Posted on 02/22/2008 2:29:50 PM PST by kellynla
NEW YORK (AP) - For many black Americans, it's a conversation they find hard to avoid, revisiting old fears in the light of bright new hopes. They watch with wonder as Barack Obama moves ever closer to becoming America's first black president. And they ask themselves, their family, their friends: Is he at risk? Will he be safe?
There is, of course, no sure answer. But interviews with blacks across the country, prominent and otherwise, suggest that lingering worries are outweighed by enthusiasm and determination.
"You can't have lived through the civil rights movement and know something about the history of African-Americans in this country and not be a little concerned," said Edna Medford, a history professor at Washington's Howard University.
"But African-Americans are more concerned that Obama get the opportunity to do the best he can," she added. "And if he wins, most of us believe the country would do for him what it would do for any president, that he will be as well protected as any of them."
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Your efforts to introduce reason to this discussion are admirable but futile and, at the core, unwelcome.
There are people who enjoy fantasizing about doomsday scenarios.
They polish their guns, count their ammunition and “check the perimeter” around their split level with a watchful eye on their suspect neighbors. They’ve seen “Red Dawn” twelve times. They read the books. This is their fun.
They are harmless enough except insofar as they make the conservative movement look suspect by association.
And what is your fun Captain , ?
I agree.
That’s why I questioned them at first.
I agree. Blacks have every right to worry about his safety.
However, I think he’ll be defeated in the campaign.
Hey! Don’t make fun, mister! My neighbors have a very suspicious beagle that snoops through my bushes and my garbage. I think it’s a communist plot. He’s trying to sniff out my evergency food and ammo supply.
FReepers to start, then anyone who vote for Ronald Reagan. She's also had bad things to say about Jews.
But I thought Hitler's total was somewhat larger, like around 11M with 6M of them being Jews, but there many other consisting of Gypsies, Slavs, homosexuals, communists, Jehovah's Witnesses, and others.
In fact I heard a little story a couple of weeks ago about that.
My son-in-law spent the year after he graduated from high school as an exchange student in Germany. His "exchange brother", who is now the Mayor of a small village, and a German friend were visiting in Austin Texas. He took them to an eatery that was very family oriented, with an outside eating area and play area for children, and even an area for pets. However they had a sign saying "Unruly Children will be sold to the Gypsies". One of the Germans remarked, in German, "I can't believe they can have a sign like that". The other replied, "well THEY didn't kill a million of them". Of course my son in law, of Irish heritage (Leprechaun I think :) ), understands German just fine, and even my daughter, who has lots of German blood, but only a little German language, could also follow the exchange.
Apparently the estimates of the number of Gypsies killed are very wide ranging. With between 220,000 and 500,000, being generally accepted, but with some more recent studies indicating perhaps up to 1.5M).
That would be extremely hard on the rioters. Sort of like trying to burn down Korean grocery stores, when the Koreans are on the roof with shotguns and "assault weapons".
Besides, where is "whitey's neighborhood?" My apparently fairly middle class neighbor hood has whites, blacks, Hispanics (both "Mexican" and Puerto Ricanos, might even be some Cubanos for all I know). In fact as German/Scots-Irish/English American, I'm probably a minority. My other neighborhood, (I live in one house, my wife in the other, and they are almost 4 hours apart) is a bit more upscale especially by "small city" standards , but still has blacks and hispanics.
Or do you just mean "outside the Ghetto?"
The Founding Fathers weren't as confident that none would ever try as you seem to be. Thus they left us the Second Amendment, to discourage the attempt.
And the Germans were the most civilized people in Europe, right up until they started slaughtering the teachers, scientists, musicians, doctors and veterans, who happened be Jewish, Gypsies, or just looked crosswise at some Nazi.
Don't EVER think "it can't happen here" or it soon will.
Look at which states those early primaries were in. Either Blue or at best purple. Only really Red state was South Carolina, where the black turnout was a very important component of the Dem turnout.
IOW, for the most part there were more Democratic votes because the primaries were in more liberal states. That was by design to help Hillary in the primaries, before they knew her opponent would be at least as liberal, a preferred minority, much younger and better looking.
They do.. after all the butts that need kicking are kicked. Not until.
And they don't care. What are we going to do to them that we haven't done or tried to do after they killed around 3,000 Americans in NY City and DC.
Good point.
Everyone knows beagles are the commies dog of choice.
Well, Iowa went for Bush as did S.C.
And in S.C. where the GOP race was hot and included McCain, Romney, Huckabee and Thompson, 530,332 Democrats voted compared to 428,075 Republicans in their respective primaries.
In 2004 in S.C. 937,974 voted for Bush and 661,699 voted for Kerry in the General Election.
I hear ya. Amazing the rhetoric we’re getting these days on FR. It sounds like DU with all the ridiculous over-the-top-fearmongering—”Chimpy Bush*tler is going to start a nuclear war and get us all killed! Aiiieeee!” “He’s going to use the Patriot Act to take all our rights away and put us in concentration camps! Arrrrggghhh!” Bush didn’t do it and neither will Hillobama.
I expect a little more reason and a lot less hyperventilating from conservatives. The way some people are acting lately, you think they expect to miraculously have a perpetual Republican president, that a Democrat can never win again or we’re all doomed. We have a two-party system and once in awhile the other party is going to win. That’s life.
The abject childish terror around here lately at the prospect of a Democrat winning is getting embarassing. Some people need to man up and stop all the hysteria.
If liberals think he is their Messiah now just wait until he becomes a Martyr!
He'll soar past Kennedy and Dr. King in popularity even if he has done nothing in office. After all would Kennedy be a hero of the left today if he had lost after one term and was still around calling for lower taxes and fighting communism? Jimmy Carter would have been a hero of the nation if somebody had shot him in his first couple years in office. Now the Democrats probably wish somebody would shoot Jimmy and make a respectable man out of him. Every time Jimmy speaks we are all reminded of what a train wreck his presidency degenerated into. If Obama wins and does not get shot His administration will flounder and those who thought he was the Messiah will become disillusioned, and begin calling for his crucification. In which case it may be another couple hundred years until we see our second Black president. Just My opinion. I called it here first.
By the way if He wants to live and not be martyred, he should not pick a power hungry Clinton as his vice president. However, if he just wants to get elected and go down in history as the first Black martyr president and be loved by all, I'm sure V.P. Hillary can arrange for his murder by a right wing racist patsy to really pull the nation together behind the Democrat party.
don’ worry, be happy.
Perhaps, perhaps not... Sounds like something I would have heard in mid-1930's Germany ("Why *no* Chancellor of the nation would even speak about, let alone attempt to exterminate a small or even a large segment of the population...")
Another fallacy, is the thinking of "President of the United States". There is a plan afoot to have a North American Union, by 2010. Who would really be in charge then, and what would be *their* agenda (bearing in mind that 2010 is just two years from now)?
In short, I find such thinking, perhaps, dangerously naive...
the infowarrior
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.