Obama College Videos: Critical Race Theory

[Neoteny]

My stance on nuclear weapons is that no one should have them. Given that this is an unrealistic stance, my second stance on nuclear weapons is that any state (state being the operative word) who wants to get them or has them wants them or has them for rational reasons.

Really? Trust anybody? That's your stance? That's silly.

Racist.

[BigBallinStalin]

Well, the US did prefer that China did not have nuclear weapons, but the US was never in a position to dictate Chinese policies. Iran's power is much lower than China's during the 1970s and 1980s; therefore, the US feels more emboldened to B&M about Iranian policy on nuclear weapons.

The point is that the US did perceive that countries like India, China, and Pakistan possessing nuclear weapons is a threat. They couldn't do as much about it as they can with Iran.

[ViperOverLord]

Well, the US did prefer that China did not have nuclear weapons, but the US was never in a position to dictate Chinese policies. Iran's power is much lower than China's during the 1970s and 1980s; therefore, the US feels more emboldened to B&M about Iranian policy on nuclear weapons.

The point is that the US did perceive that countries like India, China, and Pakistan possessing nuclear weapons is a threat. They couldn't do as much about it as they can with Iran.

Agreed. And if anybody was going to have struck China, (Pakistan or India) it would have been the USSR.

[thegreekdog]

Quick point: I don't remember NK finalizing any nuclear bombs (I could be wrong but I don't remember that). Also, Iran does not have nuclear bomb capabilities yet either.

India, Pakistan and China: I think western nations would prefer that they did not have such capabilities. But none of them apparently thought they were enough of a direct threat to be using them else there would have likely been a different outcome.

An argument for Iran having nukes should not be, well other countries have them. We have to decide whether they can be trusted. And even if you are making that case, Obama isn't. He has argued against a nuclear Iran and sanctioned them.

Woah chief - I'm not saying I WANT Iran (or North Korea) to have nuclear weapons. I'm saying it's rational for those countries to want to have nuclear weapons.

You're still arguing that a certain world view stance has to be based on racism. You should really check your logic.

Really? I thought you were arguing that. I'm glad we agree that President Obama's alleged racism is not influencing his support of Israel.

[ViperOverLord]

You're still arguing that a certain world view stance has to be based on racism. You should really check your logic.

Really? I thought you were arguing that. I'm glad we agree that President Obama's alleged racism is not influencing his support of Israel.

I think Obama's racism is affecting his actions towards Israel/Iran. But someone doesn't have to be racist to be against bombing Iran. That is what I'm saying (and have been saying).

[oVo]

So you're saying that Obama not being a racist prevents him
from bombing the hell out of Iran?

[ViperOverLord]

So you're saying that Obama not being a racist prevents him
from bombing the hell out of Iran?

Nice oversimplification. Kudos

[thegreekdog]

You're still arguing that a certain world view stance has to be based on racism. You should really check your logic.

Really? I thought you were arguing that. I'm glad we agree that President Obama's alleged racism is not influencing his support of Israel.

I think Obama's racism is affecting his actions towards Israel/Iran. But someone doesn't have to be racist to be against bombing Iran. That is what I'm saying (and have been saying).

So if he wasn't racist, his actions towards Israel/Iran would be explained by some other reason?

[ViperOverLord]

You're still arguing that a certain world view stance has to be based on racism. You should really check your logic.

Really? I thought you were arguing that. I'm glad we agree that President Obama's alleged racism is not influencing his support of Israel.

I think Obama's racism is affecting his actions towards Israel/Iran. But someone doesn't have to be racist to be against bombing Iran. That is what I'm saying (and have been saying).

So if he wasn't racist, his actions towards Israel/Iran would be explained by some other reason?

If Obama wasn't racist these are more likely outcomes (some outcomes are more likely than others as his political opportunism has to be accounted for):

- He would have put tougher sanctions against Iran sooner.
- He would definitively state the consequences of a nuclear Iran. (IE when and how would we go to war with them / bomb their facilities).
- We would likely have bases in Iraq that we could run operations from (instead of stating the red herring that US soldiers were subject to Iraqi law and not US military jurisdiction).
- He would have come to some sort of tentative understanding with Israel and our allies; the ways in which he would support Israel against a nuclear armed Iran or with regards to a preemptive strike.
. He wouldn't be disrespecting the Israel prime minister when he came to visit by telling him that they need to go back to their 1967 borders. Israel withdrew from the Gazala strip in 04 when the US gave written assurances to support Israel's existing borders. Not only that, a return to such borders endangers Israel's very safety.

[thegreekdog]

You're still arguing that a certain world view stance has to be based on racism. You should really check your logic.

Really? I thought you were arguing that. I'm glad we agree that President Obama's alleged racism is not influencing his support of Israel.

I think Obama's racism is affecting his actions towards Israel/Iran. But someone doesn't have to be racist to be against bombing Iran. That is what I'm saying (and have been saying).

So if he wasn't racist, his actions towards Israel/Iran would be explained by some other reason?

If Obama wasn't racist these are more likely outcomes (some outcomes are more likely than others as his political opportunism has to be accounted for):

- He would have put tougher sanctions against Iran sooner.
- He would definitively state the consequences of a nuclear Iran. (IE when and how would we go to war with them / bomb their facilities).
- We would likely have bases in Iraq that we could run operations from (instead of stating the red herring that US soldiers were subject to Iraqi law and not US military jurisdiction).
- He would have come to some sort of tentative understanding with Israel and our allies; the ways in which he would support Israel against a nuclear armed Iran or with regards to a preemptive strike.
. He wouldn't be disrespecting the Israel prime minister when he came to visit by telling him that they need to go back to their 1967 borders. Israel withdrew from the Gazala strip in 04 when the US gave written assurances to support Israel's existing borders. Not only that, a return to such borders endangers Israel's very safety.

I think you mean "[i]f Obama wasn't a Democrat..."

[Neoteny]

Same same.

[Phatscotty]

You're still arguing that a certain world view stance has to be based on racism. You should really check your logic.

Really? I thought you were arguing that. I'm glad we agree that President Obama's alleged racism is not influencing his support of Israel.

I think Obama's racism is affecting his actions towards Israel/Iran. But someone doesn't have to be racist to be against bombing Iran. That is what I'm saying (and have been saying).

So if he wasn't racist, his actions towards Israel/Iran would be explained by some other reason?

If Obama wasn't racist these are more likely outcomes (some outcomes are more likely than others as his political opportunism has to be accounted for):

- He would have put tougher sanctions against Iran sooner.
- He would definitively state the consequences of a nuclear Iran. (IE when and how would we go to war with them / bomb their facilities).
- We would likely have bases in Iraq that we could run operations from (instead of stating the red herring that US soldiers were subject to Iraqi law and not US military jurisdiction).
- He would have come to some sort of tentative understanding with Israel and our allies; the ways in which he would support Israel against a nuclear armed Iran or with regards to a preemptive strike.
. He wouldn't be disrespecting the Israel prime minister when he came to visit by telling him that they need to go back to their 1967 borders. Israel withdrew from the Gazala strip in 04 when the US gave written assurances to support Israel's existing borders. Not only that, a return to such borders endangers Israel's very safety.

Just want to point out as related. Obama's decisions can be predicted just by looking at the foreign policy between Isreal and xyz country in the Middle East.

If the country is at peace with Israel, we get involved (Egypt, Libya)
If the country is hostile towards Israel, we don't get involved (Iran, Syria)

[oVo]

If the country is at peace with Israel, we get involved (Egypt, Libya)
If the country is hostile towards Israel, we don't get involved (Iran, Syria)

Nah... same region but totally different situations.
Like comparing Sea Bass and avocados.

[ViperOverLord]

Really? I thought you were arguing that. I'm glad we agree that President Obama's alleged racism is not influencing his support of Israel.

I think Obama's racism is affecting his actions towards Israel/Iran. But someone doesn't have to be racist to be against bombing Iran. That is what I'm saying (and have been saying).

So if he wasn't racist, his actions towards Israel/Iran would be explained by some other reason?

If Obama wasn't racist these are more likely outcomes (some outcomes are more likely than others as his political opportunism has to be accounted for):

- He would have put tougher sanctions against Iran sooner.
- He would definitively state the consequences of a nuclear Iran. (IE when and how would we go to war with them / bomb their facilities).
- We would likely have bases in Iraq that we could run operations from (instead of stating the red herring that US soldiers were subject to Iraqi law and not US military jurisdiction).
- He would have come to some sort of tentative understanding with Israel and our allies; the ways in which he would support Israel against a nuclear armed Iran or with regards to a preemptive strike.
. He wouldn't be disrespecting the Israel prime minister when he came to visit by telling him that they need to go back to their 1967 borders. Israel withdrew from the Gazala strip in 04 when the US gave written assurances to support Israel's existing borders. Not only that, a return to such borders endangers Israel's very safety.

I think you mean "[i]f Obama wasn't a Democrat..."

Did Lyndon B Johnson, Jimmy Carter or William Jefferson Clinton call for Israel to revert to 1967 borders? I recall that Clinton's administration was very supportive of Israel. Congressman Johnson helped secure visas for Jews to escape Nazi Germany.

[thegreekdog]

Did Lyndon B Johnson, Jimmy Carter or William Jefferson Clinton call for Israel to revert to 1967 borders? I recall that Clinton's administration was very supportive of Israel. Congressman Johnson helped secure visas for Jews to escape Nazi Germany.

Touche.

I'm still not convinced that President Obama has been unsupportive of Israel. I tend to think his inaction is indicative of something other than being unsupportive of Israel. He talks a good game about a whole lot of things (Iran, jobs, manufacturing jobs, gasoline prices, gay marriage, withdrawal from Iraq/Afghanistan, not torturing, not wiretapping US citizens) but has not delivered on a whole lot of things. Some chalk this up to dealing with Congress. Some chalk this up to political expediency.

Since I believe President Obama is the ultimate politician, I chalk it up to political expediency. He will do whatever is the most popular (in my opinion).

[ViperOverLord]

Did Lyndon B Johnson, Jimmy Carter or William Jefferson Clinton call for Israel to revert to 1967 borders? I recall that Clinton's administration was very supportive of Israel. Congressman Johnson helped secure visas for Jews to escape Nazi Germany.

Touche.

I'm still not convinced that President Obama has been unsupportive of Israel. I tend to think his inaction is indicative of something other than being unsupportive of Israel. He talks a good game about a whole lot of things (Iran, jobs, manufacturing jobs, gasoline prices, gay marriage, withdrawal from Iraq/Afghanistan, not torturing, not wiretapping US citizens) but has not delivered on a whole lot of things. Some chalk this up to dealing with Congress. Some chalk this up to political expediency.

Since I believe President Obama is the ultimate politician, I chalk it up to political expediency. He will do whatever is the most popular (in my opinion).

Not all issues offer great political expedience though. There's enough division on opinions on the Mid East (and general apathy/ignorance) for Obama to pretty much do what he wants. Phatscotty brought up a good point. He has intervened for the friends of Israel (Libya, Egypt) and he has not intervened enemies of Israel like Syria even though they had very similar situations. Why the discrepancy?

In the case of Iran, the nuclear issue (and gas prices) has made the issue a matter of political expediency. Obama issued sanctions that all of the experts said in advance, would not work (but as long as he told the nit wit public that he did what he could do then he was covered). He invited the Israeli PM to the White House basically for a photo opp. But he offered no real assistance or assurances. I think the Israel PM only went there so he could say he told Obama the deal and he offered no help. Obama got to looke like he was caring (even though he doesn't). Basically both leaders were doing political c.y.a.)

If the country is at peace with Israel, we get involved (Egypt, Libya)
If the country is hostile towards Israel, we don't get involved (Iran, Syria)

Nah... same region but totally different situations.
Like comparing Sea Bass and avocados.

You have those blanket denials down pat.

[thegreekdog]

Did Lyndon B Johnson, Jimmy Carter or William Jefferson Clinton call for Israel to revert to 1967 borders? I recall that Clinton's administration was very supportive of Israel. Congressman Johnson helped secure visas for Jews to escape Nazi Germany.

Touche.

I'm still not convinced that President Obama has been unsupportive of Israel. I tend to think his inaction is indicative of something other than being unsupportive of Israel. He talks a good game about a whole lot of things (Iran, jobs, manufacturing jobs, gasoline prices, gay marriage, withdrawal from Iraq/Afghanistan, not torturing, not wiretapping US citizens) but has not delivered on a whole lot of things. Some chalk this up to dealing with Congress. Some chalk this up to political expediency.

Since I believe President Obama is the ultimate politician, I chalk it up to political expediency. He will do whatever is the most popular (in my opinion).

Not all issues offer great political expedience though. There's enough division on opinions on the Mid East (and general apathy/ignorance) for Obama to pretty much do what he wants. Phatscotty brought up a good point. He has intervened for the friends of Israel (Libya, Egypt) and he has not intervened enemies of Israel like Syria even though they had very similar situations. Why the discrepancy?

In the case of Iran, the nuclear issue (and gas prices) has made the issue a matter of political expediency. Obama issued sanctions that all of the experts said in advance, would not work (but as long as he told the nit wit public that he did what he could do then he was covered). He invited the Israeli PM to the White House basically for a photo opp. But he offered no real assistance or assurances. I think the Israel PM only went there so he could say he told Obama the deal and he offered no help. Obama got to looke like he was caring (even though he doesn't). Basically both leaders were doing political c.y.a.)

Now... here's how this links back to our original discussion - I don't think Obama's support of Israel (or lack thereof) has anything to do with critical race theory, racism, or what happened 30 years ago at Harvard. And neither do you really given the above well-thought-out and accurate, as far as I'm concerned, post. In other words, why do we need to accuse the president of being racist, when we can point out his other problems (of which there are many)? Why drag ourselves down into the mud and dreck when we don't need to?

I know the answer - Racism is a sexier accusation than political expediency. But still...

[BigBallinStalin]

Did Lyndon B Johnson, Jimmy Carter or William Jefferson Clinton call for Israel to revert to 1967 borders? I recall that Clinton's administration was very supportive of Israel. Congressman Johnson helped secure visas for Jews to escape Nazi Germany.

Touche.

I'm still not convinced that President Obama has been unsupportive of Israel. I tend to think his inaction is indicative of something other than being unsupportive of Israel. He talks a good game about a whole lot of things (Iran, jobs, manufacturing jobs, gasoline prices, gay marriage, withdrawal from Iraq/Afghanistan, not torturing, not wiretapping US citizens) but has not delivered on a whole lot of things. Some chalk this up to dealing with Congress. Some chalk this up to political expediency.

Since I believe President Obama is the ultimate politician, I chalk it up to political expediency. He will do whatever is the most popular (in my opinion).

Not all issues offer great political expedience though. There's enough division on opinions on the Mid East (and general apathy/ignorance) for Obama to pretty much do what he wants. Phatscotty brought up a good point. He has intervened for the friends of Israel (Libya, Egypt) and he has not intervened enemies of Israel like Syria even though they had very similar situations. Why the discrepancy?

Foreign policy can be framed by the executive; however, within those related bureaucracies, they have their own objectives. Sometimes, the executive can mesh very well with the already established plans of foreign policymakers; sometimes not.

The Israel-US ordeal is a process which can only unfold some plans at a time, so it may be that Obama appears to be so inactive, but in reality, there's much going on which we don't hear about (day-to-day operations, posturing, etc.).

A clear signal that Obama doesn't care about Israel would be revoking their "foreign aid" of $3bn per year. Then again, he would lose a huge portion of the Jewish voting market.

[ViperOverLord]

Now... here's how this links back to our original discussion - I don't think Obama's support of Israel (or lack thereof) has anything to do with critical race theory, racism, or what happened 30 years ago at Harvard. And neither do you really given the above well-thought-out and accurate, as far as I'm concerned, post. In other words, why do we need to accuse the president of being racist, when we can point out his other problems (of which there are many)? Why drag ourselves down into the mud and dreck when we don't need to?

I know the answer - Racism is a sexier accusation than political expediency. But still...

LOL - In all honesty, I'd rather regard how Obama is a spineless politician than regard his racism. I don't want to be the guy that is yelling racist. I don't really want to be that guy generally.

And even if a person says a racist statement or goes to a racist church; showing how racist a person really is is going to be a tough sell. I agree that generally there's enough on the table that one can make a point without regarding racism. The subject evokes strong emotion and is generally better left untouched. But it was to put me what relevance do I think the video tape had and I built the case. Racism was an undeniable cornerstone in why it mattered.

Along the way Obama learned that he needs a wide political base. Obviously he did not get to where he is by being overtly racist. But there's no denying that he comes from a strong hate whitey background. His earliest political influences were communists that taught him to hate the man. He tickled that fancy along the way by supporting radical causes in college and by going to a hate whitey church thereafter.

Obama may have learned to disguise his inner racist feelings. But to think that he has likely progressed beyond racial politics would be absolutely foolish.

A clear signal that Obama doesn't care about Israel would be revoking their "foreign aid" of $3bn per year. Then again, he would lose a huge portion of the Jewish voting market.

He needed to give the money to give to Egypt so that they could prosecute those pesky do-gooders that were promoting a democracy. Such an government could lead to freedom of speech, freedom of religion and capitalism. Why have a peace loving nation next to Israel anyways?

[Aradhus]

Just skimmed this shit pile of a fucktarded thread. How is Obama suggesting Israel revert to whatever borders they had at whatever time, being unsupportive of Israel?

Does supporting Israel mean supporting whatever Israel wants? Regardless of the unintended consequences of those wants being actualised, or ignoring the fact that what israel wants might not be in the best interest of..uh..Israel.

f*ck it, just skimming this fucking idiotic topic is enough to make me want to take a shower in a complex run by nazis.

[Lootifer]

Just skimmed this shit pile of a fucktarded thread. How is Obama suggesting Israel revert to whatever borders they had at whatever time, being unsupportive of Israel?

Does supporting Israel mean supporting whatever Israel wants? Regardless of the unintended consequences of those wants being actualised, or ignoring the fact that what israel wants might not be in the best interest of..uh..Israel.

f*ck it, just skimming this fucking idiotic topic is enough to make me want to take a shower in a complex run by nazis.

Truth, wanna come stay on my couch?

[ViperOverLord]

Just skimmed this shit pile of a fucktarded thread. How is Obama suggesting Israel revert to whatever borders they had at whatever time, being unsupportive of Israel?

Does supporting Israel mean supporting whatever Israel wants? Regardless of the unintended consequences of those wants being actualised, or ignoring the fact that what israel wants might not be in the best interest of..uh..Israel.

f*ck it, just skimming this fucking idiotic topic is enough to make me want to take a shower in a complex run by nazis.

Only an idiot would suggest that going back to 1967 borders would hurt Israel.

We cannot just give Israel anything they want. They're such children. What they want is not necessarily whats best for them anyways.

And yea you're right__ I mean any thread that dares to challenge Obama's character is just like so fucking stupid that it makes my head hurt too.

It's just so much easier when we see the world exactly how it is. I feel so enlightened now that you've taught me. And I know I'm better than anyone that would disagree with anything I just said.

[oVo]

And yea you're right, I mean any thread that dares to challenge Obama's character is just like so fucking stupid that it makes my head hurt too.

Is it because every rational person is aware that the best way to judge a person's character is to go back and review edited clips of video that was taken over three decades ago? It makes my head hurt too.

[Aradhus]

Just skimmed this shit pile of a fucktarded thread. How is Obama suggesting Israel revert to whatever borders they had at whatever time, being unsupportive of Israel?

Does supporting Israel mean supporting whatever Israel wants? Regardless of the unintended consequences of those wants being actualised, or ignoring the fact that what israel wants might not be in the best interest of..uh..Israel.

f*ck it, just skimming this fucking idiotic topic is enough to make me want to take a shower in a complex run by nazis.

Only an idiot would suggest that going back to 1967 borders would hurt Israel.

We cannot just give Israel anything they want. They're such children. What they want is not necessarily whats best for them anyways.

And yea you're right__ I mean any thread that dares to challenge Obama's character is just like so fucking stupid that it makes my head hurt too.

It's just so much easier when we see the world exactly how it is. I feel so enlightened now that you've taught me. And I know I'm better than anyone that would disagree with anything I just said.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0I6hgf9 ... page#t=11s

[Phatscotty]

Now now, Obama supporters know all about judging someone as racist based on what they said in the 80's. Just ask all the people who attacked Ron Paul in the racist newsletter from the 80's threads.