I often find that people who believe that anyone can make it because they did are taking for granted certain advantages that they had.
A few points...some people are well educated. Some are not. But regardless of this some people are just born not very bright. They'll live their entire lives not being very bright. There's a genetic component to this. It can't be helped. What does it say about the morality of an economic system that punishes stupid people?
I've been homeless myself, for 3 months, due to circumstances very much out of my control. I found myself with no place to live suddenly at 18 years of age, and because I had no place to live, I could not keep my job. The only way I could get back on my feet was due to the kindness of someone to take me in. Since that time, I have taken in countless homeless people and helped them get back on their feet. More times than not, this didin't work out well due to an untreated mental illness.
As I said eariler, class mobility is the lowest in the US out of any industrialized country in the world. You're far more likely for go from rich to middle class or middle class to poor than poor to middle class or middle class to wealthy.
Granted that the majority of ( justified ), anger
toward Obama is over the miserable economy, but it's much more than that & if anyone thinks the racial divide in this country has been greatly
eliminated since the '08 election, think again.
A couple of stats showing the racial polarization
in this country :
No Democratic Presidential candidate has won a majority of white voters since Lyndon Johnson in ' 64.
96% of African-Americans voted for Obama in ' 08.
A link is provided below to an excellent article
which elaborates on this dilemma:
It would appear that it is black people who are the ones voting along racial lines, not whites.
It is also the Dems that find it politically expediant to frame all disapproval, or call it anger if you like, of Obama as racially motivated.
It's just like hate crimes, if I run into to Zorf and punch him in the face, is it a hate crime just because he's black, or is it possible that I just don't like Zorf?
Black leadership needs to keep racism alive to stay in power, I would suggest that black leadership is more responible for the current racial devisiveness than are the southern bigots that the politically correct like to lampoon.
I remember seeing a stat some years ago that your average black family made 68 cents for every dollar a white family made. It's been long established that still to this day, when an economic recession hits the U.S., it's the equivolent of an economic depression for black families.
Given that, would it not be logical that those who are more deeply affected by economic downturns, be better adept at knowing which political party delivers better economic results?
I don't think it really counts as a hate crime if a white person gets into a fight with a black person. I would think that to be prosecuted for a hate crime, it has to be established that you did what you did because of your desire to intimidate an entire race in the local community.
I've always seen hate crimes both ways. I think it's just to punish someone more severely if he's trying to intimidate people for their race. But isn't violence towards someone else already a crime? I've always been a little uneasy with such legislation.
-- Modified on 2/22/2010 11:28:38 AM
I would be more logical that the financially gifted members of society would be better adept a picking which political party delivers better economic results.
Do you want to take your cue from losers, or winners? just asking.....
We do agree about hate crimes however, crimes like murder, aren't they already the very definition of hate crime? Why should we put a higher value on one group of people's life than another. Isn't that just the opposite of equal rights. I support "equal rights", I am not a supporter of special rights, whether it be for gays, blacks, asians, etc.
What does that mean? The capitalists fucked up the economy via their democrat and republican lackeys.
The hate crime laws exist to give prosecutors more leverage when dealing with what motivates a person to commit a crime.
I think people look at the economy often as an abstract thing that's outside of us. I don't really see it that way. I see it as nothing more than the collective financial transactions of all of us.
Given that, would it not be logical that different classes of people would have different economic agendas? That they would attempt to rework the economy to benefit them directly?
That's pretty much how I see it. The wealthy like Republicans because they make the economy benefit them...at the expense of poor. The poor like the Democrats because they rework the economy to benefit them, at the expense of the wealthy.
This isn't a universal approach by these parties of course, but I think things lean that way.
they just agree with your predisposed ideas on the subject.
Thank you for clearing that up.
I will stick with my premise that people who can make the economy work for them are more adept at economics than are those at or near the poverty level. Put another way, I know more about economics than the guy working for slave wages.
Losers always want to cry foul. Winners have no such need to complain about how life isn't fair.
the wealthy are better at getting politicians to work in their economic interest than the poor are. Of course, the reason for this is that wealth provides more resources.
The wealthy certainly do cry foul, and they do it at a nearly non-stop rate. If they didn't, then most lobbyists wouldn't have jobs.
I'm curious, beyond your own personal bias, why would you classify the wealthy as "winners" and the poor as "losers"? I don't think those in poverty can be blamed for their condition, given that 1) capital is far more efficient in creating wealth than labor is in a capitalist economy and 2) class mobility is the lowest in the United States out of any industrialized nation in the world.
Most people living in poverty are responsible for their own circumstances. There are limitless opportunities in this country, just because people are either too stupid or too lazy, or just make poor choices in life, doesn't mean that there is any lack of opportunity in this country.
Nobody wants to take any responibility for their own choices in life. That's not my problem, I work hard, more importantly I try to work smart. Why should I feel responsible for those who don't?
My personal bias, as you put it, is based on a lifetime of work and struggle to get where I am. With the exception of those with mental or physical handicaps, everyone in this country has the same opportunities. People born to wealth obviously have more opportunity, but anyone who truly wants to can make something of themself in this country.
People in many other countries don't have these advantages, there is no one holding you at gunpoint in a crime infested slum. Even if you are born into poverty and are raised in the poorest slum in the country, you are free to leave. No one prevents you from doing so. Even if you are pennyless, you can walk a few miles away and be free from the ghetto that people live in for generations. I am living proof, I have been homeless, without a penny in my pocket or a roof over my head. Not to brag, but I am doing just fine, and I don't feel any obligation to give all of my hard earned money to people who won't help themselves.
I often find that people who believe that anyone can make it because they did are taking for granted certain advantages that they had.
A few points...some people are well educated. Some are not. But regardless of this some people are just born not very bright. They'll live their entire lives not being very bright. There's a genetic component to this. It can't be helped. What does it say about the morality of an economic system that punishes stupid people?
I've been homeless myself, for 3 months, due to circumstances very much out of my control. I found myself with no place to live suddenly at 18 years of age, and because I had no place to live, I could not keep my job. The only way I could get back on my feet was due to the kindness of someone to take me in. Since that time, I have taken in countless homeless people and helped them get back on their feet. More times than not, this didin't work out well due to an untreated mental illness.
As I said eariler, class mobility is the lowest in the US out of any industrialized country in the world. You're far more likely for go from rich to middle class or middle class to poor than poor to middle class or middle class to wealthy.
work for the capitalist class. Though each party may not work for the same capitalists they nonetheless both work for the capitalist class. I fail to see how the "poor" benefit from either party. WW they are all capitalist politicians with the same capitalist goals.
...but the Dems at least have to pretend to defend the working class. The result is that they have to give them a pat on the head every once in a while, and help them out at the margins.
You actully concede that the Dems are not truly the party of the "working class", don't worry I will not try to suggest that the GOP is the party of the working class either, but the lack of partisanship is refreshing.
It appears that we "do" agree on a few things, one of them being that neither party is "superior" in any meaningful way, especially where it comes to ethics.
it's the evil of choosing between two evils. If you're a working class person, do you pick a party that lies to you and stabs you in the back 75% of the time, or do you pick the party that's honest with you and stabs you in the back 100% of the time?
Picking which party is more unethical isn't an easy question. Both are pretty horrible. I just think the GOP is more willing to be all out evil, if I can use that word in a non-religious way.
capitalist masters are. I wouldn't say that is a good quality but it explains why they don't appeal to a certain segment of US voters.
Neither party represents the working class. The working class as a united political force in the US is nonexistent.
delete
-- Modified on 2/22/2010 11:25:01 AM
Ah gag, you certainly keep us guessing, don't you? One minute you're an angry, menstruating southern belle, the next you're cyber-punching us in the face and showing us how much of an internet tough guy you can be. You are quite the three- dimensional character, aren't you? No matter what forum role you're playing though, logic seems to be your Kryptonite. You always take the detour when running into it. I don't expect a detailed explanation on how this "black leadership" you speak of can be more responsible for a racial divide than actual bigots. Maybe you have a magic responsibility gauge that the rest of us don't have access to. Or maybe your experience as an "Asian-American" lends itself to an objective view on the complexities of the racism.
What's it like to be that ignorant? Seems comfortable.
As the saying goes, "follow the money". Who has the most to gain from racial divide? Without it, the likes of Jesse Jackson, etal would have to get real jobs.
Nah, this is amusing. And frankly, you keep me entertained. You're like my little white-faced Geisha. Like this assertion that any black person has anything to gain from the same disparities that place them on the short end of everything. They're really cleaning up out there, aren't they? lol. Awww man. What else can we do to make this amusing? Maybe get Hunter in here to outline a little bigotry of her own while narrating the excruciating details of her miserable life; we'll have ourselves a ball. Hunter you there, sweetheart?
-- Modified on 2/22/2010 12:57:08 PM
Your ability to get AtlHunter all bent out of shape gives me hours of entertainment.
Aside from that your opinion is not important enough, nor is arguing with you entertaining enough for me to provide that same type of entertainment for the board.
Maybe AtlHunter will want to talk to you, I certainly don't. Talking about you is much more entertaining than actually talking to you.
Seems as if we're corresponding right now in this thread, dumbass. Maybe you can enlighten me on how that constitutes not talking to me, Confucius.
Let's not make it seem it like it's just Hunter with the problem. My ability to get YOU worked up has given me a few minutes of entertainment as well. You haven't always been level-headed about these things. You've been all kinds of bent out of shape before over some shit I directed to you, and it's fucking hilarious. You're a pathetic little woman in front of a computer, sweetheart, and I'm not going to forget that just because you happen to not be PMSing today.
The unelected black leader gig is tough work.
but it certainly pays well. As long as idiots like Zorff continue to let these guys speak for the entire "black community", the Jesse Jacksons out there will continue to get rich at the expense of the those they claim to represent.
Jackson generally speaks for the democrats and for god. I am not a fan but in order for Jackson to have attained the position of "Black Leader" he had to have support from the capitalist class which makes him a willing implementer of the racist policies of the capitalist class.
...the last person on this board that I would defend would be GaG, but most of us here have managed to keep this board rather civilized as of late. We, for the most part, do not attack each other here. Discussion and debate of politics is what this board is for, not throwing insults at each other. In short, flame wars don't belong here. Please, take it elsewhere.
tho, some might label me hypocritical for saying this--------------LOL !
Zorff is just mad because I don't feel like playing his little game today, maybe AtlHunter will come along and play with him? lmao
Priapus, your support was not as surprising as Willy's, does this mean that I have to be nice to Willy now? lmao
Truth be told, it's becoming easier and easier to be "nice" to Willy, even though we still disagree on almost everything, his posting to "stir the pot" has mellowed a bit, as has my inclination to ridicule him and resort to hurling insults.
which shouldn't be surprising since we're both left of the spectrum-------even tho Willy goes
a "bit out there" for my tastes---ahhhhh, WTF----looks like he was just trying to "bait the righties"-------LMAO !
Funny thing-----in my youth Don Rickles ( for those old enuff to know who I'm talking about ), was an idol of mine,hence, I love to "roughhouse". However ,at times on this board, even too rough for my caustic tastes. That's why good that it's become "relatively" civil in here lately. Been that way with the ( seeming ),departure of 3 cretins in here ( 2 from the far right, 1 from the far left ). Kinda surprised at the absence of someone else from far right who hasn't commented on the 2 "racial threads" that I inititiated. Mebbe being paranoid, but this guy seems to have pathological hatred of Obama that goes beyond dislike of his policies. Curious.
Lastly, GaG, ( & this will surprise you ), totally in agreement over your "personal responsiblity" post. Well said.
-- Modified on 2/22/2010 3:54:32 PM
sat in the front row, and had the bad sense to try and heckle Don Fucking Rickles. Rickles had a field day with my friend, made him look like a complete fucking moron. lmao
Cmon admit it, you miss TJ. roflmfao
Truth be told I dislike Reid/Pelosi much more than I do Obama. My biggest issue is with Obama voters who foolishly believed he was something other than a politician. I don't think we will get a POTUS who isn't damaged goods in our lifetime. The only way to get elected is to be a politician, or be rich, ala Ross Perot, but hopefully without the wacko factor. lol
As I said earlier, as a Nevada resident, WON'T be voting for Reid in the election. This may sound simplistic, but I just find Pelosi & Reid to be a pair of fucking creeps. Izzat enuff to vote against someone?---WTF---guess so----LOL !
I don't dislike President Obama. I don't like most of his policies, but I respect him as a man and a leader. I do think he talks a little too much about himself but part of that may be due to the "rock star" mentality that people gave him as they elevated him from community organizer to leader of the free world in roughly a decade.
Reid is a weak and ineffective senator. Pelosi is a joke. Reid may be gone come November but Pelosi is there (Congress) as long as she wants to be. It's up to the voters to decide if her Party stays in power and keeps her Speaker's job.
stand-up comics of his era.
Next time I'll use a bit more civility when responding to an uncivil post. LOL. Fuck that.
And if you say fuck that then everything becomes a spiral of dumb as shit name calling. It's far more effective just to point out the name calling when it happens.
If GaG and I can keep it fairly civil, then anyone can. I'm just politely asking you not to screw up this board for the rest of us.
"96% of African-Americans voted for Obama in ' 08."
Statistics are like insanity ..Depends on who's judging..I don't see a racial divide around me ..Thank God!
In my adult life personally speaking ,I have always seen as good a relation between blacks and whites, as crackers amongst themselves..
As far as my Dixie Land Hick town experiences since the election.. It is plain to see everyone still gets along quite well.. and the Blacks have a reason to feel proud of how far this country has improved.
I don't see where 96% of the Blacks voting for Obama means anything other than Obama got out the vote very well, and if I am not mistaken close to 90% of Blacks normally vote the Democratic ticket.....and a majority of young people who had never voted,icluding many blacks, voted for Obama.
No one can deny with any validity that Obama ran a excellent campaign
I don't think the fact that Democrat presidential candidates don't usually get a majority of white voters means anything other than the voters perception of who they agree with, and the many different demographics of the country. Its really not that big of a spread since we are not clones.
I don't think so.
but a POTUS who's main agenda was not ramming health care through during the middle of an economic crisis, might indeed have made a difference.
While it is true that in this case race makes no difference I don't see what the health care issue has to do with any of this. POTUS did all that he could do to deal with the health care and the economic issues facing the US. Both of these issues
have been a long time coming and will not be resolved any time soon no matter who the POTUS is.
The solution lies in changing the way that the capitalists conduct commerce globally.
One stat. left out of the link found below----77% of Jewish voters voted for Obama ( wonder how Xiao feels about that ?--------LOL ! )
So let me get this straight - whites have tended to vote Republican for more than 40 years. Fact. Despite that, the fact that in 2008, McCain recieved the majority of the white vote is somehow racist. Did I read that right? Is this journalist so - what word do I use here? Naive? Stupid? Ignorant? Take your pick - as to think that simply because Obama was black, that whites MUST....and I mean MUST.....reverse a 40 year voting trend in order to not be thought racist? I mean - really?
I didn't vote for Barack Obama.
I am so SORRY for that, but it had nothing to do with the color of his skin. His skin color isn't what is pushing a health care plan that will bankrupt us. His skin color isn't what prompted such boneheaded wastes of taxpayer dollars as the stimulus or cash for clunkers. His skin color didn't sign an Executive Order requiring the miliatry to now destroy spent casings rather than sell them to ammunition re-sellers, creating scarcity for certain caliber ammunition, raising prices on ammunition, and simultaneously costing the military millions of dollars annually. It was the MAN who did those things, and those are the reasons I voted against him.
When I vote for ANYONE who has an (R) beside their name in 2012, it will not be because Obama is black. It will be because he has been an abysmal failure, has promoted policies that would bankrupt us, chosen to surround himself with thieves and crooks, all while taking vacation after vacation.
But if we are going to talk about racial polarization, we can talk about that. White tend to vote conservative. True enough, but the majority is and has always been a thin one. That cannot be said for ANY other group. Blacks, Asians, Hispanics, and even Jews tend not just to vote Democratic, but overwhelmingly so.
If whites voted in such overwhelming majority for conservatives, a Democratic candidate wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell of ever winning the White House, or a Senate seat. Democrats would be relegated to a very small number of House seats and nothing more, hailing only from districts that have a majority of minority citizens. But it doesn't work that way. Whites tend to vote their politics one way or another. Some whites are conservative, some liberal, most somewhere in between the two - and they vote accordingly. One can only wonder what our political landscape would look like if all of our citizens voted the same way.
but to quote someone from the board : "All racists are Republicans"---
Anyway, I agree with some of your points---the majority of Republican/conservative rage is with the man's policies. Hell, I voted for him & found his 1st year in office quite disappointing--particularly the healthcare debacle & how he hasn't effectively worked to get the unemployment rate down. But to say racism plays NO small part in the anger against him is to bury one's head in the sand.
You seem to be saying that only whites can be racists. The word "all" is the most overused work in the English language.
racists come in all colors.
Wrong. Whites are far from the only racists in this country. The Democrats have plenty of racists. Its just not politically correct to call it what it is.