BoatShoes;1748548 wrote:
Jimmy Carter subtly garnering the white vote by pandering to ethnic whites opposed to integration:
Ahhhh, I got ya. So when an idea is inclusive and applies to everyone but you disagree, it's pandering. When it specifically panders to a certain group but you agree with it, it's not divisive or it's something less?
"I don’t think government ought to deliberately try to break down an ethnically oriented neighborhood by artificially injecting into it someone from another ethnic group just to create some form of integration."
That, by the way is 10,000% correct. The govt can and should prosecute discrimination and promote fairness, it should not "force" integration.
LMAO, you're water-carrying for Obama knows no bounds. But you're right, he has been absolutely mediocre. You always have an excuse for his mediocrity, always something external and nothing to do with his policies, be it Republican "obstructing him", economic "conditions", too little "Keynesian stimulus". He IS a horrible POTUS by nearly every objective measure, and historically divisive one (probably, in part, because it's all he has being such a disappointment on almost everything else).
But, errrr, you have any examples of President Carter/Bush/Reagan being divisive to compare with President Obama? Because you're kind of making my point for me, again, that Obama has never stopped being Candidate Obama to become President Obama.
I don't hate Obama, I hate his lack of leadership. I said very little about him his first two years, and had hopes he'd be better than I expected. And I waited for him to stop campaigning and start governing, but he never has. And that's what I hate.
