In Alabama, probably close to 100%
Might be around 80%
No.We have a president who happens to be black and is not doing his job,plain and simple.
Most of it, I am positive. It's possible to disagree with a leader without the name-calling and virulent hatred to which the racists resort. Good to know who's who and what's what, though. Lots of closet Klansmen (and women) have revealed themselves during this presidency.
I completely agree.
I agree. I can't recall any Democratic president who has been disrespected as much as President Obama. Disagree with the policies, but respect the Office.
Yes, lots of racist conservatives that are oversensitive to dark skin, have a real phobia/hysteria about Obama and Mexicans as illegal aliens, you don't ever hear about lighter skined illegal aliens being a problem, do you?! So it goes for Obama...Anyway Obama has my vote again, ain't no one gonna fix the wreckage of Bush in one term or even 3 terms...those wingnuts just need to 'get over it'
Absolutely, Spice! Bush messed it up big time. Guess the dead presidents will roll over in their graves when his presidential portrait is displayed with the others.
Majority - 0. Look at his presidency and you'll know why people dislike him, especially Conservatives.. Anyone who tells you otherwise is delusional and desperate to defame those who disagree with them through character assassinations, which is the utmost in juvenile behavior. I loathe him because I find him to be an arrogant moron who doesn't know what he's doing and he's taking the country, my life and everyone I love down with him.
Very, very little. Everyone I know thinks he sucks b/c his policies are OUTRAGEOUSLY STUPID. It has nothing -- let me repeat that -- NOTHING to do with his skin color and EVERYTHING to do with his policies. Period.
99.9 percent<br />
you noticed no one has said anything about the others ones father being born on the other side of the board in a mulipe wife group
I think a good portion is about his skin, but in my 80% minority city there are several black commentators who are Republican. They don't trust Obama for mostly religious reasons coupled with ignorance. They think he encourages abortion. They think he's Muslim or at least some sort of Al Qaeda sympathizer. They think he's taking away medicare from the elderly. Stuff like that. Now the white folks I know who are against him generally have racist opinions. They seem more likely to think he's not a natural US citizen and ignore every piece of information. They think he's too lenient on illegal immigrants, mostly because of the DREAM act. But the truth is he deported in his first two years more than Bush did his entire presidency. <br />
I personally love the guy and support him 100%, and I'm lily white. I don't care what color his skin is.<br />
On the reverse, how many people do you think support Obama solely because of his skin color?
Quite a bit. I find it interesting how if you ask white people this question they say it's got nothing to do with it or it's a very small minority, but then you ask black people and they mostly say it's most or all of it. White people take this to mean "They're playing the race card" or something like that, since, you know, this country's power structure is not AT ALL ethnocentric. No... Never! Perish the thought!<br />
Essentially there are two main points here.<br />
1- Most of it is racial. Anyone with a decent IQ can see it. Come on, people. You can't be this stupid. Well, you can and likely are. Nevermind.<br />
2- We are spoiled. All of us. Whether you're an American or a Brit or not. You have a computer and high-speed internet. You have the luxury of rationalizing your racism. I don't want to hear your "reasons" for hating President Obama. Not interested. You'll try to rationalize it and it'll be laughable. We're not talking about a simple difference in philosophy. We're talking about Congressmen heckling the president during a JOINT SESSION! That was real, you know. That was not some crazy dream. It really happened! Wake the **** up people! Jesus!<br />
I do take solace, however, in the fact that racists, homophobes, and other regressives are dying out. Slowly but surely, the young, atheist, non-racist, non-sexist humanists are taking over. We'll rid the world of most of this I think. Of course my generation is not perfect, but we're a hell of a lot better than this.
Hahaha....What a Pollyanna thought process.
I love false dichotomies.
Let me see if I understand , your saying that if you disagree with socialism, and class warfare that you automatically hate 0bama for the color of his skin, how juvenile.
Thank you Spirit.
All the anti-Obamaism rhetoric that can't ever come up with a real reason for hating him. All the reason ba<x>sed on falsehoods, like being a Muslim, or coddling terrorists. Yeah, all that is probably racist without wanting to admit it.
I will post the same response I posted to one of your Liberal buddies, who didn't like facts and decided to ignore me instead of proving it wrong -
Obama worked with Pelosi’s Democratic Congress to pass an additional, $410 billion, supplemental spending bill for fiscal year 2009, which was too much even for big spending President Bush, who had specifically rejected it in 2008. Next in 2009 came a $40 billion expansion in the SCHIP entitlement program Obamacare is now scored by CBO as increasing federal spending by $1.6 trillion in the first 10 years alone, with trillions more to come in future years After just one year of the Obama spending binge, federal spending had already rocketed to 25.2% of GDP, the highest in American history except for World War II. That compares to 20.8% in 2008, and an average of 19.6% during Bush’s two terms. The average during President Clinton’s two terms was 19.8%, and during the 60-plus years from World War II until 2008 — 19.7%. Obama’s own fiscal 2013 budget released in February projects the average during the entire 4 years of the Obama Administration to come in at 24.4% in just a few months. That budget shows federal spending increasing from $2.983 trillion in 2008 to an all time record $3.796 trillion in 2012, an increase of 27.3%. before Obama there had never been a deficit anywhere near $1 trillion. The highest previously was $458 billion, or less than half a trillion, in 2008. The federal deficit for the last budget adopted by a Republican controlled Congress was $161 billion for fiscal year 2007. But the budget deficits for Obama’s four years were reported in Obama’s own 2013 budget as $1.413 trillion for 2009, $1.293 trillion for 2010, $1.3 trillion for 2011, and $1.327 trillion for 2012, four years in a row of deficits of $1.3 trillion or more, the highest in world history. President Obama’s own 2013 budget shows that as a result federal debt held by the public will double during Obama’s four years as President. That means in just one term President Obama will have increased the national debt as much as all prior Presidents, from George Washington to George Bush, combined. Despite all the controversy in Washington and in the media over Ryan’s budget, what it all adds up to is just to restore federal spending to its long term, postwar, historical average of 20% of GDP. That stable level of federal spending, with some modest variance, prevailed for over 60 years after the end of World War II, until 2009. Ryan’s budget reduces federal spending from an average of 24.4% of GDP during the Obama years to 20.1% after just 3 years, by 2015. By contrast, under the budget policies supported by President Obama and Congressional Democrats, federal spending soars to 30% of GDP by 2027, 40% by 2040, 50% by 2060, and 80% by 2080. Obama’s 2013 budget proposes to spend $47 trillion over the next 10 years, the most in world history by far, increasing federal spending by $1.5 trillion above the current CBO baseline. Ryan’s budget proposes to cut that by $6.8 trillion. By 2022, Ryan’s budget would be spending nearly a trillion dollars less per year than President Obama’s budget. Numbers courtesy of Forbes.
And may I point out that Forbes is well respected by both parties.
Dreamscicles, you failed to respond to any of the numbers, all taken, as stated, from Obama's budget. I don't mean to insult you but you are a complete moron if you are trying to call numbers brought forth by a respected financial magazine untrue and biased ESPECIALLY seeing as they were taken from Obama's budget reports.
They do not want to see and will not :-((((((((((
The percentage of GDP figure rocketed in 2009 mostly because the GDP was shrinking, not so much because of the government spending.
Very little, I think Americans are just not happy with the Administration and the disregard for the public. How much worse can it get, the deficit is climbing at such a rapid rate. People are scared, and rightfully so. He is very likable , would do great on tv.
I wish we had a better playing field to choose from. Both candidates have flaws, neither have what it's going to take to get us out of this mess.
I would say a majority of it. Personally, I'm an independent, so it amuses me to see most of my friends become politics when the black guy is in charge.<br />
If only they knew how ignorant they look on the bandwagon of morons who probably don't know anything about the economy, besides the fact that it's bad.
A lot less than the liberal left would like it to be, when ever the left can't come up with a factual response to a Conservative out comes the race card and the accusation of racism, In my mind that makes them, the liberals, that like him solely because he is black the racist.
I liked him when he was a Senator, because he supported issues important to me. But I like the healthcare plan and, the tax break for middle and working class (not the rich who already get them) and of course, the social issues. I can't speak for others, but for me it really isn't about his colour (conservatives think that way, after all, so they assume everyone does). THAT's why Bush thought replacing the venerable Thurgood Marshall with that moron Clarence Thomas would be just fine, no difference. And that's why, for a moment, the conservatives dangled Herman Cain, thinking he'd be a worthy adversary to Obama---please. Btw, none of the women who came out of the woodwork were Dems, so the neo-cons weren't really serious about that, anyway.
I think you misunderstood me, you have good valid reasons for supporting 0bama I have good valid reasons for disliking him. Neither one of us is basing our opinion on the color of his skin. Yes there are some rednecks who dislike him because of the color of his skin but there are just as many who support him just because of the color of his skin. It's a wash - a non-issue.
1) the insinuation itself is rather racist because it assumes people who don't like Obama are only racist white people. A lot of people in this country like to pull the race card, what is more politically correct than blindly accusing a group of white people for hating minorities? It's amazing to me how people who claim to support tolerance often display truckloads of ignorance on a regular basis.<br />
2) while there are obviously people who don't like the color of Obama's skin, the vast majority don not like his politics. I don't agree with them either, but this is far more a matter of partisan politics than a matter of racism. Obama is a liberal. He came out in favor of gay marriage for Christ's sake. He could have have the whitest skin on the planet and the combination of health care reform, gay support, and economic policies would have him hated by the GOP and the Tea Party and half the independents. We live in a very partisan political environment, which is what this is about.
I think some are yes and some are not at all. I dislike his platend disregard of the right of all people and there rights and I also had this problem with Bush same thing but they do it for differend reasions. I dislike Obamas side for trying to blame raceism on why anyone does not like him. If a white pres said ok white people ban together for me to win there would be outrage in the land!
Anti-Obamaism? LOLOL. It's pro having freedom and money in my pocket. Since when do Americans blame a movie maker for the actions of another? Is the movie "Kill Bill" responsible for any actions of others?
none, it is ba<x>sed on his stupidity and the way he is driving this country into the ground(after bush started the slide). he could have been one of the best president's we have had in years if he had kept any of his promises and didn't blame others for his mistakes...but nooooo, he has been to busy working on his golf game to worry about what us pions do annd bailing out all his croonies that have no business since...<br />
It is the democrats who are trying to enflame the masses with the "race" card..
More than anyone will admit
Why is it so easy for so many of you to assume the worst about me (and my race)? Isn’t that what’s so bad about intolerance? Preconceived and intractable bias? I’m left with much sadness after reading some of these responses.