Carter's Racism accusation

Remove all ads!

I wonder, in his eight months in office, what monumental change did Obama bring justifying these fears, except for being the first black president? What did he bring that wasn't already there, or under way?

Answer is: So far, not that much. That means those fears are largely baseless and the threats imaginary.

 

Raguse, to some people the threat Obama represents as a black man in the most powerful office in the world is quite significant. To many of us the threat may seem imaginary, but to others it is quite real -- such is the nature of bias.

 

True.

 

I think people who feel threatened by Obama are afraid that he's going to make fried chicken and collard greens the official national foods.

 

Another part of the puzzle is something that Glenn Greenwald expressed in a rather scathing manner last year

He was writing in the fall of last year, and the situation's only become worse. The most important person in the GOP is Rush Limbaugh. When the supposed head of the GOP annoyed Rush he had to beg to be let back into his own party.

So yeah, you've got racists, and lots of 'em. The problem is that they're pretty hard to distinguish from the rest of the GOP, as their behavior is basically indistinguishable from what has become the right's modus operandi.

 

Couldn't have said that better myself, AMaster.

 

Mmmmmm, chicken! I say, go for it!

---------- Added 0 hours, 23 minutes and 31 seconds later... ----------

For starters, even allowing them hospital care should have some conditions. I am not saying to refuse them, that's just not humane, but the hospital should record that they have no ID and notify authorities, like when a gunshot wound victim is brought in or an abused child. We don't have to spend alot to do that. The authorities should be able to take it from there. Then INS won't have to track them down, they will be notified. I agree with you Drew that we should go after the employers as well, they are screwing over their countrymen by hiring illegals and should be prosecuted for it.

 

I wouldn't know a collard green if it jumped up off my plate and bit me on the nose!

But that's neither here nor there. I think that in the 8 months that Ragusa mentioned, Obama has made his agenda pretty clear. I happen to think it's pretty good -- not perfect, but pretty good. But I think that 8 months or so is a fair enough time for people to form at least a general opinion of a politician's policies.

But the racists we are discussing already had their minds made up about a black President 10 years ago.

I do believe, however, that there are those who criticize Obama for reasons other than his race. To paint them all with the same brush is neither just nor logical.

 

I think the Glen Greenwald comment seems ... almost petty. I think he's oversimplifying and adding to the partisan sentiments (just as Rush does).

 

T2, you don't get his hate mail.

 

Perhaps, but who's to say the illegal doesn't have ID? It can be faked, forged, borrowed, pilfered, etc. Moreover, if illegals know that going to the hospital is a one way road to deportation, they won't go. This isn't good, either, since it is going to cost us a lot less in the long run to actually treat people with medical problems than it would to wait until they are dying. The illegal problem isn't going to go away tomorrow, and denying medicine to illegals -- and, make no bones about it, making admission to a hospital a surefire path to deportation does exactly that -- won't help even a little. It will, in fact, increase our (surprisingly low*)costs.

* Again, contrary to popular belief, 2/3 of illegal Aliens do, in fact, pay Medicare, Social Security and personal income taxes. While some illegals who do not are working "under the table," most of them simply have no tax liability or no job (ie kids, spouses, the elderly). What's more, illegals do not benefit fromy means-tested government programs like food stamps, housing assistance, Medicaid and Medicare-funded hospitalization. The only services that illegals can still get are emergency medical care and K-12 education -- and their taxes will more than cover those services. I point this out not to argue that this should be somehow "rectified," but to correct a common misconception put forward by the right. Illegals Aliens do cost the government money, to be sure, but not as much as you'd think. The most recent estimates place their "cost" to the government at an average of $2700 per household -- less than half of what a "legal" household currently costs the government.

 

None of that matters. The fact of the matter is they are here "Illegally". We should just accept that? Hell no! Their cost is more than $2700 per household. They use our public transportation, drive on our roads, use our bridges... these are also costs that we eat above and beyond your $2700.00. They also use up foodstuffs, clothing that would otherwise be available to tax-paying citizens. Working illegally takes jobs away that should be held by citizens. If they aren't here, jack-off business owners can't hire them under-the-table. All of these points drive up costs for the rest of us. More bills we have to pay. Bottom line, they shouldn't be here and we shouldn't have to accept it.

 

While I sympathize with where you're coming from Blades, you're being very unrealistic. You're right, we shouldn't have to put up with illegal immigrants. We shouldn't have to put up with a lot of things we don't like. But we do have to. Until someone solves the problem of Mexico being a sh*thole, we'll always have problems with illegals. The question is how we deal with them, how we put up with them. Not if. There is no if.

 

I know DR. Drew is pretty much right. But someone has to rail against it, to keep the real problem in the forefront, otherwise it becomes accepted. I'll carry that standard anyday.

 

True, but I think if more people directed their energy at improving the situation, rather than merely complaining louder about a situation everyone already agrees is unacceptable and unlikely to change, I think we'd all be a lot better off. Simply "railing" against a problem is pretty counterproductive, if you ask me.

 

Yep, I agree. But do you really think we are at the point that we are ready to improve it yet? That would require agreement from all sides on what to do about improving the situation, which we don't have yet and doubt that we will anytime soon. Hence, the fight goes on. Not much different from every other issue in Congress.

 

No, we're not ready, because the debate has become so extreme. All the more reason for less railing and more listening. Less demonization, more pragmatism. Less Tom Tancredo and Lou Dobbs, more...hell, anyone really. Dora the Explorer.

 

Listening I'm for DR. Crap, you guys have swayed me a little on a few topics here at SP. I KNOW I don't know everything. Neither do the rest of you. But in order for someone to be listening, someone must be speaking This is just my turn to speak. You guys can shoot down my ideas, as Drew has just done, deftly I might add. You have also done that for me in the past, as have others. But I will still state my opinion until the debate is done, if I desire. Even if my opinion changes now and then. The ability to rail against what I think is wrong in a socialable manner is what attracts me to these boards. It's not like I'm in the media spewing forth, as my non-existant name means nothing to others outside of here. But I hope at sometime it will mean something here.

 

I think you misunderstand me, Blades. To me, simply "railing" is complaining about something without offering alternative solutions; a form of demagoguery. I would never slight anyone for voicing an opinion, I just prefer them to be constructive rather than merely complaintive. I think your arguments thus far have been sincere and more than acceptable. Keep it up.

 

Thanks DR.