Carter's Words as A Pie Chart
For those of you who can't seem to parse a simple English sentence, let me help.
"I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he's African American..."(my emphasis)
1) The first qualifier here is "I think" which means something very simple: what follows is MY OPINION.
2) The "overwhelming portion" would be a majority part of another subgroup, in this case:
3) "intensely demonstrated animosity." In my chart I didn't make a distinction between demonstrated and undemonstrated animosity, and it would have most likely made the pie slice of people Carter is actually referring to even smaller.
Understand yet? Considering that Obama's approval ratings are still over 60 percent, what portion is being unfairly "maligned" as racist by Carter's OPINION? 2%? Less?
The lady doth protesteth too much.
***UPDATED***
Here's another possible way to actually quantify this. Let's take ALL of the Washington teabaggers (70,0000) as proxy for included and other "intensely demonstrated animosity" across the nation. With 304 million people, that works out to about .023% overall. Assuming, again, that ALL of these are conservatives, that would mean Carter was describing less that one tenth of one percent of them, but they still want to complain.
Remember the Homeland security report about domestic terrorism? They took offense to that too.
thanks. why is "intensely demonstrated anomosity" too nuanced for this country?
September 21, 2009 1:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
As far as I am concerned this post is right on. Oh, and I wish I could draw. I see you cannot either but you have figured out how to draw and put it on your post. My buddy DonDi was doing that a while ago.
I found a pie chart site and you can pick and choose the type of pie you like.
BUT THIS IS GREAT.
Besides, I agree with your conclusions of course. hahahaha
September 21, 2009 1:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well if it's less than 2% then why the hell have the media, the blogosphere and prominent democrats been falling all over themselves denouncing them?
And if it's less than 2% why the hell did Carter feel the need to butt in?
Which obviously leads right back to the original conclusion - calculated political games to shut down the opposition by pretending that 2% is 92%.
September 21, 2009 8:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Harry Belafonte makes a comment, Obama has to respond. MoveOn posts an ad, Democrats have to respond. Similarly, The Republican party has to address this issue.
September 21, 2009 8:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Great point, unfortunately the "base" demonstrates over and over an unwillingness to condemn racism. Sometimes an unwillingness to even identify it.
Our contrarian friend in the stovepipe hat's views are typical, and there are many more examples.
The right (justifiably) is concern with alienating the "base" by condemning racist and violent rhetoric. John Boener basically said it was OK when asked directly, since there is a "new revolution" afoot...
September 21, 2009 10:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Butt in"? You're a trip... the next post I write on this will be on why the Republicans and conservatives can't seem to clean house.
Your posts fit in perfectly!
Who COMPLAINS about shaming racists? Oh, right, those guys do.
Your last sentence explains the right's reaction pretty well, as does my Shakespear quote... keep up the good work.
September 21, 2009 9:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Basically they're okay with some people being intensely racist as long as they convince themselves that they aren't themselves. Yet it is racist to apologize for or excuse a racists' belief. Moreover, silence in matters such as this is consent.
September 21, 2009 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Exactamundo!! They can't seem to get why defending racists looks bad LOL.
September 21, 2009 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Come on Lalo, you are smarter than this comment. It's because the media (and yourself) has conflated this 2% ... making up the bulk of a larger 3% of individuals screaming at town halls ... is representative of a "real anger at Obama's policies".
The group is in the GOP point guard on opposing reform, it is not out of like to opine on the motivations of the most vocal minority who is getting more than 90% of the media coverage.
September 21, 2009 3:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Come on Lalo, you are smarter than this comment."
S/He might be if not instead an apologist for racism.
September 21, 2009 9:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
He didn't "butt in" at all. He was asked a question bearing directly on this subject during an interview with Brian Williams of NBC.
September 21, 2009 10:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
If it was so clear cut then the White House would have been more supportive.
September 21, 2009 10:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
No, Obama was asked about the REACTION to Carter's words. I guess a better question would be "why can't people figure out simple English better"?
September 21, 2009 10:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama said he disagreed with Carter's comments. Very simple.
September 21, 2009 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Really, now. That's why he started by saying he agrees that there is some criticism of him that is based in racism. He just disagrees as to how much of the disagreement it is fueling.
Or did you miss that nuance too?
September 21, 2009 2:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/09/16/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5315789.shtml
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2009/09/16/us/politics/politics-us-usa-carter-racism.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=obama%20disagrees%20with%20carter&st=cse
Very simply, Obama and Gibbs are saying that they don't agree with Carter. Gibbs was quoted as saying "I don't think the President agrees with him."
September 21, 2009 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nice links, now go watch what Obama said, not Gibbs.
September 21, 2009 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why? Isn't Gibbs a spokesperson for the President? If you have a link to a speech where you think Obama says he agrees with Carter, feel free to provide it.
September 21, 2009 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you the spokesperson for the racists?
September 21, 2009 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
He is obviously one of them. As is "Lalo". As is "truthseeker".
Basically, everyone who is attacking Carter in fake outrage as if PERSONALLY targeted by him . . .
Hmm. Gee, why is it they take Carter's accusation PERSONALLY . . . ?
September 21, 2009 9:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm having trouble finding the clip too, Bill. Scroll back I never said he agreed with Carter, he said Carter has a point, TO A POINT.
Again nuance be damned, you want a simple yes/no.
Also the resident basically HAS to say this, otherwise be crucified by the right.
But of course you know that too. So let's quit pretending you have some point to make here.
I've already made mine.
September 21, 2009 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I said he disagreed with Carter. Your response was "Really now". To me that implies that you disagree with my statement.
September 21, 2009 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right one more time: he agrees some of his critics are racist, just not as many as Carter does.
You get it yet?
His disagreement is quantitative, as is my tolerance for making the same point over and over.
Say something new or I'm done responding.
September 21, 2009 5:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
IGMR - why do you always recommend your own posts?
September 21, 2009 10:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's called self-esteem, look into it!
September 21, 2009 10:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Start with uploading a icon... c'mon YOU DESERVE IT!!
September 21, 2009 10:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
did you grade your own tests in school too?
September 21, 2009 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
No that's only for you homeschooled kids. I went to big bad PUBLIC school and actually learned something (gasp!!)
September 21, 2009 10:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
What makes you incorrectly assume I was homeschooled?
September 21, 2009 11:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
What makes you incorrectly assume I'm not kidding?
Do better, please.
September 21, 2009 11:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
If homeschooling was meant to be a joke and not an insult, then I was mistaken. But somehow I thought it was meant to be an insult.
September 21, 2009 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Get off the cross, we need the wood.
THAT'S an insult. Glad I could clear it up for you.
September 21, 2009 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for doing this, igotmyreasons. I'll try to show how you are wrong by critiquing your interpretation and using Carter's full quote. You said:
...and I have more authority because I am a former president. Therefore, my opinion counts more.
Said another way: all but the tiniest fraction.
However, "intensely demonstrated animosity" is not a group or a subgroup; it's an attitude. And attitudes apply to anyone and everyone.
Carter, it turns out, is not referring to specific groups at all. He's referring to racist attitudes within huge swaths of the entire population. He clarifies this by saying (emphasis is Carter's, btw, not mine):
Carter underscores his authority to see more than we can see (his word, in fact): he's lived in the South, and he has had the unique vantage point of the president's office to see the country as a whole. No one else can claim such authority. What he has observed in the past he still observes today.
He's not just referring to rabid teabaggers or backwoods Southerners. He's referring to the entire country's racist inclinations.
It's not an "abominable" circumstance worthy of grief and deep concern that a tiny fraction of Americans are racist and the rest of us aren't. It's abominable exactly because it's an inherent feature of the American identity: the racist "inclination."
September 21, 2009 10:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wouldn't "intensely demonstrated" imply action and not attitude?
It's hard to demonstrate something if no one knows you are doing it.
It's abominable to HIM. Do we live in a nation where no one can discuss OPINIONS anymore? I, too find a tiny sliver of racists depressing... and I'm entitled to feel that way.
What's weird is conservatives AREN'T disturbed by this and seem to have NO desire to clean house or even shame them.
We still live in a racist country. And no, it isn't ENTIRELY racists but more than I like and more than Carter likes.
I'd say the overreaction to this rather mild observation proves it better than anything!
Did we kick and scream for weeks over Cheny saying Obama's making us less safe (presented as "fact", not opinion BTW). NO we knew his political capital SUCKS.
But you guys are terrified of CARTER?
The tone and longevity of the arguments against his statement prove the racism in this country, in my mind.
September 21, 2009 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not terrified of Carter and I'm not a conservative. What I think is weird is that you can't discuss this with liberals who happen to disagree with you.
September 21, 2009 11:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
My opinion of his opinion. Discuss what exactly?
I feel this country is racist and polarized by race.
Defending this to random hecklers is my choice, not my obligation.
I also wouldn't define my politics as liberal, but don't let that get in the way of your assumptions.
September 21, 2009 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, then, you must be a racist! I knew it!
September 22, 2009 1:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Whatever you want... take a few tokes for me.
September 22, 2009 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you - I thought he just couldn't have a discussion with us conservatives!
I think what all these blogs prove is that Carter's statement was ambiguous and could have been interpreted in a number of ways. It's not as clear cut as the above pie chart would depict.
September 21, 2009 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's why the chart is FUNNY. Sorry you missed it...
September 21, 2009 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's hysterical. And that was only lost on the opposition types who wet their knickers every time the word racism comes up and always seem to think they're being accused and/or that all conservatives in the world are being accused and/or find it objectionable that anybody at all is being accused.
The reaction's pretty deep, actually. My old therapist would have had a field day with it.
September 21, 2009 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe you could post a clear image next time. I might laugh my head off if I could read it.
September 21, 2009 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
And not give you more cheap opportunities to throw shade? HELLS NO.
I thought you liked your logic fuzzy, my bad.
September 21, 2009 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
This image looks pretty clear to me. Maybe you should get your vision checked before Obamacare kicks in and you're forced to wear some hideous, government-issued Harry Potter glasses. Just sayin'.
September 21, 2009 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL.
September 21, 2009 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Chart is funny? Perhaps. Is it consistent with Carter's thinking? Also unclear.
September 21, 2009 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's the point. You guys want a map? Sorry there isn't one... this is a GROWN UP debate for people who can THINK.
You want succinct signs and symbols go listen to the right talk about "socialism." Carter wasn't obligated to dumb down his shit for YOU. Neither am I.
September 21, 2009 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now those are insults, not an attempt at humor.
September 21, 2009 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Only if you aren't a grown-up or an easy target for jingoism. The rest of us aren't insulted, no.
September 21, 2009 4:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am a grown-up but your comments are clearly insulting.
September 21, 2009 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
So you've said about 12 times. Your manvag heal yet?
September 21, 2009 5:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
You continue to prove my point that when you don't know how to respond to an argument, you result to personal insults rather than civil discussion.
September 21, 2009 8:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Racism is incivil. You are a racist.
I've pointed that out to you any number of times; and yet you haven't claimed to be insulted by it. So I'll assume you're proud of the fact. Why else would you attack Carter as if he personally insulted your supremacist "dignity," instead of attacking the obvious racism that is emanating from the America-hating cesspool you and your "conservative" Republican ilk occupy?
September 21, 2009 10:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe he's not insulted because you are ridiculous, not to be taken seriously. You say insane shit, most of which makes no sense at all, JNagarya. If you made fewer comments, the world would be automatically improved.
September 22, 2009 1:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Perhaps they do need a map. Or better yet, how about that GPS system featuring Sarah Palin's voice? It might cost more than the Bob Dylan GPS, but I'm sure it'll be worth every penny.
September 21, 2009 4:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Trouble is they already have that installed. And they are burning a circle into their yard "taking the next right" at death panel, AGAIN.
September 21, 2009 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why are you "conservative" loons so defensive about Carter telling the truth?
And must I -- or someone else -- SUBSTANTIATE the fact of the racism YET AGAIN?
Tell us, RACIST: HOW MANY TIMES must it be SHOWN to you and your hateful ilk that there are OVERT RACISTS who are REPUBLICANS -- and they themselves made it clear they are that -- before you STOP attacking Carter for pointing to that FACT?
September 21, 2009 9:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
You keep missing the point so I'll try to boil it down to a few key things:
1. I agree that there are racists out there who don't like Obama. But I think this is a very small portion of the Republican party and a smaller portion of the overall American population.
2. Like Obama himself, I think that most of the people who dislike the President do so because of his controversial policies and not because of his skin color.
3. I interpreted Carter's statement as applying the "racist" label to a much larger percentage of the population that what I would consider deserves such a label. That's my problem with Carter's statement.
September 21, 2009 10:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
There being racists, then why are you attacking Carter? Might it be for the obvious "reason":
You want to shut him up about the core beliefs of your racist party and its adherents, including YOU?
Failing that, you want to talk and talk and talk about Carter in order to distract from the racism you are defending and protecting and perpetuating.
September 21, 2009 10:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, no and no. I already said above, I am attacking Carter because I disagree with his view on the magnitude of the race problem as it relates to backlash against Obama. I think it's a problem but he's making it out to be a very big problem.
I've tried to tell you this multiple times but you just keep asking the same question of why I am being critical of him.
September 21, 2009 10:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
When will you be attacking the evil that is racism, instead of attacking the benign finger that points at it? When you discover ethics?
September 21, 2009 11:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I do attack it. A friend made a comment the other day which I thought was over the line. I told them so. That's the level that I attack it at. Not just jumping on Carter's bandwagon
September 22, 2009 10:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
You have racist friends?? NO WAY!!
September 22, 2009 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Someone I know made an off-color joke. You don't have any friends that have ever done that?
September 22, 2009 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
When will you be attacking the very real racism instead of attacking the finger pointing at it? When YOU cease being racist?
September 21, 2009 11:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
And yet the fact is that his comment is correct: racism does exsit among the criticisms of Obama.
It's only RACISTS who want to indluge their racism, and perpetuate it, who attack Carter instead of going after the racists. In effort, of course, to "prove" that racists don't hate Obama; that their "criticisms" of Obama are "principled".
September 21, 2009 10:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
The discussion tends to get shut down because only one perception is seen as valid. The discussion breaks down into citing African-Americans who agree with one side or the other in the conversation. The discussion is difficult because there are some issues on which people simply will not agree.
The African-Americans sensed hostility coming from those attending the 912 rally that suggested that race played a large role in the opposition to Obama. The message that would be transmitted to friends and family of those attending the Black Family reunion Celebration would be that the 912 folks were biased.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/13/AR2009091302538.html
Stanley Crouch, Ta-Nehisi Coates, Eddie Reeves and other writers believe that race is an important factor in the opposition to Obama, but that race has to be played down because passing health care is more important. A segment of the Progressive community seems to want us to completely ignore the role of racism in GOP ranks despite how often the racism is thrown in our faces.
The stench of racism that goes unchallenged means that even if the GOP ever comes up with a viable plan for anything a significant portion of the voting public will ignore the plan because of the taint associated with the Republican Party. Jimmy Carter merely verbalized what many people think when they see the "I Want My Country Back" signs, weapons a public meeting, talk of secession, and repeated mention of Jefferson's quote about watering the tree of Liberty. Many hear something more ominous than just the voice of the loyal opposition.
September 21, 2009 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe you should explain exactly why you (and certain of your cohorts) have such a bug up your ass about this particular issue. It seems to me undeniable that there is a LARGE segment of the Republican right that is walking as close to the edge of calling Obama a nigger as convention will permit. See, Limbaugh, Rush; or Blunt, Roy. and I could go on. And on.
African Americans still lag behind white Americans in every indicator of socioeconomic success, including educational achievement and health statistics. Their second-class status in their own country is evident on a daily basis to anyone who lives in a large urban area. Their treatment by the establishment remains a national disgrace.
Yet you want to get all indignant about Jimmy Carter and Henry Louis Gates. Maybe your just being contrary for contrarianism's sake. And that's your right, but, in my opinion, your priorities as a "liberal" are completely fucked up.
September 21, 2009 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
You should have been around for the Southern Lamentations discussions about the good old Confederacy.
September 21, 2009 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
..............Maybe you should explain exactly why you (and certain of your cohorts) have such a bug up your ass about this particular issue. It seems to me undeniable that there is a LARGE segment of the Republican right that is walking as close to the edge of calling Obama a nigger as convention will permit. See, Limbaugh, Rush; or Blunt, Roy. and I could go on. And on.
((crickets))
September 21, 2009 5:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you are overreacting, seems they are only calling a spade a spade.
September 21, 2009 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL
September 21, 2009 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
brewmn61 said:
Just so you know, I can't speak for anyone but myself.
I don't follow Rush Limbaugh or Roy Blunt. Or Sean Hannity or Glenn Beck.
As a kid, I would often find myself trapped in the company of racists. I decided I would never spend my time that way once I reached adulthood. If you want to spend your time listening to racists, be my guest. Just don't expect me to.
I have never argued against any of this, and I don't know why you bring it up, particularly in reference to what I said. We have an African American president now, yet you seem to want to ignore this fact of black achievement.
I happen to live in a large African American neighborhood in New York. African Americans have owned homes and businesses here since the 1930s. There is enough black history in this one neighborhood to educate anyone for a lifetime. Within walking distance is an area called Weeksville, which was founded in the 1830s by free blacks.
I think my references are probably very different from yours. That doesn't make me a racist or a conservative. What I have learned in my life is that most people don't appreciate being considered victims.
I have my reasons, which are clearly lost on you. Is it possible that I just don't think your thoughts?
You don't know enough about me, and instead of asking me questions you make assumptions. You seem to expect me to think like you do or else I'm some sort of enemy. Again, I have different references. Therefore, I can't think like you do.
September 22, 2009 1:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
If you don't pay attention to any of the people under discussion here (and that Carter was referring to), then you have admitted you don't know what we're talking about. Yet you jumped in this thread to dump on Carter in spite of your admitted ignorance. Maybe you should have just stayed out of it.
September 22, 2009 1:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why don't you stop being so fucking hostile and reactionary? It might help facilitate your understanding of other points of view.
September 22, 2009 1:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
I understand other points of view just fine. You're the one who admitted you don't know anything about the people Carter was referring to in his comments, yet you chose to slam him for them anyway.
September 22, 2009 1:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, then prove to me that Carter was talking about your buddies, Rush Limbaugh and Roy Blunt. K?
September 22, 2009 1:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
How about discussing the RACISM Carter correctly and accurately identifies, "Liberal".
To much like not being a fake "Liberal"?
September 21, 2009 10:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you are both right. Initially Carter was talking about very small group of people who one would call full-blown racists. Later in the quote Carter was also talking about racist inclination in this country. Rather than a pie chart, racist views (and sexist views, etc) land along a spectrum. Carter was in part speaking about those at the far end of the spectrum, but he was also speaking of those further down. Those who are inclined to racist views and thus support and help sustain those at the far end of the spectrum.
September 21, 2009 10:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
That damned NUANCE is ruining this country!!! Doesn't he know you HAVE to decide if the country "is" or "isn't" racist??
And if we have a black president, HOW can the country be racist??
Jaysus titty-f-ing...
September 21, 2009 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree a spectrum better matches Carter's views, acamus.
I also think it's ultimately impossible to accurately interpret Carter's quote without knowing what the question was. For some reason, we are not being given that part of the interview.
September 21, 2009 11:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
There's no question about it: Carter was correctly identifying racism as being among the "criticisms" of -- animosity to Obama.
And all those who are wounded by that accusation because it's true are attacking Carter for saying it.
And he has managed to successfully call them out. And here they are, offended by being called out for being what they are: RACISTS.
September 21, 2009 10:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Racism as being among the criticisms of animosity to Obama"? That makes no fucking sense.
September 21, 2009 11:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
PS. can we dispense with the gotchya stuff like "this is why you can't debate with __________s?"
As near as I can tell we are all trying to have a discussion. No one here seems unable to or stands in as a proxy for the supposed failings of his politics.
September 21, 2009 12:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. I think people view the issue through different lenses. Joe Wilson's membership in the Sons of the Confederacy, support of the Confederate flag on capitol grounds and criticism of Essie-Mae Washington create a certain image for me. To others, he may just be a passionate conservative.
The encounters between the 912 rally attendees and the Black Family Reunion Celebrants paints a negative picture of the 912 rally for me. Both Wilson and the 912 folks fit into what Carter was relating.
I do think that we can disagree about the validity of Jimmy Carter's statement without being disagreeable.
September 21, 2009 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wouldn't necessarily call it a "discussion" (or at least a grown-up discussion) when you start flinging around things like:
"Sorry there isn't one... this is a GROWN UP debate for people who can THINK.
You want succinct signs and symbols go listen to the right talk about "socialism." Carter wasn't obligated to dumb down his shit for YOU. Neither am I."
September 21, 2009 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Really now, Bill?
Scroll back and show me where you said something more substantive than "did not"???
Then don't be shocked if I choose to stop talking to you, you're beginning to repeat.
September 21, 2009 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
On Truthseeker's blog plus on this one, many of us have stated that Carter's statement is ambiguous enough that we don't know what percentage of the population he classifies in the "intense animosity" crowd.
Just like Gasket said, it's quite reasonable to interpret that he's not just speaking about the birthers, but about a much bigger slice of the pie.
Never did Carter say that only 5% (that's my estimate of the size of your slice) of the Obama non-supporters are racist. If that's what he was thinking, then I don't think he would have even bothered to make the statement in the first place.
September 21, 2009 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Again my chart is commentary on how silly it is to try to quantify stuff like this. Actually so is your post, but you don't realize it.
Silliness bothers you? Oh, wait, YOU are dead serious.
The map you require would look more like a Saul Steinberg map of NYC, with 90% of the land covered with "Liberal Lies" or some such.
I'm glad they found some good consumers.
September 21, 2009 5:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your point in the original post was that the people being maligned represent only about 2% of the overall pie. My point is that it's a much larger percentage.
September 21, 2009 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
No my point was it's impossible to quantify and that the right is stupidly trying to do so.
Thank you for performing as specified.
September 21, 2009 5:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
You tried to quantify it.
September 21, 2009 5:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know not understanding sarcasm is one of the warning signs of early onset Alzheimers, right?
Look at how it's written, it's at least tongue-in-cheek. There's no conclusion made. The point was maybe a dumb chart could get some of the right to shut up.
I guess in that sense I was wrong.
When there are effective tools to quantify "an overwhelming portion" of "intense animosity" let me know.
Till then I'll write hyperbolic and silly blogs that go over some people's heads.
September 21, 2009 6:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your conclusion was that we protest too much because Carter was only talking about approximately 2% of the overall Obama non-supporters.
I have simply been:
1) agreeing with Obama that racism represents a very small percentage of the criticism against him, a much smaller percentage than Carter suggests
2) criticizing Carter for implying that racism is responsible for a much larger percentage of the criticism than it really is.
September 21, 2009 7:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
zzzzzzz
got it, been real.
September 21, 2009 8:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Perhaps next time rather than just attack, attack, attack you will listen to what other people are saying.
September 21, 2009 8:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
When you start saying something, anything... I'm all ears.
September 21, 2009 11:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're simply pissed that he "might" throw a large enough net to catch YOU in it.
FISH FRY!
September 21, 2009 10:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Percentages aren't the issue. Truth is. Carter expressed an accurate generalization, and it happens to encompass YOU.
You're pissed because he's MALIGNING racism.
September 21, 2009 10:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
And it encompasses you too. It encompasses us all.
September 21, 2009 11:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Percentages ARE my issue.
September 22, 2009 10:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Percentages are an irrelevant dodge.
The issue is RACSIM.
Unless, of course, your concern with "percentages" is whether you fall into or outside the segment of the pie-chart that is intensively racist.
I'd say you are: you are spewing as much gibberish as you can in effort to vaoid the actual issue:
R-A-C-I-S-M.
And we know why that is:
Because YOU are R-A-C-I-S-T.
That being settled, don't respond to my posts: I have no time for vociferously stubborn bigots who are furious about being seen for what they are, despite their repetitive BULLSHIT.
September 23, 2009 9:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
You crack me up.
September 23, 2009 10:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I love this post. Love the visual aids for the language comprehension challenged.
What a lot of ridiculous sturm un drang there's been over a quite measured and reasonable statement. Of the obvious to boot.
September 21, 2009 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well done. Words and nuance matter.
September 21, 2009 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good post indeed! Carter's statement had the same effect on the racist right as the priest's holy water did on Linda Blair in The Excorcist... "It buuuuuurnnnnnnssssss!"
September 21, 2009 9:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Like garlic to a vampire.
September 21, 2009 10:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks!! Check out my latest, it's pissing them off too!!
September 21, 2009 11:55 PM | Reply | Permalink