The Politics Thread

[quartermainefan]

well, that;s just silly!

[soapfan4life]

What I find ridiculous is tha most Americans probably would not have heard nor seen this video had these events not happened. Now the video has had so many hits on it eventually everyone will have seen it. I also don't believe that it actually had anything to do with the attack in Libya- that was premeditated I believe and was done in junction with the 11th anniversary of 9/11. I have actually heard news reports that one of the men had actually posted hours before he died that something didn't feel right and felt like there would be an attack of some sort.(Not sure how reliable this is but I have read it on two different web sites.)

Also I know this is a heavy election time, but I'm not sure how I feel about either Obama or Romney actually doing any fundraising or campaigning today. They are both using this tragedy as a talking point of why they are the better canidate. I see both events as attack on us, our people, and our beliefs, if for nothing else it says we need to somehow come together as a united country again and stand against those who try to take those away and become the strong country we used to be. (just to clarify I am NOT advocating starting or getting into another war)

[JaneAusten]

I think as the election has gotten closer, emotions on both sides have been heightened. But aside from a few posts now and then, the dialogue for the most part has been pretty respectful in this thread and good debates. I think the nicknames on both sides are childish and serve no purpose and I frankly don't see the point as it just heightens the stereotypes each candidate has been labeled with.

As for race being a factor in Obama winning, I still don't believe it or at least not to the same degree. the Washington Post in 2008 did an article that was picked up by a lot of the media across the country outlining why being a woman was a greater hindrance than being an AA man and that there is much more to overcome for a woman than there is for an African American in terms of a presidential election. Hilary may have been the most electable woman of that time and may still be but that doesn't mean she would have ever been elected president at that time. I believe taking away JUST his color, Obama still would have beat her in the primaries. All the same things that attracted voters to him, his freshness, message of hope, relative inexperience in Washington, the appearance of non partisanship, still applied. I'll always like Hilary, but all the worst of the Clinton years got absorbed by her and unlike this year, there was still a lot of vitriol. The media hates Romney? Well not to me but the media definitely hated Hilary and it was guilt by association at the time. But time heals all wounds and now all those things the public hated the Clinton's for are forgotten. Bill is now the elder statesman and Hilary doing diplomatic work, in a role that tends to rise above partisanship.

Edited September 13, 2012 by JaneAusten

[Vee]

I like how this is still a thread, seeing as Romney personally ended his campaign yesterday morning.

[GoldenDogs]

Mmm.... care less what others think, Max. I stopped caring some time ago. I also won't be driven off because people on this board, like Marceline, are passionate in their beliefs. I respect that, even when I feel those beliefs are misguided. Politics is an intense topic and I, too, have felt a bit of contempt from some here, but nothing that I have felt was over the top. You have probably gotten worse than I for whatever reason. Hell, I give you crap sometimes, too, just for the sport of it... But you shouldn't let others drive you away.

Been there, done that... If you are firm in your convictions, then it doesn't matter what sharp-tongued folks say to you. I see some totally outrageous statements here... I get it from friends, particularly when it comes to race issues.

One of my closest friends at work is black and we chat about politics once in a great while. We were discussing many issues... speculated on why MSNBC, for example, cut from their broadcast of the RNC most of the minority speakers... she didn't know or care why. As for Condoleeza Rice speaking there, she told me she didn't like her and that Rice wasn't really black. Of course I responded that Obama then wasn't really black, either. Her response to me was that Rice's daddy wasn't black, and that was where the "gene" came from.

I was stunned...

Both sides in this country and especially in this forum have a lot to learn about the world, each other, and especially tolerance. Some of the most intolerant I see are those claiming to be the most tolerant. Complete and utter bull$hit, party line and all... and they know it.

With regard to the lives of gay folks being better if Obama gets elected... horse$hit there, too. The man couldn't even offer support of gay marriage until Biden opened his big mouth and forced the issue... and it was a begruding endorsement... over THREE YEARS into his presidency. And what has Obama done to improve the plight of black folks in this country? Nothing.

But we have as signature accomplishments thus far a rotten stimulus package and a government-controlled healthcare program we can't fund because the rotten stimulus package plunged us into further debt.

It's madness... but it's politics, Max, and you have to expect a tough go when you throw opinions around, particularly in a forum where you know the folks here are predominantly left-leaning. People just have to agree to disagree. When I feel like arguing, I'll post. When I don't want to argue, I won't. Or if someone is being an ass, I ignore them. If they show contempt for me without truly knowing me, screw 'em. Look, nobody here really KNOWS me. They have no clue what I'm about or what I truly think. Only one person have I ever met through this particular forum has even bothered to talk to me on a more personal level privately.

Take a pill, Max... don't get overwrought with this thing. I know, we've all been there. You can't change people's minds... you can only present the best evidence you can to support your views and, likely they will shoot it down anyway. It's all in sport, this debating and such. And we all have bigger fish to fry in our lives once we log off this damn thing. Like right now... I gotta think about my day ahead...

First things first... I'll eat some breakfast and exercise while watching a Match Game rerun on GSN in about 5 minutes... LOL... then I'll get ready for my day.

Have a nice day, everyone. Yes, even Marceline and Ann_SS. :-) Because none of this debating and arguing is personal... Remember that, Max...

[Max]

Thanks so much for the very nice message, Brian.

[marceline]

I just got around to watching McCain's statement on Chris Stevens. That was a damn fine tribute and judging by the way his voice broke at the end, a hard one to deliver. It reminds me of the McCain I used to respect. It's good to see someone put the politics to the side and remember the man and his service. IMO, we need more of that.

[Wales2004]

Barack Obama is not proof that America is "post-racial," he's just evidence that some white Americans have no problem voting for a non-white American male for President (or a half-white one since he's biracial). The fact that he has to be identified as black and not accurately as biracial is a great indication that this country is stuck in a racialist ditch. If he "looked white" but had the same background, would people fall all over themselves insisting he was black because of a racist "one-drop rule," or would he be allowed the privilege of being white?

This makes zero sense to me in terms of logic. If society hates women more than black men then the issue was sexism. He benefitted from the fact that people would rather embrace a man in a position of power than a woman. If he won because of his race then it would mean that people would prefer a black man over any other candidate which was not the case. Rejecting a woman is not the same as embracing a race.

I find the whole argument about people not having qualifications to be president neither here nor there. I have disagreed with others on the topic of who is more qualified when it comes to comparison but there is no list of quallifications to be president other than age and citizenship. That's pretty much why some are able to look at Sarah Palin and claim that she's just like them and should be president on the basis of their commonality. Would I ever suggest that anyone who is just like me be president? No, because I would prefer to see a person who is extremely more knowledgeable and rational than I am in any public office. So if Sarah Palin is qualified then so is Barack Obama.

This is head shaking worthy. Your co-worker sounds like one of those racialists who believe there is a special way for black people to act and speak and if they don't then they must not be black. C. Rice's father had a darker skin tone than she does. Whether that makes him white is beyond me but if there is a "gene" for that then everyone in a family would have the exact same skin tone if they have the same two parents.

America is proably the only nation where race isn't just about what the naked eye can see but it's about speech, behavior, musical tastes, food, athletic ability, disposition, intelligence, and fashion. One of my high school teachers told me that she was shocked, when she went to England, to hear the little black children speak cockney. So she expected black children all over the wolrd to sound the same when all the black children in America dom't. But we pretend they all do. And we pretend that whoever does not is exceptional because this one individual has defied the racial boundary and has managed to construct a grammatically correct sentence.

The irony in all of this is that people swear that either all people or just black people originated in Africa. Since when did anyone look at Africa and claim that there was any uniformity going on in terms of speech, behavior, food, intelligence, fashion, etc? How did black Americans become the standard for what constitutes black when there are more black people outside of this nation than in it?

Sheer ignorance. We can accept that white people are diverse. We can even accept that there are various breeds of dogs. We cannot accept that black people are diverse in any way. In politics there is no break down of black voters because everyone knows that black people can only be black and gender does not matter, Age does not matter. Level of education does not matter. They are all the same rap loving, ball playing people.

Oh and I am not at all saying that you think this way....it's just a general observation.

And because of that abolishing DADT doesn't mean a thing. So if a new man comes in and gets rid of DADT plus doesn't support gay marriage, are they better off? I am not saying he's going to make it any better but he did take a step forward and is certainly unlikely to take them backwards which would make some better off than the alternative. I am just guessing though.

This relates to what I said above. Black people are diverse as hard as it may seem. They don't all have the same problems and needs.

I don't know what the plight is but there are more poor white people than poor black people in this country. It's logical because there are more white people in this country. People can argue that the rate of povery among black people is disproportionate but it is only that way because it's made in comparison to white people. So if Barack Obama cannot stop porverty for white people should he pass a special law directed to end poverty for black people only? How many people would find that racist?

I read a blog in which the blogger suggested that there be reparations and that the prison system be abolished because it's unfair to black men. That sounds like a great plan right? Let criminals run around free because some feel that black men are in prison for crimes white men get away with regularly. It would not make sense to imprison criminals across the board?

Technically, Barack Obama cannot do anything for black people in this country until white people in this country stop patronizing black people as some sort of charitable project and start treating them as equals. If that happens then I bet there will be less idiots on televison suggesting that Barack Obama hasn't done anything for black people. He hasn't fed them, hasn't given them jobs, and he hasn't kept them out of prison. They all went to the same school, they all have the same degrees, they all studied the same subjects, and they all have the same skill sets and qualifications so he's going to pass a national decree to make sure they all get the same job.

[Ann_SS]

The racial stereotypes and generalizations flying around this place are incredible.

The idea that Democratic voters hate women more than black men is a false generalization and extremely simplistic thinking just like the rant that people must only voting for Obama because he is black. Hillary Clinton had the nomination sown up, but her campaign was badly run and she turned out be a crappy politician unable to appeal to the majority of Democratic voters. She was also hurt by the fact that Obama was a better orator.

The opinion that Obama is unqualified or the least qualified person to be President is another incomprehensible one. There are no established qualifications to be president. The people who vote determine whether or not they feel the candidate is qualified to be president. We have had presidents from all sorts of background. And if history has thought us anything, you never know who is going to be a great, good or bad and forgettable president.

Edited September 13, 2012 by Ann_SS

[GoldenDogs]

Ehh... didn't post in defense or support of you, sir... just stating my opinion. I've frankly wanted to take you out back and whoop you good a time or two, myself... The only thing holding me back is that I don't pick on guys weaker than me.

[quartermainefan]

Of course it is a generalization, but one steeped in fact. I don't think we have to look very far to find actresses of a certain age who can't get jobs, women called sluts for wanting birth control, women called bitches because they run their own businesses like Martha Stewart where people like Donald Trump get touted for office. And then you come to politics. Indira Ghandi was elected PM of India in 1966. Golda Meir was elected PM of Israel in 1969. Margaret Thatcher was elected PM of the UK in 1979. Angela Merkel was elected Chancellor of Germany in 2005. And here we have the US. Two failed nominees for VP and as yet no nominees for president.

There is no explanation for this unless we are to say American women are incompetent at politics. Maybe that is the case, but I tend to believe in old fashioned sexism as the explanation. It's not democratic voters hate women, it is that american society in general hates women. That's why Eric Braeden is a leading man at the age of 600 and his female contemporaries can't get themselves arrested in soaps. It's why there is no American version of Judi Dench or Maggie Smith. It's why that host of The Today show got the blame and why so many hated Hillary and saw her as a scheming bitch who plotted murders and disposed of bodies in Washington DC parks. It;s why Mike Bloomberg can campaign against coca cola but Michelle Obama is out of line for doing the same.

[JaneAusten]

d

Edited September 13, 2012 by JaneAusten

[Wales2004]

The whole sexism against women thing is pretty much the case though there are some old timer women still hanging around like Barbara Walters, Andrea Mitchell, and the ABC News anchor whose name escapes me at present.

But they usually won't allow a woman who looks like she's pushing 90 a la Regis to co-host a show with a really young guy.

Even though there are those who prefer any man over a woman for president, Hilary Clinton had other issues such as people who flat out don't like her or her husband and her campaign underestimated Barack Obama's campaign, so there is more to that story than one single obvious factor.

Let's not kid ourselves and pretend that there aren't any black voters (besides Samuel L. Jackson) who voted for Barack Obama on the basis of race. There are voters who voted against him for that reason and there are white voters who voted for him for that reason to feel good about their charitable open-minded selves.

People who assume that every black voter who voted for Barack Obama did so on the basis of race are wrong. Some did. I can reiterate that Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Carol Mosely Braun, Alan Keyes and whoever else may have run would have received a whole lot more votes if black voters only voted on the basis of race. We can acknowledge that some people did without falsely claiming that every one did.

One of the things that makes the mention of race such a hot button topic is the continued insistence that black people operate off some shared brain cell that can only see in black.

There have been a bunch of white serial killers in this society and no one has suggested that white people are genetically predisposed to becoming mass murderers. How long would it take for someone to get on television claiming that black people had a mass murderer gene if......?

So no. All the black voters didn't go out and vote for Barack Obama on the basis of race....only some.

And not that this has anything to do with anything but I won't let that stop me--I was watching a show on MSNBC last week and someone said something about slavery and the White House and how nice it is to see this first family. I get Michelle Obama's background but the whole idea that Barack Obama's mother allegedly had a blood tie to the first documented slave from the African slave trade is a bit funny. I mean if you can't tie the father to it then his mother will do.

[marceline]

Yeah but the reason stereotypes exist is because they make it easier for some people to make sense of the world.

I go back to some things i saw posted by GOP trolls on another site when the survey showing that Romney got 0% of the black vote from those surveyed.

1.) "See black people are the REAL racists They hate Mitt Romney because he's white!" - That presumes that the ONLY reason a black voter or any voter would have not to like Romney is because he's white. That's not true. Those black people aren't refusing to support Romney because he's white, it's because he's MITT ROMNEY! If you put Barack Obama up against either of the Clintons right now the numbers would be very different.

2.) "Blacks vote for the Democrat (sic) Party without thinking!" - Nope. Black voters stick with the Democratic Party because decades ago the Republican Party chose to employ the Southern Strategy. The low numbers the GOP gets with black voters today is a direct result of years of demonizing those voters. We see this repeating itself today with Latinos.

3.) "Black people only voted for Barack Obama because of his race and white voters only voted for him out of white guilt!" - Again I direct everyone's attention to Bill Clinton who many in "the black community" (because there's only one, right?) still consider America's first black president. If that doesn't work please look at Artur Davis, a black politician in Alabama who was the first to lose the black vote to a WHITE MAN.

As long as the GOP continues to see black/Latino/LGBT voters as a necessary evil only to be indulged in photo ops and/or manipulated during the conventions the party will continue its inexorable slide to irrelevance. As they should.

[Money]

The bottom line is people will vote for those they feel connected to - be it policies, race and gender. Someone voting for Obama because he's black is no different than a woman voting for Hillary because she would be the first female president, and yet, the former is somehow morally worse because race is involved. People need to get off their high horses. I'm a liberal and I have no problem with people adding negagtive connotations to Obama's name because there are frustrated Democrats who do as well. It doesn't make anyone more superior because they refrain in the name calling when we call each other bitches and hoes.

And lastly Hillary is looking rough. Damn.