Silva
Full Member
I don't need no stinkin avatar!
Posts: 285
|
Post by Silva on Nov 5, 2008 21:14:43 GMT -5
Silva, you clearly didn't read the article I linked to. That was all the people talked about, was how excited they were to vote for a black man simply because he was black. Of course they don't admit that they're voting for a black man because he's black. They don't believe they're racists. They think only whites are racists. Any act of choosing a black man over a white man solely because he's black is, to them, the exact opposite of racism, and any suggestion to the contrary has been violently lashed out upon by the African American population. Actually I did read the article, you just don't realize how small a minority those people in the African American community are. A lot of the "it's cuz he's BLACK" mentality is greatly exaggerated.
|
|
|
Post by Ninmast on Nov 5, 2008 21:28:10 GMT -5
Perhaps you should listen to what is going on around you a little more, then. For instance, there was that black man that publicly supported McCain. Suddenly, he was swarmed with hate mail from other African Americans, one even going so far as to say something to the effect of, "Is Massah McCain gonna let you shine his shoes for the good work you did?"
Then we have Powell, who after years of supporting Republican ideals, suddenly backed Obama. He says it wasn't about race. Fine. Show me a list of all the inexperienced, extremely liberal white[/b] candidates he's endorsed for President.
The mere concept of siding with a white man over a black man in such a running has been considered and treated as outright traitorous by the African American community. This isn't something new. This isn't something localized to a small segment of a small piece of the country. This is nationwide. Global, even.
You can't even say it's slander from the Republicans. The article was written by the Associated Press, one of the most liberal media outlets there are. They were bragging about it.
I simply cited an article and described what it represented. If you disagree, that's your choice. I would prefer it if you could look at things that opposed your viewpoint with an open mind, but meh.
Also, your post has been edited to conform with the rules of the forum.
|
|
|
Post by Beanybag on Nov 5, 2008 21:31:56 GMT -5
Actually, with Powell, he said it wasn't mainly about race although race was an issue for him. It is a form of affirmative action, in a way, I suppose, but that's been going on for a while.
|
|
|
Post by Ninmast on Nov 5, 2008 21:33:20 GMT -5
In case you haven't guessed, I'm not a supporter of "affirmative action," either. And it definitely shouldn't play any role in the selection of President of the Free World.
|
|
Silva
Full Member
I don't need no stinkin avatar!
Posts: 285
|
Post by Silva on Nov 5, 2008 21:56:29 GMT -5
You didn't hear me before, so I'll say it again:
Only 9% of voters considered race an important issue, which means at least 91% weren't just voting for "the black guy". Even of that 9%, how many do you think voted for McCain because of a hatred for African Americans? You really are exaggerating.
|
|
zandyne
Full Member
This is NOT Zetsu. DX
Posts: 1,037
|
Post by zandyne on Nov 5, 2008 22:04:13 GMT -5
It goes either way, it's always scary this, and scary that. I thought it was bad when Obama denied public funding, and likewise when McCain started using robo-calls. They went all out in this election. I find it disturbing so many people went for the kool-aid this time around, and the difference between Palin being "scary" by media standards and Obama is that one was beaten over the head for it and the other was praised or had that trait smoothed over by his supporters and the media. (Impartiality, what's that?) And what kind of man is a senator for 4 years and has no record of even attempting his slogan of CHANGE when he was already in such a prime seat? It's not like it's impossible for him to write bills or anything. They have written bills talking about banning balloon venders from selling balloons to protect turtles and power lines and them failing but at least you HEAR ABOUT THEM. If you're a senator you write bills, veto and other duties, he has no bloody record and for some reason almost no one wants to pursue it! I don't appreciate this inconsistency of information! ]8< I will concede that he is an excellent spokesperson and an organizer though, but he is only a man and a politician at that. He's saying a lot of things that sound ideal but the problem is that ideal and reality don't go hand-in-hand. And like I said, kool-aid. I wanted to vote for a dead guy. ._. @nin was the "homosexuality shoved down their throats" relating to Prop 8? Just so you know the actual prop had nothing to do with teaching it in schools, the actual prop's "justification" is that it will possibly have an impact on tax-collection. I also find it ironic that animals we are about to eat got their rights but human rights were overturned. Oh CA. If you weren't talking about that though, ignore this. *And if I broke some forum rules in posting this, sorry. You didn't hear me before, so I'll say it again: Only 9% of voters considered race an important issue, which means at least 91% weren't just voting for "the black guy". Even of that 9%, how many do you think voted for McCain because of a hatred for African Americans? You really are exaggerating. Are you aware of the experiment conducted in Harlem? Basically a host went around publicizing McCain's platform under Obama's name and got a 99% approval from its citizens. Even going so far as to say that Obama considered having Palin as his VP. And they happily agreed to it.
|
|
|
Post by Beanybag on Nov 5, 2008 22:14:53 GMT -5
Now THAT is hilarious.
|
|
Silva
Full Member
I don't need no stinkin avatar!
Posts: 285
|
Post by Silva on Nov 5, 2008 22:18:11 GMT -5
Are you aware of the experiment conducted in Harlem? Basically a host went around publicizing McCain's platform under Obama's name and got a 99% approval from its citizens. Even going so far as to say that Obama considered having Palin as his VP. And they happily agreed to it.Huh? where's the source of this?
|
|
zandyne
Full Member
This is NOT Zetsu. DX
Posts: 1,037
|
Post by zandyne on Nov 5, 2008 22:20:34 GMT -5
Are you aware of the experiment conducted in Harlem? Basically a host went around publicizing McCain's platform under Obama's name and got a 99% approval from its citizens. Even going so far as to say that Obama considered having Palin as his VP. And they happily agreed to it.Huh? where's the source of this? The forgotten media, RADIO! I have no idea where you can find a hard copy of it though, I thought everyone heard it.
|
|
|
Post by Beanybag on Nov 5, 2008 22:21:33 GMT -5
I recommend google.
|
|
|
Post by Ninmast on Nov 5, 2008 23:09:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Beanybag on Nov 5, 2008 23:15:36 GMT -5
Hey, it is likely to be one of the 9%, the fallacy of hasty generalization won't help your case. But it is hilarious nonetheless.
|
|
|
Post by Ninmast on Nov 5, 2008 23:35:44 GMT -5
Sure, I suppose a whole town could be part of the 9%. And another whole town could probably be another part of the 9%. After all, with so many people, 9% can be a lot of individuals. But then, that begs the question, what are they all doing living in the same areas?
|
|
Silva
Full Member
I don't need no stinkin avatar!
Posts: 285
|
Post by Silva on Nov 5, 2008 23:50:24 GMT -5
Like what Beanybag said, this is a fallacy of hasty generalizations. So Howard Stern found merely three ignorant black voters and assumed from there that all black voters are ignorant, am I the only one who sees this as racist? (also Howard Stern sucks and has always sucked)
|
|
zandyne
Full Member
This is NOT Zetsu. DX
Posts: 1,037
|
Post by zandyne on Nov 6, 2008 0:24:08 GMT -5
My apologies Silva, feel free to disregard such a source because it does not line up with your credibility criteria.
I actually didn't know it WAS Howard Stern doing it as I HEARD QUOTES FROM OVER THE RADIO (and in case you must be reminded, the radio shows no images, all I hear are voices). And it's more than three people, and ignorance is not limited by race. (Also some people just voted for Obama just because he's prettier/younger/has a better outer image which is shallow in on itself but this isn't the point.)
If it helps (though you will probably not believe my own testimony) I can cite from my own Political Science class (and all of the students from that same professor giving a pool of 500+ students from our class forum) where we had to do REPORTS on both candidates and side with a candidate, not a single one who was supporting Obama (ranging from mild enthusiasm to practically fawning over, this was about 400 of the class) knew why the devil they were voting for him that actually had to do with his campaign platform (aka what he was standing for aside from parroting "Change!").
I have also asked every single Obama supporter I have met why they support him and not a single one can even list why they picked him. And on the rare chance they DID have a reason it was one that was reliant on the fact that they think mystically taxing the rich aka businesses and corporations and then coupling that with a national increase in the minimum wage WILL NOT AFFECT THE PRICES of the services provided by those companies (and we're not even touching inflation). Pardon my language but it's lunacy. Even if Obama wants to tax the hell out of us to get us back out of debt it's moot point when you realize how many government programs he's trying to launch.
Bottom line: There are some decent Obama supporters who have done there research but a large majority of them have all been suckered in to drinking the kool-aid. The world will most likely not end because of Obama but it will NOT be the paradise everyone has projected.
|
|