Tom Luth - [shared photo] Yup.
Monica M Sharp - my son's roommate is black. I worry.
Tom Luth - It is sad, and unbelievable, that this is even an issue today. I recall after the Treyvon Martin murder people saying "He was wearing a hoodie like a thug; he got what he deserved." Seriously? A hoodie? Like George H. W. Bush used to wear jogging when he was President? That sort of hoodie? Geez.
Ed Gauthier - I blame that trouble causer Adam Sandler and his suspicious "street cred" Red-Hooded Sweatshirt that started it all.
Muhammad Rasheed - (i blame racism)
Tom Luth - Yeah, I think that is more to the point. Like the story below of how police were able to safely take down an armed white murderer without difficulty and without shooting him, yet they need to execute unarmed black men who "look threatening." It doesn't take a graduate degree to figure this one out.
Chris Rullestad - I agree that Sargents cartoon is spot on, however it seems that all the other races are being left out. If this movement were a little more inclusive ( bad cops victimize all races) there would be much more support and I think we would see more progress.
Muhammad Rasheed - ^Because to hell with black people and their stupid problems. It'll take more than them to make people give a shit. I mean, didn't I read somewhere that they were barely human anyway...?
Chris Rullestad - My comment was reasonable Muhammad, yours wasn't, so I'm done here.
Muhammad Rasheed - lol
Muhammad Rasheed - Don't go; I was just being trollish. I'll quit.
Chris Rullestad - So what? We agree on my comment?
Muhammad Rasheed - I agree that it'll need to have more weight to the issue than just "black people problems" to get the American political machine to take it seriously. Black people alone have proven ineffective at getting issues important to our basic human rights addressed with any degree of seriousness since the civil rights act was passed. Everyone seems like they're mad at us about it, lo these 50 something years.
Muhammad Rasheed - A major chunk of it is ineffective leadership though.
Muhammad Rasheed - (the ones left over after the Assassination Era of the '60s weren't all that good, you see... i guess that was kind of the point)
Chris Rullestad - As a white person it's kind of hard for me to comment on your comment because our perspectives are obviously different.
Muhammad Rasheed - I welcome your perspective. Tell me what you see, please.
Chris Rullestad - MLK was replaced by Sharpton and Jackson and there should be no comparison
Chris Rullestad - Why hasn't there been another MLK???
Chris Rullestad - Here's my take. Jesse Jackson was part of MLK's entourage and when King was murdered I suppose Jesse felt that he was King's heir apparent. He took the ball and ran with it and then along came Al Sharpton in a track suit. So now those two have been battling it out for years and I think the message may have been muddied a bit in the fog of war...
Muhammad Rasheed - Our strongest leaders, as well as those with the most potential to be, weren't killed by lone nuts, Chris. They were killed by organized, well-connected groups that didn't want us empowered. The Assassination Era birthed the original Black Panther Party, because those actions turned those late leaders into martyrs, which mobilized our angry youth to a warfare mindset. To prevent that from happening again, the next leaders to crop up were character assassinated... any new leaders with that kind of potential were smeared and discredited. Similar to the tactics currently used by those undercover cops that sabotage peaceful demonstrations by instigating looting and violence so the gov with force the protesters to disburse, so too are their infiltrators in the black communities to keep an eye on the "uppity" trouble makers and keep them from mobilizing the 'change' of Obama's vision.
Chris Rullestad - What the hell does Obama's vision got to do with civil rights?
Muhammad Rasheed - Part of Obama's 'change' vision involves the empowerment of disenfranchised ethnic groups.
Chris Rullestad - What do you mean by empowerment?
Chris Rullestad - Empowerment is one of those buzz words that I don't really get. We don't need a president to empower us, we empower ourselves. Life is what you make of it.
Muhammad Rasheed - After being in that second class citizen status for so long, and after the Assassination Era, many in the black community not only gave up on the political machine, but developed a defeatist attitude that it wasn't for us anyway... and attitude that the greater American society seems to also reflect. That's what my caricature faux-quote from about was making fun of. Obama had hope that his presidency would give the community them hope to reach for more, and start to make that political machine work for them, too, as well as other items like throwing his weight behind education reform. You're right, he did say early on that he couldn't do it by himself; the people had to do their part, too. My disappointments haven't been with his presidency at all, but with how the people never took him up on that, and preferred to believe the negative media narrative of Barrack Obama. But I think our ideological enemy knew how that would go, and their efforts to shut him down whenever they could were also a potent symbol.
Chris Rullestad - I long for the day when we can disregard this community thing and consider ourselves one big community and we'll call it the United States of America. Forget all these colors, black, white, brown, light brown and pasty white ( I;m white and I don't even like that last one) As far as the opposition shutting down Obama's agenda goes, well you might find this strange, but there were a hell of a lot of people who thought that it was their mission to do just that and the interesting thing is , in this last election liberals were claiming that "the right has no message, they have no plan, they won't say how they would fix this or that" The fact is, they did have a massage: Stop the Obama agenda. And they were given the senate which is exactly what they needed to do that.
Muhammad Rasheed - Chris Rullestad wrote: “I long for the day when we can disregard this community thing and consider ourselves one big community and we'll call it the United States of America.”
That day will not happen while the human species lives on earth.
Chris Rullestad wrote: “Forget all these colors, black, white, brown, light brown and pasty white ( I;m white and I don't even like that last one)”
We’re different for a reason… broken up into different ethnic groups, cultures, nationalities. Some among us are able to overlook the negative side of our differences and learn from each others’ strengths. This will never, ever, ever happen across the board, but will only be a case-by-case event. Focusing inward on what we as individuals should do is wiser than wishing for a 'let's-all-of-us-humans-think-alike' fantasyland that is against our nature.
Chris Rullestad wrote: “As far as the opposition shutting down Obama's agenda goes, well you might find this strange, but there were a hell of a lot of people who thought that it was their mission to do just that…”
"The single most important thing we want to achieve is for president Obama to be a one-term president."
~Sen. Mitch McConnell
(R) Minority Leader
SOURCE: National Journal
Chris Rullestad - Yes I basically agree but we can work towards that end at least.
No we're not inherently different, we're different colors. Big difference. We'll probably have to just agree to disagree on this one.
Again, this might sound strange but McConnell had a good reason for saying that and had that goal been achieved our country would be better off today.
Muhammad Rasheed - Chris Rullestad wrote: “Yes I basically agree but we can work towards that end at least.”
We can only work towards it within ourselves, and in how we raise our children, Chris. Trying to “work towards it” in other adults will cause a war.
Chris Rullestad wrote: “No we're not inherently different, we're different colors. Big difference. We'll probably have to just agree to disagree on this one.”
Our differences are purely ideological and cultural in nature. Physically we aren’t different, of course. But we are different in ways that determine greater and lesser success when it comes to learning and quality of life. Ignoring those clear differences will not help us as a people.
Chris Rullestad wrote: “Again, this might sound strange but McConnell had a good reason for saying that and had that goal been achieved our country would be better off today.”
You’re going to have to give me more material in order to analyze. From where I sit, the fact that he said that, and the ultimate root cause behind it, is the reason for many of our problems.
Chris Rullestad - No, it's not racism, it's ideology
Muhammad Rasheed - Racism is an ideology.
Chris Rullestad - How about every time there's a general election over the past hundred years. Again. you have to accept that the opposition doesn't see it as a "deficit" to the nation to , as you say, discredit a political rival. Obama has not and will not compromise He has an agenda and that is all that matters to him. When the Dems rammed thru the ADA they exposed to the rest of us how they were going to govern That was the first volley , everything has been down hill ever since Don't get me wrong, health reform is a good idea but not the plan that the dems came up with or the process in which they passed it. I could not believe what I was seeing and neither could McConnell.
Muhammad Rasheed - Chris Rullestad wrote: “How about every time there's a general election over the past hundred years.”
Then you shouldn’t have a problem posting an example.
Chris Rullestad wrote: “Again. you have to accept that the opposition doesn't see it as a ‘deficit’ to the nation to , as you say, discredit a political rival.”
Why would I accept that? I’m paying these people to run our nation, but they believe it is in my best interest to devote all of their resources to discrediting a political rival? And that’s reasonable to you?
Chris Rullestad wrote: “Obama has not and will not compromise”
Obama had a history of compromising with ideological political rivals until he was elected POTUS. The GOP simply didn’t want him to be successful in implementing his campaign promises. So your argument here has no leg to stand upon. You are repeating GOP talking points, not facts.
Chris Rullestad wrote: “He has an agenda and that is all that matters to him.”
McConnell’s statement didn’t represent “an agenda” to you, Chris? What was it then?
Chris Rullestad wrote: “When the Dems rammed thru the ADA they exposed to the rest of us how they were going to govern That was the first volley ,”
No, the ‘Plan A’ healthcare reform was tied up by the GOP (see: McConnell’s statement) because of their agenda-based game playing that you are oddly okay with. The ‘Plan B’ version that we know as the ACA was pushed through because the president was serious about the campaign promises that the people elected him on. I guess that can be considered “an agenda.” A president won an election by a higher percentage than any president in history wants to stick to the campaign promises that the American people elected him on, is that bad?
Chris Rullestad wrote: “…everything has been down hill ever since”
Sure, if you’re a die-hard GOP voter who hates the idea of Democrats keeping the White House.
Chris Rullestad wrote: “Don't get me wrong, health reform is a good idea but not the plan that the dems came up with…”
The ACA is famous for being composed of individual health reforms that were proven to work in various states that were grouped together in a package. It works fine, and the people are actually happy with it, even those that are mad that Obama is the one that put it in place: Unreasonable Critical Stance
Chris Rullestad wrote: “…or the process in which they passed it.”
That was the GOP’s fault (see: McConnell’s statement).
Chris Rullestad wrote: “I could not believe what I was seeing and neither could McConnell.”
Well, again, if healthcare reform is what the American voters elected this president for (by a HUGE margin), then who are the political rivals to attempt to sabotage that?
Chris Rullestad - So you actually want me to come up with examples of dems saying they want the republicans to lose the next general election???
The republicans did not agree with his campaign promises so why would they not try to stop him. Like I said, he wouldn't compromise, hell, he wouldn't even negotiate
So now you're comparing the minority leaders agenda to that of the president. We might as well throw my agenda up there as long as we're at it because like me, the minority leader has no power.
The plan A was dashed by the democrats. Do I need to remind you that the dems had a super majority before Kennedy died. They could have passed it at that time.
Now you're saying that Obama was elected because the voters liked his health care plan? I doubt that because nobody knew what the plan was, including the democrat legislators and even after it was written they didn;t know what was in it because none of them read it, but they voted for it any way. How in the world do you defend that?
If the ADA is so good then why did Obama amend it unilaterally on 17 occasions?
The last point I already covered. The voters really didn't know what they were getting except for "hope and change" and the more they found out the more they didn't like him, look at his falling poll numbers and the fact that none of the democrat candidates wanted him to campaign for them. I'll finish by saying" the black half I like, it's the white European socialist half I don't like"
Chris Rullestad - The reason I didn't comment on you blaming the republicans for the tortured way that this law was passed was because that was a little too far out there
Muhammad Rasheed - Chris Rullestad wrote: “So you actually want me to come up with examples of dems saying they want the republicans to lose the next general election???”
No, I want you to come up with examples of Democrats saying that their entire focus is to keep the Republicans from winning the next general election in a stance so extreme, they gain the “Party of ‘No’” reputation from the behavior.
Chris Rullestad wrote: “The republicans did not agree with his campaign promises so why would they not try to stop him.”
On what basis did they disagree with them? “Since announcing his presidential campaign in February 2007, Obama emphasized withdrawing American troops from Iraq, increasing energy independence, decreasing the influence of lobbyists, and promoting universal health care as top national priorities.” It’s my understanding that the Republicans also wanted these things, but disagreed with the how… which is where the compromise was supposed in come in. The Republicans didn’t want any of those things to happen because, by definition, it would make his presidency a success. That’s anti-American.
Chris Rullestad wrote: “Like I said, he wouldn't compromise, hell, he wouldn't even negotiate”
What are you basing that on? It’s well documented that the Republicans effectively acted to filibuster everything the president tried to do and only wanted to get their way. That’s where the “Party of ‘No’” reputation came from. Their version of ‘negotiate’ was deny everything the president tried to do, humorously even on items that the GOP traditionally wanted.
“Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell, who led the Republican congressional strategy in responding to the bill, calculated that Republicans should not support the bill, and worked to keep party discipline and prevent defections: ‘It was absolutely critical that everybody be together because if the proponents of the bill were able to say it was bipartisan, it tended to convey to the public that this is O.K., they must have figured it out.’
“Republican Senators, including those who had supported previous bills with a similar mandate, began to describe the mandate as "unconstitutional." Journalist Ezra Klein wrote in The New Yorker that "the end result was ... a policy that once enjoyed broad support within the Republican Party suddenly faced unified opposition." Reporter Michael Cooper of The New York Times wrote that: ‘It can be difficult to remember now, given the ferocity with which many Republicans assail it as an attack on freedom, but the provision in President Obama's healthcare law requiring all Americans to buy health insurance has its roots in conservative thinking.’"
1.) Carl Hulse & Adam Nagourney, “Senate G.O.P. Leader Finds Weapon in Unity”
2.) Ezra Klein, “Unpopular Mandate: Why do politicians reverse their positions?”
3.) Michael Cooper, “Conservatives Sowed Idea of Health Care Mandate, Only to Spurn It Later”
Chris Rullestad wrote: “So now you're comparing the minority leaders agenda to that of the president. We might as well throw my agenda up there as long as we're at it because like me, the minority leader has no power.”
Considering the entire GOP roster followed suit, it was clear that McConnell wasn’t speaking just for himself, but for his entire party.
Chris Rullestad wrote: “The plan A was dashed by the democrats. Do I need to remind you that the dems had a super majority before Kennedy died. They could have passed it at that time.”
“However, following the adoption of an individual mandate as a central component of the proposed reforms by Democrats, Republicans began to oppose the mandate and threatened to filibuster any bills that contained it.” ~Avik Roy, Forbes Magazine, “The Tortuous History of Conservatives and the Individual Mandate”
Chris Rullestad wrote: “Now you're saying that Obama was elected because the voters liked his health care plan?”
They liked his plan to reform healthcare if elected, and believed that he would try, yes.
Chris Rullestad wrote: “I doubt that because nobody knew what the plan was, including the democrat legislators and even after it was written they didn;t know what was in it because none of them read it, but they voted for it any way. How in the world do you defend that?”
lol How do you know they didn’t read it, Chris? Based on what? Because the GOP voter guys down at the bar and/or barber shop said they didn’t? How am I supposed to take that seriously is the real question.
Chris Rullestad wrote: “If the ADA is so good then why did Obama amend it unilaterally on 17 occasions?”
The frustratingly painfully easy answer is that the Affordable Care Act (ACA) was designed to be a living act that can be tweaked and molded to be made more and more efficient over time, like most acts that are passed, based on the Founding Fathers' Constitutional model.
Chris Rullestad wrote: “The last point I already covered. The voters really didn't know what they were getting except for ‘hope and change…’"
That’s what all soon-to-be presidents elect sound like during the campaign; they promise stuff. Are you saying Obama invented the campaign promise? After he was elected they spent the better part of the next year creating the plan itself, and going back and forth with your stubborn GOP who were afraid the president would be successful and hoped to sabotage his efforts.
Chris Rullestad wrote: “…and the more they found out the more they didn't like him, look at his falling poll numbers…”
According to Gallup (Presidential Approval Ratings -- Barack Obama) his numbers haven't made any kind of dramatic movement over the course of his term. Starting in the high ‘60s from the enthusiasm of the year he started, they quickly leveled off to hover in the 50s-40s, and today his numbers are at 48% approval, matching the numbers of you all’s beloved Reagan. They’ve been going up and down between the 50s-40s through most of his term, so “falling poll numbers” isn’t even remotely accurate. So since the facts actually don't show "falling poll numbers," where do you all GET this stuff? Seriously where?
Chris Rullestad wrote: “and the fact that none of the democrat candidates wanted him to campaign for them.”
What does that mean?
Chris Rullestad wrote: “I'll finish by saying ‘the black half I like, it's the white European socialist half I don't like’"
I’ll interpret that as meaning that you like the part of him that only plays basketball and fist bumps people, but don’t like the part of him that actually goes to work and does his job. It’ll be impossible not to consider this comment (which is oddly supposed to be well-meaning…?) as very racist, unless you can provide additional data that puts it in a different light.
Chris Rullestad wrote: “The reason I didn't comment on you blaming the republicans for the tortured way that this law was passed was because that was a little too far out there”
The Republicans filibustered the more ambitious Affordable Health Care for America Act, so the president was able to pass the reluctantly-approved Senate's bill, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. All the ‘torture’ came from the GOP side. The Democrats didn’t like the ACA and gave a lot of pushback because they felt it was too GOP friendly. But even still, the “Party of ‘No’” decided to vilify it anyway for no other reason than it was considered a success for the president and a big part of his growing legacy.
Muhammad Rasheed - Chris Rullestad wrote: “…everything has been down hill ever since”
What's gone downhill exactly? Give me the list of GOP grievances and let's examine them together.