Jump to content

The Politics Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Members

Racism is pretty commonplace in criticism of Obama. More than once I've gotten e-mails which compare Michelle Obama to Cheetah.

A federal judge sent out an e-mail to people which said Obama's mother had sex with a dog.

If Romney has a long record against gay rights, then I'd think he would be proud to be called a homophobe. He seems fine with working with a man who put up billboards attacking PBS for showing a pro-gay special.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 45.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Vee

    6817

  • DRW50

    5991

  • DramatistDreamer

    5521

  • Khan

    3465

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

I don't understand how commonplace means 365 million Americans. Of 365 million, many support Obama, many don't care. We weren't even talking about them. Of those who oppose Obama, I do think racial attacks are common in criticism of Obama. Not everyone bases their view of him on race, but many do. It has been a constant presence for his entire term, from the birther stuff, to the secret Muslim stuff, to "food stamp President," to the ugly e-mails and jokes and bumper stickers.

Edited by CarlD2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The stupidity of all of this is that if people believe in abstinence only, then many who are trying to abstain will be drawn to porn. I think the next stap is that the true believers will also say, "No porn, and no masturbation."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That particular bumper sticker doesn't have to be commonplace because it has plenty of company: the birthers, the people who call Obama a Muslim, Joe Wilson screaming "You lie!" during the SOTU, Jan Brewer shaking her finger in the president's face like she was ordering him to bust up a chiffarobe, the insane Fox News meltsown when Common visited the White House...it all comes from the belief that the office of the President doesn't deserve respect as long as that uppity boy is in it.

If decent conservatives really don't agree with stuff like this bumper sticker then why don't they stand up and renounce it? With all due respect Max, do you call out your fellow conservatives for their hate? Or do you just accept it and then turn around and blame liberals for thinking conservatives are racist? Decent, thinking, intelligent conservatives would serve their cause a lot better by publicly pushing back against the hate speech but they don't because in the end conservatives, care more about power than principles because in the end they know that all the ideals in the world mean nothing if you don't have the power to execute them. I only wish my fellow liberals would understand that concept. We'd get a lot more accomplished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I've already indicated how I feel about that racist bumper sticker. That birther s#it--which was a lot more common than racist bumper stickers--was really terrible. In addition to the racism and anti-Muslim sentiment involved, that movement deeply damaged the credibility of conservatives and gave the Democrats plenty of ammunition to suggest that virtually all conservatives were bigots who were opposed to Obama primarily because of racial prejudice.

Actually, as despicable as those Cleland attacks were, they were not illegal. On the other hand, switching a candidate at the last minute was a direct violation of the existing election law in place (and was something that I don't believe was ever done before, aside from instances where a candidate died or became medically incapacitated). So, ONE COULD CERTAINLY ARGUE (DaytimeFan) that what happened in NJ in 2002 was even worse than what happened in GA that same year (since the former act was illegal, while the latter act was still legal, albeit highly immoral). (If Democrats wanted another candidate, then why didn't they pressure Torricelli to drop out before the deadline had passed? Or, why did they not advocate for a write-in campaign for Lautenberg, which would still have been legal?)

Edited by Max
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • It's Men's Mental Health Month.

      Please register in order to view this content

    • This is (maybe) overly simplistic and nonsoapy, but Doug needs to go to Gamblers Anonymous, to deal with the addictive neurological excitement hits that gambling gives him - and which control his life. Vanessa needs to go to therapy to find ways to remain healthfully lusty and sex-positive, but to stay away from anyone who would demean her.
    • YT keeps commending GL clips to me. I discovered Kathleen Cullen was on in Christmas 1987. Was there any talk of making it permanent  or was this just a special visit? I wish they had made the visit permanent. I liked her chemistry with Grant Aleksander.  
    • I'm not sure it's as unpopular as you think.  I just think the show knew they were in a bind, and needed a proven couple for the viewers to invest in. Trying to reunite Vanessa and Ross had just failed in 87. I don't think Ed and Holly's affair was well received, as Simon and Garrett had a brother/sister chemistry. Enter Billy and Vanessa, who give you history and an out not to try and do a Josh/Reva/Billy triangle, which would've really wrecked the relationship between Josh and Billy. I'd have been ok with trying Vanessa/Ross again, and doing a Vanessa/Ross/Holly/Billy quad for a while. I hated Nadine. HATED. She had to be the most insufferable also-ran before ATWT's Julia Lindsay. This is where I wish I knew Roger's history better.

      Please register in order to view this content

    • GROSS. Michael Swan was hot back in his ATWT days. Now he's 76 and WAY past his hot years.    
    • Since she kidnapped, locked up and tried to kill her father's wife I'd say that is still a pretty big deal
    • I'm good with the gushing, too. There aren't many soap icons like John Black, and that's important to celebrate and remember. And yes, life does go on for other characters, but as they say, timing is everything. Going sky diving the day before the funeral? And during a week of shows that were so powerful emotionally? No.    
    • No. There might have been a slight pause for dramatic effect after his "death," but pretty soon after they showed him in France getting plastic surgery and getting involved with his doctor, then planning with her to bring Christina to France. (She thought he had good reason to do it; she wasn't a bad person or anything). Now that I think of it, there must have been some kind of pause before that, during the 70s. Rita was accused of killing a private patient for an inheritance when she lived in Texas. Part of the backstory was that Roger had been there, too. Not sure exactly when or how long that was.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy