I want to hear Emily Litella do a rant on "What's all this about banning clothes?!"

To which I will add only ... how do we know the opposition to Obama and/or the policies he represents is not due to racism? I can't answer that, and neither can scaeagles.



But from the interviews I've seen of the teabaggers who protested in D.C. on 9/12, racism seems the only logical reason outside of stupidity. Take your pick. Most of them said they were freaked out about runaway spending. Where were they during the Bush years when a zero deficit when to a $500 trillion deficit?

Granted, they weren't losing their jobs and their homes at alarming rates back then, and so they weren't motivated so much by terror. But these people who equate Obama with Stalin and The H. Word because "suddenly" spending is out of control while there was nary a teabag in sight during Dubbya Days, racism is just as likely a supposition as any for the overblown animus.


Alex is correct in that racism has gone undercover, and that's a good thing. But undercover does not mean gone. Not by a long, long, long, long shot. And yes, like it or not, you're going to have to go Out Of Your Way to make arguments that are reasonable and logical if you don't want it generally ASSUMED that your beef with the black president is the color of his N.word skin.

You can't prove racism or a lack there of in the opposition. Agreed.

It is true that there were not the huge protests over spending in the Bush years, though there damn well should have been. And while 500 billion is no small deficit in the Bush years, this year's projection of 1.6 trillion is significantly larger. And the perspective of the economy adds a lot to it, as you point out ISM. However, to protest spending now in the lack of protests earlier does not mean those that are protesting now are stupid.

They are, and I think Alex's point of normal opposition being bumped up into frenzied opposition is why. I naively hoped that people would be so afraid of being labeled racist that they would choose to cooperate with the president more. Now they just rely on being defended by their supporters, and act offended when any of their detractors call them on it.

"No, your fat ass makes you look fat." < Why I never ask that question.

So you endorse using cries of racism as a political tool?

To me it might mean they are hypocritical. But I rather think they are just acting out of fear, now that the recovery from the economic collapse seems not to be including any non-rich Americans.

But yeah, I think they're also mostly stupid. Not a peep of mass protest or guns wielded at presidential events while tax cuts to the wealthy and a war of imperialism sold by pure lie ballooned the deficit in the first place. And yet now that someone wants to use it to bring jobs, energy independence, health care and environmental sustainability, folks are up-in-arms.

I don't think these bozos who couldn't articulate a decent idea are really objecting the finer points of the policy proposals aimed at restoring economic and moral vitality to America. I think they're angry sheep.

Such people have always acted against their self-interest. They don't want a better world for everyone, so they can enjoy a better world as part of it. Instead, they dream of being among the ultra-few who enjoy the better world through wealth and power, and so work to protect the privileges of that segment while they hope and pray (but do little else) to join their ranks.

Such people are deluded, plain and simple - - and act on that delusion against their own self interest. Definition of stupidity, if you ask me.

I read that as hoping that mildly racist people would bend over backwards to avoid getting outed.

Of course, that assumes that most mildly racist people are aware of it. Which I doubt.

That said, if you can identify the specific racism then of course you should cry it as a political tool.

I suppose you're claiming none of these people are lying when denying they are racist? Because, of course, racists never lie. :p


Yeah, this puts us in the difficult position of proving a negative. That's tough. But, like I said, you're gonna have to put a lot more effort into NOT seeming a racist when virulently opposing our first, ya know, colored president.

"Oh, honey, it's not the pants that makes you look fat. It's the fat that makes you look fat."*


*I can't take credit for this one. It's something an ex said. And now we know why he's an ex.
:D

Yes, there was vitriol directed at Bush. But, as I have pointed out before, they were mostly directed at what he had actually done. The vitriol directed at Obama is of a whole different order. Not only are they protesting over things that Obama hasn't done or has no intention of doing (Sending conservatives to concentration camps?! WTF?), but they are doing so in near violent paranoid delusional manner.

Most of the silly claims against Bush just caused me to roll my eyes. The things these birthers and teabaggers come up with truely frighten me.

Delude yourself that these are merely mild mannered conservatives protesting Obama's "spendthrift" policies all you want. Their signs and shouts tell a different story.