.
Parallels to country's racist past haunt age of Obama
Some historians say Barack Obama's presidency has sparked a return of racism with echoes of post-Civil War Reconstruction.
November 1st, 2012
09:19 AM ET

Parallels to country's racist past haunt age of Obama

This is the second in an occasional series on issues of race, identity and politics ahead of Election Day, including a look at the optics of politics, a white Southern Democrat fighting for survival and a civil rights icon registering voters.

By John Blake, CNN

(CNN) - A tall, caramel-complexioned man marched across the steps of the U.S. Capitol to be sworn into office as a jubilant crowd watched history being made.

The man was an African-American of mixed-race heritage, an eloquent speaker whose election was hailed as a reminder of how far America had come.

But the man who placed his hand on the Bible that winter day in Washington wasn't Barack Obama. He was Hiram Rhodes Revels, the first African-American elected to the U.S. Senate.

His election and that of many other African-Americans to public office triggered a white backlash that helped destroy Reconstruction, America’s first attempt to build an interracial democracy in the wake of the Civil War.

To some historians, Revels' story offers sobering lessons for our time: that this year's presidential election is about the past as well as the future. These historians say Obama isn't a post-racial president but a "post-Reconstructionist" leader. They say his presidency has sparked a white backlash with parallels to a brutal period in U.S. history that began with dramatic racial progress.

Some of the biggest controversies of the 2012 contest could have been ripped from the headlines of that late 19th-century era, they say: Debates erupt over voting rights restrictions and racial preferences, a new federal health care act divides the country, an economic crisis sparks a small government movement. And then there's a vocal minority accusing a national black political leader of not being a "legitimate" U.S. citizen.

All were major issues during Reconstruction, an attempt to bring the former Confederate states back into the national fold and create a new era of racial justice. And many of the same forces that destroyed Reconstruction may be converging again, some scholars and historians say.

Hiram Rhodes Revels became the first African-American elected to the U.S. Senate in 1870.

Ruha Benjamin points to this as proof that change is fragile - and reversible. The backlash that swept aside Revels lasted nearly a century.

"When white Americans helped put this African-American in the Senate, it seemed that they were really welcoming African-Americans and they wanted them to have full equality," said Benjamin, an African-American studies professor at Boston University. "We know in hindsight that it was about to get worse."

The notion that the country is poised to enter a new post-Reconstruction era may seem outlandish, even offensive. That period, known as the Jim Crow era, saw the establishment of American apartheid: segregated public facilities, race riots and white racists murdering blacks and their white allies with impunity.

Today, too many white Americans are "militantly anti-racist" for the country to return to the post-Reconstruction era, said Mark D. Naison, a history professor at Fordham University in New York City.

"You hold a racist demonstration in this country and the anti-racist protesters will have as many whites and blacks in their group, maybe more," Naison said. "We are definitely not post-racial, but we aren't going back to the days of legal segregation."

Yet there is another slice of white America that seems stuck in a time warp, as if it never left the post-Reconstruction era, other historians argue. While not calling for the return of Jim Crow segregation, some white Americans are recycling the same political rhetoric and legal strategies that snuffed out Reconstruction, these historians say.

They are also resurrecting some of the most racist images from the post-Reconstruction era, some black commentators say.

While it is no longer acceptable to call a black person the N-word publicly, people do it all the time in social media, video games and in the comment sections of online news stories, said Nsenga Burton, a writer for The Root, an online news site with an African-American perspective.

Much of this racism is aimed at Obama, she says. Among examples, he’s been called "tar baby" and "the ultimate Affirmative Action N******" and depicted as a chimp. People are not shocked anymore by overt displays of racism, she says.

Burton said in a Root essay entitled, "It's a Great Time to be a Racist," that Obama's presidency didn't inaugurate a post-racial era. "Try post-Reconstruction," she said, "because the harmful slurs and images being tossed around the public space hark back more to a racist past than to a racially ambiguous future."

A recent Associated Press online poll concluded that racial prejudice in America has slightly increased since Obama's election. The survey said that a majority of Americans, 51%, express explicit racial prejudice toward blacks, compared to 48% in 2008.

While the poll on its own doesn’t prove the country has become more racist in the last four years, it does offer evidence that the “post-racial” world some thought Obama’s inauguration would bring has yet to materialize.

"We're in a racist renaissance," Burton said. "It's a rebirth of the oldest forms of racism. It's not new, not different. It's like the 1800s, the most archaic abusive terms are applied to black people every single day."

Some conservatives have a different take, on history as well as current events. Everyone who criticizes the president is labeled a racist, they say. And describing Obama as a post-Reconstruction president is absurd.

"It's race-baiting of the highest order; it's bunk," said Niger Innis, a black conservative and son of civil rights activist Roy Innis who has defended the Tea Party movement against accusations of racism.

"The America of today is not the America of the 1870s," Innis said. "When the American people voted for their first black president, the Union Army didn't occupy the country."

Some conservative commentators also say Obama isn't a victim of racism, but to the contrary has inflamed racial divisions to advance his political agenda.

"Obama was falsely portrayed in his campaign as a post-racial president who would bring healing to the nation's racial divisions," said Larry Schweikart, co-author of "A Patriot's History of the United States."

"Obama has done everything he can to ensure that there were stark racial differences. … Obama has focused his entire administration around racism, a sort of reverse racism on his end," Schweikart claimed.

It is a view that has been reflected by conservative talk-show hosts such as Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh’s brother David, author of "The Great Destroyer." David Limbaugh would not talk to CNN for this story.

Hope and change in another time

Reconstruction, which lasted from the end of the Civil War in 1865 to 1877, was filled with dueling perceptions of race as well. The political changes unleashed by the Civil War unnerved many white Southerners: As blacks achieved positions of power that previously had been reserved for whites, historians say, many whites felt like their country didn't belong to them anymore.

After the Civil War, the U.S. Congress passed the 13th, 14th and 15th "Reconstruction Amendments" that abolished slavery, granted citizenship rights to blacks and prohibited denying the right to vote to newly freed slaves.

The term "civil rights" was coined during Reconstruction, said Eric Foner, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author of "Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution." A century before Rosa Parks refused to move to the back of a segregated bus, Congress passed the 1866 and 1875 Civil Rights Acts, which banned the discrimination of blacks in "public accommodations" such as streetcars and theaters.

The reforms provoked what some historians say was white Southerners' greatest fear: "Negro Rule."

During Reconstruction, at least 2,000 blacks were eventually elected to political offices throughout the South. They included congressmen, judges, tax collectors, sheriffs, even a governor, said Philip Dray, author of "Capitol Men," which examines Reconstruction through the lives of the first black congressmen.

"Expectations were high," said Dray, who has also written books about the rise of labor unions and lynchings in America. "People felt like there was change, and they were going to be part of it."

Revels rode that wave of optimism into high office. In 1870, he became the first African-American elected to the U.S. Senate when the Mississippi legislature appointed him to fill a vacancy left when the state seceded from the Union.

Opponents initially insisted he wasn't a legitimate U.S. citizen because the Constitution required a senator be a citizen for at least nine years. He also had an unusual background, having been born to a free black family in North Carolina when slavery was legal.

"He wasn't radical or over the top," Dray said of Revels. "He was a minister, a conciliatory figure. The idea was that it would be easier for him to weather the scrutiny."

Revels himself would anticipate the white backlash that would follow when he told the Senate early in 1871: “I find that the prejudice in this country to color is very great, and I sometimes fear that it is on the increase.”

Obamacare, 19th century style

Beyond Revels, there are other parallels between today and the post-Reconstruction era, according to some historians.

The most commonly cited link revolves around the debate over voter ID laws. Since Obama's election, 34 states have considered adopting legislation requiring photo ID for voters, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University. Seven have passed such laws, which typically require voters to present a government-issued photo ID at the polls.

During the post-Reconstruction era, many white Southerners viewed the onset of black voting power in apocalyptic terms. They created a thicket of voting barriers - "poll taxes," "literacy tests" and "understanding clauses" - to prevent blacks from voting, said Dray.

"The idea was to invalidate the black vote without directly challenging the 15th Amendment," Dray said.

This political cartoon highlighting voter intimidation appeared in Harper's Weekly in 1876.

Many contemporary voter ID laws are following the same script, he said.

"It just goes on and on. They've never completely gone away. And now they're back with a vengeance."

Some opponents of the voter ID laws note that these measures disproportionately affect the elderly and the poor, regardless of race.

Supporters of voter ID laws say they're not about race at all, but about common sense and preventing voter fraud.

"That is not a racial issue and it certainly isn't a hardship issue," said Deneen Borelli, author of "Blacklash," which argues Obama is turning America into a welfare nation.

"When you try to purchase over-the-counter medication or buy liquor or travel, you present photo ID. This is a basic part of everyday transactions."

Historians say there are other ways the post-Reconstruction script is being dusted off and that some of them appear to have nothing to do with race on the surface.

Consider the debate over "Obamacare," the nation's new health care law. The controversy would be familiar to many 19th-century Americans, said Jim Downs, author of "Sick from Freedom: African-American Illness and Suffering during the Civil War and Reconstruction."

The notion that the federal government should help those who cannot help themselves wasn't widely accepted before the Civil War. There were a few charities and municipal hospitals that took care of the sick, but most institutions ignored ordinary people who needed health care, said Downs, a Connecticut College history professor who studies the history of race and medicine in 19th-century America.

Reconstruction changed that. Post-Civil War America was marked by epidemics: yellow fever, smallpox and typhus. Freed slaves, who were often malnourished and had few clothes and little shelter, died by the "tens of thousands," he said.

The federal government responded by creating the nation's first-ever national health care system, directed at newly freed slaves. It was called the Medical Division of the Freedmen's Bureau. The division built 40 hospitals and hired hundreds of doctors to treat more than a million former slaves from 1865 until it was shut down in 1870 after losing congressional funding, Downs said.

"It absolutely radicalized health care," he said. "You can't argue that government intervention in health is something new or a recent innovation. It originated in the mid-19th century in response to the suffering of freed slaves."

Critics at the time said the new health care system was too radical. They said it would make blacks too reliant on government. The system was expanded to include other vulnerable Americans, such as the elderly, children and the disabled. Yet some still saw it as a black handout, Downs said.

"The whole notion of the modern day "welfare queen" can be traced to the post-Civil War period when people became very suspicious of the federal government providing relief to ex-slaves," Downs said. "They feared this would create a dependent class of people."

A campaign to 'save' America

Economic fears in the post-Reconstruction era also fueled the white backlash, a pattern that some historians say is repeating itself today.

A national economic collapse took place just as freed slaves were gaining political influence. The Panic of 1873 started with a banking collapse and a stock market dive. The result: Tens of thousands of workers, many Civil War veterans, became homeless. People lined up for food and shelter in cities across America.

"It made it more economically competitive for everybody," Dray said. "You saw whites become even less generous to African-Americans [than] they might have been."

Some white Southerners channeled their economic anxiety into a systemic attack on the federal government, historians said.

Before the collapse, Southern states controlled by Northern politicians and their allies had built hospitals and public schools and created social services to help freed slaves as well as poor whites, said Jerald Podair, a historian at Lawrence University in Wisconsin.

But the notion of an activist federal government helping blacks amid tough times created an opening for Reconstruction opponents. One group that took advantage of that opening was the Redeemers, a popular movement led by conservative, pro-business politicians who vowed to "save" the South, said Podair, who is writing a book on Bayard Rustin, a close aide to the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

The Redeemers gained control of most Southern statehouses and pledged to reduce the size of government. They defunded public schools, closed public hospitals and halted road construction, Podair said, all while cutting taxes for the wealthy plantation owners, the 1 percenters of their day.

The Redeemers cloaked their rhetoric in the need for more government efficiency, but their goals were also racial, Podair said.

"The Redeemers were interested first and foremost in power," Podair said. "If freed slaves received education and medical care, they were that much closer to economic and, eventually, political power. And if the federal government had a major role in the South, that also meant less economic and political power for the Redeemer class."

Some historians say the backlash against Obama mimics late 19th-century resistance to black political progress.

Podair said some contemporary governors are recycling the same talking points used by the Redeemers. They are invoking the need for austerity while cutting government jobs that employ a high number of blacks and reducing public services that help the poor, a disproportionate number of whom are black.

"There may well be a new post-Reconstruction era of slashed federal budgets and policies that transfer power and resources to state and local governments," Podair said. "Once again, initiatives that sound race-neutral on their face will have a devastating racial impact."

Innis has a different take.

He said state and local governments can't afford to keep the same number of jobs because of generous benefits negotiated by unions. Race has nothing to do with it.

"If you have a government job and the pay and benefits is more than a private sector job, something is wrong," he said.

Government cutbacks are designed to help the economy, not inflict pain on any particular group.

"Until we get our economy on track, black and brown people are going to suffer," he said.

'White Girl Bleed a Lot'

The primary weapon white Southerners used to halt Reconstruction was violence. Mobs attacked and killed blacks gathering to vote. They assassinated black officeholders and their white allies. Newspapers sparked race riots and warned of race wars by printing false accounts of black-on-white attacks.

We are not seeing anywhere near the level of violence toward black people that followed Reconstruction. But some people fear that the inflammatory rhetoric that helped trigger racial violence in that era is returning.

A Google search of the phrase "black mobs attack white people" yields tens of thousands of hits. Conservative bloggers and columnists say a "wave" of black mobs attacking whites at random has spread across the nation in places such as shopping malls, downtown tourist spots and even "Beat Whitey Nights" at Midwestern fairs.

Syndicated conservative columnist Thomas Sowell - himself African-American - wrote in a May 15 column for National Review Online that "race war" has returned to America because black gangs are "launching coordinated attacks on whites in public" across America. A Republican state legislator in Maryland, Patrick L. McDonough, warned earlier this year in a letter to the governor that "roving mobs of black youths" had been attacking white tourists in Baltimore.

One author, Colin Flaherty, wrote a book about this alleged wave of racial violence called, "White Girl Bleed a Lot: The Return of Race Riots to America." The various accounts follow the same pattern: Black "flash mobs" suddenly attack whites in public, followed by a media cover-up.

Flaherty, also a talk radio show host, said he first noticed the attacks in 2010. Since then, he claims he has seen "thousands" of videos of black mobs attacking whites.

People have called him racist, but Flaherty said he's just a "guy standing on a corner" reporting what he sees.

"White liberals go nuts on this," he said of his book. "When people use names like 'racist,' they're using it to shut down conversation, not engage in it."

The return of race war rhetoric has disturbing historical echoes, said David Godshalk, author of "Veiled Visions: The 1906 Atlanta Race Riot and the Reshaping of American Race Relations."

Godshalk said neither Sowell nor Flaherty have offered any statistical evidence that reports about "black mobs" are anything more than isolated cases. Sowell did not respond to interview requests.

Scores of blacks died during the post-Reconstruction era because newspapers spread false or grossly exaggerated reports of blacks as predators, particularly accounts of black men raping white women, Godshalk said.

Some whites used those reports to justify violence and political oppression against blacks, he said.

"Longstanding notions that African-Americans were criminals were used to argue that they shouldn't be leaders in society because they didn't have the same capabilities as whites, and they weren't trustworthy enough to hold positions of authority," said Godshalk, a history professor at Shippensburg University in Pennsylvania who has also written about Reconstruction and lynchings.

Those notions of black inferiority eventually infected the legal system during the post-Reconstruction era, historians say.

The post-Reconstruction Supreme Court played a major role in destroying what Congress had created through its racial reforms. The court delivered a series of decisions that nullified the Civil Rights Acts of 1866 and 1875 as well as additional laws designed to protect blacks from mob violence at the voting booth, said Peter Irons, a civil rights attorney and author of "A People's History of the Supreme Court."

In 1883, the court imposed a judicial death sentence on Reconstruction in the "Civil Rights Cases" decision, which allowed private individuals and businesses to discriminate against blacks. Associate Justice Joseph Bradley wrote in the decision that freed slaves should stop being "a special favorite of the laws."

The most notorious post-Reconstruction decision involving race took place in 1895 when the Supreme Court legally sanctioned Jim Crow laws by enshrining the "separate-but-equal" doctrine in Plessy v. Ferguson. The court upheld a Louisiana law requiring that federal rail cars provide different facilities for white and black passengers.

By the late 19th century, the Supreme Court had "turned its back on the claims of blacks and opened its arms to those of corporations," Irons said. It was the onset of the Gilded Age, an era of widening income inequality that saw the court first introduce "corporate personhood," the concept that a corporation has the legal rights of a person.

"People were getting tired of concerns about racial minorities," said Irons, an activist whose book on the Supreme Court was partly inspired by the late liberal historian Howard Zinn and his book, “A People’s History of the United States.”

"The court is generally a mirror of the broader society, and that was the way most people felt at the time."

Irons and other liberal observers fear the current Supreme Court is drifting in a similar direction and anticipate that it will overturn or weaken a key section of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 as well as affirmative action in college admissions.

The court is expected to hear a challenge from Shelby County, Alabama, to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which requires nine Southern states and parts of others to "pre-clear" with federal officials any voting measures that could potentially restrict black voters.

The court is also due to rule on a case on affirmative action in college admission policies in Fisher v. University of Texas.

Irons said the conservative majority on the contemporary court would be doing what their counterparts did during Reconstruction, avoiding a frontal assault on civil rights laws and other measures that protect women and workers, while eviscerating the laws.

"It's unlikely that the court would render any decisions that would be totally reactionary on issues of race," said Irons, "but what they're doing in the current court is whittling away and cutting back very gradually on things like racial, gender and wage discrimination."

From post-racial to most racial

Some conservatives, though, have a different perspective on Reconstruction and any modern parallels.

Most historians say Reconstruction ended with the disputed presidential contest of 1876. An election too close to call was resolved when candidate Rutherford B. Hayes agreed to pull Northern troops out of the South in exchange for the presidency.

Schweikart, co-author of "A Patriot's History of the United States," said the United States abandoned Reconstruction because the nation could not call itself a democracy while keeping half its population under military occupation.

"Reconstruction ended, pure and simple, because the North could not afford economically, politically or socially to maintain a standing army in a part of the U.S. for an indefinite time and still call America a democratic republic," said Schweikart, a history professor at the University of Dayton in Ohio.

Borelli, author of "Blacklash," does see one contemporary link with 19th-century America. She argues that Obama is actually encouraging a new form of servitude to what she calls the "Big Government Plantation."

Since Obama became president, a record number of Americans, at least 46 million, now receive food stamps. And one in six Americans receives some form of government aid as the nation struggles to recover from the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.

"There are a lot of people who are relying on government for their basic everyday needs: food, clothing and shelter," said Borelli, who is outreach director for FreedomWorks, a Washington-based group that advocates for smaller government and lower taxes. "When you rely on government, your liberties are reduced."

Another conservative said Obama has tacitly endorsed reverse racism.

"You can't have a legitimate disagreement with the president if you're white without being called a racist," said Stephen Marks, creator of FightBigotry.com, a Super PAC that produced a television ad accusing Obama of not standing up to racism.

Marks said Obama said nothing when Vice President Joe Biden recently told an audience of black and white voters that Republicans were "going to put y'all back in chains."

"They're the ones who play the race card, 100% of the time," Marks said of Obama and Democrats. "The Republicans don't have the gonads to respond because they're so afraid of being called a racist."

What happened to Revels?

There's little disagreement among contemporary historians about what happened to the South when the nation abandoned Reconstruction. The region became a divided society where race filtered into everything, said Dray, author of "Capitol Men."

"It had a paralyzing effect. Business interests didn't want to invest there. Immigrants didn't want to go there," Dray said. "The South became this tainted place. Instead of moving into the 20th century, it stayed put in the 19th century."

The Jim Crow laws that marked the end of Reconstruction stayed put for at least 60 years. It would take a century before the contemporary civil rights movement restored the political and civil rights of blacks. Some historians argue that the United States did not actually become a democracy until 1965 with the passage of the Voting Rights Act.

Black pioneers like Revels disappeared from the history books. After serving his Senate term, he didn't seek reappointment and returned to Mississippi, where he eventually became president of Alcorn State College and pastor of a church.

He lost much of his black support for not speaking out against the abuses that ended Reconstruction, said Benjamin, the Boston University professor.

"He was an accommodationist," Benjamin said. "He was in the Senate standing up for white folks and telling people not to be so hard on Southern plantation owners. He didn't use his platform to represent African-Americans."

In 1901, Revels collapsed and died during a church meeting in Mississippi. That same year, the last black member of the House of Representatives finished his final term. Congress resumed being an all-white institution. Blacks had been driven out of office by beatings and assassinations.

Revels' death barely got a mention in the Southern press. His fellow black congressmen received the same treatment. Revisionist historians were already depicting Reconstruction as a fatal example of government overreach and Northern "carpetbaggers" and "scalawags" coming South to profit off of the regions' misery, said Dray, author of "Capitol Men."

"When some of them passed away years later, the Southern press barely mentioned it," Dray said. "It was a part of American history that people did not want to remember. No one wanted to talk about it or think about it."

One group of Americans, however, never forgot what Revels represented.

During the Great Depression, Dray said, the federal government dispatched interviewers from the Works Progress Administration to the South to collect oral histories from former slaves.

The interviewers noticed a curious sight as they walked into the shacks of the former slaves. They saw faded copies of an 1872 lithograph depicting the first seven black members of Congress, including Revels.

The image is still haunting.

A group portrait of the first black African-American U.S. lawmakers, including Revels.

Revels and his fellow racial pioneers are posed together, dressed in vested suits and bow ties. They exude pride and determination, even though only several years earlier they weren't even considered fully human by many Americans.

Revels sits in the front row of the group portrait. He stares forward in the picture, a man who seems confident in what the future would bring.

What would he think of Obama if he could somehow see him today? Would he be delighted at what America has become in 2012?

Or would he think the future he embodied still seems far away?


Filed under: 2012 Election • Black in America • Discrimination • Economy • Ethnicity • Health • History • Language • Politics • Poverty • Race
soundoff (4,517 Responses)
  1. Ivan

    The US far Right, wants to remove government completely from people's lives (as silly of a notion as that is – highways/schools/sewers anyone?) They will say/do pretty much anything to achieve that goal. They have been very good a labeling Obama in racial terms. It remains to be seen if the US public will continue to believe the rhetoric or make up their own minds.

    November 1, 2012 at 1:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • RJ

      Give me a name of one person who "wants to remove government completely from people's lives". My guess is that you can't.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:09 pm | Report abuse |
      • Evelyn Connaway

        RJ – Your are right! The congressman want to keep their jobs, as they love living off the welfare for themselves – that they made the laws for – with their salaries, pensions, benefits and all the perks, such as bribes to do the bidding of all their rich friends and corporations – yet they don't really do any work! WE THE PEOPLE – ARE THE EMPLOYERS of that bunch – all 535 of them, and we let them get away with us like they employed us! It's time to take them off our welfare and fire/vote them out – especially the republican party and some democrats who will not work with our president and for us, as they are supposed to do. That's what the job requires and what they pledge to do. They are not worthy of being called a citizens of this country when they work against us and just for themselves.

        November 1, 2012 at 1:29 pm | Report abuse |
  2. John

    I agree with most of the comments on this board which take race out of the eqn. The media, and ignorant voters, will hold race as a major factor in this election. (Then again, most voters are ignorant... on both sides). The over arching issue, however, is monetary in nature. Romney and Obama are members of the have's, while a majority of us are the have-not's. We are controlled by the have's while we squabble over the illusion of choice in a two-party system... The fact is... regardless of who is in office, life changes very little for any of us... now, back to squabbling...

    November 1, 2012 at 1:01 pm | Report abuse |
    • Phil

      Yeah, John, I believe you're right. If Obama wins, we, the have not's get screwed, if Romney, we still get screwed, we get screwed either way

      November 1, 2012 at 1:46 pm | Report abuse |
  3. Blah blah the wheel's off your trailer

    Right now the whole world is watching the U.S. election with certain interests..And each country is wondering how's the outcome of the U.S. election going to affect them. For some countries, the concern is economics, for others its civil rights and independence. But for one particular country, its national security and sovereignty. For the past half century, various republican and democratic Presidents have tried very hard to maintain global peace through a cold war with the Soviet Union. And triumphantly, America has won the cold war and for the past two decades, for the first time in half a century, America and the world no longer lived in fear of a nuclear war with the Soviet Union. Fast forward two decades later, and now you have republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney calling Russia our number one geopolitical foe. And he has even gone as far as to call for the cancellation of the recent nuclear non proliferation threaty with Russia and for new deployment of ballistic war heads on the eastern coast of Russia. Yes, just imagine this tax evading draft dodger wants to start a new arms race with Russia and WWIII. If Romney was to become POTUS, of course we'd have to worry about another major terrorist attack on our home land, another economic meltdown, a gender war on women and on every ethnic, racial and religious group in America. But the one thing that bothers me the most is the potential for America to be vaporized off the face of the map by Russia. The cold war might be over but Russia still has triple the nuclear war heads that we have and during the cold war, Soviet nuclear submarines patrolled both our eastern and western seaboard. I'm afraid that if Romney is in office, Russia will once again resurficing nuclear submarines off our coast and any false move woul be the end of America and the world as we know it. Hey, its your call.

    November 1, 2012 at 1:01 pm | Report abuse |
  4. Sally

    Sadly, this article rings true. I'm a young white woman living in a largely conservative area. Conversations that I overhear in passing do not solely rest on Obama's policy decisions but bring up his race as well. I have watched the debates and the arguments and vacillated back and forth on how to voice my opinion about the upcoming vote. There is only one clear choice in this election to help move this country forward. We do not need to adopt conservative notions from the past that would only negate the progress we have made in this past century. Obama.

    November 1, 2012 at 1:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • Andy

      Well said.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:03 pm | Report abuse |
    • Paula Black

      It may be true about racism aimed at President Obama, but there is also racism aimed at governor Romney from the largely African American vote that president Obama will receive. There is always two sides to every coin, and in 2012 there is just as much racism aimed at the majority.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:09 pm | Report abuse |
      • tomo

        Paula,

        Clinton, Gore and Kerry all received over 90% of the black vote. Your arguement is invalid.

        November 1, 2012 at 1:13 pm | Report abuse |
      • Jon B

        What racism is directed at Romney by blacks? Blacks have been voting DEM for the last 30 years plus. Sounds like you need to do some researching before inserting foot into mouth.

        November 1, 2012 at 2:01 pm | Report abuse |
  5. Reggie from LA

    It is not about the man...YOU say. You say that it's not about the man, but a whole lot of other people will tell you it's racial. Maybe by their language in conversation. Let's see. Wasn't it Saxby Chamblis that said "he's a slow learner" because Obama didn't come into office with a 'step and fetchit' persona, as they were trying to tell him how to do his job as President. Or maybe Mitch McConnell meant nothing racial when he said, before the man even passed one bill, that the GOP objective was to ensure that he failed. Now these things (and a whole lot more) may not suggest racism, but no president in your recent recollection has ever been treated with such contempt and disrespect. Much of if subconscious, a portrait of who they really are on the inside. We can't pretend away racial.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • sickofitall

      It's called experience, not racist. Just like in a job those that work hard and are good at what they do. Oh but wait everyone should have a job and get paid the same even if they don't show up or try to do a good job or even try to get a job.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:26 pm | Report abuse |
  6. Cathie483

    This is just getting old, judging from the 90% plus black voters voting for Obama, I would say blacks are racist against Romney. Whites do not hold the race card alone. Give it up whites see through all this poor me BS. I haven't a doubt that most black are racist against white Romney.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • Foxxy News

      No one really likes Romney. Not even his own party, did you watch the Republican debates. The only person that likes him is the guy running his blind trust.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:03 pm | Report abuse |
      • tomo

        Foxxy,

        You have to admit that the Romney/Ryan supporters are in no way racist. Just look at the diversity in the crowds they attract. Hahahaha!

        November 1, 2012 at 1:06 pm | Report abuse |
    • tomo

      Cathie,

      Is that why 94% of blacks voted for Clinton, Gore and Kerry? I'm seeing some of your hidden racists tendencies in your statement. You would probably have supported the Jim Crow laws because they never mentioned the word black so how could they be racist?

      November 1, 2012 at 1:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • @Cathie483

      In NY in 2008 – 100% of blacks voting went Obama.

      100%. Even in Maine, Obama only got 87%.

      I am voting for Obama, but to say whites are the only racist group is ridiculous.

      Humans are humans.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • Blah blah the wheel's off your trailer

      First and foremost, I don't like Romney and my dislike for him has nothing to do with his race whatsoever. I held the very same dislike for Herrman Cain. The color of the candidate is not the issue here but the hypocricy, the blatant lies, the bigotry, the racism, the propaganda and the BS!

      November 1, 2012 at 1:22 pm | Report abuse |
      • Forward!

        Absolutely! Very well stated.

        November 1, 2012 at 1:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • Forward!

      Cathie:
      That's totally ridiculous. It's like saying that before 2008, every white who cast a vote for president was racist for not voting for a black candidate. You say there weren't any running? Could have written one in!

      November 1, 2012 at 1:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • Blah blah the wheel's off your trailer

      I do not like Romney period and my dislike for him has nothing to do with his color. I disliked Herman Cain just as much. And I dislike Romney because of his deceitfulness, his outrageous hypocrisy, his blatant lies, his bigotry and racism and his propaganda. And when you go behind closed doors with your rich friends and malign 47% of the country, there is no way I could respect or like Romney. Furthermore, this is a man that is telling the American people to trust him with their lives and future and with their family's lives and future and vote for him. But too bad Romney won't even trust these same voters to see what's in his tax returns. That is totally outrageous. And by the way, of the millions of unemployed Americans who have benefited from the stimulus package, how many of those American do you believe are republicans? Two, ten? one hundred? two hundred? NO, millions of the unemployed who benefited from the stimulus were republicans. Republicans like to call the President a food stamp President and accuse him of inflating the national deficit but that is hypocrisy because even lying Paul Ryan took millions of dollars in stimulus funding for his state. Furthermore, of the 47% Romney bashed, how many of thsoe Americans do you believe are republicans? Five? Ten? fifteen? No, millions in the 47% are republicans. Yet you people are attacking the President for looking out for you and supporting Romney who would rather spend that money on a foreign war? Well, go ahead and vote for the guy whose skin color is like yours and see how far it takes you. Good luck.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:37 pm | Report abuse |
  7. odell jones

    I find it offensive that anyone suggests this election is about racism and guilting in to voting for reelection. There may be some, granted who harbor views against minorities but this election is about the past four years and about how we are doing, both as a family and as a country. That is all, nothing more.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • Drew

      Is that why Republicans in Congress set out from day one to deny Obama the power of the Presidency, if not the office itself? Uh-huh.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:59 pm | Report abuse |
      • VoteR

        Silly liberal – Obama had a full Democratic House and Senate for the first two years of his Administration and did nothing. Don't cry sabotage – Obama foolishly squandered time and resources on Health Care when the real issues were the economy, unemployment and the deficit. In short, Obama missed the boat, and does not deserve a 2nd term.

        November 1, 2012 at 1:04 pm | Report abuse |
      • Foxxy News

        Vote R...He didn't have a super majority. Big differene.

        November 1, 2012 at 1:06 pm | Report abuse |
      • Drew

        Yeah, evidently he seems to think having guys like Liebermann and Ben Nelson in your caucus is having "full control" of Congress. LOL ... not too informed.

        November 1, 2012 at 1:09 pm | Report abuse |
      • Drew

        And "foolishly squandered time" on healthcare ... Dem and Rep administrations have been talking about healthcare since Roosevelt's first term, kicking that can down the road since the 30s, good economy, bad economy, every economy. And you evidently, wanted more of that. Guess what ... Presidencies are expected to accomplish multiple goals, not just the two you've outlined.

        November 1, 2012 at 1:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • William

      While the author may so selectively demonstrate racism against a specific minority (african-american), he seems to boldly remain silent about antagonism against all races....hispanic...asia...yes, even european ancestry. Certainly not a balanced piece of journalism. Just review the most recent comments of the Rev. who spoke at President Obama's inauguration. So, wonder the sermons given in churchs' this Sunday???

      November 1, 2012 at 1:04 pm | Report abuse |
      • Marty

        Well, William, the President is African American, thus, the story was solely related to a historical period and how there were similarities to this President. Based upon that, why would other races be discussed? I thought the author was pretty clear in the case he made.

        November 1, 2012 at 2:43 pm | Report abuse |
  8. Cathie483

    This is just getting old, judging from the 90% plus black voters voting for Obama, I would say blacks are racist against Romney. Whites do not hold the race card alone. Give it up whites see through all this ppoor me BS.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • uroblivious

      lol...
      simply put, you're either too stupid to see the discrimination happening, or you're a willing participant turning the other way when it happens.

      sorry to burst your bubble, but bigotry still exists.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:01 pm | Report abuse |
      • VoteR

        Government bends over backwards for minorities, which is inherently wrong. Government is supposed to focus on what benefits most Americans...which is whites.

        November 1, 2012 at 1:07 pm | Report abuse |
  9. Alger Dave

    While it may be unpopular to say so, we still deal in this country with a group of the electorate which is probably not best able to make informed voting choices. An under-educated electorate is more easily swayed by those trying to buy elections and their results. Should people who cannot read or write be allowed to vote? What makes them better citizens at voting than those incarcerated who are not allowed to vote? This is not a racial thing, as lack of education crosses all ethnic boundries, but rather a call to take a realistic look at who should be allowed to vote. Personally, requiring a high school diploma to vote seems not overly severe. This is a free service provided by our taxes that we encourage everyone to take full advantage of. If they choose not to get their HS diploma, then they are also choosing not to vote. Just an idea.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:57 pm | Report abuse |
    • Edwin

      The portion of the electorate unable to make useful decisions is much larger, I think, than you imply. In an age of social media and market focus groups, ads are crafted to target specific audiences. Psychology shows us that propaganda campaigns - based mostly on twisting the truth, with a few lies thrown in - are extremely effective on almost everybody.

      Given that our modern educational system does not actually value or reward critical reasoning or independent thought, this propaganda-based election system will only get worse.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • KCYankee

      While I understand where you are going with this, I hate to say it but receiving a certificate of formal education in no way prevents a person from being a fool and falling for the countless methods of lying and manipulating employed by politicians. I have known people with PhDs who were complete fools when it came to choosing governance.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mike

      Let me add another thought. How about making voting contingent upon being a productive member of society, let’s say for example that you’re thirty and never paid taxes, or have been receiving perpetual handouts. Should you have a say in how tax dollars are spent? Who represents you? Or a say in anything at all? Just for the record, the democrats are pandering to the wrong people. If it were not for people who pay taxes, start businesses and become evil because they are successful. There would not be anything to handout to the perpetually lazy.

      November 2, 2012 at 3:19 pm | Report abuse |
      • AndrewFromNH

        Just curious, Mike. Where do Mitt's boys fall in that spectrum? I'm pretty sure they don't get any handouts, unless you count the hundred million dollars their dad gave each of them.

        November 2, 2012 at 3:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mike

      Andrew, since I don't know your family’s financial status, let’s just say your family has worked hard, got lucky… and established some wealth. If they leave it to you, are you one of the evil or are you just like any other person who their parents extend whatever help they can to their children?

      November 2, 2012 at 4:02 pm | Report abuse |
  10. Drew

    I haven't a doubt in my mind that a portion of the opposition against Obama is racially motivated - a lot of whites are afraid that allowing even a half-black to be President is the slippery slope that will put them into the role of powerless minority. Nothing will change that opinion, and nothing any Internet troll says can change my view on this. If they don't want to admit it, fine.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • Scott

      You know Drew, your comment that no matter what anyone that is against Obama says, they are still ... gasp ... racist is quite similar to the Born Again Bible Thumpers. They believe that no matter what a non-believer says to them regarding Christianity that the non-believer only says it because the non-believer is anti-Christian.

      So you see Drew, you lib race baiter libs have a LOT in common with the Born Again Bible Thumpers. I call it the Martyr Syndrome. "They persecute me because they know I'm right."

      Scott

      November 1, 2012 at 12:59 pm | Report abuse |
      • Drew

        Nice try, Scott, but I didn't say that "anyone who is against Obama is racist;" I said, quite literally, that no one can convince me that large swaths of anti-Obama sentiment are based on race. That's not the same thing. Slow down. Take the time to read. Take even a little more time to comprehend. Then comment.

        November 1, 2012 at 1:03 pm | Report abuse |
      • Edwin

        Drew: There is nothing you can say to Scott that will make a difference. He is not interested in discussing ideas and maybe learning something. In his mind, anything a liberal (or a moderate) says is either a lie or a distortion of the truth - so he sees no reason not to consider them as anything but attacks against his Truth.

        The only people who can reach Scott are those who say ultra-conservative things. If you want a meaningful dialogue with him, try writing 'Obama the Socialist Leftist Marxist Muslim Atheist is trying to destroy our country by forcing everyone to conform to Sharia Law under the control of the United Nations.' He'll probably respond positively to that.

        November 1, 2012 at 1:17 pm | Report abuse |
      • Drew

        I'm not interested in discussing anything with Scott or any other troll. Their views on individual political issues are based on a lifetime of ideology, and therefore, cannot be changed.

        November 1, 2012 at 1:22 pm | Report abuse |
  11. Tony

    Wow. Who let the Freepers out of their cages this morning? This comments section looks like it came straight out of the mid-'50s in Alabama.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • Foxxy News

      Sean... Sean Hannity is that you. Save the talking points for AM radio. Respect the president whatever part he is from. You unpatriotic fool

      November 1, 2012 at 12:57 pm | Report abuse |
    • Foxxy News

      He is our president. Your president too.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • Edwin

      Scott: you help prove the points in this article well. Your anger and irrational arguments illustrate well the backlash they described.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:11 pm | Report abuse |
  12. Inciteful

    Did your parents have any children that lived?

    November 1, 2012 at 12:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • tomo

      It looks as if Sarah is letting Trigg play with the computer again.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:58 pm | Report abuse |
  13. Foxxy News

    Could someone tell me where they get all this classified information about what happened at Benghazi. Can those people also get me Romney's tax returns?

    November 1, 2012 at 12:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • Drew

      I suffered through "Benghazi Cover-Up" on Sean Hannity last night. Now I know where the Internet trolls get their talking points.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:56 pm | Report abuse |
      • Edwin

        I'm sorry, but it really was your own fault for watching.

        November 1, 2012 at 1:10 pm | Report abuse |
      • Drew

        Sometimes I like to see how the other half doesn't think.

        November 1, 2012 at 1:14 pm | Report abuse |
      • Michael Lee

        drew....why did you punish yourself like that?....ooooh brutal

        November 1, 2012 at 4:41 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Dwight

    When you point a finger at someone usually three are pointing back at you or in otherwords those that yell racist the loudest are the racist. Many people blame the white man for the native American troubles or the black mans troubles, but most of those troubles are slef created within thier culture. I had a friend that used to tell me, 'I'm not black, I'm Jamaican" and he was in the same electronics class as I was and he saw himself as moving on and succeeding and didn't want to be associated with the American black man. He went on to do well.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • Foxxy News

      Dwight brilliant study on your sample size of 1.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:53 pm | Report abuse |
    • tomo

      Wow Dwight! Now you are saying the it was the native Americans' culture that created manifest destiny.

      All I can say is, "white power! white power! white power!"

      November 1, 2012 at 12:56 pm | Report abuse |
      • Dwight

        Manifest Destiny happened hundreds of years ago and yet the Native American culture can't move past it. Despite increasingly more money put into reservations they continue to do worse, but there are a few that have realized that if you want to succeed you have to actually do something for yourself. Someone walking for you gets you no where.

        November 1, 2012 at 1:34 pm | Report abuse |
    • Tom

      Let me get this straight. You're saying the Native American problems were caused by them? I guess my wife's grandma, who was taken from her home by whites when she was 8, forced to attend a boarding school, beaten if she spoke Commanche, and returned only for summers and vacations for the next 8 years . . . she brought that on herself? You are clueless.
      The problem with the article is that they are comparing 10 years after the Civil War was fought, with deaths felt by just about everyone on both sides, to 150 years after the Civil War and acting like the country is coming from the same place.
      It's a ridiculous premise that belittles the people of America.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:11 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dwight

      Actually if you ask those that have come over from Africa if they are black, they will say they are African and despite coming from war and extreme poverty they seem to do much better than those of the same color here. When you have low expectations for yourself you usually achieve those low expectations and when you step out of the past you achieve the future. Many people are stuck in the past. Go figure.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:31 pm | Report abuse |
    • Greg

      Dwight... Stop. Just stop. I'll grant you one thing: I noticed a long time ago that in the U.S. we refer to ourselves as white or black, but to others as Jamaican or Irish or Indian (not Native American...or them, too) or he/she is whatever. But, Dwight, your reasoning is a bit off. To assert that blacks are not motivated to achieve you have only to look at the President. You need to turn off the TV and go meet some real people. My oldest brother is a MD and a lawyer. My older brother is a lawyer. My younger brother is a (Full Bird) Colonel in the U.S.Army. I am a retired Senior Noncommissioned Officer with a degree. I know many successful blacks, of which I count myself as one of them. Have a nice day.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:33 pm | Report abuse |
      • Dwight

        I work for two black Doctors and then I turn on TV and watch demonstrations by a group of people that feel victimized because of thier skin color and want to be given things to accomodate that. The black leaders don't call for success and self worth, but rather self loathing and for every black man that works thier way past thier color they lose a support base. I admire Bill Cosby and grew up watching Fat Albert and even he has gotten on many black people for being held back by the culture of skin color versus the willingness to succeed despite where you were born or what color you were born with. I know amputees that have run more miles than people with two legs that don't think they can.

        November 1, 2012 at 2:08 pm | Report abuse |
  15. Susie

    What silly article...if you want to compare Obama to someone, you wouldnt go back to reconstruction, but to Jimmy Carter and his attempt to pull America further to the left.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • tomo

      Neither Carter or Obama are left wingers. Now on the other hand can anyone see that the Republican Party has been hijacked by the extreme right wing ideologues? The right wingers won't even accept moderates. It is all or nothing which is not how things get done in America.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:53 pm | Report abuse |
      • Susie

        Keep your head in the sand. If you don't see Obama as a leftist, you must be even further leftist than he is. From the vantage point of most Americans, he is left wing and socialist.

        November 1, 2012 at 12:57 pm | Report abuse |
      • tomo

        I guess Colin Powell is a leftist too. Hahahaha! Don't you see how extremely right wing you and your party have become?

        November 1, 2012 at 1:00 pm | Report abuse |
      • Edwin

        Susie: those of us who actually have studied U.S. history - or simply lived more than 20 years - know what you wrote is not only false, it is ridiculous.

        Obama is not governing as a liberal. He is governing as a centrist. The problem is that the right has moved dramatically farther right in the last two decades - so far that almost all great republicans from before 1990 would also be considered leftist by this radical right.

        Actually, the problem is two-fold: not only has the right shifted (a fact that is utterly simple to discover if you do even a small amount of actual historical research) but those in the right have created a selective, revisionist history to support their contention that the rest of the world has changed and not them. If someone offers facts that contradict their narrow view, they call it liberal media bias - instead of actually engaging in discussion.

        November 1, 2012 at 1:08 pm | Report abuse |
      • Tom

        So Tomo, I guess you think half the country is extremist, then, since the election is evenly divided across the country right now? And it's been historically about half conservative and about half liberal for some time. Couldn't be that you're just slightly predisposed to accuse all Republicans of being extremists? From a middle of the road Republican, let me just say: speak for yourself, liberal, not me.

        November 1, 2012 at 1:14 pm | Report abuse |
  16. tomo

    The south has risen again in the form of the Tea Partiers. God help us all.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • VJ

      Tea Party killing American dream

      November 1, 2012 at 1:10 pm | Report abuse |
  17. Cooper

    The only thing this article does is prove that the real racist in this election are in the media. Nobody who is supporting the challenger in this election brings up his race, it is always those who are supporting the President. The fact is that I am looking at this as one presidents policies versus those of his challenger. This is just another ploy by the presidents supports to make everyone feel racial guilt if they dont vote for him.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:48 pm | Report abuse |
  18. NeoConNitwits

    I see the paid neo-con trolls are out in force today. What are you people going to do if Mitt the flip-flopper is elected and no longer needs you, or worse, outsources your paid internet trolling jobs to China?

    November 1, 2012 at 12:48 pm | Report abuse |
    • VoteR

      Those of us with jobs will be helped by Romney. It is you and the other 47%'ers who are desperately clinging to straws and engaged in negative, name-calling and 'anything but the issues' tactics to keep Obama in place. Its obvious you don't want to see your gravy train leave the station.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:51 pm | Report abuse |
      • Edwin

        It's funny you think that. Well, not funny - sad.

        But Romney's plan to balance the deficit is a lie - he has all but admitted it. He stands on no principles at all, except to become president. Obama was equally ambitious, but at least he kept a small amount of personal conviction with him. In spite of strong opposition, he tried to help our country back on its feet.

        He understood that a consumer economy depends on having consumers in order to function. So... those 47% Romney will cut off (the lazy people in the military, those parasitic elderly and disabled, the poor who work two jobs but can't afford to pay child care while at work, and so forth) will basically stop buying products. They won't have any money.

        So... with no one buying their products, companies will stop making them. That leaves YOU in a bad spot, if your job depends on your company surviving...

        November 1, 2012 at 1:02 pm | Report abuse |
      • KS

        I am a Soldier, I have spent my adult years fighting in wars for our country. I am in that 47% he does not care about, and I will not be helped by a Mitt Romney presidency. In the army we have a value system we are supposed to live by: Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity, and Personal Courage, I have seen nowhere in his campaign were he has met the basic values of the service that if elected he would be overall in command of. I have been to war under a repbulican and a democrat, I will go back when asked, but I trust the man in office right now to make the hard right call, I don't trust Romney to tell the truth on car manufacturing in Ohio.

        November 1, 2012 at 1:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • Tom

      I see the liberal troll is out as well! Funny how every time I read a CNN article, you show up bashing conservatives with no reason or logic, just insults and emotion. Yet you don't see the irony of accusing the other side of the same. Kind of gives an insight into your level of intellect.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:18 pm | Report abuse |
  19. Inciteful

    Is there a historical parallel to today's crack cocaine "culture?"

    November 1, 2012 at 12:47 pm | Report abuse |
  20. llatpoh

    It is not about the color of Obama's skin – it's about his leftist ideology!

    November 1, 2012 at 12:47 pm | Report abuse |
  21. billsharar

    Don't worry people. If you don't agree with Obama's politics, a vote for Romney won't make you a racist! Those who say otherwise truly epitomize modern intolerance.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:45 pm | Report abuse |
  22. Jon

    I think racism is actually just a specific kind of prejudice. Prejudice being a bias that is applied extremely broadly, and racism being a bias based on race that is applied extremely broadly.

    However I don't think the fact that Obama has a very large potion of the black vote is due to racism. My guess would be that black people have had a rough political time over the last hundred years or so, and they see Obama as being much more inclined to help certain communities (because he can take the perspective of a black person) than others might be.

    If black people said "All white people are stupid and lazy, therefore i refuse to vote for a white president." That would be racism. I know the difference is subtle (and i am about to get flamed) but the difference is important.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:44 pm | Report abuse |
  23. Chuck

    Use your common sense. Have whites(like GW) historically been referenced as monkeys in a racially driven matter??? ugh!!. "Double standard". You have no brain activity. Its like a black guy being offended for being called a Kra**er. Whites... stop acting like political prisoners with centuries of injustice. You own the planet so shut up and be happy.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:43 pm | Report abuse |
  24. codemanx

    And here it is, the race card finally tries to get played.

    Those voting for Romney are judging Obama not by the color of his skin, but by the content of his character, as per the great Martin Luther King, Jr. And his character stinks.

    End of story.

    Let he who keeps on bringing up race, look into the mirror and identify his or herself as the racist

    November 1, 2012 at 12:43 pm | Report abuse |
    • Edwin

      If what you got from this article is 'anyone who votes against Obama is racist' then you really need to work on your reading comprehension.

      I know it was a long article, but it simply was not about that. At all.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:56 pm | Report abuse |
    • Tact

      There are those as yourself that do measure people by the content of their character but to act as if there is not any racial tendencies whatsoever on the radio, on television, or at political rallies truly astonishes me to the ignorance and blatent denial shown by some people.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:58 pm | Report abuse |
  25. sss

    Look face it!! White people do not like blacks and never will. Just because they voted for Obama in 2008 doesn't mean anything, that was only to make themselves feel good about not being prejudice, which is BS. I have faced the never ending fact, they don't like us, and I have to live with it. So life goes on, being hated.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • Larry L

      As an old white guy from Texas I still see a lot of prejudice against African Americans. I also spend a great deal of my time campaigning for the President and a good percentage of my disposable income was contributed to his campaign. Racists come in all colors and I'd caution you to not become one of them. I support the President because of his maturity,wisdom, compassion and magnificent leadership qualities. Those are reasons enough.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:53 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dwight

      I have a friend who is black and he is like a brother to me. If you think people hate you, it is problably you and not your race and because you hate others.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • Edwin

      I understand that discrimination may have made you bitter, but your prejudice against whites is showing. I can honestly say that, as a white person, your words are hollow to me. I do not hate blacks. I do not consider them different than whites - except that they don't sunburn as easily.

      I voted for Obama because I believed his message - and I believed he was the best person for the job. I worried that he was a little young and perhaps a little too political, but nobody is perfect. I *was* excited to elect a black man as president, but it really wasn't part of the decision process. I am still voting for him. I still like him better than his opponent. That, too, has nothing to do with race - or religion.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • lmew

      How could you possibly know how every white person feels?

      November 1, 2012 at 12:54 pm | Report abuse |
  26. sss

    Look face it!! White people do not like blacks and never will. Just because they voted for Obama in 2008 doesn't mean anything, that was only to make themselves feel good about not being prejudice, which is BS. I have faced the never ending fact, they don't like us, and I have to live with it. So life go on, being hated.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:41 pm | Report abuse |
  27. @DJPurfiya

    I been saying for awhile that this country is polarized like the Civil War and Reconstruction Era.Its wrong because it shows we havent learned anything in the past 150 years since the Civil War.Im neither pro-Obama or anti-Obama.Im pro-America.And if your pro-America you should be for forward progress.The same type of forward progress vision that the men who built America had.And who built this country is more then Rockefeller,Vanderbilt and Carnegie.Who built this county were natives,immigrants,ex slaves and white anglo saxons.I was told as a child what makes this country so great is its a melting pot.The melting pot is still there but some rather tip it over and go backwards.How far back do you wanna go?When there were slaves?In that case get your muskets and bayonets ready to fight the real Native Americans

    November 1, 2012 at 12:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ed

      The major thing that polarized this nation along racial lines are the liberals and democrats that try to always makerace an issue. Have you noticed that when the presidential race is tied that they start with the "racial" articles?

      November 1, 2012 at 12:44 pm | Report abuse |
      • @DJPurfiya

        May be true they are tryna make it an issue but the issue still does exist.Its the pink elephant in the room that some wanna get rid of ,others wanna ignore,and some want it to stay

        November 1, 2012 at 1:02 pm | Report abuse |
  28. Ed

    So it appears one must vote to re-elect Obama to prove they are not a racists and to prove this is an "interracial" democracy. The truth is the proof of an interracial demorcracy is voting out any president that doesn't produce results. So vote out Obama to prove we are indeed an interracial democracy.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:41 pm | Report abuse |
  29. sisi

    What haunts Obama is not the color of his skin, it's his radical left ideology.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • mrl

      AMEN! I don't care if he is purple... he is an awful president.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:43 pm | Report abuse |
      • Papasung

        Bush was so good you voted him in twice! please give me a brake!

        November 1, 2012 at 12:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • VoteR

      Not to mention his horrible results on the economy, unemployment and the deficit. Should we forgive him for failure and cut him – or anyone – a break if they are unqualified for the job or have performed poorly. The answer is NO.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:57 pm | Report abuse |
  30. Evelyn Connaway

    I once told Thurgood Marshall we would one day have a black president – he said that day would never happen. I was sad that he never lived to see that day come. But I don't think he would be surprised at the way he has been treated as he knew the hearts and minds of people. By the way - there are more white people on welfare than blacks. But people believe what they want to believe in order to make one race look better than the other. It definitely not a "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" world – is it?

    November 1, 2012 at 12:37 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jon

      I think this whole situation is sort of like jumping into freezing water. The shock is immense and your body (or the body of the American people) reacts extremely. It takes time to get used to something like this. I am still very pleased that everything went down like this. We need EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN in the pool for the presidency. Now the next time someone who is not white runs we can look back at this and say "yea that is old news" 🙂

      November 1, 2012 at 12:49 pm | Report abuse |
  31. freedom

    The only think haunting Obama is his own record. Can't blame that on an age before him, or a president before him. And speaking of race, this president has caused not only racial divide in this country, by class warfare, and exploitation of women and their rights. Too bad he didn't put the extremely important position he was given to better use. He's disappointed many who voted for him – and that has nothing to do with his race.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:36 pm | Report abuse |
    • Blah blah the wheel's off your trailer

      Total garbage. You right wing bigots have tried very very hard over the course of the past four years to convince yourselves that the President has been a failure but you people continue to be haunted by your own failures and inability to truly convinve yourselves that the President has really been a failure. So what are you people going to do when the President is re-elected on Nov 6??? Drink Kool-Aid?

      November 1, 2012 at 12:42 pm | Report abuse |
      • mrl

        move to a free county is what I plan to do.... and I am in independent with conservative FISCAL views... and brown skin.

        November 1, 2012 at 12:45 pm | Report abuse |
      • Ed

        We will just watch the nation go into further economic decline, go much deeper in debt and figure that people get what they ask for.

        November 1, 2012 at 12:47 pm | Report abuse |
    • Pitbull

      You are correct. Obama and Holder have brought back racism to this country. We had gotten over it with more educated blacks and whites who now live together and enjoy their company and have become very good friends. Even they say Barack Obama is bad for this country and they firmly believe he was not born in Hawaii. Anyone believing in Barack Obama because he is black is sick and an idiot to vote for him after the Benghazi incident, his horrific Obamacare, the economy, which is not good, and the unemployed. It has been shown it did not go down to 7.8% in actuality it is 16%. More on food stamps buying lobster tails and steaks and drugs, and more on welfare living in million dollar homes. The Democrats have lost their intelligence, their integrity, and their morals and I will never vote for any of them ever again. We need a new President and a new Congress.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:46 pm | Report abuse |
      • Blah blah the wheel's off your trailer

        You want to know what the true definition of dividing country is??? Its called republican/tea party better known as the new Jim Crow pary!!!

        November 1, 2012 at 1:10 pm | Report abuse |
      • Intelligently Confused

        The Congress is majority Republican... So, are you admitting that the Republicans failed as well??? Your statement was that you won't vote for any more Democrats, but the Republican Congress is the reason much of Obama's agenda failed, by not agreeing to most of what he tried to implement. So, either you are speaking with an uneducated tongue, or you haven't a clue of what is really going on. I, my friend, am not a supporter of any of them, b/c they are ALL CROOKS.

        November 1, 2012 at 2:37 pm | Report abuse |
    • uraracistandhatewomen

      lol... keep squirming, bigot.

      I like how you forgot to mention your buddy, Todd Akins! lol He loves women. He believes that RAPE and pregnancy is not really rape because regardless of whether some guy is beating into her and forcing his way in, she got pregnant which means that all of the VIOLENCE associated with it was a willingness for consent. Yup, I guess Obama saying RAPE is RAPE means nothing.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:54 pm | Report abuse |
  32. KM

    It's ironic that people yell and scream at the very thought of the wealthy paying more in taxes to give the middle class a break. They scream that it's socialist and that it's wealth redistribution. However no one says a word when the wealthy receive huge tax breaks while the middle class ends up paying more in taxes. Isn't that the same thing, only in reverse??

    November 1, 2012 at 12:35 pm | Report abuse |
  33. srkp

    Same story of lies we hear on fox, can you cite one law or order that supports your claim ? Sheep...

    November 1, 2012 at 12:34 pm | Report abuse |
  34. Mike

    The worst racism in America is Planned Parenthood. It was started by Margaret Sanger who supported Eugenics and to this day 80% of Planned Parenthood Clinics are in minority areas even though they are less than 20% of the population and there is an abortion doctor you can find on You Tube when confronted by pro life activists said "go ahead and adopt those ugly black babies". The Planned Parenthood in Chiacgo this past July wouldn't even call for an ambulence when a doctor botched an abortion and the woman having the abortion who was African American ended up bleeding to death because they didn't want to draw attention to the clinc and a botched abortion. At least Tony Reaves family is demanding answers.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:33 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mike

      Tonya**

      November 1, 2012 at 12:33 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mike

      You can Google everything I posted. It is all fact. Sanger supported eugenics which supports eliminating certain races. 80% of Planned Parenthood locations are in minority areas even though minorities make up 20% of the population. You can easily find the youtube video of the doctor saying those disgusting and nasty comments about the babies and poor Tonya Reaves was killed because Planned Parenthood refused to call for help so it wouldn’t give the name bad press it was all over the Chicago media in July. She was a wonderful young woman and because of Planned Parenthood’s horrid response to her hemorrhage, her one year old son now has no mother!

      November 1, 2012 at 1:54 pm | Report abuse |
  35. ShirleyAnne

    Non of this matters – All that matters is you need to elect a President that will make America great again. His name is Mitt Romney. Please do not lose your chance.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:33 pm | Report abuse |
    • Scott2

      Willard Mitt Romney can never make a better president than Obama, NEVER. He's a wolf in sheep's clothing, he'll devour us. You have been forewarned!

      November 1, 2012 at 12:58 pm | Report abuse |
  36. Tim

    You can't rationalize why ignorant people do and say the things they do. It's like trying to get in the head of a serial killer and trying to understand why he kills..... these type of people are just different than normal people...they're sick.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:33 pm | Report abuse |
  37. larry

    Obama’s loss of nerve and decision to call off a military strike that could have taken out the Benghazi insurgents, and instead—just letting Americans die an agonizing, lonely death—is the most quintessential aspect of the story. This is because it reveals Barack as he truly is inside—an immoral, gutless, unfeeling, selfish, hypocritical, overly ambitious and hideously uncaring person. Obama ONLY cares about what he personally finds valuable, which obviously does not include individual Americans, or any random human beings.”

    November 1, 2012 at 12:32 pm | Report abuse |
    • Scott2

      Blatant LIES

      November 1, 2012 at 12:59 pm | Report abuse |
    • sickofitall

      That was a hunt Bush started and all you leftist idiots could do nothing but call him a war monger. Leave it to democrats to take all the credit when it's good. Where were his guts in Benghazi....oh that's right in the election mode in Vegas. Just because someone doesn't agree with his policies does NOT make them racist. Get over yourself.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:20 pm | Report abuse |
  38. Andrew

    I love how liberals have taken true equality for being racist. Unless women and minorities have more chances than white men, things are racist. That's racist. That's why I turned conservative. I noticed non white men groups weren't fighting for true equality, they were fighting to have a better chance than me.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:32 pm | Report abuse |
  39. Dwight

    It should be pointed out that most conservatives Republicans and Tea Party members were all for Herman Cain until the scandal derailed his political asspirations proving that for the most part race is not an issue, but rather political ideology. Plus count the fact that many whites voted for Obama in the last election and fewer blacks are going to vote for him in this election. It seems the main time race enters the picture as an issue is when the press makes it an issue.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • Scott

      Correct Dwight. The propaganda department of the Obama Re-Election Campaign (MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC & PBS) are very nervous that their "messiah" will be a one-and-done, hence the race card be dealt again.

      Scott

      November 1, 2012 at 12:32 pm | Report abuse |
    • Andrew

      Agreed

      November 1, 2012 at 12:33 pm | Report abuse |
  40. Ms. M

    This is a very interested article that I will share with my children. If we do not know our history, it has a way of repeating itself. We can never let this happen again. To those who continue to make the statement about why African Americans voted for President Obama. The answer is simple. The vast majority, probably 98% of all African Americans align with the Democratic Party. I cannot wait until Mayor Castro (San Antonio, TX) runs for President. I will FULLY support him as well. For all of you who continue to bring up the Benghazi deaths. Yes, that was sad for our country. It took over a year for both the Iran Hostage and the Weapons of Mass Destruction issues to go through the investigation and reporting. REALLY!! I do not see any of you talking about the thousands of soldiers who have died after being forced into a war to look for Weapons of Mass Destruction that NEVER existed. Ignorance is not a good characteristic to have and demonstrate. Read and KNOW your history (all of it)!!!!

    November 1, 2012 at 12:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • Chuck

      You should share only the stuff about the 1850s – 1960s with your children if you want them to truly learn history. The rest of the article is a bunch of what-ifs that have yet to even happen.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:32 pm | Report abuse |
      • Matthew

        Exactly....there were some interesting parallels until the parts about the black mobs. If you have to try that hard to make your point, you're grasping at straws.

        Sorry, I don't buy the conspiracy theory that conservatives are motivated by racism...not even a little bit. It's the economy...Period. Much can be learned from history, but the author takes it way too far. This is political rhetoric...not history.

        November 1, 2012 at 1:09 pm | Report abuse |
  41. CNNISBS

    Clinton/Obama: Benghazi assassination was caused by a “reprehensible” video…really?

    The U.S. Mission in Benghazi convened an “emergency meeting” less than a month before the assault that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, because Al Qaeda had training camps in Benghazi and the consulate could not defend against a “coordinated attack”. Summarizing an Aug. 15 emergency meeting convened by the U.S. Mission in Benghazi, the Aug. 16 cable marked “SECRET” said that the State Department’s senior security officer, also known as the RSO, did not believe the consulate could be protected.

    “According to a review of the cable addressed to the Office of the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Emergency Action Committee was also briefed "on the location of approximately ten Islamist militias and AQ training camps within Benghazi … these groups ran the spectrum from Islamist militias, such as the QRF Brigade and Ansar al-Sharia, to ‘Takfirist thugs.’” Each U.S. mission has a so-called Emergency Action Committee that is responsible for security measures and emergency planning.

    In addition to describing the security situation in Benghazi as “trending negatively,” the cable said explicitly that the mission would ask for more help. “In light of the uncertain security environment, US Mission Benghazi will submit specific requests to US Embassy Tripoli for additional physical security upgrades and staffing needs by separate cover.”
    While the administration’s public statements have suggested that the attack came without warning, the Aug. 16 cable seems to undercut those claims. It was a direct warning to the State Department that the Benghazi consulate was vulnerable to attack, that it could not be defended and that the presence of anti-U.S. militias and Al Qaeda was well-known to the U.S. intelligence community.

    Does it matter that this administration is lying to you? You will not find this story on CNN, you are being manipulated, brainwashed.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • sickofitall

      Amen! It is amazing that democrats scream racist, and fixed balloting. However nothing is ever said about the media protecting Obama. It was very evident in the first debate that he couldn't handle being attacked because he has been so protected in the past.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:37 pm | Report abuse |
  42. Ms. M

    This is a very interested article that I will share with my children. If we do not know our history, it has a way of repeating itself. We can never let this happen again. To those who continue to make the statement about why African Americans voted for President Obama. The answer is simple. The vast majority, probably 98% of all African Americans align with the Democratic Party. I cannot wait until Mayor Castro (San Antonio, TX) runs for President. I will FULLY support him as well. For of of you who continue to bring up the Benghazi deaths. Yes, that was sad for our country. It took over a year for both the Iran Hostage and the Weapons of Mass Destruction issues to go through the investigation and reporting. REALLY!! I do not see any of you talking about the thousands of soldiers who have died after being forced into a war to look for Weapons of Mass Destruction that NEVER existed. Ignorance is not a good characteristic to have and demonstrate. Read and KNOW your history (all of it)!!!!

    November 1, 2012 at 12:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jon

      As a Democrat myself, i can very clearly state that there are racists in both parties.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:52 pm | Report abuse |
  43. Matt

    Angry white people are out in full force in this comments thread.

    I hope some of you realize that your comments just lend weight to exactly what the article is saying.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • Andrew

      Another bleeding heart liberal race baiting again.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:37 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bob

      I agree in the past that racism has been a big problem and still is in some area. But I see part of this article as race baiting that if you don't vote for Obama you are racist. I didn't vote for him, but once he became my president I gave him a chance. I am worst off then I was 4 years ago and I want to give someone else a chance. I don't really care what race or color someone is, I look at the person. Half the time the inside of my house looks like the United Nations with all the good kids that come over after school. White, Black, Korean, Indian, Spanish (from Spain), and Honduran. I just don't like our presidents policies, it has nothing to do with race.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:41 pm | Report abuse |
  44. Marcus

    This post is absolutely ridiculous. Let me say this first, I am not saying there are racist in any race, but you idots fail to mention that racism of blacks who voted for him just because Obama was mixed. Second of all, I really think you know the truth why Obama is not going to get reelected, its the ECONOMY Stupid. Yes, you will blame racism, but blacks, whites, asian, arabs, etc are out of jobs, that's why they are going to vote for Romney. And for you to say if whites vote for Romney, they are racist, that is completely false and idiotic.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:26 pm | Report abuse |
  45. srkp

    What it means is, if you are voting against your personal interests and interested of the country because of his race then you are racist.

    Let's face it,

    Obamacare is the best thing that can happen to a middle class family, it frees the masses from the chains for need to have a corporate job to get health care. And people don't need to hang on to their jobs b'se of health care. And you wonder why businesses are opposing obamacare. If you are middle class like I am you have no argument against it.

    That's the sole reason I will vote for Obama.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • Evelyn Connaway

      srkp – I'm with you. Many people have the racist problem. When Obama ran for president, I being a democrat called friends who had planned on voting for Hillary Clinton as I had – but when Obama got the nomination I went with him and called all of them and asked – their answer was NO and immediately stated – it's not because he's black! I think for the majority of we poor and middle class citizens of this country he is the best president we have ever had – he wanted to work for all the citizens – no matter their race or whether they voted for him or not. But as all have seen the bigoted racist among men reared it's ugly head! They will regret the day they didn't work with him to help get our country back on it's feet. They worked against him which in turn worked against the citizens and our country. One does note that the rich got richer though!.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:55 pm | Report abuse |
  46. G. Baez

    It's Obama himself, a progressive/Marxist , affirmative action, class warfare, wealth re-distribution empty suit who is the issue, not his skin color. Any criticism of Obam brings out the race card, CNN seems to be Obamas race baiter in chief.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:21 pm | Report abuse |
    • Scott

      Yup, along with all of the other Lame Stream Media as the advertising group for the Obama Re-Election Committee.

      Scott

      November 1, 2012 at 12:28 pm | Report abuse |
    • charles

      And you are the race card dealer. Don't want it played stay away from the card table.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:28 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jon

      Could you briefly explain what a marxist is? Also please point out policies that both Marx and Obama have in common (total banishment of government, inevitable violent class struggle, etc).

      Alright i am aware the person i am responding to is very ignorant, but there are intelligent republicans out there. Anyone want to actually take a shot and try to prove that they are similar?

      November 1, 2012 at 12:28 pm | Report abuse |
    • Foxxy News

      Your lack of respect for the office of the presidency and the commander and chief clearly proves you are not racist but unpatriotic.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:48 pm | Report abuse |
      • Tom Fries

        Foxxy ; Your lack of things are astoumding ! When talking of the office it's Presidency! Capital "P". And it's Commander IN Chief not commander AND chief. But nice try, go vote for Barry. I will cote for Romney and cancell your vote !!!!

        November 1, 2012 at 2:18 pm | Report abuse |
  47. Buzz

    Can't we all just get along?

    November 1, 2012 at 12:20 pm | Report abuse |
  48. Intelligent debate

    It's unfortunate that greed and fear (of loss of power) stand in the way of intelligent debate and an open mind. Most of these posts are so venomous and toxic- they don't even deal with debate over dissagreements in leadership, but instead focus on bogus claims that are veils for personal attacks. We each need to inspect our own motives and face our own fears, then think about what kind of leader will champion an infrastructure that will support our values and our own personal success. Don't think less of yourself if that leader happens to be black :-).

    November 1, 2012 at 12:20 pm | Report abuse |
    • rapierpoint

      Perhaps the President and his supporters should heed your advice as well. It would appear, on the surface, when any complaint or criticism is made, the reaction is "How on earth could they be complaining about the President or criticizing his policies?". Since many can't fathom that there are actual issues, they have to assume it's a personal attack rather than reasoned criticism. (BTW, a point about the article, there were plenty of pictures of Bush as a chimp or monkey, so was that inherently racist? The author seems to think Obama as a chimp is racist.)

      November 1, 2012 at 12:28 pm | Report abuse |
      • Jon

        I think the problem here is that a vast majority of republicans aren't racist at all, however the right is doing a terrible job quashing the more vile parts of their party. The left is pounding the message that you can't use skin color to decide your vote and for some reason people who aren't racists feel like they are on the receiving end. Remember everyone, if you are not actually racist then dont feel insulted, we aren't talking to you. Although if you honestly believe that nobody is racist then you live on the moon. I am a bi-racial person who looks white and you would be SHOCKED how often people try to include me in their very backwards values only to be rebuked by "yea so actually i am not white..." (that shows you how much sense racism makes when you say certain people are inherently better but you can't figure out who they are lol)

        November 1, 2012 at 12:37 pm | Report abuse |
  49. Urban Chronotis

    ...somehow I missed the photo of the two black panther's with nightsticks at a polling place in 2008. They seemed like such friendly chaps...

    November 1, 2012 at 12:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • Scott

      Any bets that on BoBo's last full day in office, 19 January 2013, it will give a pardon to those two thugs along with Reichsmarschall Holder?

      Scott

      November 1, 2012 at 12:29 pm | Report abuse |
      • solange82200

        It's usually a bad sign that you don't have many intellectual arguments in your artillery when you resort to making fun of people's names, like the Right loves to do. There is a reason why this behavior is prevalent in elementary school, usually as people grow older they are able to voice their displeasure using actual reasoning. You should try it sometime

        November 1, 2012 at 2:37 pm | Report abuse |
  50. Doug (2)

    Well said. If this economy had unemployment back under 6.5% by now the GOP would be wasting their time

    November 1, 2012 at 12:17 pm | Report abuse |
  51. roadrunner2

    Everyone please note: this post is a set-up. The "Obamaphone" the poster talks about was actually a program started by President Bush to fund part of telephone service for low income citizens. This is NOT a program started by the current administratuin.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:15 pm | Report abuse |
  52. LeeBo

    If you have something of value to offer (i.e., a skill or talent), no one cares what color you are. Pro-sports is a good example.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:15 pm | Report abuse |
  53. WKT1186

    Please get off this racism nonsense. If racism were truly an issue, Obama would never have been elected in 2008. In 2012 the issue is competence to lead the USA. Obama has been an epic failure for the past 4 years. Next Tuesday he is gone!

    November 1, 2012 at 12:15 pm | Report abuse |
    • George, Dallas, TX

      I hope you are correct. I voted for Romney to do my part to give Obama the boot! Should have never been elected.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • srkp

      If Obama were to be white his face would have been on Mt. Rushmore for what he did already. I personally know folks who 'HATE' obama and can't answer why, other than repeating Fox lies – aka anti christ, take back america (am not sure from what) – it saddens me that we have long way to go. (Though we are the best compared to rest of the world when it comes to race)

      November 1, 2012 at 12:30 pm | Report abuse |
      • srkp

        Exactly what I was pointing to other than one liners of hate you can't intelligently cite reasoning.

        November 1, 2012 at 12:41 pm | Report abuse |
  54. DemFromSC

    You know that the rumor about Obama's campaign workers passing out free cell phones is just another lie by the Romney people, right?

    November 1, 2012 at 12:13 pm | Report abuse |
  55. TheObserver

    ...and so I will ask again, aside from the racists (both passive and overt), those in the Top 1%, and those who vote Pro-Life and ignore everything else, why is anyone voting for Romney?

    November 1, 2012 at 12:13 pm | Report abuse |
    • Molly

      I'm voting for Romney because of his proven history of being able to balance budgets and turn bad looking economic-related situations around. Even though Obama is appealing on other issues, the amount he added to the deficit is inexcusable. My vote turns on ability to rectify our economy and our deficit, and for me that means Romney is the better choice.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:27 pm | Report abuse |
      • srkp

        Are you serious – he turned back bad economic situation to good FOR HIM. Taking a struggling company – selling it's assets and moving the operations to china and on the way making millions is not turning around. Unless you propose selling Alaska back to Russia.

        November 1, 2012 at 12:33 pm | Report abuse |
      • Ken

        You lack depth in your understanding of the issues or even business concepts. Corporate raiders don't balance budgets they just do a statistical analysis that bets on both ends of the desire for a legitimate business having a need to raise capital. If the business succeeds they make back their investors money with fees and interest, if not they liquidate and still make their money even if the owners and employees are out in the cold. Romney didn't even do anything great as Gov of Mass.. Anything good he took credit for was other peoples work like Ted Kennedy's healthcare. Took advantage of many situations including his own faith to make his money. Will change his tune to make a buck. None of that bodes well for the 99% of American's or the country. Why do you think the mega wealthy and corporations are dumping money into his canpaign?? They will want their payback. As far as the things the GOP wants to hang on President Obama, all bogus. Obama inherited a mess 8 years in the making through deregulation and letting others like Romney rip off the country, including a bailout that was already planned before he took office.

        November 1, 2012 at 12:59 pm | Report abuse |
      • Al

        Really Molly? How is Romney so unpopular in Massachusetts if he was doing the right things? Only one elected President ALL-TIME (Polk in 1844) won in spite of losing his state of birth, and his state of residence. His platform? MANIFEST DESTINY! Romney is getting whooped in both Michigan and Massachusetts. He has no real platform. NO WAY HE WILL WIN!

        November 1, 2012 at 1:16 pm | Report abuse |
      • solange82200

        The most ridiculous thing Ive read over and over is this claim that people are voting for Romney because of the deficit or size of government. NO REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT IN RECENT HISTORY HAS SHRANK GOVERNMENT, THEY'VE ALL MADE IT LARGER. Anyone who claims to vote for Romney because of any of those reasons is a FOOL, and you know it. Show me ONE republican president in our lifetime who has shrank government or deficit. What a joke, talk about delusional. What worries me more than the debt is the fact that half this country is so gullible and easily fooled....

        November 1, 2012 at 2:21 pm | Report abuse |
      • marsh0

        are you going to sit your children down at the dinner table and discuss with them how they're being left with a hugh debt like the woman on the Romney commercial?
        Normal dinnertime conversation for your kids huh?
        fear mongering again. Conservatives will never get it.
        no one likes people who tell them that they're doomed unless they allow "conservatives" to be their rulers.

        November 27, 2012 at 11:45 am | Report abuse |
  56. Peggy Munro

    You might think you are joking but the joke's on you and yours.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:12 pm | Report abuse |
  57. Mickey

    As long as you are throwing the race card at this...don't forget to warn woment that they are all destined for work camps.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:12 pm | Report abuse |
  58. Alex

    John Blake, Thank You! What a wonderful article! I just learned a little bit more about my country's history, as ugly as it is. I am now even more committed to making sure we don't let modern day Redeemers – aka the Tea Party – take our country backwards.

    An article based on fact and history – you can't hide from these truths!

    November 1, 2012 at 12:11 pm | Report abuse |
    • teachbygoofyaccent

      I think the facts can be argued. I don't think the issue is all race as it was in 1876, but now is more about class. Class has always been a key issue in American politics, but race was a smokescreen to hide it. Now, it is a bit more boldfaced classism, and race is a more minor distraction from the class war that has developed in the country. Rich whites are trying with less success to convince poor whites that they have their interests at heart. The economy is different now: it's more obvious that class is really what gets you ahead.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • Franky

      Unemployment was 10.2%, at one point you forget that right, so trend has been downward. Also the calculation for how unemployment is done has been the same for decades, so saying total unemployment means nothing, even if we have unemployment at 4% , the "total unemployment" is higher, it's not like Obama started calculating it differently. Also we've added 5 million jobs in his last 3 years, things are definitely better than where they were. The question is to look at peaks, the fact is the peak of the worst was hit end 2009 beg 2010, things have been improving, are things perfect, no, but it's ridiculous to think by this point te would be, the only question to be asked has he set the ship on th right path, and I say yes. You can argue it's not but look around you and your life? How's your friends and family doing? I see iPhone lines are wrap lev around corners and the malls are full. Far cry from 2009, so really are things as bad as you believe hem to be?

      November 1, 2012 at 2:29 pm | Report abuse |
      • Ed

        Very well broken down Frank. If you listen to Rush Limbaugh and his fellow demagogues, you'd think that Obama has handed the entire largesse of the US economy to the black race. And, as the myth goes, everything that blacks touch, crumbles to dust. So, arguments against measurement standards that have been in play since time immemorial, even while a below-average president like G.W. Bush was in the White House, are nothing but veiled attempts at prejudice by those that seek to appear "analytical"....while clearly lacking the valid arguments to back their views!!

        November 1, 2012 at 3:02 pm | Report abuse |
  59. Peggy Munro

    You are correct.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:11 pm | Report abuse |
  60. DC Observer

    The only racism I have seen during the Obama presidency has come from the Whoite House or leading black Democratic activists . The backlash Obama feels is a backlash against his failed economic policies. To criticize Obama is to be labeled a racist - that is black racism at its worst -

    November 1, 2012 at 12:11 pm | Report abuse |
    • uraracistandblind

      What's in your kool-aid; you're not observing anything, bigot. SQUIRM...

      I like how simple article comparing the past to the present brings out the rats like you. SQUIRM!

      To criticize Obama is not to be labeled a racist, bigot. There are those who have legitimate gripes with him and aren't labeled racist.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:17 pm | Report abuse |
      • rapierpoint

        The problem, uraracistandblind, is that "legitimate gripe" is in the eyes of the beholder. When people decide that the gripe isn't legitimate, or want an excuse to dismiss it, they have been calling it "racism". Take the whole "food stamp" issue. The observation is that more people are on food stamps under this administration, but it's been dismissed offhandedly as "racist" and not a valid observation or criticism.

        November 1, 2012 at 12:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • uraracistandblind

      What's in your kool-aid; you're not observing anything, bigot. SQUIRM...
      To criticize Obama is not to be labeled a racist, bigot. There are those who have legitimate gripes with him and aren't labeled racist.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:17 pm | Report abuse |
      • Eric Sotelo

        So let me see if I get this right.

        If anyone, black, white, brown, yellow or any color for that matter, disagrees with this Muslim in the Oval Office, they are racist and bigots? So according to your retarded, illogical and elementary way of thought is how everyone should think to? Man, I couldn't think that low and that absurd even if I tried.. I'm surprised that people today still resort to caveman tactics... Or is it a political ploy? Do you need racism to be hot and on top of topics today in order for you to get ahead? WOW, you are a sad and poor waste of Carbon 14.. Sad excuse for a human being...

        November 3, 2012 at 9:44 am | Report abuse |
    • Forward!

      So the backlash against his "failed policies" began on his first day in office, when the entire republican community declared their first priority was to make him a one-term president. Such hypocrisy, acting worse than 5 year-olds to block President Obama's initiatives, then complain that he hasn't accomplished anything.

      Even worse, they try to tear down his every success he didn't get bin Laden, Seal Team 6 did. True in practice, he didn't pull the trigger, but I don't have to guess how he would have been trashed if the raid had failed – then he would have been responsible. He didn't save the auto industry – Detroit should have gone through bankruptcy, likely to never recover as the private sector wouldn't have loaned any money (they didn't have any to lend, as the republicans caused the economic melt-down in the first place.)

      And on and on it goes. Republican tactics are to criticize his accomplishments and deny that he has done ANY good at all.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:02 pm | Report abuse |
      • Pakrat13

        “The republicans caused the economic melt-down in the first place”???

        I realize it is popular, and easy to blame the preceding administration for all of the current woes, but let’s really take a look at this on, maybe we can even find the root cause of the problem. I don’t think so. Let’s look at the actual facts

        The Glass–Steagall Act (1933) was enacted after the banking collapse that triggered the Great Depression. It prevented investment firms from joining with more “traditional” banks. This helped ensure that home mortgages we treated differently than say stock portfolios. It also helped to prevent these investment firms from becoming “too big to fail”. It was [arguably] the single most important piece of regulation in the financial industry. It was repealed 1999 by then President William Jefferson Clinton.

        Without it investment firms (i.e. Wall Street) was essentially allowed to run amuck, doing whatever they wanted and getting more and more creative with the products they sold to investors. It was an unsustainable “bubble”, and when it popped it got all over everyone.

        Second, the Fannie Mae/ Freddie Mac fiasco. It was the goal of the Clinton Presidency to allow every American who wanted a home to purchase a home. A noble thought and intent? Absolutely. Unfortunately it is not practical; but it was pushed anyway. Suddenly people who could not qualify before, were being given loans with the governments stamp of approval. These people could not afford these homes, but they bought them anyway. Were predatory tactics being practiced? Sure they were, but some responsibility must lie with the individuals who took out these loans to begin with. If you make $30k a year, how on earth do you expect to be able to pay for a $250k house? Common sense dictates that this is simply wrong.

        So, what did this cause? Grossly (and falsely) inflated housing costs. But the loans kept coming, and coming until finally it was time to pay the proverbial “piper”. Foreclosures went through the roof, housing values plummeted, and suddenly we are where we are.

        Does the administration of George W. Bush bear some responsibility? Yes they do. His administration had 8 years to prevent the mess, and to re-introduce legislation that would have fixed the problem, but they did not.

        They also started two wars and put them on the “credit-card”. However it is important to note they were not alone. The resolutions for both the war in Iraq, and the war in Afghanistan passed both the House and the Senate with overwhelming bi-partisan support.

        There is more than enough blame for the financial mess to go around.

        November 1, 2012 at 2:27 pm | Report abuse |
      • Parkerman

        What? we tried to block his policies because they are wrong, not just because he wasn't a Republican. If you see something that is wrong you try and stop it simple as that. You dont solve our countries poor problems by providing freebies on the backs of the middle class and small businesses which are the heart and sole of this country.

        November 2, 2012 at 2:57 pm | Report abuse |
      • AndrewFromNH

        How about if the Republicans in Congress had offered alternatives to the proposals sent by President Obama? Pardon me, alternatives that weren't identical to or worse than the policies of the Bush administration. I tried to keep an eye on that whole process, and the best they could come up with was Paul Ryan's plans. The best analysis I've seen of that plan suggests that it will result in the economy growing worse and the deficit growing for as far out as can be projected.

        At the time Ryan first proposed that plan, the CBO did an analysis of it, other Republican proposals, and the idea of allowing the Bush-era tax cuts to expire, freezing all federal spending at the then-current level, and reducing military expenses by not expanding old operations and not starting new ones. The only one of them that had a hope of helping the country, ever, was the last one. At the time that was announced, Boehner called the House to waste a day having yet another vote to say that Republicans don't like abortion and wanted to be on record as supporting all their previous resolutions saying they don't like abortion.

        If I sound fed up with Republican politics of the last four years, it's because I am. They aren't actually being political (something that requires consideration of other viewpoints and the possibility of compromise from both sides) as much as roadblocks. If all we needed in Congress was roadblocks, it would be a lot cheaper to just buy a bunch of Jersey Barriers and save those Congressional salaries.

        November 2, 2012 at 3:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • Matt

      Get out of your bubble my man, cause things haven't changed much from the past. People now are scared to be racist unless they have something to hide behind cause now you will catch a beat down for saying something crazy.

      November 1, 2012 at 11:33 pm | Report abuse |
  61. DCH

    This article was about people like you!!!!!!!!

    November 1, 2012 at 12:11 pm | Report abuse |
  62. uraracistandnotAmerican

    lol...
    I like how this article got you to squirm, bigot. Open your eyes and read what you wrote. I like how you're Muslim bashing and thinking that America will go to the dogs when the country was founded on the principle of the separation of religion and state. I repeat, separation of religion and state because the majority of the Republican party is held hostage by a bunch of zealot Christians hellbent on bringing the messiah now through the executive branch; so much for that idea.

    As for women care, lol... your buddies like Akins think a pregnancy through rape is not rape, but a woman willingly embracing the man forcing himself into her. lol... not all rapists are muslim, but a lot of you Republicans are ok with rape and pregnancies from it. Good job.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • MTG

      I couldn't of said it better. Good job!

      November 1, 2012 at 12:20 pm | Report abuse |
  63. mlblogscbgoldsmith

    The racism that dogs Obama and created the Tea Party is apparent even to a middle aged white male like me. I'm still working out my baggage but I live by fair is fair and until every American works out their stuff, we will remain a house divided. To be more we must do more. Or do less and remain less.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • uraracistandblind

      What's in your kool-aid; you're not observing anything, bigot. SQUIRM...

      I like how simple article comparing the past to the present brings out the rats like you. SQUIRM!

      November 1, 2012 at 12:15 pm | Report abuse |
  64. Repeating History

    History has been repeating itself...um, throughout history. Love, Hate, Liberal, Conservative and Religion. Each has it's day at the front of the line for a while, only to be replaced by one of the others – and everyone gets bashed by the results until the next wave arrives. Some people just gotta hate, and have since the time of recorded history. People of like minds, no matter how shallow or wrong, will band together and impose their will on everyone else, until everyone else bands together to stop it.

    anyway, a well written article with insight and a stroll down memory lane. You know, history.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:09 pm | Report abuse |
  65. s1

    Whites do not have to fear blacks. They should be more scared of the Latinos, who, by their sheer birth rates, illegal and legal immigration, etc, will wipe out the Whites by 2050, or earlier. Latino gangs already rule parts of LA, once ruled by Black gangs. Also, Blacks did embrace the White culture of the English language, and traditional holidays. Latinos openly reject the White culture and impose their own culture on non-Latinos.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:09 pm | Report abuse |
  66. Obama Bin Laden

    Get this Muslim/Kenyan idiot out of office! The only thing Obozo is good at is being the best welfare president for lazy America in history.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • CanOnTo

      Congratulations! You've just proven the very point of the article.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:40 pm | Report abuse |
      • Dano

        So did you. One dude says something stupid, and you hold an entire group pf people responsible for it.

        November 2, 2012 at 3:21 pm | Report abuse |
  67. Obma-Bin-Lyin

    Obama And Michelke dislike whites very much.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:08 pm | Report abuse |
  68. rctu61

    The Uncle Tom comment is racist because it shows a person still has feelings of insecurity and ignorance to those he can't approach or want to be near.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:08 pm | Report abuse |
  69. Insight

    Donald Trump is the worst racist of all time. He is a blemish on humanity

    November 1, 2012 at 12:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • jaythetruth86

      The most racist people typically tend to be minorities, just saying.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:21 pm | Report abuse |
      • Lone

        The most raciest tend to be the disenfranchised and poor. Go to any area, where opportunities are low, education is not valued, and social cycles persist. You'll find racism and projection regardless of who holds majority or minority.

        November 2, 2012 at 2:33 am | Report abuse |
  70. Annirich

    That's because it has been discovered that Obo and Hillary were going through Stevens to gun run to the radical I slamists! They knew within 55 mins of what was happening and obo consistently countermanede standing orders. He would NOT send help. He and Hillary were betraying the Untied States!

    November 1, 2012 at 12:07 pm | Report abuse |
  71. Kim

    WOW. Just wow. This is absurd. Want to talk about racism? Isn't it racist that 95+ percent of the African-American population voted for Obama? Based on what? Gee, I wonder.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • DC Observer

      The vast majority of black voters cast votes based on rave for Obama - it is the reason he is in office - he is – like it or not – a race based President. The unfortunate thing is that when any white criticies Obama the black politicians and the black media ( Hi Roland Hi Donna) cry racism. Obama has played the race card deftly - his critism of whites is racist. I do not like him – not because he is half black, but becasue he is a Socilist, a redistributor of wealth, partisan to the core, polarizing, and just horrible on economic policies.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:17 pm | Report abuse |
      • kateff

        Well said!

        November 1, 2012 at 7:35 pm | Report abuse |
      • Lone

        Bet you can't even define that dog whistle of yours, socialism. Communism might as well be a close second in the echo chamber lexicon. It ends up repeated but no one wants to explain how they match anything in the last four years. Woe is us, a few million additional people have health care and our standard of living might rise a little after decades of decline.

        November 2, 2012 at 2:47 am | Report abuse |
    • k solo

      there has only been 3 times in recent history that most whites felt the way most blacks are treated all the time.1 was the oj simpson verdict.2 sept 11 and 3 when the market crashed in 2008.if you dont live it you are not qualified 2 speak on it.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • Annirich

      And exactly WHAT have the Dems ever done for the Blacks except keep them on their Dem Plantation? HUH? 40% of young blacks are unemployed; 14.5% of adult blacks are unemployed. Go read the book by Star Parker The US Plantation. That's what the Dems have done for the Blacks. Absolutely NOTHING!!!

      November 1, 2012 at 12:18 pm | Report abuse |
    • Juan Luna

      You're not supposed to point out the hypocrisy of the left.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:23 pm | Report abuse |
    • oklahoma wayne

      i wonder how many non white presidents you have voted for. i have voted for 84 white guy, 88 white guy,92 white guy, 96 white guy, 2000 white guy, 2004 white guy, 2008 white/kenyan mixed president, that makes me less racial than you i bet

      November 1, 2012 at 12:58 pm | Report abuse |
      • calph

        More than 90% voted for Clinton as well. What does that mean?

        November 1, 2012 at 3:39 pm | Report abuse |
    • calph

      Sorry, replied to the wrong person. 94% of blacks voted for Clinton, so try another argument.

      November 1, 2012 at 3:42 pm | Report abuse |
      • solange82200

        Based on what, gee, I wonder? Maybe because every time one of you mouth breathers call him a kenyan, muslim, unlike us, foreign etc., you insult every black person in this country? And then... you want them to VOTE for you? Are you really that dense? Take some responsibility for god's sake, quit trying to blame others and look at your own party and it's behaviors. At some point take responsibility for the fact that women, Hispanics, AND blacks are fleeing from your party like never before. Has it every occurred to you that it's YOUR fault, not everyone else's?

        November 1, 2012 at 3:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • rare_earth

      Your comment alone is racist.

      November 1, 2012 at 11:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • Can't Sleep

      95% of 13% of voters. And 43% of whites voted for him too. Whites made up 74% of all voters in 2008. In 2004 88% of 11% of blacks voted for Kerry. In 2000 90% of 10% of blacks voted for Gore.
      My point is, yes there were people that voted for Obama based off his race but how come the exit poll stats for black voters wasn't an issue when only white men were running for president?
      It's interesting that people complain about others pulling the race card, but in reality the complainers do it too. It's a vicious cycle. Defending yourself to the point that you become just like the person you complain about.

      November 2, 2012 at 12:34 am | Report abuse |
  72. granpafly88

    "Or the electric" and you have a Master's Degree...from what college? In what area? You can't even write a complete sentence with proper grammar and syntax. Did you buy your degree with the Pell Grants that Clinton and Obama created and continued that Bush 1, 2, and Romney plan on eviscerating? The bottom line is simple, if you earn less than $200-250K, Romney is a DISASTER for the future of this county. If you make more than that upper-middle class range, then Romney's your man – just so long as you don't have a wife or kids that need adequate health care you will have buy from another country like Canada (which has a social health care system that is FAIRLY/barely sufficient) or South America (which unless you're a drug lord, is like committing suicide by incompetence). Has anybody actually asked the most obvious question that because this is the worst recession in U.S. history and could have been an utterly disastrous depression, did the current administration stave off an American economic collapse unlike any in history with its current policies? Did anybody notice in 2010 that a Republican-controlled House stonewalled all of the administration's polices that worked to save the automotive industrial complex, stopped the housing debacle led by the banking deregulations during Bush 2's terms, and avoided a economic anchor like the current debacle in Europe by expanding trade exports for the first time in 12 years (with China, no less)? Obama's administration has been a one-legged man in a kicking contest with a group of Tea-Party bullies leading the vocal minority while having one hand tied behind its back. The administration can't move forward because Congress has come out quoted as saying their only purpose this election season is to ensure Obama doesn't get elected...not running our country effectively. Just get him out of office and return to policies we know have failed or, using Europe as the financial planners, will lead to the inevitable implosion of our currency and Gross Domestic Production. Romney's policies speak for themselves – he has no plan – no details, specifics, or timelines – and if he did, he wouldn't stick to it long enough because someone would tell him what to think and when. He changes his story week to week, if not day to day. Is that leadership? Just look at his platform...light on details except to say give me a chance...no chance there, Governor – give me a reason to vote for you that helps the 99% of this country you don't understand. The Red Cross collection disaster in Ohio proves you have no clue how organizations work and the fact that you want to collapse FEMA shows without a doubt you overestimate the strength of the States – no individual state could handle Sandy by themselves and it's been proven time and again that when the private sector gets involved, it's a fraudulent wasteland designed for profit, not assistance. Governor Christie is right – when it comes down to disasters, the Fed has to step in and help. Only an idiot would deny how effective FEMA has become under this administration's leadership. For that matter, given the ability to govern effectively, the proof is undeniable that the support given by the Fed has saved this country. Now is the time to step up and realize it's the vocal minority that is stopping the progress this country so desperately needs. Stop trying to just get Obama out of office and help the policies that grow the middle, shrink the bottom, and force the high end to help.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:04 pm | Report abuse |
  73. kyphi

    When a person, regardless of color or religion, puts himself out there and gets to know someone different from him, his fear fades. He learns there is no difference due to color or religion: goodness and evil come in all shades and beliefs. Please visit a store or restaurant of a "different" culture from yours; more than likely you be greeted warmly. Then think of people who look/act just like you who cheat/steal/lie. I am not making sweeping generalizations; look at people with your heart, and you will know.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:02 pm | Report abuse |
  74. Cecilia

    You didn't vote for him in 2008. If you are so done, how are you buying you clothes even at the Goodwill Store? Furthermore, what is wrong with buying clothes there? How shallow can you be? There may be other reasons why you can't get a job that you are not divulging. Quit feeling sorry for yourself; any job is a job.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:02 pm | Report abuse |
  75. uraracist

    lol...
    I love how this article is upsetting the bigots who think they are beyond such trivial ways of thinking. Don't deny it. Don't try to hide behind the premise that Obama is a closet-radical-muslim waiting to strike. Embrace who you are, bigot.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:02 pm | Report abuse |
  76. jon

    Until the old white people finally die off, this country will still continue to be a big bunch of racists. Sad country that we are.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:01 pm | Report abuse |
    • Peggy Munro

      This is sad but true.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • Muzak

      What about their kids that they indoctrinated, or their kids? It will take much longer than one more generation to kick off.
      The pool will get smaller and smaller over the generations, but they will be around for awhile until few remain.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:08 pm | Report abuse |
  77. Jeff

    I don't think anyone called GW Bush a monkey. They may have called him a moron or a child of privilege that failed upwards, possibly puppet, but I don't recall anyone calling him a monkey.
    As to why its would be a double standard, you know exactly why. White Supremacists use derogatory statements to make those they hate less than human, and thus not worthy of equality or respect. They demean people with multi-ethnic backgrounds by calling them mud people, or anyone of African heritage as apes to make themselves feel better. Its an old an disgusting way to psychologically lessen someone that has been around for centuries, but as been used with great frequency against Blacks. That's why.

    November 1, 2012 at 12:00 pm | Report abuse |
  78. wellsaid

    I totally agree. I found this article interesting to say the least. I found negative responses of how this article was 'garbage' very humorous; people who were offended just don't like being called out as what they are.

    November 1, 2012 at 11:59 am | Report abuse |
  79. Trololol

    And yet here you are reading this. If you would enjoy a more honest reading experience... too bad. They are all biased and totalitarian in the end.

    November 1, 2012 at 11:58 am | Report abuse |
  80. ObjectiveGuy

    It's really sickening to see all of the posters who imply that Republicans are racists. Plain ignorant, and untrue. Yes, the Republican candidate is white, and the Democratic candidate is a mixed race background (half white, and half black). Did you know that Mitt Romney's father marched in civil rights protests alongside Martin Luther King? Romney is clearly not racist, nor are the VAST majority of Republicans, and certainly no more so than the percentage of racist Democrats. That having been said, what is the point of this article? It seems to be implying that, if you don't vote for the black candidate, you must be racist. What a load of BULL!!! This is an election for the president of the United States of America. It is NOT a popularity contest like American Idol (Obama is more personable than Romney, so I think I'll vote for him). It is NOT a racial reparation (blacks have had it hard in the past, so let's throw them a bone and vote a black guy as president to make them feel better). It is NOT a means by which to prove to ourselves that we have moved past racism (a black guy and a white guy are running for office; I had better vote for the black guy to prove I'm not racist). No, fellow Americans, it is NOT any of those things. It is a determination at a critical point for our nation as to whether we continue to struggle with a floundering economy, which is currently showing signs of slipping back into yet another recession, OR if we elect a president who understands the economy and what it takes to make it grow again. It is a point of determining if we continue to settle for seeing 23 million of our fellow Americans remain unemployment, not the mention the millions more that are grossly underemployed, OR if we change direction and become a nation that is prosperous for all. It is time to decide if we are content to rack up TRILLIONS of dollars of additional debt, which we will be bequeathing to future generations, OR if we elect a president who will move us back toward a balanced budget. We have lived through four years of Obama's broken promises, and ineffectiveness as a president, and we have all suffered because of it. He mentions NO plan for reversing this state of economic malaise, so we can pretty much count on four more years of the same, if not worse. We have proven to ourselves and to the world that we are NOT racists by electing a black president. Time to move forward, and elect the president who can effectively run our country best, and that is clearly Mitt Romney. Vote with your head, not with your heart!

    November 1, 2012 at 11:57 am | Report abuse |
    • uraracist

      lol...
      I love how this article is upsetting the bigots who think they are beyond such trivial ways of thinking. Don't deny it. Don't try to hide behind the premise that Obama is a closet-radical-muslim waiting to strike. Embrace who you are, bigot.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:01 pm | Report abuse |
    • William

      Except that polls show that Republicans ARE racist – 70% in the most recent survey.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • Always Amused

      Well, Mr. "ObjectiveGuy" ??(LOL!) This article is merely reminding us of the TRUTH abehind the history of racism in America and has drawn some rather Obvious and BLATANT comparisons to our CURRENT tone of racial politics! I'm sorry that FACTS offend you so much, but that just proves that you are a typical REPUBLICAN! If you want to see the current modern day roots of racism, simply LOOK IN THE MIRROR!

      November 1, 2012 at 1:34 pm | Report abuse |
      • notraitors

        Accusations of racism are the first resort of scoundrels

        November 5, 2012 at 10:14 am | Report abuse |
    • KitVA

      Let us say for a second that the question of race never comes into the picture, that a portion of America isn't voting for Obama because he is Black and a portion of America isn't voting for Romney because Obama is black(or Muslim despite evidence that he is Christian). You state that the issue is needing a President that understands what it takes to balance a budget and grow the economy, yet neither Candidate really has an economics degree and both will be taking heavy input from economics advisors on what policies work and how to make them function. There isn't just 1 way to grow the economy, and to be quite honest the concept proposed by Obama is a more stable but perhaps lower upside for growth.

      Obama: Pushing for reduced spending and increased revenue through removing Bush tax cuts for the top tax bracket. Wants to increases taxes on companies that manufacture overseas and provide tax incentives/breaks for companies that bring manufacturing back to the states. Has attempted to provide tax breaks via job bills for companies that hire new workers, hire veterans, etc but all attempts have been shot down in the House. Wants to increase the tax rate on capital interest/gains as tax rate here is lower than all but the poorest tax groups face and the economy needs more money invested in real goods that generate jobs than in investing which provides little to no job growth.

      Romney: Tax plan is based on the idea that lower taxes, particularly on businesses, creates jobs and a larger employed base = more revenue. Romney's plan has a large potential for economic growth compared to Obama's IF AND ONLY IF it results in significantly higher job growth than policies that Obama implements does. Romney wants to eliminate capital gains tax, people with money sitting in investments shouldn't be taxed on the interest from that investment. Romney wants to reduce corporate tax rates to attract companies to manufacture in the United States, this lower revenue overall from corporate taxes unless a significant portion of companies return to the US. Romney wants to lower taxes on everyone, this may mean less of your overall income is taxed however it leads to a massive reduction in revenue for this country. Even with the increased job growth estimates of a 10% (Romney proposed 20%) tax cut would only see a 23-28% return on the lost revenue for the increased jobs. This number grows smaller as the amount cut increases due to the US marginal tax rates being on the left side of the Laffer curve (http: //en. wikipedia.org/ wiki/Laffer_curve). What we effectively see out of Romney's plan is a WHOLE BUNCH of revenue loss offset by a change in deductions (without knowing what kind) and a dependance on the idea of "but we should have a larger taxable base... just not sure how much". It is an interesting concept but the revenue difference leaves his plan with a much larger chance to fail although a larger ceiling too if everything is perfect.

      So if it is really about the economy as you suggest then perhaps the people should ask themselves, should America invest in a steady balanced approach to deficit and debt reduction, or a riskier approach with higher upside and much lower bottom if it fails? For me the balanced approach is the correct approach, although Romney's idea of larger reforms on the tax code as it applies to tax exemptions/deductions is something that Obama also needs to include in his economic plan.

      November 1, 2012 at 1:55 pm | Report abuse |
      • Independent tx

        You make a good argument. One question I have is, if taxes are raised on top earners, but there is incentive to start businesses here, then where is the benefit? Raise one tax but lower another?

        November 1, 2012 at 7:33 pm | Report abuse |
  81. Charlie

    Civil discussion is dead.

    November 1, 2012 at 11:56 am | Report abuse |
  82. ronjayaz

    Oops, i found it!

    November 1, 2012 at 11:56 am | Report abuse |
  83. dav1

    obama is a fool and communist

    November 1, 2012 at 11:56 am | Report abuse |
    • Jeff

      Nice hyperbolic nonsense

      November 1, 2012 at 12:01 pm | Report abuse |
  84. WonderFed

    Great time to be misanthropic.

    November 1, 2012 at 11:56 am | Report abuse |
  85. Luke

    bad

    November 1, 2012 at 11:55 am | Report abuse |
  86. Charlotte

    Because you, Dougiepoop, are a racist. Therefore it is racist when you do it – your intent is to liken blacks to monkeys. GWB was a witless idiot, so really he shouldn't be compared to a monkey because it's an unfiar comparison; the monkey is far smarter.

    November 1, 2012 at 11:53 am | Report abuse |
    • Doug (2)

      So you have a fairly open mind on these matters.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:10 pm | Report abuse |
  87. Charlotte

    What utter hogwash that Obama has done anything to try to increase the racial divide or make it a centerpoint of his administration. Only Scaredy-pants whitie tighties could hallucinate such a thing. It MAY be true that he hasn't done as much as some might have hoped to eliminate the notion of race in politics, but this is a far cry from actively trying to make it a bigger wedge issue. The only wedge is the wedgie you whitefauchs ought to be given to unwad your panties. That having been said, I am as white as they come – almost literally, with platinum blonde hair, blue eyes – and you people disgust me and make me ashamed to be Anglo-Saxon by your astonishingly childish and puerile behavior. Get over it. He's had plenty on his plate and probably figured trying to work on the race thing is not going to be possible right away.

    November 1, 2012 at 11:50 am | Report abuse |
    • DCH

      Please spell it out? What makes him a bad president? I would love to hear line by line what this man has done that makes him a bad president. All of his detractors fail to mention the unparalelled obstacles this man has had to endure. No president in the history of this country has had to deal with the lack of bi-partisanship during their presidency. The republicans are on record saying the president will be a one term president and they will do whatever they have to do to make it happen. Everything the president put forward to help this country was filibustered by who, the republicans. The republicans were willing to let this country fall apart just to make him look bad. How fu&$ing childish is that? Lets destroy the country so the president will not get re-elected. Don't give me this crap about him being a bad president. He is doing everything he possibly can for everyone!!!!!!!!! Not the rich and not only his supporters. I already know what you are going to say: Look at our economy, look at our job situation. All the crap that good old Mitt has been saying. How you could vote for this man is beyond me but we all make mistakes. The president established a base so the economy would grow responsibly. It may not be fast but it will be extremely effective over time. The job market is growing as well. Not as fast as some might want but it takes time to do things the right way. Oh yeah, did I mention the jobs bill the house of representatives shot down? This man is trying his a$$ off but does not have the partisan support he needs. Why is that? Is it because he is a Democrat or is it because he is black? I'm sure you know what I think on this one!!!!

      November 1, 2012 at 12:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • Chuck

      What racial comments or racial driven laws has he gotten into to cause racial divide? What has he said to offend whites....Tell me? Give me a quote. You can't name one. No its ignorance about him and your views about blacks that is causing the racial divide. It's like blaming McDonalds for making the US fat when we know its the consumers who eat it. You don't like him because he's black and as apposed to looking at yourself in the mirror you blame someone who has not signed any race driven laws to date and blame him for your feelings. If he has been a race driven president...name me ONE thing he has done??? You can't name one. It despises you that this a monkey(in your view) is in the oval office and you blame him for your feelings. Blame yourself and wake up.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:36 pm | Report abuse |
      • stan

        -"If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon"
        – "I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites."
        -"There was something about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself. And White."
        -this is a good one "I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was my fathers image, the black man, son of Africa, that I'd packed all the attribrutes I sought in myself, the attributes of Martin and Malcom, DuBois and Mandela"

        There are many, many example of Barrack Hussein Obama playing race to his advantage. Here is a final on to ponder:
        – "It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names."

        Uh-huh. Racist through and through. Using racism as a tool for advancement from his earliest days. Racial divide is barry's modus operandi.

        November 5, 2012 at 7:49 am | Report abuse |
    • notraitors

      "Only Scaredy-pants whitie tighties"

      Sounds like a racist remark to me. But it's what I expect from the left.

      And if you can't see how Obama has used race to divide the country (dropping the Bl*ck Panther voter intimidation case, siding with a foreign power (Mexico) over his own people (Arizona), encouraging Hisp*nics to "punish their enemies during the '10 elections), then you're more deluded than I thought possible

      November 5, 2012 at 10:09 am | Report abuse |
  88. Serenity

    I am a white southerner. I find your generalization deeply offensive; my family is interracial, and I can tell you with 100% accuracy that not all southerners are filled with hate. I agree with the previous comment that you should take a long look at who you're associating with. Not only that, but if you take offense to what they are saying, be a man and SPEAK UP.

    November 1, 2012 at 11:50 am | Report abuse |
  89. Kalan

    The whole issue of continuing race relations aside, this article is absurd comparing the Jim Crow era to today. The backlash that happened post reconstruction included lynchings, mobs, and a slew of illegal and horrifying activities. Whatever backlash there is based on Obama being president is nothing compared to our country's past and it's sensationalist and willfully ignorant to suppose that that's the case. Seriously, either write something serious and objective about race, or don't bother.

    November 1, 2012 at 11:47 am | Report abuse |
    • Christopher

      I think maybe you should read the article one more time more closely. This is simply a comparison of a similar "emotion or psychology of an age" not that they are the same, that is a strawman argument.

      November 1, 2012 at 11:54 am | Report abuse |
    • Michael Johnson

      Do you have a problem with literacy? The author simply noted the has been a backlash not the same backlash as Jim Crow.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:02 pm | Report abuse |
  90. Jeff

    "Obama has done everything he can to ensure that there were stark racial differences. … Obama has focused his entire administration around racism, a sort of reverse racism on his end," Schweikart claimed.

    An interesting hypothesis; too bad there isn't a shred of evidence to support it.

    November 1, 2012 at 11:46 am | Report abuse |
    • Always Amused

      The GOP has used this outrageous LIE as their mantra for the past 4 years! The GOP has absolutely NO integrity since NONE of their political ATTACKS have contained a single shred of truth in them!...

      November 1, 2012 at 11:54 am | Report abuse |
  91. fadi kanan

    Did you really forget where we were four years ago. Or do you choose to forget. I am not sure what policies you would have taken in his place but I feel like he has done an amazing job with the deck of cards he was handed. Our economy was in free fall. It was only four years ago that Lehman brothers went under and we were worried that ATMs were going to stop working. Now, the stock market has doubled and housing is starting to rebound etc....... But all of this is not enough. He should have done better. Well, tell us how at least.

    November 1, 2012 at 11:46 am | Report abuse |
  92. BinaryTooth

    Obama promotes racism by his divisive political strategy.

    November 1, 2012 at 11:45 am | Report abuse |
    • Always Amused

      What "devisive" actions are YOU referring to? Do you mean the GOP's attack on poor and minority VOTERS??? hmm? OR Do you mean the GOP's attack on poor minorities in General??? What part of this BLATANT GOP RACISM is Obama's Responsibilty, hmm? I seem to have missed that point.

      November 1, 2012 at 11:50 am | Report abuse |
      • Michael Johnson

        You will never get a lying conservative to cite any proof. They think we are ignorant conservatives and if they repeat the same lies we will believe their lies. Vote for Obama and metaphorically spit in the faces of conservatives.

        November 1, 2012 at 12:12 pm | Report abuse |
      • Dano

        Partisan much?

        November 2, 2012 at 3:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • Michael Johnson

      He hear this from the same people who convinced him Obama was going to take guns, Obama was born in Kenya, a beer drinking Obama was following Islam and that stopping 396,000 entries from Mexico last year was doing nothing so in his conservative "mind" it must be true. If he parroting this lie enough he thinks I can escape personal accountability for being a racist.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:08 pm | Report abuse |
  93. gladiatorgrl

    You really hit the nail on the head. I'm stunned really at some of the rhetoric I hear when it's just us white folk around. The disrespect shown Obama from the birther, school record, obamacare rhetoric is inexcusable from the T party rally's I've seen and their pathetic signs (one pictured above perfect example)

    One does have to point out it is coupled with the outright attack of the GOP on the left. They went after Clinton (both) with a vengance (no one cared about a B J really and $25 mil on Ken Starr alone? not to mention the Gingrich/Sanford hypocrisy). Gingrich's scorched earth policies left the door wide open for the right evangelicals to push anyone moderate out of the party. Their 1950's rhetoric is a perfect example. What woman or person of color wants to go back to that era? the "take our country back"??? from who?

    November 1, 2012 at 11:43 am | Report abuse |
    • Tim

      Take our country back from whom you ask?....you know the answer to this... don't forget the hispanics..

      November 1, 2012 at 1:33 pm | Report abuse |
  94. ronjayaz

    "A tall, caramel-complexioned man..." The very introductory phrase to describe our President is "secretly" racist. How about Bush? A tall milky-white complexioned man..." Color has always been an accident of environment. Where U were born is the determiner. If U R Swedish yor skin will be lily white and yor eyes blue. If yor African yor skin will be brown and so will yor eyes. All generalizations of course. Yor DNA mix will vary these features.

    November 1, 2012 at 11:43 am | Report abuse |
    • hmmm?

      Huh? Your skin color is not related to the location of your birth, it is related to the skin color of your parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, etc.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:01 pm | Report abuse |
    • Andy

      It wasn't used to describe the president. It was used to describe Hiram Rhodes Revels. You need to reread it.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:22 pm | Report abuse |
  95. ronaswyhod

    white america elected obama because he promised hope and change..
    america will reject obama in 2012 because he has failed..
    not because of his race..
    also remember he will garner over 95% of the black vote, so just who is racist?

    November 1, 2012 at 11:43 am | Report abuse |
    • ronjayaz

      "Hope and change" were good slogans. What politician ran on the slogan: "More of the same, nothing new"? Get real.

      November 1, 2012 at 11:47 am | Report abuse |
    • Michael

      When the Libs owned the house and the senate for the first two years of his administration where was all this hope and change, quite blaming other people.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • hmmm?

      Yes, I voted based on hope that things would get better under Obama than they were under Bush, and they have been tremendously better. Compared to where we were when Bush left office: the stock market has recovered and is higher than it was four years ago, housing prices are rising, housing construction is rising, employment is rising, consumer confidence is rising–all things that were in free-fall decline 4 years ago. We are sort of out of Iraq and have a timeline to leave Afghanistan and haven't been sucked into wars with Lybia, Syria, Iran, or other places Romney thinks we should go kill people. Racism, research shows, has also been rising, particularly when people are "tricked" into showing their racism (see many posts here) Everyone says no if asked "are you a racist?," but when asked in more subtle ways, recent research shows significantly more racism over the last 4 years and significantly more racism among republicans. A Romney win would set us back to the Bush era–a tragedy for America.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • Truth

      Great Point! As a white male that voted for Obama in 2008, this is so true.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:17 pm | Report abuse |
  96. Lam-ang

    Masters degree on what? Other people think having a masters degree on something is a passport to glory. Look at Bill Gates. He did not even finish college...

    November 1, 2012 at 11:42 am | Report abuse |
  97. DFWdad

    Nope, it's citing today's events and saying it's all happening again. Slavery was horrible. I cringe watching "The Help" because I grew up in the south, and I know from my Mom's stories, how things WERE, but are NOT now. If it were just a history lesson, I would be OK with the article.

    November 1, 2012 at 11:41 am | Report abuse |
  98. fiftyfive55

    I guess what most people are sick of is the whining about who did or said what.
    If you look at European history,more whites were enslaved longer and brutalized far worse than any other race on earth yet they dont whine about it but instead they worked their way out of it to improve , today's minorities need to do this or they will always be minorities and not true citizens.

    November 1, 2012 at 11:40 am | Report abuse |
    • k solo

      where did you get your history from?

      November 1, 2012 at 12:07 pm | Report abuse |
      • fiftyfive55

        Books

        November 1, 2012 at 12:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • lisaspups

      Many populations have been subjected to some type of slavery/servitude at one time or another. To make a comment about who has suffered longer is a bit simplistic. There is a long history of tribal communities that dealt in slavery and servitude with competing tribes. Great Britain was known for the inducting the poor, regardless of color, into servitude for some alleged criminal slight committed by themselves or a family member, and that punishment would carry on to descendants until the debt was forgiven or paid off. Even today, there is evidence that the slave trade is booming, albeit via the underground.

      All that said, your comments are very simplistic and make an apples to oranges comparison. Yes, you are correct that other races have also suffered as slaves, but the level and magnitude of how the blacks suffered in this country - as well as the native americans, I might add - is beyond comparison. I ask you to walk a mile in their shoes before you make comments about whether or not they should be "whining" about it.

      November 1, 2012 at 12:30 pm | Report abuse |
      • fiftyfive55

        blacks and indians suffered greater attrocities at the hands of each other than by the white man.One example-indians believed the longer it took a man to die,the more of that man's power would be absorbed by them,just one example.If we point this out to them,though,they consider those actions a way of life,not brutality.In modern times,nations of color,such as India ,China,the mideast,all still practice adult and child slavery.Stop trying to defend what you cant defend by means of facts.White folks tend to look more towards the future while we watch and listen to minorities complain everyday about the past.

        November 1, 2012 at 12:53 pm | Report abuse |
  99. JL

    I fully believe there are no races. Just people. God made two tan people with the genetic variability to create all the skin tones we see today. That being said, it's clear racism still exists in this country. Today, there are racists with dark skin, like Barack Obama and the author of this article and racists with fair skin like the KKK. The left wants you to believe there are only racists like the KKK in order to guilt trip people into voting for Obama, while 43% of white people already do support him. Meanwhile they see no problem with only 3% of black people voting for Romney. Is the hypocrisy not crystal clear here?

    November 1, 2012 at 11:39 am | Report abuse |
  100. frmerMarine

    What policies? Most everything he's tried to do has been blocked by the Republicans. Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) stated publicly that the GOP’s No. 1 goal was to prevent Obama from being re-elected and that the Republicans would block everything Obama tried to do so that they could say he was a "failed" president. Aside from Obamacare, which was a huge giveaway to Republican controlled insurance companies and hasn't even been fully implemented yet so can't have 'failed', the Republicans have blocked everything else including major jobs bills to put people back to work. So, I don't see how anything he could have 'done' can have 'failed'. The only failure in the last 4 years has been the Republicans putting party above country. Shame on them and you for supporting such radical divisiveness. You are the reason the economy was messed up and you are the reason it hasn't improved more than it has.

    November 1, 2012 at 11:38 am | Report abuse |
    • single mom

      I seem to remember the president saying 'Republicans can help, but they'll be at the back of the bus.' and "I won, you lost, we don't need you to run the country." Yeah, really bringing the country together there.

      November 1, 2012 at 11:52 am | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19