General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Do you want a president who fights like hell for the 99%? [View all]DonCoquixote
(13,956 posts)corporate stooge, toady, crook, idiot, etc, none of which has a risk of bringing up race that the right wing has alredy brought up ten thousand times. The sad fact is, you have to be as careful to avoid not saying something in the midst of making your point. Part of the reason DU had the whole "priviledge" thread issue is because a bunch of minorities tried to point out things that many people DO NOT REALIZE THEY ARE DOING; and what we got was a lot of angry threads from angry people that went ahead and hopped onto Discussionist, where they churn out some stuff that is as vile as anthing Free Republic did. Yes, care does need to be taken, especially if you are sincerely trying to avoid focusing on race.
"Personally, I'm sick and disgusted beyond words by the constant ugly, unwarranted accusations of racism from adults who cannot seem to defend the president's policies any other way. "
I will agree that some people do act in the way you describe. However, do not assume because some people point out the racism that Obama is affected by means that we are tryign to shield his policies. I myself am angry that he put in exactly the same Clinton style cabinet members we voted against, and whatever good he does only comes after a lot of pushing and genuflecting to the almighty reagan democrats; those centrists who saldy, are much more effective at maintiaing conservatism then the GOP could be on their own. Speaking of which, if Hillary gets elected, yes, there will be many that will try to shout "How darest thou attack our first lady President", and much will be bs, but that will not change the fact that there will be sexism used against her. One set of facts running paralell to another set of facts does not make one valid and another invalid; some trees grow apples, some grow oranges.