Opposing Obamacare = racism?

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
It's not necessarily racism, and while it is anyone's right to disagree with whatever, know what the hell you're talking about first. This whole thing has been an avalanche of propaganda and misinformation from the first whisper of it.

Combined with images and statements from certain individuals of a racial nature. Whether they mean that or not, they've put it out there and are now mad that others are pointing that out. This cannot be denied.
 

D_Aston Asstonne

Account Disabled
Joined
Sep 22, 2006
Posts
1,496
Media
0
Likes
48
Points
193
"They are spreading fear and they're trying to see that the first president who looks like me -- fails."

Is that all she has... the race card???!!!

No sweetcheeks, it's a bad idea. We don't care if comes from the green dude named The Great Gazoo. And sweetheart, even if it does go in, we don't want it RUSHED in a couple weeks. If one doesn't like nationalized healthcare, you are a racist ... got it.

I know there are some redneck racists and blah blah blah, but libtards, your own constituents are just as bad. Calling out racism for the sake of it, is just as bad as being a racist. In fact, the original definition of racism is thinking/acting/judging with prejudicial regard to race.


And politicians calling out a media member (regardless of affiliation) is a sign of patheticsm. They should be above it, and that includes Republican McCotter calling out Olbermann, and this bimbo calling out Limbaugh.
Bravo!you hit the nail right on the head.
 

Symphonic

Sexy Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Posts
1,740
Media
0
Likes
81
Points
193
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Why do people seek trouble? It doesn't matter primarily why anything is opposed; we are all capable of understanding that the world isn't fair. Most people aren't educated enough to talk about economics and politics anyway; the few that are usually aren't experienced enough to truly understand the implications of many programs to begin with, and the rest that can are often split amongst themselves for one reason or another.

Racism in and of itself is probably a major factor, but considering most aren't up to speed in economics and the understanding of social welfare and the like it's probably one of the many excuses people can come up with.
 

Cowabanga

Experimental Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 24, 2005
Posts
354
Media
7
Likes
10
Points
263
Location
northwest
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I am sick of tired of Nancy Pelosi and B. Hussein Obama and all of these other 'Tax and Spend' democrats robbing me blind with tax increases to give the welfare queens and other dirtbag members of society benefits that they do not deserve.

If a person has worked, and has become unemployed, the govt should step in with UNEMPLOYMENT to help the person, for a defined period of time, until they find work.

If someone has never worked (welfare queens) (in some cases for generations of the same family), they are not entitled to SQUAT. This country was founded on the principles of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Nowhere in the constitution does it guarantee free healthcare, free shelter, or free foodstamps.

People are undoubtedly going to call me a racist for this, and by doing so, they prove what we all know to be true. I have mentioned nothing about race in my 'rant,' yet all parties, including the liberal guilt crowd, know what group tends to 1.) contribute the least and 2.) take the most. What are the prison racial population statistics again? I know whites get blamed for that two, and frankly I am sick and tired of tiptoeing around the issue. We have been giving reparations for the last fifty years, especially when people on welfare in most states make more money than someone who works a full time job at McDonald's. It disgusts me that we are being taxed into oblivion to provide for these people. I worked hard for my education, I paid a LOT of tuition, and now I have a good job. Why should my hard work and investment benefit some asshole who sits around all month waiting for the government check to show up? You are right, it shouldn't.

I still find it funny that Barack Obama is the leader of a political party that fought against freeing the slaves.



CUT WELFARE - CUT THE DEFICIT - CUT TAXES

I agree, lets stop taxing the millionaires to death and tax the middle class, and when there gone then tax the poor, and then make them pay for the hospital, since they are the one getting sick all the time, with tainted food, tainted water, and polluted living condition. They chose to live there then they should pay for the consequences. It's about time somone thinks about wealthcare, instead of healthcare. GW Bush was on the right path to send welfare to corporation 100X times the amount that we send to those out of work, and poor. If they want jobs, they should move to the countries where the job the are moved to. It's not the billionaires fault that they choose to stay in the USA. So why should rich people pay thru the nose for the tax?

Sen. Rockafeller was surprise that he paid less tax then his own secretary!
He also said no CEO is worth more than $100,000 per year, and CEO nowadays are getting 200 mills for bonuses.
 

MovingForward

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Posts
842
Media
0
Likes
123
Points
173
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
I am sick of tired of Nancy Pelosi and B. Hussein Obama and all of these other 'Tax and Spend' democrats robbing me blind with tax increases to give the welfare queens and other dirtbag members of society benefits that they do not deserve.

If a person has worked, and has become unemployed, the govt should step in with UNEMPLOYMENT to help the person, for a defined period of time, until they find work.

If someone has never worked (welfare queens) (in some cases for generations of the same family), they are not entitled to SQUAT. This country was founded on the principles of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Nowhere in the constitution does it guarantee free healthcare, free shelter, or free foodstamps.

People are undoubtedly going to call me a racist for this, and by doing so, they prove what we all know to be true. I have mentioned nothing about race in my 'rant,' yet all parties, including the liberal guilt crowd, know what group tends to 1.) contribute the least and 2.) take the most. What are the prison racial population statistics again? I know whites get blamed for that two, and frankly I am sick and tired of tiptoeing around the issue. We have been giving reparations for the last fifty years, especially when people on welfare in most states make more money than someone who works a full time job at McDonald's. It disgusts me that we are being taxed into oblivion to provide for these people. I worked hard for my education, I paid a LOT of tuition, and now I have a good job. Why should my hard work and investment benefit some asshole who sits around all month waiting for the government check to show up? You are right, it shouldn't.

I still find it funny that Barack Obama is the leader of a political party that fought against freeing the slaves.



CUT WELFARE - CUT THE DEFICIT - CUT TAXES

Who are "these people" who do you consider wellfare queens? Have you ever filed for unemployment. The government already DOES provide unemployment for a defined period of time. Since we both live in Northern California, what taxes were raised by pelosi and obama?
 

Elmer Gantry

LPSG Legend
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Posts
48,180
Media
53
Likes
265,201
Points
518
Location
Australia
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Bullshit...
Perhaps you should learn how to make a critique about Obama that doesn't feed into the racial rhetoric? I have... I'm not completely satisfied with him... his lack of aggression on Civil Rights for gays & lesbians strikes a nerve with me, as well as his inability to move on to a different plan when his first idea doesn't work out. Such as his battle cries for bipartisanship with the Health Care Debate.

But notice, these complaints came without resorting to the usual name calling, the hope of failure, or all of the pseudo-clever comments and insults that tap into race? I can make my critiques without calling him a Socialist/Communist/Nazi/Anti-White Kenyan with no birth certificate. What's YOUR excuse?

Interesting. I find him an incredible disappointment.

We have an escalation of hostilities in Afghanistan and are now also told that the occupation of Iraq while go on for at least years, if not decades.

None of the destruction wrought on the US constitution has been ammended. Also, the Glass-Steagal Act has been used as toilet paper.

Gitmo has just been moved on, not shut down. Illegal rendition flight are still OK, apparently. Warrantless wire tapping is still kosher and now coming soon will be central control of the internet.

The appointees are nothing but Wall St flunkies and other persons with interesting backgrounds. (i.e. Rahm "Never-let-a-good-crisi-go-to-waste" Emmanuelle, Kissingers boy, Geithner, et al).

The health care deal could be good but it does seem to have a few issues but we are told that to mention them is "anti-Obama".

In short, the new boss is looking a whole lot like the old boss.
 

Elmer Gantry

LPSG Legend
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Posts
48,180
Media
53
Likes
265,201
Points
518
Location
Australia
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male

Qua

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2007
Posts
1,604
Media
63
Likes
1,268
Points
583
Location
Boston (Massachusetts, United States)
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Astonishing considering the man is just as white as he is black. Half of him has, "a score to settle?" What is the other half going to do? Grouse about it with the boys at the country club while sipping gin and tonics?

Obama's not even a descendant of slaves!

Oh wait... we're judging his agenda by the color of his skin, not his ancestry, genetic composition, history, or philosophy. Yeah, that works. :rolleyes:

Pwnage.

It's a shame many conservatives can't reason their opposition to a national health care plan without bringing up Obama's race. And a further shame when liberals assume opposition to a national health care plan is implicit racism.
 
Last edited:

Skull Mason

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2006
Posts
3,035
Media
6
Likes
110
Points
193
Location
Dirty Jersey
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Can someone explain to me what is so bad about the health care plan? I was under the impression that the government would just offer people an opportunity to purchase cheaper health care, therefore driving the costs of other heal care plans down? This may not be the case, but it is the impression I am under.

If this is the case, what is so upsetting and unsettling about it? Competition is a good thing, no? Reminds me of people who get mad when a good phone comes out that is cheaper than the iphone or an iphone plan, which forces companies to lower their rates to get customers. I like my health plan (iphone), but if it would get cheaper it would be even better. Health insurance premiums are astronomical.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Who is the opposition and why is their word holy writ?

It would be unfair to paint a "token image" of the opposition. That would be just as discriminating as some of comments being said by them. What good would it be for me to generalize and only focus on a few demographics to try and make a point?

Instead of only focusing on the who, I focus on the what. Again, I don't mind if people have critiques with the current administration nor do I care if they oppose Health Care Reform. To be honest, the only real complaint from the opposition that I've heard that may have any kind of leverage is whether or not our Nation can afford it. I don't know and nobody else knows that answer for sure either. But then, you have tools who decides to take this complaint and turn it racial by saying he's "n***er rich". :rolleyes:

We the people: America is N***er Rich
Is Obama N***er Rich? | America Speaks Ink
+Obama is nothing but a fucking +n***er+ - Obama n***er says 'Gimme dat money, rich blue-eyed devil'!
Today's Awful Income News

Now anyone who opposes Obama or the Health Care Debate can sit back and say that these voices don't represent me or the GOP, but when you do a Google Search for Obama and the offensive term more than 4 Million search results come up. When does it get to the point when we admit there's a problem that needs to be addressed? There's definitely a racial component to many people's arguments surrounding anything that involves Obama, and just because you're one of the smart ones that won't type the N-Word to address it doesn't mean it's nonexistent.
 
Last edited:

Elmer Gantry

LPSG Legend
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Posts
48,180
Media
53
Likes
265,201
Points
518
Location
Australia
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Yes, there does seem to be a small, very noisy minority with this view point that still exists.

And the media will naturally focus on them as a skinhead shouting the N word is much more scandalous than Ma asking if Grandma will get that hip replacement.

However, I think the first mistake you're making is polarising this issue into red team/blue team when I think there is a new team on the block that the media is desperately trying to alternatively discredit or ignore.

That's just from the outside looking in......................
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Yes, there does seem to be a small, very noisy minority with this view point that still exists.

And the media will naturally focus on them as a skinhead shouting the N word is much more scandalous than Ma asking if Grandma will get that hip replacement.

However, I think the first mistake you're making is polarising this issue into red team/blue team when I think there is a new team on the block that the media is desperately trying to alternatively discredit or ignore.

I'm not doing that at all. The whole red vs. blue with Politics is just as deceptive as the white vs. black argument in pertains to wealth & social class. I try to look at every comment and every person individually. And even if one party or race seems to be at the center of the problem I know that it goes much deeper than that. With that being said, one doesn't have to be part of any particular race or political party to notice the obvious. When I can get 4 million search results calling Obama "n***er rich" then there's definitely a problem that should be addressed. These are the ones who have the guts to voice their issues... but we still don't even reference any of the people who believe it and keep it bottled inside. The issue is much bigger than anyone is willing to admit, and unless you are on the wrong end of this hatred it's hard for anyone to fathom. Keep in mind I'm not even referencing comments calling Obama a Nazi. That's because every President since the end of WWII has been called or characterized in that manner by their opposition to some degree and we all know it's ridiculous.

Then again, I don't recall many political pundits in the news calling George W. Bush, Reagan or Nixon a "greedy cracker" either. :confused:
 

B_24065

1st Like
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Posts
639
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
163
Bullshit...
as well as his inability to move on to a different plan when his first idea doesn't work out. Such as his battle cries for bipartisanship with the Health Care Debate.

QUOTE]

LOL Dude, He doesnt need bi-partisan support. In fact, he's never done anything bipartisan other than use the word. If he had enough of his own party on board, it would be a non-issue. His opposition is primarily democrats and the american people (town hall protesters). The Republicans are totally irrelevant. And if you expect Republicans, in an effort for bi-partisanship, to sign onto something many democrats won't even touch, then you are pointing the finger at the wrong party. We are witnessing a rookie, inexperienced politician self-destruct before our eyes. 46% disapproval and falling.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
68
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
LOL Dude, He doesnt need bi-partisan support. In fact, he's never done anything bipartisan other than use the word.

If that was true, then we would have passed a measure already.

If he had enough of his own party on board, it would be a non-issue.

Perhaps. You do make a point there.

His opposition is primarily democrats and the american people (town hall protesters).

No. His opposition is private health insurance companies and the people they've bought out.

The Republicans are totally irrelevant.

Bullshit... they're also part of the problem just as much as the Democrats because many of them have been "bought out" too.

And if you expect Republicans, in an effort for bi-partisanship, to sign onto something many democrats won't even touch, then you are pointing the finger at the wrong party.

Again, we agree on something. Wow.
But at least an offer and an effort for bipartisanship was made. That way, if Health Care Reform goes through without any Republican support nobody can claim that Obama didn't try.

We are witnessing a rookie, inexperienced politician self-destruct before our eyes.

The only ones self destructing are the opposition. Because the more they talk, the more you see just how out of touch they are with the rest of the world. They're the ones predicting doom less than a year into the new administration's actions. That's a bigger sign of inexperience to me.

46% disapproval and falling.

That would mean that people are liking him more if his disapproval rate is falling. You may want to try this one again. "rolleyes:
 

Ericsson1228d

Experimental Member
Joined
May 22, 2005
Posts
579
Media
0
Likes
2
Points
236
Location
MI, USA
Gender
Male
I
Then again, I don't recall many political pundits in the news calling George W. Bush, Reagan or Nixon a "greedy cracker" either. :confused:

Nobody called them greedy because they actively pursued taking the government's hands off of our wallets by initiating tax cuts.

Furthermore, the House of Representatives Chief Economist to the Vice-Chairman, Christopher Frenze, writes:

The Reagan tax cuts, like similar measures enacted in the 1920s and 1960s, showed that reducing excessive tax rates stimulates growth, reduces tax avoidance, and can increase the amount and share of tax payments generated by the rich. High top tax rates can induce counterproductive behavior and suppress revenues, factors that are usually missed or understated in government static revenue analysis.

So, those who let us keep our hard-earned money are not greedy, they are mindful of how to stimulate the economy.

Ask yourself this question: With Obama in power, and a democratic congress, and all of this pending expensive legislation, are people more or less likely to spend their money? Look at the economy. We are less likely, because we are afraid of being taxed into oblivion. We are all trying to save for the upcoming rainy days of government takeovers, and therefore the economy is hurting, because nobody is spending.