You're a racist if you're not a misogynist.
55Having witnessed elections from the second Eisenhower term to the present, the current election is amongst the most vitriolic and genuinely nasty elections of the last half century. Even the 'anti-Catholic' election of John Kennedy pales compared to the current charges of racism or misogyny of the current contest. Political philosophy and convictions are suddenly of no importance, being relegated to the shadows of race and gender.
Remember when it was easy to tell if a candidate or his supporters were racist? David Duke had been a grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan and couldn't name any of the major employers in his state. George C. Wallace stood in the school house door. Jesse Jackson. Things seemed fairly simple. Now, you're a racist if you don't agree with someone's preferred candidate. Same thing on the other side. if you don't like the selection, you're a misogynist.
There's so much more that the electorate could be debating. It's fairly clear that the Democrats have selected someone who's spent his life as a schmoozer rather than a doer; and is a "so far left liberal that he's a socialist" who's in favor of expanded government, increased taxation, more entitlement spending and an appeasement style of foreign relations and favors abortion.
The Republicans have selected a moderate, sort of conservative, anti-abortion geriatric, who champions reduced government spending, decreased entitlement spending and a rigid if not confrontational style of foreign relations.
The young Democratic candidate chose an old liberal guy to be number two on the ticket - after rejecting a woman as number two. The old Republican candidate chose a young woman right-winger after rejecting old liberal guys, an African-American lieutenant governor and an Indian American governor.
So, do you have to be a racist to be philosophically opposed to Obama? Not so much. Yet, the Democrats have made this allegation both subtly and as an election argument. Let's look at the facts. It is incontrovertible that Obama was a member of Trinity Church in Chicago for 20 years. It is incontrovertible that his minister, Rev. J. Wright, has been an outspoken proponent of a racist pro-Black, pro-African agenda. It is incontrovertible that Trinity requires its membership to pledge allegiance to Black leaders who espouse a pro-Black, pro-African philosophy (check the Trinity web site). Obama has the support of approximately 90% of the Black population in the US, whose major reason for supporting him appears to be that he's "one of us". A giant chip on the shoulder alleging that the only reason anyone could oppose Obama is to keep the black man down. All of the comments regarding race have emanated from the Democrats, including Obama who has used the 'don't look like them' lines as well as the 'they'll try to scare you ... he's black' line. Obama supporters have said that community organizer is code for being black. Obama supporters have said that the only way to show the world that the US isn't racist is to elect Obama. They say that the world wants Obama because he's black (though none have offered to set up a kingdom for Barry). The Republicans have stayed away from race. Pundits have noted that Republicans are afraid to even say it's night because they might have to use the word dark. During this election cycle, the only evidence of racism is on the Democrat's side.
Republicans have, however, pushed hard on the gender issue. From the consoling words that Hillary was "dis'd" to the protestations about their hot governor and lipstick, Republicans have used the mantra of gender discrimination. You must hate women if you don't love Sarah.
Pregnancy, bastards and hypocrites: Pick a side. Sarah's the grandmother of a bastard; Barry is a bastard - literally, his parents weren't married.
Dugs and alcohol: again, pick a side. Sarah's husband got a DUI 20 years ago, about the same time that Barry admitted that he was smoking dope and doing cocaine. No credence to the charge that he was dealing drugs as the Clinton team querried.
Is this the best that American politics can do?
O.K., let's clear the rhetoric. McCain is an angry geriatric who chose a young, right-wing, redneck, gun-toting, trailer trash, whore as a running mate. Obama is a leftist black bastard schmoozer, do nothing, drug using loser, who chose a geriatric, inside the beltway, scoundrel (with a lobbist son), as a running mate.
Unfortunately, these are American's choices. One of these teams will be elected to govern the country. Now, let's drop the / Bush third term / Carter second term / George Soro's boy / racist / misogynist / invectives.
Can somebody please debate the issues?
PrintShare it! — Rate it: up down flag this hub
Comments
Thanks, Jeff, I appreciate your comments.
I, too, am independent, rather than party affiliated. My point was to show the most outrageous assertions being made by both sides. - A lancing of the boil of rancor, if you will, so that people could look at issues rather than just perpetrating their prejudices.
Yes, I am tired of it as well. I want to hear where candidates stand on issues that matter to the nation, and to me. I am tired of the constant attacks on character, or perceived character, which to me is all fluff. To be an informed voter, we need facts, not inuendo. And as I said, Great hub!
That's just you and a handful of others Jeff. The nation cares about Sarah's daughter pregnancy or Barry's drugs. And cares even more about Ray Boltz being gay...
How can you speak for black people, unless you're a mind reader and know why they are supporting a particular candidate. Did you say that when President Clinton was favored and voted for by an high African Amercan vote? Black people are not stupid and are able to choose as well as the next person. The reason many put so many negative labels on Barack Obama is to camouflage the fact that they really don't want a Black man to serve as president and that's the bottom line and I'm sorry to have to say that. Just look at the issue on his experience. Before Sarah Palin came on to the scene that's all that was talked about. Now because she lacks some key experience the tone has shifted to more negativity towards Mr. Obama. He is being laughed at especially at the RNC about haven been a community organizer, but just last night on TV both candidates were addressing a forum at Columbia University on issues directly related to community service. Hypocrisy is getting so stick and what a shame it is.
Obviously, I can't read minds. I am merely going on the basis of what blacks have siad, just like you. Of particular insight is the switch from Hillary to Barack. Thank you for confirming my post. You may find Obama's appearance on Tavis Smiley, last October enlightening - http://www.pbs.org/kcet/tavissmiley/archive/200710
I don't know what 'getting so stick' is supposed to mean but I agree with you as to the sorry state of politics. Thak was the point of this post.
Perhaps some African Americans have said such things but "just like you" did not.
Madam, you wrote, "The reason many put so many negative labels on Barack Obama is to camouflage the fact that they really don't want a Black man to serve as president and that's the bottom line and I'm sorry to have to say that."
Is that not conceptually the same as, " ... alleging that the only reason anyone could oppose Obama is to keep the black man down."
Are you saying that you didn't include that in your comment, or that you're not Black? Did you not bother to read the T. Smiley transcript? Or are you saying that you can speak for all blacks? Honestly, you should have told us that YOU could read the minds of ALL Blacks and speak for them. Otherwise, we're BOTH just relating what SOME have said. That means that I,JUST LIKE YOU, am relating what I have read and heard.
You really destroy your credibility when you deny what you wrote, especially when we're in agreement that politics are in a sorry state in this election cycle.
I was commenting on your statement " I am merely going on the basis of what blacks have said, just like you ".....the last three words (just like you)were not necessary but insulting.
I appreciate having this written discussion with you and I am not worried about my credibility.
Please do no respond to me on this topic again.
If you place comments on MY topic, I will decide if I respond, not YOU.
If a comment that I am 'just like you' is insulting then you are part of the problem, not the solution. I am tired of the racist diatribe, regardless of the source from which it eminates. YOU have already stated YOUR racist position when you said that, "they really don't want a Black man to serve". Regardless of what Mr. Farrakhan preaches, racism comes from the heart and mind, not the pocketbook. Yes, there are black racists who hate just as much as any white KKK, or members of LaRaza or any other special interst group that uses hatred to gain and maintain power. And, yours was a racist statement. Have you ever considered your own thoughts and actions, rather than searching for fault in everybody else's words?
Mr. Obama would not have been nominated nor would he be favorded to win if America were deeply racist. But, America will never get beyond the cliches if every innocent comment is taken as insult or 'code', JUST LIKE YOU.
Now, if you don't want me to respond, again, don't add another comment. Your condescending attiude is very insulting to ME.
I am not a racist at all and I was giving you my point of view. I never said America was deeply racist but you and I would be remiss if one would believe that there are people that would not vote for Obama because of racial or cultural reasons and that surely comes from ones heart and mind. My husband is caucasion and he understands exactly what I am saying. I was not raised to be hateful and I see no race or color when I engage in people. Understand that I have opinions and that is why I responded to your hub.
Whether you're a racist or not, yes, your comment WAS racist. How is it that you can 'just give a point of view' but everybody else's point of view is "insulting"
You fail to even acknowledge that some vote for Obama strictly because he is Afro-Caucasian, even when it's admitterd by a majority of the Black community. Indeed, that was your basic premise when you started in with the mind reader question.
I was not remiss, that was the very point of the topic. Namely, that this election cycle is being played on prejudices by BOTH sides.
I can't help it if a few or some or a majority of Blacks carry their race as a chip on their shoulders. No one is universally loved and few are universally hated. When someone disagrees with you, it doesn't mean that they hate you because of your race or gender or religion. It could be becasue of your positions and the values that you hold. When you box someone's opposition into a racial frame, YOU'RE the one being racist.
Again, your attempt at condescension comes through loudly when you protest that you were just giving an opinion. THAT's the reason for any and every post, to give an opinion. I accepted your comment as an opinion the first time but when you take insult at my comparison of myself to you, you've moved beyond opinion to merely fault finding. Again, that makes you prejudiced, though I know not on what basis.
You're wrong to say the this or that amount of blacks carry their race as a chip on their shoulders. Think back at how the history of blacks began in this country and the mistreatment and disparities that followed. I am so proud of my race and we have come so so far but yet you cannot dismiss the fact that past sufferings,feelings and fairness will never go away completely. I hope you have a good day and thanks again for the lively written discussion.
Madam, you do not know what you're talking about if you don't think that some Blacks, just as some whites or Latinos or Oriental don't carry a chip on their shoulder because of their race.The very fact that you make such a statement shows that you are in denial or that you, indeed, are a racist who can find no fault in their own. Have you ever thought how the whites in this country were mistreated? How their property was confiscated in violation of the bill of rights, how they were subjected to the Freedman courts, how their property was stolen by the government without compensation. How so many of the indentured servant were white, not black? Have you ever considered how many of the African tribal chiefs contributed to the misery of their brothers by capturing them and selling them to the Spanish and Portuguese slave traders? How the Africans enslaved the Jews in Egypt?How far back in history must one go to realize that all races and all peoples have been subjugated at one point in time or another? It's time that the past was dismissed - not forgotten because none of the injustices of the past should be repeated. None of that happened to YOU. None of that happened to Obama. Your race doe not give you a special entitlement. Obama's mixed race does not give him an entitlement to be President, just as McCain's POW status does not confer a right to be President. There is no equitable rotation as to race or gender when deciding who should be President. We should elect a president on the basis of what is best for America, not our individual pocketbook or special interest. Remember, nobody gets to ride when the bus is broken.
I will be voting on who will be best for America, I know you will too. I appreciate your in depth comments. No hard feelings please.
You're welcome. Unfortunately, from your comments, you do not seem to be able to be objective. I hope that I am wrong about that.
You know, I wrote a comment, then I reread the whole comments thread and though...this guy just isn't worth it.
Thanks, I appreciate your self editing. But that's no way to talk about the candidate.
Chef Jeff says:
15 months ago
I agree with the basic premise of your hub even though I disagree that Obama is a Socialist. having lived in nations where Socialists rule, I see a lot of differences between being a Democrat and being a Socialist, just as I also think the opposite and commonly heard refrain that Conservative and republicans are mosr akin to Fascists.
I have seen people of all races ( a term in which I do not believe, for races, in my hu,ble opinion, are an artificial construct of society), in both parties and I do not believe that ONLY Conservative values are good, and ONLY Liberal values ae bad.
As an Independent, I certainly see many things with which I would disagree in both our major parties and their Presidential, as well as other candidates, and I believe that a Conservative will always see a Democrat as somehow far-Left, Socialist, even Communist, and therefore unfit for office, just as a Liberal will always see a Conservative as always being Old fashioned, Behind the Times, Fascist, possibly even racist.
If political choice were passed on from father to son, mother to daughter, etc., I'd be a dyed in the woolrepublican. Instead, I enjoy being an Independent, because it allows me to see both sides, make up my own mind and then vote as I believe best. I research all sides of th eissues and only then decide which most closely fits my own beliefs. Of course, I am unique in my family, where no one would ever, under any circumstances, vote for a Democrat, simply because they have come to believe (falsely, I believe), that all Democrats are Liberals, Socialists and possibly even (Yikes!) Communists.
Let's face it - most of us are hard-wired to believe in the politics of our choice and trying to convince one side or the other to change, while possibly a noble cause, is nearly impossible. As with religious conversions, it is a matter of willingness to change, not of outside logic, influence or pressure.
Great hub! I enjoyed reading your point of view.