Quantcast

Is it Possible to Disagree With Obama's Policies and NOT be 'Racist'?

Nimitz 2012/07/16 04:45:09
Related Topics: Obama, Racist, Policies
No.  Just asking the question makes you a racist.
Yes--but you're still a racist anyway.
Other racist answer :-)
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • elijahin24 2012/07/16 16:12:10
    Other racist answer :-)
    elijahin24
    +6
    The gentleman doth protesteth too much.
    Of course you can disagree with President Obama's policies, without being a racist; and most who disagree with him, are NOT racist. But this is not to say that there are no racists out there. The problem is that the racists out there tend to be the most vocal. It's really very simple: Those who oppose the President on policy, can explain in detail why they don't like the policy, without making it personal, or racial. Those who use insults and personal attacks, tend to be the ones who are racist. This is not always the case. Sometimes they're just Conservative-nationalists; but honestly, that's a form of bigotry too.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Steve ☮ R ☮ P ☮ 2012 ☮ 2012/07/19 00:34:22
    Other racist answer :-)
    Steve ☮ R ☮ P ☮ 2012 ☮
    +1
    Of coure it's possible. The question should be whether or not a liberal can understand this possibility. The answer to this is almost unanimously "no".
  • Pedro Doller ~Inc. 2012/07/18 13:05:35
    Yes--but you're still a racist anyway.
    Pedro Doller ~Inc.
    +1
    I always thought you had to do something really bad to be a racist, if it's as easy as criticizing the 0, many people will become racist.
  • Nimitz Pedro D... 2012/07/18 18:13:32
    Nimitz
    +1
    What drives most of us nuts is when they confuse racism with bigotry. Many people are bigoted but not necessarily racist.

    Racism:
    n.
    The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others. Discrimination or prejudice based on race. (This last part was ADDED to the definition within the last couple of decades.

    Bigot
    n.
    One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

    [French, from Old French.]

    WORD HISTORY Bigots may have more in common with God than one might think. Legend has it that Rollo, the first duke of Normandy, refused to kiss the foot of the French king Charles III, uttering the phrase bi got, his borrowing of the assumed Old English equivalent of our expression by God. Although this story is almost surely apocryphal, it is true that bigot was used by the French as a term of abuse for the Normans, but not in a religious sense. Later, however, the word, or very possibly a homonym, was used abusively in French for the Beguines, members of a Roman Catholic lay sisterhood. From the 15th century on Old French bigot meant "an excessively devoted or hypocritical person." Bigot is first recorded in English in 1598 with the sense "a superstitious hypocrite."
  • Pedro D... Nimitz 2012/07/18 18:17:42
    Pedro Doller ~Inc.
    +1
    They'll have to change the definitions again for this election.
  • rich Nimitz 2012/07/24 11:46:15
    rich
    Interesting. Can you name an example in this country, of a person or type of person more accurately, who is bigoted, but not racist, so I can fully understand your point?
  • tobe 2012/07/17 21:30:10 (edited)
    Yes--but you're still a racist anyway.
    tobe
    +1
    the race card is a cheap shot. If a person doesn't agree with obama its because they don't agree with whats he's doing. i don't give a da** what color he is. doug cartoon
  • AGPhillbin 2012/07/17 21:29:47 (edited)
    Other racist answer :-)
    AGPhillbin
    +1
    I think people use the "racist" label for people who attack Obama reflexively, partly because of the absolutely insane level of hostility he has received from the right wing, and can't comprehend it, and thus attribute it to racial motives. and, to be absolutely fair, it is certainly true, at times. I have seen blatant racist attacks on Obama here on Sodahead. Yes, the baiting of Bill Clinton is certainly comparable, but people have short memories, and obviously they couldn't retort "racist" at the Clinton haters. But here's my question to you:

    Which is more significant: the fact that some people reflexively respond to Obama-bashing by attacking the bashers as "racist," or that most of the attacks on Obama emanating from the right wing blogosphere (and AM radio & Fox News) are not policy based, but personality-based or ignorant political labeling, such as calling him a "communist," "socialist," "fascist," "Muslim," "terrorist," etc., often several at once or even all simultaneously? How is one supposed to rationally deal with that kind of idiocy? I say this as someone who hates Obama's policies, whether we are speaking of Obama/Romney Care, attacking countries (Libya) that have not attacked us (without even raising it with Congress), the extension of the Patriot Act, the NDAA...
    I think people use the "racist" label for people who attack Obama reflexively, partly because of the absolutely insane level of hostility he has received from the right wing, and can't comprehend it, and thus attribute it to racial motives. and, to be absolutely fair, it is certainly true, at times. I have seen blatant racist attacks on Obama here on Sodahead. Yes, the baiting of Bill Clinton is certainly comparable, but people have short memories, and obviously they couldn't retort "racist" at the Clinton haters. But here's my question to you:

    Which is more significant: the fact that some people reflexively respond to Obama-bashing by attacking the bashers as "racist," or that most of the attacks on Obama emanating from the right wing blogosphere (and AM radio & Fox News) are not policy based, but personality-based or ignorant political labeling, such as calling him a "communist," "socialist," "fascist," "Muslim," "terrorist," etc., often several at once or even all simultaneously? How is one supposed to rationally deal with that kind of idiocy? I say this as someone who hates Obama's policies, whether we are speaking of Obama/Romney Care, attacking countries (Libya) that have not attacked us (without even raising it with Congress), the extension of the Patriot Act, the NDAA, his cowardice under the slightest Republiscum pressure, etc. I have never in my life voted Democroach or Republiscum for POTUS, but these idiots (which overpopulate this board) actually make me want to vote for Obama (or at least lie and say I will), if only to spite them. Now, I don't throw around the "racist" label unless it is clearly warranted in dealing with these clowns, but my counter barbs are not exactly restrained, either. So why is the occasional misdirected accusation of "racism" so significant to you? Do you really expect irrationalism to be dealt with by pure rationalism?
    (more)
  • John Galt jr or Ron/jon 2012/07/17 06:02:12
    Yes--but you're still a racist anyway.
    John Galt jr or Ron/jon
  • adeenmckenziekennedy 2012/07/17 00:31:29
  • eyeballz 2012/07/16 23:54:19
    Other racist answer :-)
    eyeballz
    +3
    Of course it is possible , you're only a bigot if you disagree with his politics, not a racist .
    LOL
  • Nimitz eyeballz 2012/07/17 00:01:42
    Nimitz
    +2
    Very good!! That's a 7.9 on the Cogitation Scale. :-D
  • Lana 2012/07/16 23:17:52
    Other racist answer :-)
    Lana
    +3
    Yes, I think it is fair to say you can separate race relations with politics, even though our current president happens to be non 100% caucasian
  • derek.goldthorne 2012/07/16 22:00:55
    Other racist answer :-)
    derek.goldthorne
    +2
    Do you still beat your mother?

    LOADED QUESTIONS FTW!
  • Nimitz derek.g... 2012/07/16 22:56:55
    Nimitz
    +1
    Excellent example! That's what a charge of racism amounts to: you have to stop everything and defend yourself. That's what the accuser is counting on.
  • Anna 2012/07/16 21:31:43
    Yes--but you're still a racist anyway.
    Anna
    +1
    Unless you disagree with him simply because he's black.
  • Nimitz Anna 2012/07/16 21:42:03
    Nimitz
    ROFLOL! I'll go along with that!
  • John Hall 2012/07/16 19:04:35
    Other racist answer :-)
    John Hall
    +1
    yes i disagree with obama on most his policies and agree with him on others but that doesnt make me or anyone else a racist.
  • Nimitz John Hall 2012/07/16 19:32:03
    Nimitz
    Agreed! I had to ask, though, for reasons which should be obvious in the discussions which sprawl below. :-)
  • Jacob Torres 2012/07/16 18:20:07
    Other racist answer :-)
    Jacob Torres
    +3
    It is possible. On the other hand, it would be dishonest of anybody to deny that a good chunk of the negative sentiment towards the president comes from racist and xenophobic people.
    Unfortunately, idiots have always and will always outnumber rational creatures, and they tend to be louder, too. Race is simply a more sensational (and easy) topic than Obama's extension of Orwellian policies.
  • gfreeman BN-0 2012/07/16 17:46:12
    Other racist answer :-)
    gfreeman BN-0
    +2
    Is it possible to disagree with Mitt's policies and not be called a militant atheist?
  • Jacob T... gfreema... 2012/07/16 18:24:21
    Jacob Torres
    +1
    Yes, but again, there's some truth to the stereotype. Going onstage at a Christian college and promoting a one-man-one-woman view of marriage doesn't win over any atheists.
  • gfreema... Jacob T... 2012/07/16 18:43:22
    gfreeman BN-0
    +1
    I wonder if Mitt has gotten his copy of Atlas Shrugged from the Paul camp?
  • Nimitz gfreema... 2012/07/16 19:33:38
    Nimitz
    +1
    I suppose Mitt has about as much use for Paul as he has for Obama. Perhaps even less so. At least Obama's a kindred statist.
  • Nimitz gfreema... 2012/07/16 18:47:31
    Nimitz
    +1
    Being called a militant atheist doesn't carry the same stigma as being called a racist, but yes, it's entirely possible. I disagree with Romney about just about everything and I'm a Christian. Gee, how's that happen? :-)
  • gfreema... Nimitz 2012/07/16 18:53:50
    gfreeman BN-0
    +1
    Militant atheism, see, you didn't even see it coming.
  • Nimitz gfreema... 2012/07/16 19:35:42
    Nimitz
    Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know I was supposed to jump through hoops, roll over and play dead. If you want people to grasp your gloriously recondite point, don't be cryptic about it. (And yours was the first use of the phrase.)
  • gfreema... Nimitz 2012/07/17 13:53:59
    gfreeman BN-0
    +1
    I'll give you a cookie if you do. Lighten up, Francis.
  • Melizmatic 2012/07/16 17:09:44
    Other racist answer :-)
    Melizmatic
    +3
    This question is trite, obvious bait meant to pander to the hate addicts, and (in my opinion) beneath you.
  • Nimitz Melizmatic 2012/07/16 18:54:07
    Nimitz
    That MIGHT be because you don't understand the objective. It has *nothing* to do with 'pandering' to anyone.
  • Melizmatic Nimitz 2012/07/16 18:58:59
    Melizmatic
    +1
    The "objective?"

    *lolz

    Sure, if you say so.
  • Nimitz Melizmatic 2012/07/16 19:36:49 (edited)
    Nimitz
    The objective is to stimulate discussion. To bring both sides of the controversy together in order to understand how the other is thinking.

    And you're right. I do say so. Deal now/avoid rush.

    (Gawd I love your avatar. Reminds me of a cross between Alien and Lost Boys.)
  • Melizmatic Nimitz 2012/07/16 19:39:18
    Melizmatic
    +2
    Yes, "you said so"; that doesn't mean that I believe it.

    :)

    But then again, I'm highly skeptical of pretty much everything I read here.


    And thanks; I love both movies.
  • Nimitz Melizmatic 2012/07/16 19:47:57
    Nimitz
    I'm not here to convince you of anything, but my motives are crystal clear. I've taken great pains across the board to make them thus. They're apparent in the entirety of my 'presence' here.
  • Melizmatic Nimitz 2012/07/16 19:52:35
    Melizmatic
    +2
    I never said nor implied that you were; you gave snark as a reply, so you get it back, in return.

    :)

    And what's 'apparent' to one is not necessarily so to another.
  • Nimitz Melizmatic 2012/07/16 19:53:26
    Nimitz
    +1
    Touche'
  • Bob S 2012/07/16 16:42:40
    Other racist answer :-)
    Bob S
    +1
    Why can't anyone agree or disagree and not be considered a racist. I have used the word too but everyone is NOT a racist beacause of their beliefs.
  • Nimitz Bob S 2012/07/16 18:56:58
    Nimitz
    Correct. Now, do you suppose the nation's interests are served by this kind of polarization--both on the part of politicians and those who support particular candidates? If you're like me you don't. What good, then, does it do ANYONE to bring up race in this contest? Obama, a black man, is president. There are those who like him and those who don't. The fact that he's black is irrelevant. The REAL racists are hiding in caves!
  • ETpro 2012/07/16 16:23:16
    Other racist answer :-)
    ETpro
    +4
    Yes, but since you leave me no choice but label you a racist, I assume you know yourself and had good reason to provide just those three options.
  • Nimitz ETpro 2012/07/16 18:58:25
    Nimitz
    The options I chose are based on the disgust I feel toward those of my countrymen who insist on making presidential contest this about race. That SHOULD be obvious to anyone in possession of a fourth grade education.
  • elijahin24 2012/07/16 16:12:10
    Other racist answer :-)
    elijahin24
    +6
    The gentleman doth protesteth too much.
    Of course you can disagree with President Obama's policies, without being a racist; and most who disagree with him, are NOT racist. But this is not to say that there are no racists out there. The problem is that the racists out there tend to be the most vocal. It's really very simple: Those who oppose the President on policy, can explain in detail why they don't like the policy, without making it personal, or racial. Those who use insults and personal attacks, tend to be the ones who are racist. This is not always the case. Sometimes they're just Conservative-nationalists; but honestly, that's a form of bigotry too.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/09/24 00:26:25

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals