|
|
On October 04 2012 03:19 kmillz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 03:17 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:10 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:08 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 04 2012 03:05 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:00 paralleluniverse wrote:On October 04 2012 02:56 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 02:42 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 02:37 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 02:27 TheTenthDoc wrote:
[quote]
Thanks Reverend Wright in the audience for being his pastor. Talks about worshipping God. Talks about Katrina Stafford issues, which are not related to minorities or race at all unless you believe Florida and NYC have no minorities. Note that there are also several cuts here from throughout the speech to accent the Caller's point, which is hideous journalism when your article babbles about how the release of the speech was heavily edited. It's not a straight thing, and indeed takes parts from the beginning, middle, and end of the speech.
The only portion of this that would be construed as racially charged if it were uttered by Bill Clinton is the bit about trying to increase transportation in needy communities to facilitate the development of minority-owned businesses, and this is indeed a pretty big flub by Obama.
He was pretty thankful of Reverend Wright that year, not so much a year later, and nobody addressed this so I will show it again: OBAMA, JUNE 5, 2007: I have to give a special shout out to my pastor. The guy who puts up with me, counsels me, listens to my wife complain about me.
(LAUGHTER)
He's a friend and a great leader to everybody. Everybody give an extraordinary welcome to my pastor, Dr. Jeremiah Wright.
OBAMA, MARCH 18, 2008: I have already condemned in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy and in some cases, pain. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course.
OBAMA, JUNE 5, 2007: When Hurricane Andrew struck in Florida, people said, look at this devastation. We don't expect you to come up with your money here. What's happening down in New Orleans? Where's your dollar? Where's your Stafford Act money? Makes no sense. Tells me the bullet hasn't been taken out.
(APPLAUSE)
Tells me that somehow the people down in New Orleans, they don't care about as much.
OBAMA, MARCH 18, 2008: Reverend Wright's comments were not only wrong, but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity, racially-charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems, problems that are neither black nor white or Latino or Asian, but rather, problems that confront us all. He said that they don't care about the people in New Orleans as much. New Orleans is far more heavily black than NYC or Florida. Why would he say they don't care about the people in New Orleans as much? ........because the government response to Hurricane Katrina was one of the most pitiful demonstrations of inefficiency in the history of the United States? Seriously though, it is not as though he mentioned Detroit...... It was the most destructive hurricane to ever hit the United States. The help sent was not as good as it could have been but to call it the most pitiful demonstration of inefficiency in the history of the United States? Hardly, I'd call Obama's failure to do anything about the debt the most pitiful demonstration of inefficiency in the history of the United States. The whole point of his speech was to get people fired up and convinced that they are being singled out for their race in order to get their vote. It was very obvious. Contrary to the doomsayers, the debt is not a urgent problem. If it is why are government borrowing rates so low? The debt is a problem in the long run. The most urgent problem is high unemployment. This is a short run problem that will have long run consequences if not addressed by actions to stimulate the economy. No the debt isn't an urgent problem because we pretty much blew our chance to fix it already, now we're just waiting for the recession to hit us. Obama had a chance to do something about it and he didn't. High unemployment is the most urgent problem, but the recession is unavoidable at this point. It doesn't matter who gets elected, by 2014 our economy is going to be total shit. If you think that Americas economy hasn't gotten better under Obama, you either fail to understand economics or simply wish to be blissfully ignorant. Blissfully ignorant describes anyone actually believe Obama has improved our economy. Raising the debt ceiling, borrowing more money, spending like crazy, only short term solutions for the economy, its all hot air in a balloon waiting to pop. You parrot Republican talking points so readily, and yet fail to respond to any of the available criticism outlining how fundamentally flawed your conception of economics is. You do realize that saying "debt" over and over again does little to change to actuality of the situation and instead just looks sycophantic. Furthermore, I'll take it by your silence that you have never been to New Orleans, so let me enlighten you. I traveled down in 2005 with a community group to help clean up, and I've seen some FEMAvilles, I've seen the lower 9th ward, and I've seen just how deplorable our governments response was. That you so willingly mitigate the harm caused by the government mishandling of the Katrina events only to then trumpet some vague and ill-informed economic critique of Obama as worse leads me to believe you really have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not a Republican, I'm a Libertarian. I would vote Gary Johnson if I didn't live in a swing state. Obama used Katrina to worsen the racial divide in our country, that is the only reason it is being talked about.
Obama never had to "use" anything, the Katrina debacle made it plain as day that those in charge of FEMA, emergency response, and the US Federal Government in general simply did not care as much as they should have. Obama was simply speaking to an obvious racial divide that already existed, regardless of whatever conservative talking points one might believe in.
|
On October 04 2012 03:21 paralleluniverse wrote:
Citation needed.
Don't worry about scanning headlines every day to determine the U.S. economy's chances of entering a recession in 2013. We already know the answer. Such indicators as gross domestic product (GDP), consumer spending, durable goods and exports all point to an economy not in a slow recovery, but on the verge of a 2013 recession. That's because the trend lines, rather than showing gradual improvement, are moving in the opposite direction. The economy, after spending months with its head just barely above water, is about to go under. The U.S. Commerce Department last week revised second quarter GDP sharply downward from 1.7% to 1.25%. The GDP was 1.9% in the first quarter of 2012. While we do not yet have any official data for the current quarter, a Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia survey of forecasters in August put the number at 1.6%. That's an ominous pattern. James Pethokoukis of the American Enterprise Institute explains: "Research from the Fed … finds that since 1947, when two-quarter annualized real GDP growth falls below 2%, recession follows within a year 48% of the time. And when year-over-year real GDP growth falls below 2%, recession follows within a year 70% of the time." The Mounting Evidence for Recession 2013 There's actually a term for what we're experiencing: the "stall-speed economy." It's roughly defined as a period of two or more quarters in which the GDP remains mired below 2%. ![[image loading]](http://moneymorning.com/images2/recession2013.jpg) And the headline GDP numbers only tell part of the story. All too many economic indicators are flashing a warning that growth will slow down even more. Here are three pieces of the GDP that show how the economy is getting slammed from several directions: Durable Goods Orders plunged 13.2% in August, the worst one-month drop since January 2009. The drop keeps this statistic on a trajectory that echoes previous recessions. Durable Goods indicates the health of the manufacturing sector. Consumer Spending was up $500 million in the second quarter, but that number was revised downward 90% from the previous Q2 estimate. Consumer spending makes up about 70% of the GDP. Exports decreased $300 million in the second quarter, a 110% decrease from the previous Q2 estimate. That's bad for U.S. corporations, which rely on exports for more than one-third of their profits. In addition to the GDP data, there's plenty of other evidence pointing to a 2013 recession: The Philly Fed's Survey of Coincident Indicators, a mix of state-level wage and employment data, has dropped to +24 from +80 just three months ago. This indicator has averaged +41 in the three months preceding each of the past five recessions. The latest drop puts this indicator into recession territory. Earnings warnings from corporations have been on the rise since mid-summer. Most recently, key companies like FedEx Corp. (NYSE: FDX), Intel Corp. (Nasdaq: INTC) and Caterpillar Inc. (NYSE: CAT) have issued warnings. The ratio negative outlooks versus positive is 4.3-to-1, the most bearish since Q3 of 2001. The Dow Jones Transportation Index has fallen 5.88% in the past three months, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average has risen 5.19%. Railroad and trucking companies have been reporting lower shipping volumes in recent months – another sign of slowing economic activity. QE3, or QE Infinity, the Federal Reserve's latest plan to pump billions of dollars of new liquidity into the country's financial system, was hailed as a positive for the stock market. But the Fed would only take such an extraordinary measure if it anticipates a lot of economic ugliness ahead. Even if such a tottering economy isn't quite weak enough to tip over on its own, all it takes is a little push from an external shock, such as the Eurozone debt crisis.
http://moneymorning.com/2012/10/02/this-pattern-joins-the-mounting-evidence-for-recession-2013/
|
On October 04 2012 03:22 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 03:19 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:17 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:10 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:08 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 04 2012 03:05 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:00 paralleluniverse wrote:On October 04 2012 02:56 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 02:42 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 02:37 kmillz wrote:
[quote]
He was pretty thankful of Reverend Wright that year, not so much a year later, and nobody addressed this so I will show it again:
[quote]
He said that they don't care about the people in New Orleans as much. New Orleans is far more heavily black than NYC or Florida. Why would he say they don't care about the people in New Orleans as much?
........because the government response to Hurricane Katrina was one of the most pitiful demonstrations of inefficiency in the history of the United States? Seriously though, it is not as though he mentioned Detroit...... It was the most destructive hurricane to ever hit the United States. The help sent was not as good as it could have been but to call it the most pitiful demonstration of inefficiency in the history of the United States? Hardly, I'd call Obama's failure to do anything about the debt the most pitiful demonstration of inefficiency in the history of the United States. The whole point of his speech was to get people fired up and convinced that they are being singled out for their race in order to get their vote. It was very obvious. Contrary to the doomsayers, the debt is not a urgent problem. If it is why are government borrowing rates so low? The debt is a problem in the long run. The most urgent problem is high unemployment. This is a short run problem that will have long run consequences if not addressed by actions to stimulate the economy. No the debt isn't an urgent problem because we pretty much blew our chance to fix it already, now we're just waiting for the recession to hit us. Obama had a chance to do something about it and he didn't. High unemployment is the most urgent problem, but the recession is unavoidable at this point. It doesn't matter who gets elected, by 2014 our economy is going to be total shit. If you think that Americas economy hasn't gotten better under Obama, you either fail to understand economics or simply wish to be blissfully ignorant. Blissfully ignorant describes anyone actually believe Obama has improved our economy. Raising the debt ceiling, borrowing more money, spending like crazy, only short term solutions for the economy, its all hot air in a balloon waiting to pop. You parrot Republican talking points so readily, and yet fail to respond to any of the available criticism outlining how fundamentally flawed your conception of economics is. You do realize that saying "debt" over and over again does little to change to actuality of the situation and instead just looks sycophantic. Furthermore, I'll take it by your silence that you have never been to New Orleans, so let me enlighten you. I traveled down in 2005 with a community group to help clean up, and I've seen some FEMAvilles, I've seen the lower 9th ward, and I've seen just how deplorable our governments response was. That you so willingly mitigate the harm caused by the government mishandling of the Katrina events only to then trumpet some vague and ill-informed economic critique of Obama as worse leads me to believe you really have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not a Republican, I'm a Libertarian. I would vote Gary Johnson if I didn't live in a swing state. Obama used Katrina to worsen the racial divide in our country, that is the only reason it is being talked about. Obama never had to "use" anything, the Katrina debacle made it plain as day that those in charge of FEMA, emergency response, and the US Federal Government in general simply did not care as much as they should have. Obama was simply speaking to an obvious racial divide that already existed, regardless of whatever conservative talking points one might believe in.
So you agree that Obama is telling them they got fucked by the government because they are black?
|
On October 04 2012 03:17 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 03:05 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:00 paralleluniverse wrote:On October 04 2012 02:56 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 02:42 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 02:37 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 02:27 TheTenthDoc wrote:On October 04 2012 02:13 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 02:08 TheTenthDoc wrote:On October 04 2012 02:04 kmillz wrote:
[quote]
Are you kidding me?!?!? If Romney made that comment Chris Matthews would probably shit himself and have a heart attack at the same time. It is the CONTEXT that gives it away, just saying "our" neighborhood doesn't hold much weight on its own but when he is obviously talking about minorities and throws that in the middle of it, of course he is talking about minority communities. They would react crazily because it's not something Romney would say (though no one knows what Romney will say these days, his beliefs are mercurial), not being it's somehow "racist" to say suburbs don't need more highways and needy communities need more transportation funding, both of which are pretty true statements. I also don't get the Chris Matthews thing. You're saying you're justified in grasping for "racism" straws because a Limbaugh-level pundit has done the same? If you don't like the guy, don't lower yourself to his level to attack the opposing party. No, what I am saying is this exactly the kind of thing Chris Matthews would feed off of, actual race-dividing comments. He grasps for straws but theres no need for grasping here, have you actually watched the whole video? Thanks Reverend Wright in the audience for being his pastor. Talks about worshipping God. Talks about Katrina Stafford issues, which are not related to minorities or race at all unless you believe Florida and NYC have no minorities. Note that there are also several cuts here from throughout the speech to accent the Caller's point, which is hideous journalism when your article babbles about how the release of the speech was heavily edited. It's not a straight thing, and indeed takes parts from the beginning, middle, and end of the speech. The only portion of this that would be construed as racially charged if it were uttered by Bill Clinton is the bit about trying to increase transportation in needy communities to facilitate the development of minority-owned businesses, and this is indeed a pretty big flub by Obama. He was pretty thankful of Reverend Wright that year, not so much a year later, and nobody addressed this so I will show it again: OBAMA, JUNE 5, 2007: I have to give a special shout out to my pastor. The guy who puts up with me, counsels me, listens to my wife complain about me.
(LAUGHTER)
He's a friend and a great leader to everybody. Everybody give an extraordinary welcome to my pastor, Dr. Jeremiah Wright.
OBAMA, MARCH 18, 2008: I have already condemned in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy and in some cases, pain. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course.
OBAMA, JUNE 5, 2007: When Hurricane Andrew struck in Florida, people said, look at this devastation. We don't expect you to come up with your money here. What's happening down in New Orleans? Where's your dollar? Where's your Stafford Act money? Makes no sense. Tells me the bullet hasn't been taken out.
(APPLAUSE)
Tells me that somehow the people down in New Orleans, they don't care about as much.
OBAMA, MARCH 18, 2008: Reverend Wright's comments were not only wrong, but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity, racially-charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems, problems that are neither black nor white or Latino or Asian, but rather, problems that confront us all. He said that they don't care about the people in New Orleans as much. New Orleans is far more heavily black than NYC or Florida. Why would he say they don't care about the people in New Orleans as much? ........because the government response to Hurricane Katrina was one of the most pitiful demonstrations of inefficiency in the history of the United States? Seriously though, it is not as though he mentioned Detroit...... It was the most destructive hurricane to ever hit the United States. The help sent was not as good as it could have been but to call it the most pitiful demonstration of inefficiency in the history of the United States? Hardly, I'd call Obama's failure to do anything about the debt the most pitiful demonstration of inefficiency in the history of the United States. The whole point of his speech was to get people fired up and convinced that they are being singled out for their race in order to get their vote. It was very obvious. Contrary to the doomsayers, the debt is not a urgent problem. If it is why are government borrowing rates so low? The debt is a problem in the long run. The most urgent problem is high unemployment. This is a short run problem that will have long run consequences if not addressed by actions to stimulate the economy. No the debt isn't an urgent problem because we pretty much blew our chance to fix it already, now we're just waiting for the recession to hit us. Obama had a chance to do something about it and he didn't. High unemployment is the most urgent problem, but the recession is unavoidable at this point. It doesn't matter who gets elected, by 2014 our economy is going to be total shit. What recession is going to hit us? Are you talking about the recession that is predicted to result from hitting the fiscal cliff? If you think the debt is a problem, then you should love the fiscal cliff. It would massively reduce the deficit. ![[image loading]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/de/Deficit_or_Surplus_with_Alternative_Fiscal_Scenario.png) CBO = Hit the fiscal cliff. Alternative = Avoid the fiscal cliff.
The fiscal cliff isn't just a problem because of austerity. The composition of the tax increases and spending cuts are designed to be particularly onerous.
|
On October 04 2012 03:31 kmillz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 03:22 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:19 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:17 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:10 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:08 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 04 2012 03:05 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:00 paralleluniverse wrote:On October 04 2012 02:56 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 02:42 farvacola wrote:
[quote]
........because the government response to Hurricane Katrina was one of the most pitiful demonstrations of inefficiency in the history of the United States? Seriously though, it is not as though he mentioned Detroit...... It was the most destructive hurricane to ever hit the United States. The help sent was not as good as it could have been but to call it the most pitiful demonstration of inefficiency in the history of the United States? Hardly, I'd call Obama's failure to do anything about the debt the most pitiful demonstration of inefficiency in the history of the United States. The whole point of his speech was to get people fired up and convinced that they are being singled out for their race in order to get their vote. It was very obvious. Contrary to the doomsayers, the debt is not a urgent problem. If it is why are government borrowing rates so low? The debt is a problem in the long run. The most urgent problem is high unemployment. This is a short run problem that will have long run consequences if not addressed by actions to stimulate the economy. No the debt isn't an urgent problem because we pretty much blew our chance to fix it already, now we're just waiting for the recession to hit us. Obama had a chance to do something about it and he didn't. High unemployment is the most urgent problem, but the recession is unavoidable at this point. It doesn't matter who gets elected, by 2014 our economy is going to be total shit. If you think that Americas economy hasn't gotten better under Obama, you either fail to understand economics or simply wish to be blissfully ignorant. Blissfully ignorant describes anyone actually believe Obama has improved our economy. Raising the debt ceiling, borrowing more money, spending like crazy, only short term solutions for the economy, its all hot air in a balloon waiting to pop. You parrot Republican talking points so readily, and yet fail to respond to any of the available criticism outlining how fundamentally flawed your conception of economics is. You do realize that saying "debt" over and over again does little to change to actuality of the situation and instead just looks sycophantic. Furthermore, I'll take it by your silence that you have never been to New Orleans, so let me enlighten you. I traveled down in 2005 with a community group to help clean up, and I've seen some FEMAvilles, I've seen the lower 9th ward, and I've seen just how deplorable our governments response was. That you so willingly mitigate the harm caused by the government mishandling of the Katrina events only to then trumpet some vague and ill-informed economic critique of Obama as worse leads me to believe you really have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not a Republican, I'm a Libertarian. I would vote Gary Johnson if I didn't live in a swing state. Obama used Katrina to worsen the racial divide in our country, that is the only reason it is being talked about. Obama never had to "use" anything, the Katrina debacle made it plain as day that those in charge of FEMA, emergency response, and the US Federal Government in general simply did not care as much as they should have. Obama was simply speaking to an obvious racial divide that already existed, regardless of whatever conservative talking points one might believe in. So you agree that Obama is telling them they got fucked by the government?
Fixed, and yes.
|
On October 04 2012 03:50 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 03:31 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:22 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:19 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:17 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:10 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:08 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 04 2012 03:05 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:00 paralleluniverse wrote:On October 04 2012 02:56 kmillz wrote:
[quote]
It was the most destructive hurricane to ever hit the United States. The help sent was not as good as it could have been but to call it the most pitiful demonstration of inefficiency in the history of the United States? Hardly, I'd call Obama's failure to do anything about the debt the most pitiful demonstration of inefficiency in the history of the United States. The whole point of his speech was to get people fired up and convinced that they are being singled out for their race in order to get their vote. It was very obvious. Contrary to the doomsayers, the debt is not a urgent problem. If it is why are government borrowing rates so low? The debt is a problem in the long run. The most urgent problem is high unemployment. This is a short run problem that will have long run consequences if not addressed by actions to stimulate the economy. No the debt isn't an urgent problem because we pretty much blew our chance to fix it already, now we're just waiting for the recession to hit us. Obama had a chance to do something about it and he didn't. High unemployment is the most urgent problem, but the recession is unavoidable at this point. It doesn't matter who gets elected, by 2014 our economy is going to be total shit. If you think that Americas economy hasn't gotten better under Obama, you either fail to understand economics or simply wish to be blissfully ignorant. Blissfully ignorant describes anyone actually believe Obama has improved our economy. Raising the debt ceiling, borrowing more money, spending like crazy, only short term solutions for the economy, its all hot air in a balloon waiting to pop. You parrot Republican talking points so readily, and yet fail to respond to any of the available criticism outlining how fundamentally flawed your conception of economics is. You do realize that saying "debt" over and over again does little to change to actuality of the situation and instead just looks sycophantic. Furthermore, I'll take it by your silence that you have never been to New Orleans, so let me enlighten you. I traveled down in 2005 with a community group to help clean up, and I've seen some FEMAvilles, I've seen the lower 9th ward, and I've seen just how deplorable our governments response was. That you so willingly mitigate the harm caused by the government mishandling of the Katrina events only to then trumpet some vague and ill-informed economic critique of Obama as worse leads me to believe you really have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not a Republican, I'm a Libertarian. I would vote Gary Johnson if I didn't live in a swing state. Obama used Katrina to worsen the racial divide in our country, that is the only reason it is being talked about. Obama never had to "use" anything, the Katrina debacle made it plain as day that those in charge of FEMA, emergency response, and the US Federal Government in general simply did not care as much as they should have. Obama was simply speaking to an obvious racial divide that already existed, regardless of whatever conservative talking points one might believe in. So you agree that Obama is telling them they got fucked by the government for being black? Fixed, and yes.
Then why did he condemn Reverend Wright for doing the same thing?
|
On October 04 2012 03:50 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 03:31 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:22 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:19 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:17 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:10 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:08 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 04 2012 03:05 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:00 paralleluniverse wrote:On October 04 2012 02:56 kmillz wrote:
[quote]
It was the most destructive hurricane to ever hit the United States. The help sent was not as good as it could have been but to call it the most pitiful demonstration of inefficiency in the history of the United States? Hardly, I'd call Obama's failure to do anything about the debt the most pitiful demonstration of inefficiency in the history of the United States. The whole point of his speech was to get people fired up and convinced that they are being singled out for their race in order to get their vote. It was very obvious. Contrary to the doomsayers, the debt is not a urgent problem. If it is why are government borrowing rates so low? The debt is a problem in the long run. The most urgent problem is high unemployment. This is a short run problem that will have long run consequences if not addressed by actions to stimulate the economy. No the debt isn't an urgent problem because we pretty much blew our chance to fix it already, now we're just waiting for the recession to hit us. Obama had a chance to do something about it and he didn't. High unemployment is the most urgent problem, but the recession is unavoidable at this point. It doesn't matter who gets elected, by 2014 our economy is going to be total shit. If you think that Americas economy hasn't gotten better under Obama, you either fail to understand economics or simply wish to be blissfully ignorant. Blissfully ignorant describes anyone actually believe Obama has improved our economy. Raising the debt ceiling, borrowing more money, spending like crazy, only short term solutions for the economy, its all hot air in a balloon waiting to pop. You parrot Republican talking points so readily, and yet fail to respond to any of the available criticism outlining how fundamentally flawed your conception of economics is. You do realize that saying "debt" over and over again does little to change to actuality of the situation and instead just looks sycophantic. Furthermore, I'll take it by your silence that you have never been to New Orleans, so let me enlighten you. I traveled down in 2005 with a community group to help clean up, and I've seen some FEMAvilles, I've seen the lower 9th ward, and I've seen just how deplorable our governments response was. That you so willingly mitigate the harm caused by the government mishandling of the Katrina events only to then trumpet some vague and ill-informed economic critique of Obama as worse leads me to believe you really have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not a Republican, I'm a Libertarian. I would vote Gary Johnson if I didn't live in a swing state. Obama used Katrina to worsen the racial divide in our country, that is the only reason it is being talked about. Obama never had to "use" anything, the Katrina debacle made it plain as day that those in charge of FEMA, emergency response, and the US Federal Government in general simply did not care as much as they should have. Obama was simply speaking to an obvious racial divide that already existed, regardless of whatever conservative talking points one might believe in. So you agree that Obama is telling them they got fucked by the government? Fixed, and yes.
They did get fucked by the government. There were people pretty much living on their roofs begging for help for days.
To me a seemed like the result of a economic/political divide in an area that quite visibly impacted a single racial demographic more than other. If a Hurricane hit San Francisco or Connecticut the government response wouldn't have been as nearly as tepid.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On October 04 2012 03:59 kmillz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 03:50 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:31 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:22 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:19 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:17 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:10 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:08 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 04 2012 03:05 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:00 paralleluniverse wrote:
[quote]
Contrary to the doomsayers, the debt is not a urgent problem. If it is why are government borrowing rates so low? The debt is a problem in the long run. The most urgent problem is high unemployment. This is a short run problem that will have long run consequences if not addressed by actions to stimulate the economy. No the debt isn't an urgent problem because we pretty much blew our chance to fix it already, now we're just waiting for the recession to hit us. Obama had a chance to do something about it and he didn't. High unemployment is the most urgent problem, but the recession is unavoidable at this point. It doesn't matter who gets elected, by 2014 our economy is going to be total shit. If you think that Americas economy hasn't gotten better under Obama, you either fail to understand economics or simply wish to be blissfully ignorant. Blissfully ignorant describes anyone actually believe Obama has improved our economy. Raising the debt ceiling, borrowing more money, spending like crazy, only short term solutions for the economy, its all hot air in a balloon waiting to pop. You parrot Republican talking points so readily, and yet fail to respond to any of the available criticism outlining how fundamentally flawed your conception of economics is. You do realize that saying "debt" over and over again does little to change to actuality of the situation and instead just looks sycophantic. Furthermore, I'll take it by your silence that you have never been to New Orleans, so let me enlighten you. I traveled down in 2005 with a community group to help clean up, and I've seen some FEMAvilles, I've seen the lower 9th ward, and I've seen just how deplorable our governments response was. That you so willingly mitigate the harm caused by the government mishandling of the Katrina events only to then trumpet some vague and ill-informed economic critique of Obama as worse leads me to believe you really have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not a Republican, I'm a Libertarian. I would vote Gary Johnson if I didn't live in a swing state. Obama used Katrina to worsen the racial divide in our country, that is the only reason it is being talked about. Obama never had to "use" anything, the Katrina debacle made it plain as day that those in charge of FEMA, emergency response, and the US Federal Government in general simply did not care as much as they should have. Obama was simply speaking to an obvious racial divide that already existed, regardless of whatever conservative talking points one might believe in. So you agree that Obama is telling them they got fucked by the government for being black? Fixed, and yes. Then why did he condemn Reverend Wright for doing the same thing?
You have a twisted view of what the 'same thing' is.
|
On October 04 2012 04:08 Defacer wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 03:50 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:31 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:22 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:19 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:17 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:10 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:08 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 04 2012 03:05 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:00 paralleluniverse wrote:
[quote]
Contrary to the doomsayers, the debt is not a urgent problem. If it is why are government borrowing rates so low? The debt is a problem in the long run. The most urgent problem is high unemployment. This is a short run problem that will have long run consequences if not addressed by actions to stimulate the economy. No the debt isn't an urgent problem because we pretty much blew our chance to fix it already, now we're just waiting for the recession to hit us. Obama had a chance to do something about it and he didn't. High unemployment is the most urgent problem, but the recession is unavoidable at this point. It doesn't matter who gets elected, by 2014 our economy is going to be total shit. If you think that Americas economy hasn't gotten better under Obama, you either fail to understand economics or simply wish to be blissfully ignorant. Blissfully ignorant describes anyone actually believe Obama has improved our economy. Raising the debt ceiling, borrowing more money, spending like crazy, only short term solutions for the economy, its all hot air in a balloon waiting to pop. You parrot Republican talking points so readily, and yet fail to respond to any of the available criticism outlining how fundamentally flawed your conception of economics is. You do realize that saying "debt" over and over again does little to change to actuality of the situation and instead just looks sycophantic. Furthermore, I'll take it by your silence that you have never been to New Orleans, so let me enlighten you. I traveled down in 2005 with a community group to help clean up, and I've seen some FEMAvilles, I've seen the lower 9th ward, and I've seen just how deplorable our governments response was. That you so willingly mitigate the harm caused by the government mishandling of the Katrina events only to then trumpet some vague and ill-informed economic critique of Obama as worse leads me to believe you really have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not a Republican, I'm a Libertarian. I would vote Gary Johnson if I didn't live in a swing state. Obama used Katrina to worsen the racial divide in our country, that is the only reason it is being talked about. Obama never had to "use" anything, the Katrina debacle made it plain as day that those in charge of FEMA, emergency response, and the US Federal Government in general simply did not care as much as they should have. Obama was simply speaking to an obvious racial divide that already existed, regardless of whatever conservative talking points one might believe in. So you agree that Obama is telling them they got fucked by the government? Fixed, and yes. They did get fucked by the government. There were people pretty much living on their roofs begging for help for days. To me a seemed like the result of a economic/political divide in an area that quite visibly impacted a single racial demographic more than other. If a Hurricane hit San Francisco or Connecticut the government response wouldn't have been as nearly as tepid.
So you, too, agree that Obama was telling the people in his speech that they got fucked by the government because of their race. Interesting, now suddenly everyone agrees with me about the speech.
|
On October 04 2012 04:08 Defacer wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 03:50 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:31 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:22 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:19 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:17 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:10 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:08 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 04 2012 03:05 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:00 paralleluniverse wrote:
[quote]
Contrary to the doomsayers, the debt is not a urgent problem. If it is why are government borrowing rates so low? The debt is a problem in the long run. The most urgent problem is high unemployment. This is a short run problem that will have long run consequences if not addressed by actions to stimulate the economy. No the debt isn't an urgent problem because we pretty much blew our chance to fix it already, now we're just waiting for the recession to hit us. Obama had a chance to do something about it and he didn't. High unemployment is the most urgent problem, but the recession is unavoidable at this point. It doesn't matter who gets elected, by 2014 our economy is going to be total shit. If you think that Americas economy hasn't gotten better under Obama, you either fail to understand economics or simply wish to be blissfully ignorant. Blissfully ignorant describes anyone actually believe Obama has improved our economy. Raising the debt ceiling, borrowing more money, spending like crazy, only short term solutions for the economy, its all hot air in a balloon waiting to pop. You parrot Republican talking points so readily, and yet fail to respond to any of the available criticism outlining how fundamentally flawed your conception of economics is. You do realize that saying "debt" over and over again does little to change to actuality of the situation and instead just looks sycophantic. Furthermore, I'll take it by your silence that you have never been to New Orleans, so let me enlighten you. I traveled down in 2005 with a community group to help clean up, and I've seen some FEMAvilles, I've seen the lower 9th ward, and I've seen just how deplorable our governments response was. That you so willingly mitigate the harm caused by the government mishandling of the Katrina events only to then trumpet some vague and ill-informed economic critique of Obama as worse leads me to believe you really have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not a Republican, I'm a Libertarian. I would vote Gary Johnson if I didn't live in a swing state. Obama used Katrina to worsen the racial divide in our country, that is the only reason it is being talked about. Obama never had to "use" anything, the Katrina debacle made it plain as day that those in charge of FEMA, emergency response, and the US Federal Government in general simply did not care as much as they should have. Obama was simply speaking to an obvious racial divide that already existed, regardless of whatever conservative talking points one might believe in. So you agree that Obama is telling them they got fucked by the government? Fixed, and yes. They did get fucked by the government. There were people pretty much living on their roofs begging for help for days. To me a seemed like the result of a economic/political divide in an area that quite visibly impacted a single racial demographic more than other. If a Hurricane hit San Francisco or Connecticut the government response wouldn't have been as nearly as tepid.
The response wasn't tepid, it was ineffective. It was ineffective for a lot of reasons, not just mis-management at the federal level.
|
On October 04 2012 04:14 kmillz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 04:08 Defacer wrote:On October 04 2012 03:50 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:31 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:22 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:19 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:17 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:10 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:08 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 04 2012 03:05 kmillz wrote:
[quote]
No the debt isn't an urgent problem because we pretty much blew our chance to fix it already, now we're just waiting for the recession to hit us. Obama had a chance to do something about it and he didn't. High unemployment is the most urgent problem, but the recession is unavoidable at this point. It doesn't matter who gets elected, by 2014 our economy is going to be total shit. If you think that Americas economy hasn't gotten better under Obama, you either fail to understand economics or simply wish to be blissfully ignorant. Blissfully ignorant describes anyone actually believe Obama has improved our economy. Raising the debt ceiling, borrowing more money, spending like crazy, only short term solutions for the economy, its all hot air in a balloon waiting to pop. You parrot Republican talking points so readily, and yet fail to respond to any of the available criticism outlining how fundamentally flawed your conception of economics is. You do realize that saying "debt" over and over again does little to change to actuality of the situation and instead just looks sycophantic. Furthermore, I'll take it by your silence that you have never been to New Orleans, so let me enlighten you. I traveled down in 2005 with a community group to help clean up, and I've seen some FEMAvilles, I've seen the lower 9th ward, and I've seen just how deplorable our governments response was. That you so willingly mitigate the harm caused by the government mishandling of the Katrina events only to then trumpet some vague and ill-informed economic critique of Obama as worse leads me to believe you really have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not a Republican, I'm a Libertarian. I would vote Gary Johnson if I didn't live in a swing state. Obama used Katrina to worsen the racial divide in our country, that is the only reason it is being talked about. Obama never had to "use" anything, the Katrina debacle made it plain as day that those in charge of FEMA, emergency response, and the US Federal Government in general simply did not care as much as they should have. Obama was simply speaking to an obvious racial divide that already existed, regardless of whatever conservative talking points one might believe in. So you agree that Obama is telling them they got fucked by the government? Fixed, and yes. They did get fucked by the government. There were people pretty much living on their roofs begging for help for days. To me a seemed like the result of a economic/political divide in an area that quite visibly impacted a single racial demographic more than other. If a Hurricane hit San Francisco or Connecticut the government response wouldn't have been as nearly as tepid. So you, too, agree that Obama was telling the people in his speech that they got fucked by the government because of their race. Interesting, now suddenly everyone agrees with me about the speech.
In case you didn't notice, farvacola edited your post to limit it to "they got fucked by the government". That's why he wrote "fixed". They're both agreeing with the idea that they got fucked by the government, not with your initial statement.
|
On October 04 2012 04:17 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 04:14 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 04:08 Defacer wrote:On October 04 2012 03:50 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:31 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:22 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:19 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:17 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:10 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:08 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
[quote]
If you think that Americas economy hasn't gotten better under Obama, you either fail to understand economics or simply wish to be blissfully ignorant. Blissfully ignorant describes anyone actually believe Obama has improved our economy. Raising the debt ceiling, borrowing more money, spending like crazy, only short term solutions for the economy, its all hot air in a balloon waiting to pop. You parrot Republican talking points so readily, and yet fail to respond to any of the available criticism outlining how fundamentally flawed your conception of economics is. You do realize that saying "debt" over and over again does little to change to actuality of the situation and instead just looks sycophantic. Furthermore, I'll take it by your silence that you have never been to New Orleans, so let me enlighten you. I traveled down in 2005 with a community group to help clean up, and I've seen some FEMAvilles, I've seen the lower 9th ward, and I've seen just how deplorable our governments response was. That you so willingly mitigate the harm caused by the government mishandling of the Katrina events only to then trumpet some vague and ill-informed economic critique of Obama as worse leads me to believe you really have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not a Republican, I'm a Libertarian. I would vote Gary Johnson if I didn't live in a swing state. Obama used Katrina to worsen the racial divide in our country, that is the only reason it is being talked about. Obama never had to "use" anything, the Katrina debacle made it plain as day that those in charge of FEMA, emergency response, and the US Federal Government in general simply did not care as much as they should have. Obama was simply speaking to an obvious racial divide that already existed, regardless of whatever conservative talking points one might believe in. So you agree that Obama is telling them they got fucked by the government? Fixed, and yes. They did get fucked by the government. There were people pretty much living on their roofs begging for help for days. To me a seemed like the result of a economic/political divide in an area that quite visibly impacted a single racial demographic more than other. If a Hurricane hit San Francisco or Connecticut the government response wouldn't have been as nearly as tepid. So you, too, agree that Obama was telling the people in his speech that they got fucked by the government because of their race. Interesting, now suddenly everyone agrees with me about the speech. In case you didn't notice, farvacola edited your post to limit it to "they got fucked by the government". That's why he wrote "fixed". They're both agreeing with the idea that they got fucked by the government, not with your initial statement.
So they didn't get fucked over race. Whew, I thought that's what Obama was trying to tell us.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
idk why we need to spend so much time responding to a fox news level troll attack.
|
On October 04 2012 04:14 kmillz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 04:08 Defacer wrote:On October 04 2012 03:50 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:31 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:22 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:19 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:17 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:10 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:08 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On October 04 2012 03:05 kmillz wrote:
[quote]
No the debt isn't an urgent problem because we pretty much blew our chance to fix it already, now we're just waiting for the recession to hit us. Obama had a chance to do something about it and he didn't. High unemployment is the most urgent problem, but the recession is unavoidable at this point. It doesn't matter who gets elected, by 2014 our economy is going to be total shit. If you think that Americas economy hasn't gotten better under Obama, you either fail to understand economics or simply wish to be blissfully ignorant. Blissfully ignorant describes anyone actually believe Obama has improved our economy. Raising the debt ceiling, borrowing more money, spending like crazy, only short term solutions for the economy, its all hot air in a balloon waiting to pop. You parrot Republican talking points so readily, and yet fail to respond to any of the available criticism outlining how fundamentally flawed your conception of economics is. You do realize that saying "debt" over and over again does little to change to actuality of the situation and instead just looks sycophantic. Furthermore, I'll take it by your silence that you have never been to New Orleans, so let me enlighten you. I traveled down in 2005 with a community group to help clean up, and I've seen some FEMAvilles, I've seen the lower 9th ward, and I've seen just how deplorable our governments response was. That you so willingly mitigate the harm caused by the government mishandling of the Katrina events only to then trumpet some vague and ill-informed economic critique of Obama as worse leads me to believe you really have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not a Republican, I'm a Libertarian. I would vote Gary Johnson if I didn't live in a swing state. Obama used Katrina to worsen the racial divide in our country, that is the only reason it is being talked about. Obama never had to "use" anything, the Katrina debacle made it plain as day that those in charge of FEMA, emergency response, and the US Federal Government in general simply did not care as much as they should have. Obama was simply speaking to an obvious racial divide that already existed, regardless of whatever conservative talking points one might believe in. So you agree that Obama is telling them they got fucked by the government? Fixed, and yes. They did get fucked by the government. There were people pretty much living on their roofs begging for help for days. To me a seemed like the result of a economic/political divide in an area that quite visibly impacted a single racial demographic more than other. If a Hurricane hit San Francisco or Connecticut the government response wouldn't have been as nearly as tepid. So you, too, agree that Obama was telling the people in his speech that they got fucked by the government because of their race. Interesting, now suddenly everyone agrees with me about the speech.
What's you're point? Are you disagreeing? Do you think if they where middle-class white surbanites the response would have been the same?
Do you live in a imaginary post-racial bubble that only exists in the heads of middle class white people?
|
On October 04 2012 04:26 Defacer wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 04:14 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 04:08 Defacer wrote:On October 04 2012 03:50 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:31 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:22 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:19 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:17 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:10 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:08 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
[quote]
If you think that Americas economy hasn't gotten better under Obama, you either fail to understand economics or simply wish to be blissfully ignorant. Blissfully ignorant describes anyone actually believe Obama has improved our economy. Raising the debt ceiling, borrowing more money, spending like crazy, only short term solutions for the economy, its all hot air in a balloon waiting to pop. You parrot Republican talking points so readily, and yet fail to respond to any of the available criticism outlining how fundamentally flawed your conception of economics is. You do realize that saying "debt" over and over again does little to change to actuality of the situation and instead just looks sycophantic. Furthermore, I'll take it by your silence that you have never been to New Orleans, so let me enlighten you. I traveled down in 2005 with a community group to help clean up, and I've seen some FEMAvilles, I've seen the lower 9th ward, and I've seen just how deplorable our governments response was. That you so willingly mitigate the harm caused by the government mishandling of the Katrina events only to then trumpet some vague and ill-informed economic critique of Obama as worse leads me to believe you really have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not a Republican, I'm a Libertarian. I would vote Gary Johnson if I didn't live in a swing state. Obama used Katrina to worsen the racial divide in our country, that is the only reason it is being talked about. Obama never had to "use" anything, the Katrina debacle made it plain as day that those in charge of FEMA, emergency response, and the US Federal Government in general simply did not care as much as they should have. Obama was simply speaking to an obvious racial divide that already existed, regardless of whatever conservative talking points one might believe in. So you agree that Obama is telling them they got fucked by the government? Fixed, and yes. They did get fucked by the government. There were people pretty much living on their roofs begging for help for days. To me a seemed like the result of a economic/political divide in an area that quite visibly impacted a single racial demographic more than other. If a Hurricane hit San Francisco or Connecticut the government response wouldn't have been as nearly as tepid. So you, too, agree that Obama was telling the people in his speech that they got fucked by the government because of their race. Interesting, now suddenly everyone agrees with me about the speech. What's you're point? Are you disagreeing? Do you think if they where middle-class white surbanites the response would have been the same? Do you live in a imaginary post-racial bubble that only exists in the heads of middle class white people.
It's pretty cozy in here.
|
On October 04 2012 04:26 Defacer wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 04:14 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 04:08 Defacer wrote:On October 04 2012 03:50 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:31 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:22 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:19 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:17 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:10 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:08 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
[quote]
If you think that Americas economy hasn't gotten better under Obama, you either fail to understand economics or simply wish to be blissfully ignorant. Blissfully ignorant describes anyone actually believe Obama has improved our economy. Raising the debt ceiling, borrowing more money, spending like crazy, only short term solutions for the economy, its all hot air in a balloon waiting to pop. You parrot Republican talking points so readily, and yet fail to respond to any of the available criticism outlining how fundamentally flawed your conception of economics is. You do realize that saying "debt" over and over again does little to change to actuality of the situation and instead just looks sycophantic. Furthermore, I'll take it by your silence that you have never been to New Orleans, so let me enlighten you. I traveled down in 2005 with a community group to help clean up, and I've seen some FEMAvilles, I've seen the lower 9th ward, and I've seen just how deplorable our governments response was. That you so willingly mitigate the harm caused by the government mishandling of the Katrina events only to then trumpet some vague and ill-informed economic critique of Obama as worse leads me to believe you really have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not a Republican, I'm a Libertarian. I would vote Gary Johnson if I didn't live in a swing state. Obama used Katrina to worsen the racial divide in our country, that is the only reason it is being talked about. Obama never had to "use" anything, the Katrina debacle made it plain as day that those in charge of FEMA, emergency response, and the US Federal Government in general simply did not care as much as they should have. Obama was simply speaking to an obvious racial divide that already existed, regardless of whatever conservative talking points one might believe in. So you agree that Obama is telling them they got fucked by the government? Fixed, and yes. They did get fucked by the government. There were people pretty much living on their roofs begging for help for days. To me a seemed like the result of a economic/political divide in an area that quite visibly impacted a single racial demographic more than other. If a Hurricane hit San Francisco or Connecticut the government response wouldn't have been as nearly as tepid. So you, too, agree that Obama was telling the people in his speech that they got fucked by the government because of their race. Interesting, now suddenly everyone agrees with me about the speech. What's you're point? Are you disagreeing? Do you think if they where middle-class white surbanites the response would have been the same? Do you live in a imaginary post-racial bubble that only exists in the heads of middle class white people?
How would have / could have the response been different?
You really think it was a disaster because white people didn't try hard enough?
|
On October 04 2012 04:26 Defacer wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 04:14 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 04:08 Defacer wrote:On October 04 2012 03:50 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:31 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:22 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:19 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:17 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:10 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:08 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
[quote]
If you think that Americas economy hasn't gotten better under Obama, you either fail to understand economics or simply wish to be blissfully ignorant. Blissfully ignorant describes anyone actually believe Obama has improved our economy. Raising the debt ceiling, borrowing more money, spending like crazy, only short term solutions for the economy, its all hot air in a balloon waiting to pop. You parrot Republican talking points so readily, and yet fail to respond to any of the available criticism outlining how fundamentally flawed your conception of economics is. You do realize that saying "debt" over and over again does little to change to actuality of the situation and instead just looks sycophantic. Furthermore, I'll take it by your silence that you have never been to New Orleans, so let me enlighten you. I traveled down in 2005 with a community group to help clean up, and I've seen some FEMAvilles, I've seen the lower 9th ward, and I've seen just how deplorable our governments response was. That you so willingly mitigate the harm caused by the government mishandling of the Katrina events only to then trumpet some vague and ill-informed economic critique of Obama as worse leads me to believe you really have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not a Republican, I'm a Libertarian. I would vote Gary Johnson if I didn't live in a swing state. Obama used Katrina to worsen the racial divide in our country, that is the only reason it is being talked about. Obama never had to "use" anything, the Katrina debacle made it plain as day that those in charge of FEMA, emergency response, and the US Federal Government in general simply did not care as much as they should have. Obama was simply speaking to an obvious racial divide that already existed, regardless of whatever conservative talking points one might believe in. So you agree that Obama is telling them they got fucked by the government? Fixed, and yes. They did get fucked by the government. There were people pretty much living on their roofs begging for help for days. To me a seemed like the result of a economic/political divide in an area that quite visibly impacted a single racial demographic more than other. If a Hurricane hit San Francisco or Connecticut the government response wouldn't have been as nearly as tepid. So you, too, agree that Obama was telling the people in his speech that they got fucked by the government because of their race. Interesting, now suddenly everyone agrees with me about the speech. What's you're point? Are you disagreeing? Do you think if they where middle-class white surbanites the response would have been the same? Do you live in a imaginary post-racial bubble that only exists in the heads of middle class white people?
Just break it down for me what is wrong with what Tucker Carlson is saying here:
After rolling out a Daily Caller exclusive video Tuesday on the Fox News Channel’s “Hannity” that showed then-Sen. Barack Obama speaking to an audience in 2007 with an accent, Daily Caller Editor-in-Chief Tucker Carlson reacted by explaining, as Obama once said himself, “words matter.” Carlson said the message Obama was trying to convey, that the federal government plays against minorities in disaster circumstances, particularly with Hurricane Katrina, which struck the U.S. Gulf Coast in 2005. “Let me just be totally clear for anyone who just watched it and who has seen Obama speak in public over the last ten years will note, this accent is absurd,” Carlson said. “This is not the way Obama talks — at least it’s not the way he’s talked in the dozens, the scores of speeches I’ve watched him give, or public appearances I’ve seen him make. This is a put-on. This is phony. That’s issue one. The second issue is he is telling a predominantly black audience something very clear: The federal government doesn’t like you because you are black.” He said that Obama’s use of racial overtones to describe the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina had negative implications on several levels. “That’s what he’s saying: ‘They don’t like you’ because they are black. That is the theme of the speech from front to back, from beginning to end: ‘They don’t like you because of your skin color.’ And that is a shockingly — that’s a nasty thing to say. It’s a divisive thing to say. It’s a demagogic thing to say. And in the case of Katrina, it’s an untrue thing to say.” Carlson explained that the federal government issued the same fund-matching waiver to Katrina-torn regions that Obama claimed was held back unfairly. “At the moment he uttered those words — you are getting short-changed in the Katrina reconstruction funds — the administration, the government had pledged $110 billion to the Gulf. Two weeks before this speech, the Bush administration gave the Katrina-affected areas $7 billion with no strings attached,” Carlson explained. “He was a sitting senator. He knew that and he said this anyway to that audience and I think that’s a shocking thing to do.” When asked by host Sean Hannity if it had so-called “dog whistle” qualities, Carlson responded by saying it went beyond that. “This is not a dog whistle,” Carlson said. “This is a dog siren.” “These are appeals to racial solidarity. And a few minutes before that, he said, ‘Our people’ — ‘our young people’ should have gotten the construction jobs to rebuild after Katrina, but instead they went to Halliburton, right? So look, he is make very clear case, again, on the basis of his racial solidarity with this audience, that they are getting shafted by a racist federal government. And by the way, unless you can provide evidence that that’s true, unless you can nail down factually that that’s true, you should not say things like that because it’s dangerous to say things like that.” Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/02/tucker-carlson-on-obama-speech-this-is-a-dog-siren-video/#ixzz28Ga6mzCp
Yeah yeah I get it Sean Hannity, faux news, blah blah blah, don't really care how biased it is, the only thing that matters to me is if our President actually is using race-charged rhetoric to convince the black community they are being singled out by the federal government, and it seems to me he is doing exactly that in the video.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On October 04 2012 04:34 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 04:26 Defacer wrote:On October 04 2012 04:14 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 04:08 Defacer wrote:On October 04 2012 03:50 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:31 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:22 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:19 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:17 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:10 kmillz wrote:
[quote]
Blissfully ignorant describes anyone actually believe Obama has improved our economy. Raising the debt ceiling, borrowing more money, spending like crazy, only short term solutions for the economy, its all hot air in a balloon waiting to pop.
You parrot Republican talking points so readily, and yet fail to respond to any of the available criticism outlining how fundamentally flawed your conception of economics is. You do realize that saying "debt" over and over again does little to change to actuality of the situation and instead just looks sycophantic. Furthermore, I'll take it by your silence that you have never been to New Orleans, so let me enlighten you. I traveled down in 2005 with a community group to help clean up, and I've seen some FEMAvilles, I've seen the lower 9th ward, and I've seen just how deplorable our governments response was. That you so willingly mitigate the harm caused by the government mishandling of the Katrina events only to then trumpet some vague and ill-informed economic critique of Obama as worse leads me to believe you really have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not a Republican, I'm a Libertarian. I would vote Gary Johnson if I didn't live in a swing state. Obama used Katrina to worsen the racial divide in our country, that is the only reason it is being talked about. Obama never had to "use" anything, the Katrina debacle made it plain as day that those in charge of FEMA, emergency response, and the US Federal Government in general simply did not care as much as they should have. Obama was simply speaking to an obvious racial divide that already existed, regardless of whatever conservative talking points one might believe in. So you agree that Obama is telling them they got fucked by the government? Fixed, and yes. They did get fucked by the government. There were people pretty much living on their roofs begging for help for days. To me a seemed like the result of a economic/political divide in an area that quite visibly impacted a single racial demographic more than other. If a Hurricane hit San Francisco or Connecticut the government response wouldn't have been as nearly as tepid. So you, too, agree that Obama was telling the people in his speech that they got fucked by the government because of their race. Interesting, now suddenly everyone agrees with me about the speech. What's you're point? Are you disagreeing? Do you think if they where middle-class white surbanites the response would have been the same? Do you live in a imaginary post-racial bubble that only exists in the heads of middle class white people? How would have / could have the response been different? You really think it was a disaster because white people didn't try hard enough?
Erhm, just curious... Are you taking the stance that the government response to Katrina was perfect given the circumstances?
|
On October 04 2012 04:34 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 04:26 Defacer wrote:On October 04 2012 04:14 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 04:08 Defacer wrote:On October 04 2012 03:50 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:31 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:22 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:19 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:17 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:10 kmillz wrote:
[quote]
Blissfully ignorant describes anyone actually believe Obama has improved our economy. Raising the debt ceiling, borrowing more money, spending like crazy, only short term solutions for the economy, its all hot air in a balloon waiting to pop.
You parrot Republican talking points so readily, and yet fail to respond to any of the available criticism outlining how fundamentally flawed your conception of economics is. You do realize that saying "debt" over and over again does little to change to actuality of the situation and instead just looks sycophantic. Furthermore, I'll take it by your silence that you have never been to New Orleans, so let me enlighten you. I traveled down in 2005 with a community group to help clean up, and I've seen some FEMAvilles, I've seen the lower 9th ward, and I've seen just how deplorable our governments response was. That you so willingly mitigate the harm caused by the government mishandling of the Katrina events only to then trumpet some vague and ill-informed economic critique of Obama as worse leads me to believe you really have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not a Republican, I'm a Libertarian. I would vote Gary Johnson if I didn't live in a swing state. Obama used Katrina to worsen the racial divide in our country, that is the only reason it is being talked about. Obama never had to "use" anything, the Katrina debacle made it plain as day that those in charge of FEMA, emergency response, and the US Federal Government in general simply did not care as much as they should have. Obama was simply speaking to an obvious racial divide that already existed, regardless of whatever conservative talking points one might believe in. So you agree that Obama is telling them they got fucked by the government? Fixed, and yes. They did get fucked by the government. There were people pretty much living on their roofs begging for help for days. To me a seemed like the result of a economic/political divide in an area that quite visibly impacted a single racial demographic more than other. If a Hurricane hit San Francisco or Connecticut the government response wouldn't have been as nearly as tepid. So you, too, agree that Obama was telling the people in his speech that they got fucked by the government because of their race. Interesting, now suddenly everyone agrees with me about the speech. What's you're point? Are you disagreeing? Do you think if they where middle-class white surbanites the response would have been the same? Do you live in a imaginary post-racial bubble that only exists in the heads of middle class white people? How would have / could have the response been different? You really think it was a disaster because white people didn't try hard enough?
No. I think it was a disaster because the government responded poorly. To underestimate the potential of the disaster is understandble, to respond so slowly is deplorable.
I'm not going to get into a strawman argument with you guys.
|
On October 04 2012 04:37 kmillz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2012 04:26 Defacer wrote:On October 04 2012 04:14 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 04:08 Defacer wrote:On October 04 2012 03:50 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:31 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:22 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:19 kmillz wrote:On October 04 2012 03:17 farvacola wrote:On October 04 2012 03:10 kmillz wrote:
[quote]
Blissfully ignorant describes anyone actually believe Obama has improved our economy. Raising the debt ceiling, borrowing more money, spending like crazy, only short term solutions for the economy, its all hot air in a balloon waiting to pop.
You parrot Republican talking points so readily, and yet fail to respond to any of the available criticism outlining how fundamentally flawed your conception of economics is. You do realize that saying "debt" over and over again does little to change to actuality of the situation and instead just looks sycophantic. Furthermore, I'll take it by your silence that you have never been to New Orleans, so let me enlighten you. I traveled down in 2005 with a community group to help clean up, and I've seen some FEMAvilles, I've seen the lower 9th ward, and I've seen just how deplorable our governments response was. That you so willingly mitigate the harm caused by the government mishandling of the Katrina events only to then trumpet some vague and ill-informed economic critique of Obama as worse leads me to believe you really have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not a Republican, I'm a Libertarian. I would vote Gary Johnson if I didn't live in a swing state. Obama used Katrina to worsen the racial divide in our country, that is the only reason it is being talked about. Obama never had to "use" anything, the Katrina debacle made it plain as day that those in charge of FEMA, emergency response, and the US Federal Government in general simply did not care as much as they should have. Obama was simply speaking to an obvious racial divide that already existed, regardless of whatever conservative talking points one might believe in. So you agree that Obama is telling them they got fucked by the government? Fixed, and yes. They did get fucked by the government. There were people pretty much living on their roofs begging for help for days. To me a seemed like the result of a economic/political divide in an area that quite visibly impacted a single racial demographic more than other. If a Hurricane hit San Francisco or Connecticut the government response wouldn't have been as nearly as tepid. So you, too, agree that Obama was telling the people in his speech that they got fucked by the government because of their race. Interesting, now suddenly everyone agrees with me about the speech. What's you're point? Are you disagreeing? Do you think if they where middle-class white surbanites the response would have been the same? Do you live in a imaginary post-racial bubble that only exists in the heads of middle class white people? Just break it down for me what is wrong with what Tucker Carlson is saying here: Show nested quote +After rolling out a Daily Caller exclusive video Tuesday on the Fox News Channel’s “Hannity” that showed then-Sen. Barack Obama speaking to an audience in 2007 with an accent, Daily Caller Editor-in-Chief Tucker Carlson reacted by explaining, as Obama once said himself, “words matter.” Carlson said the message Obama was trying to convey, that the federal government plays against minorities in disaster circumstances, particularly with Hurricane Katrina, which struck the U.S. Gulf Coast in 2005. “Let me just be totally clear for anyone who just watched it and who has seen Obama speak in public over the last ten years will note, this accent is absurd,” Carlson said. “This is not the way Obama talks — at least it’s not the way he’s talked in the dozens, the scores of speeches I’ve watched him give, or public appearances I’ve seen him make. This is a put-on. This is phony. That’s issue one. The second issue is he is telling a predominantly black audience something very clear: The federal government doesn’t like you because you are black.” He said that Obama’s use of racial overtones to describe the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina had negative implications on several levels. “That’s what he’s saying: ‘They don’t like you’ because they are black. That is the theme of the speech from front to back, from beginning to end: ‘They don’t like you because of your skin color.’ And that is a shockingly — that’s a nasty thing to say. It’s a divisive thing to say. It’s a demagogic thing to say. And in the case of Katrina, it’s an untrue thing to say.” Carlson explained that the federal government issued the same fund-matching waiver to Katrina-torn regions that Obama claimed was held back unfairly. “At the moment he uttered those words — you are getting short-changed in the Katrina reconstruction funds — the administration, the government had pledged $110 billion to the Gulf. Two weeks before this speech, the Bush administration gave the Katrina-affected areas $7 billion with no strings attached,” Carlson explained. “He was a sitting senator. He knew that and he said this anyway to that audience and I think that’s a shocking thing to do.” When asked by host Sean Hannity if it had so-called “dog whistle” qualities, Carlson responded by saying it went beyond that. “This is not a dog whistle,” Carlson said. “This is a dog siren.” “These are appeals to racial solidarity. And a few minutes before that, he said, ‘Our people’ — ‘our young people’ should have gotten the construction jobs to rebuild after Katrina, but instead they went to Halliburton, right? So look, he is make very clear case, again, on the basis of his racial solidarity with this audience, that they are getting shafted by a racist federal government. And by the way, unless you can provide evidence that that’s true, unless you can nail down factually that that’s true, you should not say things like that because it’s dangerous to say things like that.” Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/02/tucker-carlson-on-obama-speech-this-is-a-dog-siren-video/#ixzz28Ga6mzCp Yeah yeah I get it Sean Hannity, faux news, blah blah blah, don't really care how biased it is, the only thing that matters to me is if our President actually is using race-charged rhetoric to convince the black community they are being singled out by the federal government, and it seems to me he is doing exactly that in the video.
Can't take anyone seriously who's sole job is to make the other party look bad. Can't trust anything he says about politics sadly.
Also the video is from 2007, why are we watching this video again? Oh thats right, because the republicans can't find anything worthwhile to show Obama in a bad light that isn't 5yrs old and that has alrdy been shown.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
