• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Why does the GOP condone its association with racism?

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

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
0
0
Unlike you I contributed to the thread by pointing out that the Democratic party is not immune to racism like the OP implies.
You did contribute to the thread, and no, the Democratic party is not immune.

But the vast majority of the racism is not on their end.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,880
4,212
126
The GOP is and will continue to be the party of white America.
And both sides have more than their share of ideological idiots. If we could only lock them in a gigantic cage and have a PPV deathmatch the rest of us could get some relief and pay down the debt at the same time and the hacks can kill each other. Win/win.
 

DominionSeraph

Diamond Member
Jul 22, 2009
8,392
31
91
The point is moot, as Mitt Romney isn't a racist. I hear he's friends with several owners of black people.
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,267
3
76
Is it no coincidence that 99.99% of those flinging out the birther claims are white? Read between the lines, the GOP will continue pandering to the racists in this country because it's what wins them elections.

Times have changed, Republicans can't be overtly racist like they used to. But that doesn't mean the coded message isn't there. It's alive and well, and furthermore you are an ABSOLUTE IDIOT if you can't see that. The Democrats have their own share of pandering as well, but in my mind it is far less egregious than what the GOP has done. The Southern Strategy ain't dead yet.
lulz@theconspiracyleftist

There is racism alive in America, that IS a fact, but this is simply not the case here in a general sense. Yes, there are some birthers that are racist, jst like there are some democrats that are racist, but simply being a birther does not "make someone a racist", it makes them a moron.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,587
9
81
Threads like these are why I despise Democrats. They're every bit as nutty as Republicans.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,880
4,212
126
He has to be with Obama controlling drones circling US cities waiting to strike evil birthers and Romney. It's true!

I'm making a pitcher of margaritas when I get home. Then this will all be hysterical.
 

a777pilot

Diamond Member
Apr 26, 2011
4,261
21
81
Some of the best minds of the Republican party, Sarah Palin, Sean Hannity are still bitching that Obamas past associations were not vetted in '08 and want to relitigate. Meanwhile we have a current association that isn't getting enough coverage.

http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/ad-lib/2012/may/25/birther-donald-trump-host-las-vegas-fundraiser-mit/

Let's face it birtherism = racism. The only reponse we get from Mittens is similar to "those aren't the words I would have chosen" Meanwhile he has no problem funraising with this kook. So much for the open tent.
Why the fuck is this occupier and his mate such blatant racists?

There's the real question for you.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,880
4,212
126
Threads like these are why I despise Democrats. They're every bit as nutty as Republicans.
I was just on another site and yes they swore that Obama is gathering domestic drones to attack terrorists on US soil, and he includes those who politically oppose him. It's like on the holiday weekend people went off their meds,
 

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
0
0
I was just on another site and yes they swore that Obama is gathering domestic drones to attack terrorists on US soil, and he includes those who politically oppose him. It's like on the holiday weekend people went off their meds,
Maybe the holiday weekend 2008.

It's no coincidence that Obama is when the GOP finally went completely around the bend.
 

Gamingphreek

Lifer
Mar 31, 2003
11,679
0
81
One party is clearly more aligned with business interests at the expense of the regular people that are supposed to be governing for. Hell, they run on that fact.



One party also insists government can't work and goes on to prove it when they're elected. They purposely prevent and even do the opposite of proven methods to improve a country's economy and non-partisan, middle of the road, independent types still give them the benefit of the doubt.
Fine... one party is clearly more aligned with poor people at the expense of every single other person they are supposed to be governing for. Hell, they run on that fact.

See what I did there?

I don't know what you want me to say to the second point. Are you really claiming that every time the Democrats are in office magical/wonderful things happen and all is right in the world? Give me a break, each side has their faults. If you can't admit that, then this argument is pointless as you won't even listen to reason.

-GP
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,880
4,212
126
Maybe the holiday weekend 2008.

It's no coincidence that Obama is when the GOP finally went completely around the bend.
There are several things that I dislike, Obamacare being a chief example. Thats because as a health care provider I see it isn't reform and indeed neither the government nor it's supporters have much of an understanding of the basics and most seem insistent that we do not examine our situation, but have faith and single payer will save us. We must not doubt. I don't like faith based solutions to our problems so I don't care for "trust us".

Thats a bit of background on me for context. Despite what I see as a perfect example of what not to do, my objections are known and I have suggestions which do not involve making claims tantamount to claims of Obama being a space alien. I can't see that an appeal to the insane/inane is helpful, but then again saying all of a group are X because "they should be" as with the OP is much better. Obscuring reality for partisanship is nothing I can make peace with.
 

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
0
0
There are several things that I dislike, Obamacare being a chief example. Thats because as a health care provider I see it isn't reform and indeed neither the government nor it's supporters have much of an understanding of the basics and most seem insistent that we do not examine our situation, but have faith and single payer will save us. We must not doubt. I don't like faith based solutions to our problems so I don't care for "trust us".
I can't comment much on single-payer as I haven't looked into it much. But I'm not sure it's too legitimate to claim it is simply "having faith". There are many countries that are using a single-payer system already, which we can use as a basis for comparison.

Despite what I see as a perfect example of what not to do, my objections are known and I have suggestions which do not involve making claims tantamount to claims of Obama being a space alien.
This is a boiling down of why saying the Democrats and Republicans are "equally insane" is simply BS.

I disagree with the policies of both big parties, probably about equally. But the Republicans simply behave in such a manner that I cannot allow myself to support them.

It's one thing to say "I don't like the policies of some of my opponents" and another to say "80 of my opponents are communists" (with zero evidence).

It's one thing to say "we'd like to have a president from our party in the White House" and quite another to say "defeating Obama's re-election is our number one legislative priority".

And so on.
 
Last edited:
Oct 16, 1999
10,497
3
0
Fine... one party is clearly more aligned with poor people at the expense of every single other person they are supposed to be governing for. Hell, they run on that fact.

See what I did there?
Yeah, you completely missed a point that businesses aren't people but at least poor people are.

I don't know what you want me to say to the second point. Are you really claiming that every time the Democrats are in office magical/wonderful things happen and all is right in the world? Give me a break, each side has their faults. If you can't admit that, then this argument is pointless as you won't even listen to reason.

-GP
Each side certainly does have their faults. That doesn't mean they are equally distributed among the two. They clearly aren't. One glaring example is the willingness of one to put the full faith and credit of the nation in jeopardy to further their political goals. Goals which even on their own put the economic recovery in even greater jeopardy. The sky is not purple.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,880
4,212
126
But I'm not sure it's too legitimate to claim it is simply "having faith". There are many countries that are using a single-payer system already, which we can use as a basis for comparison.
There are and they generally run well. That it co-evolved with their legal and economic system, that there aren't large inner city problems of violence, that population density here as opposed to Europe aren't things to mention. We have on average a shorter life expectancy, but if one compensates for violent deaths that improves significantly. If one looks at lifestyle and weight then it's gone. Others will tell you that costs are less in Europe and blame insurance companies, but they don't earn nearly enough to account for the differences. What really is going on? What would be most beneficial? Give the whole thing to the government. Why? Because other nations with a completely different demographic, social structure, political and economic system, Constitution and on and on , have it and it works for them. Well they have public education and so do we. If the government is inherently superior then we should have the same results and costs in LA as the Germans do in their country. We don't. That's because of factors other than education itself that nonetheless influencing factors.

So... what I suggested is that we have a group of professionals recognized by their peers as being superior in ability and character which would include not only practitioners, but advocates, actuaries, and others who have a clue to what's going on here. They would examine our system, our strengths and weaknesses, our needs and make an analysis and propose solutions with the idea of resource allocation, cost containment which doesn't sabotage care, future educational needs, the works. Develop plans which give a good estimate as to costs, their advantages and disadvantages of each. Then people familiar with the particulars of our legal system and regulations work with providers and the others to craft a package including the necessary language for implementation which achieves the desired outcomes while minimizing the law of unintended consequences. A very detailed analysis indeed of the most complex organization that exists, US health care. Present it to the public and Congress and THEN have Congress legislate. If they want to play politics then they would have to justify to the public just why they are making changes. That's on them.

The response? "Oh we don't need that, just implement single payer. It works everywhere else."

That's the Dems.

The Republicans? "Health care? We heard of that."


Neither is very helpful, but very typical of how partisan minds work.


Does that recommend the Republicans? Not at all, but there seems to be a deeper problem. The parties have become the most important thing to themselves, and our government is run by parties. Consequently we have sniping and bad solutions to make political hay and all the while there are no good solutions. While one side goes off the deep end, the other wants to make changes without due consideration of consequences or indeed if the changes are beneficial at all.

When neither benefits the nation, when both are out for themselves no matter what they claim, then I haven't time for them at all. Equally insane may not be the case, but useless and potentially harmful? That applies to both.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY