Obama: Health Care Anger Not Motivated by Race

Saturday, September 19, 2009

President Barack Obama said Friday that angry criticisms about his health care agenda are driven by an intense debate over the proper role of government -- and not by racism. "Are there people out there who don't like me because of race? I'm sure there are," Obama told CNN in an interview that airs Sunday. "That's not the overriding issue here."

Posted by nmg_no at 11:24 AM | 66 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry

Front Page
News Weblog
Comments
Flagged Comments
User Blogs
Write a Blog Entry
Edit Account
Stats Page
RSS Feed
Back Page

Subscriptions

RSS Feed

Author Info

nmg_no

Private E-mail
Visit Home Page

Joined 2007/03/24
Visited 2009/11/17

Status: user

SNL Mocks Obama as a Do-Nothing (169 comments) ...

Massachusetts Boycotts Hyatt (69 comments) ...

There's no Free Health Care: And everyone knows it (9 comments) ...

Obama: Health Care Anger Not Motivated by Race (66 comments) ...

Top Chrysler Exec Can't Pay Bills (16 comments) ...

When Singers Can't Sing Their Songs Anymore (94 comments) ...

Time: Is Glenn Beck Bad for America? (113 comments) ...

Pelosi worried about angry healthcare comments (12 comments) ...

Carter: Racism Fuels Opposition to Obama (355 comments) ...

Obama Called Kanye West a 'Jackass' (137 comments) ...

Michael Jordan's induction speech.. attack everyone (3 comments) ...

Georgia woman on probation for manure pile (7 comments) ...

Laughing Gas.. Run for your life (24 comments) ...

Health Care Debate not based on logic (33 comments) ...

Special Features

Daily Nooner

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

Whoa! The Messiah tells Jimmy Carter to get lost! That's what Carter gets for leaving the Baptist church!

#1 | Posted by vernon at 2009-09-18 11:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

Obama has more fucking sense than his retarded supporters. All the fucking fucks who make this shit about race can now go fuck themselves.

#2 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2009-09-18 11:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

here's the nyt version

www.nytimes.com

Liberals believe in the American ideal of good government; of government of, by, and for the people, not the cynical "your govenment is evil" Reaganism, which only empowers the moneyed interests to run government when people turn their backs on it.

Government has systemic problems, mostly having to do with campaign finance/bribery where corporations are super-citizens and every day citizens aren't heard, but progressive legislation can change that if the people are behind it.

We can also have what every other advanced, moral nation has, good health care at less cost, if we pool our money together and demand it.

Which is really what health care reform is all about, not racism or socialism.

#3 | Posted by Corky at 2009-09-19 12:05 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Can someone tell me what health care reform is all about?
- Sure Charlie Brown, I can tell you what health care reform is all about.....lights, please?"

#4 | Posted by Snark_Needleton at 2009-09-19 12:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

I think it's funny that the Messiah so quickly Jap-Slapped Carter -- the closest thing the Democrats have to an icon -- and a smug, half-assed one at that.

#5 | Posted by vernon at 2009-09-19 01:05 AM | Reply | Flag:

BTW, my use of 'Jap-Slapped' was not racially motivated

#6 | Posted by vernon at 2009-09-19 01:06 AM | Reply | Flag:

Which is really what health care reform is all about, not racism or socialism.

#1 | Posted by Corky at 2009-09-19 12:05 AM

Exactly.

Thank you Obama for smacking down the retarded fucks who keep playing the race card in your name.

#7 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2009-09-19 03:38 AM | Reply | Flag:

- Sure Charlie Brown, I can tell you what health care reform is all about.....lights, please?"

Hahahaha,very good

#8 | Posted by bruceaz at 2009-09-19 04:06 AM | Reply | Flag:

#3 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at

Yep, and the picture of a watermelon patch laid out in front of the white house, , , , I'm not sure what that is, but it and god damned near every sign I see one of you nut suckers or ball tasters or tea baggers or whatever the hell you call yourselves definately is NOT racism.

#9 | Posted by NoGov4Me at 2009-09-19 07:03 AM | Reply | Flag:

It could be the projected $9,000,000,000,000+ deficit, that might make some people a little 'angry.'

#10 | Posted by wurster at 2009-09-19 11:43 AM | Reply | Flag:

and of course this chickenshit pussy is lieing again

he is keeping away from his mouthpieces who are driving this shit.
if he really thought this as the leader of the democrat party he could stop it.
but thats not in his interest to do so.

CAOS is part of the liberal company line

#11 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2009-09-19 11:48 AM | Reply | Flag:

It's a good thing for the president to try to put out this fire. There are legitimate reasons to oppose his proposals, as there would be on any major bill.

However, it's clear that much of the extremist right is motivated by racism. Some people in this country will never accept the legitimacy of a black president. Their treatment of him as alien, as un-American or as a communist is motivated by that prejudice.

If I was a right-winger joining protests, I'd want to distance myself from that bile in any way I could.

#12 | Posted by rcade at 2009-09-19 11:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

Health care anger is about republican lies.

Not race.

Fear of death panels
Fear of another depression
Fear of govt bankruptcy
Fear of muslim takeovers -biggotry isn't racism
Fear of faux marxism
Fear of Hitler

However fear of their own ignorance is not an issue.

#13 | Posted by klifferd at 2009-09-19 11:55 AM | Reply | Flag:

Crybaby is part of the afkabable bush lover line.

Even bush would tell you to shut yer idiot mouth up.

#14 | Posted by klifferd at 2009-09-19 11:56 AM | Reply | Flag:

It was pretty obvious a democrat was going to take the W.H.. I was so relieved when Obama was declared the democratic nominee. Hillary is scary. I think Obama is more central. And he makes the far left mad sometimes so that's a plus also.

#15 | Posted by wurster at 2009-09-19 12:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

Even bush would tell you to shut yer idiot mouth up.

#14 | Posted by klifferd at 2009-09-19 11:56

bite me

how many times must we show you where obama is PROVEN to be a fuckin liar

from lieing about aarp being on board

telling us he isnt in going for single payer

HOLDING bACK THE PRICE OF CAP AND TAX

no illegals covered

ABORTION being paid for by tax payers

the man who died because of health care problems named otto raddack

and on and on and on

NO TAX HIKE...but taxes to people who will pass them on to us and fees and FINES for not getting health care

and on and on and on and on

and liberal dupes still dont get it

#16 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2009-09-19 12:12 PM | Reply | Flag:

and so we are stupid because we are worried about a govt depression and banktuptcy

thats one of the dumbest things Ive heard around here and IVe been here for some time and heard some really dumb things from liberal fucks

#17 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2009-09-19 12:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

AND word from MASS health care bullshit

people pay the fine because its less and then when they need some care they sign up since there is a no pre conditions clause and the result

its costing them billions more than projected

THIS according to 'bulls and bears' finance show...

unintended consequences....THE number one result from goddamn democrats

#18 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2009-09-19 12:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

Honestly afka. You haven't "proven" shit.

Except how much a cry baby whiner you are.

You sure you aren't a lib. Cause you are the posterchild for wimp.

#19 | Posted by klifferd at 2009-09-19 12:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I saw this on my rightwing show it must be the truth!"

"I saw this on my leftwing show it must be the truth!"

Dumb.

#20 | Posted by klifferd at 2009-09-19 12:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

angry criticisms about his health care agenda are driven by an intense debate over the proper role of government -- and not by racism

Has Obama ever actually heard these teabaggers try to articulate their criticisms of health care reform?

Cos it's about 99% intense and 1% debate.

And in the main the debate part is usually based on lies like "death panels" and "wants to kill my Gramma" and "zOMFG Soshulizm!"

No-Drama Obama recognises the racism inherent in his opposition but maintains that that is not the major impetus in the manufactured mob mentality found on the right.

In truth the mobs whipped up in DC and elsewhere are a mixed bag of nuts.

Anti choicers, snake handlers, gun nuts, birfers, Survivalists, the 'All taxes are illegal' crowd etc.

And of course racists.

These groups are not mutually exclusive ya know.

Spud's sure there must be a few informed rational righties who legitimately oppose Obama's health care reforms based purely on policy preferences but Spud aint seen one yet.

Be Well.

#21 | Posted by dethspud at 2009-09-19 12:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

#20

No kidding!!

#22 | Posted by Lisa at 2009-09-19 12:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

If the reason that Conservatives oppose Obama is because of his race,
Then it must be true that the reason Liberals oppose Sarah Palin is because she's a woman.

#23 | Posted by HawkSprings at 2009-09-19 12:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

If the reason that some Conservatives oppose Obama is because of his race,
Then it must be true that the reason Liberals oppose Sarah Palin is because she's a very stupid woman who is dangerously ignorant and clearly unfit to lead.

FTFY.

Be Well.

#24 | Posted by dethspud at 2009-09-19 01:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

"if he really thought this as the leader of the democrat party he could stop it."

Oh, gimme a break. So could your fucking hero have stopped blind righties from all over the country from calling dissenters traitors? Just by saying so? I don't think he bitch-slapped anyone, just said something smart and apt--it's not all racism, but racism is a factor (I firmly believe). Look at some of the language right here on DR. Some of it is pure trolling, but some is actually sincere racist invective.

Akf, even for you, this is too much. I think your blind hatred of the president is getting in the way. Even when he takes the high road, you have to bitch and try to slap him.

How old are you? Not old enough to know better yet?

#25 | Posted by pragmatist at 2009-09-19 02:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

While the anger over health-care may not be racially motivated, the hatred of President Barack Obama most definitely is.

One only has to look at the many of the posts from the DR Klansmen (tm) to see that.

#26 | Posted by COMMONSENSE at 2009-09-19 04:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

^.^

Good for Obama! He let Carter get out on stage just long enough for all of these "America is racist" comments of his to get the attention, then he cut the rug out from under him.

Carter has been an America-hater since the 80s, after Americans rejected his "I can't get our hostages out of Iran" weakness, and instead chose a man who would allow America to stand up for itself, rather than go on our knees to everyone else on the planet.

The more it is pointed out that Carter is a complete idiot, the quicker this man will fade into obscurity, where he belongs.

John B.

#27 | Posted by lunahq7 at 2009-09-19 04:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

Just when I wonder if our President is some crazy socialist, he goes and makes sense.

If he and Reid and Pelosi check their pride and stop insulting and dismissing their principled detractors, their approval rates would stop falling.

YES, the same thing applies/did apply to W.

#28 | Posted by kirk at 2009-09-19 09:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

Sometimes I forget what a cool customer our president can be...

During the Dem campaign and the general campaign, HE was not the one to make race an issue. DR lefties would, but Barak Obama is very comfortable in his own skin.

#29 | Posted by kirk at 2009-09-19 09:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

"check their pride"

At the risk of actually communicating on the DR: When I worked at Motorola in the pursuit and attainment of 100% factory yields I would go to these wonderful brainstorming meetings where there was a sign that said, "Check your ego at the door."

Then the Clinton administration let management sell it all to China for a song so I quit; Fools.

#30 | Posted by Zatoichi at 2009-09-19 09:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

#21 | Posted by dethspud at 2009-09-19 12:35 PM | Reply

You aren't paying attention...and you're whining about Obama's "take" by basically saying IT IS all racism. Bad day for you.

And just 'cause you and your fellow humanists/socialists aren't getting your dream, you're pissed.
Sorry. Bush couldn't get social security privitization, Obama won't get the "public option."

#31 | Posted by kirk at 2009-09-19 09:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

" Barak Obama is very comfortable in his own skin. "

Posted by kirk

Time to sign off. I'm in agreement with Kirk.
Got John Luc Ponty on the turntable.

#32 | Posted by Zatoichi at 2009-09-19 09:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

Zat,
Thanks for real communication here.

President Obama would be proud.

#33 | Posted by kirk at 2009-09-19 09:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

I had eight maritime mobiles check in this afternoon.

mmsn.org

That was fun.

#34 | Posted by Zatoichi at 2009-09-19 09:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Bush couldn't get social security privitization, Obama won't get the "public option.""

As if they're even in the same universe. Bush sought to take money out of the macro system. The public option seeks to put it back in. Polar opposites.

#35 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-09-19 10:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

Some people in this country will never accept the legitimacy of a black president. and SOME people think the earth is flat..

That's an idiotic statement.. almost NONE of the objection to Obama is racially motivated.. you could just as easily make the argument that if he were white, Hilliary Clinton would be president.

That's just trying to excuse the denigration of people that oppose left wing ideology.. which happens to be the majority of Americans..

#36 | Posted by nmg_no at 2009-09-19 10:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

Isn't it time for Carter's end of life consultation from Obama's new health plan?

#37 | Posted by Denverite at 2009-09-19 11:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Isn't it time for Carter's end of life consultation from Obama's new health plan?"

The same type of consultation Sarah Palin was for before she was against? The same type George W. Bush signed into law in Texas? The same type John Boehner and other Repubicans voted FOR six years ago?

That consultation?

#38 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-09-20 12:09 AM | Reply | Flag:

Right, Danforth.
BOTH proposals would be game-changers....and too much for our wobbly-kneed nation anytime soon.

#39 | Posted by kirk at 2009-09-20 12:33 AM | Reply | Flag:

Privitization of social security and the public option healthcare that is...

#40 | Posted by kirk at 2009-09-20 12:36 AM | Reply | Flag:

"and too much for our wobbly-kneed nation anytime soon."

Wait till we get another decade of medical inflation at 4x actual inflation.

Privatization was just an attempted giveaway to the banking system.

#41 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-09-20 12:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

Translation: " Strength is irrelevant. Resistance is futile. We wish to improve ourselves. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service ours."

All the czars should dress up like the Borg this halloween (omg that would be funny.)

No it's not about race...

#42 | Posted by xrayvision at 2009-09-20 01:45 AM | Reply | Flag:

"omg" ... Should all of GW Bush's "czars" that you didn't seem to care much about dress up as the Borg as well?

#43 | Posted by BetelG at 2009-09-20 01:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

YES!

#44 | Posted by xrayvision at 2009-09-20 01:56 AM | Reply | Flag:

Why didn't you care about them then? "W" was President for eight years, and passed Medicare Part D at a cost of over a trillion dollars which he didn't even attempt to pay for and he had scores of "czars".

So what's changed, XRAY?

#45 | Posted by BetelG at 2009-09-20 01:59 AM | Reply | Flag:

You've ruled out the racial component, and I'm willing to play along for the moment.

So what's changed, XRAY?

#46 | Posted by BetelG at 2009-09-20 02:11 AM | Reply | Flag:

(It hurts to Google "Medicare Part D" and "Bush Czars", doesn't it?)

#47 | Posted by BetelG at 2009-09-20 02:28 AM | Reply | Flag:

Nothing has changed.

Betelg don't get me started on that *&%#@! Bush. I was focused on the topic at hand.

Personally I think we need to clean house across the board.

#48 | Posted by xrayvision at 2009-09-20 02:32 AM | Reply | Flag:

Nothing has changed.

Hell, then point to your criticism of Medicare Part D or Bush's "czars" back when Bush was President.

#49 | Posted by BetelG at 2009-09-20 02:40 AM | Reply | Flag:

You were upset about this, right?

One month later, the ten-year cost estimate was boosted to $534 billion, up more than $100 billion over the figure presented by the Bush administration during Congressional debate. The inaccurate figure helped secure support from fiscally conservative Republicans. It was reported that an administration official, Thomas A. Scully, had concealed the higher estimate and threatened to fire Medicare Chief Actuary Richard Foster if he revealed it.[2] By early 2005, the White House Budget had increased the 10-year estimate to $1.2 trillion.[3]

Former US Comptroller General David M. Walker has called this "...probably the most fiscally irresponsible piece of legislation since the 1960s... because we promise way more than we can afford to keep." [4]

en.wikipedia.org

I'm sure you heard all about this at the time from your favorite current sources, and were outraged!

#50 | Posted by BetelG at 2009-09-20 02:44 AM | Reply | Flag:

Well, that and the attention the media you listen to today gave to all of Bush's "czars"....

Remember the outrage?

#51 | Posted by BetelG at 2009-09-20 02:45 AM | Reply | Flag:

But that brings us back to the obvious question, XRAY:

What's changed that has you all in a snit? We've ruled out race, and demonstrated that Bush had scores of czars and passed a health care bill that squandered over a trillion dollars as a sop to drug corporations and seniors, with little notice from the tea partiers of today, or the new media that informs them.

So, what's changed with the election of Barack Obama?

#52 | Posted by BetelG at 2009-09-20 02:57 AM | Reply | Flag:

'night

#53 | Posted by BetelG at 2009-09-20 03:09 AM | Reply | Flag:

sry was walking dog.

Like I said, nothing has changed. Same old thing. You think this administration is not beholden to anybody? You really think they care about YOU? Bush or any of them.

Betelg, I have agreed with what you said. What more do you want? I made my comment that I didn't like the direction of the current administration. You obviously favor the Obama administration and thats your choice.

LONG LIVE FREE SPEECH!

#54 | Posted by xrayvision at 2009-09-20 03:26 AM | Reply | Flag:

"That's just trying to excuse the denigration of people that oppose left wing ideology.. which happens to be the majority of Americans.."

I'd LOVE to see proof of this. The country is divided. Fairly neatly. If that is a majority, then it's a small majority. In fact, I think most people don't match either rightwing or leftwing ideology. We are mixed. But I can't back that up any more solidly than you can back up your assertion.

"LONG LIVE FREE SPEECH!"

And where did _that_ come from? Did anyone try to put down free speech here today? Clearly, we are here; we are engaging in free speech.

#55 | Posted by pragmatist at 2009-09-20 06:59 AM | Reply | Flag:

yesterday, Hans von Spakovsky offered a compelling explanation: Carter himself has a history of virulent racism. The facts, drawn from A Voting Rights Odyssey by Laughlin McDonald, director of the ACLU's Voting Project, are astonishing:

When Carter returned to Plains, Georgia, to become a peanut farmer after serving in the Navy, he became a member of the Sumter County School Board, which did not implement the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision handed down by the Supreme Court. Instead, the board continued to segregate school children on the streets of Carter's hometown. ...
Carter's board tried to stop the construction of a new "Elementary Negro School" in 1956. Local white citizens had complained that the school would be "too close" to a white school. As a result, "the children, both colored and white, would have to travel the same streets and roads in order to reach their respective schools." The prospect of black and white children commingling on the streets on their way to school was apparently so horrible to Carter that he requested that the state school board stop construction of the black school until a new site could be found. The state board turned down Carter's request because of "the staggering cost." Carter and the rest of the Sumter County School Board then reassured parents at a meeting on October 5, 1956, that the board "would do everything in its power to minimize simultaneous traffic between white and colored students in route to and from school."

You can see how such episodes could leave Carter with a guilty conscience.

From Powerline.com

#56 | Posted by tontonmacoute at 2009-09-20 07:05 AM | Reply | Flag:

tontonmacoute,Alias papa doc henchman.Can you come up with a better link than that.I tried to look it up,too vagye

#57 | Posted by bruceaz at 2009-09-20 07:10 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Carter's board tried to stop the construction of a new "Elementary Negro School" in 1956. Local white citizens had complained that the school would be "too close" to a white school. As a result, "the children, both colored and white, would have to travel the same streets and roads in order to reach their respective schools." The prospect of black and white children commingling on the streets on their way to school was apparently so horrible to Carter that he requested that the state school board stop construction of the black school until a new site could be found. The state board turned down Carter's request because of "the staggering cost." Carter and the rest of the Sumter County School Board then reassured parents at a meeting on October 5, 1956, that the board "would do everything in its power to minimize simultaneous traffic between white and colored students in route to and from school."

As Bruce says, too vague. Well, vague isn't the word I'd use. But just because Carter was on the board, why was it Carter's board? Was he the chair? Even if he were, did he force the decision down the board's throat? Did he vote for the decision? Did he vote against it? Did he abstain? What was his position? And where is the proof?

#58 | Posted by pragmatist at 2009-09-20 07:23 AM | Reply | Flag:

Never mind that that was 1956. 1956?!? I've changed a few of my positions over the decades.

#59 | Posted by pragmatist at 2009-09-20 07:26 AM | Reply | Flag:

Prag,thanks for not giving me shit on a spelling error.I'd sure like to read the original link.I like Carter,sorry folks.

#60 | Posted by bruceaz at 2009-09-20 07:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

1956?!? I've changed a few of my positions over the decades.

Me too,since I was born in '57

#61 | Posted by bruceaz at 2009-09-20 07:33 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Prag,thanks for not giving me shit on a spelling error." Oh, NO! Is that how people here see me, just as a grammar and spelling cop? Oh, FUK. Nah, I try to bring it up only when it interferes with meaning, or when someone is criticizing education and writing in a nonsensical or rule-breakin' way. Though I will admit to trolling using grammar now and then.

I think the language in Tonton's post is from a site. There's probably no specific record that shows what Carter's position was. I've been to many school board meetings, and members' positions aren't recorded that specifically, at least not at the meetings I've been to. If someone is quoted in the minutes, it's rare.

#62 | Posted by pragmatist at 2009-09-20 07:47 AM | Reply | Flag:

Oh, NO! Is that how people here see me

No no,I didn't think you did that,but others sure do.You try to make a point around here and slip up,well you know.

#63 | Posted by bruceaz at 2009-09-20 07:57 AM | Reply | Flag:

We is all human.

#64 | Posted by pragmatist at 2009-09-20 08:09 AM | Reply | Flag:

No shit Obama! Duh!

Breaking News!!!! CNN just reporting that Obama says that refering to his new residence as "The White House" is also not racist.

#65 | Posted by utastaff at 2009-09-20 12:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

So I don't understand why more people can't acknowledge that Obama did the right thing, no matter his motivation, by saying this out loud. Oh, 'cause you hate him; that's right. He can do _nothing_ right. If he instituted a new policy that clearly won our two big wars (like that's possible), you'd still say it was luck or not him. If he dropped the health care reform and went for tort reform and knocking down state lines, you'd call him spineless.

This is like the conservatives who are pissed that Obama is "continuing Bush's policies." You'd think they might consider... "Oh, shit: We were wrong. Maybe he's not a pussy." But there's no pleasing some people.

#66 | Posted by pragmatist at 2009-09-20 01:20 PM | Reply | Flag: