Obama plays Rope a Dope with Repugs - Knockout Punch in 2012

Cyberwulf wrote:

Spotts1701 wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

But of course that would mean giving up on "bipartisanship" and telling Republicans to go fuck themselves instead.

So the 60 million people who voted for the other guy are what, exactly? Chopped liver?

I mean, don't misunderstand, I don't like this version of "bipartisanship". But I'm not a proponent of doing the same thing to the minority when you're in the majority as they did to you. That's very destructive, and just means when they get back into power they'll really make you suffer for your arrogance.

The Democratic Party runs on a platform of being the party for blacks and women and LGBTQI and disabled people and everyone, in short, who isn't a white, straight, cis-gendered, able-bodied man. They can't compromise with a party who deliberately cultivates bigotry in the name of enforcing the status quo without throwing everyone who isn't a white man under the bus. When the Republicans get back into power they won't give a fuck about how nice the Dems were to them and their supporters. So maybe instead of pandering to them, the Dems should actually do stuff to help the people who put them in power. Taking a few minutes to make a statement on the number of anti-abortion measures being brought at State level would be nice, for instance.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

The only difference between the Republicans and the Democrats with regard to minorities is their level of indifference. The Democrats might back a couple affirmative action and gay marriage bills but beyond that, you're on your fucking own. Minorities are called minorities for a reason. You want the majority of votes to get elected.

Cyberwulf wrote:

Taking a few minutes to make a statement on the number of anti-abortion measures being brought at State level would be nice, for instance.

Remember what happened with SB1070 in Arizona? The President spoke against it, and the right-wing mercilessly attacked him for being a tyrant and trying to usurp the will of Arizona's voters in order to get more votes from the Hispanic caucus. And the media lapped it up and said "Why is the President meddling in state affairs?"

TheHermit wrote:

Adagio wrote:

And he presented his official birth video to clear up any lingering doubts.

Obama is making several very flawed assumptions about birthers:

1. He assumes birthers really believe he was not born in the US.
2. He assumes the people passing on this rumor are doing so in good faith; they are misinforming others because they themselves have been misinformed.
3. He assumes birthers are willing, or even care about, the facts of the matter.
4. Because birthers are horrified by the allegations, he assumes they would be overjoyed to know they are not true.

(Psst. It was a joke. Go look at the video.)

WD40 wrote:

The Alien from Uranus wrote:

Yes, it comes off as being very racism-driven on the surface because he happens to not be white, but really...

So it only seems to be racist because it's a bunch of white dudes making racist comments?

"Obama hates white people"?
"Get off his basketball court"?

It doesn't seem racist. It is racist.

Quote :

the driving factor was hatred his political affiliation, and the GOP would have used any petty attack to make him look like he's not "one of us".

So they encourage blatant racism? This is not an excuse. And the leaders of this party should know better.

Finding excuses to explain the existence of racism does not remove the responsibility of supporting and giving voice to the racist stance.

The point I was trying to make is that it's not just racism, it's every form of "otherism", too. Anything about him that would make him other than white American, straight, English-speaking, Christian, free-market capitalist, rich, Libertarian...

I'm not saying that comments aren't racist, I'm saying that the GOP hates everyone who isn't them. They hate more than just black people, and they have manufactured far more reasons to hate Obama than just his blackness. It's his blackness in addition to other things. If Obama had been white and Colin Powell had been the front runner for the Republican Party, they'd still be attacking him is all I'm saying.

Can we make posting shitty macros a bannable offence, please?

Pokemon first.

Just Chipper wrote:

Can we make posting shitty macros a bannable offence, please?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

P.S. It's spelled "offense" you autistic dipshit.

The Alien from Uranus wrote:

The point I was trying to make is that it's not just racism, it's every form of "otherism", too. Anything about him that would make him other than white American, straight, English-speaking, Christian, free-market capitalist, rich, Libertarian...

I'm not saying that comments aren't racist, I'm saying that the GOP hates everyone who isn't them. They hate more than just black people, and they have manufactured far more reasons to hate Obama than just his blackness. It's his blackness in addition to other things. If Obama had been white and Colin Powell had been the front runner for the Republican Party, they'd still be attacking him is all I'm saying.

So... What you're saying is... That... They're racist?

WD40 wrote:

So... What you're saying is... That... They're racist?

More like whatever Obama believes or propounds they reflexively state the opposite. He's governing like a Clinton Democrat or a Rockerfeller Republican, and yet the GOP casts him as a bomb-throwing radical socialist. The Affordable Care Act is in many ways not that substantially different than proposals that came out of the Republican Congress in the 1990's - and yet some of the very same people who supported those provisions then are denouncing them now simply because President Obama advocated for it.

It's like Hillary Clinton said - President Obama could walk on water, and they'd criticize him for not being able to swim.

Spotts1701 wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

Taking a few minutes to make a statement on the number of anti-abortion measures being brought at State level would be nice, for instance.

Remember what happened with SB1070 in Arizona? The President spoke against it, and the right-wing mercilessly attacked him for being a tyrant and trying to usurp the will of Arizona's voters in order to get more votes from the Hispanic caucus. And the media lapped it up and said "Why is the President meddling in state affairs?"

So nobody do the right thing because THE MEDIA. Got it.

Just Chipper wrote:

Can we make posting shitty macros a bannable offence, please?

Added to which, I don't see half the macros posted here because I've got pictures turned off partly because of shitty macros and I doubt I'm the only person who's done this. So they're a complete waste of time and effort for a proportion of the board.

Cyberwulf wrote:

Spotts1701 wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

Taking a few minutes to make a statement on the number of anti-abortion measures being brought at State level would be nice, for instance.

Remember what happened with SB1070 in Arizona? The President spoke against it, and the right-wing mercilessly attacked him for being a tyrant and trying to usurp the will of Arizona's voters in order to get more votes from the Hispanic caucus. And the media lapped it up and said "Why is the President meddling in state affairs?"

So nobody do the right thing because THE MEDIA. Got it.

*facepalm*

You're oversimplifying it again. Even if it is the right thing, the media and the right-wing bullies will drown out the message. Not to mention that the federal government has damned few options if a state legislature wants to pass a stupid law and the feds don't have standing to challenge the law in court.

Does it matter? Trump's going to buy the Presidency in '12 anyway.

KGarrett wrote:

Does it matter? Trump's going to buy the Presidency in '12 anyway.

In order for that to happen, he'd have to win over at least, like, three Freepers.

Penguin wrote:

KGarrett wrote:

Does it matter? Trump's going to buy the Presidency in '12 anyway.

In order for that to happen, he'd have to win over at least, like, three Freepers.

Hey, with a political stance like this, how can he lose?

Quote :

“It’s like in golf,” he said. “A lot of people — I don’t want this to sound trivial — but a lot of people are switching to these really long putters, very unattractive,” said Mr. Trump, a Republican. “It’s weird. You see these great players with these really long putters, because they can’t sink three-footers anymore. And, I hate it. I am a traditionalist. I have so many fabulous friends who happen to be gay, but I am a traditionalist.”

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


Those gay people. They're just like golf players who can't sink three-footers.

...

...

No, In your end-oh!

Wow.

Quote :

“Seth Meyers has no talent,” Mr. Trump said in an interview on Sunday. “He fell totally flat. In fact, I thought Seth’s delivery was so bad that he hurt himself.”

Ha, nice to see he hasn't matured in the 20 years or so since Berke Breathed stuck his brain in Bill the Cat. Slightly related:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Spotts1701 wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

Spotts1701 wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

Taking a few minutes to make a statement on the number of anti-abortion measures being brought at State level would be nice, for instance.

Remember what happened with SB1070 in Arizona? The President spoke against it, and the right-wing mercilessly attacked him for being a tyrant and trying to usurp the will of Arizona's voters in order to get more votes from the Hispanic caucus. And the media lapped it up and said "Why is the President meddling in state affairs?"

So nobody do the right thing because THE MEDIA. Got it.

*facepalm*

You're oversimplifying it again. Even if it is the right thing, the media and the right-wing bullies will drown out the message. Not to mention that the federal government has damned few options if a state legislature wants to pass a stupid law and the feds don't have standing to challenge the law in court.

He could still say something, Spotts. There's an ongoing assault on women's reproductive rights. Obama is leader of the party that's supposed to stand up for those rights. He could at least say something. Not for the right-wingers and the forced-birthers but for the people who elected him and who are the ones most likely to elect him again.

"Saying something" might give his base the warm fuzzies, but would probably be counter-productive.

WD40 wrote:

The Alien from Uranus wrote:

The point I was trying to make is that it's not just racism, it's every form of "otherism", too. Anything about him that would make him other than white American, straight, English-speaking, Christian, free-market capitalist, rich, Libertarian...

I'm not saying that comments aren't racist, I'm saying that the GOP hates everyone who isn't them. They hate more than just black people, and they have manufactured far more reasons to hate Obama than just his blackness. It's his blackness in addition to other things. If Obama had been white and Colin Powell had been the front runner for the Republican Party, they'd still be attacking him is all I'm saying.

So... What you're saying is... That... They're racist?

As I read it, saying that they're worse than racist. They're racist plus a whole lot more.

Although that Libertarian part completely confuses me.