Typical racist response from the typical Liberal Express. Was race a factor in the opposition to President Bush? This is just a typical Liberal response straight from the Saul Alinsky playbook. When someone disagrees with you and you have no leg to stand on, call them a racist. And I thought Obama was supposed to be a uniter and not a divider. Whatever. That pipe dream did not even last six months.

Oh, yes, most definitely. The race to convert the United States to a socialist society is most assuredly a major factor in America's desire to see this pompous, ignorant poseur out of office and on a plane to Kenya.

Of course it is. Change is very scary to the right wingers. Thank God we have had great leaders in the past who have guided us in new directions.......

Many people disagree with Obama's plans for legitimate reasons. They're not racists.
But race is a factor in more subtle ways. Let's leave aside health care and wonder why there is such fierce, angry, bitterness against Obama on essentially meaningless issues like speaking at a major U.S. university, or in a high school (as several of his Republican predecessors have done without comment before)? Race just makes it a little easier for those whose agenda is to defeat the Obama agenda by scare tactics to whip up their "core" supporters...including the racists who abandoned the Democratic party in 1964 and fled to the Republicans. Rather than reject them, the GOP has chosen to pander to them; and rather than offering its own solutions to the disgraceful, third-world state of our health care system, it has chosen to keep us in the 1950's by sowing fear. Fear has many components but one of them - one that need not even be spoken, for many are predisposed to read it as a subtext - is race.

The major problem the press have is that the public is finally voicing their frustrations with their government for doing a bad job representing the people's interests.

I am sure race plays a minimal facter, but MINIMAL. The ones screaming it is a racial problem are just looking for a reason to excuse bad government versus responsible government.

Give me a break. The President of the United States (who happens to be black) is called a liar on national TV during a message he is delivering on the House floor by a white Republican and Kayne West interrupts the acceptance speech of Taylor Swift (who is white) during the MTV Awards and more people are siding with Ms. Swift than the President of the U.S. Something is definitely wrong with that picture.

The president is selling bad product. In the speech, the president admitted that the medicare (managed by government) has wasteful spending, mismanagement etc. Why is he creating another agency to do just that? It is a well known fact that government cannot compete with private sector. Instead, government should concentrate on enforcing existing laws.

There are still an awful lot of racists in this country, and they are angry that the black man won. And the fact that so many people can't believe he was born in Hawaii and want to "prove" he was born in Kenya is indicative of that.

Calling President Obama’s opponents racist is about as fair as implicating Obama supporters in the death of anti-abortion activist James Pouillon simply because Democrats support the right to abortion. It doesn’t take a lot of intelligence to realize people would oppose a president with an agenda this liberal regardless of that president’s race.

In short, yes.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/13/AR2009091302538.html

Yes and no. I think, to some people, Obama represents the rise of "the other," which is very intimidating. When you've been taught to fear people and things that are different, you're not capable of accepting a situation outside your boundaries. But, the vitrol from the right is a typical reaction to their being out of power. Instead of debating policy, they hurl ad hominem attacks at elected leaders and are generally hysterical about things that aren't even true.

i still don't think that even though this country (and this country did elect him) accepts the fact that he is the president. I know of quite a few whites who don't consider him their President. Even though a majority of us did not like W, I never saw him disrepsected like this awesome president we have now. Look at how many conservatives took their children out of school when President Obama gave a back to school pep talk last week. I commend our President for being the man that he is. I have nothing but respect for him.

Is race the sole factor? Clearly not. However, it's ludicrous to assert race plays no role whatsoever in opposition to President Obama. To claim otherwise is to be willfully ignorant of reality.

Absolutely not, although I can understand why Obamaniacs would need to believe that anyone who doesn't share their adoration of The Chosen One can only be doing so for unworthy motives. I'm sure there are racists who oppose Obama, but smearing his whole opposition with that (a standard Post policy) is like saying that because there are left-wing wack jobs among the Democrats, the whole party should be sent for re-education. As for the person who was quoted this morning as saying that nobody among the previous forty-three presidents ever had people hoping they would fail, has she been living in a cave the last eight years? There have been whole organizations (MoveOn comes to mind) who spent 24 hours a day 7 days a week praying Dubya that would fail. It's by no means unique to Obama, people - get over it!

It's racism pure and simple. We had a president who did absolutely nothing to help the economy. Look at where that got us. Now we have a president who has at least gotten us up to where we are beginning to see the future a little brighter and all you hear are complaints. Most of the older whites find it hard to believe that a black man would be intelligent enough to do something like this.

Calling opposition to Obama "racist" cheapens the issues and the President himself. He should be held to the highest standard regardless of the color of his skin. And that means a fervent opposition to keep him on his toes.

Wait, Obama's black? I thought he was white? Or is he equal parts both? I'm confused.

It is definitely a factor. I'm sure conservatives would hate any Democratic presidency but the anger at Obama takes it to another level. One needs only read the comments on this page about "sending him back to Kenya" to see race is a factor.

It is definitely a factor. I'm sure conservatives would hate any Democratic president but the anger at Obama takes it to another level. One needs only read the comments on this page about "sending him back to Kenya" to see race is a factor.

Absolutely. Though it's not, of course, the only reason. People always have disagreements with what the president does that are based on legitimate factors. But I think the level of vitriol and fear-mongering out there is definitely because President Obama is not white.

Race has a lot to do with it. Some of these people who want their"America" back the way it was are those who want white men to only be in the White House. These people act as if because an African American president is going to exact revenge on the 400 years of mistreatment of all African Americans. In fact, he's trying to help ALL Americans to get something every industrialized country in the world except us have. That is health care for all its citizens. If people will get past the fear and hype the conservatives are spewing, they will see that this will benefit them.

The major drawback of having a colored president (any color) is that when his policies are questioned it is going to be a race issue; never mind the fact that a particular act or policy is going to adversely affect the public. The saddest part is that those who are screaming racism will gladly ignore the fact that they are getting $crewed just so they can jump up and down in righteous indignation.

Here we go again: It was Bush, who stated in a May 6, 1999 David Horowitz interview:

(page 2) "..I showed the people of Texas that I'm a uniter, not a divider. I refuse to play the politics of putting people into groups and pitting one group against another."

He then went on to dissolve relationships with many in the US electorate by his divisive politics, that has led him to become the worst president (by the numbers) so far in modern history.

To your other point: Bush deserved strong opposition for from across the demographic spectrum because of his lies about the run-up to the war and WMD and his extreme inability to run the country. He and his cronies, including Rove and Ashcroft deserve more scorn then they've received thus far. From warrantless wiretapping, wiring fraud, torture to two pre-emptive wars, they shoulder a lot of the divisive burden in this country.

Obama has also used this language when discussing how to heal the country past the Bush's wars and the failed economy....also occurring under Bush.

To ignore the fact that Bush fronted this language when asked to address how he'd work with minorities (and then incidentally turned around and ignored the NAACP until the backend of his presidency) is disengenuous and partisan.

With some people, yes. But what I'm tired of is the fact that people could say "The President sucks" a year ago and no one would say anything. Now, if I say the EXACT SAME THING, "The President sucks", then I am labeled a racist. It has happened. It makes no sense.

Of course it does, just not in the way most people here are saying. Obama's racial makeup (no sure how anyone can reference his "race", when he is not a member of one specific race) insulated him from criticism for quite a while. We were so busy talking about a "post-racial" world and patting ourselves on the back for electing a man with dark skin that people faced backlash for criticizing him about anything. It wasn't until Obama completely blew the early part of his term, especially via the ridiculous "stimulus" package, that people finally started speaking up.

They must all be racists since they disagree with Obama who is only half black. Just look at all the black racists from the Tea Party this past Saturday (pictures 3, 7, and 17) (http://www.lookingattheleft.com/2009/09/conservative-woodstock-rocks-the-capital/). Besides, it is not like the Democrats in Congress booed President Bush in 2005 (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/09/10/flashback_democrats_boo_bush_at_2005_state_of_the_union.html). What is good for the goose is good for the gander! Both parties have a tough time being out of the White House just like the uberLiberals did over the last eight years. Spending was insane under GWB, but BHO has pushed the spending pedal to the medal and locked the wheel such that we are headed straight toward the cliff with no "hope" of changing direction before we plummet to our deaths. Also, according to an AP poll, half of those surveyed said deficit reduction should be a national priority over increased spending on health care, education or alternative energy (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090914/ap_on_bi_ge/us_meltdown_ap_poll). I guess half of America is racists, huh?

Barely anyone called Clinton a socialist even though he wanted to reform health care much the same way Obama is.

If Obama was white and southern, the opposition would be a lot smaller. For those that have spent time in the South and parts of the Midwest, there's still quite a bit of cultural racism within peoples' perceptions. It doesn't mean they're going to lynch anyone anymore, but now that many Blacks are on a competing political level, many people find this disquieting and fight against it.

@ Diane Yates

How do you tell a politician is lying? There lips are moving. The congressman apologized. The question remains is the answer... was the President lying about no taxes to support healthcare of not? Sounds inplausible.

It probably would be if he were, you know, a member of a particular race.

Politics, reform, economy and everything else, aside; far too many Americans (whatever the culture or ethnicity) still perpetuate the tangible/intangible legacies of the 19th & 20th centuries with regards to race and race relations.

@ VeggieTart

It is funny how Obamaites state that anyone not happy that Obama is President is because they are a racist. That in itself is a racist point of view.

I know plenty of people that did not vote for Obama and race had nothing to do with it... his message (and his party's message) did.

Race is always going to be a factor. The blacks are going to say any white that disagress with Obama is a racist. Racism is alive and well in the US, but black people do not acknowledge that assuming any white person that disagress with a black man is a racist ideal as well. Every race can be racist.

Perhaps every black person that disagreed with George Bush was a racist. It is the same logic being used by many commenting on this BB today.

I think that it does have something to do with his race. No other president has been covered doing everything under the sun by the media like he has and been criticized for every move like him. But i am confused on why people hate him so much cuz he is not African American he is mixed! So stop being so critical and give the man a chance to do something. No one every questioned Geo Bush about a freaking thing and he destroyed us.

Who cares what color he is? Race will be thrown around by both blacks and whites to meet their agendas, but it is truly not an issue for the majority of Americans. Obama and Congress are spending us into the ground and focusing on issues that could wait. Bush and Congress also spent money at the end of his term on a useless and short-sighted stimulus plan.

Throwing money at big business and banks will not help the economy other than a short term spike. The citizen is still in dire straits financially and they ultimately drive the economy by what they can spend. The President and Congress have not addressed that fact yet, nor have they developed a plan to help the citizens directly. Most Americans do not have enough power, money, and influence to catch the government's (President and Congress) attention.

Cash for Clunkers cost Americans a lot of money, but more than likely it will be a spike for the auto market, not a progressive trend. People are still struggling to make ends meet (other than politicians and special interests).

While I agree healthcare is an issue, since the public seems to disagree with the current proposal and both the President and Congress indicate they would not sign up for the program they are proposing, perhaps they need to start from scratch again. Could fixing the insurance companies constantly rising prices and denials help? If so, then there would only need to be government healthcare for the indigent or those that need subsadies.

Some citizens wanted us out of Iraq because soldiers were dying. Now they are just dying in Afganistan. The rules of engagement need to be changed to allow the military to do its job. Neither Bush or Obama were willing to do that because the press sensationalized a lot of non-US deaths.

BTW: Violent crime killed more US citizens in Detroit daily that were dying in Iraq. Nobody outside of Detroit cared.

I am disagreeing with the President based on policy. I am willing to see how he completes the next 3 1/4 years before I decide whether I would vote for him or not.

This is my opinion, not a statement of fact that every Amercian should agree with me.

The true racists are those on the left who support Obama and can find no fault no matter how much he screws up this country and have no stand on the issues so they cry racist. Common Kevin is right and this tactic is straight from Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals. At least ACORN lost funding for the CENSUS after their disgraceful actions in both Baltimore and D.C regarding blacks trying to keep others down in poverty and cheat on taxes. Why is it that cities that have mainly Democrat leaders have the poorest conditions? Is this because they are trying to keep minorities down so they can get more votes to "help them get out of poverty."

Anonymous @ 9:18 AM,
That comment was made by an Obama supporter and most likely yourself you Loon.

Ken Wells,
Does that mean that whites should exact revenge on Egypt since they were the first slaves in history? You are yet another racist in D.C.

Anonymous @ 9:22 AM,
Well said.

MTL,
You are correct when you say Bush is "so far" the worst president in history "by the numbers," but Obama is fast approaching his numbers. You mentioned Bush's "warrantless wiretapping," but are you at all concerned that Obama is trying to get the power to shut down the internet whenever he wants? That sounds like hypocrisy to me.

demonfafa,
I have lived in one southern state and I would have to agree with you on at least the area of that state in which I lived, but to say that all Americans that oppose Obama are racists is ignorant at best.

Gas on the fire,
He plans to only tax "the rich" to pay for health care reform and that will be able to pay for it all, right? I seriously doubt it.

Anonymous @ 9:43 AM,
Very good point.

A lot of it is the Left-Right divide, but make no mistake about race. It plays an integrate part for some groups' hatreds for President Obama. I think white neo-Nazis groups forming militias across the country since election day is enough proofs of that. There are rationally criticisms to be make against the President, but frankly not too many of those agreements are being made by the far right. A lot of what I have been hearing are ill-informed and flat out wrong statements.

"Let me tell you what this is all about: The President of the United States is named Barack Hussein Obama. He is the first chief executive of this grand and good nation not to be melanin-deprived. There are a fair number of frightened, ignorant, idiot white folks still prowling the streets. They listen to right-wing talk radio. They show up at Republican town meetings. They can not believe that a man named Barack Hussein Obama could actually have been elected President. I must admit, I relish their discomfort. But I wish they'd go away."

I don't think every person who dislikes obama or his policiies is racist. But every half-cooked birther argument I've heard seems rascist.

WOW. Here we go again..by asking this poll question, the media has once against exposed its liberal bias, intentionally questioning and undermining the integrity of the hundreds of thousands of people around this nation of all political beliefs who believe Obama and his administration are taking the country down the wrong path and who protested on Saturday in D.C. and around the country in underreported rallies everywhere. We oppose the president so we MUST be racist? The country elects this president and we are colorblind?? Which is it? Really? The ONLY people who oppose this president are racist? Anyone who believe that is not paying attention. How would these same people feel if the poll question was "Was Race a factor in getting Obama elected?" or "Is the media handling Obama with kid gloves because he is Black?"" How telling that p. 3 of the Express has a story saying that 74% of Americans believe the press has lost whatever integrity it ever had. This may be the biggest gift Obama's administration will leave this country. Eyes are opening.

Dear readers, today's Express poll asks whether race is "a factor" in the opposition to President Obama, not the one and only factor. Let's stick to the question at hand and leave the partisan posturing aside, shall we?

Unfortunately this is totally a problem. No one except Bill Maher is speaking out on this issue. White men in Congress don't know what to do becasue they can't stop him so there TRUE feelings are coming out.

Well, some people, not all though, do oppose President Obama just because he is black. In one of Sen Spector's town hall meetings this summer, an angry white man ask Spector to tell Obama if he does not love this country, there are lots of other countries in the world. Some folks just don't think people of color can be integral part of this country. They are wary that minorities always intend to harm this nation. And how about the stupid birther?

About take back this country - come on, Conservatives had ruled this land for most of the past three decade and look what shape we are in. We just fortunately took it back from them last year. They want to take it away again? Not so fast!

It appears to me that most blacks answering this post today are racist against whites. That is a shame.

Will tomorrow's poll question be "Do you think race is a factor in the support of President Obama?"

No, but apparently the media would like it to be.

Are we really debating whether a man who belittled the disabled on national television is being treated unfairly because of a physical characteristic?

There are people on both sides of the aisle who discriminate. Were some of the protesters bigots? Certainly. But as a whole, this opposition is a partisan divide, not a racial divide. I think we enter dangerous territory when we can't criticize an elected official for fear it will be construed as racism.

The Express made a big mistake. In todays paper they bring up that the protestors from Saturday were racist yet they show a picture with a black woman on the right. I guess this woman is racist also?
Diogenes,
That question is racist in and of itself.

Melissa,
Bill Maher called you a stupid American and you listen to what this moron says. I guess he is defiinately right in your case and you are stupid.

Sam,
You are racist yourself to read racism into that comment. I don't care what color you are: If you do not like this country and prefer Canada or France, then MOVE THERE. If you do not like the fact that our money says "In God We Trust," then don't use our money and move to Canada or somewhere else. The fact that you brought race into that comment makes you a blatent racist.

Was the opposition to President Bush based on his race? Before you reply "No, it was based on his stupidity", ask yourself if you could say the same thing about Obama without fear of being called racist.

@ Thomas J
Can you show me where in the comments section the race box appears? It seems to be blocked on my computer.

@ Express Editors
Race is a sociological construct, long since discredited by biological science. Can we please refrain from engaging in this divisive and nonsensical debate in the future?

Of course it is A factor. More than half the country currently say they disapprove of his performance, so I'm sure that at least one out of the 200 million Americans who don't think he's doing a good job is racist.
Better question would be whether his race hurts or helps his popularity, as that is a subject that is at least debatable.

@I am surrounded by racists from the left

I am concerned about Obama's spending. But, I'm looking at Bush's whole body of work - 8 years; not just 6 months of this new administration. Big difference. The pre-emptive wars have A LOT to do with the spending by Bush. But also Bush is also widely considered the worst president on other fronts as well.

The second point you make reminds me of the GOP with then FCC Chair Kenneth Tomlinson trying to shutdown public broadcasting. So I think both parties are guilty. I just think some right-leaning posters on this site right don't call it down the line. They attack only liberal points like you and Kevin do, to make it seem like the left is only guilty of political sins. While I'm not Dem or Republican, I think it's important to "remind" posters that the GOP is guilty of the very same things that some on this site rail about everyday of liberals.

"Sins of commission, I can forgive. Sins of omission, I canot forgive".
- John Thompson

We need a 3rd Party.

Race is a factor in both the support of and opposition to Obama's policies; moreso the former. It is primarily liberals who are judging arguments against Obama's policies by the skin color of the person making them. Krugman, Garofalo, and Patterson are the real racists here.

The truly unbelievable part of this debate is that so many people are so smitten with Obama that they can't fathom opposition to him based on legitimate reasons.

People protested Bush's policies (stop the war, no offshore drilling, etc.). Now the same people who prodly proclaim my country right or wrong are the first to spew vitriol directed at the man (Obama) and not really at the message.

Was race a factor in Michelle Obama's statement that "for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country"?

I think the vast majority of those opposing President Obama would do so regardless of the color of his skin. They would oppose ANY Democratic President based on the party's equality for all, pro-working class, pro individual rights, pro Constitution platform. There are, however, a large number of people for whom the President's race makes him all the more intolerable.

@ Diogenes 1056

I do not think Thomas J needs to answer your question. I am a black American and I refuse to be called an African American since I have been to Africa. Africans are racist against black Americans. That is a moot point though.

It is clear to me from reading several of the posts, that there are quite a few anti-white racists posting on the site, as well as anti-black racists. It is a shame since it does not help with the issue at hand.

My take is that anyone that thinks race would not come into play at some point in time during the tenure of the first black president is ignorant.

You cannot take bigotry out of the human race; one can only supress their own feelings. Everyone has some opinion of another race, gender, age, sexual persuasion, etc. It is in our nature and based on our experiences. I am not saying it is right. Regardless of one's feelings on the issue, it is not polite to let your feelings come out in mixed company. The side you favor is irrelevant.

This question should really ask if racism still exists. Of course it's a factor here. But it's been a factor with every president since the 15th amendment was passed.

@ 57th State
Clearly there were those who opposed President Bush based on his race (see Kanye West's outburst at the Katrina telethon), but I believe the vast majority of the opposition was due to his policies. I would argue the same is true in the case of President Obama.

Democrats don't seem to understand that Americans are capitalists. We don't care what race you are. Fix the economy. If you can't do it, we'll get someone else who can. If you fail to deliver, the electorate will take away your majority and render you powerless. Its how our political system works.

If you succeed, you will be re-elected and praised by the citizens and history.

It has to be. Just look at that horribly racist poster of Obama as the joker and the justifiable uproar it caused among the media and his supporters. No one would ever disrespect a white POTUS in such a way, and, if they did, the unbiased media would surely have been equally offended.

If I'm opposed to Obama's policies, does that make me a racist? What if I'm opposed to Biden, Pelosi, and Reid, too? And is it racist to criticize the Bush Administration for the Iraq war, given that Condy was his Secretary of State and Powell gave the sales-pitch for invasion?

I'd answer, but, as a white male, I feel I should defer to the Latina women in the audience. After all, with the richness of their experiences, they more often than not will reach a better conclusion than members of my race and gender.

@ Rimshot

Good food for thought based on fact.

Don't think a guy who's been a Senator for 2 years should be President? RACIST! Don't want to add nearly $1 trillion to the deficit to pay for gay adult theater, turtle highways, and various other "infrastructure" projects? RACIST! Don't want to multiply your energy bills in order to reduce carbon emissions to a degree that won't impact climate change? RACIST! And, finally, don't want to bankrupt our nation to let bureaucrats try to run our hospitals as efficiently as they do the Postal Service and Social Security? RACIST!!!!!

I agree that we need a third party and that both parties are guilty of the same hypocrisy. Your first post was Liberal Leaning as many, if not all of your posts have been until recently. When people questioned Bush over those last 8 years, why were they not called racists as those that question Obama are? Obama does already have more debt in 6 months than Bush did in 8 years and I think that is why people are finally starting to wake up and smell the coffe and realize that we have been spending way too much this century and they want it to stop. I was not attacking only Liberal points, but simply pointing out the fact that anyone who questions Obama is a racist while those that questioned Bush were not.

Jesse in Maryland,
You forgot Obama's buddy Pastor Wright and Al Sharpton.

MildlyMisanthropic,
Maybe you can explain to me why the poorest cities over the last 100 years have had, and continue to have, the poorest citizens. Why have the Democrats not fixed this atrocity if they are so for the poor?

Durr,
What about the pictures of Bush with horns as the devil? How is this any different from the pictures of Obama as the joker who was white?

I think it's one factor. Partisanship is another. Obama's behavior doesn't help. I'm not sure I could count the number of times he has made snarky comments about his opposition, including regularly calling them liars.

There is no doubt in my mind that the opposition to Obama is half fueled by racism, the other half by partisanship. That the right-wing would protest against their own interests, and rally for the insurance industry profiteers is a perfect example. To make their point, they call for Obama, and by extension, the US, to fail. If they don't wise up and grow up, they might just get their wish. And for purpose of disclosure, I am caucasian.

@ Rimshot:
Nice work. I'll add:
Don't presume a white cop automatically acted stupidly in arresting a black man? RACIST!
Don't think the disabled should be used as punchlines on late-night talk shows? RACIST!
Don't think $250 sneakers are appropriate footwear for serving lunch at a soup kitchen? RACIST!

Don't presume a white cop automatically acted stupidly in arresting a black man? RACIST!
Don't think the disabled should be used as punchlines on late-night talk shows? RACIST!
Don't think $250 sneakers are appropriate footwear for serving lunch at a soup kitchen? RACIST!

Whoops, meant to direct @ Scarlet R.
One more:
Think I'm unable to figure out how to post properly? RACIST!

Of all the things to take ire with, why would you choose skin color? Heck, Obama's race is his greatest virtue!

@ I am surrounded by racists from the left

Because wealth and power go together. People with one or both tend to want to hold onto it at any cost. The perfect example would be the health care reform debate(s).

Truth is, money is like manure. It doesn't do much good unless you spread it around.

Nope...most of the racists are supporting him...those that supported him only on the basis of race would qualify, as well as those that would accept the soft bigotry of low expectations...

Since Obama opposes gay marriage, couldn't that mean his opponents are not subconscious racists but subconscious champions of gay rights?

@ Mr. Walker
Thomas J can't answer my question, because it's a trick. There is no "race box" on the Express poll. The fact is, unless a poster openly declares his/her race (again, a discredited sociological concept I reject), he couldn't possibly know who among the respondents is who. He's guessing based on what he percieves to be a certain group's biases and beliefs. If that's not racist, it certainly is bigotted.

Do not put anything on Obama. Lets make that clear. Lets stop using names of any sort for a moment. We can all agree there is a need for health care. Now, lets put all the ideas in a basket and it seems 85% were pulled out as good ideas according to the president. To date there has been few to disagreed to that conclusion. Now, lets give the 15% remaining issues to those complaining and have them raise ideas for possible solutions.

But, now I will not say you lie!!! In any Forum especially to the president of the United States of America...

MildlyMisanthropic,
You still did not answer my question. If the Democrats are for the poor, then why are so many cities that they have run for decades or the last century (Take your pick.) overflowing with poor people? Seems to me that the are all talk and no action. The Republicans are no better, but since you brought up the partisanship, I thought I would ask. Here is another question for you since you brought it up. Why should I work hard to become educated and succeed so that my acquired wealth can be spread around. like manure, to those who are not motivated to do the same?

What a totally biased question. Of course Express has to make it seem like there's opposition to the Dear Leader. This publication is such a right-wing propaganda machine.

Having ridden the train Saturday morning with some of these fun people and hearing one woman say "We're gonna get that boy outta there" among other things, I've changed my mind on the issue. I now see that race is definitely a factor for some of these people. To say otherwise is either delusion or deception.

Let's ask this question instead:

Do you think that race is a factor in opposition to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas?

Or this one:

Do you think that race and gender were factors in oppostion to Secretary of State Condoleeze Rice?

Hahaha... Obama (and of course the previous president) provides PLENTY of reasons to oppose him, who needs to ignorantly resort to race? It's only use now is a diversionary tactic by people unwilling to research and fully understand the opposing views.

@ MildlyMisanthropic Your comment amounting to "money only does good if you spread it around" ignores the fact that in a capitalist society, money doesn't sit around rotting away. Saved money is invested, which expands businesses, creates jobs, raises salaries, improves technology, increases productivity, and improves everyone's standard of living--not just the person doing the investing. Google a comic called 'How an Economy Grows and Why It Doesn't" for a basic primer.

Taking earnings away from someone and "spreading the wealth around" boils down to what Karl Marx suggested. But it doesn't work because it de-motivates the most productive people. The pilgrims tried doing this and almost starved to death as a result, look up the real history of the pilgrims and read about the failure of communal farming vs private farming.

EWC,
And you think the same was not said of Bush by the other side? That statement could be said of any race. To suggest otherwise is just plain racist.
GW,
Well said. As 'I am surrounded by racists from the left' pointed out', why work hard just to get what you have worked for taken from you while others sit by and do nothing? Where is the motivation in that?

Race is an issue with those who consider it. Or get mad at another person because they have a good thing going and one begins to see this "N" as winning on particularilly good ideas. The opposition has backers that will loose upfront money, power, and influence if the particular ideas come to life. Sometimes the oppostition is picked for particular reasons and racist can be one reason. If you have a group deeply involved in hate and an outsider comes to the rally with a particular message in mind yells out more hate. No one knows who the outsider is but the rally has picked up the message and it becomes the new mission. Moral of the story, "Takes names of those who attend your rally, watch the Hate"

@ I am surrounded by racists from the left, 1:22 pm

First of all, you raised the partizan flag by virtue of your pseudonym.

Secondly, your assertion that the Democratic Party has maintained complete governmental control of the nation (because you can't really separate the cities from what's going on in the state government or the federal government, unless you're talking about ancient Sparta or some other city-state) is absurd.

@ George Washington 1:54 pm
I guess all of that money in mortgage backed securities has done the nation a world of good. How could I have been so dumb? It was my naive understanding that even in a capitalist society there were things called "public goods" that the government managed in order to help move the supply curve, such as infrastructure, health care, education. By taking care of those needs it enabled industry to bring goods to market faster for less money.

As for spreading money around, well there are two curves in the macro economic model: supply and demand. By directing money where there is the greatest need that wealth gets pumped back into the ... "circle of life." If you think it is so wonderful to be at the lowest rung of the economic ladder, I encourage you to quite your job, file for bankruptcy and start collecting welfare. There is plenty of motivation to achieve.

I find you neocons to be a laugh riot, particularly those of you who haven't come out of the closet yet (oh look at me, I'm non partizan. Of course I've never said anything critical about the GOP, except perhaps that it's too liberal ...). Everything comes down to adhering your point of view otherwise it's communism.

I think it is clear that race does color some of this issue. You gotta think this might be a factor – why else would people protest against a program that will HELP them and society and come to believe the most outrageous theories and beliefs? I am sure many aren’t racists but are just closed minded and refuse to listen to anything beyond the Fox “news” channel or a certain bloated radio personality (both of which have an obvious agenda) -- but I am sure a large percentage are predisposed to dislike anything the President does because they don’t like his race. And they see this as an opportunity to make him look bad, even to their own detriment.

@MildlyMisanthropic
You're calling me a neocon for defending free market policies (which we don't actually practice)? I also feel we should be out of Afghanistan, Iraq, and the other 100+ countries we currently have troops in. Are you laughing at that too? :) And I think Bush was a terrible president..

The mortgage meltdown was not a failure of the free market, it was a failure of government intervention (removing the risk element, etc) and more especially the Federal Reserve's artificially low interest rate policies. It's too complicated to explain further here, see "Meltdown" by Thomas Woods.

You're talking about state capitalism's consequences, not free market capitalism where government doesn't cater to business special interests, there's a big difference.

You're talking about spreading money around for purposes of consumption it seems, but spending does not fuel an economy and create wealth--savings and investment does. Savings squanders wealth, again you should check out the comic I referred you to above.

MildlyMisanthropic,
"They would oppose ANY Democratic President based on the party's equality for all, pro-working class, pro individual rights, pro Constitution platform."
Who brought up political parties first again? I think you need to take a long hard look in the mirror. Seems you can not answer either of my questions and your assumption is absurd as observed by the fact that Montgomery County as compared to Baltimore City is far richer even though they are both heavily Democratic while generally the Northwest portion of Maryland leans Republican and yet some areas are vastly more poor than others within the same state. I think you need to hit the books some more little grasshopper since these questions are clearly far past your comprehension skills. As you mentioned in your post to GW earlier: "I encourage you to quite your job, file for bankruptcy and start collecting welfare." First of all, I think you meant quit. Second, I think that is a great idea and is what I plan on doing. I plan to work hard for about a decade more. Consolidate my assets into one form that I will not disclose and then live off all you ignorant saps who want to pay for my health care and well being as well as my kids’ education. Just like ACORN showed us in the Bronx, Baltimore, and D.C. recently, there are ways around things here and I personally know people on welfare that live better than I do and have no job. Why work hard if Liberal suckers like you are more than willing to provide for my every need and want?

There are Reverend Wright types on each side of political spectrum but I believe their numbers are small. The reason for the public out cry is Obama's policies which will destroy this country. We are out of the frying pan and into the fire with Obama.

Absolutely. Common – adjective; hackneyed; trite; of mediocre or inferior quality. The comments typical of white trash like Common Kevin and anonymous perfectly emphasize this by regurgitating (to give back or repeat, esp. something not fully understood or assimilated) someone else's thought and describing health care reform as a "race to convert the United States to a socialist society?" Isn't it ironic that the ignorant dare to call such a highly educated and articulate man "ignorant" and to bash the Express as liberal while referencing opposition to Bush, who was not well educated, learned or articulate, admitted that he did not care about other cultures and supported causes and strategies that favored and benefitted him and his rich, white, elitist skin head and redneck friends? When you disagree with someone and have no leg to stand on, call them ignorant and liberal to cover up for the fact that you really don't know what you are talking about and refuse to get educated about what it is you have been indoctrinated to fight against. Centuries of inbreeding has removed all intelligence and ability for free thinking from domestic sheep. The protestors opposing Obama and health legislation are no different, which is what the TEA Party organizers wanted -- a bunch of inbred sheep to mindlessly follow the flock. "The weak minded are easily led" (Obi Wan Kenobi). Groups like the TEA Party enlist and brainwash such low brow, extremist, lower socio-economic class trailer trash bigots I saw holding signs and waving flags in Washington because they can't stand the idea of a black man as President of the United States. I am white and voted for Obama. Obama is exactly what this country needs after 8 years of Bush and his merry band of thieves and crooks raping and pillaging, ignoring or playing loose with the Constitution and generally letting those with the most money make even more by ignoring corruption in his own administration and the corporate world. That Rep. Wilson will not publicly apologize in Congress for his disrespectful and childish outburst paints a clear picture of the type of good old boy stupidity behind all of the criticism of Obama. From small minds come small ideas attached to the biggest mouths. Only the weak minded fear change. If you don't like what see here, get the funk out and take your pointy white hats and long robes with you. The south will never rise again. RESPECT! WALK!

Blaming racism is weak. Most of us don't care. Performance and the content of your character are what matter. Man up already, face your critics, and solve problems without resorting to inflammatory excuses and rhetoric.
Barack, Nancy and Harry better get their heads together and learn how to govern or they'll join millions of Americans on the unemployment line.

Walk,
Good job son. You really have my Rules for Radicals down pat.

Crawl,
I guess the fact that Democrats booed Bush in 2006 is ok? What a typical hypocrite child you are. Let me know when you finally move out of mommy's basement and start eating adult food. At least Clinton and Bush could speak publicly without a teleprompter. BO is lost without his teleprompter telling him what to say and his talking point memos from his good 'ol boys.

Walk,
Don't you see the bigotry and prejudice in your own language? Can't we stop the name calling? After a wasteful spending war monger disaster like Bush, another wasteful spending "war continuer" like Obama is not the cure!

"Isn't it ironic that the ignorant dare to call such a highly educated and articulate man "ignorant""

Obama may be highly educated overall and articulate, but this doesn't mean he can't be ignorant on economic matters, which he is in the extreme. Every industry the government is heavily involved in is a disaster, health care being one of the worst due to the skyrocketing costs government causes. The government aids big pharm companies for example with massive regulation, which big business actually likes, because it makes the barrier to entry for smaller companies impossible to overcome. Thus, no free market, no competition, higher prices, less innovation, no accountability, and no alternative choices for consumers. The government is the friend of big (corrupt) business because only they have the resources to control government policy and to implement massive regulatory requirements. (Which don't actually produce safer products, either--remember no accountability, they are a de facto monopoly industry.)

Gee, lots of people voted for him because he was black. Is that racist?

Two things started me not supporting him: his stand (as the committee chair who was able to block its going to vote) against the Protection of Babies Born Alive act in the Illinois Senate and his voting 129 "present" rather than yes or no on bills. His speeches were about dreams not realities, he had little background in foreign policy AND ignored the chance to get it. Anyone besides me know he was actually the Chair of the Sen Comm. on Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Europe...but NEVER held a single hearing? Yeah, that's just the kind of go getter I want as a President. There was, and is, quite enough to dislike about candidate and President Obama. The real question is...if he had been white (say, like John Edwards, another liberal) would he ever have been seriously considered with his paper thin level of experience? Not likely. People need to start paying attention to what he does, not his race. You might notice he is driving us over a cliff of bad economic policy at home and bad judgement debacles overseas. But hey, he sure looks good in those suits on those magazine covers so I guess that's all that counts.

@ MOTO

I don't mean to single you out, because since that representative from South Carolina heckled the President during a joint session of Congress I've heard a lot of people trying to explain the behavior away by suggesting President Bush was booed during an address before Congress. However, I have seen virtually every State of the Union Address since Gerald Ford was in office, and certainly every address President Bush made before Congress, and frankly I don't recall him EVER being treated the way President Obama was treated last week. It was shameful, and it discredited the nation and our system of government. I have heard those who point to more raucous legislative bodies such as those of England and Israel as examples of why it should be acceptable for this Congressman to behave in such a fashion. The problem is, there is no precedent for such behavior in modern American government -- certainly not at its highest levels. It was intended to be disrespectful, and that is exactly what it was. I believe that level of disrespect, as well as the sometimes outlandish behavior of some of the teabagger groups, has more to it than a simple idealogical disagreement. There is genuine rage and hatred on display, and I can attribute that to nothing less than racism.

If Hilary Clinton had made office and pushed for health care reform (which she definitely was set to do) would these same health care opponent protestors be labeled "sexist" instead of "racist"? I'm all in favor of Obama and his health care reform plan but am wondering why people feel the need to pull the race card on this?

I believe answer is now yes as he is being opposed for any new idea put forwared by him by perticular group or say community eventhough they know it is good and beneficial to majority of common public.This is wrong trend and those people forget bad things and negative done by previous rulers.they are not able to read what is written on wall means what is right and what is wrong for benefit and progress of this country. m ay god bless our country and get reid of such people-BK

Anonymous @ 6:49 PM,
Like I told my supervisors in the military: "Respect is earned, not automatically given. You show me respect and I'll show you respect." With the president constantly twisting the facts ("the cost of health care will raise the deficit if we do not pass Obama-care" - like Medicare is not already doing that and the CBO said that Obama-care will increase our deficits even more) he is being either misleading at best or ignorant at worst. He has constantly belittled the opposition and I thought he was supposed to be a uniter and bipartisan. What happened? Maybe if he showed respect to the opposition then they would show him respect. You can not have it both ways. We already had one president that was not the sharpest knife in the drawer. Did we get another one?

Matt Carl,
I agree and would have voted for Clinton if she won the nomination. Obama had and still has no experience. As far as health care, I am against the government (public) option since we see how well Medicare is going. Do we really need another loser like Medicare, Social Security, the Post Office, and the D.C. Metro that are bottomless pits when it comes to our tax dollars?

BK,
Health care reform is good, but the "public" option is bad. That is main concern. Besides there have been many Obama supporters going to these Town Halls and protests and raising the race card to make the opposition look bad. It is his own supporters that are being racist in an attempt to reduce the opposition to a pile of rubble.

@ George Washington, 5:21

You can be well educated and still be ignorant of something. It happens everyday, in every country. No one knows everything.

IGNORANT:

1. lacking in knowledge or training; unlearned: an ignorant man.
2. lacking knowledge or information as to a particular subject or fact: ignorant of quantum physics.
3. uninformed; unaware.
4. due to or showing lack of knowledge or training: an ignorant statement.

Dictionary,
All four of these describe Obama since he has no experience in running ANYTHING. He has never run a city, state, or business ( not even so much as a lemonade stand), but now he is trying to run a country and failing miserably at it. I guess that makes Obama IGNORANT by your own definition.

@ Anonymous 1033

I agree.

It was George Washington who IMPLIED one cannot be well educated and ingorant at the same time.

@ George Washington, 5:21pm and @ Anonymous, 1033am

I am sorry, I read George's posting too fast. My comment should be supporting George Washington and directed at WALK, 421pm.

Sorry George.