Jimmy Carter weighs in on the opposition to Obama

[cubby1223]

Seriously, if the left-wing of the media and the blog sites never touched upon racism, this would have *never* crossed any of your minds. This *is* manufactured.

 

[Mr. Lennon]

Originally posted by: cubby1223
Seriously, if the left-wing of the media and the blog sites never touched upon racism, this would have *never* crossed any of your minds. This *is* manufactured.

Wahh left wing media wahhh

Such a tired and lame horse that has beaten to death thousands of times.

For the record, I am not a Democrat so you can go take your failed assumptions elsewhere.

I'm not saying that everyone there at these gatherings are racist. But for Christ's sake, open your damn eyes I don't need a blog to tell me that is a passive aggressive racist right there.

Believe me, I am just as angry about the bailouts and economy as these guys are. The one thing that I will not tolerate though is racism in any shape or form

 

[Athena]

Originally posted by: cubby1223
Seriously, if the left-wing of the media and the blog sites never touched upon racism, this would have *never* crossed any of your minds. This *is* manufactured.

Not true. Jimmy Carter just said out loud what many have been thinking for several weeks. You may have been insensitive to the ugly undercurrents represented by the birthers, Glen Beck, and the Nazi comparisons at town hall meetings but that doesn't mean that others failed to see what was going on.

It is not manufactured. Only Republicans who represent "safe" seats can afford to think it is.

 

[sandorski]

It's hard to quantify how much is based on Racism, but it is undoubtedly at least partially fuelled by Racism. Not all people are motivated by that and it isn't 100% the reason for anyone to be opposed, but it is certainly one reason among many which causes some people to say things like, "This is not my America" or "I don't even recognize America anymore". The level of vitriol, anger, and outright fear being expressed can not be attributed to Policy alone. Simply because the Policy isn't really that much different than the status quo.

 

[alchemize]

"When a radical fringe element of demonstrators and others begin to attack the president of the United States as an animal ...
lol

...or as a reincarnation of Adolf Hitler...
lol

...or when they wave signs in the air that said we should have buried Obama with Kennedy,
lol

those kinds of things are beyond the bounds," the Democrat who served from 1977-1981 told students at Emory University.

lol

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.

Richard Nixon, Republican.

Another '60s leader, this time Democrat.

"A racist is one who despises someone because of his color, and an Alabama segregationist is one who conscientiously believes that it is in the best interest of Negro and white to have a separate education and social order."

I got more.

This is another thing, the whole 'Democrats in the 60's were racists too' completely ignores the fact that all those racist Democrats got up and joined the Republicans after the Democratic party moved away from them. The Republicans greeted them with open arms.

Robert Byrd, D-WV, would like to have a word with you.

You really should actually know what you're talking about before running your mouth. Your ignorance and bias is very apparent.

 

[JTsyo]

I think these days there's more friction between Republicans and Democrats than between white and black.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.

Richard Nixon, Republican.

Another '60s leader, this time Democrat.

"A racist is one who despises someone because of his color, and an Alabama segregationist is one who conscientiously believes that it is in the best interest of Negro and white to have a separate education and social order."

I got more.

This is another thing, the whole 'Democrats in the 60's were racists too' completely ignores the fact that all those racist Democrats got up and joined the Republicans after the Democratic party moved away from them. The Republicans greeted them with open arms.

Robert Byrd, D-WV, would like to have a word with you.

You really should actually know what you're talking about before running your mouth. Your ignorance and bias is very apparent.

Robert Byrd repudiated his racist views, attributing this change to a traumatic event in his life in the early 1980's. Regardless of his motivations however, Byrd moved to embrace the Democratic platform on race relations and stayed with the party as opposed to maintaining them and joining the Republicans... which was my entire point.

You really should actually know what you're talking about before running your mouth. I almost feel bad beating up on you all the time, you're just too easy.

 

[nageov3t]

this has been a constant theme from Obama supporters ever since they called Bill Clinton a racist during the primaries.

are there racist people who are anti-Obama? of course. but the constant assertion that any and all criticisms of our dear leader have a racial motivation is absolute bullshit.

when I read Maureen Dowd's op-ed on the subject last week, I'm not sure what sickened me more -- the argument itself or the fact that hundreds of comments on the article were agreeing with her.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: loki8481
this has been a constant theme from Obama supporters ever since they called Bill Clinton a racist during the primaries.

are there racist people who are anti-Obama? of course. but the constant assertion that any and all criticisms of our dear leader have a racial motivation is absolute bullshit.

when I read Maureen Dowd's op-ed on the subject last week, I'm not sure what sickened me more -- the argument itself or the fact that hundreds of comments on the article were agreeing with her.

What I'm sick of is the constant attempt to strawman the arguments against these people. No one has ever claimed that 'any and all criticisms of Obama have a racial motivation'.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that... but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.

Richard Nixon, Republican.

Another '60s leader, this time Democrat.

"A racist is one who despises someone because of his color, and an Alabama segregationist is one who conscientiously believes that it is in the best interest of Negro and white to have a separate education and social order."

I got more.

This is another thing, the whole 'Democrats in the 60's were racists too' completely ignores the fact that all those racist Democrats got up and joined the Republicans after the Democratic party moved away from them. The Republicans greeted them with open arms.

Robert Byrd, D-WV, would like to have a word with you.

You really should actually know what you're talking about before running your mouth. Your ignorance and bias is very apparent.

Robert Byrd repudiated his racist views, attributing this change to a traumatic event in his life in the early 1980's. Regardless of his motivations however, Byrd moved to embrace the Democratic platform on race relations and stayed with the party as opposed to maintaining them and joining the Republicans... which was my entire point.

You really should actually know what you're talking about before running your mouth. I almost feel bad beating up on you all the time, you're just too easy.

:laugh:

Ah, so only the fine, upstanding Democrats can "repudiate" their views, but of course, all Republicans can't.

:roll:

You're such a partisan tool...it's not worth even debating with you, since you ignore the facts and go purely off of your bias (typical from the left). Read any article on Robert Byrd...listen to his speeches. Bah, what am I talking about...those silly facts again! It's amazing how this pesky thing called the truth gets in the way of pure emotional rotgut, isn't it? 😉

Go slink back under your rock of "superiority".

For everyone's reading enjoyment:

Check out Section 1.1

Justify away, eskimospy! Justify away...

Of course, eskimospy will claim (again) that the fine Democrats have "repudiated" their views they held for years, but of course, "all those bigots who joined the Republican party, welcomed with open arms" are completely incapable of "repudiating" their views.

:laugh:

 

[MotF Bane]

Originally posted by: alchemize
"When a radical fringe element of demonstrators and others begin to attack the president of the United States as an animal ...
lol

...or as a reincarnation of Adolf Hitler...
lol

...or when they wave signs in the air that said we should have buried Obama with Kennedy,
lol

those kinds of things are beyond the bounds," the Democrat who served from 1977-1981 told students at Emory University.

lol

:laugh:

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: loki8481
this has been a constant theme from Obama supporters ever since they called Bill Clinton a racist during the primaries.

are there racist people who are anti-Obama? of course. but the constant assertion that any and all criticisms of our dear leader have a racial motivation is absolute bullshit.

when I read Maureen Dowd's op-ed on the subject last week, I'm not sure what sickened me more -- the argument itself or the fact that hundreds of comments on the article were agreeing with her.

What I'm sick of is the constant attempt to strawman the arguments against these people. No one has ever claimed that 'any and all criticisms of Obama have a racial motivation'.

I'm trying to think of a critic who hasn't been called one and I'm drawing a blank.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: loki8481
this has been a constant theme from Obama supporters ever since they called Bill Clinton a racist during the primaries.

are there racist people who are anti-Obama? of course. but the constant assertion that any and all criticisms of our dear leader have a racial motivation is absolute bullshit.

when I read Maureen Dowd's op-ed on the subject last week, I'm not sure what sickened me more -- the argument itself or the fact that hundreds of comments on the article were agreeing with her.

What I'm sick of is the constant attempt to strawman the arguments against these people. No one has ever claimed that 'any and all criticisms of Obama have a racial motivation'.

You're the one setting up the "strawman", since the subject of this article, Jimmy Carter, has said such the thing that you're saying "no one is claiming".

"I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he's African American," Carter said.

And now, you will split hairs over "an overwhelming portion" VS "any and all".

"Bu...bu...but! Overwhelming majority is 99%, not 100%!"

3...2...1...go!

:laugh:

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Robert Byrd, D-WV, would like to have a word with you.

You really should actually know what you're talking about before running your mouth. Your ignorance and bias is very apparent.

Robert Byrd repudiated his racist views, attributing this change to a traumatic event in his life in the early 1980's. Regardless of his motivations however, Byrd moved to embrace the Democratic platform on race relations and stayed with the party as opposed to maintaining them and joining the Republicans... which was my entire point.

You really should actually know what you're talking about before running your mouth. I almost feel bad beating up on you all the time, you're just too easy.

:laugh:

Ah, so only the fine, upstanding Democrats can "repudiate" their views, but of course, all Republicans can't.

:roll:

You're such a partisan tool...it's not worth even debating with you, since you ignore the facts and go purely off of your bias (typical from the left). Read any article on Robert Byrd...listen to his speeches. Bah, what am I talking about...those silly facts again! It's amazing how this pesky thing called the truth gets in the way of pure emotional rotgut, isn't it? 😉

Go slink back under your rock of "superiority".

For everyone's reading enjoyment:

Check out Section 1.1

Justify away, eskimospy! Justify away...

Of course, eskimospy will claim (again) that the fine Democrats have "repudiated" their views they held for years, but of course, "all those bigots who joined the Republican party, welcomed with open arms" are completely incapable of "repudiating" their views.

:laugh:

You realize that you do this every time, right? The only reason I can think of is that you have (once again) failed to comprehend what you read. Are the schools in Texas really this bad?

My original post had exactly one point. Racists in the US who used to identify with the Democrats and felt the party moved away from them went from that party to the Republicans in the years following the passage of civil rights legislation. This is undeniable historical fact. You then took that idea and attempted to disprove it by showing a racist who moved his views to keep them with the Democratic Party. This is simply an elementary failure in understanding or in logic.

The rest of your post is just emotional, enraged arm waving and anti liberal foaming. Oh, you threw in a few more made up arguments for me to have too (like the whole 'Republicans are incapable of repudiating their views' thing.) Are your gallant victories over invented positions and arguments of mine some sort of therapy you have going on?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: loki8481
this has been a constant theme from Obama supporters ever since they called Bill Clinton a racist during the primaries.

are there racist people who are anti-Obama? of course. but the constant assertion that any and all criticisms of our dear leader have a racial motivation is absolute bullshit.

when I read Maureen Dowd's op-ed on the subject last week, I'm not sure what sickened me more -- the argument itself or the fact that hundreds of comments on the article were agreeing with her.

What I'm sick of is the constant attempt to strawman the arguments against these people. No one has ever claimed that 'any and all criticisms of Obama have a racial motivation'.

You're the one setting up the "strawman", since the subject of this article, Jimmy Carter, has said such the thing that you're saying "no one is claiming".

"I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he's African American," Carter said.

And now, you will split hairs over "an overwhelming portion" VS "any and all".

"Bu...bu...but! Overwhelming majority is 99%, not 100%!"

3...2...1...go!

:laugh:

Dude, go back to school. 'Intensely demonstrated animosity' in no way encompasses all opposition to Obama.

Also, that would not be a 'straw man'. Please go learn the definition of straw man. (after you go do that, go read your own posts and see if you can spot any. It will be good for you.)

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
You realize that you do this every time, right? The only reason I can think of is that you have (once again) failed to comprehend what you read. Are the schools in Texas really this bad?

My original post had exactly one point. Racists in the US who used to identify with the Democrats and felt the party moved away from them went from that party to the Republicans in the years following the passage of civil rights legislation. This is undeniable historical fact. You then took that idea and attempted to disprove it by showing a racist who moved his views to keep them with the Democratic Party. This is simply an elementary failure in understanding or in logic.

The rest of your post is just emotional, enraged arm waving and anti liberal foaming. Oh, you threw in a few more made up arguments for me to have too (like the whole 'Republicans are incapable of repudiating their views' thing.) Are your gallant victories over invented positions and arguments of mine some sort of therapy you have going on?

:laugh:

Speaking of foaming at the mouth and baseless raging, nice assumption there, chief. I've never been to Texas. Bigot much?

Oh, nice way to evade the post by Hayabusa way back around post 60-ish, where he asks you to provide specific reps who jumped party like you claimed they "all" did, yet you...evaded his question with a deflection and failed to provide any facts whatsoever to back up your claims.

:laugh:

You make a wild claim, you need to back it up with facts, not just biased delusions in your head. The burden of proof (look it up) is on the person making the accusations.

I've provided link upon link backing up my position, you once again provide...insults and deflections. Not one solid piece of fact to back up anything you say. Just more arrogance, "I'm better than you and I'm superior so all I say is right and all you say is wrong!"

:roll:

For someone so "smart", you sure are extremely poor at debating, instead of actually debating, you turn to the tried-and-true Saul Alinsky playbook of insult and belittle your opposition.

TLDR version: Put up or shut up. Where are the facts backing up your supposedly superior position? I've provided mine...where are yours? If they even exist?

 

[D-Man]

President Obama said he would be everyone's President after he was Elected. I did not vote for him and I really did not want to Vote for McCain. After Obama made this statement I was impressed and figured maybe I was wrong not voting for him he might be just the man we need. I am concerned about the health care plan and would like to see a final draft before passing any bills even though I do not have Health Care and I am 60 years old. The sheer number of Czar's disturbes me somewhat though I can see these Czar's would have more time to really dig into some of our problems and come up with well thought out solutions. But after I saw the Background of the Green Jobs Van Jones I became troubled that President Obama may not have looked into the background's of all the other Czar's agendas. I have more reasons I do not agree with President Obama that have nothing to do with race and of all my friends only 1 I would consider a racist and does not hide it at all. So if I attend a Tea Party or a March to Washington am I now a Racist?

I do concede that President Obama had a very large pile of problems laid at his feet and I wish him well. His success is our Nations success. I am sure we all have a goal for America abut I believe the Political bickering and jockeying for position by our Congress and Senate Democrat and Republican alike is turning his Presidency into a mess more than any other reason.

 

[seemingly random]

Originally posted by: D-Man
President Obama said he would be everyone's President after he was Elected. I did not vote for him and I really did not want to Vote for McCain. After Obama made this statement I was impressed and figured maybe I was wrong not voting for him he might be just the man we need. I am concerned about the health care plan and would like to see a final draft before passing any bills even though I do not have Health Care and I am 60 years old. The sheer number of Czar's disturbes me somewhat though I can see these Czar's would have more time to really dig into some of our problems and come up with well thought out solutions. But after I saw the Background of the Green Jobs Van Jones I became troubled that President Obama may not have looked into the background's of all the other Czar's agendas. I have more reasons I do not agree with President Obama that have nothing to do with race and of all my friends only 1 I would consider a racist and does not hide it at all. So if I attend a Tea Party or a March to Washington am I now a Racist?

I do concede that President Obama had a very large pile of problems laid at his feet and I wish him well. His success is our Nations success. I am sure we all have a goal for America abut I believe the Political bickering and jockeying for position by our Congress and Senate Democrat and Republican alike is turning his Presidency into a mess more than any other reason.

It seems that very few repugs agree with this. If it's not a republican in control, then the president will be continuously stymied. They are so loyal to their party - more than to the country - that they stomached bush for eight years.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: D-Man
President Obama said he would be everyone's President after he was Elected. I did not vote for him and I really did not want to Vote for McCain. After Obama made this statement I was impressed and figured maybe I was wrong not voting for him he might be just the man we need. I am concerned about the health care plan and would like to see a final draft before passing any bills even though I do not have Health Care and I am 60 years old. The sheer number of Czar's disturbes me somewhat though I can see these Czar's would have more time to really dig into some of our problems and come up with well thought out solutions. But after I saw the Background of the Green Jobs Van Jones I became troubled that President Obama may not have looked into the background's of all the other Czar's agendas. I have more reasons I do not agree with President Obama that have nothing to do with race and of all my friends only 1 I would consider a racist and does not hide it at all. So if I attend a Tea Party or a March to Washington am I now a Racist?

I do concede that President Obama had a very large pile of problems laid at his feet and I wish him well. His success is our Nations success. I am sure we all have a goal for America abut I believe the Political bickering and jockeying for position by our Congress and Senate Democrat and Republican alike is turning his Presidency into a mess more than any other reason.

It seems that very few repugs agree with this. If it's not a republican in control, then the president will be continuously stymied. They are so loyal to their party - more than to the country - that they stomached bush for eight years.

that's partisanship for you, and it was no different under Bush or Clinton or Reagan.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Judging from his post D-Man is clearly one of the people Jimmy Carter and the others who agree with his statement are NOT talking about. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to be critical of Obama. Clearly not everyone who is critical of Obama is racist. It seems the only people that are saying that are those same people who love calling him "messiah." "Some" is not a synonym for "all," "part" does not mean "whole." It's like certain people on the other side of this argument just don't understand how English works.

And here's Joe Wilson refusing to address whether he's racist or not:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wkEsvhc4EE

Honestly, I don't know enough about the man to accuse him personally one way or the other, but the fact he twice dodges the direct question leads me to believe either 1) he is or, more likely, 2) he doesn't want to deny it and risk alienating constituents.

 

[Doboji]

Originally posted by: Athena

Originally posted by: cubby1223
Seriously, if the left-wing of the media and the blog sites never touched upon racism, this would have *never* crossed any of your minds. This *is* manufactured.

Not true. Jimmy Carter just said out loud what many have been thinking for several weeks. You may have been insensitive to the ugly undercurrents represented by the birthers, Glen Beck, and the Nazi comparisons at town hall meetings but that doesn't mean that others failed to see what was going on.

It is not manufactured. Only Republicans who represent "safe" seats can afford to think it is.

Not only do I think you're outright wrong... I think this type of attitude is incredibly counter-productive and damaging to our country.

To declare dissent racism-motivated is downright insulting. I disagree with alot of what President Obama wants to do... I still voted for him.... and the only time I even think about his "race" is when this type of discussion is raised. And I really think thats true for the overwhelming majority of people opposed to him. Stop calling people racists for dissenting... it's EXACTLY the same as when Bush supporters were calling Liberals "unpatriotic" during the Bush administration. It was asinine then... and it's even more asinine now.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: eskimospy
You realize that you do this every time, right? The only reason I can think of is that you have (once again) failed to comprehend what you read. Are the schools in Texas really this bad?

My original post had exactly one point. Racists in the US who used to identify with the Democrats and felt the party moved away from them went from that party to the Republicans in the years following the passage of civil rights legislation. This is undeniable historical fact. You then took that idea and attempted to disprove it by showing a racist who moved his views to keep them with the Democratic Party. This is simply an elementary failure in understanding or in logic.

The rest of your post is just emotional, enraged arm waving and anti liberal foaming. Oh, you threw in a few more made up arguments for me to have too (like the whole 'Republicans are incapable of repudiating their views' thing.) Are your gallant victories over invented positions and arguments of mine some sort of therapy you have going on?

:laugh:

Speaking of foaming at the mouth and baseless raging, nice assumption there, chief. I've never been to Texas. Bigot much?

Oh, nice way to evade the post by Hayabusa way back around post 60-ish, where he asks you to provide specific reps who jumped party like you claimed they "all" did, yet you...evaded his question with a deflection and failed to provide any facts whatsoever to back up your claims.

:laugh:

You make a wild claim, you need to back it up with facts, not just biased delusions in your head. The burden of proof (look it up) is on the person making the accusations.

I've provided link upon link backing up my position, you once again provide...insults and deflections. Not one solid piece of fact to back up anything you say. Just more arrogance, "I'm better than you and I'm superior so all I say is right and all you say is wrong!"

:roll:

For someone so "smart", you sure are extremely poor at debating, instead of actually debating, you turn to the tried-and-true Saul Alinsky playbook of insult and belittle your opposition.

TLDR version: Put up or shut up. Where are the facts backing up your supposedly superior position? I've provided mine...where are yours? If they even exist?

My claim is only 'wild' if you have never cracked a history book. I assumed you were from Texas because of your spirited defense of it in the past, but my question would stand no matter where you were from. The schools there obviously need work. Why don't you go take some time to read about the 'Solid South' and get back to me.

As for your insight into the rest of this thread, I never mentioned politicians jumping ship at all, I was referring to voters. Once again, it is an indisputable historical fact. When you decided to bring up a politician as a 'fact', I simply showed you why your 'fact' only served to prove MY point. Don't you check these 'facts' before you post them?

I don't debate with you because to do such a thing would be impossible. You have proven yourself incapable of reading others' posts for comprehension, and you allow your ultra partisan views to fill in the gaps that your poor reading leaves. This frequently causes you to go off on wild tangents that have nothing to do with the points being offered by those you are attempting to 'debate'. In addition, you lack an understanding of the definitions of basic words and concepts, even though you frequently attempt to employ them. For example, how can I argue about the validity of statistics with someone who doesn't understand what statistical significance is? That's the most basic concept possible in that area and you didn't even know what it was.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Doboji

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Doboji

This is a fallacy... you need to go do your research. The North did NOT believe that Black people were equal to Whites... their economy simply didnt run on slave labor the way the South did. The war was NEVER about slavery, they freed the slaves to help win the war, not the other way around.

Having said that I do more often than not... find that when I meet a person who flies a confederate flag... they tend to be more likely to be racist. But the flag in and of itself is NOT a racist symbol.

I never said that northerners believed blacks were equal to whites (as they were frequently quite racist), but the civil war was definitely about slavery. The idea that it wasn't about slavery experienced brief popularity about 70-100 years ago, but most historians now agree that while the civil war was about many things, it was about slavery more than any other.

Your missing the point... it was about economics. The entire economy of the South revolved around the Slave labor and Southern power revolved around this economic strength. The overwhelming majority of people who were looking to end slavery in that century were interested because of it's economic impact NOT because they deemed it racist.

I'm not missing the point at all. Of course economics was the most important aspect of slavery, but it was exactly that: one aspect of slavery. You said that the war wasn't about slavery, and that is incorrect.

My views on the symbolism of the Confederate flag don't have anything to do with the racial biases and motivations of the Union. The Confederacy was a racially based slave state, and their culture explicitly dehumanized black people in the service of that. Flying a flag from that nation implicitly makes a statement about the values that it held, and that was one of the defining ones.

 

[syrillus]

I just really like the way Carter said, "qualified".

Also, obviously not everyone who opposes Obama is racially motivated, and that's not what Carter said. Some, maybe a majority (maybe not, I don't know), are in fact racially motivated, either consciously or sub-consciously. My parents were among those, I remember them saying during his campaign, "I dunno, I just get this feeling that something really bad is going to happen to this country if he's elected."

/facepalm