I'm going to try one more time to state why the 'racism' argument is pure horse shit. It seems to be a reaction of desperate people who can't stand any criticism of this new administration's policies, so they deflect these criticisms by using an
ad hominem argument avoiding the criticism altogether just to call someone a racist, a criticism of their character. This argument is
logically invalid. (See Copi's
Introduction to Logic for verification.) It does not count in debate. Below take the word 'Obama' to mean the 'Obama Administration' and the Democratically controlled Congress. This is composed of thousands of people, many from the far left who are hell bent on changing this country into an image of what they want to see.
Objection: "Obama's foreign policy is a disaster. He has kissed and bowed to dictators, and thrown Israel and Eastern Europe under the bus (which they well know)."
Answer: You're a racist.
Objection: "Obama's health care plan is ruinous to everyone. This will add thousands of dollars in both taxes and premiums to the average person's budget."
Answer: You're a racist.
Objection: "Obama has created a budget deficit that is more than
all previous Presidents combined, from George Washington to Bush 2. He has 'monetized' this debt (printed money) which will result in runaway inflation down the road."
Answer: You're a racist.
Objection: "Obama's anti second amendment stance is unconstitutional, as has been affirmed by the recent Heller Decision. Making firearms more restrictive will result in registration, then confiscation."
Answer: You're a racist.
Objection: "Pelosi and Reid are the worst leaders in Congress we have ever had."
Answer: You're a racist.
Objection: "Obama's relationship with the corrupt Chicago political machine, including his close association with William Ayers, the Weatherman bomber and cop killer, went largely unreported by the MSM."
Answer: You're a racist.
Objection: "Why is Obama's academic record, his means to secure a Harvard education, his ability to travel to Pakistan during a time when that was prohibited (on which passport, please?) and his birth certificate (His actual birth certificate, not a certificate that a certificate exists) all considered 'off-limits' when it is demanded that the activities of every other candidate, along with those of their off-spring, be closely scrutinized?"
Answer: You're a racist.
Objection: "Why is there such feigned outrage over portraying Obama as 'The Joker' or an association with a Nazi swastika when critics of Bush did EXACTLY the same thing, but then it was considered 'free speech'?
Answer: You're a racist.
This kind of knee-jerk reaction is an emotional ploy designed to prevent real inquiry and debate based on facts. It is, in my opinion, insanely juvenile and beneath contempt. It reminds me of Creationists' responses to the objection that the world was not made by God in 4004 BC at 10:00 in the morning on October 23rd with 'Well, you don't have an open mind.'
It's also an easy and PC call. I suspect many people call others racists to justify to themselves that they are not. This idea that there are those of superior intellect able to detect racism in those who cannot recognize it in themselves is specious at best and betrays the accuser in rather the opposite light. In fact, to feel superior to another group is the basis of racism itself. People who accuse others of racism might want to take a good hard look in the mirror and examine their own motives for why they feel composed to accuse others of racism when they can't possibly know. I would put Jimmy Carter and Al Gore in this category as well. It may 'feel good' to relegate your fellow Man to an inferior status based on your own perceived superiority of being on the side of righteousness, but the fact is you are being laughably simplistic and moreover, you're not contributing substantively to the discussion. Thus, you personally can be safely ignored. The overall trend, however, is very frightening.
Now, this thread started as a reasonable discussion on 'ammo hoarding.' It has been hijacked. I object to that. If you look back at the discussion before it went awry, you will find:
1. This is old news. There's plenty of ammo available in most areas.
2. It is not so much hoarding as supply and demand.
3. Part of the issue is the credit crunch which has limited the ability of manufacturers and distributors to get loans to pay for getting product to market. Same thing happened to the housing market, but no one accuses others of hoarding houses.
4. Part of the issue was a lack of material, particularly brass.
5. Part of the issue is the military's need and precedence for ammo. They use .223. It's a NATO round.
6. Part of the issue is an avowedly anti-gun administration which will seek further controls on firearms based on how they look. A wooden stock and you're OK. A black gun and suddenly this is an 'assault weapon' though the innards are EXACTLY the same. It's this kind of insanity that 'promotes sales.'
7. .22 Long rifle, the most popular form of ammo, has never been in short supply, nor have any gauges of shotgun shells. They have all been readily available throughout this supposed shortage.
8. The supply issue has largely been resolved.
BTW, Obama is half white. I know because I dated his Mom's kid sister.
