Yes, some of it is about racism

Joe Wilson didn't yell "You lie" when Obama said he won't sign any bill that will raise the deficit, he didn't yell when the President said there were no death panels. Joe Wilson yelled when the topic of illegal immigrants came up.

He yelled when a half black man from Kenya, Hawaii, Phillipines got up in front of the nation to set straight misconceptions of the debate. And Joe Wilson just couldn't stand it anymore when Obama claimed that the healthcare reform bill that he will be signing will not pay for any illegal immigrants.

"You lie". No dufus, he didn't lie. The bill is still under the process of being written, it has to be written and sign before you can call him a liar. But that is besides the point. Obama and the white house has said that no illegal immigrant will be able to purchase the public option from the government. I have read it in H.R. 3200 myself, it is said on two pages. One is page number two. The second page. THe second time is in section 246.

Why do you describe him as being from Kenya, Hawaii and the Philippines? It seems to me you're trying to deny his Americanism.

As for "dufus," I believe it is spelled "doofus."

You're making my point.

The fact that he has lived in those places at one point or another in his life is often pointed at proof that he is not a valid American President. Hawaii sometimes pointed out to be not part of the United States, that is if you ask some on the right. My statement was a satirical one. Wasn't meant to be taken literally.

Oh and doofus, sorry English is my second language. I am a product of the word processor generation and my spelling skills are as faulty as the rights reading of American history.

And yes i was just echoing your point.

Great article Mike, I love how some say that just because I disagree with Obama doesn't make me a racists. Well that may be true but don't ask me to believe that none of this hate directed towards the President has anything to do with his race. Hell some just come right out and say it and others carefully try to disguise it.

But it's there!

Very interesting point there. There is no question that disagreeing with the president does not make you a racist, but I have to wonder about all these folks calling him a "Muslim" or a "Marxist."

Lots of hate in America these days, because a lot of people are hurting.

Is the hate any different from the crowd who ranted and raved about Bushler a few years ago. A black working man and a white working man do have a lot more in common than Donald Trump both get taxed to death by liberal politicians who claim they are the friends of the working man. The politicians then give the money away to rich white guys like Donald Trump in the name of progress.

Nobody attacked Bush as different or un-American. I have tried to point out here that there is a difference between hating someone's policies and hating the person.

Bushler? Funny how all the Republicans now are calling Pelosi and Obama both Nazis and Marxists, the two opposite ends of the spectrum.

Good catch about the money going to the rich, though. Most right-wingers think it all goes out in welfare and foreign aid, two things that barely exist anymore.

The last people I want to listen to feigning concern over racism are Liberals & Democrats. Lest we all forget, it was the republican party that brought about the Civil Rights movement. It was the Democrats dressed up in Ku Klux Klan outfits that were discriminating against Blacks.
Secondly, Obama is not just a Black President. He is White as well. Please mention that in your insatiable desire to have a "Crazed White Man" bring harm to the President so you can hide behind your keyboard and proclaim, I told you so.
When it is all said and done, it is not any one person that will do harm to the President, It will be the President doing harm to millions.
Please change the subject already. You are inciting this type of mentality by continually bringing up the subject.
I need to hear more about California and how it is going Bankrupt and how the rest of the country should be wary and not make similiar mistakes in governing.

Redhanded,

Concerning your first comment:

To your first point:
You are like a pit bull? Why are you so angry? Everyone knows Republicans and Democrats have switched sides throughout history. I am not a Liberal or a Democrat and I am black. I totally agree with CaliforniaMike. There is an undertone of racism. Will you listen to me? Why is it that some people get so angry when we say it? Racism still exists and ignoring it isn't going to make it go away.

To your second point:
Historically, in the days of Slavery, having a drop of black blood made you black. You may have gotten to work in Massa's house, but you were still a slave. Even today, I think there is the same stigma and the racists don't give one God damn if he is half black or not. To them, he is still a n*gger. To have anyone other than a white man become president is historical. I don't think Mike was trying to deny his white heritage.

To your third point:
I don't think discussing this topic incites a mentality of hate that is taught to people by the intolerant and ignorant. I appreciate the subject, since I for one have not seen a blog about this subject matter. So many people are afraid to "pull the race card" because they are attacked as you have attacked Mike here. Why does it make you uncomfortable to have a conversation about race? If you don't want to engage in it, why did you read the blog and take the time to comment? You can choose to be blind to whatever you choose. So please leave the chat room and stop spewing your venom. Sorry, but I'd rather hear about the subject that EVERYONE is avoiding rather than California's bankruptcy which, shocker, isn't really news when the countries economy is in the crapper. I could sense your high blood pressure when I read your comment. Calm down. Have a glass or wine or something.

This was about public relations, and gaining votes again. And it is amazing to me that at this point the liberals keep delusing themselves. Are we not still in a war? Did Obama not fire the "brothers" and mostly black assembly workers on the Detroit GM line? Are you another "pretender" since it appears this site has an agenda to take the focus off of what is truly occurring.

And continue to play the "race card" and "political parties" as if they truly exist. And most of those civil rights groups would go out of business, if they didn't also take part inflaming matters. Most are headed by lawyers, and lawyers do, after all, only make money when there is dissention, not agreements. That's IS how they earn their livings, after all.

Expect for the literally thousands now that simply hang aroung the state capitols and Halls of Congress waiting for their handouts.

Why do you think those bills are written in the manner they are. Because if you really wrote bills and laws that were both Constitutional, and in the English language rather than legalese, it would put all those British Bar members out of work.

I worked with one of the best. And this generation of lawyers has not only been dumbed down, they have been so propagandized, it isn't any wonder our courts now are also such a mess.

And that's what you truly should be concerned with. Because the race card is used always by liberals, and it is used in order to deflect and detract most of all.

On both sides of the aisle, and obviously also here, in the claimed "citizen" journalism sites, since it is clear a great many here are paid bloggers with agendas for the globalists and grant monies involved, and mainstream media.

Which is probably why most people have simply stopped watching television and voting.

Since they know the law better than the government does,that's clear, especially on those bailouts, the war, and now this health care bill for the insurance industry, and Silicon Valley venture capitalists once again for all that "tehnology." That's whose strip searching you at the airports, and most of them are Democrats as Murdoch and Gates are.

So unbelieveable, and how much is the going rate for writing political fiction now by those foreign investors for their continued agendas.

I know I, as a great many Americans, who have fled the West Coast and what has progressively occurred through liberalism that has now made so many Americans jobless and homeless, just wonder when that big earthquake is really coming....

For all that those Californians have cared about their fellow countrymen over the illegal situation and the liberal agendas that have now resulted in untold loss of American lives, I can only mark it down to either too many drugs in most of their youth, or too much sun.

Since those of us real Westerners know that if you stay out in the sun too long, it will bake your brain, and to wear a hat. And sun and drugs really don't mix. Maybe they should start that as the new public service message for those on the West Coast....I'm sure Ms. Pelosi would be right on board with that one.

Ross,

Why am I commenting on your statement, since I don't understand half of what you're talking about. You are a conspiracy theorist, and you are ranting....again. I forgot what the topic was because you are all over the place. Do you even understand yourself?

To what I could decipher:

"And continue to play the "race card" and "political parties" as if they truly exist. And most of those civil rights groups would go out of business, if they didn't also take part inflaming matters."

I know some would like to silence Mike because they disagree on a site called 'Allvoices' of all things. How does talking about race and racism inflame maters? I went to college in North Cali where there are not many black folks. And the black folks I knew talked about racial tensions from townspeople in their own circles. When I saw a Swastika painted in the bike trail on my way to work, I stopped taking that path. So we all ignored it. And a couple years later a Jewish family's car is defaced with hate propaganda, a student is assaulted on campus by a white supremacist with a machete, a white supremacist newspaper is dropped on the doorsteps of the people who lived in the ethnic communities, Bomb plots unraveled and people wondered "where did this all come from?" Well Ross, it was there the whole time. We just ignored it. Perhaps because we thought that would make it go away. Perhaps because we didn't want to be ridiculed for upulling 'the race card'. So I engage dialogue about race now.

"Because the race card is used always by liberals, and it is used in order to deflect and detract most of all."

What a peculiar statement. On the contrary I find that people who feel a little guilty deep down, probably have been called a racist before, are quick to deflect a valid argument, using their powers of projection, to call racism 'pulling a card' to delegitimize the idea that discrimination or their own personal subconscious internalized racism does exist. No, deny the history of racism in this country, slavery, segregation, institutionalized, and say we are using our race as an unfair advantage, to garner symapathy, an excuse, a weapon, or trump card. No. Discrimination doesn't exist. We're all just sensitive. Or maybe it makes you uncomfortable to be reminded of your own prejudices.

Redhanded,

To your first point:
You are like a pit bull? Why are you so angry? Everyone knows Republicans and Democrats have switched sides throughout history. I am not a Liberal or a Democrat and I am black. I totally agree with CaliforniaMike. There is an undertone of racism. Will you listen to me? Why is it that some people get so angry when we say it? Racism still exists and ignoring it isn't going to make it go away.

To your second point:
Historically, in the days of Slavery, having a drop of black blood made you black. You may have gotten to work in Massa's house, but you were still a slave. Even today, I think there is the same stigma and the racists don't give one God damn if he is half black or not. To them, he is still a n*gger. To have anyone other than a white man become president is historical. I don't think Mike was trying to deny his white heritage.

To your third point:
I don't think discussing this topic incites a mentality of hate that is taught to people by the intolerant and ignorant. I appreciate the subject, since I for one have not seen a blog about this subject matter. So many people are afraid to "pull the race card" because they are attacked as you have attacked Mike here. Why does it make you uncomfortable to have a conversation about race? If you don't want to engage in it, why did you read the blog and take the time to comment? You can choose to be blind to whatever you choose. So please leave the chat room and stop spewing your venom. Sorry, but I'd rather hear about the subject that EVERYONE is avoiding rather than California's bankruptcy which, shocker, isn't really news when the countries economy is in the crapper. I could sense your high blood pressure when I read your comment. Calm down. Have a glass or wine or something.

are you kidding me?!! To disagree with your President means you are a racist? That's the biggest bull ever!!! I have absolutely nothing wrong with blacks, but I don't like our President.It has absolutely NOTHING to do with his color. That's crazy. I would also not disrespect him, as I was raised correctly, with the engrained concept that we should respect our elders even if they have disagreeing viewpoints. Gosh that's crap whoever said disagreeing with a President is racism!

These are the ludicrous analogies that you get when concerned Americans have an interest in seeing that their President puts his country first and above partisan politics. If the Media does not do their job, it is up to citizens to seek the truth. I think the President himself has used the race card to his advantage and has polarized this country in a way never seen since the 60's & 70's

@ Redhanded

"These are the ludicrous analogies that you get when concerned Americans have an interest in seeing that their President puts his country first and above partisan politics. If the Media does not do their job, it is up to citizens to seek the truth. I think the President himself has used the race card to his advantage and has polarized this country in a way never seen since the 60's & 70's "


My guess is you're a Republican? The problem is that too many people are partisan and want to agree with one party philosophy and if the other side wins, they feel they have to automatically dislike him/her because they don't have the same generic platform their used to following. People like this, really don't give the other side a chance to prove them wrong because they are sooooo brainwashed. They will find a point to disagree on no matter what.

Race is not a card to be pulled, played, trumped. Can Barak deny his identity? Please give examples of how Obama has used this 'card' to his advantage. I'd really like to know. Perhaps he used this 'card' the same way rich white men have used their money and power to their advantage. Who was it that funded his own Senate campaign out of his own pocket? Here's some food for thought, how many times in Barak's life do you think his race was a disadvantage to him? I'm curious. You will never understand what it's like to be black in this country. Black people like me, hate it when white folks say they use the 'race card' like life is a game. Likewise, I don't understand where you're coming from. I think you don't like to talk about race. I think you have a little bit of white guilt. I think that's why you seem so angry. No one is blaming you are calling you a racist specifically. Does that make you feel better?

It absolutely was not Republicans who brought about the Civil Rights movement. What are you, 8 years old? It was Northern Democrats -- liberals -- and the now extinct liberal Republicans.All the Southern Democrats who were racists later became Republicans -- because of race.

As for my subjects, you choose yours and I'll choose mine.

'the now extinct liberal Republicans' - that is pretty much true. I am a Democrat, married to a liberal Republican, but as a liberal Republican the only logical choice he has most of the time is to vote Democrat. Sad.

CaliforniaMike,

You are now bordering on Lying.
But, I will kindly correct you.

Lincoln and the Republican Party abolished slavery in 1862. Republicans passed the 14th amendment to the Constitution in 1868 known as the equal protection clause and the 15th amendment in 1870 which granted equal rights to vote.
Republicans also passed an act which guaranteed the right or equal access to all citizens in all public accommodations, whether or not controlled by government. (In 1883 the Supreme Court declared the act unconstitutional).
It was Aaron Sargent, Republican from your state of California who introduced the Susan B. Anthony Amendment in 1878, but it didn't become law of the land until 1920 when Republicans gained the majority in the US House and Senate.

In the 26 major civil rights votes after 1933 a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes.Dirty little secret should be noted. Democrats held the White House from 1933 to 1952.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (HR 7152) passed the House on Feb 10, 1964. Of the 420 members who voted, 290 supported the Civil Rights bill and 130 opposed it. Republicans favored the bill 138 to 34 or 80 percent. Democrats supported it 152 to 96 or 61 percent.

In the Senate the person most responsible for the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Bill was Senator Everett McKinley Dirksen, a Republican from Illinois. There were 52 days of filibusters by Southern Democrats before Dirksen got the Senate to vote 76 to 18 to adopt a bipartisan substitute he had worked out. On June 19, 1964 the Senate passed the Civil Rights Bill 73 to 27. Senate Democrats voted 46 to 21 in favor or 69 percent, while Republicans voted 27 to 6 or 82 percent in favor. Democratic Senators Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia and Al Gore Sr. of Tennessee along with most Southern Democrats voted in opposition.
On the Voter Rights Act of 1965, House Democrats voted 217 to 54 or 80 percent in favor while Republicans voted 111 to 20 or 85 percent in favor. In the Senate Democrats voted 49 to 17 or 62 percent in favor while Republicans voted 30 to 1 or 97 percent in favor.

This was too important to let go unchallenged. Once again, I'll reiterate my point, if it were not for Republicans, Democrats would have never passed Civil Rights Legislation.

Would you like to hear about the Ku klux Kan and their party affiliation?

Gee, I wonder why 90 percent of African-Americans vote for Democrats? I guess they must be too stupid to know how much Nixon, Bush and Reagan loved them.

And why did those Southern Democrats become Republicans?

Yes, you may disagree with the president on matters other than his race, but many of your conservative brethren see it differently. We all know theres still alot of racism in this country, we've seen it and heard it, and most of the racists i've known are conservatives. You can't deny there are people out there who hate obama because of his skin color, and that those people mostly vote republican. You may want to tear down the president on entirely honorable political grounds, but your movement gets a lot of support from unabashed racists, and thats just something your going to have to live with.

so then why did Obama win Iowa? One of the "whitest" state's in the country? There is also the fact that Obama got the black vote overwhelmingly during the democratic primaries for the most part because he was black. Meaning it isn't racist to vote for a black man because he is black but it would be racist not to vote for a black man because he is black?

Ross,

WTF? Are you serious? Just because a state is majority white does not make it a state full of racists. I suppose Barak won Iowa because they thought he was the best candidate.

I, a black woman, voted for Barak Obama because I liked his platform, for the most part, and thought he was the best candidate. What does that say about you that you jump to such conclusions about all the black people that voted for him and say they did so because he was black? Do you know that 92-98% of African Americans vote Democratic overwhelmingly in elections? Could their votes not have been because black people identify more with the democratic party platform?

To answer your question. No, it is not racist to vote for someone because they are black or white. Racism is about disproportionate concentration of power of one group which is then used to discriminate and disenfranchise another group of people simply because they are different.

Stillthinking,

Over the past five decades or more, African Americans have been used by the Democrat Party to win elections under the guise of the Party's support of civil rights. In reality, it is Republicans who have been responsible for most of the civil rights African Americans enjoy today. And that is indisputable fact.

All the bills were introduced by Democrats.

And why did 1964 GOP nominee Barry Goldwater vote against the Civil Rights Act AND the Voting Rights Act?

CaliforniaMike,

You can't undo history.
Republicans have done more for Blacks in this country than Democrats and you know it.
Blacks need to wake up and get away from the numbing effects of entitlements and not be led like blind sheep by a Party that only cares about keeping them uneducated & unmotivated.

Common characterizations of Black people used to justify First the slave trade, then slavery itself, then the institution of Jim Crow, then everything from the end of welfare to longer prison sentences, to the abolition of the public school system:

1)Lazy, unwilling to work. In other words, Black people are sleeping through life and need to "Wake up", and stop being so "unmotivated" to do what they need to do to get their lives on track.

2) Stupid, uneducated, unteachable. 'nough said.

3)Greedy. They have a sense of entitlement, and just want something for nothing because they're too lazy and unmotivated to work for what they need and want.

4)Dangerous, deserving of one's fear... OK, so you didn't go that far.

But do you understand what I'm saying here? With this centuries-old rhetoric still being thrown around for so long, a lot of Black people, and many people who aren't Black, but just have their ears and eyes open have learned to recognize it when it starts up.

Another common one:

"Shut up and take it". In other words, when I spew some 200 year old racist rhetoric, don't call me on it by "Pulling the race Card" because I'm not explicitly saying that Black people are stupid, lazy and greedy... even though, Redhanded, that is what you're are saying pretty explicitly. You're just using synonyms.

That's why CaliforniaMike suggested that Racism is, indeed, a part of it. I'm just still shocked that we even have to make that assertion at this point.

I couldn't agree with you more. It is hard to take a microscope to your own thoughts and question what is ingrained in your psyche. I'm sure redhanded meant no harm. He is not trying to offend us, but he does so because he doesn't understand what his rhetoric means to us and other enlightened folks. I think you know what I'm getting at yahmsan, but I'm so tired of saying it at this point. I feel like a broken record.

Common characterizations of Black people used to justify First the slave trade, then slavery itself, then the institution of Jim Crow, then everything from the end of welfare to longer prison sentences, to the abolition of the public school system:

1)Lazy, unwilling to work. In other words, Black people are sleeping through life and need to "Wake up", and stop being so "unmotivated" to do what they need to do to get their lives on track.

2) Stupid, uneducated, unteachable. 'nough said.

3)Greedy. They have a sense of entitlement, and just want something for nothing because they're too lazy and unmotivated to work for what they need and want.

4)Dangerous, deserving of one's fear... OK, so you didn't go that far.

But do you understand what I'm saying here? With this centuries-old rhetoric still being thrown around for so long, a lot of Black people, and many people who aren't Black, but just have their ears and eyes open have learned to recognize it when it starts up.

Another common one:

"Shut up and take it". In other words, when I spew some 200 year old racist rhetoric, don't call me on it by "Pulling the race Card" because I'm not explicitly saying that Black people are stupid, lazy and greedy... even though, Redhanded, that is what you're are saying pretty explicitly. You're just using synonyms.

That's why CaliforniaMike suggested that Racism is, indeed, a part of it. I'm just still shocked that we even have to make that assertion at this point.

You're delusional. Republicans have done nothing for blacks since the 19th century.

Democrats said far worse things about Bush. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lTUB5_l0Mg go here to see one of them. I'm not into Tu queque. I don't believe if one side did it then it's alright for the other side but ugly rhetoric is nothing new. As for there being racists in the crowd, I'm sure you could find them in any crowd.