Nugent jumps on Beck bandwagon: Obama and Carter the "real racists" who "have been destroying black America for decades"
October 01, 2009 8:35 am ET by Media Matters staff
From Ted Nugent's October 1 HumanEvents.com column:
Jimmy Carter is either a racist or an idiot or both. Probably both, tinged with a little senility.
Carter recently made the statement that he believes racism is at the core of the angst by those who are protesting Barry O's policies and programs.
Schindler's list was probably racist too. Bad deal, criticizing the naked Emperor like that.
With beliefs and statements such as these, one has to wonder if Jimmy Boy still lusts after other women or if Rosslyn has finally tamed the beast.
When the left-wing moonbats and their toxic, dopey, hippie-inspired ideas are cornered and exposed, they will often revert to hollow and tired charges of racism in hopes of deflecting the blazing light of truth. These are the actions of a racist. What say you, Peanut Boy?
The Democrats know that without the support of black Americans their political party is doomed --a t least until they can addict the immigrants who have arrived over our southern border. Get them dependent on Fedzilla handouts, and the Democrats believe they can own their votes.
Meanwhile, the condition of black America continues to erode because our government keeps it so. How sad. How totally unnecessary.
[...]
You don't need to be an historian to see who the real racists are in America. Jimmy Boy, Barry O and others have been destroying black America for decades for their votes. That's the ugliest side of racism.
Previously:
Limbaugh: Obama is "the greatest living example of a reverse racist"
Bill Cunningham: "Barack Hussein Obama, that's the racist - obviously"
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
Um, Mr. Nugent
I remember back in middle school when kids would write out personal attacks against other kids in secret letter form... this reminds me of those days.
Personal attacks steal away any credibility of the author. Not that you had much credibility to begin with! Perhaps if you took a proper English course you might be able to learn to write properly. Oh, who am I kidding?
Being that only uneducated masses will be the only ones who will read this 7th grade level idiocy and will see it as some kind of master piece anyways... I say, have at it hoss!
I get emails from people who call Obama "Obambam", like Bam-Bam in the Flintstones! This is from adults who think it's funny to equate Obama with a cartoon toddler.
And we wonder why they think it's an undue amount of respect to sing about the first Black American during Black History month a couple of weeks after that first Black President was inaugurated.
He may have changed and washed his filthy, excrement filled clothes since he evaded the draft, but his mind is even filthier than his own feces laden pants were.
They're motivatited by nothing more than fear, power-lust, greed and short-term self interest.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
And since Jan 20th, they have collectively lost their f---ing minds.
The "column" consists of nothing more than baseless personal attacks from a guy who lost relevance in any arena years ago.
P.S. Here's the album cover that ol' Ted "didn't know" had drug paraphernalia on it:
Black poverty
under Carter
Year Total Number Percent Total Number Percent
1978...... 24,956 7,625 30.6 22,027 6,493 29.5
Under Reagan
1983 6/... 27,678 9,882 35.7 24,138 8,376 34.7
Under Clinton
2000 12/.. 35,425 7,982 22.5 29,378 6,221 21.2
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/histpov/hstpov2.html
His music stunk and that's why he's deaf.
1) Ronald Reagan, with his 'trickle down' economics and 'cowboy (actor) foreign affairs.
2) 1994 Republican Congress with the 'Contract With/On America', Newt Gingrich (3rd wife) as the leader
3) The Dubya years, or FauxCons as you call them. I did a 'bumper sticker' saying that a friend asked to use as a .sig file:
Reagan said Government is the Problem, George W. Bush proved it.
While Ted's guitar gently weeps. Or is that just feedback?
Yeah, Obama is keeping the black man down, and so did Carter and Clinton. Yeah, OK Ted, whatever you say. Forget the actual, you know, facts and all. And don't worry, there won't be a mass dessertion of black people to the GOP anytime soon, mostly because of idiots like you who ARE republicans. And is it any wonder immigrants to this country are also more likely to align with democrats? Again, look at the crap you spew yourself.
You're a draft dodger chicken hawk who talks about "supporting the troops" when you dodged your chance to actually go and fight back in the Vietnam days. And now, all of a sudden, you're some sort of fake tough guy who has enough money to buy lots of guns.
I'm pretty sure like most fake tough guys, if you ever came face to face with someone brandishing a weapon, you'd soil your draws and start crying.
Henry Rollins (liberal) vs Ted Nugent in the octagon.
Any bets on who would beat down whom?
I'd take Rollins in the first round.
Nugent is all talk. The proof is that after he was granted a draft deferment for soiling himself and walking around in the same crap filled clothes for a week afterwards, he made the following statement:
‘... but if I would have gone over there, I'd have been killed, or I'd have killed, or I'd killed all the hippies in the foxholes...I would have killed everybody.’” -- Detroit Free Press Magazine, July 15, 1990
So, he would have killed all of those "hippies" who answered the call to serve their country and risk their lives fighting in Vietnam.
Another typical, rightwing, paranoid, coward. The only thing that sets him apart from the others is the smell, which won't wash away.
We need welfare reform that weens people off of welfare and prepares and enters them into the job market. We need vouchers that allow lower income students have the option of private education (which typically costs far less per student for a much better education). Democrats have lured these people into the system, and once they have them their, they make it very difficult to escape.
(#2) "(which typically costs far less per student for a much better education)" Please show me your statistics that say this is, um, actually true.
#2. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/04/AR2008040402921.html
http://thevoiceforschoolchoice.wordpress.com/2008/03/25/house-promises-11400-per-child-5884-goes-to-bureaucrats/
If you need more I will provide them. The CATO institute has and extensive study performed in 1996. It is old, but draws the same conclusions. I can get it if you need it.
By the way, if we are going to debate, you may want to provide some stats of your own.
They are stacked by including all the costs of public education (capital improvement), then only referencing tuition at the private schools. The Cato summary is just a more scholarly approach to cooking the books. I had direct experience with My Son in a private school and tuition is just the beginning. There might be books provided and usually lightly used uniforms to dig through, but lunch definitely won't be included with tuition. Playing on a sports team will cost, so will band, choir, being in a play, dances, picnics or whatever they do; it all has a price. If you don't have the money to put down, you may be able to work in some capacity for the school so that means taking on a part or even full-time job, 'volunteering' at school events, and helping to fund raise. Gifting is also a neat way private schools have to solicit money, also available to public schools but not, shall we say, frequent? Also not mentioned is money private schools have available from trusts or other investment funds used for education.
Do I really need to go on? Even if the private school raises the money for a new building or gym, it will have a separate fund raiser for the desks, carpets, and basketballs. The trip to State championships or debate nationals will be paid by those attending. To say tuition alone is the cost of attending private school is false. All the links you provided depend on that 'fine point' being true for their conclusions to be correct. It is not, therefore....
Once again, we have a wingnut whose links don't say what he thinks they do.
Why don't you explain why you would be against vouchers instead of resorting to personal attacks? Or is that the only mode you know how to debate in?
As far as welfare reform, ok what is your reform, that does not involve the government in some way? I guess you can find some examples of poor black people being brainwashed into waiting for the government,but black people do not represent most of the people on welfare or without health insurance,but I'll grant you that the ratio is high compared to our overall numbers in society ,but I think that has to do with socio-economic factors more than some subjective characteristic of being lazy or brainwashed into accepting government handouts. Quite frankly I find that insulting and condecending. Your libertarian small government philosophy doesn't fit into this 21th century where the problems we face must have governmental solutions. I can personally do my share to fight global warming but that won't be enough , I can give to charity but that won't help the millions of children living in poverty in this nation, nor those who must decide whether to eat the last 3 days of the month or purchase their blood/pressure medication or their insulin,government must be part of that solution. Asking for donations for healthcare may solve an individuals problem but for the 45 million uninsured, and the thousands who are losing insurance daily and going bankrupt that is no solution. The free market has failed them and that is why we need government involvement.
Blacks were doing just fine with their slave ancestors' trust funds and when they were 3/5 of a person sitting in the back of the bus that wasn't going to the schools that the whites were going to. Welfare ruined all that.
By the way, I'm going to have a jolly time watching you actually find the source of that idiotic quote that you gave: "Give me your vote. I'll give you everything you need." No Democrat has ever said any such thing in recorded history, and if you think otherwise, you're an unbelievable fool.
Go ahead, grunt. Give us a reason to assume you have any credibility at all.
Obviously, no democrat ever made that quote... it was sarcastic. I was mocking how libs represent conservatives and how conservatives represent dems. You might want to be careful how you throw the word fool around. Why are some people in this forum so hateful? Since when did tasteful, educational dialogue disappear from the lib left?
Two hours and six minutes ago for you.
I said that because twseattle was alive in the eighties, he could at least pretend to speak for that time period. I never said you weren't around in the eighties. Good grief, you're even denser than I thought.
Some of you dodge better than Ben Stiller.
I don't know what that refers to, but you haven't shown any dodging from me.
Are people of all skin color, gender, sexual orientation, etc. not allowed to stand and speak up for minorities?
No, they're not. You said "the poor minorities called"; this means you've taken it upon yourself to speak on their behalf. You don't have that right.
I guess all of the white politicians better shut their mouths, especially the liberal ones. They speak for minorities all of the time.
No they don't. And no, I'm not going to bother asking you to back your statement up. No need to embarrass you further.
Just because my solutions differ doesn't make my speaking for them any less or more important to their future.
Ideas are fine, but you still can't pretend to speak on behalf of a group of people that you don't personally represent. I can't speak on behalf of women, or left-handed people, or Republicans, or Jews, or African-Americans, or gays, or southerners, or senior citizens, or even people that are handsome. And so I never pretend to do so. Find someone in the black community to speak for himself on this matter.
Obviously, no democrat ever made that quote... it was sarcastic.
Then don't put it in quotation marks.
I was mocking how libs represent conservatives
By making up a quote that doesn't represent our views? That's not sarcasm, that's idiocy.
and how conservatives represent dems.
You were mocking how conservatives represent "dems"? Where have you ever done that? That is a bold-faced lie, grunt, and you know it.
You might want to be careful how you throw the word fool around.
I am careful with my epithets, and the shoe fit perfectly. If anything, it's a better fit now than before.
Why are some people in this forum so hateful? Since when did tasteful, educational dialogue disappear from the lib left?
That's too ironic for words. As if you ever contributed anything tasteful, much less educational.
You're dismissed, troll.
Welfare does provide some support for lower income families (not just black by the way), and helps them to you know, get food, and shelter for themselves, and their families. I mean, that's just horrible!
Nobody has proposed a full and total government run healthcare system. Nobody.
So what you're saying is if the government didn't help low income families around the country, they'd be better off? Our welfare system DOES get people ready to take jobs, and supplements their meager incomes. I know folks who are on welfare that work 3 or 4 jobs, and still can't make ends meet.
What does drug testing have to do with any of this? You talk of freedom, and then try to strangle it with drug testing. And then you complain about the government bailing these folks out, and then suggest they work for, the government.
The welfare system doesn't trap people, it does help them. You are just talking from the Reagan playbook from the 80's and the entirely made up Cadillac queen he talked about.
"The black family has been torn apart because of the welfare system." ----grunt
"Blacks were doing just fine with their slave ancestors' trust funds and when they were 3/5 of a person sitting in the back of the bus that wasn't going to the schools that the whites were going to. Welfare ruined all that."
Private schools have a tendency to expel anyone who doesn't keep up their grades. They expel any kid with behavior problems. They don't accept special needs kids, unless you're talking about a school for kids with special needs.
On the other hand, public schools take everyone. They have to keep kids who can't keep up academically, they have to keep kids with emotional and discipline problems and they have to provide special education for every kid who needs it.
To you, being black in America is "a life of slavery to politicians and your government". How can someone who isn't black come to that kind of conclusion?
- Many private schools offer special needs programs. Do some research before you make bogus, blanket statements. By the way, I didn't call for shutting down public education. I asked what is wrong with giving these lower income families a choice?
- How do you know what race I belong to? Why does that even matter? I thought people of all races were supposed to stand up for the weak and down-trodden?!?!?
As such, any direct comparison of private and public schools is bogus. I said above that it might simply be that you're ignorant of the facts. I also said that it's more likely that you're corrupt and dishonest. Thanks for clearing up that it's much more of the latter in your case.
Um, I don't recall the healthcare proposals specifying that you had to be black.
>>To me, it is a life of slavery to politicians and your government.
Yep, much better that we slash the minimum wage and poverty programs and wait for AIG to trickle down all of that wealth.
>>We need vouchers that allow lower income students have the option of private education (which typically costs far less per student for a much better education).
School taxes are typically around $2000 or so for as many kids as you happen to have. And vouchers only cover a portion.
Um, I don't recall saying that. There is a disproportional number of blacks and minorities who would be effected by gov't healthcare.
"Yep, much better that we slash the minimum wage and poverty programs and wait for AIG to trickle down all of that wealth."
How did the minimum wage come up? Why do you have such a hard time sticking to the subject? If you want to discuss the minimum wage and its economic impact we can, but I don't know that this post is the place. My point is that we should better utilize the poverty programs to help move people out of poverty rather than keep them there. Do you have a problem with that?
"School taxes are typically around $2000 or so for as many kids as you happen to have. And vouchers only cover a portion."
Go back and read the links I posted earlier. We aren't talking about taxes. We are talking about costs per student (payed by the fed, state, and local gov'ts). The average cost per student is over $10,000 for public education (I am being very low and generous with that number. In some states it approached $25,000).
You do the usual thing of glossing over whites in government programs.
>>How did the minimum wage come up? Why do you have such a hard time sticking to the subject? If you want to discuss the minimum wage and its economic impact we can, but I don't know that this post is the place.
Minimum wage is government involvement in the market, just like aid programs.
>>My point is that we should better utilize the poverty programs to help move people out of poverty rather than keep them there. Do you have a problem with that?
Not at all. Check out my post on poverty rates through the years.
>>Go back and read the links I posted earlier. We aren't talking about taxes. We are talking about costs per student (payed by the fed, state, and local gov'ts).
The cost for the consumer is much lower in public schools.
This middle aged, middle class, highly educated, WHITE woman very much is looking forward to the day she gets to write her last check to her private insurance company and the day she gets to opt into a government run public health insurance plan because she tends to believe that she won't be able to afford private insurance on the market as currently constituted very much longer since health insurance premiums now cost more than her mortgage, property taxes and homeowner's insurance, plus utilities and cable combined. So, if current trends continue, she forsees a point in the future when health insurance premiums would swallow up more income than all her other expenses combined. And then she would be one of those "lower income" folks.
Now, I realize that this is in the realm of "anecdotal evidence," but you have not pointed to any facts that would support your supposition that a national health care plan will primarily benefit the dark complected people. I don't have any fancy "institute" to back up my argument, but I'll betcha a million bucks that white people, even hard working, middle class, not lazy welfare types, have problems paying for health insurance, and oftentimes, even if they manage to pay those premiums, they have problems getting service from these private insurance companies.
But, your totally amazing committment to the welfare (no pun intended) of black folks is duly noted.
Oh, and btw, the same factual and logical errors apply in terms of public education and welfare. The fact of the matter remains that white folks benefit from public education and welfare just as much as black folks and if every single "lower income" black person in this country disappeared, we'd still have a need for public education and welfare. Now perhaps you do not believe in a moral imperative to help out the needier people in this world, but if that is the case, why have government provide any public services whatsoever? Why are you arguing for vouchers to private schools? If you are arguing that private markets inevitably provide better service at lower costs, you would be dead wrong about that. See, my kids are being educated at public school for about 10K a year and my neighbor sends her kids to a private school for 15K a year. Medicare's administrative costs are much, much, much lower than Aetna's.
As for Mr. Nugent, well, so much stupid, so little time. I could write a doctoral dissertation about the universes of stupid in that column or blog or screed or whatever you would want to call it.
And YOU know this how?
And YOU know THIS how?
Here we go again, with ANOTHER Republican a**hole insulting Black America!
We're sooo stupid, we've been brainwashed by the Democratic party.
And from your post, YOU don't know sh&t about lower, middle or even upper income African American families except what you hear on Fox, Glenda and Insanity!
There is a reason that African Americans only make up 2% of the Republican party and your post is part of the reason why!
He's a coward who talks a pretty tough line, but when it came time to stand up for the nation he claims to love, and show how brave he was, he actually wet his pants and slithered away.
He's also a coward who wouldn't serve his country when it called on him to do so.
He's also an arrogant prick that can't even play good music.
If yes, then why?
If no, then what are you doing on this thread at all?
Rock on wingnuts. It's hilarious.
"When the moonbats are cornered, they will revert to charges of racism..."
Heh.