I was enjoying it. I began to edge back into the political questions on a lower key, trying to avoid controversy. It was just too stressful otherwise. I haven’t been entirely successful at that. But I can vouch for the whole experience being educational and quite satisfying.

In the process, i also developed an appreciation for the inhabitants of Fluther…:) Thanks for asking. It’s fun to be here.

plethora's avatar

@Dutchess_III Yes, I am from AB. I was a newbie there and had really gotten used to its style. As @Ron_C said, their “upgrade” pretty well ruined it for a lot of us. I am much happier at Fluther.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@plethora Glad you’re here then! Yes, when I came from Wisdm in the first wave about a year ago, I was very frustrated with Fluther too. I actually canceled my account and vowed never to come back. Social networking is a whole new animal. It’s just like traveling from America to another country, only I didn’t know it at the time. If you traveled to another country, you’d lay low and try to figure out what was acceptable and what wasn’t in the other country. I mean, I’d know that! But….I didn’t realize that Fluther was just like a different country, and I thought I could come in here and act like I did on Wisdm and everything would be cool. It wasn’t! But, you live and learn.

Seek's avatar

I’m an ex-ABer. Now a happy jelly. ^_^

Dutchess_III's avatar

Wow! We got the Creme De La Creme from AB, didn’t we! I know that some of the AB’rs weren’t….the creme. I knew some of them on Inquire. I’m happy!

Dutchess_III's avatar

LOL! @Seek_Kolinahr I just realized, you were the first one to post. You must be STUFFED with popcorn! :)

ETpro's avatar

@plethora My friend, I followed you over here from AB because you were one of the intelligent, thoughtful right-wingers there who could at least debate on policy and not just resort to insults or dismissive statements like, “I see you’ve drunk the Obama Koolaid.”

I love to debate political policy with people of all viewpoints, so long as it can remain a policy debate and not devolve to sludge slinging. Occasionally, someone on the right shows me where I am wrong. Occasionally, I convince a right-winger that the policy their party is pushing is wrong for the country. And even when neither of those desirable outcomes are possible, I get well schooled in their talking points.

And just to drive home a point about Obama bashing, take a look at this (NSFW) post, and feel free to scroll up to see how innocent the original comment of mine was that finally degenerated into it.

@Dutchess_III Yes, I am an AB transplant as well. I loved it till they “improved” it. Now I am ever so thankful to be here and not there. The general intelligence level of the discussions here sometimes blows my mind.

whitenoise's avatar

@ETPro… interesting thread that you posted.

You did however enter into a discussion with someone that had just suggested to have the police shoot a lot of innocent people. You didn’t really expect that person to have a lot of nuance and openness to opposing views, now do you?

You’re not only an idealist, but also trying to improve the world. Keep on trying… :-)

ETpro's avatar

@whitenoise No, I was hardly surprised by the tack the discussion took. But I have a nose for fascist mentality and like to expose it wherever I see it. As I explained to him after his withering, profane rant, he tipped his hand. He showed his true character.

plethora's avatar

@ETpro I read the thread and others you posted. I will have to say, except for these, I have yet to see a racist slur about Obama. And I get a lot of negative emails about him, but never a racist slur. No doubt they are there. You’ve got them.

ETpro's avatar

@plethora The Party and Fox News and professionals like that are far to smart to be openly racist. It would destroy them in today’s America. And frankly, many of them are not racist. THey just know how to use dirty tricks to win power. THey’re very good at it.

Rather than open racism, they use a subtle form of race baiting that suggests that the blacks are somehow taking over. In some cases of affirmative action run amok, they have a good argument to make. But in general, if you look at any meaningful metric like disparity in income, wealth, home ownership, employment, educational level, teen pregnancy, single parent homes, and incarceration rates; the white race is in absolutely no danger of the black populations taking what we have any time soon. But the threat resonates with a good number of white voters. THe anger about affirmative action is out there to be tapped as an electoral force.

A top Republican strategist actually published an oped piece in 1970 in the New York Times outlining the great strategy to win all Dixiecrats over to Republican roles. His advice was to use the power of Congress to tear down literacy tests and let blacks in the South register to vote. He was quite forthright in explaining that if the Party did that, Whites would recoil in fear of losing what they had, and they would become Republicans because blacks would vote Democratic. It worked.

mattbrowne's avatar

I mentioned this in one of my answers to the Fluther blog interview questions:

One of the best Fluther questions is

http://www.fluther.com/61967/whats-so-bad-about-sarah-palin/

because it explores the reasons why Sarah Palin isn’t qualified to lead the most powerful country on our planet. Her being elected would not only affect the US, but also Europe and all the other continents and it would have disastrous consequences. There seems to be a growing number of Republican voters who think countries should be run by normal people. They seem suspicious of people with degrees from Harvard. Being intellectual sounds negative to them. This is a very dangerous trend and we should do something about it. We need the people who are best qualified for a particular job. And it’s time to give the word ‘intellectual’ back its positive connotation.

Sarah Palin might be a good hunter. Our society needs them to deal with the overpopulation of certain species such as deer. She might also be a fashion expert and know how to shop for expensive clothes, so perhaps she could write for magazines like Vogue and Elle avoiding words like refudiate before the editors notice them. But she can’t be President. Period.

Where are all the intelligent Republican candidates? There must be alternatives for the 2012 elections.

Ron_C's avatar

@mattbrowne Palin’s other main skill is enriching Sarah Palin. It seems that she is willing to say anything and do most anything to make a few bucks. If I was a Republican or in the “Tea Party”, I would be embarrassed to be represented by here.

I cringe when George Bush talks become the lies come out in garbled English. She must have gone to the same school as Bush.

Seek's avatar

Sarah Palin is the political version of Lady Gaga. Hopefully her particular pan-flash will burn out before she makes any lasting impression on our culture.

Dutchess_III's avatar

If I were Sarah Palin I’d wear a grocery sack over my head at all times.

mattbrowne's avatar

Dreamers think big and start small. Fools think small and start big.

Obama is a dreamer. Palin is a fool.

Ron_C's avatar

@mattbrowne I like that, do you mind if I borrow your comments?

mattbrowne's avatar

@Ron_C – No, not at all. It’s my personal motto and I’m using it on the homepage of my website http://www.meet-matt-browne.com

Ron_C's avatar

thanks Matt

Shinimegami's avatar

Is unfair lie say all people not like Barack Obama are racist minority. Some people try make every issue racist. People I know not like his incompetence. He is bad leader whatever his ancestry.

ETpro's avatar

@Shinimegami Are you trying to learn English by watching Fox News? If so, it is a bad idea from a language viewpoint as well as a truth viewpoint.

Shinimegami's avatar

@ETpro You say my Engrish imperfect, is cruel. I am Japanese, not watch USA TV, never see Fox News, not see any USA news. I think all media at USA or Japan lie support biases. Fox have one bias, other news have other biases, I think you biased too. I doubt you know truth. What you think mean Shinimegami?

Dutchess_III's avatar

It’s not cruel, it’s true! Your English is far from perfect. It’s OK though.
Shinimegami is a kind of cartoon art.

Shinimegami's avatar

@Dutchess_III You and ET pro kick people have wheelchairs, crutches, canes? Is certainly cruel and evade issue, is part of defamation! I have friend at USA ask me be his model draw Shinimegami, one story have Kitsune, Shao Chou and Shinimegami face Batman and Batwoman. 5’-5.5”, 136# Chinese lady bodybuilder model of Kitsune, 5’-2”, 111.5# Japanese lady bodybuilder model of Shao Chou, I am 5’-0.6”, 96.8# Japanese dancer model of Shinimegami. I am actress too, appear at movie series have several Shinigami.

Dutchess_III's avatar

What? What on earth are you talking about? Your English is not perfect. So? Dude is in a wheel chair, so? Dude is on crutches, so? Who cares?

Shinimegami's avatar

@Dutchess_III You not care if someone attack man have wheelchair, crutches, cane, attack someone’s language too, is all evasive and barbaric. Have you no conscience?

Dutchess_III's avatar

Noticing that someone is in a wheelchair is not the same thing as “attacking” them. If they’re at a video store and want a video that’s on the top shelf, is it attacking them to ask if they’d like some help?
You’re English is not perfect. Do you want us to tell you that it is anyway? Why would you want us to do that? Anyway, you can work on it if you want it to be perfect. Sounds like something that bothers you a lot more than it bothers any of us.

ETpro's avatar

@Shinimegami It is not being cruel to tell someone the truth. I am a published author and have an excellent command of English, and I am here to tell you that if you want to make yourself understood in the English speaking world, your language skills need some work. Trying to post and read here should be an excellent exercise to achieve more fluency in the language.

If anyone becomes committed to believing a falsehood, they will likely carry right on believing that falsehood. I am sure you’ve encountered that with Christian fundamentalists. But all who are open to the truth welcome it when it is provided to them. They particularly welcome it when it sets aside some pet belief they held. Lovers of truth do not want to go on and on believing a falsehood because the falsehood is comfortable.

Shinimegami's avatar

@ETpro and Dutchess III are cruel and unjust try defame someone say she have poor English, extend that at poor logic and knowledge. Politics quite subjective, not easy find facts at it. My lover is Nissei (USA-born Japanese) man, have perfect English, I not use much English until visit female friend, then meet him at California. He publish books at Japan. I am actress, model, singer, dancer, not write books. Everyone should question beliefs, that include you.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Well, my Spanish sucks and I wouldn’t expect people to pretend otherwise, and I don’t know WHY you want us to.
The rest of your post is completely irrelevant. What does the fact that your bf speaks “perfect English” have to do with anything?
What does the fact that you’re an actress, model, singer, dancer etc. have to do with anything?
And what makes you think we don’t question beliefs? Hell, that’s all we do ‘round these parts! And what does that have to do with the fact that your English isn’t very good?

Shinimegami's avatar

@Dutchess III, what this mean? Why mention Spanish? Is incomprehensible “kuso”, you not know logic. I can allow boyfriend reply my behalf. My profession not writer is emphasis, you not comprehend? You not show question absurd beliefs. Is cruel constntly say my Engrish poor. Not mean my thinking flawed, more logical of you.

Dutchess_III's avatar

I’m saying that if I attempted to speak Spanish it would be all screwed up, and I wouldn’t expect others to tell me it was just fine when it wasn’t. Which is what you want us to tell you. YOUR ENGLISH IS VERY POOR! It hardly even makes sense, girl! We don’t really care, but apparently YOU do! If it bothers you, make an attempt to learn the language a little better. If not, then we can end this discussion now.

This whole conversation is illogical. It’s like someone pointing out to you that you have brown eyes, and you get upset because you wish you had blue eyes, so you want everyone to tell you you have blue eyes and you tell them they are cruel to tell you have brown eyes.

Why do you want us to lie to you?

Seek's avatar

Kombanwa, @Shinimegami!

Sumimasen. I hope you don’t mind if I jump in, but I want to assure you that @Dutchess_III and @ETpro do not intend to insult you.

Your English (for the record, “Engrish” is an insulting word, and you probably shouldn’t use it) is considerably better than my Japanese. I only know the dirty words I picked up from watching subtitled episodes of Dragon Ball Z and Bishoujo Senshi Sailormoon back in high school.

However, you are still a bit hard to understand. This makes communication difficult. My friends @Dutchess_III and @ETpro wish only to inform you that it is hard to understand you, and encourage you to continue working on your command of the language. It is not defamation, it is information.

plethora's avatar

Not at all. I think Obama is more damaging to the US than all the Obama bashing combined by racists, non-racists, rich, poor, black, white, male, female, gun rights advocates, you name it. Anyone for impeachment?

ETpro's avatar

@plethora No. You actually have to have a legally valid reason to Impeach a president. Just hatred isn’t a sufficient charge to bring.

Shinimegami's avatar

Two people continuously say my English poor. Is cruel and not necessary. Purpose is destroy my credibility, is defamation. Japanese use letter “R”, not use letter “L”, we say “Rike” not “Like”, “Engrish” not “English”. Is not insult, is just normal speech of Japanese people. My boyfriend is Nissei (USA-born Japanese) speak English quite well. Maybe ask him help me or join Fluther.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Well, do you want to speak good English or poor English, or do you care?

plethora's avatar

@ETpro You don’t have to hate the man to know he is a poor excuse for POTUS. As for impeachment, certainly he must be charged and those charges proved. Sooo…anyone for impeachment?

ETpro's avatar

@plethora Then if you were not calling for the impeachment of George W. Bush (poorest excuse for a president in all of US history) you lack any credibility in this matter.

Response moderated (Personal Attack)
GiantKyojin's avatar

It is quite ludicrous to dismiss critics of Barack Obama as racists. Kokujin have been doing such foolish “kuso” for a long time. It is illogical and unjust. We could claim that critics of George W. Bush are a racist minority just as well. It is kindergarten level “osu no kuso” to resort to such low down methods.

Seek's avatar

Hi @GiantKyojin, and welcome to Fluther!

There are about three of us who have seen enough anime to know what ‘osu no kuso’ means. For the benefit of all involved, ‘bullshit’ is the preferred phrase.

(^﹏^)

ETpro's avatar

@GiantKyojin I am pretty sure white people are not a racial minority in America. That has no bearing on the fact that there’s plenty to criticize Obama about without having a racist bone in your body. But a lot of the criticism does appear racially motivated, and the Birther movement is a perfect case in point.

GiantKyojin's avatar

I am a Nissei (USA-born man of Japanese ancestry), and I consider myself to be a moderate Republican. I hear that Hakujin are becoming a minority. Most of my friends are Issei (born in Japan) and Nisssei, and we do not like Kokujin (“Hak Kwei”, to my Chines friends), but we do not allow that to influence us in politics. Colin Powell is a better Kokujin than Barack Obama. The supposedd question exaggerates any racism in existence and acts as if that is he only reason people citicize Obama-san. That is “Gojira no kuso” that “Hak Kwei” (Black Devils) use. On Yahoo Answers such a rant might be removed. We are supposed to ask real questions, not sermonize.

Seek's avatar

^ I don’t care what language you say it in, “We don’t like black people” is disgustingly racist.

GiantKyojin's avatar

I am just stating a fact. Chinese and Japanese people do not like “Kokujin-Hak Kwei”. I recall, Maeda Sadao (a.k.a. Chiba “Sonny” Shennichi) killing one in a movie. He deserved it, and many deserve to be despised. Many people would say exactly the same thing we do, if they were more honest. South China people do not like anyone from North China, Japan, Europe, Africa, the Americas, etc. It is natural to be racist and unnatural to pretend not to be. Being natural is Not disgusting, except to hypocrites.

Seek's avatar

There is no reason to dislike a person based on the place they were born, or the people they were born to.

A person is to be judged on their own actions and their own merits.

There is nothing “natural” about racism.

ETpro's avatar

@GiantKyojin Every racist thinks they are stating facts, when the fact is racism is painting with such a broad brush that all that it covers could not possibly be based in fact.

Dutchess_III's avatar

“It is natural to be racist and unnatural to pretend not to be.” That make no sense. If being a racist is “natural,” then my 8 month old white twins could be expected to act negatively when they’re around people of other races. They don’t.

Racism is learned behavior.

Shinimegami's avatar

Dutchess III give more absurd comments. Babies know little, cannot distinguish races, is quite illogical use such example. I see small children conscious of races. Is absurd deny it. Some groups have strong tendencies behave badly. I see large group of small children at bus, Chinese children quiet, behave well, African children noisy, behave badly. Mindless Lunatic Left fanatics deny facts they not wish see. My 6’-10”, 475 pound lover GiantKyojin state facts, not say right or wrong, several people not read what he say, try twist it suit their leftist bias.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@GiantKyojin said that racism is “natural.” Babies come equipped with all the things that are truly “natural” to all of us, such as the fear of heights, loud noises, being hungry. If it is “natural,” then babies should instinctively be able to distinguish race. They can’t because it isn’t natural. It’s learned behavior.

Oh, and for some strange reason I feel compelled to mention that I’m 5’7 and weight 145 pounds.

Response moderated (Flame-Bait)
Dutchess_III's avatar

Um…I don’t really care how big or small you or your boyfriend is. That was my point in randomly listing my height and weight.

Babies show plenty of reaction, from day one. If something scares them they cry. If being racist is natural, they would cry when they see someone of a different race.

If you say, “Babies don’t know what race they are,” then you will have made my point. Babies are taught what their race is vs other races. They are taught to be racist. It is not natural, it is learned.

Response moderated (Personal Attack)
Response moderated (Personal Attack)
Response moderated (Personal Attack)
Dutchess_III's avatar

But I got to read them first! Yay!

Response moderated (Personal Attack)
Response moderated (Flame-Bait)
Seek's avatar

HAHAHA! Libel against Y!A?!? Hilarious.

And I wouldn’t go to Texas if you paid me. I like to be around evolved lifeforms.

Response moderated (Personal Attack)
Response moderated
Response moderated
Dutchess_III's avatar

@Seek_Kolinahr! I was born in Texas!

Seek's avatar

And you left. Which shows good judgment on your part.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Well, yeah. When I was six months old. I just packed up and walked out!

彼らは狂っている!

Response moderated (Personal Attack)
Response moderated
Dutchess_III's avatar

Damn it @Seek_Kolinahr! How many times do we have to tell you to stop attacking Texas! You’re gonna hurt the poor thing. Shame shame.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Didn’t Answerbag close down several years ago?

Response moderated
Response moderated
Dutchess_III's avatar

That’s right….you came in on the Answerbag wave Seek. I’d forgotten that.

Seek's avatar

Yeah. Me and Ucme, and Hypocrisy-Central, and… I think LuckyGuy, maybe? and a few others. I lost a couple of years of steady Fluthering… hurt my lurve. ucme is ten grand above me because of it. ^_^

Dutchess_III's avatar

Does this look familiar? :)

Seek's avatar

I believe it does! Were you an ABer as well?

That site was so big… so many people. And I know I changed my name at the crossover.

Dutchess_III's avatar

No…I came from Wis.dm and our reception here was, shall we say, less than welcoming. One of our former users JOE, created a ning site to approximate Wis.dm, and we tried to direct ya’ll there. I found that pic and put “Answerbaggers Welcome!” in rainbow letters across the top. It was a counter point, actually, to Fluther, cause they were so MEAN so we tried to be the opposite! I forget how we set it up so that would be the first thing you guys saw, but we did.
That site didn’t last long. :(

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther