Cain is too far right to appeal to independent voters in the general election. In my opinion that means that if cooler heads prevail, the GOP will nominate someone else. And while the far right does seem to be at the wheel right now, I believe they will fundamentally reject Cain based on his stubborn refusal to budge on the issue of being black.
Yup, I said it.
Then how do you respond to Cain leading the most recent Zogby poll and being in a virtual dead-heat with Romney and Perry in the most recent Fox News poll? I'm one of the most conservative people I know and think that race has absolutely jack crap to do with who should lead the country. Personally I'm hoping for a Cain/Rubio ticket next year.
I just looked up ENDA on wikipedia, and I dunno that I'd be cool with it either. It just seems to create another "protected class" when discrimination is already against the rules, and is just common sense.
I'm generally against passing laws for the sake of passing laws, or passing laws to enforce existing laws' enforcement.
In Nebraska (which I would argue is one of the more conservative states in the union), we have no such law on the books at a state level, and theres no massive anti-gay firings going on here. Course, we tend to look at things based on merit of character rather than other factors...
The rhetoric seems to be if we don't pass that bill on a federal level we're just like Iran or something.
|
Maybe I'm just hate-mongering and conservative bashing.
Naw. I haven't seen you making blanket statements about needing to love guns and hate gays to win conservative votes.
Herman Cain On Gay IssuesCain is a staunch opponent of gay marriage and believes that we Americans need to protect the sanctity of marriage as defined between one man and one woman. He does not support civil unions and would reinstate 'Don't Ask Don't Tell' which prohibits homosexuals from serving openly in the military.
I didn't see that sourced to anything. I'm going with the June interview on CNN with Wolfe.
He stated gay marriage rights should belong to the states.Also can't find anything stating he'd "reinstate DADT". I can find where he says HE wouldn't have repealed it if he'd been President, but it's done now.
Maybe that doesn't qualify as "hate gays" to you.
Me thinks you use the word "hate" very, very loosely.
|
|
And while the far right does seem to be at the wheel right now, I believe they will fundamentally reject Cain based on his stubborn refusal to budge on the issue of being black.
Yup, I said it.
Thanks Bugleyman. It's been all of 3 or 4 hours since I've heard "Republicans are Raaaaaacist!!!111!!"
<sigh>
|
Cain is too far right to appeal to independent voters in the general election. In my opinion that means that if cooler heads prevail, the GOP will nominate someone else. And while the far right does seem to be at the wheel right now, I believe they will fundamentally reject Cain based on his stubborn refusal to budge on the issue of being black.
Yup, I said it.
Funny because I'm faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar from far right, I'm an independant voter. The only issues to me are the fiscal ones, and Cain appeals to me, although this thread has helped temper my excitement and is helping me to make a more informed decision, so I'm glad for that.
Thanks Bugleyman. It's been all of 3 or 4 hours since I've heard "Republicans are Raaaaaacist!!!111!!"
<sigh>
Except that isn't what I said. I said the far right is racist -- or at least enough of it is to cost Cain the nomination.
Funny because I'm faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar from far right, I'm an independant voter. The only issues to me are the fiscal ones, and Cain appeals to me, although this thread has helped temper my excitement and is helping me to make a more informed decision, so I'm glad for that.
I didn't say anything about your opinion. I merely observed that the majority of independents tack toward the center.
And while the far right does seem to be at the wheel right now, I believe they will fundamentally reject Cain based on his stubborn refusal to budge on the issue of being black.
Yup, I said it.
Thanks Bugleyman. It's been all of 3 or 4 hours since I've heard "Republicans are Raaaaaacist!!!111!!"
<sigh>
Cain at the Republican Convention.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just looked up ENDA on wikipedia, and I dunno that I'd be cool with it either. It just seems to create another "protected class" when discrimination is already against the rules, and is just common sense.
I'm generally against passing laws for the sake of passing laws, or passing laws to enforce existing laws' enforcement.
In Nebraska (which I would argue is one of the more conservative states in the union), we have no such law on the books at a state level, and theres no massive anti-gay firings going on here. Course, we tend to look at things based on merit of character rather than other factors...The rhetoric seems to be if we don't pass that bill on a federal level we're just like Iran or something.
just because something is against the rules doesn't mean it does not happen.
|
|
Thanks Bugleyman. It's been all of 3 or 4 hours since I've heard "Republicans are Raaaaaacist!!!111!!"
<sigh>
Except that isn't what I said. I said the far right is racist -- or at least enough of it is to cost Cain the nomination.
You're right. I apologize for jumping to conclusions.
So you're saying "Far right conservatives are Raaaaacist!!!!"
Cause I'm still not buying THAT one either. :)
I know plenty of far rights that fully support Cain and couldn't give a LICK about what color his skin is.
just because something is against the rules doesn't mean it does not happen.I just looked up ENDA on wikipedia, and I dunno that I'd be cool with it either. It just seems to create another "protected class" when discrimination is already against the rules, and is just common sense.
I'm generally against passing laws for the sake of passing laws, or passing laws to enforce existing laws' enforcement.
In Nebraska (which I would argue is one of the more conservative states in the union), we have no such law on the books at a state level, and theres no massive anti-gay firings going on here. Course, we tend to look at things based on merit of character rather than other factors...The rhetoric seems to be if we don't pass that bill on a federal level we're just like Iran or something.
And if something is already against the rules and still happening, what makes you think that putting more rules in place is going to stop it?
Cain at the Republican Convention.
** spoiler omitted **
I think it would be better if he took the stage and asked "Where are the white women at?"
EDIT:
You're right. I apologize for jumping to conclusions.
So you're saying "Far right conservatives are Raaaaacist!!!!"
Cause I'm still not buying THAT one either. :)
Then I guess it's a good thing that I didn't say that, either.
Is the entire far right racist? Nope.
Is the entire tea party racist? Nope.
Are enough of both racist (many openly so) to scuttle Cain's nomination? You betcha.
I know plenty of far rights that fully support Cain and couldn't give a LICK about what color his skin is.
No doubt. But as compelling as your anecdotal evidence is, one needn't look too hard to find numerous racist signs at tea-party rallies. Enough, in fact, to undermine the stock response that it is "just a few fringe folks."
I just looked up ENDA on wikipedia, and I dunno that I'd be cool with it either. It just seems to create another "protected class" when discrimination is already against the rules, and is just common sense.
I'm generally against passing laws for the sake of passing laws, or passing laws to enforce existing laws' enforcement.
In Nebraska (which I would argue is one of the more conservative states in the union), we have no such law on the books at a state level, and theres no massive anti-gay firings going on here. Course, we tend to look at things based on merit of character rather than other factors...The rhetoric seems to be if we don't pass that bill on a federal level we're just like Iran or something.
I'm not sure how you can claim both "already against the rules" and "we have no such law on the books"? If there are no laws in your state, which rules is it against?
Some states do have such laws. Most do not.
I can go down into the breakroom here at work, and find an OSHA poster that explicitly states my rights as an employee. One of the things is discrimination for sex, preference, race. This is a Federal law.
Nebraska does not have a state law, because we don't need double whammy.We cetrainly don't need triple whammy. "Now you SUPER can't fire people becasue of this stuff" isn't needed.
Most of those tea party signs, to be fair, is just folks putting stuff out there they thought was cleaver. I'm not going to go so far as to take them to have sinister intent. People in the heat of the moment say stupid stuff. There's alot of anger out there at Obama, so they take pot shots. To take this and say they are all racists is fallacious, in my opinion.
If they were out there in hoods burning crosses, then that would be another matter.
|
|
Is the entire far right racist? Nope.
Is the entire tea party racist? Nope.
Are enough of both racist (many openly so) to scuttle Cain's nomination? You betcha.
Proof? Where is it? Haven't seen JACK to convince me the far right is any more racist than the far left. Or anyone else for that matter.
Cause you're right. Any large group of people will have racists. And pedophiles.So can I start calling Liberals pedophiles? Cause there's certainly one!
This idea that the Tea Party or far right is racist is absurd.
And to use that as a basis for the conclussion Herman Cain will NEVER get the primary nomination is just as absurd.
No doubt. But as compelling as your anecdotal evidence is, one needn't look too hard to find numerous racist signs at tea-party rallies. Enough, in fact, to undermine the stock response that it is "just a few fringe folks."
Ignoring the snark about my anecdotal evidence, I DID have to look pretty damn hard to find a SINGLE racist sign.
Most were political signs that -since there was a black man on it- automatically were racist. Sorry, that doesn't fly.And yeah, been to plenty of tea party rallies. Seen no racist signs.
But hey, that's just anecdotal again. :)
Most of those tea party signs, to be fair, is just folks putting stuff out there they thought was cleaver. I'm not going to go so far as to take them to have sinister intent. People in the heat of the moment say stupid stuff. There's alot of anger out there at Obama, so they take pot shots. To take this and say they are all racists is fallacious, in my opinion.
If they were out there in hoods burning crosses, then that would be another matter.
Let's explore that for a moment, shall we? Why is there so much anger at Obama, specifically?
It's not because he is black, if that's what you are implying.
I can go down into the breakroom here at work, and find an OSHA poster that explicitly states my rights as an employee. One of the things is discrimination for sex, preference, race. This is a Federal law.
Nebraska does not have a state law, because we don't need double whammy.
We cetrainly don't need triple whammy. "Now you SUPER can't fire people becasue of this stuff" isn't needed.Many people believe this, but it isn't true. If it was there would be no need. The OSHA poster in your breakroom should not cover discrimination by race. This the official OSHA discrimination poster. It prohibits discrimination based on "race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy), or national origin." There is also a separate section on disability. Sexual orientation is not covered.
Some states do cover it, as I said before. I don't believe Nebraska is one. I assume they would have separate notice posted.
Well, then we're just super awesome and assume sex or gender includes preference I guess, or we've found there's much better reasons to fire people.
EDIT: I confused my posters. It's company policy, not Federal law.
I would support updating existing law to include sexual preference.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's not because he is black, if that's what you are implying.
Funny, I believe that, consciously or not, a good part of it is.
It's perfectly reasonable to disagree with his policies, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the white hot anger that results in images like this one or this one or this one.
I can't open the other 2 because of web blocker at work, but "Whatchu talkin bout Willis?" is in our popular culture. That a better example of the guy thinking he's clever, than a closet KKK member.
Reminds me of the racial epithet scene from Clerks 2...
|
|
Funny, I believe that, consciously or not, that is is a good part of it.
Really? So now you're accusing the far right of being UNCONSCIOUSLY racist?
Well now. That's just ... wow.It's perfectly reasonable to disagree with his policies, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the white hot anger that results in images like this one or this one or this one.So making a poster of Obama and any other black celebrity is racist?
Got it. So the left is FAR more racist because I seriously lost count of the number of "Bush as Hitler" or "McCain as Hitler" posters I've seen. Must be racist. They're both white.The Obama as witchdoctor one I'll give you. That ain't cool. :)
But that's ONE poster of... thousands? (Actually I'll give you about 2 more that were waaay out of line too that I found).Still not enough to say the MAJORITY of the far right is racist.
And if something is already against the rules and still happening, what makes you think that putting more rules in place is going to stop it?just because something is against the rules doesn't mean it does not happen.I just looked up ENDA on wikipedia, and I dunno that I'd be cool with it either. It just seems to create another "protected class" when discrimination is already against the rules, and is just common sense.
I'm generally against passing laws for the sake of passing laws, or passing laws to enforce existing laws' enforcement.
In Nebraska (which I would argue is one of the more conservative states in the union), we have no such law on the books at a state level, and theres no massive anti-gay firings going on here. Course, we tend to look at things based on merit of character rather than other factors...The rhetoric seems to be if we don't pass that bill on a federal level we're just like Iran or something.
It depends on how you want to go about fighting something.
|
|
It's not because he is black, if that's what you are implying.Funny, I believe that, consciously or not, that is is a good part of it.
It's perfectly reasonable to disagree with his policies, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the white hot anger that results in images like this one or this one or this one.
okay the first two are bad but aren't representative, and I'm sorry but that last one is just funny.
I just looked up ENDA on wikipedia, and I dunno that I'd be cool with it either. It just seems to create another "protected class" when discrimination is already against the rules, and is just common sense.
I'm generally against passing laws for the sake of passing laws, or passing laws to enforce existing laws' enforcement.
In Nebraska (which I would argue is one of the more conservative states in the union), we have no such law on the books at a state level, and theres no massive anti-gay firings going on here. Course, we tend to look at things based on merit of character rather than other factors...
The rhetoric seems to be if we don't pass that bill on a federal level we're just like Iran or something.I'm not sure how you can claim both "already against the rules" and "we have no such law on the books"? If there are no laws in your state, which rules is it against?
Some states do have such laws. Most do not.
also, this.
Actually, back to the sexual preference bit, I would support a law that said "If you're an American, you have all of the following rights..." and removes verbiage that divides us. Actual equality would be awesome.
Actually, back to the sexual preference bit, I would support a law that said "If you're an American, you have all of the following rights..." and removes verbiage that divides us. Actual equality would be awesome.
I'll gladly +1 this.
okay the first two are bad but aren't representative, and I'm sorry but that last one is just funny.It's not because he is black, if that's what you are implying.Funny, I believe that, consciously or not, that is is a good part of it.
It's perfectly reasonable to disagree with his policies, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the white hot anger that results in images like this one or this one or this one.
not representative? How many signs does it take until something is? How many passes does one get until they are called upon something?
As much as I loved clerks 2, i found all those signs disgusting.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Cain at the Republican Convention.
** spoiler omitted **
I think it would be better if he took the stage and asked "Where are the white women at?"
EDIT: ** spoiler omitted **
He better not. That's my line for when I become president.
not representative? How many signs does it take until something is? How many passes does one get until they are called upon something?
N+1, where N=the number of observed occurrences.
Naturally. :)
|
|
not representative? How many signs does it take until something is? How many passes does one get until they are called upon something?N+1, where N=the number of observed occurrences.
Naturally. :)
Yes. In this case: 3.
3 incidents of the millions of Tea Party members and conservatives.Or about .000006%
Definitely racist.
But what does it matter, right? You've already said we're unconsciously racist. I guess I just don't even KNOW I'm a racist.
Way to win a discussion! I can't argue with that! <sigh>
|
|
not representative? How many signs does it take until something is? How many passes does one get until they are called upon something?
As much as I loved clerks 2, i found all those signs disgusting.
Um, more than 5 when the "tea party" you claim is racist has well over 20,000 people. How about if even 1% of the total signs are racist in nature, hmm is that a low enough margin for you? Because I guarantee what you've shown isn't 1% and therefore isn't representative of the tea party.
And honestly I doubt you'd get anywhere near what I'd consider representative which is when it's more than half. That's what I consider representative, when more than half of a group is doing something, then you can claim that behavior is representative of the group, Hell I'll even be generous and let you get away with one-third, can you show me one third of the signs being racist in nature? Hell I bet you those signs were from shocking idea different rallies. Which means that they maybe just might have been gasp, the only signs at those particular rallies. Hell, only one of those signs is actually a rally sign photographed at a rally so what we have is proof that shockingly at least one racist knows how to make signs. CONDEMN THEM ALL!
Senior Software Developer
|
I think comparing any political group to pedophiles is kind of disingenuous and inflammatory. Political threads are trouble enough as they are, can we dial back the painting of entire groups of people with the same brush and making arguments that you don't actually mean seriously?
If you want to talk about whether or not a particular political party is racist please consider taking it to a different thread.
Yes. In this case: 3.
3 incidents of the millions of Tea Party members and conservatives.Or about .000006%
Definitely racist.See my earlier example.
By your definition Liberals are now pedophiles.But what does it matter, right? You've already said we're unconsciously racist. I guess I just don't even KNOW I'm a racist.
Way to win a discussion! I can't argue with that! <sigh>
Unfortunately, your focus on who is winning precludes discussion. :(
Perhaps we'll have a discussion when you start addressing what I'm saying, rather than the words you're putting in my mouth.
I think comparing any political group to pedophiles is kind of disingenuous and inflammatory. Political threads are trouble enough as they are, can we dial back the painting of entire groups of people with the same brush and making arguments that you don't actually mean seriously?
If you want to talk about whether or not a particular political party is racist please consider taking it to a different thread.
10-4
|
|
I'm not a republican or a tea partier so technically I don't have a dog in this fight, but I can say that I've personally known as many people who vote democrat and are racist as the # of signs you've shown to support your claim. It's anecdotal true (I grew up in the deep south where when I was a kid the clan chapter was actually larger than the town population), and I've known a lot more who would vote republican and were racist, but I thenk it is intellectually disingenuous to claim that the tea party and the far right is racist because of the fact that there are racists in those organizations. Not to mention just how off topic this whole discussion is. It's funny, last election it was, "there's no way Obama can win because there are too many racists in the world." and this year its "there's no way cain can win because there are to many racists in the world."
Hopefully if Cain wins people will realize that while racism still exists and is still a problem, it is not as prevalent or as influential on our society as people think it is.
|
|
not representative? How many signs does it take until something is? How many passes does one get until they are called upon something?
As much as I loved clerks 2, i found all those signs disgusting.
Um, more than 5 when the "tea party" you claim is racist has well over 20,000 people. How about if even 1% of the total signs are racist in nature, hmm is that a low enough margin for you? Because I guarantee what you've shown isn't 1% and therefore isn't representative of the tea party.
And honestly I doubt you'd get anywhere near what I'd consider representative which is when it's more than half. That's what I consider representative, when more than half of a group is doing something, then you can claim that behavior is representative of the group, Hell I'll even be generous and let you get away with two-thirds, can you show me two thirds of the signs being racist in nature? Hell I bet you those signs were from shocking idea different rallies. Which means that they maybe just might have been gasp, the only signs at those particular rallies. Hell, only one of those signs is actually a rally sign photographed at a rally so what we have is proof that shockingly at least one racist knows how to make signs. CONDEMN THEM ALL!So what you're saying is that you'll deny it unless presented with at least 13,000 racist images each of which has documented proof of being of an actual tea party member at an actual tea party rally.
In other words, you're asking for the impossible. Such images may or may not exist, but there is no way any one could present them in this discussion.
In other words, I just think this way even though there's no way to prove it.
EDIT, I edited the previous post, but I meant one third when I said two thirds lol.
not representative? How many signs does it take until something is? How many passes does one get until they are called upon something?
As much as I loved clerks 2, i found all those signs disgusting.
Um, more than 5 when the "tea party" you claim is racist has well over 20,000 people. How about if even 1% of the total signs are racist in nature, hmm is that a low enough margin for you? Because I guarantee what you've shown isn't 1% and therefore isn't representative of the tea party.
And honestly I doubt you'd get anywhere near what I'd consider representative which is when it's more than half. That's what I consider representative, when more than half of a group is doing something, then you can claim that behavior is representative of the group, Hell I'll even be generous and let you get away with two-thirds, can you show me two thirds of the signs being racist in nature? Hell I bet you those signs were from shocking idea different rallies. Which means that they maybe just might have been gasp, the only signs at those particular rallies. Hell, only one of those signs is actually a rally sign photographed at a rally so what we have is proof that shockingly at least one racist knows how to make signs. CONDEMN THEM All !
Actually, I didn't post anything. Nor did I call the tea party racist. My question was about the signs, and the signs alone. I'm not calling for anyone's head either, but I am by the dismissal of the posters presence at tea party rallies by those sympathetic to their beliefs.
not representative? How many signs does it take until something is? How many passes does one get until they are called upon something?
As much as I loved clerks 2, i found all those signs disgusting.
Um, more than 5 when the "tea party" you claim is racist has well over 20,000 people. How about if even 1% of the total signs are racist in nature, hmm is that a low enough margin for you? Because I guarantee what you've shown isn't 1% and therefore isn't representative of the tea party.
And honestly I doubt you'd get anywhere near what I'd consider representative which is when it's more than half. That's what I consider representative, when more than half of a group is doing something, then you can claim that behavior is representative of the group, Hell I'll even be generous and let you get away with two-thirds, can you show me two thirds of the signs being racist in nature? Hell I bet you those signs were from shocking idea different rallies. Which means that they maybe just might have been gasp, the only signs at those particular rallies. Hell, only one of those signs is actually a rally sign photographed at a rally so what we have is proof that shockingly at least one racist knows how to make signs. CONDEMN THEM ALL!So what you're saying is that you'll deny it unless presented with at least 13,000 racist images each of which has documented proof of being of an actual tea party member at an actual tea party rally.
In other words, you're asking for the impossible. Such images may or may not exist, but there is no way any one could present them in this discussion.
No what he's saying is, it's rediculous to assume something that broad based on so little data.
Obama didn't win becasue he was black either.
He won because he wasn't Bush.
I predict he will lose re-election, because now America wants someone who is not Obama.
I'm going to refrain from further posts along this line of discussion in accordance with Gary's request. If someone wishes to continue this conversation, I suggest the creation of a new thread. Alternatively, feel free to simply consider yourself the winner if so inclined.
|
|
Actually, I didn't post anything. Nor did I call the tea party racist. My question was about the signs, and the signs alone. I'm not calling for anyone's head either, but I am by the dismissal of the posters presence at tea party rallies by those sympathetic to their beliefs.
My bad, and yes those signs are a condemnation of those individuals, but not the tea party as a whole which is what I was trying to say.
IMO: the people who claim the tea party and the far left are racist are as bad as the people who claim that muslims want to have Sharia law take hold in our country. Both are guilty of the same type of thinking, just for different groups, Yes Bugely man that means as much as I respect and enjoy discussing things with you in the political threads, I think you are falling into the same type of fallacious thinking as I see in Herman Cain, and that doesn't mean that I think less of you, I just hope you'll realize it and learn better.
|
|
I'm going to refrain from further posts along this line of discussion in accordance with Gary's request. If someone wishes to continue this conversation, I suggest the creation of a new thread. Alternatively, feel free to simply consider yourself the winner if so inclined.
I WON YAY CAKE FOR EVERYONE TO CELEBRATE!