Any "Buyer's Remorse"?

[rushmc 23]

Quote

He's the most powerful man in the world. I'm sure he can take the same names and caricatures used against his predecessor. He doesn't need the protections of politically correct language policing. Insisting that those caricatures are racist is demeaning to the President and his achievements.

+1


THEY dont think it should work that way but +1 none the less

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Dutton 0]

Balkanization.

Coming to a USA near you.

[quade 4]

Quote

He's the most powerful man in the world. I'm sure he can take the same names and caricatures used against his predecessor. He doesn't need the protections of politically correct language policing. Insisting that those caricatures are racist is demeaning to the President and his achievements.

It's an overly divisive term though. I'm nearly certain Obama himself can take quite a bit of abuse. That said, when somebody uses a term that can clearly be seen as racist intentionally just because he thinks he can vaguely justify it and think he's being "clever" in doing so, well, I have to lose all respect for that person (if I ever even had any).

It's a game of "let's see what we can get away with because that's what 'they' called GWB" and it's stupid. There isn't a racist connotation to calling GWB a chimp; none. There absolutely is calling a black man one. If people don't understand that at this point in their lives, then they probably never will.

I feel sorry for them, because they simply haven't learned enough to get along in life with other people and they are pitiful.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kbordson 8]

You're right feeling that such terms should not be used. But... they should not be used REGARDLESS of whether someone is referring to President Obama or Former President Bush, REGARDLESS of whether that person is black, white or green.

To say that "it was ok for them to say it about Former President Bush... but this is different." isn't right.

It's NOT ok to throw personal insults based on physical appearance or heritage on anyone. Not ok to call Former President Kennedy a mick, NOR is it ok to call Former President Truman by that same term. And arguing that it would be ok to call Former President Reagan a cripple, but not ok to call Former President Roosevelt one because of his physical limitations is foolish.

And I'm not going to pity you or feel sorry for you, I just think it's wrong either way. If you want to justify it in cases that you think are acceptable, that's who you choose to be.

[warpedskydiver 0]

I think someone sees my point, either it is wrong in every circumstance or it's all good, no matter who the term is used on.

Anything else such as pretending that what is ok to call whites is taboo to call a black is RACIST.

[quade 4]

Quote

And I'm not going to pity you or feel sorry for you, I just think it's wrong either way. If you want to justify it in cases that you think are acceptable, that's who you choose to be.

And if you can find a single case of -me- ever calling George W. Bush a chimp . . . you might have a point.

We do, on the other hand, have a very recent case of one poster calling Obama a chimp. That's pretty classless.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[riddler 0]

Quote

I don't think that when they said they wanted to withdraw troops from Iraq (right on schedule with the Bush timetable) that they meant they'd like them redeployed to Afghanistan.

Obama said we have to find and kill Osama Bin Laden. Sometimes he said "kill", sometimes he said "take him out". There can only be one implication of that - a military presence in Afghanistan. Anyone who is passionately anti-war could not have voted for McCain OR Obama, based on their campaign promises.

Now, in the event we do actually get OBL, what then? Obama didn't make any statement about withdrawing from Afghanistan afterwards. Personally, I think if he decides to go the nation-building route that Bush Jr. did, I will be sorely disappointed.

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

[LyraM45 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Civil libertarians and anti-torture folks aren't especially happy either.

Nor are the anti-war folks. I don't think that when they said they wanted to withdraw troops from Iraq (right on schedule with the Bush timetable) that they meant they'd like them redeployed to Afghanistan.

I think that was predictable. One of the talking points of the Democratic Party has been that the Iraq war has distracted us from the Afghan war. Afghanistan is seen as a more just war by many on the left and I think it's clear to many that we didn't have enough troops there to really gain traction against the Taliban after initially knocking them out of power.

It was very predictable, and expected by his voters since he talked about it during the election. I am anti-war, but I am also all for going and kicking some ass with the people who actually were involved in 9/11, and not with the people who were not directly responsible (Iraq).

Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :)

[stitch 0]

I haven't read the entire thread, nor am I going to.

The way I see it is, the man hasn't even been in office six months and everybody is expecting miracles. That much I pretty much expected.

The trend of republican goverment steering everything towards the wealthy and successful, I really don't see how things would be all that different if McCain had been elected. Does anybody really think he would have let GM and Chysler executives go hungry ?

Everything was already in shambles when Obama took office, give the man a chance. No matter whom was in office, it is still sure to be a long road out of this mess.

"No cookies for you"- GFD
"I don't think I like the sound of that" ~ MB65
Don't be a "Racer Hater"

[redlegphi 0]

I suppose that depends on how you define nation-building. Do I think we should be in Afghanistan for the next decade guiding their government? No. But I think we should try and get them to a point of stability where they can keep control of their nation on their own so that it doesn't revert back to Taliban control the second we leave. And, of course, if their government asks us to leave, then it's time to go, regardless of what state they're in (though I doubt Karzai would ask us to go until he has solid control).

[freeflybella 0]

+1

Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

[kbordson 8]

Quote

Quote

And I'm not going to pity you or feel sorry for you, I just think it's wrong either way. If you want to justify it in cases that you think are acceptable, that's who you choose to be.

And if you can find a single case of -me- ever calling George W. Bush a chimp . . . you might have a point.

We do, on the other hand, have a very recent case of one poster calling Obama a chimp. That's pretty classless.

I actually can't recall you resorting to name calling (and no... not going to do a search for it) But MANY feel that it was acceptable to call Former President Bush names. Not just "chimp" but many others as well. My complaints then were that it was a very poor argument and wrong... as is your complaint now.

I'm not saying that you are not right in arguing about it now.

Just also saying that those that did the same a year ago are as wrong.

[likearock 2]

Quote

To say that "it was ok for them to say it about Former President Bush... but this is different." isn't right.

It's NOT ok to throw personal insults based on physical appearance or heritage on anyone.

No one is saying that it is right to call Bush a chimp. It is wrong in both cases. But it is more wrong if the person you're calling a chimp happens to be black.

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

That said, when somebody uses a term that can clearly be seen as racist intentionally just because he thinks he can vaguely justify it and think he's being "clever" in doing so...

That's not the reason.

The reason is to demonstrate the hypocrisy of the politically correct mentality that cries "oppression" in only one of the two cases when the exact same term is used.

It does take a pretty good victim complex to somehow think that the exact terminology, caricatures and names, when recycled by the other side, are somehow extra bad this time around.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

Obama said we have to find and kill Osama Bin Laden. Sometimes he said "kill", sometimes he said "take him out". There can only be one implication of that - a military presence in Afghanistan. Anyone who is passionately anti-war could not have voted for McCain OR Obama, based on their campaign promises.

I think the truly anti-war folks mostly voted for Ron Paul.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[redlegphi 0]

Quote

Quote

That said, when somebody uses a term that can clearly be seen as racist intentionally just because he thinks he can vaguely justify it and think he's being "clever" in doing so...

That's not the reason.

The reason is to demonstrate the hypocrisy of the politically correct mentality that cries "oppression" in only one of the two cases when the exact same term is used.

It does take a pretty good victim complex to somehow think that the exact terminology, caricatures and names, when recycled by the other side, are somehow extra bad this time around.

Yeah. Why can't you all understand that white people like GWB have historically been de-humanized and oppressed just as bad as black people have? Therefore, calling GWB a chimp is exactly the same as calling Obama a chimp.

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

...it is more wrong...

And are some animals more equal than others, also?

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[TomAiello 26]

Presidents of the United States have historically been dehumanized and oppressed? Is that before or after they have historically high popularity ratings and complete filibuster proof control of Congress?

Yep, sounds like pretty terrible oppression to me.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[likearock 2]

Quote

Quote

...it is more wrong [if the person you're calling a chimp happens to be black.]

And are some animals more equal than others, also?

It's got nothing to do with "more equal". It's got to do with context. Unless you want to pretend that the many years of slavery, lynching, and treating black people like animals (along with the psychological justification for treating them like animals) never happened, there is a world of difference between the two cases.