|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted November 12, 2008 10:51 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
But if in a glashouse. don't throw with stones, they say.
The people who think America sucks and that Americans are ignorant, arrogant, fat slobs can probably find other forums dedicated to such a subject.
Oh, please, that's pathetic. Don't you think there just might be a slight difference between the official, governmental face the US as a national state show to the world and the actual twohundred something million people living there and that some people here are just, well, mature enough to make a difference between those two things?
|
|
Moonlith
Bad-mannered
Supreme Hero
If all else fails, use Fiyah!
|
|
posted November 12, 2008 12:16 PM |
|
Edited by Moonlith at 12:19, 12 Nov 2008.
|
Quote:
As opposed to statement you made that America is far behind Europe? America has black president, no nation in Europe has ethnic minority president.
And that has nothing to do with racial surpression. The difference I am pointing out here is that it CAN happen in Europe, and if it would, there wouldn't be such a huge hype about it as in America, as if it were some breakthrough. I repeat, racial difference isn't so much an issue here.
Quote:
No, it shows that racial minority have not chance to be elected. If racial minority had equal chance to be elected equal representation would occur.
No, it doesn't... I don't know where you get your ideas but you have some pretty illogical 'logic'. It has nothing to do with "having no chance to be elected". I repeat, AGAIN, racial background is no issue here in politics! How long does it take before you understand that?
Quote:
No, that is not my belief. But if no racism were involved then percentage of ethnic minority in population would be roughlly same as in parliment.
And what makes you think that is not the case here? Mind you, I wouldn't know, but I do know there has NEVER been any issue here with "being unable to achieve something" as an ethnic minority... Actually there has been, with turks and marocs here, but not in politics. And on this issue I would refer you to Lord_PC's post, he makes a very valid point on this.
Quote:
No, if Europe were ahead they would have had ethnic minority electerd as head of country already and would have more ethnic minorites in parlimentary bodies.
Let me rephrase it into a question.
Why do YOU make an issue over a president's racial background, as if it were actually relevant to his or her performances?
The fact you make that an issue makes me think you are a left-wing extremist: you would rather see a moronic black guy run the office instead of a competent white man, just for the sake of being able to say we have reached some sort of milestone by electing a minority...
Racial background plays NO relevance. When do you get that??
Quote:
You assume I am American because I am defending her? I hate America bashing. America have done much good for world and recieve no credit from some people. Only unjustified charges. When America elect black president it is "Oh, the hoopla just show how far behing Europe America is." Hah!
No, I think hatred for America is because of envy of her freedoms and prosperity. Everyone want to blame America that they are not prosperous.
We obviously have some different ideas on what is good and bad. Or rather, different sources, I suspect you only see the propaganda and not the actual effects of MANY of America's actions in this world. This does not make me specificly dislike any American for it (I do distinguish between those in power and America's population), but it does make me dislike those that blindly support America's ways.
Quote:
Amerca have helped meke democracy possible possible in many places and often defend others from agressive nation.
America is one of the most agressive nations, if not the single most agressive one.
Quote:
See what?
Obviously you don't, so I won't argue on this point anymore.
We are drifting off topic here anyway.
Quote:
Obama is called black because of his skin tone. Black community sees him as black. I think he sees himself as black. That is not racist.
Personally I think they are all colourblind then, he is clearly brown.
____________
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted November 12, 2008 06:40 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Oh, please, that's pathetic. Don't you think there just might be a slight difference between the official, governmental face the US as a national state show to the world and the actual twohundred something million people living there and that some people here are just, well, mature enough to make a difference between those two things?
Quote:
There's so much bigottery there
Oh, so it's the American government that you think is a bigot and not its population? And I can easily think of another country that has mingled racism and money to far worse effect than the United States.
____________
The giant has awakened
You drink my blood and drown
Wrath and raving I will not stop
You'll never take me down
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted November 12, 2008 07:15 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I take issue with this. Firstly, America does not have a black president, he is a mix, a "mutt" as Obama called it. Kenya has a black president. America has a president of mixed race. Secondly, to me your statement is racist towards white people. It presents the view that the only way to move forward is to elect ethnic minorities into office. You cannot measure progress through racial representation in the government. Its ridiculous.
Obama's appearance is that of "black." Black community identify him as black. When Obamaa discuss Wright he say "I can no longer turn my back on him than I can turn my back on black community" so he consider himself black.
No, I already said it does not take black man to represent black man. But if racism did not prevent it parlimentary bodies would reflect racial makeup of general population.
Quote:
If a black, asian, hispanic or any other race wanted to be a politician, they would be a politician.
To say that only white people are interested in politics is a silly idea. The problem is because of racism they have no chance to be elected. Are white people the only racist? No, not at all.
Quote:
Why do YOU make an issue over a president's racial background, as if it were actually relevant to his or her performances?
YOU made statement that hoopla over Obama showed America was backwards nation compared to Europe. It shows the opposite since Euroope have no ethnic minority in comparable position of power and have not equal representatino in parlimentary bodies.
Race have nothing to do with job performance.
Quote:
The fact you make that an issue makes me think you are a left-wing extremist: you would rather see a moronic black guy run the office instead of a competent white man, just for the sake of being able to say we have reached some sort of milestone by electing a minority...
No, I did not say I would rather have moron in office because of his race. It is funny in one thread I was called right wing extremist and now you call me left wing extremist.
I would rather have most qualified person for job in office. In absence of racial bias parlimentary bodies would reflect racial makeup of nation's population.
America has shown she does not elect based on race. Europe has yet to show this though you cliam Europe is far ahead of backwards America.
Quote:
America is one of the most agressive nations, if not the single most agressive one.
Yes America is making worldwide empire, right? It seem America is beig aggressive towards terrorists but is not adding to her national territories.
|
|
DagothGares
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
No gods or kings
|
|
posted November 12, 2008 07:25 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Yes America is making worldwide empire, right? It seem America is beig aggressive towards terrorists but is not adding to her national territories.
Well, America turned them pretty much into rubbish, so why take some hostile nation that's entirely destroyed if you have taken all the resources it has had to offer?
(burn flame wars, burn  )
____________
If you have any more questions, go to Dagoth Cares.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 12, 2008 08:13 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Oh, please, that's pathetic. Don't you think there just might be a slight difference between the official, governmental face the US as a national state show to the world and the actual twohundred something million people living there and that some people here are just, well, mature enough to make a difference between those two things?
Quote:
There's so much bigottery there
Oh, so it's the American government that you think is a bigot and not its population? And I can easily think of another country that has mingled racism and money to far worse effect than the United States.
Yep, the current American government is bigot. However - and I'm making matters short here, because it's off-topic, looking into history you'll see that there was a very powerful religious "trend" based on Calivinism in the US claiming that wealth in life was expression of living a godfearing and good life, and so on and so forth - the begin of an unholy alliance between money and religion leading directly to ruthless capitalism.
As far as I know there are still a lot of religious fundamentalists in the US, calling themselves Christians one way or another, wo, for me are representing everything which is bad about religious fundamentalism - and those I would call bigotted IN GENERAL, even though there will be exceptions as with everything else.
Now, for the country who mingled things, I claimed MONEY AND RELIGION, not MONEY AND RACISM. If you insist on combining these, well, the US shipped some 12 million slaves from Africa to America...
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted November 12, 2008 08:30 PM |
|
|
Just noticed the religion thing. My mistake. However, if you really want to get into comments about which of our two countries committed the worse atrocities according to race, I can do that.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have a witch to go burn.
____________
The giant has awakened
You drink my blood and drown
Wrath and raving I will not stop
You'll never take me down
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 12, 2008 09:09 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Just noticed the religion thing. My mistake. However, if you really want to get into comments about which of our two countries committed the worse atrocities according to race, I can do that.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have a witch to go burn.
As I said, if YOU insist on mingle them and if YOU would reall like to start counting atrocities, I'm not afraid of it.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted November 12, 2008 10:34 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Yep, the current American government is bigot.
Howso? There are number of ethnic minorities in Congress and as mayors and such and now America elect black president.
Quote:
However - and I'm making matters short here, because it's off-topic, looking into history you'll see that there was a very powerful religious "trend" based on Calivinism in the US claiming that wealth in life was expression of living a godfearing and good life, and so on and so forth - the begin of an unholy alliance between money and religion leading directly to ruthless capitalism.
I am not sure who discussion turn from election to religion but I will respond.
I am not Calvinist since I disagree with main points of Calvinism. But here are the main points of Calvinism. I don't think Calvinism teaches living godly result in being rich. Small percentage of Chritians, "prosperity" movement, believe that.
Calvinism 5 points:
--Total Depravity (also known as Total Inability and Original Sin)
--Unconditional Election
--Limited Atonement (also known as Particular Atonement)
--Irresistible Grace
--Perseverance of the Saints (also known as Once Saved Always Saved)
Quote:
As far as I know there are still a lot of religious fundamentalists in the US, calling themselves Christians one way or another, wo, for me are representing everything which is bad about religious fundamentalism - and those I would call bigotted IN GENERAL, even though there will be exceptions as with everything else.
Are you actually aware what Christian fundamentalist means? It is not at all same as Muslim fundamentalist.
Christian fundamentalist believes:
--Inerrancy of the Scriptures
--The virgin birth and the deity of Jesus (Isaiah 7:14)
--The doctrine of substitutionary atonement by God's grace and through human faith (Hebrews 9)
--The bodily resurrection of Jesus (Matthew 28)
--The authenticity of Christ's miracles (or, alternatively, his pre-millennial second coming)[4]
What is bad or bigotted about above beliefs?
Quote:
Now, for the country who mingled things, I claimed MONEY AND RELIGION, not MONEY AND RACISM. If you insist on combining these, well, the US shipped some 12 million slaves from Africa to America
Slavery existed before America was born so perhaps condemnation should fall elsewhere than just America. Slavery has been in existence from dawn of history.
Slavery had nothing to do with religion and especially with Christianity since slavery existed before Christianity.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 12, 2008 10:38 PM |
|
|
JJ:
I think you're confusing prosperity theology with Calvinism.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 12, 2008 11:00 PM |
|
|
I said, it's BASED on it. It's not Calvinism, but a couple of spin-offs, so-to-speak.
I further said, I'd make it VERY short, since it's off-topic.
So it makes no sense to delve into that now - I full well know I did just touch this subject, and I didn't want to cover it fully here.
Since I dodn't intend to discuss religion, slavery or anything else under this thread, erring off-topic again, I'll stop this here. If anyone is interested make another thread, please.
For this thread, the Bush admin is bigotted, imo, because whatever the reasons for them are to fight a war in Iraq, it's not the reasons they claimed, that much is sure. The claim to be Christians, the mention God every so often, but I fail to see anything in their actions that would justify this.
For Obama being "black", he isn't. He's as black as he's white, and if HE sees himself as black than it's because he's always been seen as black - even though he is just as black as white.
Now, if you would watch a discussion in Germany where everyone would say "a Jew is entering highest office", when in fact the FATHER was a Jew, but the mother was Roman-Catholic or being of any Christian belief, while he himself had visited both Churches in various stages of his life, what would you think?
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted November 12, 2008 11:14 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
If a black, asian, hispanic or any other race wanted to be a politician, they would be a politician.
To say that only white people are interested in politics is a silly idea. The problem is because of racism they have no chance to be elected. Are white people the only racist? No, not at all.
Quote:
The fact you make that an issue makes me think you are a left-wing extremist: you would rather see a moronic black guy run the office instead of a competent white man, just for the sake of being able to say we have reached some sort of milestone by electing a minority...
Quote:
America has shown she does not elect based on race. Europe has yet to show this though you cliam Europe is far ahead of backwards America.
The problem is the US is like bragging about it: "We got a black president".
Besides, we got someting called the majority law. Let me ask you this, is there a white guy as a president somewhere in Africa? And by white i mean white and of north-european blood.
If a country got 50% black people, 20% white, and the 30% that left is varius asian aka yellow as somebody says it. What is the chances of a black president then? Its atleast 2,5 times bigger than the the chance of a white one, and even bigger if the white part recently immigrated the last 40-50 years.
Europa is mainly immigrated now these days, thus the % will of politicans will likely not be that high since immigrations usually means getting a lasting job. A they will become parts of different political factions and likely have a vote in the local community, and they usually have no wish of gonig further. Their kids and grandkids might have a other moral since they are part of the country and also learned the political history, and they are of the country alas just like every other non-immigrant.
Ofcourse there exist Immigrants that go and get elected to higher positions in the grand system, but its quite few compared to the rest of the immigrants.
Consider these facts and the fact black people ARE a part of USA(not America, because America is heckalot more than USA), its a real wonder that there was no black president before. I guess you can then label USA as a racist country in presius years, what it is now is just a random guess.
Besides, what is the poltical situation in Canada? The news don't cover it properly.
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 13, 2008 07:34 AM |
|
|
More on topic seems the interesting question:
Will Colin Powell will become Secretary of State under Obama again?
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted November 13, 2008 08:04 AM |
|
|
He'll no doubt get something for throwing his hat in for President Elect Obama but I doubt it'll be on his cabinet. Powell waited too long to endorse Obama to do him a lot of good. He may have experience but I believe PE Obama will want some younger blood and parts of the Clinton cabinet.
I wonder if he would have endorsed Obama had the situation been reversed? I believe he would have endorsed McCain then.
____________
The giant has awakened
You drink my blood and drown
Wrath and raving I will not stop
You'll never take me down
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted November 14, 2008 02:43 AM |
|
|
@JOKER:
Quote:
He's obviously NEITHER white NOR black
false
@Mytical:
Quote:
The problem is..again the 'labeling'. "You are American, so you have to be blindly patriotic and think your country does no wrong." is how this that sounded.
I disagree, his post was insightful and honest.
He is not labelling anyone, Elodin is being nationalistic and Moonlith countered that with logic.
That was one of his better posts.
Quote:
America has flaws, but show me a country that doesn't.
Switzerland.
They invented the cuckoo clock.
@Dagoth:
Quote:
the only problem we have is two wars
i disagree again...
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 14, 2008 09:11 AM |
|
|
Quote:
@JOKER:
Quote:
He's obviously NEITHER white NOR black
false
In case that is supposed to mean he's both, you seem to stand pretty alone with your opinion - I never heard someone mention that Obama would be WHITE as well.
|
|
nocaplato
Adventuring Hero
Lover of Ancient Philosophy
|
|
posted November 14, 2008 03:09 PM |
|
|
Shameless self plug RE: Black in America....
Read the The "One Drop Rule" post on page 77 by yours truely to get insight into the black or white issue.
America Bashing
Tiresome... Look people, our government has done some things that are reprehensible. Our people have occasionally embarassed themselves with their lack of understanding or inability to understand other cultures. Our companies have ruthlessly persued their own self interests often to the harm of those who couldn't oppose them.
However many governments make poor decisions, and for all the negative side of American action, there are positives as well (e.g. international aid). There are idiots in every country, but again, Americans are not a homogenous or monolithic group all of the same type. Some of us are idiots, and some of us are thoughtful, just like anywhere else. While some companies have exploited, others have had liberalizing influences and have spread wealth into non-American countries as well.
If you've got a problem with someone being an idiot, that's one thing. Please take it up with them and handle your issues. I, for one, refuse to be lumped into any generic group, let alone the straw man that is the evil empire attacked by people who say things like "America is racist" or some other negative epithet.
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted November 14, 2008 06:02 PM |
|
|
Quote:
However many governments make poor decisions, and for all the negative side of American action, there are positives as well (e.g. international aid). There are idiots in every country, but again, Americans are not a homogenous or monolithic group all of the same type. Some of us are idiots, and some of us are thoughtful, just like anywhere else. While some companies have exploited, others have had liberalizing influences and have spread wealth into non-American countries as well.
How any countries are ruthless captitalistic like the USA today?
And stop using America, becasue its only the USA whom are betwhen Mexico and Canada in America. USA IS NOT AMERICA ITSELF!
____________
|
|
nocaplato
Adventuring Hero
Lover of Ancient Philosophy
|
|
posted November 15, 2008 01:59 AM |
|
|
Quote:
How any countries are ruthless captitalistic like the USA today?
And stop using America, becasue its only the USA whom are betwhen Mexico and Canada in America. USA IS NOT AMERICA ITSELF!
Oh please, there are plenty of capitalistic countries around the world, ruthless and not. It's not as though America has cornered the market on pitiless exploitation.
And good heavens, aren't we indignant about what the place is called? If I say 'America', someplace in the western hemisphere, and am referring to a country, rather than a continent, there's only one place I'm talking about. What you are referring to is the continent of North America. If you're going to get so upset, you might as well include Brazil, Argentina, Peru, Chile, Honduras, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Costa Rica, Panama, Guayana, French Guayana, Venezuala, Colombia, Guatamala, Belize, and let's not forget about Cuba, Haiti on Puerto Rico... which are called, collectively Central and Southern America.
If you're going to be so upset about how I refer to my country, you might as well be thorough in your petulance.
Wasn't this supposed to be a post about the election???
Okay, my fault for digressing too, but back to topic. Yes, the election is over, but the dust hasn't quite settled has it? I'm talking now of cabinet positions and I have to say Clinton would be a great Secretary of State. I've been hoping for a long time this would be one of the stories that came up, and now here it is. Sure there are more potentials out there, Richardson, for example, however Clinton's background and her potential future as a candidate again in 2012-2016 would be well served. Maybe that's crass political gamesmanship here, sorry about that. On the other hand, she would make a fine pick. Thoughts?
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 15, 2008 05:42 AM |
|
|
I think that Clinton would be a terrible choice. She has no foreign policy specialization. Richardson would be much, much better.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
