# Morgan Freeman calls Herman Cain a racist



## billc (Sep 23, 2011)

In this little video clip Morgan freeman calls the tea partymembers racists because they want to kick obama out after only one term.  He says it is because he is a black guy.  Well, as a tea party supporter myself, I will speak for the tea partiers and say that it is Obamas policies on healthcare, taxes, spending, corruption, immigration and foreign policy that makes me and them want him to only serve one term.  His race has nothing to do with it.  Someone might want to tell Morgan freeman that one of the favorite candidates of the tea party is Herman Cain, a black guy, and the tea party would gladly put Herman Cain into office within minutes of Obama vacating that office, if not seconds...I also think that Herman cain is a member of the tea party and so...Morgan Freeman is calling him a racist.

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/hollywoodland/2011/09/23/morgan-freeman-calls-tea-party-racist/

Herman Cain and the tea party:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...esidential-live-straw-poll-at-phoenix-summit/

Morgan freeman might want to discuss racism and the democrat party with Alfonso Rachel, another tea party member...


----------



## Steve (Sep 23, 2011)

It's not because he's black.  It's because he's a democrat.


----------



## billc (Sep 23, 2011)

Hmmm...are these tea party members racists as well?

http://biggovernment.com/bhysen/2011/08/07/black-tea-party-protests-naacp-annual-convention/


----------



## billc (Sep 23, 2011)

To be a little bit more accurate, it is because he is a far left, democrat who has all the wrong policies.  But thanks for the thought Steve Bjj, at least you understand it isn't about race.


----------



## Steve (Sep 23, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Hmmm...are these tea party members racists as well?
> 
> http://biggovernment.com/bhysen/2011/08/07/black-tea-party-protests-naacp-annual-convention/


While confident that some of you guys are racists, it's pretty clear that you don't like Obama because he's a Democrat.  

I wonder, though... it seems like you're expecting people here to try and explain to you why Morgan Freeman said something.  Only person who can tell you what he's got in mind is him.  Maybe you should send him (or his agent/publicist/pr firm) an email.


----------



## Steve (Sep 23, 2011)

billcihak said:


> To be a little bit more accurate, it is because he is a far left, democrat who has all the wrong policies.  But thanks for the thought Steve Bjj, at least you understand it isn't about race.


Yeah, well, that's the funny thing about political opinions, but sure.  I get that it's not racial... at least, not for most.  I'm sure there are some die hard bigots out there unwilling to vote for a black dude, but I can't imagine there are many.


----------



## elder999 (Sep 23, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Hmmm...are these tea party members racists as well?
> 
> http://biggovernment.com/bhysen/2011/08/07/black-tea-party-protests-naacp-annual-convention/



Hard to tell from that picture, so probably not as racist as these apparently are:


----------



## WC_lun (Sep 23, 2011)

It is just more of the trend.  If someone from the left says/does something stupid it is posted asap in an attempt to show how stupid the left is or to justify bad behavior from the right.  Morgan Freeman said something you don't agree with.  He doesn't make policy, running for office, or in politics, so why exactly is it something we need to know?

Obama has shown he is far left only if you are from the fringe far right.  Don't believe it?  Go talk to some true far left people.  You'll see they have almost as much issue with him as the far right, because he is not implementing a far left agenda.  In fact, much of the legislation many from the right says they have issue with, contain many things originally proposed by Republicans.  That tends to make Obama more centrist.  Face it, most of the problem the right has with him is he isn't thier guy.


----------



## Empty Hands (Sep 23, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Well, as a tea party supporter myself, I will speak for the tea partiers and say that it is Obamas policies on healthcare, taxes, spending, corruption, *immigration* and foreign policy that makes me and them want him to only serve one term.



Highlighting one item, you clearly have no idea what Obama's actual policies are.  "The Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency expects to deport about  400,000 people this fiscal year, nearly 10 percent above the Bush  administration's 2008 total and 25 percent more than were deported in  2007. The pace of company audits has roughly quadrupled since President George W. Bush's final year in office." LINK

So it sounds like not only do you have no idea what Obama's policies are, you have no interest in finding out.  The strawman in your head is convenient enough.

Since you aren't interested in the actual policies, what is your reason?  This right here is the very reason the motives of the tea party and other conservatives are suspect.  They aren't based on fact.


----------



## MaxiMe (Sep 23, 2011)

Empty Hands said:


> you clearly have no idea what Obama's actual policies are.
> They aren't based on fact.


Yup ya got me on that one, I sure don't have a clue ( I really don't think he does either). He keeps saying "let me be clear" he would'nt have to say that if he'd just post it on the net and give us time to read it before it's acted upon.


----------



## billc (Sep 23, 2011)

Hmmm...

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/08/dream-act-students-cheer-obamas-immigration-enforcement-policy.html




> The news that the Obama administration was planning to halt virtually all deportations of Dream Act students and possibly their families  drew cheers and applause from several students and immigrant rights activists who gathered at the downtown Los Angeles office of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles."This is huge," said Angelica Salas, executive director of the coalition, which has long lobbied for the measures announced Thursday. "This is wonderful for all the families who are currently facing deportation."​



http://www.miamiimmigrationlawyersblog.com/2011/08/obama-administration-halting-d.html



> The Obama administration announced today that it will begin reviewing the case files of the estimated 300,000 illegal immigrants in deportation proceedings to determine which individuals should be released from custody and possibly allowed to obtain work authorization. The administration said the move is an attempt to concentrate resources on criminal aliens who pose a high risk to the country and national security.
> The U.S. Department of Homeland Security will also begin prioritizing its enforcement procedures to ensure "low-priority" illegal immigrants, those who pose no public safety risk, or who likely came to the country unlawfully only to work, do not enter the deportation process in the first place.



And his ILLEGAL immigration policies are what...?  I highlight the word ILLEGAL, because people who think that anyone against ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION is a racist always overlook the ILLEGAL part of ILLEGAL immigration.

Hmmm...300,000 non-violent ILLEGALS, plus all the students brought here ILLEGALLY, SHOULD PUT THE TOTAL AT ABOUT 400,OOO,  you were saying empty hands?


----------



## Twin Fist (Sep 23, 2011)

so a black guy is taking up for another back guy and accusing anyone that isnt for the black guy of being racist, we....color me shocked

apparently for Mr Freeman, race is the first, last and only thing he considers.

one more actor i wont be spednign my money on.


----------



## billc (Sep 23, 2011)

Add to that Obamacare, his alienation of Israel and Britain, his love of increasing taxes and increasing spending and you have about all the reasons the tea party needs to want him gone and Herman Cain or any other republican in the office and none of that has anything to do with race.


----------



## billc (Sep 23, 2011)

You know, the people who invested in the dolphin movie out this week must be really annoyed with Morgan Freeman.  They pay him all that money to be in their film, and he goes out and intentionally insults the very people who one, like Morgan Freeman in general, or used to, and two are the specific target audience for a family movie like the dolphin movie.  If I was a producer I would be pretty irritated.


----------



## billc (Sep 23, 2011)

Oh, and his making fun of the people who want to put a fence on the border, you know, the border where the mexican drug dealers are hanging the disemboweled bodies of bloggers, and killing border agents with guns provided by the Obama administration thru operation Gun Runner...perhaps that is part of the ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION policy that some people object to...?  Hmmm...empty hands?


----------



## Monroe (Sep 23, 2011)

billcihak said:


> You know, the people who invested in the dolphin movie out this week must be really annoyed with Morgan Freeman.  They pay him all that money to be in their film, and he goes out and intentionally insults the very people who one, like Morgan Freeman in general, or used to, and two are the specific target audience for a family movie like the dolphin movie.  If I was a producer I would be pretty irritated.



Are you saying most of the people that would want to watch a family movie are republican?


----------



## billc (Sep 23, 2011)

Don't worry either Steve Bjj.  I don't think that all democrats supported the slavery, jim crow laws and civil rights abuses of the democrat parties history or it's current soft racism of denying African american citizens the chance of a good education by keeping them trapped in horrible inner city schools.  And I don't believe that all democrats were members of the Ku Klux Klan either.  It is interesting to note, the democrat group, the Ku Klux Klan, the real racist group, had and has no African American members, (except for Dave Chapelle's one character) but the tea party is full of African Americans....Hmmm...which political party has more of a history of racism at all levels...?


----------



## billc (Sep 23, 2011)

No, but there are a lot of people who are conservative, or republicans or tea party members who were just insulted by Morgan Freeman who won't take their families to see that movie.  I was going to take a relatives kid to see it tomorrow...now that isn't going to happen.  Why would you insult such a large portion of your potential audience, especially at a time when box office receipts are at an all time low?


----------



## hongkongfooey (Sep 23, 2011)

billcihak said:


> No, but there are a lot of people who are conservative, or republicans or tea party members who were just insulted by Morgan Freeman who won't take their families to see that movie.  I was going to take a relatives kid to see it tomorrow...now that isn't going to happen.  Why would you insult such a large portion of your potential audience, especially at a time when box office receipts are at an all time low?




I cannot believe the children that would like to see this movie would identify themselves as either a republican or democrat, or liberal or conservative. They don't give two squirts of warm pee about the tea party, Morgan Freeman or Herman Cain. They just want to see the movie. If the parents will deny their child something that makes them happy, then that says tons about the parents.  It does not matter whom is elected. Whether democrat, republican or tea party, you are still gonna get screwed by the politicos.


----------



## Omar B (Sep 23, 2011)

We give a damn what actors say now?  Next thing you know we'll be quoting musicians, painters and plumbers to make headlines.

I'm a musician and even I don't give a damn what my opinion in ... and that's me!


----------



## Steve (Sep 23, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Don't worry either Steve Bjj.  I don't think that all democrats supported the slavery, jim crow laws and civil rights abuses of the democrat parties history or it's current soft racism of denying African american citizens the chance of a good education by keeping them trapped in horrible inner city schools.  And I don't believe that all democrats were members of the Ku Klux Klan either.  It is interesting to note, the democrat group, the Ku Klux Klan, the real racist group, had and has no African American members, (except for Dave Chapelle's one character) but the tea party is full of African Americans....Hmmm...which political party has more of a history of racism at all levels...?


 I'm glad.  But for some  reason, you dont sound sincere.


----------



## billc (Sep 23, 2011)

Morgan Freeman is evidence that the smear machine of the democrats and their strategy, which was documented during the healthcare debate to smear the opponents of healthcare as racists to keep them too busy defending themselves, has moved onto the tea party and is permeating the easily duped, like hollywood actors, and Bill Maher.

If I take myself and two kids to the movie, that puts more money into the pockets of guys like Morgan freeman who will support people like obama.  That would be one reason to stay home.  Another reason, Morgan Freeman smeared me and the tea party, most importantly me.  Let's pretend you are an african american, or if you are an african american, just be yourself.  You go into a store and as you walk through the aisles the owner calls you the "N" word.  Would you then go and spend 40 bucks or more in that guys store?


----------



## hongkongfooey (Sep 24, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Morgan Freeman is evidence that the smear machine of the democrats and their strategy, which was documented during the healthcare debate to smear the opponents of healthcare as racists to keep them too busy defending themselves, has moved onto the tea party and is permeating the easily duped, like hollywood actors, and Bill Maher.
> 
> If I take myself and two kids to the movie, that puts more money into the pockets of guys like Morgan freeman who will support people like obama.  That would be one reason to stay home.  Another reason, Morgan Freeman smeared me and the tea party, most importantly me.  Let's pretend you are an african american, or if you are an african american, just be yourself.  You go into a store and as you walk through the aisles the owner calls you the "N" word.  Would you then go and spend 40 bucks or more in that guys store?



  Bill you take the musings of actors and politicians to heart too much. Why do you let this kind of thing get you so worked up? Actors pretend to be someone else for a living and politicians lie for a living. Everything that comes out of their mouths should be taken with a huge helping of salt. The democrat, republican, and tea party candidates are all in it for themselves only. They only want your vote and once they have it, you will be tossed to the side until next election cycle.


----------



## elder999 (Sep 24, 2011)

billcihak said:


> In this little video clip Morgan freeman calls the tea partymembers racists because they want to kick obama out after only one term. He says it is because he is a black guy. Well, as a tea party supporter myself, I will speak for the tea partiers and say that it is Obamas policies on healthcare, taxes, spending, corruption, immigration and foreign policy that makes me and them want him to only serve one term. His race has nothing to do with it. Someone might want to tell Morgan freeman that one of the favorite candidates of the tea party is Herman Cain, a black guy, and the tea party would gladly put Herman Cain into office within minutes of Obama vacating that office, if not seconds...I also think that Herman cain is a member of the tea party and so...Morgan Freeman is calling him a racist.
> 
> http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/hollywoodland/2011/09/23/morgan-freeman-calls-tea-party-racist/
> 
> ...



1) He called the "Tea Party" racist, *not* "Herman Cain."

2) If he had, are you implying then that blacks cannot be racist? Or that blacks cannot be racist against their own "race?" Because you'd be wrong.

3) Continuing with the black racist theme, are you implying that because there are black people who call themselves "Tea Party" members, the Tea Party itself cannot be racist? Or are you implying that because they don't exclude black people, _none_ of their membership can be racist?

Whatever your position on items #2&3, _please note the *inherent* racism implied in taking *any* position on them, or even bringing it up._ (Please also take note of how firmly my tongue is inserted in my cheek...:lfao: )

Note: if you need to keep bringing up how many "black friends" you have, you just might be a racist. :lfao:

Not tongue in cheek at all, there, really-I mean it. _Oh, I can't be racist; I have sooo many "black friends."_ Just what your posts of "black tea partyers" remind me of. Sorry. 

No, I'm not "sorry" at all.....:lfao:

Oh, and does anyone really care what an actor/former Air Force Mechanic/former drug addict has to say? Except, of course, that he can say it with such _gravitas?_:lfao:


----------



## billc (Sep 25, 2011)

Herman Cain, winner of the Florida straw poll, responds to Morgan Freeman...

http://www.breitbart.tv/florida-straw-poll-winner-herman-cain-calls-out-morgan-freeman-over-tea-party-racism-charge/

And here is an article on Cains win of the florida straw poll:

http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/09/25/for-tea-party-followers-cain-win-is-hardly-a-surprise/



> This observation is illustrated in Mr. Cain&#8217;s continually strong Gallup positive intensity scores. The [URL="http://www.gallup.com/poll/election.aspx"]latest measure





> shows Mr. Cain tied with Texas Governor Rick Perry at the top of the heap. The reason Mr. Cain is doing well right now is because his message is one that is resonating with voters. He has one intangible quality that many of the Republican candidates sorely lack: authenticity.


[/URL]


----------



## Carol (Sep 25, 2011)

Cain's got moxie. 

At its core though, I agree with Mr. Freeman's criticism.  I'm not a particular fan of the President, but if President Obama is truly this terrible, horrible, no good, very bad President then there's no reason or excuse for the racial commentary.  Racial comments aren't the focus of tea-party gatherings that I have seen, but there doesn't see much effort to distance the on-topic messages from the personal attacks if/when they occur.    I find it interesting that the local tea party groups were guaranteed the eyes of the President (he visited to speak at our high school), the signs were all on-topic and civil. Critical, but civil. There was no vitriol in the crowd, you had conservatives standing next to Obama supporters and everyone was peaceful.  NH politics as its best...active, serious, but respectful.  I'd open my door to just about any of those folks at any time.

But it seems to me that when a media audience isn't guaranteed, criticisms turn to personal attacks and outrageous statements, perhaps in the hopes for attention.  No wants to distance themselves. They are too afraid to reduce their clout by having fewer bodies under their tent.  A personal attack is OK as long as its the other side. If the barre to entry is that low, then that's not a group that I would stand with.


----------



## billc (Sep 25, 2011)

More on Herman Cain:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20101494-503544.html



> Republican presidential hopeful Herman Cain, the keynote speaker at the event, humorously batted back what he said were attempts to discredit the Tea Party movement and made frequent jabs at Washington in his remarks."You see, the liberals, the left, the Democrats, they have stooped to a new low," Cain said. "Trying to intimidate people into not coming out to rallies like this.""They call me racist - I haven't figured that one out yet," the African American business executive continued to titters. "Uncle Tom, sellout, Oreo, the list goes on.""How about Mr. President?" an audience member shouted.Cain grinned widely.The afternoon event had the feel of a county fair with a political twist. There were booths manned by Tea Party-affiliated groups, local Republican candidates and talk radio stations, vendors hawking Ronald Reagan buttons, booze flowing aplenty -- even a recitation of the Declaration of Independence by three children, the so-called "Trustees of Liberty."​


----------



## Twin Fist (Sep 25, 2011)

Carol,
I have been to several tea party events, and there were no racist there, no signs with racial slogans, nothing refferencing the presidents race at all.

I dont know ANYONE that objects to the president because of his race, but everyone i know objects to his policies.

and i live in the supposed bastion of racial hatred, Texas.

this story is nothing but an attempt to smear people into silence by throwing the most powerful ridicule bomb they got, the race card





Carol said:


> Cain's got moxie.
> 
> At its core though, I agree with Mr. Freeman's criticism.  I'm not a particular fan of the President, but if President Obama is truly this terrible, horrible, no good, very bad President then there's no reason or excuse for the racial commentary.  Racial comments aren't the focus of tea-party gatherings that I have seen, but there doesn't see much effort to distance the on-topic messages from the personal attacks if/when they occur.    I find it interesting that the local tea party groups were guaranteed the eyes of the President (he visited to speak at our high school), the signs were all on-topic and civil. Critical, but civil. There was no vitriol in the crowd, you had conservatives standing next to Obama supporters and everyone was peaceful.  NH politics as its best...active, serious, but respectful.  I'd open my door to just about any of those folks at any time.
> 
> But it seems to me that when a media audience isn't guaranteed, criticisms turn to personal attacks and outrageous statements, perhaps in the hopes for attention.  No wants to distance themselves. They are too afraid to reduce their clout by having fewer bodies under their tent.  A personal attack is OK as long as its the other side. If the barre to entry is that low, then that's not a group that I would stand with.


----------



## billc (Sep 25, 2011)

Great post twin fist, you are absolutely correct in your observation.  It is the democrat strategy to smear the tea party as racists in order to keep them from effectively influencing the next election.  It is a strategy that has worked on Morgan Freeman and several people here on the study.  Calling normal americans "racist" is a cheap way to intimidate good people.


----------



## Carol (Sep 25, 2011)

Twin Fist said:


> Carol,
> I have been to several tea party events, and there were no racist there, no signs with racial slogans, nothing refferencing the presidents race at all.
> 
> I dont know ANYONE that objects to the president because of his race, but everyone i know objects to his policies.
> ...





Mmmm....yes, that's why 3 years were spent talking about where President Obama was born.  That was a debate of which Obama policy exactly?  The Maine Tea Party referring to a "Moochelle" bumper sticker?  Ah, that was just a typo right?  I mean, that couldn't have been a personal attack.    And then there was the guy at the Concord tea party rally last summer, one Mr. Ryan Murdough tried for for New Hampshire's 8th district.  He wanted to keep New Hampshire white and states white folks need their own homeland (but he says he's not racist). 

http://www.concordmonitor.com/artic...?SESS2eb05ff9af4f9b440b49f1bbe4887347=gsearch
http://themaineteaparty.com/photo/moochelle-bumper?context=user


----------



## billc (Sep 25, 2011)

Carol, they also questioned John McCain because he was born in the Panama canal zone, and he quickly ended the controversy by showing the proper documents.  "Moochelle" obama, a personal attack, sure, but not racist.  There are individual nut jobs in every organized movement, but I will tell you that racism is not what the tea party is about.  People are trying to smear the tea party members because they are being effective in influencing republican politics and directing the political conversation toward excessive taxation and excessive spending.  There are also organized campaigns to send people to tea party events with racist signs to get them in front of any camera they can find.  Big Don had a link to one specific guy who called for volunteers to do it.  If you want to mention the one guy in New Hampshire you would also have to look at the nut job hangers on to all the political parties.  The democrats have way more than one or two nutty hangers on and the President himself has at least three friends who are either terrorist bombers or supporters, not to mention outright racists.

The tea party is a movement that wants to get government under control, race as an issue is a weapon being used against the tea party.


----------



## billc (Sep 25, 2011)

As to the guy in New Hampshire:

from wikipedia



> [h=2]Political activities[/h]New Hampshire state party chairman Ryan Murdough ran in the Republican Party of New Hampshireprimary for a seat representing the Eighth District of the Grafton County delegation to the New Hampshire House of Representatives,[SUP][13][/SUP] but he was refused support by the Republican party, which called him a "despicable racist".[SUP][14][/SUP] He placed fifth out of five candidates in the Republican primary, garnering 296 votes (11%).[SUP][15][/SUP] Murdough is now the National Political Director for the National Socialist American Labor Party which espouses Nazi beliefs.[SUP][16][/SUP]



As a socialist he would be more at home on the democrat ticket, especially with his racist views.


----------



## Twin Fist (Sep 25, 2011)

birthplace isnt racial

calling his wife a cow isnt racial

personal attacks? sure, but not racial

HUGE difference

are there racist in the tea party? i am sure there are

are there racists in the democratic party? i KNOW there are. ROBERT BYRD sat in congress for 125 years or something, and he was a friggin GRAND WIZARD in the actual klan

but niether is founded on racism, and that is the claim against the teat party types

it simply doesnt hold water



Carol said:


> Mmmm....yes, that's why 3 years were spent talking about where President Obama was born.  That was a debate of which Obama policy exactly?  The Maine Tea Party referring to a "Moochelle" bumper sticker?  Ah, that was just a typo right?  I mean, that couldn't have been a personal attack.    And then there was the guy at the Concord tea party rally last summer, one Mr. Ryan Murdough tried for for New Hampshire's 8th district.  He wanted to keep New Hampshire white and states white folks need their own homeland (but he says he's not racist).
> 
> http://www.concordmonitor.com/artic...?SESS2eb05ff9af4f9b440b49f1bbe4887347=gsearch
> http://themaineteaparty.com/photo/moochelle-bumper?context=user


----------



## Carol (Sep 25, 2011)

billcihak said:


> As to the guy in New Hampshire:
> 
> from wikipedia
> 
> ...



I'm thinking he'd be more ad home on Mars, or maybe one of those island-countries where he live without being troubled by people that don't look like him.


----------



## billc (Sep 25, 2011)

Just for reference, here is an article on John McCain's birth issue:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/01/AR2008050103224.html

The headline:



> [h=1]McCain's Birth Abroad Stirs Legal Debate[/h]





> But Sarah H. Duggin, an associate law professor at Catholic University who has studied the "natural born" issue in detail, said the question is "not so simple." While she said McCain would probably prevail in a determined legal challenge to his eligibility to be president, she added that the matter can be fully resolved only by a constitutional amendment or a Supreme Court decision.
> "The Constitution is ambiguous," Duggin said. "The McCain side has some really good arguments, but ultimately there has never been any real resolution of this issue. Congress cannot legislatively change the meaning of the Constitution."


----------



## Carol (Sep 25, 2011)

Twin Fist said:


> birthplace isnt racial
> 
> calling his wife a cow isnt racial
> 
> ...



Sure.  I don't for a minute think the Tea Party is founded on racism.  Nor do I think they are defined by the fringe wackos, but if/when it is the fringe wackos that get attention, thats when the distortion starts.  You've been to gatherings, they are open to everyone that wants to come by...even people with differing ideas and unfortunately even the nutcases that want to mooch off the party's organizational efforts.   Why go through all the trouble to get your own group together when you know someone else will be bringing 100 politically active voters to the Capitol building tomorrow night?  If the tea party wants the political clout of being a election player, I think the tea party should take the path of sticking to the issues, avoiding personal attacks, and distancing themselves from nutjobs that appear, preferably before they get on a ballot.


----------



## billc (Sep 25, 2011)

They do all of those things and have even had teams out with signs that say "He isn't a tea party member," which they hold next to the people who come to the tea party and hold up the racist stuff to get on camera.  But there is only so much you can do in a large gathering and where the cameras from news organizations actively seek out the nutjobs.


----------



## billc (Sep 25, 2011)

Here is a video of a tea party member confronting a racist infiltrating the tea party...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYfmShJe5MA

and here is another video of someone trying to get on camera to smear Rand Paul and the tea party.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvcIzpyzAUs&feature=related

on the one below, the non-tea party member breaks his cover at the 2:34 mark

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8I3FbC_hq8&feature=related


----------



## Carol (Sep 25, 2011)

billcihak said:


> They do all of those things and have even had teams out with signs that say "He isn't a tea party member," which they hold next to the people who come to the tea party and hold up the racist stuff to get on camera.  But there is only so much you can do in a large gathering and where the cameras from news organizations actively seek out the nutjobs.



Thats at least something to show that dreck ain't welcome here.  Doesn't have to be limited to racist stuff either, could be the nutjobs like the guy who made it to the NH state house (before the tea party existed) with twisted libertarian views that included killing cops if they get out of line (his tenure didn't last long).   The guy is still around, and while he seems to have no interest in the Tea Party, I'd wager that the Tea Party wouldn't be fond of having him on board either.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 26, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Add to that Obamacare, *his alienation of *Israel and *Britain*, his love of increasing taxes and increasing spending and you have about all the reasons the tea party needs to want him gone and Herman Cain or any other republican in the office and none of that has anything to do with race.



We've been alienated? I think someone forgot to tell us.


----------



## granfire (Sep 26, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> We've been alienated? I think someone forgot to tell us.



billi just did.
Take notes now! You have been alienated! Sheesh...Brits!


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 26, 2011)

:chuckles: I'm not sure that 'alienated' is the right word, BillC. There has certainly been a cooling of relations at some levels and a certain amount of offence taken (by Englishmen like me) at the diplomatic gaffes and missteps that have been made by President Obama's staff. But 'alienation' is too strong a term. 

Something to bear in mind is that the pivot of our diplomatic relations with the world is Her Majesty; that means that ebbs and flows within the international community are ameliorated by her abillty to 'ride out' an unwelcome or somewhat fumblefooted foreign administration if it is so required.

I confess that I do fear that her successor may not be such a valuable servant of their people as she has been and we may lose some of that 'smoothness' and continuity that she has given us as a nation.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 26, 2011)

Sukerkin said:


> :chuckles: I'm not sure that 'alienated' is the right word, BillC. There has certainly been a cooling of relations at some levels and a certain amount of offence taken (by Englishmen like me) at the diplomatic gaffes and missteps that have been made by President Obama's staff. But 'alienation' is too strong a term.
> 
> Something to bear in mind is that the pivot of our diplomatic relations with the world is Her Majesty; that means that ebbs and flows within the international community are ameliorated by her abillty to 'ride out' an unwelcome or somewhat fumblefooted foreign administration if it is so required.
> 
> I confess that I do fear that her successor may not be such a valuable servant of their people as she has been and we may lose some of that 'smoothness' and continuity that she has given us as a nation.



William is a charming young man who will take over from granny and do as good a job lol! charlie will be miffed I'm sure but tough!

Relations were good with Reagan because we thought he was funny as we did with Bush Jnr, both not to be taken seriously but we've all been caught up in our own problems in the recession to really worry about what America thinks of us...if we ever did anyway... which we didn't really lol. What goes on at political levels is a game, what goes on between real people isn't and the good relations between Americans and the British has always remained on the same friendly level, doubtful any politician can change that so no, Obama hasn't alienated us, he's just a politician, right wing as all American politicians are... waits for shrieks of indignation from Bilcihak.


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 26, 2011)

I am willing to be convinced about Prince William, Tez; I'm not counting him out yet and he is being groomed the right way {lord knows he has a good role-model in his grandmother :nods:}.  I was just expressing the fear, as I said, that Queen Elizabeth II has served us royaly well {yeah, monarchy based pun attack! } and will leave some very big footsteps to follow.

As to the Wing of American politics, aye, couldn't agree more; I've said many times it is comprised of the Right and the Really Far Right.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 26, 2011)

Sukerkin said:


> I am willing to be convinced about Prince William, Tez; I'm not counting him out yet and he is being groomed the right way {lord knows he has a good role-model in his grandmother :nods:}. I was just expressing the fear, as I said, that Queen Elizabeth II has served us royaly well {yeah, monarchy based pun attack! } and will leave some very big footsteps to follow.
> 
> As to the Wing of American politics, aye, couldn't agree more; I've said many times it is comprised of the Right and the Really Far Right.



He's RAF for goodness sake OF COURSE he'll be good! 

I've been down to Cornwall for a couple of weeks, spent a very convivial evening in a pub with two Canadians here on holiday, interesting views on America lol!


----------



## CanuckMA (Sep 26, 2011)

We do represent the civilized part of NA.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 26, 2011)

CanuckMA said:


> We do represent the civilized part of NA.



Just what they said! The chap had been in the Canadian Air Force then worked for a military contractor who supplied parts for the RAF so had been to many places we knew. When people have travelled and worked in other countries their minds tend to be far more open and educated as well.


----------



## yorkshirelad (Sep 26, 2011)

stevebjj said:


> Yeah, well, that's the funny thing about political opinions, but sure. I get that it's not racial... at least, not for most. I'm sure there are some die hard bigots out there unwilling to vote for a black dude, but I can't imagine there are many.



Funny thing is Steve, before Obama was a nominee, only a small portion of African Americans voted in General Elections. When obama became the nominee, they voted in droves. Are those people racist, because they only came out to vote for an African American?


----------



## Twin Fist (Sep 26, 2011)

yes



yorkshirelad said:


> Funny thing is Steve, before Obama was a nominee, only a small portion of African Americans voted in General Elections. When obama became the nominee, they voted in droves. Are those people racist, because they only came out to vote for an African American?


----------



## hongkongfooey (Sep 26, 2011)

Sukerkin said:


> :
> 
> 
> I confess that I do fear that her successor may not be such a valuable servant of their people as she has been and we may lose some of that 'smoothness' and continuity that she has given us as a nation.



Sukerkin,

Are you saying Charles lacks the grace of his momma?


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 26, 2011)

:grins:  I am not one of those that holds a low opinion of Prince Charles.  I like the fact that, like his father, he is not afraid to have his say, even if others erroneously believe he should not.

But, as Tez alluded to earlier, it is possible that he will not inherit the throne when the sad time comes that Queen Elizabeth II must leave us.  It may well pass to his son to pick up that burden.

Leaving that to one side tho', what I was saying, in all seriousness, is that Elizabeth is a tough act to follow.  Since the Second World War, she has served us very well as our monarch, placing her people before herself, just as the first Elizabeth did so many centuries ago.  I pray that we are as lucky again with her successor but am not sure that a 'media age' monarch will carry quite the same weight and gravitas.


----------



## hongkongfooey (Sep 26, 2011)

Sukerkin said:


> :grins:  I am not one of those that holds a low opinion of Prince Charles.  I like the fact that, like his father, he is not afraid to have his say, even if others erroneously believe he should not.
> 
> But, as Tez alluded to earlier, it is possible that he will not inherit the throne when the sad time comes that Queen Elizabeth II must leave us.  It may well pass to his son to pick up that burden.
> 
> Leaving that to one side tho', what I was saying, in all seriousness, is that Elizabeth is a tough act to follow.  Since the Second World War, she has served us very well as our monarch, placing her people before herself, just as the first Elizabeth did so many centuries ago.  I pray that we are as lucky again with her successor but am not sure that a 'media age' monarch will carry quite the same weight and gravitas.



I have to agree Queen Elizabeth is a classy lady, just as Diana was.


----------



## Twin Fist (Sep 26, 2011)

agreed


----------



## Carol (Sep 26, 2011)

Sukerkin said:


> :grins:  I am not one of those that holds a low opinion of Prince Charles.  I like the fact that, like his father, he is not afraid to have his say, even if others erroneously believe he should not.
> 
> But, as Tez alluded to earlier, it is possible that he will not inherit the throne when the sad time comes that Queen Elizabeth II must leave us.  It may well pass to his son to pick up that burden.
> 
> Leaving that to one side tho', what I was saying, in all seriousness, is that Elizabeth is a tough act to follow.  Since the Second World War, she has served us very well as our monarch, placing her people before herself, just as the first Elizabeth did so many centuries ago.  I pray that we are as lucky again with her successor but am not sure that a 'media age' monarch will carry quite the same weight and gravitas.



A tough act to follow, and a difficult position to inherit.  But at the same time, the Monarchy's future looks bright.  If it is William, then the Commonwealth will potentially see another long reign...bringing a remarkable consistency to an inconsistent world.  If it is Charles, then the Commonwealth benefits from his age and experience and William and Catherine have a chance to start their family with perhaps a teensy bit more privacy.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 27, 2011)

I think a lot of non Commonwealth people think the Monarchy is either useless or at least outdated but it's actually a sort of oil/grease that eases diplomatic actions between our country and others even those that aren't part of the Commonwealth. A lot of what the Queen does is done out of sight and sound of the political media so it doesn't seem as if she does much other than launch ships and wave nicely. However she can ease tensions between the political heads of state and smooth ruffled feathers that no other agency can. Her work is sadly very under valued and under estimated. A call from the Queen is never turned down even if it's only taken in politeness to start with and while she doesn't interfere with the politics, a tactful suggestion from her can make a huge difference to how countries approach each other. It may be something as simple as a visit from a Royal or an invite to Buck House but it smooths the trouibled international waters. Even the Presidents of the USA, China and Russia aren't adverse to be seen staying with the Queen! Her contacts are varied and wide ranging, she's related to most of the Royals in the rest of the world, she's respected by the Arab Royal Families who actually run their countries as well as the heads of State of the Commonwealth countries. 
In this country the police, armed forces, civil service all take their oath of allegiance to her not the prevailing government, it's a check in their power if it;s ever needed.


----------



## granfire (Sep 27, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> I think a lot of non Commonwealth people think the Monarchy is either useless or at least outdated but it's actually a sort of oil/grease that eases diplomatic actions between our country and others even those that aren't part of the Commonwealth. A lot of what the Queen does is done out of sight and sound of the political media so it doesn't seem as if she does much other than launch ships and wave nicely. However she can ease tensions between the political heads of state and smooth ruffled feathers that no other agency can. Her work is sadly very under valued and under estimated. A call from the Queen is never turned down even if it's only taken in politeness to start with and while she doesn't interfere with the politics, a tactful suggestion from her can make a huge difference to how countries approach each other. It may be something as simple as a visit from a Royal or an invite to Buck House but it smooths the trouibled international waters. Even the Presidents of the USA, China and Russia aren't adverse to be seen staying with the Queen! Her contacts are varied and wide ranging, she's related to most of the Royals in the rest of the world, she's respected by the Arab Royal Families who actually run their countries as well as the heads of State of the Commonwealth countries.
> In this country the police, armed forces, civil service all take their oath of allegiance to her not the prevailing government, it's a check in their power if it;s ever needed.



Diplomacy happens behind closed doors.
(and being kin to half of Europe's heads of state does not hurt either) 

I saw a short documentary on what her day looks like. Her book is full! (but it was kind of odd when she was basically standing in the middle of a big room, surrounded by a handful of officers....I suppose it was a rather short meeting, so they did not sit down.....)

I think it helps tremendously when head of state and head of government are not identical.

(yeah, I am a huge fan of the old gal! She is just that awesome. I mean, who else can instill discomfort in a person with the mere mentioning of 'the Queen is not amused'!!!)


----------



## billc (Sep 27, 2011)

I'm sorry, but you guys still have a monarchy, it just seems so quaint.  Perhaps one day Britain will move into the modern age and ditch the royals.  Not that I mind your Queen, she is a very tough individual, but still, a Monarchy?


----------



## mook jong man (Sep 27, 2011)

billcihak said:


> I'm sorry, but you guys still have a monarchy, it just seems so quaint.  Perhaps one day Britain will move into the modern age and ditch the royals.  Not that I mind your Queen, she is a very tough individual, but still, a Monarchy?


She is not only their Queen , she is ours as well , and we like it just the way it is thank you very much.


----------



## granfire (Sep 27, 2011)

billcihak said:


> I'm sorry, but you guys still have a monarchy, it just seems so quaint.  Perhaps one day Britain will move into the modern age and ditch the royals.  Not that I mind your Queen, she is a very tough individual, but still, a Monarchy?



LOL


You are so silly!

Aside from being a constant in the diplomatic circus, the royals are also a major economical factor.
And their upkeep is rather minimal when one considers the work load they shoulder and the impact they have.

(I think it was in the low double digit _millions_ a year, astonishing considering security etc...)


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 28, 2011)

billcihak said:


> I'm sorry, but you guys still have a monarchy, it just seems so quaint. Perhaps one day Britain will move into the modern age and ditch the royals. Not that I mind your Queen, she is a very tough individual, but still, a Monarchy?



I see that despite what we've posted you have understood nothing and still take your view as being the correct one. We had a time without a monarchy and we didn't like it so we put it back. I think you need to educate yourself on British and European history before you comment so much on things you don't actually know anything about. It's all about checks and balances, that's why we have a monarchy as do other countries, it works fine and is far from being 'quaint'


----------



## elder999 (Sep 28, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> *you comment so much on things you don't actually know anything about*.


.


----------



## Twin Fist (Sep 28, 2011)

he is allowed to have an opinion you know.



Tez3 said:


> I see that despite what we've posted you have understood nothing and still take your view as being the correct one. We had a time without a monarchy and we didn't like it so we put it back. I think you need to educate yourself on British and European history before you comment so much on things you don't actually know anything about. It's all about checks and balances, that's why we have a monarchy as do other countries, it works fine and is far from being 'quaint'


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 28, 2011)

Crown + Lords + Commons = Continuity + Stability - Extremism.

A simple and very successful equation that has served us very well for many centuries. 

The Americans decided they didn't want a monarchy guiding their steps quite early on; a choice that they have to live with until such time as they come to their senses . 

Seriously, it's 'your' choice as a nation and tho I think it is the wrong one as it allows exteme bipartisanship to flower (that opinion being borne out every day by the political bickering in these pages) it was the path you elected (yeah, politics pun attack !) to take. We tried it both ways (ooh er nurse :lol:!) and found it more preferable to have a parliamentary democracy rather than republicanism. That is our choice and, as I said, its worked pretty well. The greatest flaw is that at present it is the personal authority of the Queen herself that is holding sway; whether the 'office' will in future retain it's place in the system of checks and balances is yet to be seen. I hope that it does.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 28, 2011)

Of course he's allowed to have an opinion but making statements that aren't true isn't expressing an opinion is it?


----------



## Twin Fist (Sep 28, 2011)

generally no, unless it is an honest mistake


----------

