AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA

[RangerM]

How do we know? Because there is racism in this country. There likely always will be.

 

I don't know if a large percentage of the heat is because of that though. We are dealing with very controversial policies, whatever the color of the president.

 

But yes, it's still the elephant in the room. I have seen racism all over this country, of every type. It pervades our society in every form, and every place. If you don't know of too many people that would never vote for a president because of race (white, black, anything), just ask around. But do it quietly. Americans (including some of us on this board) like our racism that way. We're good like that.

I think you're misusing the term 'racism'. It implies a system. America is not a racist country, but there are bigoted Americans. The term has been overused to the point of uselessness.

 

When you speak of individuals, you are speaking of prejudice or bigotry.

 

That said, it is no less prejudice/bigoted to vote FOR a black man because he's black, than to vote against a black man because he's black. The motivating factor is the same.

Edited September 6, 2009 by RangerM

[Edstock]

I think you're misusing the term 'racism'. It implies a system.

Like Jim Crow laws?

 

Intelligence and Perspective

[Len_A]

Huh? None of that makes sense to me. I am talking about Church sermons of GD America and the White Man and Blowing things up not political statements. Are you on board here?

 

So you will not or can not differentiate between political speech Verses Racist sermons and Terrorist activities?

 

Yes. If Any family member, friend, acquaintance, etc. talked about positively about, terrorist activities, murder, racism, etc. I would discuss it with them to figure out just what they mean. And if they mean its good and OK I would turn my back on walk away. I have no room in my life for racists, murderers, terrorists, etc. Family or not!

 

Peace and Blessings

I'm plenty "on board". It's called "Freedom of Speech", even if that speech makes your blood boil. I have no love for racists, etc. either, but if I had to disavow every family member or family friend who shot their mouth of, especially in an inflammatory, and yes, anti-USA, way, I probably wouldn't speak to half the family, and the other half would be pissed at me for making an issue out of it, especially if I did around some major family get-together.

 

It's inflammatory speed. Big damn deal. Grow a thicker skin and learn some tolerance. All the "peace and blessings" doesn't cover up a decided lack of tolerance.

[stephenhawkings]

Huh? None of that makes sense to me. I am talking about Church sermons of GD America and the White Man and Blowing things up not political statements. Are you on board here?

 

So you will not or can not differentiate between political speech Verses Racist sermons and Terrorist activities?

 

Yes. If Any family member, friend, acquaintance, etc. talked about positively about, terrorist activities, murder, racism, etc. I would discuss it with them to figure out just what they mean. And if they mean its good and OK I would turn my back on walk away. I have no room in my life for racists, murderers, terrorists, etc. Family or not!

 

Peace and Blessings

ok whitey

[RangerM]

Like Jim Crow laws?

Do you believe those still exist as a matter of law?

 

If so, I'd appreciate your "intelligence and perspective" as to where.

 

ok whitey

Being intentionally provacative doesn't help your case, or make you look clever.

Edited September 7, 2009 by RangerM

[ford4v429]

heres a nice short snippet I got via email, pretty good I thought.

 

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=3848

 

Why Is There No Car Insurance Crisis?

 

by Wayne Dunn (August 16, 2004)

 

Is there something special about health insurance that makes it crisis-prone? I mean, we never hear about the horrible "house insurance crisis" or the "spiraling cost of auto insurance."

It wouldn't be too hard to create such a crisis though. In fact, let's try to map one out.

Just imagine if politicians resolved that, since automobiles are vital for getting people to work, companies ought to provide for the care and maintenance of its employees' vehicles.

So political pressure is applied to employers-- maybe through the tax code, or perhaps legislation is passed outright; and, before long, auto insurance is restructured to cover not merely accidents, but routine maintenance and service. For a monthly premium and a $10 or $15 "co-pay,"

your car insurance would cover the cost of an oil change, tune up, new tires, whatever it needed.

Something odd would begin happening though. Mechanics would stop hearing the now pervasive, "How much will it cost?"

Why? Because if all you had to do is plop down ten or fifteen bucks and your insurance paid the rest, why would you care what the mechanic charged? Heck, you'd start taking your car in for an oil change every 1000 miles instead of every 3000. Rather than getting your tires rotated, you'd just have new ones put on. And that rear electric window that won't lower, you'd not think twice about having fixed.

The influx of customers seeking what would be virtually free service means, however, you'd have to wait days, even weeks, to see a mechanic.

Costs would skyrocket. Since comparison shopping would be a thing of the past, auto service centers would have no pressure to lower prices.

Moreover, they'd have to buy more equipment and hire more employees to accommodate the heavier workload, driving costs still higher.

Insurance companies would have to raise premiums. Some people wouldn't be able afford it. So politicians would trot out new government programs -- Car-aid, Car-care-- to help the "disadvantaged." We'd see another deduction on our pay stubs. The numbers of "disadvantaged" would swell.

Resultantly, auto shops would have to hire more clerks to manage all the red tape generated by the government programs and regulations, making costs even higher. Perhaps by then an oil change might run $200 and a brake job $1000.

Before long, we'd hear speeches about our alleged "right" to affordable car insurance. Some would even propose putting everyone on the government dole with "universal" car care coverage.

Now in the midst of all this, imagine that some "radical" suggests the

following: that people would be able to afford car insurance and maintenance costs if only government would reverse everything it'd done to cause the mess in the first place.

How would that likely be met? Probably with screams of "You don't care about the poor!" and "Do you expect people to pay for oil changes out of their own pockets? Have you seen how expensive they are?"

See how easy it is to kick off a crisis? Just add a little government control in the "right" area, and the thing practically runs on cruise control.

America doesn't have a health care crisis. It has government crisis. Or, put another way, it has a freedom crisis.

 

 

 

Wayne Dunn writes about political and cultural events from an Objectivist perspective.

__________________

Recession is when your neighbor loses his job. Depression is when you lose yours. And recovery is when Obama loses his.

[Edstock]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-...0,6632988.story

 

Wal-Mart and healthcare

 

Obama's healthcare agenda turns out to be a deal that usually red-state Wal-Mart has decided to buy into.

 

 

Intelligence and Perspective

[mustang84isu]

Does it scare you that his 20 year pastor/like an uncle/family friend/spiritual leader is an American cursing racist or that his friend is an unapologetic terrorist?

 

Peace and Blessings

Nope, because the whole thing has been blown out of proportion by the far right media.

[RangerM]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-...0,6632988.story

 

Wal-Mart and healthcare

 

Obama's healthcare agenda turns out to be a deal that usually red-state Wal-Mart has decided to buy into.

 

 

Intelligence and Perspective

Sooner or later, you'll figure out that WalMart favors one color....green.

 

Clearly, WalMart believes there is advantage to supporting (Obama's) healthcare reform, or (and I think more likely) it puts its competitors at a disadvantage.

Edited September 7, 2009 by RangerM

[Ford Jellymoulds]

This must be a thread for folk that never voted for Obama, and are pissed off he got in.

 

50 million Americans don't have any health insurance they are gonna be pleased to get proper health care from Obama & it will create a lot of new healthcare jobs with it. If you are down on your luck, and have worked hard all your life and lose your job does your healthcare go out the door with you in the US just intersted?

 

What happens to folk who have work in low paid jobs like Walmart all their life when they retire do they have to go without health insurance when they will need it the most, or does health insurance get cheaper as you get older and retire in the US just interested?

 

In the UK medical care free, prescription drugs are free & you get a free bus pass to travel when you get to the government retirement age. What happens to your health insurance when you retire in the US do you still have to pay like most of you like doing or is it free, or is it a quick will patch you up, here's your leg we cut off job it should cure your gout. You never kept the insurance payments you no longer could afford to keep up. Just interested what happens to your heathcare in retirement Stateside, do you like it because it is free or still have to pay for your own healthcare if you retire from working for a company like Walmart what happens just interested?.

Edited September 7, 2009 by Ford Jellymoulds

[sprinter]

This must be a thread for folk that never voted for Obama, and are pissed off he got in.

 

50 million Americans don't have any health insurance they are gonna be pleased to get proper health care from Obama & it will create a lot of new healthcare jobs with it. If you are down on your luck, and have worked hard all your life and lose your job does your healthcare go out the door with you in the US just intersted?

 

What happens to folk who have work in low paid jobs like Walmart all their life when they retire do they have to go without health insurance when they will need it the most, or does health insurance get cheaper as you get older and retire in the US just interested?

 

In the UK medical care free, prescription drugs are free & you get a free bus pass to travel when you get to the government retirement age. What happens to your health insurance when you retire in the US do you still have to pay like most of you like doing or is it free, or is it a quick will patch you up, here's your leg we cut off job it should cure your gout. You never kept the insurance payments you no longer could afford to keep up. Just interested what happens to your heathcare in retirement Stateside, do you like it because it is free or still have to pay for your own healthcare if you retire from working for a company like Walmart what happens just interested?.

 

 

Fukin liberals just don't get it. All that FREE stuff is paid by somebody. Could be that is why the tax rate is so high. There is even a tax to watch TV. :finger: :finger:

[napfirst]

Nope, because the whole thing has been blown out of proportion by the far right media.

How so?...are you saying none of it was true?

[Len_A]

How so?...are you saying none of it was true?

Maybe not whether it's true, but whether it's of any importance to some (if not most) people.

[the_spaniard]

I think you're misusing the term 'racism'. It implies a system. America is not a racist country, but there are bigoted Americans. The term has been overused to the point of uselessness.

 

When you speak of individuals, you are speaking of prejudice or bigotry.

 

That said, it is no less prejudice/bigoted to vote FOR a black man because he's black, than to vote against a black man because he's black. The motivating factor is the same.

 

Technicalities. Racism in general is commonly discussed in the manner I used above. Yes, the individual is bigoted, but pointing this out hardly sheds light. Everyone knows what's being discussed and communicated here.

 

And yes, the motivating factor is the same for racism of all types. I never said it wasn't.

 

Bigoted Americans make up this country. Why would some not feel the country itself, to be racist? It is an opinion, and matter of perspective.

[napfirst]

Maybe not whether it's true, but whether it's of any importance to some (if not most) people.

Your opinion? or you have facts?

[stephenhawkings]

it's called sensationalism.

[Len_A]

Your opinion? or you have facts?

Facts of what? Whether it's of importance to the majority of people? All of this came out before the election, didn't it? Obama got elected anway, didn't he? Does it look like any of these "issues" (and I use that word very lightly) appear to be important to most voters? Even those that voted for McCain - how many of them were influenced by these "issues" and how many of them voted based on policy positions taken by the candidates?

 

Opinion? In your opinion, these "issues" may be of some importance. In my opinion, they aren't.

 

it's called sensationalism.

Exactly. That's what the neocons and the rest of the far-right appear to be trying to hang their hat on.

[boominup]

Nothing about Obama scares me. He is more liberal than I am, but he and his party won. And....he's only the President....the administrtator of the country. Last time I checked....Congress is still in charge of the rules. Blame Congress if you don't like the direction of things.

And this, my friends , is what scares me the most!!

[suv_guy_19]

Fukin liberals just don't get it. All that FREE stuff is paid by somebody. Could be that is why the tax rate is so high. There is even a tax to watch TV. :finger: :finger:

 

The UK isn't the US. I'm pretty sure that most people know that healthcare isn't free, but it's universal, and it's accessible. Does it always work? Of course not, it's as imperfect as the people that are involved. The reality is that the UK has only marginally higher personal income tax and much lower business tax than the US. It's disturbing how many Americans look at other first world countries and see them as oppressive places, when they aren't that at all.

 

Oh, and I don't believe there's a tax on TV as such. There's a fee to watch the BBC, if you watch the BBC, because it isn't a for profit private enterprise.

[napfirst]

Facts of what? Whether it's of importance to the majority of people? All of this came out before the election, didn't it? Obama got elected anway, didn't he? Does it look like any of these "issues" (and I use that word very lightly) appear to be important to most voters? Even those that voted for McCain - how many of them were influenced by these "issues" and how many of them voted based on policy positions taken by the candidates?

 

Opinion? In your opinion, these "issues" may be of some importance. In my opinion, they aren't.

 

 

Exactly. That's what the neocons and the rest of the far-right appear to be trying to hang their hat on.

I'm far from a "far-right" voter.....and these issues are important to me....and like you said they weren't important to enough people prior to his election to make a difference, but I think now the Independents who helped him get elected are starting to look back (it's not just rev. wright or ayers but a combo of those and other questionable things)...and it's causing them to pause....look, he has a terrible track record so far for choosing those who puts in positions of authority......ie......vann jones, tom dachle, tim geither and others.....he's a poor judge of character and people are now beginning to see it...and this lack of judgement is just a part of the big picture that now has his poll numbers falling....trouble with his agenda and his ability to govern....

[Len_A]

I'm far from a "far-right" voter.....and these issues are important to me....and like you said they weren't important to enough people prior to his election to make a difference, but I think now the Independents who helped him get elected are starting to look back (it's not just rev. wright or ayers but a combo of those and other questionable things)...and it's causing them to pause....look, he has a terrible track record so far for choosing those who puts in positions of authority......ie......vann jones, tom dachle, tim geither and others.....he's a poor judge of character and people are now beginning to see it...and this lack of judgement is just a part of the big picture that now has his poll numbers falling....trouble with his agenda and his ability to govern....

I never implied you were a far-right voter. I think you're a more middle right voter that didn't like what he saw. Maybe I'm wrong on that. Hell, I voted for him, and there's things I see that I don't like either, but given the choices we had last November, it wouldn't have changed my vote either. The Rev. Wright situation, he could have handled faster, but he eventually distanced himself from Wright. I think bringing it up now is a tactic from the far-right because it's still effect at inflaming emotions (not certain I'm phrasing that right, but I think you know what I mean). You may not be far-right, but it does bother you, so it does show that it's still capable of stirring things up.

 

Dachle? Seems to be a pattern for the last two decades, or so, that every in coming President has some supposedly fully vetted cabinet or court nominee that has something negative in their background. Geither? He got confirmed, and my memory is fuzzy on how much GOP objections there were to his nomination. In any case, I doubt it's influencing the polling numbers, per se. I think the polling numbers are falling more due to the right's effectiveness is stirring up public emotions on the health care debate. In any event, polling seem to change with the political weather. Too early to call it a trend. But by early next year, it will be a whole other thing.

[sprinter]

The UK isn't the US. I'm pretty sure that most people know that healthcare isn't free, but it's universal, and it's accessible. Does it always work? Of course not, it's as imperfect as the people that are involved. The reality is that the UK has only marginally higher personal income tax and much lower business tax than the US. It's disturbing how many Americans look at other first world countries and see them as oppressive places, when they aren't that at all.

 

Oh, and I don't believe there's a tax on TV as such. There's a fee to watch the BBC, if you watch the BBC, because it isn't a for profit private enterprise.

 

License or tax same thing.

 

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/information/index.jsp

 

 

 

License or tax same thing.

 

Don't try to avoid it

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/information/t...rvans.jsp#link2

[suv_guy_19]

Yes, that's how they fund the BBC as far as I know, though I wasn't aware that it applied to all TVs.

[RangerM]

Technicalities. Racism in general is commonly discussed in the manner I used above. Yes, the individual is bigoted, but pointing this out hardly sheds light. Everyone knows what's being discussed and communicated here.

 

And yes, the motivating factor is the same for racism of all types. I never said it wasn't.

 

Bigoted Americans make up this country. Why would some not feel the country itself, to be racist? It is an opinion, and matter of perspective.

Obviously if everyone a person encounters is prejudiced against that person's race, then I can understand how his perspective would be that America is a racist country. And he'd still be wrong.

 

People on my side of the political aisle are often criticized for failing to share the opposite side's perspective, yet we are accused as being the intolerant ones. The irony of that, is that it was people on the left who said Obama couldn't win because he's black.

[mustang84isu]

How so?...are you saying none of it was true?

Obama is a father of two who graduated from both Columbia and Harvard and has done more public service in his lifetime than most could claim. I honestly don't get all the paranoia and fear toward him. The Ayers / Wright thing was a feeble attempt to demonize Obama, along with calling him a socialist or fascist (most throwing these terms around probably couldn't define either) and claiming he is not an American citizen.

 

Is Obama perfect? No...he has admitted to experimenting with drugs in high school. But you know what? He's honest enough to admit his flaws, unlike most of our elected officials in Washington.

Edited September 8, 2009 by mustang84isu