Nader asks if Obama will be "Uncle Tom"

1…34689…11

Comments

  • MrBrian
    MrBrian Posts: 2,672
    Its Evolution Baby wrote:
    All of this proves what I've known and said all along...Nader never would have what it takes to be a President.

    He's a brilliant man. He's a great consumer activist. But he could never lead the nation and rally the people around him. He just doesn't know how to speak effectively.

    So you would rather back a person who is not as brilliant as nader and not as great for the people of America, simply because he may be able to rally the nation behind him and speaks effectively. So he can be talking or pushing issues that are not the best for the people but as long as (in this case) Obama is able to get people behind it with great arms movements and a great vocal range and nice words. He is better?
  • VictoryGin
    VictoryGin Posts: 1,207
    Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:
    the four hundred thousand shots of black families crying tears of joy after Obama's victory were fairly exploitative.

    exploitative? are you fucking kidding me? you must be as this is one of the most ridiculous statements i've seen this election.

    it's what happened. maybe you missed it. maybe you don't understand because you don't live here. but guess what? people organized and voted in unprecedented numbers. many black people who were formally disenfranchised came out to vote, their votes counted, and we all elected out first black president. maybe you're not used to seeing happy black people in the media? maybe that's it. because i just can't figure out why you would say something so fucking asinine.
    if you wanna be a friend of mine
    cross the river to the eastside
  • VictoryGin
    VictoryGin Posts: 1,207
    El_Kabong wrote:
    where would you place when you say you lost a primary b/c the voters cling to their guns and religion and are anti-immigrant??



    i don't see how saying 'time will tell if obama is an uncle sam or uncle tom' is denigrating him




    kinda like ppl who keep putting their support behind corporate candidates and expecting change, eh?


    i don't even know what you're asking with much of this. uncle tom isn't a negative thing? that's not even my point though. my point is that nader is an idiot because of course people are going to seize upon that statement and that's what is getting played. not nader's supposedly amazing and benevolent professional citizenry.

    and as for your last question: there certainly is going to be more positive change than there would have been under a mccain presidency. to ignore that is dumb. or maybe it's just nice and safe because you're never going to have to be held accountable for your beliefs and actions.
    if you wanna be a friend of mine
    cross the river to the eastside
  • Rhinocerous Surprise
    Rhinocerous Surprise Posts: 4,423
    VictoryGin wrote:
    exploitative? are you fucking kidding me? you must be as this is one of the most ridiculous statements i've seen this election.

    it's what happened. maybe you missed it. maybe you don't understand because you don't live here. but guess what? people organized and voted in unprecedented numbers. many black people who were formally disenfranchised came out to vote, their votes counted, and we all elected out first black president. maybe you're not used to seeing happy black people in the media? maybe that's it. because i just can't figure out why you would say something so fucking asinine.
    Oh, I understand that it was huge. But people are asking why Nader brought race into this... when race has been one of the defining aspects of this entire election.
    Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
  • Strangest Tribe
    Strangest Tribe Posts: 2,502
    Why do we even care about Nader anymore? I'm guessing he'll disappear for another 4 years.?
    the Minions
  • LukinFan
    LukinFan Florida Posts: 29,121
    Uncle Leo wrote:
    Joking rationalization: Maybe he's just trying to counterbalance the fears that Obama's going to be this angry black man who will do things like create a remixed national anthem featuring P. Diddy.
    lol
    www.RLMcDaniel.com

    1996: Ft Lauderdale
    1998: Birmingham
    2000: Charlotte, Tampa
    2003: Tampa, Atlanta, Phoenix
    2004: Kissimmee
    2008: West Palm Beach, Bonnaroo, Columbia
    2010: MSG2
    2012: Music Midtown
    2014: Memphis
    2016: Ft. Lauderdale, Miami, Jacksonville, JazzFest
    2018: Wrigley 1, Fenway 1
    2022: Nashville
    2023: Ft. Worth II
    2024: Baltimore
    2025: Hollywood II
  • VictoryGin
    VictoryGin Posts: 1,207
    Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:
    Oh, I understand that it was huge. But people are asking why Nader brought race into this... when race has been one of the defining aspects of this entire election.

    oh are they? i was asking how exactly showing pictures of black people being happy at the election of obama is exploitative.
    if you wanna be a friend of mine
    cross the river to the eastside
  • Its Evolution Baby
    Its Evolution Baby Posts: 849
    MrBrian wrote:
    So you would rather back a person who is not as brilliant as nader and not as great for the people of America, simply because he may be able to rally the nation behind him and speaks effectively. So he can be talking or pushing issues that are not the best for the people but as long as (in this case) Obama is able to get people behind it with great arms movements and a great vocal range and nice words. He is better?

    Well I think he is what the American People want. We are a centrist country. Why can't the far left see that? I consider myself very liberal but I know that there are just as many people who are on the right of me. A leader has to work with both sides so there is no more bitter in fighting.

    Nader would be awful as President. Worse then Bush. There I said it.
    10/31/2000 (****)
    6/7/2003 (***1/2)
    7/9/2006 (****1/2)
    7/13/2006 (**** )
    4/10/2008 EV Solo (****1/2)
    6/25/2008 MSG II (*****)
    10/1/2009 LA II (****)
    10/6/2009 LA III (***** Cornell!!!)
  • Rhinocerous Surprise
    Rhinocerous Surprise Posts: 4,423
    VictoryGin wrote:
    oh are they? i was asking how exactly showing pictures of black people being happy at the election of obama is exploitative.
    It's exploiting the racial factor of the election - don't get me wrong, I completely understand that it's a huge occasion for the USA. I just think that showing endless streams of crying black families (although maybe I'm seeing different coverage than you across the pond) is purely racial - like black people have never been happy about an election before, or white people aren't happy about this. Maybe exploitative is a strong word for it, but surely you can at least see where I'm coming from?
    Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
  • MrBrian
    MrBrian Posts: 2,672
    Its Evolution Baby wrote:
    Well I think he is what the American People want. We are a centrist country. Why can't the far left see that? I consider myself very liberal but I know that there are just as many people who are on the right of me. A leader has to work with both sides so there is no more bitter in fighting.

    Nader would be awful as President. Worse then Bush. There I said it.

    Ok, what do you feel about Obamas recent admin choices? Being pro war? That is centrist? You know some issues are not liberal or conservative.

    Some are just right and wrong. The war on Iraq was wrong, to hire people who supported it is not a good choice. What other wars like that will they back?

    Is Obamas stance on Russia and Iran correct? It has nothing to do with America not being 'left'. Those positions Obama has on Iran and Russia are misplaced. The view Obama has on Israel is not a left or right or centrist issue. it's a Human rights issue. Tell me why he refuses to be critical of Israel?

    How is Obama backing Israel 100% and getting Rahm in such a high position being a centrist?
  • VictoryGin
    VictoryGin Posts: 1,207
    Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:
    It's exploiting the racial factor of the election - don't get me wrong, I completely understand that it's a huge occasion for the USA. I just think that showing endless streams of crying black families (although maybe I'm seeing different coverage than you across the pond) is purely racial - like black people have never been happy about an election before, or white people aren't happy about this. Maybe exploitative is a strong word for it, but surely you can at least see where I'm coming from?

    no i can't because it doesn't make sense. who is exploiting who? to say pictures of happy black people are exploiting the "racial factor" doesn't make sense. who is gaining from this unfair advantage of pictures of happy black people?

    what struck me as i've followed this for a long time is how diverse the images are. sure there are a lot of happy black people, but they did overwhelmingly vote in barack obama. there is not another election you can compare this to. surely electing in our nations first black president is different than electing in old white guy after old white guy. turnout is different. images are different (not that turnout is the only factor. obvs for too long the media often portrays black people not as happy but instead as poor, violent, etc.)

    edit: i have to add that it's not just that black people voted in barack obama. they organized in unprecedented numbers, too. they did the groundwork for months and months now. and it wasn't just black people. it was millions and millions and millions of people who worked hard for months and came out to vote. the people made this election. you cannot underestimate or trivialize the ways in which history was made with this campaign and election.
    if you wanna be a friend of mine
    cross the river to the eastside
  • Urban Hiker
    Urban Hiker Posts: 1,312
    Strangest Tribe wrote:
    Why do we even care about Nader anymore? I'm guessing he'll disappear for another 4 years.?

    http://www.november5.org

    Just because you don't see him, doesn't mean he's not there.
    Walking can be a real trip
    ***********************
    "We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
    ***********************
    Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
  • decides2dream
    decides2dream Posts: 14,977
    El_Kabong wrote:
    i would think saying, as a black man, that someone didn't vote for me b/c they are anti-immigrant seemed a bit racially charged, but i don't wish to get into some nitpicking debate w/ you, i just don't think saying 'time will tell if obama is an uncle sam or an uncle tom' was worse than obama saying he lost the primary in pennsylvania b/c the voters cling to religion, guns and are anti-immigrant since ppl ae bringing up communication skills



    i'm sorry, i missed this post the first time around...and due to my anal-rententive nature ;), have to go back and address it.


    hmmmmm...as a black man? seriously? wtf difference does that make? so if her were not be a black man, it would be ok? i kinda miss the point right there. however, even as a black man, i still miss it. how is it racially charged for a black man, or ANYone really...to possibly say "you lost a primary b/c the voters cling to their guns and religion and are anti-immigrant??" hmmmm....is obama an immigrant, too anmti-gun or too anti-religion? i seriously miss the point. and black, white or otherwise..i apparently am blind to the 'racially charged' nature of the comment. whereas saying 'as a black man' does indeed seem racially charged, as does saying 'i hope he wants to be an uncle sam and not an uncle tom.' but i guess that's just me.


    i fail to see the correlation. 'uncle tom' is used as a derogatory slur and only to those of african-american descent. saying one didnd't vote for a candidate, rightly or wrongly in the assessment..due to clinging to guns, reliigion..or being anti-immigrant does not possess any racial slur that i can decipher. it may be incorrect, it may be slanted...but it's no racial or cultural slur. ANYone could possess any of those traits, regardless of race..whereas an 'uncle tom' is clear a reference only to an african-american. for me, therein lies the BIG difference. for you, maybe not so much...i have no idea.


    that's all.


    it rerally comes down to what you find acceptable or unacceptable for apublic figure, especially one trying to convince the world that he is indeed a leader and a world leader....if using such terminolgy is ok or not. if you think it is...cool. i do not. and so it goes. that was the only discussion/point of this thread as far as i can tell from the OP.
    Stay with me...
    Let's just breathe...


    I am myself like you somehow


  • flywallyfly
    flywallyfly Posts: 1,453
    Urban Hiker wrote:
    Why do we have to be so PC? Many posters seem to think Nader's message was fine, they only wish he'd used different words.

    I think his usage was perfectly fine - in fact, rather proper.

    Whenever I can, I throw PC out the fucking window. It's high time people stopped being so hypersensitive.

    BTW - I work in a very diverse environment and in that setting this whole PC BS seems to be used by more people suffering from 'White Guilt' than anyone else.

    I'd love to see you walk up to a black man and call him Uncle Tom. Absolutely love to see it.
  • MrBrian
    MrBrian Posts: 2,672
    flywallyfly wrote:
    I'd love to see you walk up to a black man and call him Uncle Tom. Absolutely love to see it.

    K, say Urban Hiker does that. The way you are trying to make this, what do you think this random black man will do? I mean some stranger just called him an 'uncle tom' for no reason. Maybe because he's black and only knows violence? Is that what you think will happen? Really what are you expecting? why would you love to see it?
    Do you just expect him to start fighting? Like an animal?

    Or maybe he will ask "Ummm why did you call me an uncle tom?" You know, have a normal thinking response.

    I mean your argument makes no sense, you are obvioulsy trying to compare 'uncle tom' with the word 'nigger', in which case one may expect a more angry reaction.
  • hailhail82
    hailhail82 Posts: 330
    MrBrian wrote:
    Ok, what do you feel about Obamas recent admin choices? Being pro war? That is centrist? You know some issues are not liberal or conservative.

    Some are just right and wrong. The war on Iraq was wrong, to hire people who supported it is not a good choice. What other wars like that will they back?

    Is Obamas stance on Russia and Iran correct? It has nothing to do with America not being 'left'. Those positions Obama has on Iran and Russia are misplaced. The view Obama has on Israel is not a left or right or centrist issue. it's a Human rights issue. Tell me why he refuses to be critical of Israel?

    How is Obama backing Israel 100% and getting Rahm in such a high position being a centrist?

    Exactly. I like how people aren't talking about these aspects of Obama's decisions. People are too blinded by the hype to see these completely politics-as-usual actions as completely contradictory to his message of change.

    As for Nader, it was a play on words that people might not like but his point stands. But hooray for everybody ignoring the central issue of his comment.
    Using the word "methinks" in your message board posts doesn't make you look smart.
  • flywallyfly
    flywallyfly Posts: 1,453
    MrBrian wrote:
    K, say Urban Hiker does that. The way you are trying to make this, what do you think this random black man will do? I mean some stranger just called him an 'uncle tom' for no reason. Maybe because he's black and only knows violence? Is that what you think will happen? Really what are you expecting? why would you love to see it?
    Do you just expect him to start fighting? Like an animal?

    Or maybe he will ask "Ummm why did you call me an uncle tom?" You know, have a normal thinking response.

    I mean your argument makes no sense, you are obvioulsy trying to compare 'uncle tom' with the word 'nigger', in which case one may expect a more angry reaction.

    Obviously you dont know any black people or you would know the answer to this. You will get the same response for either word unless you are on VERY friendly terms. As an experiment why dont you try it today with 5 different random black men. Let us know how it goes.

    My argument makes no sense? I believe I made a statement that I'd like to see something -- you are arguing your own interpretations with yourself, kinda funny but you do make assumptions quite a bit on here. "Like an animal" ?? -- I think maybe YOU have preconceived notions. Wow.
  • Urban Hiker
    Urban Hiker Posts: 1,312
    flywallyfly wrote:
    I'd love to see you walk up to a black man and call him Uncle Tom. Absolutely love to see it.

    I'll be sure to bring it up at my next Race and Social Justice meeting. :)
    Walking can be a real trip
    ***********************
    "We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
    ***********************
    Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
  • Urban Hiker
    Urban Hiker Posts: 1,312
    hailhail82 wrote:
    Exactly. I like how people aren't talking about these aspects of Obama's decisions. People are too blinded by the hype to see these completely politics-as-usual actions as completely contradictory to his message of change.

    As for Nader, it was a play on words that people might not like but his point stands. But hooray for everybody ignoring the central issue of his comment.


    I'm guessing we have at least four years of this to look forward to. Politics and American ignorance as usual.

    I'd like to see what would happen if people stopped using names when describing situations. I wonder if it would help people focus on issues rather than the petty things of the typical us versus them argument.
    Walking can be a real trip
    ***********************
    "We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
    ***********************
    Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
  • FinsburyParkCarrots
    FinsburyParkCarrots Seattle, WA Posts: 12,223
    Urban Hiker wrote:
    Why do we have to be so PC? Many posters seem to think Nader's message was fine, they only wish he'd used different words.

    I think his usage was perfectly fine - in fact, rather proper.

    Whenever I can, I throw PC out the fucking window. It's high time people stopped being so hypersensitive.

    BTW - I work in a very diverse environment and in that setting this whole PC BS seems to be used by more people suffering from 'White Guilt' than anyone else.


    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=6DefCmUsCPs


    Let's just say it's a sore point amongst the African-American community.

Categories