Does Jimmy Carter read rec.boats?
 

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 21:46:42 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"H the K" wrote in message
news:2LmdnfhTW506pi3XnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@earthlink. com...
From NBC's Mark Murray
In an interview with NBC's Brian Williams, former Democratic President
Jimmy Carter attributed much of the conservative opposition that
President
Obama is receiving to the issue of race.

"I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity
toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black
man," Carter said. "I live in the South, and I've seen the South come a
long way, and I've seen the rest of the country that share the South's
attitude toward minority groups at that time, particularly African
Americans."

Carter continued, "And that racism inclination still exists. And I think
it's bubbled up to the surface because of the belief among many white
people, not just in the South but around the country, that
African-Americans are not qualified to lead this great country. It's an
abominable circumstance, and it grieves me and concerns me very deeply."
--


President Carter...he must be reading herring, jack, justhate, DK, BAR
and
the rest of the right-wing bigots who populate this joint.


I definitely think a lot of it is racism. Just look at the signs displayed
in the rally in DC... I certainly acknowledge that Bush got treated to
signs
comparing him to Hitler, but I don't believe any of them made reference to
his race.

I also think that a lot of it is more of a fear-based reaction than out
and
out racism... white good/black bad. Obama is an unknown to lots and lots
of
people.. unknown in the sense that some have never had a black man or
women
be in charge of directly affecting their lives, and they're afraid.

The really disturbing part is the promoting of these feelings of fear and
uncertainty by "news services" such as Fox and Dick Army's Freedomworks.
Both of these groups know better. They should be ashamed of themselves.

More drivel.
--

John H


More truth. Sorry if it hurts.


--
Nom=de=Plume

Does Jimmy Carter read rec.boats?
 

On Sep 16, 2:30*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 10:22:30 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:





On Sep 16, 12:42*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 04:47:42 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

On Sep 16, 1:46*am, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 21:46:42 -0700, "nom=de=plume"

snipped for brevity

the biggest spenders in US history were ronald reagan and george w.
bush. where was the outrage when they busted the budget?

Got up on the wrong side of a reasoned discourse this morning?

"House Speaker Thomas O'Neill (D., Mass.), who had tried to offset the
President's personal pulling power with some tough political talk of
his own, said after the vote that "the monkey is off the Democrat's
back. *The federal budget cuts, as brutal as they are, are Reagan's
cuts."

Toledo Blade, May 8th, 1981

unfortunately for your distorted view of history, the right wing 'cato
institute' agrees with me:

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3750

President Bush has presided over the largest overall increase in
inflation-adjusted federal spending since Lyndon B. Johnson. Even
after excluding spending on defense and homeland security, Bush is
still the biggest-spending president in 30 years

and for a longer view, the biggest budget busters have been
republicans:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...6/ai_20409139/

Over the last 100 years, of the five presidents who reigned over the
largest domestic spending growth, four were Republicans. Taken in
order of expenditures, they were Richard Nixon, Herbert Hoover, Dwight
Eisenhower, Harry S. Truman (the lone Democrat), and George Bush.

and for a view of presidents and budget deficits, check

http://jimbuie.blogs.com/photos/unca...5/natl_debt_ch...

to see what a BIG spender reagan was compared to clinton.

now, right winger, go read. you might learn something

May the gentle reader please note, if one is disposed to an honest
scrutiny of the discourse, that this particular thread has devolved
from a discussion of what impels and compels those who object to the
ostensible, inexorable, oppression through legislation by government

IOW 'his' form of govt...where the rich rule

and a recognition of the use of the strawman argument of racism
applied to those very objectors.

compared to a form of govt where the middle class has a voice...an
idea that's anathema to the rich-wannabee's


*My commentary was not read carefully
by this particular antagonist as this antagonist launched into his
standard rigamarole of "busted budgets" and whatever that is supposed
to suggest. *The lack of an apprehensible commentary on his or her
part is best illustrated in the use of the ad hominem "right winger,"
which is applied through vacuous presupposition and palpable angst.


and the poseur, faux sesquipedalianism belies the feigned
intellectualism of the bankrupt supplicants for right wing ideology