Other Resources My Cup of Joe » Is President Carter right? Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, the bear, DerekL, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 7
 
 
Is President Carter right?
OptionResults
Agree20 Votes - [19.42%]
Disagree83 Votes - [80.58%]

2009-09-16 3:22 PM
in reply to: #2410111

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?
PennState - 2009-09-16 2:50 PM
ride_like_u_stole_it - 2009-09-16 3:29 PM

 

Can one oppose Obama's policy without being racist? Of course. To suggest otherwise is stupid. Can one dislike him without being racist, absolutely. However to deny that there is not a significantly racist motivation to much of the most viscious and hateful reactions to his presidency is to deny the truth.

 



Ok here's a question for you... what do you suppose drove the "most vicious and hateful reactions" (your exact words) to president George W. Bush? If you don't think that these reactions occurred to both Bush and Obama (ie; someone who only sees their guy getting the vicious attacks), I doubt there will be any possible value to the current discussion

My answer??? It was his POLICY. People objected to the Iraq war, his spending, "no child left behind", treatment of terror suspects, violation of civil liberties etc, etc, ect.

Why can Obama supporters not accept that many (and yes me) strongly disagree with the current president's policies... and future legislation...  and yet don't care about his skin color the way we are painted by good ole' J.C.???
...
Personally I think Obama is a big boy and can accept some strong opposition to policy... making this strong oppostion about race (mainly) seems so very unwise.

I don’t think it was only his policies.  I think there are lots of people who hated Bush because he is the wealthy son of a powerful man who hadn’t necessarily had to work as hard as most Americans to get where he got.  I think people hated him for his poor grammar and for what some perceived as ignorance or at least inarticulateness (is that a word?). I think Bush’s strong religious beliefs, about which he was particularly outspoken at times, infuriated some people who didn’t share those beliefs.   

I think those things were magnified once he started enacting policies that people didn’t like, much as I believe they are now with Obama.  It’s true that had his policies been more popular, they might have been more able to see past those traits of his that bothered them, but it’s undoubtedly true that what drove the intense dislike of Bush as his presidency ended was not simply his policies.



2009-09-16 3:22 PM
in reply to: #2408911

User image

Master
1821
1000500100100100
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?
many rectangles are squares.

now please spend the next 5 pages debating whether i was right or wrong in saying that all polygons are squares.


for the metaphorically challenged:
rectangles : people displaying intense animosity toward barack obama as a person
squares : racists
polygons : critics of obama
2009-09-16 3:28 PM
in reply to: #2410190

User image

Champion
5376
5000100100100252525
PA
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?
jimbo - 2009-09-16 4:22 PM many rectangles are squares. now please spend the next 5 pages debating whether i was right or wrong in saying that all polygons are squares. for the metaphorically challenged: rectangles : people displaying intense animosity toward barack obama as a person squares : racists polygons : critics of obama


It would be much more interesting to debate what that monkey is doing (or going to do) to that cat. 

Ready... set... go!  Laughing
2009-09-16 3:31 PM
in reply to: #2410149

User image

Champion
7821
50002000500100100100
Brooklyn, NY
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?
crusevegas - 2009-09-16 3:08 PM

From what the definition Webster has for many, is "most" I thought most meant a majority. I can't understand it differently unless yo define many in a different way than Webster.



Sorry, but that's the second time you've said that Webster's dictionary defines "many" as meaning "a majority" and it just isn't true.

The two definitions from Websters that you posted are:

1 : consisting of or amounting to a large but indefinite number <worked for many years>
2 : being one of a large but indefinite number <many a man> <many another student>

2009-09-16 3:32 PM
in reply to: #2410189

User image

Champion
6786
50001000500100100252525
Two seat rocket plane
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?

jmk-brooklyn - 2009-09-16 3:22 PM
PennState - 2009-09-16 2:50 PM
ride_like_u_stole_it - 2009-09-16 3:29 PM

 

Can one oppose Obama's policy without being racist? Of course. To suggest otherwise is stupid. Can one dislike him without being racist, absolutely. However to deny that there is not a significantly racist motivation to much of the most viscious and hateful reactions to his presidency is to deny the truth.

 



Ok here's a question for you... what do you suppose drove the "most vicious and hateful reactions" (your exact words) to president George W. Bush? If you don't think that these reactions occurred to both Bush and Obama (ie; someone who only sees their guy getting the vicious attacks), I doubt there will be any possible value to the current discussion

My answer??? It was his POLICY. People objected to the Iraq war, his spending, "no child left behind", treatment of terror suspects, violation of civil liberties etc, etc, ect.

Why can Obama supporters not accept that many (and yes me) strongly disagree with the current president's policies... and future legislation...  and yet don't care about his skin color the way we are painted by good ole' J.C.???
...
Personally I think Obama is a big boy and can accept some strong opposition to policy... making this strong oppostion about race (mainly) seems so very unwise.

I don’t think it was only his policies.  I think there are lots of people who hated Bush because he is the wealthy son of a powerful man who hadn’t necessarily had to work as hard as most Americans to get where he got.  I think people hated him for his poor grammar and for what some perceived as ignorance or at least inarticulateness (is that a word?). I think Bush’s strong religious beliefs, about which he was particularly outspoken at times, infuriated some people who didn’t share those beliefs.   

I think those things were magnified once he started enacting policies that people didn’t like, much as I believe they are now with Obama.  It’s true that had his policies been more popular, they might have been more able to see past those traits of his that bothered them, but it’s undoubtedly true that what drove the intense dislike of Bush as his presidency ended was not simply his policies.

Actually, now that you mention it, I disliked Bush both for his policy and for the fact that he was a rich Yale-educated Yankee Brahmin masquarading as a dumb Texas redneck.

2009-09-16 3:34 PM
in reply to: #2409822

User image

Expert
805
500100100100
Portland,OR
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?

mrbbrad - 2009-09-16 10:49 AM Hey, how come nobody refers to Jimmy Carter as JC?

I did! But just because I was lazy, not because he has any sort of God-like quality.



Edited by rsqdvr 2009-09-16 3:39 PM


2009-09-16 3:36 PM
in reply to: #2410207

User image

Master
1821
1000500100100100
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?
Pector55 - 2009-09-16 4:28 PM

jimbo - 2009-09-16 4:22 PM many rectangles are squares. now please spend the next 5 pages debating whether i was right or wrong in saying that all polygons are squares. for the metaphorically challenged: rectangles : people displaying intense animosity toward barack obama as a person squares : racists polygons : critics of obama


It would be much more interesting to debate what that monkey is doing (or going to do) to that cat. 

Ready... set... go!  Laughing


heh. you're probably right. now here, go watch a monkey washing a cat:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9wAqNN-Dic

and let's all be sure to congratulate ChrisM for his impressive feat of mightily swinging a bat at a hornet's nest and then quietly backing away. you should see his pantry. nothing but cans of worms and an arsenal of can-openers
2009-09-16 3:41 PM
in reply to: #2410221

User image

Champion
6786
50001000500100100252525
Two seat rocket plane
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?

jimbo - 2009-09-16 3:36 PM
Pector55 - 2009-09-16 4:28 PM
jimbo - 2009-09-16 4:22 PM many rectangles are squares. now please spend the next 5 pages debating whether i was right or wrong in saying that all polygons are squares. for the metaphorically challenged: rectangles : people displaying intense animosity toward barack obama as a person squares : racists polygons : critics of obama


It would be much more interesting to debate what that monkey is doing (or going to do) to that cat. 

Ready... set... go!  Laughing
heh. you're probably right. now here, go watch a monkey washing a cat: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9wAqNN-Dic and let's all be sure to congratulate ChrisM for his impressive feat of mightily swinging a bat at a hornet's nest and then quietly backing away. you should see his pantry. nothing but cans of worms and an arsenal of can-openers

Yay Chris!

BTW, a civil political debate that goes on for 6 pages is a thing of beauty.

2009-09-16 3:46 PM
in reply to: #2410208

User image

Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?

jmk-brooklyn - 2009-09-16 1:31 PM
crusevegas - 2009-09-16 3:08 PM

From what the definition Webster has for many, is "most" I thought most meant a majority. I can't understand it differently unless yo define many in a different way than Webster.



Sorry, but that's the second time you've said that Webster's dictionary defines "many" as meaning "a majority" and it just isn't true.

The two definitions from Websters that you posted are:

1 : consisting of or amounting to a large but indefinite number many years>
2 : being one of a large but indefinite number <many a man> <many another student>

 

  • Main Entry: 1many
  • Pronunciation: \'me-ne\
  • Function: adjective
  • Inflected Form(s): more \'mo?r\; most \'most\
  • Etymology: Middle English, from Old English manig; akin to Old High German manag many, Old Church Slavic munogu much
  • Date: before 12th century

Edited to add ,,,, you can look up the word large, you may want to interpret what he said differently, I don't see how using the English language and it's common definitions you can come to that conclusion. If you still do I'll agree to disagree with you.



Edited by crusevegas 2009-09-16 3:51 PM
2009-09-16 3:48 PM
in reply to: #2408911

Subject: ...
This user's post has been ignored.
2009-09-16 3:49 PM
in reply to: #2410232

Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?
ride_like_u_stole_it - 2009-09-16 1:41 PM

jimbo - 2009-09-16 3:36 PM
Pector55 - 2009-09-16 4:28 PM
jimbo - 2009-09-16 4:22 PM many rectangles are squares. now please spend the next 5 pages debating whether i was right or wrong in saying that all polygons are squares. for the metaphorically challenged: rectangles : people displaying intense animosity toward barack obama as a person squares : racists polygons : critics of obama


It would be much more interesting to debate what that monkey is doing (or going to do) to that cat. 

Ready... set... go!  Laughing
heh. you're probably right. now here, go watch a monkey washing a cat: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9wAqNN-Dicand let's all be sure to congratulate ChrisM for his impressive feat of mightily swinging a bat at a hornet's nest and then quietly backing away. you should see his pantry. nothing but cans of worms and an arsenal of can-openers

Yay Chris!

BTW, a civil political debate that goes on for 6 pages is a thing of beauty.



The only thing I'll post is that I am quite pleased to see a civil conversation, I had no such hopes when posting it.  It should not go unnoticed that the only civil thread on race and politics in the history of BT was posted by yours truly.  That is not a coincidence, my friends.

Carry on


2009-09-16 3:51 PM
in reply to: #2410243

Champion
11989
500050001000500100100100100252525
Philly 'burbs
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?
crusevegas - 2009-09-16 4:46 PM

jmk-brooklyn - 2009-09-16 1:31 PM
crusevegas - 2009-09-16 3:08 PM

From what the definition Webster has for many, is "most" I thought most meant a majority. I can't understand it differently unless yo define many in a different way than Webster.



Sorry, but that's the second time you've said that Webster's dictionary defines "many" as meaning "a majority" and it just isn't true.

The two definitions from Websters that you posted are:

1 : consisting of or amounting to a large but indefinite number many years>
2 : being one of a large but indefinite number <many a man> <many another student>

 

  • Main Entry: 1many
  • Pronunciation: \'me-ne\
  • Function: adjective
  • Inflected Form(s): more \'mo?r\; most \'most\
  • Etymology: Middle English, from Old English manig; akin to Old High German manag many, Old Church Slavic munogu much
  • Date: before 12th century


that's not the definition
2009-09-16 3:53 PM
in reply to: #2408911

Champion
6786
50001000500100100252525
Two seat rocket plane
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?

Too much dictionary, not enough name-calling

 

2009-09-16 3:57 PM
in reply to: #2410232

Champion
5376
5000100100100252525
PA
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?
ride_like_u_stole_it - 2009-09-16 4:41 PM

jimbo - 2009-09-16 3:36 PM
Pector55 - 2009-09-16 4:28 PM
jimbo - 2009-09-16 4:22 PM many rectangles are squares. now please spend the next 5 pages debating whether i was right or wrong in saying that all polygons are squares. for the metaphorically challenged: rectangles : people displaying intense animosity toward barack obama as a person squares : racists polygons : critics of obama


It would be much more interesting to debate what that monkey is doing (or going to do) to that cat. 

Ready... set... go!  Laughing
heh. you're probably right. now here, go watch a monkey washing a cat: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9wAqNN-Dicand let's all be sure to congratulate ChrisM for his impressive feat of mightily swinging a bat at a hornet's nest and then quietly backing away. you should see his pantry. nothing but cans of worms and an arsenal of can-openers

Yay Chris!

BTW, a civil political debate that goes on for 6 pages is a thing of beauty.



Especially when it's filled with Jimmy Carter, a bunch of accused racists, and a box of used dictionaries. 
2009-09-16 3:59 PM
in reply to: #2410246

Champion
5376
5000100100100252525
PA
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?
PennState - 2009-09-16 4:48 PM This is what is sad to me... Strongly disagree with the Bush policies...and they label you un-patriotic or un-American. Strongly disagree with Obama policies...and they label you as a racist. Sad because largely untrue and not helpful labels in civil discussion. *sigh*


No doubt and a great call-out.  That's what I was hitting on with the overuse of the "Hitler" and "racist" labels. I forgot about the "un-patriaotic" awards.

2009-09-16 3:59 PM
in reply to: #2408911

Champion
11989
500050001000500100100100100252525
Philly 'burbs
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?
My head is going to explode.


intensely demonstrated animosity


I happen to strongly disagree that strong disagreement equals intensely demonstrated animosity.


2009-09-16 4:00 PM
in reply to: #2410257

Champion
11989
500050001000500100100100100252525
Philly 'burbs
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?
ride_like_u_stole_it - 2009-09-16 4:53 PM

 not enough name-calling

 



or Acme products. Meep meep.
2009-09-16 4:04 PM
in reply to: #2409022

Master
1795
1000500100100252525
Boynton Beach, FL
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?
JBrashear - 2009-09-16 7:27 AM

bradword - 2009-09-16 12:38 AM

The other dumb thing is, he has already said he made an apology to the President and he accepted. The only people who still seam to care are the late night comedians, and the Democrats in congress who are trying to make a show. Get over it.


Let's be realistic; if this had happened during Dubya's terms the GOP would be doing precisely what the Dems are doing now. That doesn't make it right or wrong, but both sides would be squeezing every last little drop out of it if it happened to a president from their party.

Can you really keep a straight face when comparing the way the media treated W. vs. how they idolize Obama? The Dems showed true disrespect to the office on an ongoing basis. Put your feelings for the person in the chair aside, I think Wilson was wrong, but to say that it did not happen to W. is a joke. Just wait to see how much worse it will get with 3+ years to go. The crowds are just gettign warmed up. This is not racisism, it is the country starting to realize the change they were promised is not coming and they were sold a "bill" of goods. Rant continued... How much did we here about pulling out of the middle east when W. was in office? Funny how that subject is taboo now that it is Obama's decision to keep troops in place. Majority of people have had it with both parties, expecialyl the independents. I am convinced we will have an independent President in the next 16 years. It is better than what we had and certainly better than what we have now.
2009-09-16 4:16 PM
in reply to: #2410282

Philadelphia, south of New York and north of DC
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?

Does the collective wisdom of CoJ think that the issue of race in the news lately is:

A. A natural occurrence given the nature of the history of racism in the US.

B. The misguided personal opinions of a few public personalities.

C. A political strategy orchestrated by Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod to help push through legislation.

I honestly don't know myself, but I'm not naive to how power politics works.



Edited by dontracy 2009-09-16 4:18 PM
2009-09-16 4:18 PM
in reply to: #2410269

Member
381
100100100252525
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?
mrbbrad - 2009-09-16 2:59 PM

My head is going to explode.


intensely demonstrated animosity


I happen to strongly disagree that strong disagreement equals intensely demonstrated animosity.



I'm sorry, I cannot see past your intense demonstrations of animosity.

I agree that many does not imply majority nor even substantial number. I agree that JC seemed to be addressing a "large" partition of those that are intensely demonstrating animosity (a small subset of the population, I infer.)

However, there is still the issue of whether or not Mr. Wilson's outburst was racially motivated. I believe it was not, and that it is certainly plausible that his intense animosity towards Obama, in this case, reflects passion regarding the policy being debated. I also think it is a sad outcome if demonstrating passion in one's arguments becomes generally equated with racism. I do recognize that passionate argument can be handled without expressing intense animosity.
2009-09-16 4:29 PM
in reply to: #2410304

Master
1585
1000500252525
Folsom (Sacramento), CA
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?
dontracy - 2009-09-16 2:16 PM

Does the collective wisdom of CoJ think that the issue of race in the news lately is:

A. A natural occurrence given the nature of the history of racism in the US.

B. The misguided personal opinions of a few public personalities.

C. A political strategy orchestrated by Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod to help push through legislation.

I honestly don't know myself, but I'm not naive to how power politics works.



D. Some parts of all of the above.


2009-09-16 4:30 PM
in reply to: #2410304

Subject: ...
This user's post has been ignored.
2009-09-16 5:52 PM
in reply to: #2409041

Master
1669
10005001002525
"Home of Superman"
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?

travljini - 2009-09-16 8:49 AM
PennState - 2009-09-16 7:29 AM Has Carter EVER been right???

Truly the worst president since Warren Harding.


Ding, ding, ding.  We have a winner. 

Until now!

2009-09-16 6:19 PM
in reply to: #2410338

Extreme Veteran
606
500100
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?
PennState - 2009-09-16 5:30 PM
dontracy - 2009-09-16 5:16 PM

Does the collective wisdom of CoJ think that the issue of race in the news lately is:

A. A natural occurrence given the nature of the history of racism in the US.

B. The misguided personal opinions of a few public personalities.

C. A political strategy orchestrated by Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod to help push through legislation.

I honestly don't know myself, but I'm not naive to how power politics works.



Don, I'd vote for all 3. I vividly remember the fear people had in speaking out against the Bush admin immediately post 9-11, as they didn't want to be viewed as 'un-patriotic'. heck if Obama was a Senator then who's to say he wouldn't have felt the pressure that many Democrats did and voted for the Iraq resolution???

This is flat and simple a milder version of McCarthyism. I DO NOT think things are worse then that time, as you were put on trial for simply questioning the Senator from Wisconsin in those days... lots of people are free to openly question each of the last 2 presidents without much consequence.

The part I also dislike is that Obama, to me at least, has the look of a guy who does not really want any piece of this J.C. race thing. *I* think he wants to face the music like any other good leader (yes he can be a good leader despite the fact that I stongly disagree with his POLICY) and not use a smoke screen defense. (this is just MY opinion)


You dislike that Obama doesn't want a piece of the race thing????
2009-09-16 6:22 PM
in reply to: #2410464

Expert
1288
1000100100252525
Hatboro, PA
Subject: RE: Is President Carter right?
JustTriDave - 2009-09-16 7:19 PM
PennState - 2009-09-16 5:30 PM
dontracy - 2009-09-16 5:16 PM

Does the collective wisdom of CoJ think that the issue of race in the news lately is:

A. A natural occurrence given the nature of the history of racism in the US.

B. The misguided personal opinions of a few public personalities.

C. A political strategy orchestrated by Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod to help push through legislation.

I honestly don't know myself, but I'm not naive to how power politics works.



Don, I'd vote for all 3. I vividly remember the fear people had in speaking out against the Bush admin immediately post 9-11, as they didn't want to be viewed as 'un-patriotic'. heck if Obama was a Senator then who's to say he wouldn't have felt the pressure that many Democrats did and voted for the Iraq resolution???

This is flat and simple a milder version of McCarthyism. I DO NOT think things are worse then that time, as you were put on trial for simply questioning the Senator from Wisconsin in those days... lots of people are free to openly question each of the last 2 presidents without much consequence.

The part I also dislike is that Obama, to me at least, has the look of a guy who does not really want any piece of this J.C. race thing. *I* think he wants to face the music like any other good leader (yes he can be a good leader despite the fact that I stongly disagree with his POLICY) and not use a smoke screen defense. (this is just MY opinion)


You dislike that Obama doesn't want a piece of the race thing????


I thought that same thing.  I'm also confused on the bolded part above, as Obama was a Senator and voted against the War in Iraq.
New Thread
Other Resources My Cup of Joe » Is President Carter right? Rss Feed  
 
 
of 7