Why play this card

[cattails]

I have very good friends of different color, I really don't care about the color of a man's skin. But if a white man did this.....................well just watch and get the picture.
This is pretty low IMO and reminds me of the OJ trial. I may get blasted but I was shocked to see this.


I copied and pasted this

What do you think would happen if a Caucasian president ever produced and published a You Tube video for ALL WHITE PEOPLE
to unite for a WHITE PRESIDENT. This is the MOST SIGNIFICANT DEMONSTRATION of INTENTIONAL DIVISIVE RACISM by ANY PRESIDENT
in the history of our country. Obama announces the 2012 launch of "African Americans for Obama".

This is what racism smells like. It can't be explained away. Would you vote for a white person who did this? I wouldn't, and I think they would be run rightout of town if they tried it. I guess only white people can be racists.

This is just some food for thought if you're still not sure how to vote in November.


http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/BdjoHA5ocwU?rel=0


Also go to this site http://www.barackobama.com/african-americans/

[badrose]

He seems desperate. I don't think African Americans are as enthusiastic for him this go 'round.

[jazyd]

he is so full of s--t it makes me sick. Everyone gets their fair shot? What has he doen for the black community other than put more out of work? Fair share? What 50% not paying anything so the other 50% pay double their share.

I cannot stand him, would use the word hate but I know I shouldn't

[jazyd]

Cheadle is a foul mouth low life, we went to a movie he was in and he was so vulgar and showed him screwing a white woman, and it was actual and more like a porn movie, we had to leave. Won't ever watch anything he is in again. Piece of trash is all he is.

[CitizenBBN]

"A fair shot" requires an opportunity for a quality education and opportunities to get a job. Obama has done ZERO to improve the nation's educational system, and the kind of economic foundation needed to provide jobs for largely inner city areas that are desperately poor doesn't come from massive government spending on roads.

In fact those jobs, b/c of government contracting rules, largely go to union operations and wealthy white contractors who are entrenched with state governments.

Jack Kemp had a real plan for giving the poor, and in particular the inner city poor which is largely African American, a real shot at a better life. It was to create jobs through enterprise zones that lowered taxes and subsidized small businesses (which create 90% of new jobs) and to transition federal housing into home ownership and financial self responsibility.

Obama is just another in a long line of ostensibly well intentioned leaders who have led to the systematic destruction of the chances for African Americans to pursue the American dream. As Alan Keyes pointed out, the War on Poverty has led to an illegitimacy rate higher than African Americans experienced during slavery. The family unit has been destroyed by a series of financial incentives through welfare, financial responsibility never learned thanks to an array of federal programs, job opportunities made non-existent by regulatory and tax pressure on small businesses (which constitute most job opportunities in inner city areas).

Rather than simply focusing on eliminating discrimination and creating job opportunities, 50 years of the War on Poverty has taken America's poor, many African Americans among them, and systematically turned them into a permanent underclass all but devoid of the cultural norms that create economic advancement. Many of us are familiar with what has happened in Appalachia, and that is what has happened in inner cities as well, and Obama's ideology is responsible for it.

Hard to have a "fair shot" when your entire agenda is to make it harder for people to start businesses and increase the cost of hiring employees. How many more people could be hired if businesses didn't have to pay FICA, FUTA, SUTA taxes on them, now insure them, worry about lawsuits from them, etc.? I'm not saying businesses should get a free pass, but Obama has no understanding of even how to start the process of giving anyone a "fair shot."

A "fair shot" at what? He doesn't encourage job growth, hasn't addressed education, roads don't help poor people who don't have cars very much, so what exactly are they getting a shot at with his plan?

[CitizenBBN]

PS, a good compare and contrast would be "a fair shot" versus "you didn't build that". So you get a fair shot to make something of yourself, which is for most people through the path of small business, but if you manage to get that shot and get somewhere, then you didn't really do it? It makes my head hurt.

Essentially the only ones who matter aren't those born with chances, including the middle class, nor is it the poor who manage to get out of poverty (b/c they didn't build it right?), but those who are stuck in generational poverty, and many of them don't even want "a shot" and those who do only get one until they take advantage then they're the bad guy.

Don't even get me started on the generational issues of his philosophy vis a vis the "American Dream." For many, esp. those in poverty, their dream is to leave their kids better off than they were, but according to Obama they'd better not do too well b/c then their kids are getting an unfair advantage and will have to be taxed in order to give that "shot" to someone else, their parent's hard work to make things better for their kids being just a meaningless and apparently random (you didn't build that) event.

[jazyd]

Aritcle in the paper today that 3 plants in Ala and Miss will close their doors because they lost government contracts to make military clothing. Guess who they lost the contracts to? Now these are jobs for tax paying Americans, losing them to federal prisons and prisoners. Over 600 jobs will be lost at these 3 plants to prisoners.

Fair share, fair opportunity?

[cattails]

Aritcle in the paper today that 3 plants in Ala and Miss will close their doors because they lost government contracts to make military clothing. Guess who they lost the contracts to? Now these are jobs for tax paying Americans, losing them to federal prisons and prisoners. Over 600 jobs will be lost at these 3 plants to prisoners.

Fair share, fair opportunity?

Two construction companies in Owensboro with over 60 years in business each have closed their doors and sold equipment and property. Think bad times are not on the way.

[BigBlueBrock]

Because African-Americans are a large voting block that require a lot of prodding to get into the voting booth. This is like the question "Why is there no White History Month?" Because every month is white history month. Politicians don't do "Causian-Americans for Romney" because white people will vote regardless. Politicians do make specific appeals to young voters because there's a lot of them and they don't tend to vote. The majority of voters are old white people (for better or worse), so they don't need specific targeting.

Really, it's not that difficult of a question to answer, so long as one is willing to set aside personal prejudice.

[kencat]

The democrat deck of cards only has four cards in it, and they play them every chance they get.

1. Race
2. Gender
3. Class Warfare
4. Scare Seniors

Divide and conquer, that has been their game plan for as long as I can remember.

[BigBlueBrock]

The democrat deck of cards only has four cards in it, and they play them every chance they get.

1. Race
2. Gender
3. Class Warfare
4. Scare Seniors

Divide and conquer, that has been their game plan for as long as I can remember.

Swap out race and gender for religious zealotry and xenophobia, and you've got the Republican deck! Magical, huh?

[BigBlueBrock]

BTW, it is and always will be the goal of the politicians to divide and conquer the electorate. The only way to get us to ignore their woefully inadequate leadership is to make us fight one another. People need to stop falling for it.

[kencat]

Swap out race and gender for religious zealotry and xenophobia, and you've got the Republican deck! Magical, huh?

I guess it depends on what your definition of religious zealotry and xenophobia is.

If you mean not being embarrassed to use the word God in the platform, or, being in favor of enforcing the existing laws against ILLEGAL immigration, then I guess you're right.

[BigBlueBrock]

I guess it depends on what your definition of religious zealotry and xenophobia is.

If you mean not being embarrassed to use the word God in the platform, or, being in favor of enforcing the existing laws against ILLEGAL immigration, then I guess you're right.

My definition of "religious zealotry" is the GOP platform against science for the sake of fairy tales in schools and bigotry against same-sex couples for the sake of marital "sanctity." GOP xenophobia isn't limited to enforcing current immigration laws, unfortunately. Not with states like Arizona passing laws requiring Hispanics to carry around documentation to demonstrate their legal residence or laws that disallow the education of the children of supposed undocumented workers.

[kencat]

My definition of "religious zealotry" is the GOP platform against science for the sake of fairy tales in schools and bigotry against same-sex couples for the sake of marital "sanctity." GOP xenophobia isn't limited to enforcing current immigration laws, unfortunately. Not with states like Arizona passing laws requiring Hispanics to carry around documentation to demonstrate their legal residence or laws that disallow the education of the children of supposed undocumented workers.

I think your "fairy tales" comment unfortunately shows your zealotry against, and lack of respect for a majority of the population.

As for "bigotry against same-sex couples", need I remind you that a few weeks ago Obama had the same opinion as Romney does? Our dear leader, as he so eloquently put it, evolved....

And anyone who refer's to ILLEGAL immigrants as undocumented workers, and thinks ID's are a bad idea when trying to enforce the laws on the front lines, has OD'd on the kool-aid, so nothing I say is worth the effort...

[BigBlueBrock]

I have no problem with people being religious in whatever way they choose (another difference between myself and the Christian Conservative wing of the GOP). My problem is when people seek to supplant scientific teachings in school with mythology. Teach your kids the story of creation on your own time, but it has no place in a science class. Politicians will always be politicians. The fact remains that part of the GOP platform is a bigoted agenda against the LGBT community. Nice try with the red herring, though.

Illegal immigrants, undocumented workers... who cares? You didn't address my point. I don't think ID's are bad, I think profiling and asking people for papers is too reminiscent of a certain 1930s European country and is born of nothing other than rabid xenophobia. GOP ideologues aren't interested in real solutions, though. They'd rather have you think they're trying to "fix" the problem with untenable policies and insane border fences.

[ukblue]

Seeing how black employment is down right at 18% since Obama took over you would think the "hope and change"thing isn't getting it done. Obama is nothing but another Chicago thug posing as a politician.

[jazyd]

You seem to ahve a real problem setting aside your personal prejudice against Christians.

As kencat said, you have OD'd on the juice and bought the spin hook, line and sinker. You must have hated the founding fathers and what they stood for, you know God and country. Do you hate the consitution also, think it should evolve like your president so that it only conforms to your way of thinking. You don't like laws about people crossing our borders illegally so you call them 'undocumented', hell they break the law, they should go to jail.

Because African-Americans are a large voting block that require a lot of prodding to get into the voting booth. This is like the question "Why is there no White History Month?" Because every month is white history month. Politicians don't do "Causian-Americans for Romney" because white people will vote regardless. Politicians do make specific appeals to young voters because there's a lot of them and they don't tend to vote. The majority of voters are old white people (for better or worse), so they don't need specific targeting.

Really, it's not that difficult of a question to answer, so long as one is willing to set aside personal prejudice.

[BigBlueBrock]

You seem to ahve a real problem setting aside your personal prejudice against Christians.

As kencat said, you have OD'd on the juice and bought the spin hook, line and sinker. You must have hated the founding fathers and what they stood for, you know God and country. Do you hate the consitution also, think it should evolve like your president so that it only conforms to your way of thinking. You don't like laws about people crossing our borders illegally so you call them 'undocumented', hell they break the law, they should go to jail.

Please, many of the Founding Fathers were deists, i.e., they didn't believe in the Christian God or the Bible. The idea that we were founded on "Christian values" is wholly false and the work of Christian revisionists. Why do you think the Constitution makes no mention of God or Christianity? In fact, the 1792 Treaty of Tripoli specifically states that the United States of America is in no sense founded on the Christian religion.

The rest of your post is a strawman that isn't worth addressing.

[BigBlueBrock]

That's not entirely true. Some desists believe in the Christian God. They just believe that the bible and divine intervention are man made reactions to the unknown aspects of God as a divine creator. Many also live by and believe in Christian values. One can discount the bible as a divine work and still believe in the values it teaches.

The reason the constitution makes no specific references to God or Christianity is due to the framers shared belief that that church and state be separate. Saying that they didn't found the constitution on Christian values is at best an opinion and thereby can't be verifiably wholly false. I, for one, believe that the founding deists and Christians alike, in general, had a shared set of values.

Well most people have a shared set of values, whether they're Christian, atheist, or agnostic. The idea, at least as perpetuated by Christian Conservatives, is that anti-LGBT legislation is perfectly in line with the America the Founding Fathers created. That's where I take issue with the statement "the Founding Fathers stood for God and country."

[CitizenBBN]

I don't think ID's are bad, I think profiling and asking people for papers is too reminiscent of a certain 1930s European country and is born of nothing other than rabid xenophobia. GOP ideologues aren't interested in real solutions, though. They'd rather have you think they're trying to "fix" the problem with untenable policies and insane border fences.

I'm not a rabid xenophobe, support broadening immigration laws for those who apply legally, and I completely support building a big shiny wall across the border. Am I insane or don't know the definition of xenophobia?

Control of ones national borders, control of who enters and exits a country is a far far cry from xenophobia. Likewise trying to deal with people who are by definition criminals (that's why it's called "being illegal") is a far cry from 1930s Germany and that's an absurd analogy. Beyond absurd really.

When Arizona starts running videos of illegal immigrants portrayed as rats or organizes a Kristallnacht that analogy will work.

I agree with your pragmatism on immigration, I do, but Arizona faces an impossible situation where they dont' have authority to regulate the border but must bear all the costs.

Further, this is not directed at anyone who is a citizen or enjoys Constitutional protections. They are not part of the social contract of our society either by birth or oath of allegiance. No ones rights are being violated by having to show you are a citizen. The constitution itself spells out explicit citizenship requirements, clearly showing that the Founders never intended this to be a club you could get into without permission.

I think we need to have an amnesty for those who are here and do not have criminal records, deport those who do, put up our wall to stop illegal immigration, expand legal avenues of immigration for those who want to come.

So am I a rabid xenophobe? Your posts paints with a pretty broad brush the motives of those who may agree with a given position. I think we're both pragmatists and can agree that's not entirely fair.

PS -- on the creation/evolution front I believe in evolution and find stuff like the Creation Museum odd at best, but I'm also deeply concerned about telling parents or local schools what they can and cannot teach. You used the 30s Germany analogy, but that analogy can be just as easily applied to your views on teaching evolution versus creation.

It was an accepted scientific fact in Nazi germany that Arians were superior, and it was taught that way, period. While I think this is different, just as I think immigration is different, it is also dangerous to allow the State to determine fact from fiction, b/c you never know who will be in power some day to decide what is fact and what is fiction.

It's not clear to me the federal government has any place determining what is and isn't taught in schools. That was a local matter from the founding of the nation, and I see no reason to change it. The solution to these debates was to always let the states settle them on their own. Neither party should be concerned with it at a national level, and there we probably agree in that the GOP shouldn't be concerned with it either, but unfortunately there is a lot of federal meddling now in education so it gets addressed.

[BigBlueBrock]

My problem with the Arizona thing is that it is racially driven. They're not going to pull over a white person and ask for their documents. That kind of law is inherently racist because it gives reason to profile minorities (Hispanics, specifically). The intent of the law isn't xenophobic, but the application most certainly is (it has to be for it to actually serve it's purpose, otherwise you're just harassing people and wasting money).

I don't have a problem with teaching creationism - in a theology class. But it has absolutely no place in a science class because it is, in no form or fashion, scientifically proven or even viable. Science class is for science. Theology is for religion.

[cattails]

Because African-Americans are a large voting block that require a lot of prodding to get into the voting booth. This is like the question "Why is there no White History Month?" Because every month is white history month. Politicians don't do "Causian-Americans for Romney" because white people will vote regardless. Politicians do make specific appeals to young voters because there's a lot of them and they don't tend to vote. The majority of voters are old white people (for better or worse), so they don't need specific targeting.

Really, it's not that difficult of a question to answer, so long as one is willing to set aside personal prejudice.

The prejudice is coming from Obama. In his add if he had said no matter what party you vote for just get out there and vote. But the add was pointed straight at the black community and keeping a black president in office. I find that offensive. I don't like any of the selections, I don't think either will get us out of this hole we are in. These are the best 2 we can put forward? At least Romney knows how to run a business and make money, at this point that is what we need, someone to run our government like a business and start looking at the bottom line.

[ukblue]

BBB, if you are pulled over in Ky. For any reason including road checks you can bet your ass you will show a pictured driver license. They won't ask if you're a Mexican.

[BigBlueBrock]

BBB, if you are pulled over in Ky. For any reason including road checks you can bet your ass you will show a pictured driver license. They won't ask if you're a Mexican.

The extent of the Arizona law isn't a driver's license. When I'm pulled over in KY, I'm asked for a license, registration and insurance. I'm NOT asked for my birth certificate or other proof of legal resident status, my social security card, or anything else.

[BudCat_upthecreek]

The extent of the Arizona law isn't a driver's license. When I'm pulled over in KY, I'm asked for a license, registration and insurance. I'm NOT asked for my birth certificate or other proof of legal resident status, my social security card, or anything else.

Not yet anyway. KY doesn't have the problem with illegals entering the country here due to geography, but if we continue to have more and more Mexican labor in Central KY all that could change.

I'll bet it isn't long until we're all forced to prove we're citizens and not here illegally.

I remember being young and idealistic. I hope and pray you are able to enjoy the same freedoms I have for the last 56 yrs, but I'm afraid that's all going to change soon. And even though I'm a registered Dem, I realize the far left views and actions are what is and has changed our country. I only pray it doesn't destroy the freedoms we've all enjoyed up till now.

[CitizenBBN]

FWIW when I was a grad assistant I had to provide proof of citizenship including a birth certificate. That was a federal law required of universities that receive funding. So it's long been established to verify citizenship in this country at a federal level. The difference is requiring it on a broader basis.

So if we had a national ID card that says we're legal, and everyone gets one and if you don't have one you go directly to the deportation center and do not pass go, and it's policy to ask for it at every traffic stop, is that no longer racist?

A law enforced in a racist manner is very different from a racist law. More minorities are pulled over for routine traffic violations in some parts of the country so does that mean laws against illegally signaled turns are racist? Rod Strickland was pulled over for one, and I have no doubt a black man in a Porsche was at least likely a contributing factor, but the law against illegally signaled turns isn't racist.

A law requiring you be a US citizen and showing you are to law enforcement isn't racist. Further, if the basis for profiling is statistically valid I don't find that racist either. It's highly unlikely the white or black person you pulled over who clearly has English as a first language is here illegally. I'm fine to pass a law that they have to ask so everyone is treated the same, but just like with TSA where it's likely the 80 year old grandmother isn't a terrorist it can be a waste of valuable resources to check people who have a 0.000001% chance of being illegal.

It's true legal hispanics will get asked more, but since they are far more likely to be illegal that's not a racist basis for policy, it's a pragmatic basis for policy. it's unfortunate but it's a long dang way from Kristallnacht. In Nazi germany Jews were forced to wear signs of being Jews simply for being Jewish. the offense itself was their religion. In this case any person who is legal, Hispanic or not, is completely free of any charges and hasn't broken any laws and will not be prosecuted for their race in any way.

I do support a national card, just to eliminate the excuse of not possessing a driver's license. Everyone gets one, all it says is you're a legal citizen and that's that. There is no reporting that goes back to any central database. The information flow is one way only.

That's how the NICS system works for gun background checks. Which guns you buy isn't recorded in the database and the records of the checks themselves are purged within 48 hours so there's not even a record of the purchase in any national database. The same would work here.

[jazyd]

Brock is a lliberal period. How many white people cross the borders in the middle of the night illegally paying huge amounts of money to illegal coyotes? And it isnt' just 'Mexicans' as he says, it is people from all over south of the border. The break our laws immediately upon entering the country, they obtain illegal drivers license, illegal SS cards, often pay no federal or state taxes, get free medical attention, have babies born here so they can be 'citizens' and get all the free benefits, don't assimilate into our country, learn our language, force schools to teach in spanish, ridicule actual American white citizens in schools in California or Az when they where American flag shirts, and politicians like Obama then keep them as second class citizens so that he can prey on them all for their illegal votes. Nice little system that is set up and yet someone like Brock then declares basically than anyone that dares question them is nothing more than a racist. Nice try Brock, doesn't wash. and by the way, try going into Mexico and break their laws, you will need more than that white picture on your Kentucky DL

Not yet anyway. KY doesn't have the problem with illegals entering the country here due to geography, but if we continue to have more and more Mexican labor in Central KY all that could change.

I'll bet it isn't long until we're all forced to prove we're citizens and not here illegally.

I remember being young and idealistic. I hope and pray you are able to enjoy the same freedoms I have for the last 56 yrs, but I'm afraid that's all going to change soon. And even though I'm a registered Dem, I realize the far left views and actions are what is and has changed our country. I only pray it doesn't destroy the freedoms we've all enjoyed up till now.

[BigBlueBrock]

There are actually more than two million non-Hispanic illegal immigrants in the United States, which is about 1/4 of all undocumented persons in the country. It's just much easier for people from Latin America to cross illegally since there is a physical border and they can more or less hop across.

The problem of illegal immigration needs to be addressed, but obviously race-driven policies such as the one in Arizona isn't the answer. Rounding them all up and shipping them out would be a very expensive exercise in futility as you could never get them all. The answer, which anti-immigration people don't want to hear, is a path to citizenship for those that are here so they can earn a living wage and pay taxes (instead of leeching off the system, as you pointed out) and reform of the very draconian and arduous immigration laws. This country has thrived, throughout it's history, on immigrants coming to the country for better lives. The answer isn't shutting the borders down, any of the borders, and it should never be.

[BigBlueBrock]

It's true legal hispanics will get asked more, but since they are far more likely to be illegal that's not a racist basis for policy, it's a pragmatic basis for policy. it's unfortunate but it's a long dang way from Kristallnacht. In Nazi germany Jews were forced to wear signs of being Jews simply for being Jewish. the offense itself was their religion. In this case any person who is legal, Hispanic or not, is completely free of any charges and hasn't broken any laws and will not be prosecuted for their race in any way.

Racial profiling is always wrong. Period. I don't care what your justification for it is.