Link: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... s_gay.html“I think if President Obama came out as gay, he wouldn't lose the black vote," a cheerful Van Jones told MSNBC this afternoon.
"President Obama is not going to lose the black vote no matter what he does," he added.
Once word gets out though, it's not down low anymore - and the black community does not tolerate homosexuals like the white community does.Kreutz wrote:He's right, if you're "down low" its OK to the other brothers (who you're having sex with anyway) as its not gay if everyone agrees its not.
He'll just have to cover his rear from the blacks then won't he?Diomed wrote:Once word gets out though, it's not down low anymore - and the black community does not tolerate homosexuals like the white community does.Kreutz wrote:He's right, if you're "down low" its OK to the other brothers (who you're having sex with anyway) as its not gay if everyone agrees its not.
This, sadly.allingeneral wrote:I think most blacks would rather see a queer black man in the White House than any white man. "He's queer? So what - he's BLACK"
I'm going to propose its fear of accusations of racism, a fear which has become so deeply ingrained in (most) white conservatives it might even be found etched into your genetic code by now.mamabearCali wrote:I really don't know what to make of it. I know people who are as conservative as I am pro-life, pro-capitalism, keep your bedroom out of the classroom, pro-2nd amendment, etc etc etc. Yet when it comes to Obama they are 100% blind. When we talk I tell them the bills he voted for--denying a baby born alive and viable during a late term abortion care--they look at me and say "he would never do that"....WHAT!?! He did! I mention his and Holder's fast and furious scandal--they say he was misunderstood! On every issue they have said is near and dear to them (or so they claim) they either make an excuse or flat out deny the president's record.
What is going on here? Why are they willing to exchange everything they have ever believed in for a guy with a similar melanin count in his skin.
An interesting twist, but I'm gonna stand by my initial idea. The narrative on race is so distorted it may be that they unconsciously consider any public criticism of our first glorious "post-racial" President possibly "racist" even without a white guilt factor, so they will not even condemn the two factual examples you gave.mamabearCali wrote:Well actually the people I was speaking of have significantly more melanin in their skin than I do. So why would they be afraid of being called racist? Why can't they stick up for the things they believe in?
>>>>>>>>>Kreutz wrote:An interesting twist, but I'm gonna stand by my initial idea. The narrative on race is so distorted it may be that they unconsciously consider any public criticism of our first glorious "post-racial" President possibly "racist" even without a white guilt factor, so they will not even condemn the two factual examples you gave.mamabearCali wrote:Well actually the people I was speaking of have significantly more melanin in their skin than I do. So why would they be afraid of being called racist? Why can't they stick up for the things they believe in?
Think about, was any other President in history treated with such kid gloves? No.
I agree. Third parties aren't around yet do to the long held belief that all they will do is split the vote and can never win.kelu wrote:As an outsider, it looks to me that something is wrong with both democrat and republican parties. Looks like very same to me, like two heads on a bicefal monster.
Please explain me: why a third party did not emerge yet? Most other countries have at least one more significant party.
I must admit, I know nothing about American politics history. And actually I don't care much about history, as I am too concerned about present.
