Dr. Henry Louis Gates Arrested

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by agzg

I wouldn't go so far as to say "Oh I knew you would disagree with me" or "Oh I knew that most of the people on here would attack me..." More along the lines of I know that if I confront someone in a certain way it's going to "ruffle their feathers" - at least as much as one can be ruffled from interweb conversations. You can have the feeling that "oh this isn't going to end well with [poster]" - most people would adjust the wording on that particular post. DI just rolls that "I told you so" implication into her insults.

I also don't transfer that to real life. I'm sure if people that post here knew me IRL they'd find me to be a very different person.

There's no one here that I'd be motivate to find in real life the way creepy people have done in the past, but if I met the people behind the usernames here, for the most part, I'd be more disposed to like them in real life than if I hadn't read their ideas here. There are a handful of people who'd be starting off behind, and another handful who especially intrigue me about what they are like in real life but it's not positive or negative.

(Weirdly, though, I don't think I'd ever go to a real life GC event if there were one. I've met one person in real life from the site and that went really well, but the idea of it just seems like the most awkward thing ever.)

I do think that we share enough of our political and social biases that if you are a regular and long-term user you really can often guess what other users' responses are going to be or at least be like.

It pretty much invariably will make someone mad to say so, but honestly, how often, when you recognize the username, are you surprised by the content of a post?

[Dreadloc'd Diva]

Calm down..I was being sarcastic.

Originally Posted by DrPhil

How about you respond to the substance of our posts instead of playing the guessing game and trying to decide if you consider us among the cool people.

[Dreadloc'd Diva]

No leader of any nation is perfect. However,Obama hasn't been given the chance to do what he promised,and it's not even 2012 yet. At least he's doing the best he can under very...tense times. He's trying to clean up two wars and the economy,which is an ugly mess that Bush left behind. So before we pass judgment on Obama..give him a chance.

Originally Posted by agzg

Why would that matter at all? Several other posters have made the point that no matter what anyone's political affiliation, it's a valid criticism.

Stop trying to cause drama or partisanship on this board.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by Dreadloc'd Diva

No leader of any nation is perfect. However,Obama hasn't been given the chance to do what he promised,and it's not even 2012 yet. At least he's doing the best he can under very...tense times. He's trying to clean up two wars and the economy,which is an ugly mess that Bush left behind. So before we pass judgment on Obama..give him a chance.

If you are striving for people to be fair to Obama, then you might want to re-think whether Bush and his policies were solely responsible for leaving the economy in a mess.

If you're going to use the-buck-stops-with-the-President standard for Bush, then you're going to have to expect other people to use it with Obama.

ETA: what's Obama doing to clean up the two wars?

[SWTXBelle]

What does that have to do with his rhetorical style? Are all the press conferences the first year considered mulligans? Was he not aware when he ran for the job that he would be dealing with the economy and two wars?When do we get to hold him accountable for his campaign speeches? What constitutes "enough time"? Is he not to be judged until 2012?

(rhetorical questions, btw)

[Dreadloc'd Diva]

First of all,I hated Bush and everything he stood for! Second of all,didn't Obama ask for bi-paritisanship when he got in office? All he is getting is Republicans bitching about one thing or another!

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

If you are striving for people to be fair to Obama, then you might want to re-think whether Bush and his policies were solely responsible for leaving the economy in a mess.

If you're going to use the-buck-stops-with-the-President standard for Bush, then you're going to have to expect other people to use it with Obama.

[SWTXBelle]

WHOOSH

[Dreadloc'd Diva]

He wants to try and move on from this experience..but I don't think that this is far from over.

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

He is saying that the arrest was racially motivated. Based on the information in the article, I would agree. Yet another situation where people don't believe that a black man can live in a nice neighborhood or own a nice home. And I seriously wonder why this neighbor who called the cops didn't even recognize or know her own neighbor. I hope he pushes this further.


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/21/us/21gates.html

[Dreadloc'd Diva]

Even after Obama was elected,Republicans were talking about 2012. The way I see it,the GOP is looking for the right time when his icy facade melts,and then they'll strike. The GOP knows that their party is weakened,and they are desperate to get back into power.

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

What does that have to do with his rhetorical style? Are all the press conferences the first year considered mulligans? Was he not aware when he ran for the job that he would be dealing with the economy and two wars?When do we get to hold him accountable for his campaign speeches? What constitutes "enough time"? Is he not to be judged until 2012?

(rhetorical questions, btw)

[SWTXBelle]

Originally Posted by Dreadloc'd Diva

Even after Obama was elected,Republicans were talking about 2012. The way I see it,the GOP is looking for the right time when his icy facade melts,and then they'll strike. The GOP knows that their party is weakened,and they are desperate to get back into power.

Okay, I stated the questions were rhetorical, but if you are going to then quote them, you should address them and not go off on some tangent regarding when the Republicans might hope to come back into power.

After ANY party loses an election, they look ahead to the next election cycle. Actually, both parties look ahead - that's what they do. Both parties aren't even waiting until 2012 - they are focusing on the 2010 elections. That has NOTHING to do with the timeline for being able to hold Obama responsible for what he promised during the campaign.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

WHOOSH

Thank you for this.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Dreadloc'd Diva

Calm down..I was being sarcastic.

No one is "not calm" and you would know that if you knew the dynamics of this board.

ETA: I see you're contributing beyond one liners now. You got the point. Good.

[Dreadloc'd Diva]

Back to the original subject....as far as the arrest of Professor Gates...he claims he wants to move on from this. But while it's easy to say,it's hard to do. Success can bring many fortunes,but it can't protect you from the cold reality of racism in the 21st century. This will most likely be debated for a long time.

[DrPhil]

Dr. Henry Louis Gates, Jr. was arrested? What?! When did this happen?

I wonder what Obama has to say about it. That matters.

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

After ANY party loses an election, they look ahead to the next election cycle. Actually, both parties look ahead - that's what they do. Both parties aren't even waiting until 2012 - they are focusing on the 2010 elections. That has NOTHING to do with the timeline for being able to hold Obama responsible for what he promised during the campaign.

I would even go so far as to say it would be irresponsible for a party not to look ahead to the mid-terms and next Presidential election after a defeat. The party has to re-examine where it went wrong and do everything it can to make sure the next election cycle is a better one.

The Republicans did it after Clinton won, the Dems did it after Bush won...it's just the way politics goes.