Can you even imagine the s***storm if someone on the right had made this sort of comment?
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
Here's the full quote
quote:He said Republicans had driven the economy into a ditch and then stood by and criticized while Democrats pulled it out. Now that progress has been made, he said, "we can't have special interests sitting shotgun. We gotta have middle class families up in front. We don't mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back."
I'm sorry, but I don't see what you find objectionable about this statement. When you loose an election (as the Republicans did in 2008), you can't expect to still set the agenda, which is exactly what Republicans have been trying to do ever since then. Given the way the GOP has acted for the past 2 years, I think Obama's comment was long overdue.
Even if the GOP takes a huge majority in the house this election, they are still going to have to work with a democratic President and a democratic Senate. If they don't accept the fact that they will have to work with the democrats rather than against them, we've got 2 more years of gridlock to look forward to.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
Right. Because "gotta sit in the back" isn't a racially charged comment, or anything.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Sure. Had he been talking about a bus or if there had been no other context, it might have been odd. As he was using other car metaphors ("driving into a ditch" "sitting shotgun") it seems pretty clear that "riding in the back" was a continuation of the metaphor.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
Let's just assume that Obama was talking about a bus. in the 1950's. Let's furthermore say that Obama isn't black. And that sit in the back/backseat driving/etc style quotes aren't actually pretty common. And that, for the sake of argument, the GOP is to be considered analogous to black people. Ok, now it's sort of a racially charged comment.
QUICK, LETS MANUFACTURE SOME OUTRAGE, UGH, OBAMA MAKES ME SICK
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
You cant convince rational people Lisa that this is in any way racially charged.
Posted by Herblay (Member # 11834) on :
The metaphor said that middle-class families needed to be in front and that republican interests should take a back seat to the wellbeing of the middle-class.
<<Confused>>
They should, shouldn't they?
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
The metaphor is clearly a car, not a bus. You can't ride shotgun in a bus.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Right! Everyone knows buses have turrent gunners. Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
This comment didn't bother me too much. The one that did was calling people that don't agree with him his "enemies."
Gee, glad the president thinks I'm his enemy. That really makes me feel like our country is doing just fine.....
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
quote:Originally posted by ElJay: Right! Everyone knows buses have turrent gunners.
well, they SHOULD..... Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: This comment didn't bother me too much. The one that did was calling people that don't agree with him his "enemies."
which comment was this
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
Lisa, you're making a mountain out a speck of dirt.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: ... And that, for the sake of argument, the GOP is to be considered analogous to black people. ...
The fact that the argument requires that the GOP is analogous to a *single* race is intriguing even on its own.
Posted by capaxinfiniti (Member # 12181) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: This comment didn't bother me too much. The one that did was calling people that don't agree with him his "enemies."
which comment was this
i believe geraine is referring to a speech obama gave regarding immigration.
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
I propose that we let Lisa's threads like this float in zero comment obscurity to the bowels of Hatrack.
Posted by maui babe (Member # 1894) on :
quote:Originally posted by Herblay: The metaphor said that middle-class families needed to be in front and that republican interests should take a back seat to the wellbeing of the middle-class.
<<Confused>>
They should, shouldn't they?
No, he didn't say "republican interests"... he said "republicans"
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
If that's the speech he's talking about, then I have no idea where he got the idea that Obama was talking about Obama's enemies, or the fact that "enemy" in this context is simply someone who disagrees with him.
You can't get anything from that when you view "enemies" in context in the speech.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
I think the outrage is because he used the term "sit in back" instead of the proper term, which is of course "ride b****".
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
I think this is a situation where "sit in back" is not automatically linked to the offensive phrase we're referring to, because something "taking a backseat" to other interests is far more a common use phrase these days. Had Obama say "they have to go to the back of the bus" then it would have been a red flag that he was clearly making the reference. But "sit in back" by itself is not a clear enough reference, not when it can refer to so many different things, especially in a culture that has so many auto-related metaphors used with regularity. And hello, the words all around this evil phrase are full of outrage defeating context.
You have to want it to mean that.
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
Lyrhawn, I appreciate your class, but I honestly think it's not worth your time. You have more important things to do!
Posted by Herblay (Member # 11834) on :
I think he said frenemies, not enemies.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by capaxinfiniti:
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary:
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: This comment didn't bother me too much. The one that did was calling people that don't agree with him his "enemies."
which comment was this
i believe geraine is referring to a speech obama gave regarding immigration.
If that's it, then the president is not saying 'everyone who disagrees with me is my enemy.' Far from it, in fact, but unsurprisingly.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Obama has gone off the rails. Declaring that half the country needs to keep their mouth shut is a terrible, terrible campaign strategy. On top of being a really trashy, despicable thing to say.
And yeah - "sit in the back" is a LOADED phrase. I don't think it was scripted, but that almost makes it worse. When you have to rewrite his words to make them acceptable, then they aren't acceptable as is.
What on earth happened to him? So much for his principles. And this is BEFORE the election. I can only imagine the hateball he'll turn into afterwards when the Democrats lose the House.
quote:When you loose an election (as the Republicans did in 2008), you can't expect to still set the agenda
And when the Democrats lose in this election, they can't expect to set the legislative agenda.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
We dont have to rewrite his words as anything, sit in the back in the clear context of a car metaphor isn't a loaded phrase.
Also Republicans aren't half the country, not even close there's only 40ish million registered republicans.
"What happened"? Maybe the republicans acting as the most childish despicable obstructionists in the history of American politics is what happened.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Blaming other people for your own trashy behavior is not a mature nor impressive action. Someone who can't even take responsibility for themselves should most certainly be entrusted with the responsibility for anything important. Like a country.
It was the context of a car, but "sit in the back" is an ICONIC phrase. Find another, better way to say it.
I'm disturbed less by the phrase than by the general whiney, hateful tone. Confident leaders don't need to throw a hissy fit because people want someone else. That speech was pathetic.
Posted by Herblay (Member # 11834) on :
It's funny. Republicans are just as angry as the Dems were with Bush. Unfortunately, they don't have the justification. So they have to make stuff up and get indignant about nothing. Ooh, Obama's terrible, he eats children!?!?!
"Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." George Bush
"You're either with us or against us." Benito Mussolini
"Each man must choose between joining our side or the other side. Any attempt to avoid taking sides in this issue must end in fiasco." Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
"If you're not with me, then you're my enemy." Darth Vader
It feels good to dig out the old anti-Bush propaganda. Needless to say, Darth Vader never told anyone to ride "in the back seat".
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
Oh good grief katharina. Any one who calls that a "hissy fit" really must be paranoid delusional.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Both Mitt Romney and John McCain received an awful lot of flack for using the pseudo racially charged term "tar baby" a few years ago, and they weren't even referring to human beings.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: Both Mitt Romney and John McCain received an awful lot of flack for using the pseudo racially charged term "tar baby" a few years ago, and they weren't even referring to human beings.
This man speaks the truth. Personally I think there's plenty to debate about with what is actually said and done, without bringing in what wasn't actually said, and what hasn't yet been done.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Bah, I want to listen to the white people complain about racism a bit more Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Wow, Rabbit, responding to a discussion of a politician with personal insults. That speaks a lot about you.
--------
Look at the difference between Obama's rhetoric in the 2008 campaign and his rhetoric now. It's so sad on multiple levels.
Maybe the man hasn't had enough experience in failing, because his principles and rhetoric are going down in flames now that he has a challenge on his hands.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:That speaks a lot about you.
And this isn't a personal insult?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Depends on what she thinks of her own behavior. If she's proud of herself, she'll be preening at the remark.
And dude, really? You're okay with her calling me paranoid delusional because of a discussion about a politician? If not, where's your outrage there?
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
I'm not particularly outraged at either statement. It was the inconsistency that jumped out - an apparent personal insult embedded in a complaint about personal insults. If you want to take the high road, take it. Point out your objection to the insult without the amendment that implies an insult in return.
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
People should worry about what politicians actually mean by the words they say, rather than what those words could be taken to mean if one were to read them out of context in the worst possible light.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Yeah, honestly, the obvious intent of this remark is to call Republicans children. Faking up some bizarre white person racial outrage over this kind of lends credence to this description.
The car metaphor that the Democrats have been pushing seems pretty dumb to me and President Obama's whiny campaigning has, as far as I can tell, done little to help, but, man, hearing white people complain about the racial undertones of this statement made by a black man...it's just silly.
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: ...but, man, hearing white people complain about the racial undertones of this statement made by a black man...it's just silly.
And scene.
Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
<unrelated rant>
I hate the people on public busses who stand in the aisle in the front when there are open seats in the back, so people who get in at the next stop can't get by them and see that there was someone to sit the entire time.
</unrelated rant>
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Yesterday I was standing at the bus stop and the bus driver just drove right on by. I waved and ran after him screaming, but he kept on driving. I rode my bike to work in the rain.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
The quote I was referring to is this one:
quote:
“If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, ‘We’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us,’ if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it’s gonna be harder and that’s why I think it’s so important that people focus on voting on November 2.”
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that he is referring to republicans as the enemies and the democrats as the friends. Republicans are to be punished! They are the enemy!
This is from the same guy that said:
quote: When we get past the politics of division and distraction and we start actually focusing on what we have in common, there’s nothing we can’t accomplish…
I'm glad to see he practices what he preaches.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
I more ride the subway, and it bugs me when we pull up to the platform and the people stand right in front of the doors we need to leave by. Seriously, if you back the heck up, you're actually going to get on faster. Trying to crowd your way in is just stupid.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Geraine, Do you not see a pretty big difference between what that quote says and what you claimed it did?
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: Wow, Rabbit, responding to a discussion of a politician with personal insults. That speaks a lot about you.
My apologies Katharina. I presumed you knew that your "hissy fit" comment was over the top hyperbole. By my understanding, a "hissy fit" is a sudden violent emotional outburst, typically over something fairly trivial. I haven't seen or heard of Obama do anything remotely resembling a temper tantrum in public. In fact, he's routinely criticized for being too unemotional about important issues.
If there is something I'm missing and Obama done something recently that a rational person would call a "hissy fit", can you please give me a link.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
You have missed the point. In a discussion about a politician, you responded with a personal insult.
THAT is the problem. That you even consider personal attacks to be a legitimate technique in a discussion of a politician is the exact issue. That you do so is a reflection of your character and your thought processes.
Are you proud of yourself? Does knowing that your words reflect who you are fill you with reflexive approbation?
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Looks like he was thinking about someone ELSE'S mindset, not his own.
Posted by DDDaysh (Member # 9499) on :
Yes, the "enemies" quote bugged me too. Obamma hasn't been at the top of his game lately (though, I think this "sit in back" thing is making a mountain out of a mole hill).
Can I vote for someone who isn't a politician?
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
Katharina, It wasn't intended as a personal attack, it was intended as a rebuttal to the claim you made that Obama has been having a "hissy fit". My point was that "hissy fit" is a description that is totally and utterly inconsistent with the facts with which I am familiar.
I recognize I chose an inflammatory way to make that argument and given our history, I should have anticipated you would take it as a personal attack. I do not think you are paranoid delusional.
I am how ever interested in the debate. What has Obama done that you think could reasonably be described as a "hissy fit"?
I keep reading these criticisms of his behavior, but when I look at the real context of what he says all I see are conservatives with a chip on their shoulder twisting relatively benign statements so that they can justify their own hatred of the man. If you've got substantial claims, please post them.
Posted by Baron Samedi (Member # 9175) on :
I sometimes wonder if people offer Katherina sincere apologies on purpose, just to watch her lose it. I mean really, it never fails. The more conciliatory you are, the more it escalates the situation.
To anyone else, I'd say The Rabbit's post was helpful and diplomatic. But as well as she knows Katharina it almost looks like a subtly foolproof trolling maneuver.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Rabbit's post where she said "My apologies Katharina. I presumed you knew..." sounded, to me, an awful lot like a veiled attack instead of a helpful apology.
Posted by Parkour (Member # 12078) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: Are you proud of yourself? Does knowing that your words reflect who you are fill you with reflexive approbation?
Quite an ironic question for you Posted by JanitorBlade (Member # 12343) on :
Both Rabbit and katharina need to cool their jets, and stop addressing each other personally. Stop with the psycho analysis please.
I'll be watching this thread, I hope it gets back on track.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
did you make "psychoanalysis" two words on purpose? Posted by Baron Samedi (Member # 9175) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: Rabbit's post where she said "My apologies Katharina. I presumed you knew..." sounded, to me, an awful lot like a veiled attack instead of a helpful apology.
I guess that's where tone of voice would help. I read it as sincere, but I can see it your way too.
I withdraw my comment. Pending further evidence I guess I'll give them both the benefit of the doubt.
Posted by Destineer (Member # 821) on :
You guys are something else. Go on, let the hate flow through you.
Me, I save my anger for my true enemies -- the Republicans in Congress. Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: Rabbit's post where she said "My apologies Katharina. I presumed you knew..." sounded, to me, an awful lot like a veiled attack instead of a helpful apology.
It was not intended as such. I do sincerely apologize, I could have and should have found a much better way to express my position.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
Yes, Samp, but don't you remember the shitstorm the PC-obsessed liberal media made over those comments by Steele?
Seriously though, this controversy actually made my brain hurt. I'm not going to defend Obama, since he never actually made any racially charged comment, since he never referred to a bus, which is a pretty important piece of the back of the bus metaphor. Instead I'm going to defend Steele, since Steele actually did make the comment.
Lisa, I don't think it's fair of you to attack Steele for what he said about Pelosi. Steele is a black man, and it was his people who suffered from segregation in America for so long, and likely takes the issue very seriously. It's entirely possible that he meant the comment innocently, or if he was referring to racial segregation, he was perhaps trying to counter some perceived racism he was sensing from Pelosi herself, and felt that would be the most hard-hitting way to draw an effective comparison between her behaviour and previous racist sentiments in America.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)