Chris Matthews: Obama’s Critics Are Driven By Racism

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

TerryMathews

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,464
2
0
No it's not, and no he didn't. He was very specific on who and what criticisms he was talking about, and the second link absolutely backs up what he's saying.

No. The first quote lays out very clearly that if you disagree with the president or question his citizenship status, it's thinly veiled racism.

Go read it.
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
No. The first quote lays out very clearly that if you disagree with the president or question his citizenship status, it's thinly veiled racism.

Go read it.

That's exactly the point. When you claim you oppose Obama for some phony fantasy you lose credibility denying it's not really the reason that's staring everyone in the face.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,069
55,592
136
No. The first quote lays out very clearly that if you disagree with the president or question his citizenship status, it's thinly veiled racism.

Go read it.

Yes, if you are questioning Obama's citizenship status at this point the only rational explanations are that you are either a complete moron, illiterate, or a racist. Considering that literacy rates in the US are quite high, draw your own conclusion.
 

JockoJohnson

Golden Member
May 20, 2009
1,417
60
91
Those on the left did true racists a big favor. You cry wolf every time someone says or does something against Pres. Obama and people will start to ignore it. Now when racism might actually occur, people don't want to hear it --- except those living in that bubble.

To quote the great Pony Professor---Libtards gonna tard.
 

TerryMathews

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,464
2
0
Yes, if you are questioning Obama's citizenship status at this point the only rational explanations are that you are either a complete moron, illiterate, or a racist. Considering that literacy rates in the US are quite high, draw your own conclusion.

He made no clarification that it was "at this point". You added that yourself.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,069
55,592
136
He made no clarification that it was "at this point". You added that yourself.

I will say that it was a (barely) reasonable question to ask right up until June of 2008 when he produced his birth certificate. Everything after that (which includes nearly all Republican birtherism) was racism, pure and simple. The longer the birthers continued to soldier on with it even in the face of ever increasing evidence, the more naked that racism was exposed to be.
 

JockoJohnson

Golden Member
May 20, 2009
1,417
60
91
I will say that it was a (barely) reasonable question to ask right up until June of 2008 when he produced his birth certificate. Everything after that (which includes nearly all Republican birtherism) was racism, pure and simple. The longer the birthers continued to soldier on with it even in the face of ever increasing evidence, the more naked that racism was exposed to be.

Maybe it is a matter of perception. It could be my denial of racism...which may be true. I just see the birthers as complete morons who are Republicans that couldn't accept defeat.
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
Yes and can you, with your pea sized brain, understand why it would be crossing the line?

Try reading a fucking history book, hell! Try reading any book!

Sometimes I think you are gunning for incorruptible's crown for the dumbest poster on AT. If you weren't allowed to post your stupid false equivalences I bet you would have one post per day.

No. That title is shared among the leftists here including you. You have already lost the debate.

If it's wrong to do it to obama then it's wrong to do it to bush, no double standards.
 

TerryMathews

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,464
2
0
I will say that it was a (barely) reasonable question to ask right up until June of 2008 when he produced his birth certificate. Everything after that (which includes nearly all Republican birtherism) was racism, pure and simple. The longer the birthers continued to soldier on with it even in the face of ever increasing evidence, the more naked that racism was exposed to be.

So then you agree that IF Matthews comment was intended to cover all time, it was unreasonable?

You yourself admit there was some (albeit slight) contention on whether he met the constitutional requirements to be president.

I again point out that Matthews did not restrict his comment to Republicans after the release of the birth certificate. As a matter of fact, I think a few he named did drop it after the certificate came out. I'm not 100% on that though.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,069
55,592
136
So then you agree that IF Matthews comment was intended to cover all time, it was unreasonable?

You yourself admit there was some (albeit slight) contention on whether he met the constitutional requirements to be president.

I again point out that Matthews did not restrict his comment to Republicans after the release of the birth certificate. As a matter of fact, I think a few he named did drop it after the certificate came out. I'm not 100% on that though.

I do not expect people to add in all the caveats necessary when making a larger statement. I don't believe he thinks that all questions ever were racist, but if he does that would be unreasonable, yes.

I will bet a lot of money that none of the people he named dropped it after June, 2008. That's when he released his official birth record from Hawaii. That was before he even won the Democratic nomination. After that all the 'long form' nonsense started. Anyone who was going after the 'long form' was either woefully ignorant of how US birth records work or was a racist.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
[ ... ]
Anyone who was going after the 'long form' was either woefully ignorant of how US birth records work or was a racist.
Sorry, I don't agree. First and foremost, they continued going after him because of irrational hatred. They wanted -- they needed -- to bring him down. Yes, I agree many hated him due to race. But many others hated him only because he was a successful Democrat ... a hatred that exploded when he became the Democrat who kicked their asses. Many hated him because he is intelligent and erudite (whereas they loved GWBush because he was the exact opposite, the dumb hick next door). Some hated him because they swallowed the propaganda that he is Muslim. His middle name is Hussein, you know. Some hated him for reasons I can no longer remember because they were so stupid.

Of course most hated him for some combination of the reasons above. Regardless, the bottom line is they hated him, and that's why they sought every possible excuse to bring him down ... an obsession that continues to this day.
 

TerryMathews

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,464
2
0
I do not expect people to add in all the caveats necessary when making a larger statement. I don't believe he thinks that all questions ever were racist, but if he does that would be unreasonable, yes.

I will bet a lot of money that none of the people he named dropped it after June, 2008. That's when he released his official birth record from Hawaii. That was before he even won the Democratic nomination. After that all the 'long form' nonsense started. Anyone who was going after the 'long form' was either woefully ignorant of how US birth records work or was a racist.

You have more faith in him than I do.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
Back in 2008 the progressive lefties kept going on and on and on and on and on about how many racist acts there would be and how much escalated violence over a black president...

And guess what! None of it came to be. So little MSNBC had to manufacture racism to stay relevant:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYKQJ4-N7LI

But dang it if they still will continue beating their drums to salvage whatever dwindling ratings they are clinging to!

Anyone still paying attention to what that network has to say, you're just a worthless waste of time. Sorry for being so blunt, but you are.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
It's fucking politics. Republicans and conservatives knock down Democrats in power, while Democrats and progressives knock down Republicans in power.

It has more to do with political party affiliation than it ever has to do with race.

But, go on, listen to your progressive overlords as they are the true understanders of the world!
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,069
55,592
136
It's fucking politics. Republicans and conservatives knock down Democrats in power, while Democrats and progressives knock down Republicans in power.

It has more to do with political party affiliation than it ever has to do with race.

But, go on, listen to your progressive overlords as they are the true understanders of the world!

I like how no matter what happens the answer is never racism. Never.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
-snip-
After that all the 'long form' nonsense started. Anyone who was going after the 'long form' was either woefully ignorant of how US birth records work or was a racist.

Or, to be more precise, they were mightily aware of how HI birth records worked.

The problem with the 2008 release was that no hospital was listed.

Fern
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,069
55,592
136
Or, to be more precise, they were mightily aware of how HI birth records worked.

The problem with the 2008 release was that no hospital was listed.

Fern

No, there was no reason. That birth certificate is proof accepted by any court, and those records were verified by both the department and the governor of the state.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,069
55,592
136
And I like how your answer is reducto ad racism.

Nope, sure isn't. There are tons of criticisms that I have described as not being related to race. Can you provide a single area where you think Republican opposition to Obama is the product of racism?
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
No, there was no reason. That birth certificate is proof accepted by any court, and those records were verified by both the department and the governor of the state.

I never said if he wasn't born in a hospital it means he wasn't a citizen. What I said back then was it would be a damn interesting situation.

The Constitution doesn't require that a person needs a birth certificate to be eligible. It says one must be a NBC. You don't even need to be born in this country to get a BC in most states. And most states also have a type 2 BC, meaning you weren't born in a hospital. Instead, a couple of people just show up and claim a kid was born and one is issued. And this can be days or even years after the birth. And as far as the due diligence done by the state - your mileage will vary greatly.

Fern
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,069
55,592
136
I never said if he wasn't born in a hospital it means he wasn't a citizen. What I said back then was it would be a damn interesting situation.

The Constitution doesn't require that a person needs a birth certificate to be eligible. It says one must be a NBC. You don't even need to be born in this country to get a BC in most states. And most states also have a type 2 BC, meaning you weren't born in a hospital. Instead, a couple of people just show up and claim a kid was born and one is issued. And this can be days or even years after the birth. And as far as the due diligence done by the state - your mileage will vary greatly.

Fern

This has been discussed ad nauseum, the different types of birth certificates specifically.

Needless to say, I stand by it.
 

TerryMathews

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,464
2
0
Nope, sure isn't. There are tons of criticisms that I have described as not being related to race. Can you provide a single area where you think Republican opposition to Obama is the product of racism?

A place where I think opposition to Obama is due to him being black?

No I honestly can't. For some people I am sure it is a contributing factor, but I genuinely believe that if this were the second term of Kerry/Edwards, with the same policies, they would be fighting just as hard.

Republicans hate gun control. They hate tax increases that go to anything but the MIC. They hate people who bypass Congress to advance their own agenda, if it's one they (republicans) don't support.

To me, the litmus test is "would Kerry/Edwards get bipartisan support on these initiatives?"

I believe the answer is no.

Some republicans might hate him because he's black, I don't deny that. They can also hate his policies, for a reason beyond his race.

Serious thought exercise: is it still racism if someone finds a legitimate gripe, due to their racism? What I mean by that, is does their initial motive negate the substance of their point, even if their point is unrelated to race.

Think of it as a form of the lesbian sex offender in Florida.
 
Last edited:

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,069
55,592
136
A place where I think opposition to Obama is due to him being black?

No I honestly can't. For some people I am sure it is a contributing factor, but I genuinely believe that if this were the second term of Kerry/Edwards, with the same policies, they would be fighting just as hard.

Republicans hate gun control. They hate tax increases that go to anything but the MIC. They hate people who bypass Congress to advance their own agenda, if it's one they (republicans) don't support.

To me, the litmus test is "would Kerry/Edwards get bipartisan support on these initiatives?"

I believe the answer is no.

Some republicans might hate him because he's black, I don't deny that. They can also hate his policies, for a reason beyond his race.

So basically you are saying that you agree racism exists in America but think it has not had any bearing on Obama's presidency? You can't really think that?
 

TerryMathews

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,464
2
0
So basically you are saying that you agree racism exists in America but think it has not had any bearing on Obama's presidency? You can't really think that?

That is oversimplifying my point until it loses its meaning.

ETA: To support my position, Obama didn't have any trouble expanding the domestic spying program, did he? That's something republicans love.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,069
55,592
136
That is oversimplifying my point until it loses its meaning.

ETA: To support my position, Obama didn't have any trouble expanding the domestic spying program, did he? That's something republicans love.

Okay, so I think that means we agree that racism has changed how Obama's presidency has gone. How would you say racism has changed it?