:thumb: Nothing gives me a bigger laugh than Westsider claiming everyone else is biased. It's like he doesn't realize he's the most biased poster on this board. :lol:

You're entitled to your view.

I didn't take it that way at all. I thought the point was that one would think that if the country had gotten to the point that they'd elect a black president, that the issues of black people/fathers/mothers would be significantly better than in yesteryear. However, it's just not so. Come on west, not everything is a dart at Obama.

 

 

If they were smart they would have pointed out that even the president grew up that way. I understand exactly what Westsider is saying. Why wouldn't they use any year? What are they trying to accomplish by mentioning Obama at all?

If they were smart they would have pointed out that even the president grew up that way. I understand exactly what Westsider is saying. Why wouldn't they use any year? What are they trying to accomplish by mentioning Obama at all?

I'm not sure how you get that it's a shot at Obama. Paranoia at it's peak.

I'm not sure how you get that it's a shot at Obama. Paranoia at it's peak.

I don't see it as paranoia at all. The far right has mobilized forces against Obama and taken shots (even those of a personal nature) at him from day one.

 

The point, regardless of what one thinks about it, could have been made without referring to Obama. It's simply another par for the course.

I'm not sure how you get that it's a shot at Obama. Paranoia at it's peak.

 

Why mention him then?

I don't see it as paranoia at all. The far right has mobilized forces against Obama and taken shots at him from day one. It's simply another par for the course.

Ok, if we could magically resurrect Martin Luther King, briefly tell him we had a black president, do you not think that he'd assume by that alone that the condition of the black man/black family would be different than it is today?

 

That's what I got out of that when I read it. I never once thought it was a shot at Obama. And I don't like Obama. So, FWIW, I think it was simply addressing the state of things. Would the comment have made sense had it been made when W was in office? Would have made no sense whatsoever.

Ok, if we could magically resurrect Martin Luther King, briefly tell him we had a black president, do you not think that he'd assume by that alone that the condition of the black man/black family would be different than it is today?

 

That's what I got out of that when I read it. I never once thought it was a shot at Obama. And I don't like Obama. So, FWIW, I think it was simply addressing the state of things. Would the comment have made sense had it been made when W was in office? Would have made no sense whatsoever.

 

:thumb: You'll have better luck getting through to a brick wall though.

I don't see it as paranoia at all. The far right has mobilized forces against Obama and taken shots (even those of a personal nature) at him from day one.

 

The point, regardless of what one thinks about it, could have been made without referring to Obama. It's simply another par for the course.

Ironic considering the cliams being made against Bachman in this thread. And no, I don't think the point is made without mention the fact that black man is President.

 

Why mention him then?

Because it goes to the heart of the point. We as a country have evolved from a time when a black man was property to one being the President. Yet the family structure in the black community has declined in over the same time period. Good grief you people reading too much into this. Not everything is a shot at the President. It boogles my mind how anyone can make that leap.

Ok, if we could magically resurrect Martin Luther King, briefly tell him we had a black president, do you not think that he'd assume by that alone that the condition of the black man/black family would be different than it is today?

 

That's what I got out of that when I read it. I never once thought it was a shot at Obama. And I don't like Obama. So, FWIW, I think it was simply addressing the state of things. Would the comment have made sense had it been made when W was in office? Would have made no sense whatsoever.

 

 

It makes sense without mentioning Obama or Bush. The point is the same. The point doesn't change just because Obama is the president. The numbers are still the same are they not?

I didn't take it that way at all. I thought the point was that one would think that if the country had gotten to the point that they'd elect a black president, that the issues of black people/fathers/mothers would be significantly better than in yesteryear. However, it's just not so. Come on west, not everything is a dart at Obama.

 

I too felt it was an effective way to illustrate the seriousness of the problem. I didn't see it as a shot at Obama since he has no control over it.

It makes sense without mentioning Obama or Bush. The point is the same. The point doesn't change just because Obama is the president. The numbers are still the same are they not?

If Bush was black yes. He ain't.

Ok, if we could magically resurrect Martin Luther King, briefly tell him we had a black president, do you not think that he'd assume by that alone that the condition of the black man/black family would be different than it is today?

It is, in some respects, especially on the political front.

 

I never once thought it was a shot at Obama. And I don't like Obama. So, FWIW, I think it was simply addressing the state of things. Would the comment have made sense had it been made when W was in office? Would have made no sense whatsoever.

They could have easily used another reference point ... instead, they alluded to Obama, which is to be expected.

:thumb: You'll have better luck getting through to a brick wall though.

Hello, Mr. Pot.

Ironic considering the cliams being made against Bachman in this thread. And no, I don't think the point is made without mention the fact that black man is President.

 

Because it goes to the heart of the point. We as a country have evolved from a time when a black man was property to one being the President. Yet the family structure in the black community has declined in over the same time period. Good grief you people reading too much into this. Not everything is a shot at the President. It boogles my mind how anyone can make that leap.

 

According to the study there has never been structure in the black community. Even the black president was raised in a single parent home.

Ironic considering the cliams being made against Bachman in this thread.

You act as if Bachmann's history of out-there statements is irrelevant.

 

We as a country have evolved from a time when a black man was property to one being the President. Yet the family structure in the black community has declined in over the same time period.

No argument with those two points.

 

Good grief you people reading too much into this. Not everything is a shot at the President. It boogles my mind how anyone can make that leap.

It's not hard to see, given the way the right has mobilized against him from the outset.