If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   "My party is full of racists"   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 480
    More: Obvious, sununu, Lawrence Wilkerson, Colin Powell, GOP, human beings, Blast!, First Lady Michelle Obama, Tom Donilon  
•       •       •

9490 clicks; posted to Politics » on 27 Oct 2012 at 5:45 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



480 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-28 08:39:27 AM

CapeFearCadaver: Yep. And if I were to go up to my estranged Father and tell him that the only reason he's voting for Romney is because he's white...

Can everyone just shut the fark up? Peas? And carrots too?

/miss my family, but I'm 'doing the devil's work by voting with my vagina'; so, I don't know that I'll ever speak with them again after this...
//fark you Fox, Limbaugh, Beck, Tea Party, etc for ruining what used to be a decent family. Now I have no one.
///5th beer today, sorry


I'm nit even sure what that means but it sounds very, very disturbing. My condolences on your family going off the rails.
 
2012-10-28 09:09:31 AM
s16.postimage.org
 
2012-10-28 09:29:38 AM

Gordon Bennett: CapeFearCadaver: Yep. And if I were to go up to my estranged Father and tell him that the only reason he's voting for Romney is because he's white...

Can everyone just shut the fark up? Peas? And carrots too?

/miss my family, but I'm 'doing the devil's work by voting with my vagina'; so, I don't know that I'll ever speak with them again after this...
//fark you Fox, Limbaugh, Beck, Tea Party, etc for ruining what used to be a decent family. Now I have no one.
///5th beer today, sorry

I'm nit even sure what that means but it sounds very, very disturbing. My condolences on your family going off the rails.


I do understand hun,

My family (sisters, both BIL, many cousins) have ostracized myself and my kids for our "Libtard Traitor to Dad's Memory" views.

Many of the same cousins boycotted my late wife's funeral because she was a tireless Democrat.

I've also been "shunned" for, and I quote: "Poisoning your nephew's mind." He's 32 and I moved away in 1987 fer Chrissakes!

/You can pick your nose and your friends but you can't pick your family
 
2012-10-28 09:35:35 AM

G.I.R.B.: Gordon Bennett: CapeFearCadaver: Yep. And if I were to go up to my estranged Father and tell him that the only reason he's voting for Romney is because he's white...

Can everyone just shut the fark up? Peas? And carrots too?

/miss my family, but I'm 'doing the devil's work by voting with my vagina'; so, I don't know that I'll ever speak with them again after this...
//fark you Fox, Limbaugh, Beck, Tea Party, etc for ruining what used to be a decent family. Now I have no one.
///5th beer today, sorry

I'm nit even sure what that means but it sounds very, very disturbing. My condolences on your family going off the rails.

I do understand hun,

My family (sisters, both BIL, many cousins) have ostracized myself and my kids for our "Libtard Traitor to Dad's Memory" views.

Many of the same cousins boycotted my late wife's funeral because she was a tireless Democrat.

I've also been "shunned" for, and I quote: "Poisoning your nephew's mind." He's 32 and I moved away in 1987 fer Chrissakes!

/You can pick your nose and your friends but you can't pick your family


I was written out my grandparent's will because I supported Obama. Not that I would need the money but still, kinda dick move.
 
2012-10-28 09:38:23 AM

MisterRonbo: skullkrusher: , said the guy in charge of running this year's Northeastern Neo-Nazi Potluck Dinner and Blind Auction Charity Event

/DNRTFA

I have some very intelligent, very conservative friends. Their positions are extremely well reasoned.

They just are based on assumptions that are contradicted by well established evidence, but they relentlessly ignore such evidence. If pressed they will insist the main stream media (which does not include the highest rated news network or 90% of talk radio) is wrong.

I like them. I like you. I cannot fathom why intelligent people remain so willfully - note, willfully - ignorant.


do your friends not make jokes about obvious new stories?
 
2012-10-28 10:34:51 AM
hypervocal.com
abcnews.go.com 

/It's not racist, it's patriotism.
 
2012-10-28 10:41:14 AM
legalinsurrection.com

We're going to burn an upper case T on his lawn.

For TIME TO LEAVE! 


/Vote Romney
//I've got rapes to commit and I don't want to be charged.
 
2012-10-28 10:45:47 AM

G.I.R.B.: My family (sisters, both BIL, many cousins) have ostracized myself and my kids for our "Libtard Traitor to Dad's Memory" views.

Many of the same cousins boycotted my late wife's funeral because she was a tireless Democrat.


I've lost three old friends for the same reason, but compared to you and CapeFearCadaver I've gotten off pretty easy. How is it even possible for politics to ruin longstanding personal relationships? This is so farking stupid. 

/"And you know that I could have me a million more friends / and all I'd have to lose is my point of view." ~John Prine
 
2012-10-28 11:43:41 AM

Fark Me To Tears: FTFA: My party, unfortunately, is the bastion of those people -- not all of them, but most of them -- who are still basing their positions on race. Let me just be candid: My party is full of racists, and the real reason a considerable portion of my party wants President Obama out of the White House has nothing to do with the content of his character, nothing to do with his competence as commander-in-chief and president, and everything to do with the color of his skin, and that's despicable.

The man is correct. The Republican power base -- i.e., most of the rich people in the U.S. -- cannot pull in enough votes on its own to win elections. So, they go after the right-wing kooks, which include the "conservative" religious zealots and the white supremacist bigots (those are not mutually exclusive btw) and a vast majority of the undereducated hotheads. I don't believe in my heart that the true core of the Republican party really likes having most of these idiots in their constituency, but from a vote-count perspective they really have no choice but to court them. I would think that most of the real leadership in the Republican party finds a significant portion of their constituency to be repugnant at best. They see it as a necessary evil.


And they are in the process of getting what they deserve for striking a bargain like that - along with a lot of other slimy bargains - just so their team can win the Big Game. And in a few more years the "true core" will have been crowded out entirely by the scumbags they brought in.

/can't shake the devil's hand and say you're only kidding
 
2012-10-28 11:46:54 AM
Silly Jesus and Vectron are the same troll. What's worse, a possible mod.
 
2012-10-28 11:49:32 AM
Login: Vectron
Account created: 2012-09-28 17:19:06

Protip: When you see someone saying absurdly stupid or offensive things, or in general making an ass of themselves in such a way it generates a large amount of attention...check their profile before replying. They might be a newly created troll account.
 
2012-10-28 12:05:17 PM

Anonymous Bosch: Fark Me To Tears: FTFA: My party, unfortunately, is the bastion of those people -- not all of them, but most of them -- who are still basing their positions on race. Let me just be candid: My party is full of racists, and the real reason a considerable portion of my party wants President Obama out of the White House has nothing to do with the content of his character, nothing to do with his competence as commander-in-chief and president, and everything to do with the color of his skin, and that's despicable.

The man is correct. The Republican power base -- i.e., most of the rich people in the U.S. -- cannot pull in enough votes on its own to win elections. So, they go after the right-wing kooks, which include the "conservative" religious zealots and the white supremacist bigots (those are not mutually exclusive btw) and a vast majority of the undereducated hotheads. I don't believe in my heart that the true core of the Republican party really likes having most of these idiots in their constituency, but from a vote-count perspective they really have no choice but to court them. I would think that most of the real leadership in the Republican party finds a significant portion of their constituency to be repugnant at best. They see it as a necessary evil.

And they are in the process of getting what they deserve for striking a bargain like that - along with a lot of other slimy bargains - just so their team can win the Big Game. And in a few more years the "true core" will have been crowded out entirely by the scumbags they brought in.

/can't shake the devil's hand and say you're only kidding


Are you saying this is where the Party ends?
 
2012-10-28 12:13:45 PM

Shrugging Atlas: Login: Vectron
Account created: 2012-09-28 17:19:06

Protip: When you see someone saying absurdly stupid or offensive things, or in general making an ass of themselves in such a way it generates a large amount of attention...check their profile before replying. They might be a newly created troll account.


I don't have TF, and I've seen comments where people talk about being banned or having those comments deleted for pointing out who has a troll account. Should I worry about ousting the trolls? I want engaged discussion. To weed out the trolls from the genuinely stupid and offensive people allows us to engage with people who actually should discuss their viewpoints to show justification for them.

I rarely get on the kick of commenting on FARK, but I recently have gotten back into the swing of things. I just don't want to be discouraged about commenting here and engaging with actual people to see their justification, not see their stupid and never hear from them again or defend their comments.
 
2012-10-28 12:42:35 PM
So, been reading the last 200 comments after I passed out last night... sobbing; yet sobbing with a strange mixture of hurt, elation, loneliness and companionship. I just wanted to say that I love all of you.
 
2012-10-28 02:34:28 PM

YoungSwedishBlonde: I was written out my grandparent's will because I supported Obama. Not that I would need the money but still, kinda dick move.


Wow! Lots of dysfunctional families out there, by the sound of things.

I disagree on many political topics with my family, but they would never stab me in the back over something like that...

/ that really sucks
 
2012-10-28 02:39:24 PM

Silly Jesus: [ct.fra.bz image 311x327] "Not voting for Obama because he's black is racist? Tell me again how voting for him because he is black isn't"


Easy actually, pride in ones race or group is a different thing than hate for another race or group. Lets say for example, you are from New Jersey, and Snookie is running for President. And you vote for Snookie because you love everything Jersey. It doesn't mean you hate the guy who isn't from Jersey. But you have a certain pride for Jersey Shore, and you think Snookie would represent you best and you want her in the Oval Office.
 
2012-10-28 02:42:03 PM

CreamFilling: It is peculiar that Republicans have appointed minorities to the highest non-elected position in the country. I'm sure it's part of a "Some of my best friends are black" defense, but they seem really committed to it.


If you are referring to Clarence Thomas, it was exactly that. Please look up the terms "token" and "Uncle Tom". If you are referring to Colin Powell, he appears to have broken ranks with the Republican party on...well, damn near everything. And when they appointed Michael Steele to be chairman of their party, they promptly ignored him and made him apologize when he said that Rush Limbaugh did not speak for the Republican Party.
 
2012-10-28 03:01:09 PM

sugardave: And they are in the process of getting what they deserve for striking a bargain like that - along with a lot of other slimy bargains - just so their team can win the Big Game. And in a few more years the "true core" will have been crowded out entirely by the scumbags they brought in.


Numerically, they already are and have been for some time. From a long ago thread, "People like Palin were supposed to be the base, not on the ticket."

/can't shake the devil's hand and say you're only kidding

Are you saying this is where the Party ends?


Another article made the point that, demographically, this is the last time the Republican party can possibly hope to win an election on the white vote alone, and they know it. So, yes, in order for the GOP to continue to exist on a national level, it would have to become something totally different and repugnant to most of its current membership.

But then, the Dems have been there--"Democrat" used to mean something entirely different in the former Confederacy than it meant in New England. Now those "problem children" are firmly ensconced in the GOP. Well played, actually.
 
2012-10-28 03:21:25 PM

Silly Jesus: [ct.fra.bz image 311x327]


One is a question of racism based on hatred of another race, while the other is an example of "racism" based on hope, and on seeing a representative of their long-repressed race succeed. But the latter isn't "racism" with its negative connotations of hate like the former is.

Just like how women pointing to successful female pioneers in politics and business isn't sexism, but denying women rights based on the fact that they are women would be.
 
2012-10-28 07:16:09 PM

Dan the Schman: Silly Jesus: Halli: Silly Jesus: Jesus Christ...this isn't that difficult. I'm talking about the number of AfAm's who voted at all increasing by 20%. Prior to 2008, there were 20% fewer AfAm votes cast.

You have a citation for that?

Oh wait some other guy just said it earlier and you are just copying his post. I'm sure you will deliver.

Yeah, I shouldn't have taken his word for it. Was closer to 5%. Still significant though.

Aside from the fact that a 5% increase isn't that significant, and that ALL demographics were up, the fact remains that the number of people who vote "for" Obama because he's black have never, and will never, approach the number of people who vote "against" Obama because he's black.

And yet, curiously, you're oh so concerned about the former form of "racism" rather than the latter.


1. citation needed.
2. I'm not concerned about one more than the other...I'm merely equating the two...which is evidently contentious here at Fark.
 
2012-10-28 07:21:05 PM

burning_bridge: Silly Jesus: CreamFilling: stoli n coke: The actual statistics have shown the overwhelming majority of African Americans have voted Democratic since Kennedy and LBJ. May have had something to do with the whole "pushing for and signing the civil rights act" deal.

Those are the statistics for people who voted. The actual percentage of eligible African Americans who voted at all was barely above 50%. Certainly not an overwhelming majority of African Americans as a whole voting for any particular party. In 2008, the number of eligible African Americans who voted jumped 20%. Of course you can't ascribe any one motivation to why African American turnout suddenly leaped in 2008, but you'd have to be absolutely farking stupid to believe that race wasn't a factor.

[blog.2modern.com image 340x480]


Since black people are willing to support a politician simply because he's also black means what exactly? Jim Crowe is a-okay or something? Is this suppose to be some sort of justification for something else? That's certainly what you seem to allude to.


Was just pointing out that reverse racism is still racism. Lots of libs disagree with that assertion, obviously.
 
2012-10-28 07:23:42 PM

TheGhostofFarkPast: So let me get this straight, fark needed more Alt Trolls so someone went and created one called Silly Jesus and now he just sits and trolls as many threads as he can while trying to boost page counts?

There have been more than one thread proving that is what his job is yet he is allowed to keep posting. I understand marketing dollars are important to keep things going but it gets beyond annoying. It's like when Phil Herup use to run around thread after thread crapping on everything.


It's weird to hear ideas outside of your echo chamber, isn't it? It's interesting that the result is lashing out with absurd conspiracy theories. I thought libby libs were better than that.

Anywho, carry on with your complaining.

Love you long time.
 
2012-10-28 07:26:18 PM

MindStalker: Silly Jesus: [ct.fra.bz image 311x327] "Not voting for Obama because he's black is racist? Tell me again how voting for him because he is black isn't"


Easy actually, pride in ones race or group is a different thing than hate for another race or group. Lets say for example, you are from New Jersey, and Snookie is running for President. And you vote for Snookie because you love everything Jersey. It doesn't mean you hate the guy who isn't from Jersey. But you have a certain pride for Jersey Shore, and you think Snookie would represent you best and you want her in the Oval Office.


1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-10-28 07:27:11 PM

The Great Gazoo: Silly Jesus: [ct.fra.bz image 311x327]

One is a question of racism based on hatred of another race, while the other is an example of "racism" based on hope, and on seeing a representative of their long-repressed race succeed. But the latter isn't "racism" with its negative connotations of hate like the former is.

Just like how women pointing to successful female pioneers in politics and business isn't sexism, but denying women rights based on the fact that they are women would be.


Fair enough. Sort of...
 
2012-10-28 11:53:35 PM

Silly Jesus: Dan the Schman: Silly Jesus: Halli: Silly Jesus: Jesus Christ...this isn't that difficult. I'm talking about the number of AfAm's who voted at all increasing by 20%. Prior to 2008, there were 20% fewer AfAm votes cast.

You have a citation for that?

Oh wait some other guy just said it earlier and you are just copying his post. I'm sure you will deliver.

Yeah, I shouldn't have taken his word for it. Was closer to 5%. Still significant though.

Aside from the fact that a 5% increase isn't that significant, and that ALL demographics were up, the fact remains that the number of people who vote "for" Obama because he's black have never, and will never, approach the number of people who vote "against" Obama because he's black.

And yet, curiously, you're oh so concerned about the former form of "racism" rather than the latter.

1. citation needed.
2. I'm not concerned about one more than the other...I'm merely equating the two...which is evidently contentious here at Fark incredibly dishonest because although both things exist, they occur on vastly different scales, but by artifically equating them I can attempt to make my own contemptable positions appear slightly less so.

 
2012-10-29 07:16:47 AM

Jorn the Younger: Silly Jesus: Dan the Schman: Silly Jesus: Halli: Silly Jesus: Jesus Christ...this isn't that difficult. I'm talking about the number of AfAm's who voted at all increasing by 20%. Prior to 2008, there were 20% fewer AfAm votes cast.

You have a citation for that?

Oh wait some other guy just said it earlier and you are just copying his post. I'm sure you will deliver.

Yeah, I shouldn't have taken his word for it. Was closer to 5%. Still significant though.

Aside from the fact that a 5% increase isn't that significant, and that ALL demographics were up, the fact remains that the number of people who vote "for" Obama because he's black have never, and will never, approach the number of people who vote "against" Obama because he's black.

And yet, curiously, you're oh so concerned about the former form of "racism" rather than the latter.

1. citation needed.
2. I'm not concerned about one more than the other...I'm merely equating the two...which is evidently contentious here at Fark incredibly dishonest because although both things exist, they occur on vastly different scales, but by artifically equating them I can attempt to make my own contemptable positions appear slightly less so.


citation needed

Also, please tell me what my own contemptible position is?
 
2012-10-29 07:31:12 AM

Silly Jesus: Dan the Schman: Silly Jesus: Halli: Silly Jesus: Jesus Christ...this isn't that difficult. I'm talking about the number of AfAm's who voted at all increasing by 20%. Prior to 2008, there were 20% fewer AfAm votes cast.

You have a citation for that?

Oh wait some other guy just said it earlier and you are just copying his post. I'm sure you will deliver.

Yeah, I shouldn't have taken his word for it. Was closer to 5%. Still significant though.

Aside from the fact that a 5% increase isn't that significant, and that ALL demographics were up, the fact remains that the number of people who vote "for" Obama because he's black have never, and will never, approach the number of people who vote "against" Obama because he's black.

And yet, curiously, you're oh so concerned about the former form of "racism" rather than the latter.

1. citation needed.
2. I'm not concerned about one more than the other...I'm merely equating the two...which is evidently contentious here at Fark.


2008
2004

Notice that the racial breakdown is virtually identical, meaning there wasn't a significant change in a single racial demographic.

Not only that, but Obama did better with ALL RACES than Kerry. So it's curious that you singled out the black demographic, and are so ready to believe that only did better among the blacks, and don't see any differences between "for" and "against".
 
2012-10-29 07:41:52 AM

Silly Jesus: Jorn the Younger: Silly Jesus: 2. I'm not concerned about one more than the other...I'm merely equating the two...which is evidently contentious here at Fark incredibly dishonest because although both things exist, they occur on vastly different scales, but by artifically equating them I can attempt to make my own contemptable positions appear slightly less so.

citation needed


Primaries

Select a state, click 'exit polls' and one of the questions is "How Important was race?" and you can see the difference in those voting for Hillary and those voting for Obama.

General

And this is for the general election.
 
2012-10-29 05:42:53 PM

Dan the Schman: Silly Jesus: Dan the Schman: Silly Jesus: Halli: Silly Jesus: Jesus Christ...this isn't that difficult. I'm talking about the number of AfAm's who voted at all increasing by 20%. Prior to 2008, there were 20% fewer AfAm votes cast.

You have a citation for that?

Oh wait some other guy just said it earlier and you are just copying his post. I'm sure you will deliver.

Yeah, I shouldn't have taken his word for it. Was closer to 5%. Still significant though.

Aside from the fact that a 5% increase isn't that significant, and that ALL demographics were up, the fact remains that the number of people who vote "for" Obama because he's black have never, and will never, approach the number of people who vote "against" Obama because he's black.

And yet, curiously, you're oh so concerned about the former form of "racism" rather than the latter.

1. citation needed.
2. I'm not concerned about one more than the other...I'm merely equating the two...which is evidently contentious here at Fark.

2008
2004

Notice that the racial breakdown is virtually identical, meaning there wasn't a significant change in a single racial demographic.

Not only that, but Obama did better with ALL RACES than Kerry. So it's curious that you singled out the black demographic, and are so ready to believe that only did better among the blacks, and don't see any differences between "for" and "against".


I suppose that a good bit of anecdotal evidence may have skewed my perception.
 
2012-10-30 11:58:59 AM
Well I guess it ain't yo party no mo.
 
Displayed 30 of 480 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report