Do some people really consider obama an antichrist?

123578

Comments

  • VictoryGin
    VictoryGin Posts: 1,207
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    I'm only addressing the points of focusing on color instead of focusing more directly on people who are racist. To me we are all the same and should be colorblind towards one another when it comes to how we judge and treat one another. We (us who can look past a person's color and view each other for who they are) should be focusing on the problems of racism still today...not continuing it by making race relevant.

    i think i see what you're saying and i think i'm talking more about colorblind on a societal level, not a personal (or interpersonal) one. we have to make race relevant in order to focus on and deal with the problems of racism. for example, the acknowledgment that our recent history of racism has contributed to inequalities in things like education and financial situations. at the same time we could definitely do as you say and be 'colorblind' towards each other in the way of treating each other well. but we can't be colorblind as a society and think that we are all equal in regards to things like education and economic situations because if people think that, we will never be able to become equal.
    if you wanna be a friend of mine
    cross the river to the eastside
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    RainDog wrote:
    I didn't take your question as honest; particularly because we've had these back and forths before. It read a little too much like "have you stopped beating your wife?"

    You have, however, more than implied that Obama is simply a corporate candidate, and that the only reason anyone is voting for him is because they've been duped by a fawning media desperate to elect a black president. Some have been "duped," sure. Some haven't, definitely.
    I haven't.

    And no one is stopping you from expressing your opinions; nor is anyone else prevented from expressing their thoughts on them.

    It was an honest question because my perspective of Obama is so different than yours. So I'm asking these questions to see how we come to these extremely different conclusions. I wasn't trying to insult you in any way. Some people do think electability is a very valid reason to vote for someone and I do not. I was only trying to make the distinction in your case because you brought up the varying degrees me and you would have to settle. Actually I think we tend to agree on most issues, so my question was an honest one. And even if I think your reasonings for support weren't the best in the end after we came to a clear understanding of what they were, then so be it....obviously you don't think too highly of mine to bring up things like 'street cred' or 'righteousness' as if my decisions weren't based on my principles but for some kind of 'appearance's sake'. If I'm wrong then feel free to correct me.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    VictoryGin wrote:
    i think i see what you're saying and i think i'm talking more about colorblind on a societal level, not a personal (or interpersonal) one. we have to make race relevant in order to focus on and deal with the problems of racism. for example, the acknowledgment that our recent history of racism has contributed to inequalities in things like education and financial situations. at the same time we could definitely do as you say and be 'colorblind' towards each other in the way of treating each other well. but we can't be colorblind as a society and think that we are all equal in regards to things like education and economic situations because if people think that, we will never be able to become equal.


    But we...me and you, everyone...we make up society. And how we view race creates how our society deals with it.

    We can not correct problems of the past by reliving the same thing today...judging and treating one another differently based on race. We can always focus on problems of our society today when racism occurs and work together on fixing those problems by promoting equality....part of that, though is actually living our lives treating everyone equal.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • VictoryGin
    VictoryGin Posts: 1,207
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    But we...me and you, everyone...we make up society. And how we view race creates how our society deals with it.

    We can not correct problems of the past by reliving the same thing today...judging and treating one another differently based on race. We can always focus on problems of our society today when racism occurs and work together on fixing those problems by promoting equality....part of that, though is actually living our lives treating everyone equal.

    i believe i already said that what i'm saying is not about reliving it. it's not about treating each other differently. in order to obtain equality we have to realize the effects of our racist history and how that has impacted our society. or else we will continue to repeat history. that is all.
    if you wanna be a friend of mine
    cross the river to the eastside
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    reborncareerist wrote:
    I also think there's a difference between forgetting history and wallowing in it ... One must not forget, but one must also know when to move on. Not an easy task, granted.


    Right. I don't want to deny the past. I want to learn from it. And in learning from it, we have to see how treating others as 'not equal' based on race alone has not worked out, is illogical and is completely wrong.

    The white people of the past are not the white people of today...and even then everyone wasn't a racist BUT it was widely accepted. Today however, it is not, it is looked down on for personal matters and against the law for matters of opportunity and discrimination etc....so it is much easier for us to pin point the blame/problem of racism on people who are actively being racist now. We are now able to move past blanket assessments based on color and view individuals who perpetuate this cycle as the ones we need to place focus on.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    VictoryGin wrote:
    i believe i already said that what i'm saying is not about reliving it. it's not about treating each other differently. in order to obtain equality we have to realize the effects of our racist history and how that has impacted our society. or else we will continue to repeat history. that is all.


    Then how are you proposing we go about this so we can be clear?
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • VictoryGin
    VictoryGin Posts: 1,207
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    Then how are you proposing we go about this so we can be clear?

    i'm not sure what you are asking. are you looking for my step by step plan to rid america of racism?
    if you wanna be a friend of mine
    cross the river to the eastside
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    VictoryGin wrote:
    i'm not sure what you are asking. are you looking for my step by step plan to rid america of racism?

    No, of course not. More of a general direction. My position is that we as a society and we as individuals shouldn't treat/view one another differently based on race. You posted a piece saying we shouldn't be colorblind like that. So I was just wondering in which ways you think we should not be colorblind towards one another as far as present actions go?
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • RainDog
    RainDog Posts: 1,824
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    It was an honest question because my perspective of Obama is so different than yours. So I'm asking these questions to see how we come to these extremely different conclusions. I wasn't trying to insult you in any way. Some people do think electability is a very valid reason to vote for someone and I do not. I was only trying to make the distinction in your case because you brought up the varying degrees me and you would have to settle. Actually I think we tend to agree on most issues, so my question was an honest one. And even if I think your reasonings for support weren't the best in the end after we came to a clear understanding of what they were, then so be it....obviously you don't think too highly of mine to bring up things like 'street cred' or 'righteousness' as if my decisions weren't based on my principles but for some kind of 'appearance's sake'. If I'm wrong then feel free to correct me.
    The "street cred" and "righteousness" remark was meant to be snarky. It's not that I think your decisions aren't based on principles, but rather a response to the impression I get when you write phrases like "D next to the name" as opposed to "Democrat" or "Obama supporters are like this" - which immediately lead to me saying "Nader supporters are like that."

    The funny thing is, I was having a conversation with a Democratic activist here at work last week where I was more in "your" position defending my past Nader votes. Weird how things work. I did point out that if it wasn't for Nader ruining Gore's run (debatable, I know), then the Democrats would be dealing with a Lieberman nomination right now. He didn't think me too funny, though.
  • cornnifer
    cornnifer Posts: 2,130
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:

    The white people of the past are not the white people of today....

    True, but the sad truth is that the white people of today have inherited that legacy and are left to deal with the consequences of history. The proper way to deal with those consequences can't simply be to declare them "water under the bridge". They must be addressed head on. Ignoring them or wishing them away doesn't cut it.
    "When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
  • VictoryGin
    VictoryGin Posts: 1,207
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    No, of course not. More of a general direction. My position is that we as a society and we as individuals shouldn't treat/view one another differently based on race. You posted a piece saying we shouldn't be colorblind like that. So I was just wondering in which ways you think we should not be colorblind towards one another as far as present actions go?

    i think i covered that in every post about this though: people of different ethnicities exist. they have been treated quite badly in the past. the effects of that can be seen in society today (various inequalities). to say that we are all the same is not true because of these lingering effects. yes we should be treated the same. but just to say that and ignore the issue of race doesn't do the problem justice. we need to realize the effects and treat them so they don't repeat.
    if you wanna be a friend of mine
    cross the river to the eastside
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    VictoryGin wrote:
    i think i covered that in every post about this though: people of different ethnicities exist. they have been treated quite badly in the past. the effects of that can be seen in society today (various inequalities). to say that we are all the same is not true because of these lingering effects. yes we should be treated the same. but just to say that and ignore the issue of race doesn't do the problem justice. we need to realize the effects and treat them so they don't repeat.


    Okay, I agree on how people of certain races have been severely mistreated in the past. And I agree that we shouldn't ignore that. I agree that we should be treated the same. But exactly how do we do that problem justice is where I am unclear about what you're proposing. How do we treat these problems of the past in today's society?
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    cornnifer wrote:
    True, but the sad truth is that the white people of today have inherited that legacy and are left to deal with the consequences of history. The proper way to deal with those consequences can't simply be to declare them "water under the bridge". They must be addressed head on. Ignoring them or wishing them away doesn't cut it.


    Meaning what exactly? The people of today did not commit these acts and the ones who are should most certainly be addressed...other than that, I don't understand what exactly we should be doing about it other than educating ourselves on the mistakes of the past and focusing on not repeating them.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • RainDog
    RainDog Posts: 1,824
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    No, of course not. More of a general direction. My position is that we as a society and we as individuals shouldn't treat/view one another differently based on race. You posted a piece saying we shouldn't be colorblind like that. So I was just wondering in which ways you think we should not be colorblind towards one another as far as present actions go?
    Not a solution, but how about a parable?

    It's great when someone quits smoking - but if they already have lung cancer, survival will require a lot more than simply quitting.
  • VictoryGin
    VictoryGin Posts: 1,207
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    Okay, I agree on how people of certain races have been severely mistreated in the past. And I agree that we shouldn't ignore that. I agree that we should be treated the same. But exactly how do we do that problem justice is where I am unclear about what you're proposing. How do we treat these problems of the past in today's society?

    well i think you just asked the question of the day! or the century?

    i'd say the first step is not brushing it off. i'm not saying you're doing this. but that's what it originally sounded like when we first started this 'conversation' and that's where my responses were coming from. we as a society should have an open dialogue about this and go at it head on. we should talk about how exactly people are still unequal today and how it can be more hidden in so many ways for so many reason. i know how you feel about barack obama, but honestly his 45 minute speech about this stuff is a good example.
    if you wanna be a friend of mine
    cross the river to the eastside
  • cornnifer
    cornnifer Posts: 2,130
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    How do we treat these problems of the past in today's society?

    i know this question wasn't addressed to me, so pardon me for butting in. Personally, i think we start by acknowledging the truth of their existence. Not only that societal inequalities are a direct result of a hideous history, but also that racism is very real today. The problems of the past are not just that. Only then can we begin to truly heal and correct societal inequalities. We need to acknowledge the fact that racism isn't just the gross examples we see manifested in white sheets and swastika tattoos. Racism exists in very subtle forms throughout our society.
    "When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    RainDog wrote:
    The "street cred" and "righteousness" remark was meant to be snarky. It's not that I think your decisions aren't based on principles, but rather a response to the impression I get when you write phrases like "D next to the name" as opposed to "Democrat" or "Obama supporters are like this" - which immediately lead to me saying "Nader supporters are like that."

    The funny thing is, I was having a conversation with a Democratic activist here at work last week where I was more in "your" position defending my past Nader votes. Weird how things work. I did point out that if it wasn't for Nader ruining Gore's run (debatable, I know), then the Democrats would be dealing with a Lieberman nomination right now. He didn't think me too funny, though.

    Obviously I don't think all Obama supporters are all the same on anything in particular. That was my reasoning for the question. To me Kucinich is more like Nader on the issues and you mentioned that you would vote for him had he gotten the nod. So I have to wonder if how much you're willing to settle depends on whether or not the candidate has 'Democrat' beside his name....which ironcally enough is actually seen as a 'D' on the ballot if I remember correctly.


    And yes, it is highly debatable to blame Nader for Gore's not winning seeing as how we live in a democracy, where's the blame for the people who actually voted for Bush? and all of the third party candidates on the ballot received more votes than the difference between Bush and Gore in FL an-.....don't get me started.... ;)
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • VictoryGin
    VictoryGin Posts: 1,207
    cornnifer wrote:
    i know this question wasn't addressed to me, so pardon me for butting in. Personally, i think we start by acknowledging the truth of their existence. Not only that societal inequalities are a direct result of a hideous history, but also that racism is very real today. The problems of the past are not just that. Only then can we begin to truly heal and correct societal inequalities. We need to acknowledge the fact that racism isn't just the gross examples we see manifested in white sheets and swastika tattoos. Racism exists in very subtle forms throughout our society.

    absolutely. it seems to become more hidden or manifested in different ways since de jure segregation became illegal. we still deal with a lot of de facto segregation for example.
    if you wanna be a friend of mine
    cross the river to the eastside
  • cornnifer
    cornnifer Posts: 2,130
    RainDog wrote:

    It's great when someone quits smoking - but if they already have lung cancer, survival will require a lot more than simply quitting.

    As a huge fan of analogy, i must say, this is a pretty good one. :)
    "When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
  • cornnifer
    cornnifer Posts: 2,130
    VictoryGin wrote:
    absolutely. it seems to become more hidden or manifested in different ways since de jure segregation became illegal. we still deal with a lot of de facto segregation for example.

    Wow. De jure, De facto... i'm impressed. :) And i agree. ;)
    "When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."

Categories