Friday, March 29, AD 2024 1:48am

White House Clueless on Health Care Protests

“A mob”

“Astroturf”

“Nazi’s”

President Obama and Speaker Pelosi are trying their hardest at imitating an ostrich sticking its head in the sand.  It continues still today.

When White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod was asked for his opinion concerning the large number of protesters that marched on Washington on Saturday, he replied:

“I don’t think it’s indicative of the nation’s mood . . . “You know, I don’t think we ought to be distracted by that. My message to them is, they’re wrong.”

After tens of hundreds of tea party and town hall protests, the Obama administration seems to purposely be ignoring what Americans demand, no more government intrusion and spending.

The tone deafness of this administration and their proxies is simply stunning.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
43 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Kevin in Texas
Kevin in Texas
Monday, September 14, AD 2009 5:59am

One small correction, Tito, to an otherwise right-on post: “tens of hundreds” is also known by its more mathematical name, “thousands”! 😉

Bill Sr.
Bill Sr.
Monday, September 14, AD 2009 6:42am

Unbelievable!

Barack Obama in a few short months as president of “all the people” has assembled a group of unelected Czars who with the aid of the most liberal congress in history and an agenda to “fundamentally change” our country has taken over the banking and finance system (which is reported to be in worse shape now than before he fixed it), the major portion of our auto industry, is planning to control all elements of the energy production, and is demanding that one way or another government should take control of our health care system. All of this was carefully planned to take place without any input from the people and over any objections by the minority party in congress.

Fortunately some of this Marxist blitzkrieg is still incomplete. The “people”, after witnessing the obvious socializing of America almost over night, voiced their objection to Obama’s polices and the actions of a hell bent congress to bankrupt the nation by allocating never before imagined enormous amounts of deficit spending to support Obama’s agenda.

Citizens by the tens of thousands have gone to town hall meetings and marched on Washington to demand a halt to the destruction of our economy and the jobs which are at stake under Obama’s inept governance. He reads his ambiguous speeches from a script.
Yet when the people read the fine print in his legislation and find it different from his script we are scary, ill informed, and obstructionist who are opposed to progress.

They are frightened by a future that looms with higher taxes, out of control deficits, loss of private healthcare, potential skyrocketing energy costs, and pending inflation not to mention loss of basic freedoms granted under our constitution. They are aware seniors over seventy fear “cuts” in the availability of healthcare services and small businesses see increased costs which will cut payrolls. They hear that primary care doctors see the possibility of not being able to continue to serve patient volumes if reimbursements are lowered and surgeons and hospitals say without tort reform prices will continue to rise.
All of this is tied directly to provision within the stealth “Obamacare” bill which the House of Representatives hurriedly proposed without even reading it.
The future is frightening for families and the economy and the people know it!

SO WHAT IS OBAMA’S RESPONSE TO THE PEOPLE?
He says we are using SCARE TATICS in our opposition to his policies and agenda.
Who’s scaring who?
Unbelievable!! Mr. President that’s real AUDACITY.

Paul W. Primavera
Monday, September 14, AD 2009 7:08am

Perhaps I am completely off-base, but if in 2012 there is a real chance of Obamolech being defeated, then I think he will declare some sort of national emergency and postpone the election indefinitely. He is so narcissist that he cannot conceive that the “peepul” don’t love him any longer. Liberalism is tyranny.

Zak
Zak
Monday, September 14, AD 2009 8:01am

It seems to me that when he was confronted by protests, Richard Nixon said he was speaking for the silent majority. Many conservatives at the time agreed that the loud left-wing protests were not representative of the attitudes of the population as a whole.

During the Iraq war, there were protests involving hundreds of thousands of people. Conservatives (of a certain kind, at least) argued in that case too that the protests were not representative of the population as a whole.

In both cases, I would argue they were correctin rejecting the notion that people with the drive to get involved in protests were unrepresentative, and their concerns were not the only ones to be considered.

Last year, the huge crowds Obama drew were dismissed by conservatives.

Why should the “tea party” protests, which are as chaotic and divided (in terms of policy goals) as the anti-war protests of 2003 be considered authoritative and representative? Because you agree with their attitude toward the President?

Donald R. McClarey
Admin
Monday, September 14, AD 2009 8:26am

“Why should the “tea party” protests, which are as chaotic and divided (in terms of policy goals) as the anti-war protests of 2003 be considered authoritative and representative? Because you agree with their attitude toward the President?”

No, because they match what political prognosticators are seeing as a very rough year for the Democrats in the 2010 elections.

https://the-american-catholic.com/2009/09/14/of-tea-and-elections/

Elaine Krewer
Admin
Monday, September 14, AD 2009 8:30am

Zak, it’s true that one or a few big D.C. gatherings don’t necessarily reflect the mood of the entire country. But what about state and local gatherings? What if they keep growing over a period of years?

The Iraq war protests of 2003 probably didn’t represent the mood of the people at that time. The “loud left-wing protests” of the Vietnam era, however, were another matter — they kept spreading. Campus unrest also was not confined only to places like Kent State and Berkeley.

In the early chapters of Chuck Colson’s “Born Again,” when he recalls his years in the White House, he says that the wave of protests after the Cambodian incursion and Kent State in 1970 were intense enough to spark genuine fear — at least for a brief period — within the Nixon Administration that an all-out civil war or insurrection could be brewing. Perhaps Nixon’s assertion that he had a “silent majority” behind him was a little bit of whistling in the dark, so to speak?

However, you are right in pointing out that conservatives can’t have it both ways — asserting that THEIR massive protest gatherings prove the country is on their side while liberals’ massive protests don’t prove anything.

DarwinCatholic
DarwinCatholic
Reply to  Paul W. Primavera
Monday, September 14, AD 2009 8:52am

Perhaps I am completely off-base, but if in 2012 there is a real chance of Obamolech being defeated, then I think he will declare some sort of national emergency and postpone the election indefinitely. He is so narcissist that he cannot conceive that the “peepul” don’t love him any longer. Liberalism is tyranny.

Yes, I’m afraid that I think you are indeed completely off base.

There’s virtually nothing about Obama that I like, but conservative fears that he will cancel elections are no more founded than liberal fears that George Bush would. Sorry, I just don’t see it. And I must admit, it really annoys me to see members of “my side” sounding unhinged in the way that I was so recently blasting the left for doing.

John Henry
Monday, September 14, AD 2009 9:12am

Perhaps I am completely off-base, but if in 2012 there is a real chance of Obamolech being defeated, then I think he will declare some sort of national emergency and postpone the election indefinitely.

Um, what? If off-base is a baseball mataphor, then I’d say you’re across town on a train speeding away from the stadium. Get off the train. Put down Atlas Shrugged. Come back to sanity.

Zak
Zak
Monday, September 14, AD 2009 9:59am

But there were plenty of pro-Hward Dean state and local gatherings in ’04 that signified nothing. Granted they weren’t as loud as tea party protests, and weren’t played up by Fox News, but I don’t think loudness is a good criterion for political importance. It is true, as Don says, that the Dems will probably do relatively poorly during the ’12 election – but except for ’02, the President’s party always loses seats in his first off-year elections. And the Republicans are just as (or more) unpopular and distrusted by independents.

Matt McDonald
Matt McDonald
Monday, September 14, AD 2009 11:14am

Perhaps I am completely off-base, but if in 2012 there is a real chance of Obamolech being defeated, then I think he will declare some sort of national emergency and postpone the election indefinitely. He is so narcissist that he cannot conceive that the “peepul” don’t love him any longer. Liberalism is tyranny.

As others have stated, I highly doubt this would happen and I don’t think we should discuss this as a likelihood…. however…. I have no doubt that the left believe they know what’s good for the people no matter how unpopular, and they will use whatever means possible to achieve their goals, stealing elections is definitely in their bailiwick.

The possibility of such an act being successful increases as the constitution is allowed to be infringed, especially those elements which were designed to prevent such a usurpation. Efforts such as gun confiscation, internal security expansion, infringements on free speech all lead us down the path of dictatorship.

Art Deco
Art Deco
Monday, September 14, AD 2009 11:37am

There’s virtually nothing about Obama that I like, but conservative fears that he will cancel elections are no more founded than liberal fears that George Bush would.

I would agree with you. There is, however, an element within the academy and in and among pressure groups which simply does not regard the opposition as legitimate exponents within intellectual life or in the wider public square. At the intersection of this academic subculture and electoral politics is Bradford deLong, and Dr. deLong is (in his programmatic preferences) not at all eccentric within the Democratic Party and may be mildly to the right-of-center when compared to the total population of professors on liberal arts faculties. Look north to Canada and also to Sweden to see extensions of this mentality in practice, and recall that provisions of the federal and state Constitutions guaranteeing rights of speech and petition and assembly are interpreted by the same crews which say the 14th Amendment requires county clerks to issue marriage licenses to pairs of dudes.

DarwinCatholic
DarwinCatholic
Monday, September 14, AD 2009 12:01pm

And we have a mainstream NY Times liberal columnist talking about how in many ways the communist dictatorship in China is better than our own government.

Certainly, there is a certain appreciation that elements of the left can have for authoritarianism when it’s their kind of authoritarianism. I just don’t see that ever translating into elections being canceled. Heck, we even had an election when we were in the middle of a civil war. Not having one is pretty much unimaginable to the American people. I can’t see such a thing ever happening.

Tito Edwards
Monday, September 14, AD 2009 1:18pm

Kevin in Texas,

Thanks! I will correc that.

Zak,

You make an excellent point. I’ll need to chew on that for a while for another posting.

Foxfier
Monday, September 14, AD 2009 2:18pm

Why conservative protests are getting folks’ attention more than the liberal versions:
Libs are always protesting. Cons hardly ever go in for big protests.

Same way it’s a big deal in social circles when cons are rude about politics, but not when libs do it; it’s just not the style.

I guess the best way of phrasing it would be that it’s a matter of different “cultures”– either the Con culture is changing, or there’s something really wrong. (or maybe both, really)

restrainedradical
Tuesday, September 15, AD 2009 2:57am

Question: Why are 99.9% (probably not an exaggeration) of the protesters white? This is DC! And I thought it wasn’t just Republicans, but a nice cross-section of America that’s mad.

Foxfier
Tuesday, September 15, AD 2009 9:16am

…are you seriously trying to claim that Republicans can’t be black, Asian or anything else?

American Knight
American Knight
Tuesday, September 15, AD 2009 12:36pm

restrainedradical,

I was there and about half a percent of the ‘protesters’ were black not to mention other non-white ethnicities. Several of the speakers were black too. Keep in mind that blacks are less than 12% of the total populaiton and over 95% have been brainwashed into thinking their political salvation is from the nice, stealthy racists on the LEFT!!!!

Not to mention that over a third of the 50,000,000 murdered babies of the last 30 some years have been BLACK.

You can hardly expect that a majority of the people at the pro-constitutional government rally would be black.

As for us believers, we know that there is neither Jew nor Greek, nor black nor white — we are one in Christ.

The racism canard is getting really old. I am not afraid that there is a half-black, half-white man in the White House, I am afraid that the white house is becoming RED — Commie RED!!!

restrainedradical
Tuesday, September 15, AD 2009 4:16pm

over 95% have been brainwashed

Those dumb black people. But why weren’t there more Hispanics and Asians? They’re 15% and 5% of the population respectively. Are they stupid too?

You can hardly expect that a majority of the people at the pro-constitutional government rally would be black.

I’d expect more than 0.5%.

So far, American Knight offers the explanation that there were hardly any non-whites because most blacks are dumb. Any other explanations?

American Knight
American Knight
Tuesday, September 15, AD 2009 4:33pm

Nice try — it is clear that is not at all what I said. Additionally I did see quite a few Asians.

Furthermore, I am not exactly a WASP myself. Heck, I wasn’t even born here. My parents, by the Grace of God moved us here before I was an adult and they came in through the front door.

Stupid and groupthink are not necessarily the same thing. And before you go flying off the handle and tell me everyone at the pro-constitution rally is engaged in groupthink and blind followers of Glenn Beck; don’t confuse unity for our founding principles with groupthink.

America is a Constitutional Republic based on Christian Law no matter if you like it or not. If it bothers you that real Americans (who happen to be mostly white but that doesn’t mean there isn’t room for the rest of us) are RESTORING the country to stop the current Zeitgiest that seeks to reform her into Nazi Germany or Red China or Soviet Russia you can leave.

From what I understand our southern border is pretty open. I’ll buy your burro for you since y’all like to use other people’s money so much. 🙂

Foxfier
Tuesday, September 15, AD 2009 5:01pm

Guess we should take a page from the Dem’s book and make sure to move token folks of the right color and sex in for pictures….

Or maybe borrow from MSNBC and crop out anything that doesn’t fit the story? (Say, like a black man packing a scary looking gun in the same area that Obama’s in?)

Or, we can do like we have been, take pictures and not care what shade folks are or what shape their eyes are, and ignore race-baiters who want to insist that, somehow, the party that keeps getting about half of the support of the nation is made up of old, fat, male WASPS.

restrainedradical
Wednesday, September 16, AD 2009 1:15am

American Knight Says:
don’t confuse unity for our founding principles with groupthink.

But it’s OK to confuse unity against bigotry with groupthink? Oh wait. Only non-whites are brainwashed, right? Whites are “unified for our founding principles.” What is it that makes whites so enlightened?

Foxfier says:
Or, we can do like we have been, take pictures and not care what shade folks are or what shape their eyes are, and ignore race-baiters who want to insist that, somehow, the party that keeps getting about half of the support of the nation is made up of old, fat, male WASPS.

Because you don’t care is exactly why you don’t get their votes (though if you’re a loyal Republican, you should care that too many Hispanics are entering the country). The party that keeps failing to capture non-white votes is made up overwhelmingly of white people. That’s a fact. McCain won the WASP vote.

Foxfier
Wednesday, September 16, AD 2009 1:21am

But it’s OK to confuse unity against bigotry with groupthink?

We can show unity with the founding fathers; all you can show is “you disagree with a politician whose father was black.”

I won’t even dignify your garbage aimed at me with a response. Should I ever meet the strawman you’re fighting with, it might be an interesting visit.

You want to keep insisting “you don’t agree with me that we should treat folks differently because of their race, then you’re a racist” — go for it. I’ve got enough faith in humanity that enough will see that BS for what it is.

Joe Hargrave
Wednesday, September 16, AD 2009 2:41am

I’m sorry, but not appearing to be a racist when I am in fact not one is somewhere next to what color socks I wear and what brand of toothpaste I buy on my “things I give a crap about” list.

I don’t even think people like “reinstatedradical” can even coherently define racism anymore, or differentiate it from other things they don’t like. Racism is bad, policy x is bad, somehow they must be related, because “everyone knows” we still live in a racist society.

All hail the never-ending march and triumph of reason!

restrainedradical
Wednesday, September 16, AD 2009 3:21am

Funny. I didn’t mention “racism” anywhere. Didn’t accuse any one of it. Talk about oversensitive! For the record, I oppose Obamacare, at least the public option part of it. I opposed the bailouts. My dislike of ACORN goes back more than a decade. I just asked an honest question. A question to which the only answer given so far has been that blacks are brainwashed. So if I were to dig for racism anywhere in this discussion, I’d have to say that American Knight’s comment was racist. Not the Republican party (to which I belong), not any policy or protest of policy, just American Knight’s comment.

But this does bring up something interesting. Just my mentioning of a racial disparity, is dismissed as an unfounded accusation of racism. There is a reluctance on the Right to acknowledge even the existence of a racial disparity, and if acknowledged, there’s a tendency to ignore it, or worse, blame the race that makes them look bad as American Knight did.

cminor
Wednesday, September 16, AD 2009 7:44am

“Question: Why are 99.9% (probably not an exaggeration) of the protesters white?”

“So far, American Knight offers the explanation that there were hardly any non-whites because most blacks are dumb.”

“But it’s OK to confuse unity against bigotry with groupthink?”

“Because you don’t care is exactly why you don’t get their votes (though if you’re a loyal Republican, you should care that too many Hispanics are entering the country). The party that keeps failing to capture non-white votes is made up overwhelmingly of white people. That’s a fact. McCain won the WASP vote.”

“There is a reluctance on the Right to acknowledge even the existence of a racial disparity, and if acknowledged, there’s a tendency to ignore it, or worse, blame the race that makes them look bad as American Knight did.”

“Funny. I didn’t mention “racism” anywhere. Didn’t accuse any one of it.”

Good one, restrained. Without actually using the word “racism”, you imply one commenter is a bigot, accuse another of not caring about nonwhite people, and insinuate that loyal Republicans fear Hispanic immigration. But you didn’t accuse anyone of racism.

So you didn’t like American Knight’s assessment of why comparatively few black folks participated in the rally. Fair enough; brainwashing would be tough to quantify anyway. Perhaps you’d care to explain why it is that black voters support the Democratic Party (and supported Obama) at consistent rates of around 95% although the party offered no support to the antislaver movement in the 1800s, little to the civil rights movement before the ’60’s, and has consistently promoted policies that have resulted in the disproportionate abortion of black babies, damage to the black family, and urban decay.

BTW, that the DC population didn’t turn out in droves is hardly surprising. These are the same folks who have repeatedly scuttled their own statehood attempts by maintaining crooked or incompetent local administrations that would have been ridden out on rails anyplace else, and who continue to keep convicted drug offender and do-nothing politico Marion Barry in government. My guess is a good segment of D.C. would continue to support Obama and his policies were he to declare himself President for Life, abolish private property right down to toothbrushes, and commence acquiring a harem of teenage girls.

Matt McDonald
Matt McDonald
Wednesday, September 16, AD 2009 7:52am

Restrainedradical,

white knight was merely alluding to the % of blacks who voted for Obama. A far greater rate than voted for any previous presidential candidate. His comment may have been inarticulate, but it was surely not meant to be racist as you have CLEARLY suggested.

I do agree that we must convert minorities to vote their already conservative values.

Raging Elephants is a Houston based effort to do just that, led by conservative minorities who recognize the devastation wrought on minorities by their democrat voting records.

American Knight
American Knight
Wednesday, September 16, AD 2009 9:14am

Please let me clarify ‘brainwashed’. As some of you have cogently pointed out, it is bad wording. Forgive the speed at which I typed a response because I was incensed.

I think it is very insulting to black people to state that there were no or very little black people at the pro-constitution rally. I think it is equally insulting to state that blacks, or anyone else, including us non-white naturalized citizens, can’t think for themselves.

My ‘brainwashed’ comment was a reference to the cognitive dissonance among black voters. Most blacks are pro-family, pro-life, pro-school choice and pro-private property, yet as a block they vote for the exact opposite, which is what the nice, stealthy racists on the left promote. In addition to my mention that the general genocide of abortion is disgusting, it is also racist in that it has targeted black babies overwhelmingly. That is racist. The voting black population has been decimated by the horror of abortion. How can a party or ideological fellow travelers claim to empower blacks when they are the once eradicating the black population? That is racist and hypocritical.

As other posters have pointed out, the policies of the Left (both the Donkeys and the Elephants) have been extremely damaging to black Americans. I stated that the voting blacks are ‘brainwashed’ because I can’t think of another reason that they would vote against their own interests consistently and malign the minority of blacks that support Constitutional government, personal responsibility and a general improvement for all Americans, which includes black Americans.

I also think the right-thinking silent majority, who are not all Republicant’s, are waking up to this long march toward the end of the United States as we know it. That isn’t racist, that is patriotism. If Republicans want to attract so-called minorities then they need to return to true conservative principles and quit copying what the Democrats were 40 years ago and the Democrats need to stop copying the Politburo.

Also, as I stated before, which was conveniently ignored, people of faith know that there is no Jew or Greek, no black and no white, we are one in Christ. We also should all be red, white and blue rather than red vs. blue and black vs. white.

We can by UNITED, as in the United States (Commonwealths) of America on basic, fundamental American principles enshrined in the Declaration and the Constitution. And please don’t go trotting out the allowance for slavery and the three-fifths mistakes — they have been corrected because they were and are not compatible with liberty. America is the best, warts and all.

PS – Matt, my moniker is AMERICAN Knight and although white knight has a certain appeal, given this topic it is probably very innaproriate. I am fairly confident the KKK would not have me as a member not only becuase of the color of my skin and texture of my hair but becuase I am also very Catholic and my status as knight is only due to Fr. McGivney 🙂

Big Tex
Big Tex
Wednesday, September 16, AD 2009 9:33am

One thing that seems to be lost on Michael Sean Winters and others intimating that racism is a major motivator for these protesters is the fact that these same protesters are also quite angry with the quite fair-skinned congress.

Just sayin’.

Matt McDonald
Matt McDonald
Wednesday, September 16, AD 2009 10:06am

American Knight,

deepest apology for the typo. Growing up in Canada the concept of “white knight” has nothing to do with racism or the KKK and so the transposition was not ill-intended.

ps. I find it ironicly amusing that restrainedradical would imply you are racist against yourself…

American Knight
American Knight
Wednesday, September 16, AD 2009 10:16am

Matt,

No harm. I didn’t think you meant it that way; I was clarifying becuase some people tend to use any slip to latch on to in order to promote their illogical argument.

You may be interested in knowing that I am currently suing myself for discrimination and I am hoping to enlist the help of ACORN becuase I will not put up with this blatant racism and hatred for an immigrant especially becuase he dared to enter through the front door and actually read the Constitution. These kind of people are dangerous, they may actually have an idea that liberty and rights come from God and are secured by the Constitution for everyone! Where would that leave community ‘prostitution’ organizers and trial lawyers? Not to mention who would actually watch NBC? This is frightening. I demand an investigation. Unfair. I am victimizing myself — do something about it you white people.

Foxfier
Wednesday, September 16, AD 2009 11:12am

AK- *lol*

…Am I the only one kinda sad that folks watch the video up top, and the first thing they do is try to count how many of what race are where?

I wish I’d kept track of a picture that was making the rounds during the election– it was from one of the mainstream newspapers, and some folks made a stink because the lighting made Obama look no darker than an Italian with a slight tan. If he were wearing a hat with a nice shirt…are we sure someone would be able to guess his race in that video? Seems like a lot of sand to build an accusation on.

restrainedradical
Wednesday, September 16, AD 2009 7:37pm

cminor says:
Without actually using the word “racism”, you imply one commenter is a bigot, accuse another of not caring about nonwhite people, and insinuate that loyal Republicans fear Hispanic immigration. But you didn’t accuse anyone of racism.

That 95% of blacks are brainwashed is a bigoted comment. I said that that was racist. I didn’t accuse anyone of not caring about nonwhite people. Foxfier admitted to not caring about race. Stephen Colbert mocks that sentiment with his line, “I don’t see race. I’ve been told I’m white.” It’s not racism. It’s ignoring that race issues exist. That’s why the GOP can’t win nonwhite votes. As for the loyal Republicans and xenophobia, “loyal Republicans” was not entirely accurate. I was talking about the Tom Tancredos and that large minority of the party that agrees with him.

Perhaps you’d care to explain why it is that black voters support the Democratic Party (and supported Obama) at consistent rates of around 95% although the party offered no support to the antislaver movement in the 1800s, little to the civil rights movement before the ’60’s, and has consistently promoted policies that have resulted in the disproportionate abortion of black babies, damage to the black family, and urban decay.

I’ll address that but I’d just like to let you know that those are very poor arguments that the Right would do well to drop. Seriously. It doesn’t convince anyone and only demonstrates how little the modern GOP has done for blacks. Blacks were Republican in the 1800’s and left the party entirely in the ’60’s. Parties change. Black babies are disproportionately aborted because more black women want to. They want abortion.

Blacks vote Democrat because:
1. They’re poorer than whites. Progressive taxation and social programs help them disproportionately. Most people vote according to their economic interests. Not “brainwashed.” Perfectly rational.
2. They don’t trust Republicans. After the GOP picked up the segregationists in the 60’s, they lost the trust of blacks. The GOP did nothing to earn that trust back. Again, not “brainwashed.” Perfectly rational.

But I’d like to hear your answer as to why blacks don’t vote Republican, if as you claim the Democratic party is so bad for them.

restrainedradical
Wednesday, September 16, AD 2009 8:06pm

American Knight says:
I think it is very insulting to black people to state that there were no or very little black people at the pro-constitution rally.

It’s a fact. You said so yourself: “about half a percent.” Don’t be insulted by facts.

I think it is equally insulting to state that blacks, or anyone else, including us non-white naturalized citizens, can’t think for themselves.

Good to see you acknowledge that. But then you say…

I stated that the voting blacks are ‘brainwashed’ because I can’t think of another reason that they would vote against their own interests consistently and malign the minority of blacks that support Constitutional government, personal responsibility and a general improvement for all Americans, which includes black Americans.

So you’re standing firm? Most blacks are brainwashed? Unbelievable.

Also, as I stated before, which was conveniently ignored, people of faith know that there is no Jew or Greek, no black and no white, we are one in Christ. We also should all be red, white and blue rather than red vs. blue and black vs. white.

Using faith in Christ for an appeal to nationalism? How about this one? There should be no illegal immigrant vs. native. No child vs. parent. No rich vs. poor. No healthy vs. disabled. In Christ we are all of equal dignity but these earthly differences should matter when it comes to policy.

restrainedradical
Wednesday, September 16, AD 2009 8:08pm

Big Tex says:
One thing that seems to be lost on Michael Sean Winters and others intimating that racism is a major motivator for these protesters is the fact that these same protesters are also quite angry with the quite fair-skinned congress.

The KKK didn’t like LBJ, therefore, the KKK cannot be racist.

cminor
Wednesday, September 16, AD 2009 9:18pm

Restrained:
Way to dodge the question, dude. And no, I’m not going to be lured into venturing theories as I have little doubt that I’ll have been called a racist and a few other things by the time I’m done. You didn’t notice, by any chance, American Knight’s reference to his own racial background? I’m astonished you persist in attacking him.

Incidentally, I think most black pro-lifers would take issue with your flip remark about black women and abortion. You’re unaware, I take it, that Planned Parenthood originated from the eugenics movement and strategically locates clinics in predominantly black neighborhoods to this day?
http://www.lifeissues.org/connector/2005/Oct05_PPTargetsAA.htm

I’m part Hispanic and can vouch for the fact that PP and other abortionists also advertise heavily in the secular Spanish-language press, so their commitment to “servicing” minorities is nothing if not broad-based. For some reason they seem to be less interested in ad campaigns targeting middle-class white women, unless they happen to be high school or college students.

cminor
Wednesday, September 16, AD 2009 9:23pm

Myapology; there was an answer down there at the bottom. But I’m sticking to my guns re the rest.

cminor
Wednesday, September 16, AD 2009 9:25pm

OTOH, it doesn’t really explain the persistence of Democratic voting into the black middle and upper classes.

American Knight
American Knight
Thursday, September 17, AD 2009 6:42am

This is getting tired. 0.005% of the country’s population was at DC on 912. 300,000,000 at 12% (approx black population)= 36million. black population factored by total of dc 912 population is 180,000. Since 95% of balcks are probably still against this movement then we can expect that 9,000 black Americans would be present at DC 912. I didn’t count, but I think the number is higher than that.

In any event, it doesn’t really matter this whole discussion is a canard. Are some people racists? Yes. Are they all white? No. Is America as a country racist? No. Is the por-Constitution movement racist? No. Are some people in it racist? Probably.

A minority of racists no matter if they are black, white, Kenyan, Korean or from Kansas do not make a racist movement.

As for radical’s comment about using faith for nationalism. What do you think Jefferson (not an exemplary Christian and sadly using enlightenment language) meant when he wrote that our rights come from Nature’s God? This is a Christian nation. That doesn’t mean she doesn’t allow for other beleifs it means the principles are Christian — a fact, a stubborn, unavoidable fact.

In your twisted attack on me you mixed behavior with constitution. A black man is a black man becuase God made him that way. An illegal alien is illegel becuase he chose to trespass. Not the same thing at all. We are not to be judged on our make-up but on our behavior and choices.

I am finished with this discussion so like a typical antagonist, I am sure that radical will take the last word. I know I am right so I am done.

God bless you all.

TomSVDP
TomSVDP
Thursday, September 17, AD 2009 8:49am

Margaret Sanger the big abortion pioneer lectured the Klan. By the way, Catholics have been targets of the KKK as well.

http://www.blackgenocide.org (and the more rowdy dot com version give lots of facts)

Martin Luther King a Republican.

Republicans voted for desegregation in the 1960s. I’m not sure saying the Republicans picked up the Segregationists is an accurate statement with someone like Byrd a powerful democrat and he was in the Klan.

TomSVDP
TomSVDP
Thursday, September 17, AD 2009 9:01am

“Blacks were Republican in the 1800’s and left the party entirely in the ’60’s. Parties change. Black babies are disproportionately aborted because more black women want to. They want abortion.”

Denzel Washington, Martin Luther King, Republicans.

Desegregation Bills only passed because Republicans voted for those bills.

The last sentence really is a joke, again http://www.blackgenocide.org

Big Tex
Big Tex
Thursday, September 17, AD 2009 9:23am

restrained radical,

The KKK didn’t like LBJ, therefore, the KKK cannot be racist.
I fail to see your point. In fact, you entirely missed mine. In these protests, the ire directed at President Obama is very much the same as that directed at the Congress. Why not take a look at the rhetoric from these protests and see for yourself what the nature of the ire actually is.

restrainedradical
Thursday, September 17, AD 2009 10:40am

American Knight Says:
Since 95% of balcks are probably still against this movement

You say that in passing but that’s my point.

In your twisted attack on me you mixed behavior with constitution. A black man is a black man becuase God made him that way. An illegal alien is illegel becuase he chose to trespass. Not the same thing at all. We are not to be judged on our make-up but on our behavior and choices.

I also used the example of children and the disabled which you very conveniently ignore. Unless, you think one chooses to be a child or disabled.

I know I am right so I am done.

Bigotry is never right.

restrainedradical
Thursday, September 17, AD 2009 10:57am

cminor says:
OTOH, it doesn’t really explain the persistence of Democratic voting into the black middle and upper classes.

The distrust of Republicans still applies plus:
1. Many middle and upper income blacks grew up poorer. They have friends and family who are still poor.
2. Solidarity within the black community. At the macro level it’s strong.

Discover more from The American Catholic

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Scroll to Top