DescentBB

Don't get riled at me, AQ 2nd in command (or first as some think Osama may be dead) used the term as he didn't like position Obama was taking on war on terrorism. While as demeaning as the term may be, there is a element of truth to the name.

When Bush took over, he put 2 highly capable African Americans into key spots. Colon Powell into Secretary of State and Condoleeza Wright as National Security Adviser. Now how many capable blacks has Obama elevated into positions of trust? No one so far. In fact Obama seems to be resurrecting the Herr Klinton team. All white as the driven snow. So where's the change? I guess the message to all those good black folk who voted for him, Obama is showing that he doesn't think black people are capable as a race. Just capable enough to be sucked in by the color of his skin and to vote for him.

So as I said before, Obama is half white and now that he has plucked the best apple off the tree by standing on the backs of all those Afro-Americans who voted for him, the white side is now becoming apparent by who Obama is choosing for his cabinet.
Isn't change wonderful.

OH No He Di'n't !!!

Woodchip wrote:When Bush took over, he put 2 highly capable African Americans into key spots. Colon Powell into Secretary of State and Condoleeza Wright as National Security Adviser. Now how many capable blacks has Obama elevated into positions of trust? No one so far. In fact Obama seems to be resurrecting the Herr Klinton team. All white as the driven snow. So where's the change? I guess the message to all those good black folk who voted for him, Obama is showing that he doesn't think black people are capable as a race. Just capable enough to be sucked in by the color of his skin and to vote for him.

Just Yesterday...

CNN wrote:Sources tell CNN’s Ed Henry and John King Barack Obama has chosen Eric Holder as his nominee for Attorney General.

Holder has accepted the position but must still undergo a vetting process by the Obama transition team.

If confirmed, Holder will become the first African-American to hold the position.

link

Just another evidence that the change that was voted for on Nov 4 wasn't the change people thought they were getting. The people he hires will make perfect sense, in the light of his Marxist/socialist agendas. In fact it's very arguably about the same revolution that the folks in the SDS and the Weather Underground were fighting for, it just went straight to the top this time (incidentally with the support of the liberal youth). Same degree of understanding among its followers, and the same underlying goals. Scary stuff.

Damn liberals...

ST wrote:Just another evidence that the change that was voted for on Nov 4 wasn't the change people thought they were getting.

The post above yours is good stuff.

My fellow "damn liberals" never fought for black majority, we fought for equality. Blacks make up 12%; in a "race blind" country their ratio in the government should on average be similar.

Of all things, a majority of white people shouldn't be what is giving you guys pause.

Gooberman wrote:The post above yours is good stuff.

That's funny, so is the one above (and below) yours.

Did you read "Damn liberals" as "★■◆● sympathizers"? I was just venting annoyance at their fascination with socialist ideas, and really their anti-capitalism (Marxism), in a country based on the sort of liberty that capitalism allows.

An argument that black Americans should have equal representation in the U.S. government would not be totally out of line, in my opinion, if that's what you're saying, but it could lend legitimacy to racial divides, as a side-effect, as opposed to aiding in working past the problem of racism (it all depends on how it's done, IMO). Who is going to understand the concerns of their fellow black Americans if it isn't a black man, though? All I ask is that they be otherwise qualified, and have conservative values.

All those blacks that voted for him just because he is black are morons. Did they really think he was going to 'represent' and hire all 'niggaz'?

He's going to hire who he thinks will get the job he wants done. Color doesn't mean ★■◆●.

Put your racist bull★■◆● back in the 50's where it belongs, Woodchip. Since you don't know why he's hired all whites, for you to jump to said conclusion really makes you're a dick.

Testi, try laying the smack down on woody without being quite so nasty/angry about it. Typing while angry makes you're fail at grammar.

Then I must always be angry

I thought he was just being poetic.

All your anger are belong to us.

Testiculese wrote:All those blacks that voted for him just because he is black are morons. Did they really think he was going to 'represent' and hire all 'niggaz'?

He's going to hire who he thinks will get the job he wants done. Color doesn't mean *****.

Put your racist ***** back in the 50's where it belongs, Woodchip. Since you don't know why he's hired all whites, for you to jump to said conclusion really makes you're a dick.

Really? So you are saying there are no Afro American's capable of filling all these admin slots? I think you fail at understanding the difference between qualified and being in the tank for your party. Or are you upset that your man is really inept and has to run to ex Clinton people to run his show?
Nice try tho. You are a classic example of a apologist explaining why black Americans are kept from getting ahead. So who's the real racist Testi?

.....I really do think my first post was an important contribution to this thread

Too much quote, too little text?

Lol, poor Goob.

First, some of the language in here is absolutely uncalled-for. There's no reason to use it, even if you're attributing the words to someone else. (Now, before you accuse me of catering to political correctness, don't; I'm talking about having the sense to avoid flame-bait.)

Second, let's please avoid making this another one of those threads where everyone ends up accusing everyone else here of racism or reverse-racism or reverse-triple-counter-racism, or whatever. If you want to talk about motivations for hiring cabinet members, fine... but let's drop all the \"you're the one being racist\" flames, 'k?

Third, I'm curious, what scenario would satisfy you, Woody? If Obama picked all or mostly black members, you'd of course accuse him of direct racism... if he picked all white members, you'd accuse him of some kind of reverse racism or pandering to the Clinton crowd... and if he picks some of each, it seems you'd still accuse him of trying to meet some kind of racial quota. Am I wrong?

I think what we can all agree upon, or rather what we should all agree upon, is that the color of one's skin isn't the issue. It's the thought process and attitude. Really, I would view Obama exactly the same if he were also a paraplegic midget with an IQ of 12. In fact, I think I would much prefer that version of him. He might actually get something good done.

Also, LMAO @ Spidey. You're really crack me up sometimes.

Foil, I don't ascribe to any number either way. I just think it is laughable that Obama is turning to a majority of Clinton types. I could name at least one good black for his chief economic adviser or commerce secretary who has nothing to do with Washington politics. That would be Dave Bing (ex basketball player) who owns Bing Enterprises here in Detroit.

Another qualified black would be Dennis Archer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Archer
He was a well like former Mayor of Detroit who I think is going to run for Michigan Governor.

If I can find qualified African Americans who are not part of the Washington circle jerk, why can't Obama?

woodchip wrote:If I can find qualified African Americans who are not part of the Washington circle jerk, why can't Obama?

The other day I was reading CNN, and I saw a story about Obama picking an african american for Attorney General. It would be a first, I wish I could find the link though....

What are your thoughts on that? I mean doesn't that defeat your white as the driven snow comment?

Foil wrote:First, some of the language in here is absolutely uncalled-for. There's no reason to use it, even if you're attributing the words to someone else. (Now, before you accuse me of catering to political correctness, don't; I'm talking about having the sense to avoid flame-bait.)

Second, let's please avoid making this another one of those threads where everyone ends up accusing everyone else here of racism or reverse-racism or reverse-triple-counter-racism, or whatever. If you want to talk about motivations for hiring cabinet members, fine... but let's drop all the "you're the one being racist" flames, 'k?

Yes'em massa. anythin' ya say sur!

I just now heard a story on The Nightly Business Report, that they were looking for people who were already vetted and live in the Washington area, because it’s so expensive to move…go figure.

Goob, if Holder is indeed the choice then Kudos to Obama for picking him as he seems to be a respected jurist. Holder does have some baggage and the most glaring is advising Clinton that regarding a presidential pardon for Mark Rich, Holder was neutral to favorable. Holder has since said he regrets saying that. The question is, will certain senators forgive Holder for saying. Again Holder is still another Clinton admin person and I wish Obama would find other people to fill his cabinet spots. Makes it look like he (Obama) can't think for himself.

Racism and just being a disgusting jerk seems to run rampant here lately and stuff like this belongs in the NHB. I'm glad the color of a persons skin never meant anything to me.

Bettina

If I understand correctly, woody's argument is thus:

1) Obama promised change
2) Obama got a lot of votes specifically from blacks hoping he'd bring other blacks into his cabinet
3) BUT, Obama hasn't appointed (many) blacks yet, and is therefore disappointing those from #2
4) AND, Obama has mostly picked Clinton types, and is therefore disappointing those from #1

To which I say... I don't see the problem here. Those who voted for racist reasons (#2) shouldn't be pandered to; Obama should pick people he thinks are capable, regardless of race (#3; see also Testi's post). And the sort of \"change\" people seemed to expect from Obama (#1; see also Thorne's complaint) is hella scary; if his main \"change\" is going back to Clinton-style triangulation (#4) rather than weird off-the-deep-end socialism, I'll be extremely happy.

Bet51987 wrote:Racism and just being a disgusting jerk seems to run rampant here lately and stuff like this belongs in the NHB. I'm glad the color of a persons skin never meant anything to me.

Bettina

Have you ever dated a highly political black woman? Americans are ★■◆●ing cowards when it comes to race. First is Genocide on the indigieous. Then is american slavery. Then is japanese american internment camps. Then (always) there is police brutality. Then...

It is an insult to say you "see no color". It's important to people. Respect it. Identity matters to everyone.

We got a long way to go idealist.

I think all those points woodchip, are fair. I didn't think the snow one was.

My only response is clearly, Obama doesn't know what it takes to run the white house. That doesn't mean he wont be a good president, it just means that he hasn't done it before.

So it is reasonable to want people in the white house who have done this sort of thing before.

He can't keep the Bush people, I mean the American people pretty vocally spoke out against that. Most of the Reagan people are gone by now (though he has already named one iirc).

So where is he left with to go for people "who have done this before?" Clinton People.

meat wrote:Have you ever dated a highly political black woman?

For almost 5 years. Changed my outlook on life forever.

Dude, I clicked on this thread expecting to see people laughing at al-Zawahri, not agreeing with him.

Oh well. :/ I should have expected it.

Lothar wrote:Testi, try laying the smack down on woody without being quite so nasty/angry about it. Typing while angry makes you're fail at grammar.

Hehe. You're right, sorry. I just can't stand people with such narrow, primitive, hateful views.

TheCope wrote:It is an insult to say you "see no color". It's important to people. Respect it. Identity matters to everyone.

Cope... I edited my orginal reply because it was too inflammatory. (ok Spidey?) But, I stand by what I said. It was not insulting.

Bee

oi vey

Spidey wrote:oi vey

gazuntite!

Dedman wrote:

Spidey wrote:oi vey

gazuntite!

isn't that "guzunheit".

Actually I'm quite surprised that no one caught the misspelling of Condoleezza Rice's name. Jeez Makes me think no on here actually reads a damn thing they just spew opinions.

Duper wrote:

Dedman wrote:

Spidey wrote:oi vey

gazuntite!

isn't that "guzunheit".

Actually, it's "Gesuendheit".

... and Alphadog, I noticed. I just chose to ignore it because it was a trivial matter. People's names are misspelled every day. It's no big deal.

Oh My bad, I just thought no one noticed. I'll STFU now.