Is the GOP racist? Is it classist?

[CriticalThought]

I'll put that question somewhat in reverse. If your objection is to policies that boil down to "from each according to their ability (to pay taxes), to each according to their need (for free stuff)" are you therefore against the "common man" and for the "rich man"?

The idea of using the gov't power of taxation to force "proper" income redistribution to achieve "social justice" or economic "fairness" requires treating individual economic success as a bad thing that must be taxed more and economic "need" as something that deserves rewarding (fixing?). Generally the rich do not get rich by taking from the poor but by providing goods and/or services that people willingly buy.

The idea that any individual's lack of personal income is really the fault of society and thus must be "fixed" by a gov't handout, taken from the "excess" that was attained by another's honest efforts is not in keeping with a free society. The percentage of federal spending that is purely for income redistribution is already alarming, yet growing rapidly. We now, at the federal level, "must" spend 43% more than that we are willing to collect by direct taxation. Saying "no" to continuing or expanding that borrow and redistribute scheme is not racism or classism - it is simply logical.

Once again the math does not add up. Republicans historically have spent more on social programs.

Chart of the Day: Republican vs. Democratic Spending | Mother Jones

 

[Redress]

A few years ago I would have vehemently disagreed with what this poster said, but I am considerably less convinced now that the GOP isn't motivated by an unconscious prejudice.

It just seems so odd how many unprecedented actions the GOP has taken. They have shut down political appointments on a huge scale in both the judicial and executive branches and every old school politician who is retiring, whether Democrat or Republican, is lamenting at the extraordinary amount of animosity that exists at the Capital. It is hard to say what the GOP represents anymore, or even WHO they represent. Are they are just about doing everything they can to shut down Obama, even during those times when what he is aiming for is something that everyone wants?

So many middle class folk seem to feel abandoned by the GOP and I don't hear anything from the GOP that would disprove that they aren't the Grand Old Millionaires and Billionaires Party that they are portrayed by the media to be. Even Republican posters on this forum seem to jump at the chance to declare anyone who disagrees with the GOP's economic policies to be "moochers, parasites, envious, jealous, etc."

Is it racism? Is it classism? What is the source of this great animosity?

It is partisanship. The GOP in and of itself is not racist(nor is the democratic party). The GOP, like the democratic party, does contain some racists. Classism..who cares? That is like taking the whole "-ism" thing way too far.

There are tons of things to criticize the GOP over, including some things you mentioned. But crying racism and classism takes away from that criticism. It is time to stop playing the victim card.

 

[CriticalThought]

Don't you think this particular race card has been quite thoroughly worn out?

Believe it or not, there are many of us who identify as Republicans, who don't give a rat's ass about the color of the President's skin, but who believe that his policies are the very worst that any President has inflicted on this nation, and that they would not be any more acceptable to us if he were a light-skinned, blue-eyed, blond-haired Caucasian. It is only his supporters who resort to playing the race card, and that is only because they know that they cannot defend the content of his policies or of his character.

I said it would be an "unconscious" prejudice. Everyone is inherently prejudiced. That is just how nature has wired humans. What makes the difference is when people make the conscious and willful attempt to correct for their prejudices. It would seem that the GOP has not been doing so. What I am curious about is whether than prejudice is racial or classist.

 

[clownboy]

I disagree. The math does not add up.

Daily Kos: Yes, GOP obstruction of Obama nominees is*unprecedented

When HALF A YEAR is the average waiting period for a nominee, you know there are problems.

Step away from the extremist rag that is the DailyKOS. Heck, if you're married to it, at least check out the original articles that are their source (though their sources are themselves slanted with bias). From here:

None of these data points is perfect, and surely there are other ones that complicate the picture. And it remains true that the White House has, in fact, been too slow in pushing nominations.

You'll also see the study, the incomplete data and missing factors, only applies to the last five presidents in the first place. Not to mention, not factored in is the sheer number of appointments have increased.

Also, to have any chance of making an accurate statement, only last term appointments should be considered.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Have you ever heard the expression, "Every "X" has it's 10%"?

Like when you hear about some 'roided up cop pulling his gun on a five-year-old girl or something like that your cop friends are like, "Not all cops are like that, every profession has it's 10%".

Well kinda like that most every demographic has it's 10% that are just lowlifes.

Guess what percentage of Republicans vote in primaries?

Right, about 10%.

So the quality of folks standing for election, and more importanly [sic] reelection from the Republican Party is decided by the far-right-wing 10% that controls a candidate's primary electoral destiny.

·
·
·​

It doesn't matter what the actual politicians think, the bottom line is that they have to cater to the ignorant, uneducated, inbred 10% that votes in the primary.

And there we have it. Yet again, a clear demonstration of the observation that I frequently have made, that those who most loudly proclaim their opposition to bigotry very often turn out to be the worst bigots of all.

It seldom fails, that in any thread that starts out or otherwise evolves into bashing conservatives and/or Republicans with false accusations of bigotry, that those behind these accusations cannot help putting their own genuine bigotry on display; waving it like a proud banner, as if they think that it somehow shows them to be better than the false bigotry of which they accuse their adversaries.

 

[CriticalThought]

Classism..who cares?

I do. A stable middle class is historically essential for the long term welfare of a modern society. Why should I not care?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Hey, kids, the reverso-meme!

I guess the OP touched a nerve.

OK, genius, was my reply based racism or classism? Policy differences are what a party sytem is all about, if the demorat's ideas were as popular as they wish they were (and vice versa) then we would not now have a divided gov't. As Obama likes to point out - elections have consequences. Neither party's leaders are offering any honest "compromise" they merely blame the other for not going along with them - citing a mandate from their elctorate. To break out of the stalemate cycle is totally up to the voters.

 

[CriticalThought]

And there we have it. Yet again, a clear demonstration of the observation that I frequently have made, that those who most loudly proclaim their opposition to bigotry very often turn out to be the worst bigots of all.

It seldom fails, that in any thread that starts out or otherwise evolves into bashing conservatives and/or Republicans with false accusations of bigotry, that those behind these accusations cannot help putting their own genuine bigotry on display; waving it like a proud banner, as if they think that it somehow shows them to be better than the false bigotry of which they accuse their adversaries.

So...you agree that the GOP is controlled by the "the ignorant, uneducated, inbred 10% that votes in the primary" and yet you argue that I am a bigot for asking why they are controlled by people who seem motivated by prejudice or animus?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

That's why Democrats in Washington wanna spend money like drunken sailors on shore leave in the Philippines.

Not a fair analogy. A drunken sailor spends his own money, and he has to stop when he runs out of it.

 

[head of joaquin]

And there we have it. Yet again, a clear demonstration of the observation that I frequently have made, that those who most loudly proclaim their opposition to bigotry very often turn out to be the worst bigots of all.

It seldom fails, that in any thread that starts out or otherwise evolves into bashing conservatives and/or Republicans with false accusations of bigotry, that those behind these accusations cannot help putting their own genuine bigotry on display; waving it like a proud banner, as if they think that it somehow shows them to be better than the false bigotry of which they accuse their adversaries.

The reverso-meme: the GOP uses racist or cryptoracist rhetoric and propose policies that play to their racists base, and tea partiers claim that Democrats are racist for opposing such dreck.

Like clockwork.

 

[CriticalThought]

Step away from the extremist rag that is the DailyKOS. Heck, if you're marr4ied to it, at least check out the original articles that are their source (though their sources are themselves slanted with bias). From here:



You'll also see the study, the incomplete data and missing factors, only applies to the last five presidents in the first place. Not to mention, not factored in is the sheer number of appointments have increased.

Also, to have any chance of making an accurate statement, only last term appointments should be considered.

Uh huh. So we have to wait until Obama is no longer President to find out whether or not he is facing unprecedented obstructionism? Seems odd.

 

[CriticalThought]

Not a fair analogy. A drunken sailor spends his own money, and he has to stop when he runs out of it.

Nah, he goes to the loan shark. Hm...I wonder who that would be in this analogy.

 

[head of joaquin]

OK, genius, was my reply based racism or classism? Policy differences are what a party sytem is all about, if the demorat's ideas were as popular as they wish they were (and vice versa) then we would not now have a divided gov't. As Obama likes to point out - elections have consequences. Neither party's leaders are offering any honest "compromise" they merely blame the other for not going along with them - citing a mandate from their elctorate. To break out of the stalemate cycle is totally up to the voters.

Thanks for contributing to something off topic.

Now, back to the GOP and what we know it stands for by its rhetoric and policies. It isn't pretty.

 

[clownboy]

Who ran the Willy Horton ad? Who has a Southern Strategy? Who used code like "take back the country" and "the culture of entitlement"? Who bashes immigrants?

More ostriching by anothing conservative.

Guess who brought up the furlough program first? Al Gore that's who. He didn't single out Horton, but Horton, no matter his color, was a prime example of the problem and the GOP did a great job of tying Horton and the problem to the opposing candidate (Dukakis).

The Southern Strategy used in electoral politics was and is no different than the regional election politics democrats have always used. The GOP was not the ones who used the slogan, "take back the country". That would be Tammany Hall - democrats. In fact the original template still used today for the democrat party.

The GOP does NOT bash immigrants. Many of the GOP politicians do indeed bash ILLEGAL ALIENS.

Yours is a history fail on all fronts.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

Classism..who cares? That is like taking the whole "-ism" thing way too far.

Was this a joke that went over my head or are you serious?

But crying racism and classism takes away from that criticism.

How does hypothesizing about the role that racism and classism play in the decisions of a political entity "take away" from other criticism?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

The constant use of "playing the race card" as a response to discussions of racism by Republicans is one of the reasons Republicans are perceived as hostile to black people. It's dismissive and treats racism as nothing more than a political tool instead of an actual thing that people perceive and experience.

One thing that is always amazing to me in threads that question racism in the GOP is how many Republicans defend themselves against the accusations by doing the very things that cause people to view them as racist or racially insensitive in the first place.

The accusations of “racism” that are constantly leveled against conservatives and Republicans are false. Those who bring these accusations know that they are false. “Racism” is indeed being used by those on the far wrong, as a political tool to deflect the debate away from practices and polices that they know they cannot defend directly.

Yes, I am being dismissive of these false claims of “racism”. These claims do not call for or deserved any better treatment than that.

 

[head of joaquin]

Guess who brought up the furlough program first? Al Gore that's who. He didn't single out Horton, but Horton, no matter his color, was a prime example of the problem and the GOP did a great job of tying Horton and the problem to the opposing candidate (Dukakis).

The Southern Strategy used in electoral politics was and is no different than the regional election politics democrats have always used. The GOP was not the ones who used the slogan, "take back the country". That would be Tammany Hall - democrats. In fact the original template still used today for the democrat party.

The GOP does NOT bash immigrants. Many of the GOP politicians do indeed bash ILLEGAL ALIENS.

Yours is a history fail on all fronts.

God I love it when conservatives try to rewrite history with factoids. It such perfect teabaggery.

"Al Gore responsible for Willy Horton Ad"!

BWHAHHAHHAHHAHAHHH! Not an honest argument in the entire GOP quiver.

 

[soot]

And there we have it. Yet again, a clear demonstration of the observation that I frequently have made, that those who most loudly proclaim their opposition to bigotry very often turn out to be the worst bigots of all.

Yopu must have me confused with someone who considers the GOP my opposition.

I vote GOP in probably 85% of elections.

Alas, being in NJ the candidates I vote for frequently lose, but that's democracy for you I guess.

It seldom fails, that in any thread that starts out or otherwise evolves into bashing conservatives and/or Republicans with false accusations of bigotry, that those behind these accusations cannot help putting their own genuine bigotry on display; waving it like a proud banner, as if they think that it somehow shows them to be better than the false bigotry of which they accuse their adversaries.

Ohhhh, poor you! You poor little thing you. Cry me some crocodile tears.

:roll:

Do you know what the definition of a bigot is?

It's a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices.

Am I obstinately to the opinion that the far-right-wing of the Republican party is populated with ignorant, intollerant asshats?

You bet I am.

Does that make me a bigot?

Well the shoe certainly fits.

But I'd much rather be a bigot in respect to my intollerance of asshats than side with the asshats in their intollerance of common sense, common decency, and educated opinon.

The fact that my Grand Old Party has been hijacked by small minded, ignorant, self-absorbed Christian conservative southerners gauls me every single day.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Once again the math does not add up. Republicans historically have spent more on social programs.

Chart of the Day: Republican vs. Democratic Spending | Mother Jones

A very brief look at you linked site immediately reveals its bizzarre "slant" as taxes not collected are considered equivalent to gov't "spending". Charitable (or any other) federal tax deductions are not gov't social spending.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

But crying racism and classism takes away from that criticism. It is time to stop playing the victim card.

It's the only thing that the far wrong has from which to make its case. Take away the false claims of racism, take away the “victim card”, and the far wrong would have nothing left.

 

[head of joaquin]

The accusations of “racism”*that are constantly leveled against conservatives and Republicans are false. Those who bring these accusations know that they are false. “Racism” is indeed being used by those on the far wrong, as a political tool to deflect the debate away from practices and polices that they know they cannot defend directly.

Yes, I am being dismissive of these false claims of “racism”. These claims do not call for or deserved any better treatment than that.

Willy Horton Ad. Southern Strategy. Welfare Queen rhetoric. Bashing Immigrants. "Take back the country [from blacks]", "The Culture of [Black] Entitlement".

Which party does this belong to again? Come on, you can be honest. I won't tell on you.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

The accusations of “racism”*that are constantly leveled against conservatives and Republicans are false. Those who bring these accusations know that they are false. “Racism” is indeed being used by those on the far wrong, as a political tool to deflect the debate away from practices and polices that they know they cannot defend directly.

Yes, I am being dismissive of these false claims of “racism”. These claims do not call for or deserved any better treatment than that.

And therein lies the problem. So much of the GOP is so far removed from the perspectives of people who are not like them, that they cannot or refuse to comprehend how the accusations of racism against them might have legitimate grounds. This is why the GOP primarily attracts heterosexual white Christian men. Because many of its perspectives on things like race, gender, sexuality, et al. are rooted in a limited perspective that would primarily be had by heterosexual white Christian men. Then, when people like me point it out to you, you dismiss as "playing the race card", coming full circle. It's amazing to watch.

 

[clownboy]

Uh huh. So we have to wait until Obama is no longer President to find out whether or not he is facing unprecedented obstructionism? Seems odd.

Yes and no. We only have the experience of knowing presidents are last term presidents at the onset since the 22cd was ratified. But since then we know a second term president is on his/her last term. That means the very next presidential election will involve primaries for both parties. The opposing party during a president's last term ALWAYS does it's best to foil any efforts that might give the in-power party a talking point advantage during the next election. Democrats, Republicans, they both go after the opposing party's second term incumbant, doing their best to make them a lame duck.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

So...you agree that the GOP is controlled by the "the ignorant, uneducated, inbred 10% that votes in the primary" and yet you argue that I am a bigot for asking why they are controlled by people who seem motivated by prejudice or animus?

No, I do not agree.

It is only bigots that insist on characterizing them as “the ignorant, uneducated, inbred 10%”. This is a characterization that has no basis in fact, and every basis in raw bigotry. If you're going to falsely accuse others of bigotry, then it really helps not to be quite so outrageously blatant in waving your own genuine bigotry around in this manner.

 

[clownboy]

God I love it when conservatives try to rewrite history with factoids. It such perfect teabaggery.

"Al Gore responsible for Willy Horton Ad"!

BWHAHHAHHAHHAHAHHH! Not an honest argument in the entire GOP quiver.

The first person to mention the Massachusetts furlough program in the 1988 presidential campaign was Al Gore. During a debate before the New York primary, Gore took issue with the furlough program. However, he did not specifically mention the Horton incident or even his name, instead asking a general question about the Massachusetts furlough program.[7]

Republicans picked up the Horton issue after Dukakis clinched the nomination. In June 1988, Republican candidate George H.W. Bush seized on the Horton case, bringing it up repeatedly in campaign speeches. Bush's campaign manager, Lee Atwater, said "By the time we're finished, they're going to wonder whether Willie Horton is Dukakis' running mate."[8]

Source

Now, read what I actually posted, and what you falsely rewrote it to mean.

Originally Posted by clownboy
Guess who brought up the furlough program first? Al Gore that's who. He didn't single out Horton, but Horton, no matter his color, was a prime example of the problem and the GOP did a great job of tying Horton and the problem to the opposing candidate (Dukakis).

Look at the facts. And then season your crow the way you like to eat it.