Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Seriously, what is with all the race card throwing from the left lately?

Maxine Waters accuses the tea party protestors of being racists and wants the "media" to "investigate" the tea baggers to find some hint of racism for them to exploit to silence them. Given her track record of being a race baiter, its no real surprise on that one.

Jimmy Carter himself, (which somewhat surprised me) tossed out the race card as well. As if anyone really gives a damn about Carter anyway, except for the extreme leftists.

there are myriad other cases of race being dragged into this matter, but I figure a couple of examples would be enough.

Are the left so hard against the wall in trying to get health care legislation passed that they have to resort to trying to use Obama's half black status as a means to silence the opposition by trying to portray them as racists? The far left wingers realize that the American People have bested them. They technically have... well, had a filibuster proof majority in the senate until Kennedy died, they could have rammed this through, tailored to their exact desires. Except for 1 thing. The non far left wing of the American People would have none of it. The "blue dogs" realizing that they, unlike the likes of Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, and other liberals in states where they are guaranteed reelection regardless of what they do, will have to answer to their voters in the next election. And they WANT to be reelected too.

Its funny how greed and the lust for power can actually work out like that. They could have went along with the others and pretty much ended their congressional careers to get this passed, but their desire to stay in power put a stop to such thinking.

This race card pulling is idiotic and it shows how many of the Obama supporters don't even have a clue what they are getting involved in. It is a shame whenever someone is so fucked up that the only defence is the ever-so useful race card.

Thank you for this news.

Man. It's really gonna piss people off when they do get reelected, huh?

I wonder how long it will take before the backlash becomes too much for the Dems to handle.

Also, is it bad that I got the joke so quickly?

In other words, the "blue dogs" could less about what the American People want and more about power. Why am I not surprised?

At 9/17/09 12:04 AM, TheShrike wrote: Man. It's really gonna piss people off when they do get reelected, huh?

Lol truth to those words man, here in west virginia 1 Robert Byrd is practically on his death bed after 70 years and is still reelected.

At 9/17/09 12:04 AM, TheShrike wrote: Man. It's really gonna piss people off when they do get reelected, huh?

Pretty much, but there will always be another excuse trumped up for that one too.

I love though how we keep going with the idea on either side of the coin that as long as they agree with you that's The American People, or The Real Americans. Shit last I checked, when The American People are polled, Obama still holds a positive approval rating. Just saying.

This topic raises an interesting point. I thought that people were just being dumb when they said America wasn't ready for a black president. I hadn't considered that it would be in the sense that the president's supporters were unable to handle the responsibility of having a black president.

Elfer, I know what you mean.

I stopped some drunk kids from stealing a banner at my college around 3am on a Saturday years ago. It turned out to be the student Latina group's banner and apparently someone had run off with the Black group's banner the semester before.

The would be thieves were made out to be racists in an editorial and I was made out to be defender of minority rights on campus, when in actuality it was some drunk guys who thought it would be funny to steal a sign and I just saw them stealing and told them to knock it off.

I wrote one back saying it was ridiculous to assume any such thing and that pretty much shut up the assistant teacher.

They could have been racially motivated, but that didn't matter much when you had people who were willing to assume it was racially motivated. The only clear thing was that the person writing the editorial was victimizing minorities due to their race, no matter the situation.

Similar thing happened at my campus. There was a big racism outcry when someone jimmied the (shitty) lock on the Muslim association's door and stole hundreds of dollars that they kept in a poorly secured container.

I agree. As a left winger who strongly stands in favour of free speech (and typically in favour of almost anything to do remotely with freedom, being the liberal commie red media man that i am) I am shocked by the suppression being mounted on the back of race. no man or woman should stand for it.

At 9/17/09 12:10 AM, dySWN wrote: I wonder how long it will take before the backlash becomes too much for the Dems to handle.

The backlash was too much when Pelosi called town hall protesters nazis.

At 9/17/09 12:11 AM, MultiCanimefan wrote: In other words, the "blue dogs" could less about what the American People want and more about power. Why am I not surprised?

few people get into politics for any other reason, and they don't tend to last long once they're in.

the "moderates" on both sides tend to come from states that has some semblance of balance between the 2 parties and as such, can't just say, "Screw you, I'm gonna do what I want!" They have to take something of a middle ground so that their people will vote them back in.

If only every state had a decent balance between left and right, only then would we see some actual bipartisanship, that these congresspeople spent half a hear harping about (and oddly enough you don't hear much about it anymore, when they figured out the right wasn't willing to roll over and play dead)

Race is a dividing part of our country, and unfortunately, I see it continuing down the road. The power of the race card has lead to a lot of bad publicity situations, for example, the NY Post cartoon about a couple officers killing a monkey and commenting about new writers for the stimulus bill. It drew a lot of criticism from people, more notably, the ramblings of Al Sharpton. But rather then cave in to the pressure, the NY Post defended the author and fought back against Al Sharpton. It was then that I saw something that changed my perspective once I saw the cartoon itself and the backlash:

For people like race-baiters to survive, the image of their people had to be that of the victims of an oppressive society.

Honestly, one of the problems is that there are people who would trade the integrity of their race for power. They paint a picture of inferiority, oppression, and/or discrimination in the hopes of attacking a person or a group and damaging their credibility. The power of the word racist carries with it a huge burden in our society to anyone labeled as such. Al Sharpton is the perfect example of a man who victimizes his own race to attack the entities he's faced.

What I think is that men like Al Sharpton must be discredited as a "leader" by a unified front of their own race. Unfortunately, I see that as something as a dream, because as long as they can strike fear into the hearts of people by intimidating people with the specter of "racist", he will continue to do so.

Of course, it could be all in my head.

At 9/18/09 10:31 AM, wrathofmannix wrote: Of course, it could be all in my head.

Other issue is that there are actually racists. You have people like this simply because at one point or another they probably were the victim of some racist action, but they've carried that on and applied it to situations that aren't necessarily racially motivated.

As much as I don't think it is always right to decry acts as being racist, its hard to deny there are racists out there when I've met more than several in my life.

At 9/18/09 10:36 AM, Brian wrote:

At 9/18/09 10:31 AM, wrathofmannix wrote: Of course, it could be all in my head.

Other issue is that there are actually racists. You have people like this simply because at one point or another they probably were the victim of some racist action, but they've carried that on and applied it to situations that aren't necessarily racially motivated.

As much as I don't think it is always right to decry acts as being racist, its hard to deny there are racists out there when I've met more than several in my life.

While there are certain instances you can legitimately call racism, you can't exactly deny that there are race-baiters of all races. I'm sure most people have seen legitimate racism. But as far as some of the alleged racism going on this past year, (Sotomayor confirmation, NY Post uproar are a couple of examples I can think of on top of my head) some of it reeks of race-baiting.

At 9/18/09 10:31 AM, wrathofmannix wrote:

What I think is that men like Al Sharpton must be discredited as a "leader" by a unified front of their own race. Unfortunately, I see that as something as a dream, because as long as they can strike fear into the hearts of people by intimidating people with the specter of "racist", he will continue to do so.

Nothing would please me more than to see the black community rise up against the race pimps like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and the NAACP.

How long can you continue to hold down your own people for your gain before they finally get sick of it and rise up? You see the asians whining and bitching? no. you see the mexicans whining and bitching? some, but many of them are too busy working and making a living to complain.

The reason why people are seemingly "held down" is often because they don't make any solid plans for their lives. put away the dirty music, grab a book, study.

2 people working together could elevate their status in society, then later on, when their children are in school, they could instill the need for a good education to the children, who can then go even further. 2 people working together could work like this. one holds down full time work somewhere while the other goes to a trade school, or community college. once one finishes, they find a job and sends the other. when both are done, they both have much better jobs and can afford to put away money. its a basic plan, but with the proper tweaks, it could work.

Of course, only those blacks and hispanics who toss their peers aside and go for it can ever hope to achieve anything. I remember when I was in high school, the smart black students were taunted for "acting white". This should be the leader of the black people, not charlatans like Jesse Jackon.

At 9/19/09 12:15 AM, Korriken wrote: This should be the leader of the black people, not charlatans like Jesse Jackon.

I agree. But unfortunately, he was crucified by the charlatans as trying to appease "whitey". This, to me, begs the question, "Why is it unacceptable for a (insert race/gender here) to act differently from his peers, especially one that have been seen as the oppressor for decades." Rather than follow the standards of these false prophets, there are some who fight the stereotypes and become productive members of our society.

However, there is one person that has somewhat evaded the appeasing whitey criticism, and though I may disagree with him on occasion, I agree with Barack Obama's stance on personal responsibility.

His 2008 address to the NAACP coverage from CNN including Jackson's famous castration remark, (ugh, why'd they call Jackson a "leader")a transcript of the 2008 speech, in pdf format, (I couldn't find the actual video from 2008) and his address to the 2009 NAACP, with personal responsibility remarks.

Does the context of the speeches seem familiar? Remember that speech some people decried as indoctrinating our youth? It is a miniature version of the personal responsibility stump he gave at numerous events.

the whole controversy on the speech to the children started off with the proposed workbook on "how to help Obama." Which is something the media (except for 'bigoted racist faux news' (end sarcasm) reported on. once the people found out about it, they dropped it.

I don't know whether they changed the speech at the last minute, but the speech he did end up giving wasn't half bad. I don't see why a lot of schools refused to show it. I think it was a positive move on Obama's part.

had Obama's writers prepared the speech, and put it online, and then announced it, and said where the speech can be found, would have killed off the controversy before it could even begin. Leaving out the workbook would have been a great help too.

Obama had such a great opportunity. its unfortunate that he squandered it by recklessly shutting down gitmo without a plan, pursuing health care reform without a solid plan.

correction, only fox news reported on the workbook.

Race is the most powerful weapon nowadays. If you call anything or anyone racist, they are automatically bad and everyone hates them (an exaggerated situation, but it's what the media tries to portray imo) Ah, fuck what was his name?...eh, the guy who wanted to exterminate white people. Anyway, everything people do will always be traced back to some race issue just because it can be and will be.

It doesn't make any sense, but that's what I'm getting from everything recently.

OMG, is this real? From the opion article of the San Angelo Standard-Times I read this morning.

At 9/16/09 11:43 PM, Korriken wrote:

Are the left so hard against the wall in trying to get health care legislation passed that they have to resort to trying to use Obama's half black status as a means to silence the opposition by trying to portray them as racists?

Do seriously deny that Obama's race has been a factor? Have you been down to Arkansas or Texas lately? I have never heard the word n!gg@r used so freely before (and about our president). I was dumbfounded. It left little doubt in my mind that race is a factor in (at least part) of Obama's opposition. I'm not denying that some simply disagree with his policy, and labeling all Teabaggers as racist is wrong. But the racist element has found a socially acceptable way to vent its frustration.

I'm not surprised that Jimmy Carter noted the racial element of this. He hails from a state that until 2 years ago still flew the confederate flag, was the first Deep-South governor to attack the issue of racism. The man knows his biggotry.

Maxine Waters on the other hand was prompted about the question. It came as an afterthought and her comments about how the news was handling the issue was agreeable. Wouldn't you be curious to know why some teabaggers carry Obama hearts Hitler signs while carrying an AR-15 assault rifle to a peaceful political rally? That person is, if nothing else, certainly interesting and worthy of question or two.

At 9/22/09 11:06 AM, awkward-silence wrote:

I'm not surprised that Jimmy Carter noted the racial element of this. He hails from a state that until 2 years ago still flew the confederate flag, was the first Deep-South governor to attack the issue of racism. The man knows his biggotry.

funny how everyone equates the confederate flag with racism, and how the south is somehow inherently racist. the vast majority of people, even in the south, despite popular belief, are not racists. I have a confederate flag, does that automatically make me a racist? should i be branded as racist for posessing a flag? pfft. people think the flag stands for slavery and racism are also the people who think the south broke away from the union over slavery, who think that the civil war was fought over slavery, which is just ignorant.

Maxine Waters on the other hand was prompted about the question. It came as an afterthought and her comments about how the news was handling the issue was agreeable. Wouldn't you be curious to know why some teabaggers carry Obama hearts Hitler signs while carrying an AR-15 assault rifle to a peaceful political rally? That person is, if nothing else, certainly interesting and worthy of question or two.

not really, considering the left's protestors did almost the same thing to Bush for 8 years. it's standard protestor strategy to compare the person being protested to something people don't like. They called Bush a monkey for years, and compared him to everyone from hitler to stalin to satan himself. Why they think it would be different with Obama, I don't know. One thing I do know is that turnabout is fair play, and apparently the left doesn't like their own strategy being turned on them.

they're doing nothing more than trying to leverage Obama's skin color to thwart the opposition's building momentum which is devastating to Obama's plans.

At 9/22/09 09:31 PM, Korriken wrote:

funny how everyone equates the confederate flag with racism, and how the south is somehow inherently racist.

I've never heard "That f**king n!gg@r, Barack Osama." In Michigan. In Texas it seemed like a Mantra. I never claim that every southerner is inherintly racist. But to deny a certain concentration in the south, is ignorant, especially when talking about Jimmy Carter's era. The man was prepairing for politics while watching desegregation. He had to fight racism in his offices. Don't pretend like racism has vanished in the last 30 years.

not really, considering the left's protestors did almost the same thing to Bush for 8 years.... Why they think it would be different with Obama, I don't know.

Things are different. For starters we were forced to protest in "free speech zones" located 1-2 miles away from who we were protesting and out of sight. Additionally, we never brought TACTICAL ASSAULT RIFLES. This is something new. This isn't same ol' same ol'.

they're doing nothing more than trying to leverage Obama's skin color to thwart the opposition's building momentum which is devastating to Obama's plans.

Do you honestly not even admitt that his is socially accepted outlet for racial tension? Do you gloss over that as even a possibility? I can tell you from my own fucking family that it is. I can't have a conversation with my aunt without hearing these elements fly

At 9/23/09 10:29 AM, awkward-silence wrote:

I've never heard "That f**king n!gg@r, Barack Osama." In Michigan. In Texas it seemed like a Mantra. I never claim that every southerner is inherintly racist. But to deny a certain concentration in the south, is ignorant, especially when talking about Jimmy Carter's era. The man was prepairing for politics while watching desegregation. He had to fight racism in his offices. Don't pretend like racism has vanished in the last 30 years.

uh huh. i serious doubt you heard "***ger barack osama" everywhere you went. you probably heard it once or twice by some backwater hick that found his way to walmart that day and decided that it must be a common thing. How would I know? because I live in Louisiana and i take trips into Texas often, and i never hear people running around chanting "***ger barack osama"

Things are different. For starters we were forced to protest in "free speech zones" located 1-2 miles away from who we were protesting and out of sight. Additionally, we never brought TACTICAL ASSAULT RIFLES. This is something new. This isn't same ol' same ol'.

its actually quite the same ol' same ol' its just changed up a little. one person does something stupid and then a crowd of zombies with no creativity follow suit. It always happens. Also, those are not tactical assault rifles, they just look like them. its cosmetic, much like the set of Katanas that adorn my bookshelf. they may look like swords, but they don't have an edge on them. They can still kill someone, much like the rifles these guys are carrying. but people who can afford such a thing will most likely not turn it on anyone. you don't spend $1500+ on a rifle to kill someone. you spend $200 on a handgun, which are far more lethal.

Do you honestly not even admitt that his is socially accepted outlet for racial tension? Do you gloss over that as even a possibility? I can tell you from my own fucking family that it is. I can't have a conversation with my aunt without hearing these elements fly

Never would have guessed that your aunt sets the standards for what is socially accepted. just because a few backwater hicks do it, doesn't mean its the norm. the vast majority of people can see beyond his skin color to what he is doing.

At 9/23/09 08:57 PM, Korriken wrote:

uh huh. i serious doubt you heard "***ger barack osama" everywhere you went. you probably heard it once or twice by some backwater hick that found his way to walmart that day and decided that it must be a common thing.

Actually I heard it first from a FEMA employee (that's right a government employee), while outside of Houston, but have since heard it from people in Oklahoma, and from relatives in West Virginia and Kentucky.

its actually quite the same ol' same ol' its just changed up a little.

"Its exactly the same, only different"... Go on.

those are not tactical assault rifles, they just look like them.

The civilian model AR-15 is quite similar to the military grade M-16. Its semi-auto and a simple modifaction away from full-auto.

They can still kill someone, much like the rifles these guys are carrying. but people who can afford such a thing will most likely not turn it on anyone. you don't spend $1500+ on a rifle to kill someone. you spend $200 on a handgun, which are far more lethal.

They are bringing those too!!! But to effectively use a handgun you need to get close. For Rifle you only need to be across the street from a town hall meeting.

Never would have guessed that your aunt sets the standards for what is socially accepted.

I never said she set the standard. I'm simply showing you what you refuse to aknowledge. You say race is not a factor. I give you an example to pile on top of another example to pile on top of a president who made fighting racism his core issue when he was still a governor in the segregated deep-south, and you retort with your hands clasping your ears "Lalalalala, I can't hear you! Its not true if I can't hear you! a long range fire-arm isn't scary if its not military issue, Lalala"

I'm not trying to get you to say all protestors are racist. I don't even believe that. Simply admit that this is a socially acceptable forum in which people, who are racist, can vent frustration over having a black president.

Admitting that some people on your team fight for sickly reasons doesn't mean that YOU don't fight the good fight.

At 9/24/09 08:19 AM, awkward-silence wrote:

At 9/23/09 08:57 PM, Korriken wrote: those are not tactical assault rifles, they just look like them.

The civilian model AR-15 is quite similar to the military grade M-16. Its semi-auto and a simple modifaction away from full-auto.

So "close-enough" is acceptable to you? Doesn't the person behind the trigger scare you more than whatever firearm he happens to be carrying at the time? I'd feel more secure, knowing enforcement allowed upstanding citizens to exercise their rights as vigorously as humanly possible... but that's just how I think. I also view the carrying of firearms in such a scenario as an equally protected first amendment right to freedom of expression, akin to flag burning and draft ticket destruction.

They can still kill someone, much like the rifles these guys are carrying. but people who can afford such a thing will most likely not turn it on anyone. you don't spend $1500+ on a rifle to kill someone. you spend $200 on a handgun, which are far more lethal.

They are bringing those too!!!

Don't be a pussy.

But to effectively use a handgun you need to get close. For Rifle you only need to be across the street from a town hall meeting.

AND YOU MUST HAVE THE INTENT TO KILL. Again, the person behind the trigger should inflict more fear than the tool he carries... or the one's he chooses not to carry. If you are going to be paranoid, go for the win, not just the four-card flush. Show your fear of the human mind as well, it's much more dangerous.

It's a fun way to stick it to the man while making him feel guilty

At 9/24/09 08:19 AM, awkward-silence wrote:

Actually I heard it first from a FEMA employee (that's right a government employee), while outside of Houston, but have since heard it from people in Oklahoma, and from relatives in West Virginia and Kentucky.

so you basically heard someone using a racial slur towards obama a couple of times and assume its the norm. good job. you're talking as if the people in the south run around chanting it in mass numbers.

its actually quite the same ol' same ol' its just changed up a little.

"Its exactly the same, only different"... Go on.

think i already explained that one, but it probably went right over your head, considering you're looking for an explanation.

those are not tactical assault rifles, they just look like them.

The civilian model AR-15 is quite similar to the military grade M-16. Its semi-auto and a simple modifaction away from full-auto.

so.... your point? Most people who would spend that much money on a rifle wouldn't spend the extra money to make it full auto, then carry it in public. Also, most people are smart enough to consider the consequences of firing off their guns in public, which would be the confiscation of the gun, being locked up for a felony, which means you're no longer allowed to own guns, and a long prison term.

They can still kill someone, much like the rifles these guys are carrying. but people who can afford such a thing will most likely not turn it on anyone. you don't spend $1500+ on a rifle to kill someone. you spend $200 on a handgun, which are far more lethal.

They are bringing those too!!! But to effectively use a handgun you need to get close. For Rifle you only need to be across the street from a town hall meeting.

how bad of a shot are you that need a rifle to hit someone from across the street? I can use my .22 pistol and take a squirrel out of a tree.

Never would have guessed that your aunt sets the standards for what is socially accepted.

I never said she set the standard. I'm simply showing you what you refuse to aknowledge. You say race is not a factor.

It's not.

I give you an example to pile on top of another example to pile on top of a president who made fighting racism his core issue when he was still a governor in the segregated deep-south,

Critical thinking activated. Black president. Liberal. Carter, Liberal. Liberals losing momentum. Liberals are catching hell trying to explain away everything. the best way to go? exploit Obama's race and try to use emotion to draw people back to their side to fight off the evil racist crowds that would dare stand before the president. the problem now? its not working for them.

also... both Obama and clinton say that race is only a minor factor.

and you retort with your hands clasping your ears "Lalalalala, I can't hear you! Its not true if I can't hear you! a long range fire-arm isn't scary if its not military issue, Lalala"

very mature....

well with your logic, i could present the case that you should be horrified of getting into and out of bed in the morning. people have been killed driving to work.

I'm not trying to get you to say all protestors are racist. I don't even believe that. Simply admit that this is a socially acceptable forum in which people, who are racist, can vent frustration over having a black president.

Demanding me to concede? I don't think so. It is true that some racists are out there, but to claim that it's socially acceptable is a whole new can of worms. To say that people condone the racism a tiny few spew out is ignorant at best and dishonest at worst.