• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

Bill Cosby: Obama has Bush To Thank

pirate_girl

legendary ⚓
GOLD Site Supporter
As The Cosby Show celebrates its 25th anniversary this coming Sunday, star Bill Cosby is posed the question:
Did the black family that he presented to the American television-viewing audience in the 1980s pave the way for President Barack Obama and Michelle Obama?
No, Cosby replies.



The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., and the movement he led in the 1960s, had a lot more to do with the election of the first African American president, Cosby suggests.
But without the legacy of former President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and "the Republican Party and what it did to people,'' Cosby adds, Obama might not have won the White House.


"Along comes this man and this woman, and he is what the people are looking for,'' Cosby says in an interview with The Root. "The people [were] trying to get out of this mess, and it didn't make a difference to them what color [Obama was], if he created a feeling of honesty and as he said, change.''


Cosby, the comedian whose Emmy Award-winning sit-com, The Cosby Show, ran for eight seasons on NBC - from 1984-92 - portrayed the fictional African American family of Dr. Heathcliff Huxtable comfortably ensconced in middle-class American life.


Cosby sat for an interview with The Root, an online magazine whose editor-in-chief, Harvard Prof. Henry Louis Gates Jr., recently gained some national attention of his own in an arrest at his home in Cambridge, Mass., which Obama denounced as another instance of racial profiling in America - the president later apologizing for his choice of words in saying police had "acted stupidly,'' and invited Gates and arresting officer Sgt. James Crowley to the White House for a beer.

The Root asked Cosby if his show, displaying a "black middle class to a mainstream audience who might otherwise only have seen them as gangbangers, shift-workers or athletes,'' had paved the way for Obama. Without Cliff and Clair Huxtable, "would there have been Barack and Michelle?''
"My answer is yes, he would be,'' Cosby says in the intervew.
"Yes. Because before Cliff and Clair, there was Dr. King. ''


Cosby's talk could not be more timely, arriving at a time when former President Jimmy Carter is suggesting that the most extreme criticism of Obama is coming from people who cannot accept that a black man is president. "Jimmy Carter, True Son of the South, Hits Nail on the Head,'' reads one piece in the newest edition of The Root. The White House, for its part says criticism for Obama is not explained by the "color of his skin.''


Cosby says the path for Obama's election was opened decades ago.
"And that movement brought down a whole lot of things that were against black people. In those participations against racism, against segregation, there were people of all colors, cultures, races, creeds, who joined, marched, took hits, gave money, were fired from jobs, were called communist and anti-American by the New York Times and the Washington Post,'' Cosby says.


" Because the government and institutions were treating black people negatively. So when these people joined together and they began to win, they also married ... integrating and marrying, so that it was Latin, brown people, black people, white, mixing. I think that this United States has come to a point--or had--where this man and his wife could do it.


"You know, I'm not sure if (Obama) didn't have a George W. and a Cheney and that Republican Party and what it did to people, he could have been elected,'' Cosby adds. "More than anything, I think people also woke up, and they were being used; they were using soldiers and holding them up as shields to keep this inept president and vice president. The nation became very, very tired of this foolishness--and they were tired of being used.


"And so along comes this man and this woman, and he is what the people are looking for,'' Cosby says. "The people [were] trying to get out of this mess, and it didn't make a difference to them what color [Obama was], if he created a feeling of honesty and as he said, change.''

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2009/09/bill_cosby_obama_has_bush_to_t.html
 

California

Charter Member
Site Supporter
So I'm your Human Shield now? Thanks loads! What happened to posting what *you* think?

I'll be interested too to see what the crowd here thinks of Cosby. Let's see who's first to call him a communist socialist or something.
 

pirate_girl

legendary ⚓
GOLD Site Supporter
So I'm your Human Shield now? What happened to posting what *you* think?

I'll be interested too to see what the crowd here thinks of Cosby. Let's see who's first to call him a communist socialist or something.
Nope, you're not, but I do like you.
I always post more comment when it's important enough for me to give a damn.
I can guarantee that may happen.
:whistling::poke::rolleyes:
 

Doc

Bottoms Up
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
But without the legacy of former President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and "the Republican Party and what it did to people,'' Cosby adds, Obama might not have won the White House.

....

"You know, I'm not sure if (Obama) didn't have a George W. and a Cheney and that Republican Party and what it did to people, he could have been elected,'' Cosby adds. "More than anything, I think people also woke up, and they were being used; they were using soldiers and holding them up as shields to keep this inept president and vice president. The nation became very, very tired of this foolishness--and they were tired of being used.
Cosby is right on. The Repubs screwed up over and over. Obama promised 'Change'. People wanted 'Change'. Obama ran a brilliant campaign. He did the right stuff at the right time and place in history. It worked for him.

He was elected by the people. Now if only he will choose to listen to the people about what kind of 'Change' America wants maybe he could do a good job. If he goes forward with what he wants no matter what the people want then he'll pay the consequences ....much like Bush did.
 

Raspy

New member
The Rebublicans will do better in the next election cycle if their message of fear rings with a weak minded public.

Americans are very easily scared.

When a group, such as the right wing, has made it clear that they want the president to fail, that they think the Democrats are "trying" to destroy the country, that they think the president is trying to turn our country into a socialist state, that they think Obama wants to kill off the older generation with his "death panels" and that they are unwilling to expose their children to a message from the president about staying in school and working hard, you just have to marvel at the fact that anyone is listening to the right at all.

What a bunch of fear mongering liars. Out only for more power and doing it by trying to scare the simple minds that cannot see through it. If this is the American future, and how we will continue to be a succesful nation, we are in for a lot of hard times ahead. Is this really the best we can do? Screaming at each other, starting wars, being totally intollerant of each other?

Obama offerd a breath of fresh air from the same old thing. From Bush and the horrendous problems he managed to preside over and incite. But the big money and the old guard just can't stomach the new face. Especially since it's not the usual color. It is surprising that Obama won with all the prejudice here, but McCain, as honorable as he is, ran a terrible campaign and showed that he is beginning to fail, or at least, was getting in over his head. Obama showed vigor, calmness, intellegence. Younger and/or less prejudice people, and those of us wanting to move forward, connected with him sufficiently to push him over the top.

There are many who will never acept Obama no matter what he does. Never. Period. And if they are able to thwart his progress, simply because they hate him, the country will turn back instead of moving forward.
 

RedRocker

Active member
Oh man, another race card player, gimme a frikken break!
The nicest way to put this is you're delusional Raspy. No
fear, just heads up observation of what's in front of me.
I'm afraid the "simple mind" here is looking at you in the mirror.
 

jpr62902

Jeanclaude Spam Banhammer
SUPER Site Supporter
I'm not going that far with Raspy, RR. But I find just a tad of irony in that his proposition that we should be more tolerant of another was prefaced with calling some folks "fear mongering liars."

I like Bill Cosby. He calls it like he sees it and seemingly without some hidden agenda. I don't agree with his characterization of Dubya's administration, but I can't deny that it certainly contributed to openning the door for BHO's policies.
 

Raspy

New member
Red,

You might be right, but can you explain the common sense, if any, behind the death panel stuff and keeping children from listening to the president about staying in school? How about wanting Obama to fail, regardless of his message, instead of wanting our country to succeed through conversation instead of fear mongering. Sounds like you have a good understanding of the issues. Please enlighten me. Can you say there is no prejudice involved? Can you say no one on the right is trying to scare others to get their way? Like with a threat of death panels. I really need to hear how that kind of talk is productive.
 

Raspy

New member
jpr,

I'm with you on the intolerance stuff. I'm not very tolerant of those that make such ridiculous statements that then must be responded to and become part of the national conversation. My intolerance is in response to those that incite fear as a way to make a living. And yes, I'm the first to admit I don't like the right's scare tactics. It's a waste of time and it scares the weak for financial or political gain.

I'm afraid I stoop to the same level in my frustration with it. As a response to it. But I don't dream up wild fantacies to deliberately start it, like death panels. I don't make a living by being more outrageous than the next guy on national TV and radio. And I don't live my life hobbled with fear because of what a commentator says.

But, yes, I must stand up and be counted on the side of common sense, or, at least my definition of what that is. For instance, I don't hate Obama because his skin is a different color. I don't think he wants death panels, I think Iraq was and is a monumental waste of life and treasure that was promoted through fear, etc.

I am frustrated and I let it show.

And I do agree with a lot of what Cosby had to say.
 

jpr62902

Jeanclaude Spam Banhammer
SUPER Site Supporter
You might be right, but can you explain the common sense, if any, behind the death panel stuff and keeping children from listening to the president about staying in school?.

This mischaracterizes the issue. The problem wasn't the President's speech. The problem was the DOE submitting a suggested curriculum, telling teachers to ask their students, "What can you do to help the President?"

Can you say no one on the right is trying to scare others to get their way? Like with a threat of death panels. I really need to hear how that kind of talk is productive.

Agreed, there is no use for this type of hyperbole in a discussion. But the "death panel" concept isn't wholly without merit, either. To me, there's something a bit troubling about legislation that offers doctors federally funded incentives to discuss foregoing life extending measures with their patients.
 

RedRocker

Active member
Red,

You might be right, but can you explain the common sense, if any, behind the death panel stuff and keeping children from listening to the president about staying in school? How about wanting Obama to fail, regardless of his message, instead of wanting our country to succeed through conversation instead of fear mongering. Sounds like you have a good understanding of the issues. Please enlighten me. Can you say there is no prejudice involved? Can you say no one on the right is trying to scare others to get their way? Like with a threat of death panels. I really need to hear how that kind of talk is productive.

Yes I can: Death panel, if the feds end up doling out our health care, they will be in charge of who gets what. Now I'm an old fart with leukemia, if the budget is tight and it will be, someone may decide I don't need chemo or a transplant cause it's too expensive and better spent on a younger patient. What would you call a government panel that makes life or death decisions? Death panel might be harsh, but not far from the truth.
School speech: Originally the speech was quite different from what the end result turned out to be. Probably a lot of misinformation flying around, but I recall something about pledging to Obama and such. Things like that were the cause of that uproar, what he delivered seemed OK.
Wanting Obama to fail: Well, Rush IMHO was correct. Obama wants to fundamentally change America with huge government controlling programs that will surely bankrupt the nation. I don NOT want him to succeed in that endeavor. I want America to succeed, don't think Obama is headed in the right direction.
Prejudice: Nope, can't say there isn't any of that, but the people you see at tea parties and the 9/12 DC event are probably 90% there on the issues. I'm sure there are some folks that hate him because he's black.
Those folks are in every race, look at Obama's preacher if you want to see
a racist. Obama has some very shady friends and his ideas are very foreign to me and detrimental to our country, fear, yeah some, but I have faith in the system for now. I'm fed up with all politicians as are most conservatives I think. Hope this helps, I typed kinda fast.
 

Raspy

New member
jpr,

I wish we could all have a chance to let our families know what extreme measures we are willing to endure to keep our failing bodies alive. Many people don't want extreme measures and also many want to be organ donors. I see no problem with the discussion. If you think that kind of discussion will turn into an attempt to kill the elderly, I can easily see your fear. But that is not it's intention and it seems a bit paranoid to think it does. That paranoia, if that's what it is, is just going to be injected into everything related to any policy that comes up for discussion. At some point we have to decide on courses of action and move on. Or we all just devolve into a nation of fear stricken inaction.

If what you say is correct about the DOE wanting students to help the president, I can see your point about keeping children away. Why in the world would anyone want to "help" the president? We should all be doing all we can to stop the president, right? Or is it right? It's only right if you come from the place that the president is working against the people and the nation. That somehow he is the enemy. Then it makes sense. Even if you don't agree with him on many issues, he's not the enemy. Working toward a better policy is a better approach than simply declaring him the enemy and then trying to stop him. Education and common sense are far better than just doing all we can to stop him. If becomming literate and aware were dangerous why would he want better education? Maybe those things are good for society and will make it harder for the fear mongers to prevail through misinformation. His message was stay in school and work hard. If we don't follow a policy of better education we'll turn into a second or third world nation in this modern global era. You bet I want better education. And you can bet I'll stand with those that want it too. The alternative is superstition and being lead around by those with an agenda of their own. And finally, telling our kids that the president is the enemy instead of discussing with them what he said and how it might affect us, is going to lead to more distrust and less intelligent involvement. In other words, it promotes fear. Fear is huge in this country and not what we need more of.
 

jpr62902

Jeanclaude Spam Banhammer
SUPER Site Supporter
The problem isn't with the doctor\patient discussion. The problem is with the government encouraging and paying the doctor to have it.

And the problem wasn't the speech. The problem is the government suggesting to teachers that they ask of their students, "How can I help the President?"

If I'm a parent, and disagree with the POTUS's agenda, I don't want my child to be asked in school how they can further an agenda with which I'm opposed. This violates the very core of what our country is about.
 

Raspy

New member
Red,

Thanks for the thoughtful response.

The medical debate seems to always come back to the same old bottom line. You know? I don't believe life saving procedures will be eliminated for the weak and old. Who knows, but that's not the agenda.

I would rather have a system like the VA (which I use and like) or Medicare (which my parents use and like) than begging permission from a fat insurance company where the CEO makes millions a year from the common guy's insurance payments. Companies that take about 35% of the total for profit and who give bonusses for denying coverage or won't give it for pre-existing conditions. The system we have now is sick.

It's easy to say you don't want a beaurocrat from the government dictating what care you get, and I agree, but I don't like an insurance company denying coverage just to enhance their bottom line either.

My insurance for my family went up 30% this year alone and there is no end in sight. Sooner or later it will lead to total chaos and already is bankrupting a huge number of people. Others without medical simply show up at the emergency room and you and I pay for their care in the most expensive setting there is. That doesn't work either. Sooner or later a complete financial collapse will occur if we let it. How long can we as Americans continue to absorb 30% a year increases?

No one is saying you should not get coverage. I don't see a different system as a plot to deny you the coverage you deserve and need. It's a way to keep costs in check and make sure we all get what we need without financial ruin and becomming a burden to others. The big compromise here is to see how close we can come to that goal. Extreme paranoia about the government may be justified but may also be a bit over the top. Just ask others how willing they would be to give up Medicare or VA coverage. Those programs are very popular. You'll find the programs, while not perfect, do a good job and are not out to kill seniors or deny coverage.
 
Last edited:

Raspy

New member
jpr,

Maybe with a few bullet points you could lay out for us what the president's agenda is, how he is trying to acheive it, and how it's un American.

It seems like, to most of the Obama haters, he can absolutely do nothing right and must be stopped at all costs on everything he tries to do. All bad and zero good. A menace to America, etc. Is that how you feel? Can you honestly say America is better by stopping EVERYTHING Obama wants. Is progress acheived by stonewalling and accusing?

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, just wondering if we can move forward by stopping. Does suspicion rule or are there some facts that are relevant? Can we adjust policies rather than destroy them?

Oh, and if a doctor talks to a patient in the privacy of his office about relevant medical issues, should he do it for free? I get paid for my consultation and I can't deny a doctor should be paid for his to. Or are you saying that if a doctor is paid by the government that he will only be able to spout the party line and promote death to the elderly?
 

jpr62902

Jeanclaude Spam Banhammer
SUPER Site Supporter
jpr,

Maybe with a few bullet points you could lay out for us what the president's agenda is, how he is trying to acheive it, and how it's un American.

It seems like, to most of the Obama haters, he can absolutely do nothing right and must be stopped at all costs on everything he tries to do. All bad and zero good. A menace to America, etc. Is that how you feel? Can you honestly say America is better by stopping EVERYTHING Obama wants. Is progress acheived by stonewalling and accusing?

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, just wondering if we can move forward by stopping. Does suspicion rule or are there some facts that are relevant? Can we adjust policies rather than destroy them?

Oh, and if a doctor talks to a patient in the privacy of his office about relevant medical issues, should he do it for free? I get paid for my consultation and I can't deny a doctor should be paid for his to. Or are you saying that if a doctor is paid by the government that he will only be able to spout the party line and promote death to the elderly?

You most certainly are putting words in my mouth. Schools, at the behest of the government, should not be asking students (children) what they can do to help the President.

Doctors should not be specifically incentivized by the government to discuss only one possibility of what could be many possible courses of care for any given patient.

Why is it that if someone disagrees with Obama, you automatically consider them to ba paranoid or an Obama-hater?
 

Raspy

New member
jpr,

I'm responding to those that hate Obama and try to make everything he says into a big scare. Always making him wrong on everthing by claiming he has a secret agenda. I hope you are not one of those.

No, I'm not putting words in your mouth, that's why I asked you some questions. So you could clarify for me what you mean.

I'd like you to show me where it says that the government was specifically trying to incentivize doctors to discuss only one possibility with patients about end of life choices. I know nothing about that incentive. Please elaborate. Are you saying the government wants to kill off seniors? Are you thinking that planning end of life issues is a bad idea?. Just asking. Not putting words in your mouth.
 

SShepherd

New member
Yes I can: Death panel, if the feds end up doling out our health care, they will be in charge of who gets what. Now I'm an old fart with leukemia, if the budget is tight and it will be, someone may decide I don't need chemo or a transplant cause it's too expensive and better spent on a younger patient. What would you call a government panel that makes life or death decisions? Death panel might be harsh, but not far from the truth.
School speech: Originally the speech was quite different from what the end result turned out to be. Probably a lot of misinformation flying around, but I recall something about pledging to Obama and such. Things like that were the cause of that uproar, what he delivered seemed OK.
Wanting Obama to fail: Well, Rush IMHO was correct. Obama wants to fundamentally change America with huge government controlling programs that will surely bankrupt the nation. I don NOT want him to succeed in that endeavor. I want America to succeed, don't think Obama is headed in the right direction.
Prejudice: Nope, can't say there isn't any of that, but the people you see at tea parties and the 9/12 DC event are probably 90% there on the issues. I'm sure there are some folks that hate him because he's black.
Those folks are in every race, look at Obama's preacher if you want to see
a racist. Obama has some very shady friends and his ideas are very foreign to me and detrimental to our country, fear, yeah some, but I have faith in the system for now. I'm fed up with all politicians as are most conservatives I think. Hope this helps, I typed kinda fast.


well put:clap:

and lets not confuse the 9/12 -tea party with fear, it's anger
 

jpr62902

Jeanclaude Spam Banhammer
SUPER Site Supporter
I'd like you to show me where it says that the government was specifically trying to incentivize doctors to discuss only one possibility with patients about end of life choices. I know nothing about that incentive. Please elaborate.

In the reform bill. Why specifically reference end of life counseling without any other modality?

Are you saying the government wants to kill off seniors?.

Of course not. Why are you inferring that I am?

Are you thinking that planning end of life issues is a bad idea?. Just asking. Not putting words in your mouth.

Okay, you're just drawing wild inferences to suggest something much different than my message. And end of life counseling is not a bad idea AS LONG AS IT IS NOT PROMOTED TO THE EXCLUSION OF OTHER POSSIBLE MODALITIES.
 

Deadly Sushi

The One, The Only, Sushi
SUPER Site Supporter
The Rebublicans will do better in the next election cycle if their message of fear rings with a weak minded public.

Americans are very easily scared.

When a group, such as the right wing, has made it clear that they want the president to fail, that they think the Democrats are "trying" to destroy the country, that they think the president is trying to turn our country into a socialist state, that they think Obama wants to kill off the older generation with his "death panels" and that they are unwilling to expose their children to a message from the president about staying in school and working hard, you just have to marvel at the fact that anyone is listening to the right at all.

What a bunch of fear mongering liars. Out only for more power and doing it by trying to scare the simple minds that cannot see through it. If this is the American future, and how we will continue to be a succesful nation, we are in for a lot of hard times ahead. Is this really the best we can do? Screaming at each other, starting wars, being totally intollerant of each other?

Obama offerd a breath of fresh air from the same old thing. From Bush and the horrendous problems he managed to preside over and incite. But the big money and the old guard just can't stomach the new face. Especially since it's not the usual color. It is surprising that Obama won with all the prejudice here, but McCain, as honorable as he is, ran a terrible campaign and showed that he is beginning to fail, or at least, was getting in over his head. Obama showed vigor, calmness, intellegence. Younger and/or less prejudice people, and those of us wanting to move forward, connected with him sufficiently to push him over the top.

There are many who will never acept Obama no matter what he does. Never. Period. And if they are able to thwart his progress, simply because they hate him, the country will turn back instead of moving forward.

yup! I agree. Alas, politics in general on either side spreads lies, half truths, skewed stats and deception. I see VERY little "serving" the publc from the elected. I see serving the lobbyists and banks. This government as it stads is very corrupt and I see it like Rome before it fell. Saddly it will fall on YOU and ME!
 

Raspy

New member
jpr,

Wasn't the end of life stuff just part of the preventive medicine ideas that were seen as part of medical care to better everyone's life by making it clear what one's wishes might be?

What are all the other "modalities" that were specifically excluded in these potential conversations? Were there some things that doctors were to be forbidden to mention? Please expand.

Apparantly we agree that end of life counselling as a good idea. What was the agenda that was so bad here?
 

jpr62902

Jeanclaude Spam Banhammer
SUPER Site Supporter
Asked and answered, Raspy. Your seemingly unmitigated trust of government is notable.
 

Raspy

New member
jpr,

I'm afraid I don't understand your last post to me. I wanted something specific to understand the other "modalities" you mentioned.

I'm hardly the one that trusts the government. Not at all, unless I'm trusting it to follow the money and seek more power. But, I am not ruled by distrust only and always. I take it on a case by case basis with some evidence instead of a blanket rule. Health care is an important issue and distrusting Obama, or just wanting him to fail, is not sufficient reason to dream up false scare tactics. I hope you are not doing that. And since I don't know what the other "modalities" that you mention are, I'm asking you to enlighten me about them and their dangers.

Maybe a discussion would be better, in the health care debate, than trying to stop it just to see Obama lose. Don't you agree?
 

jpr62902

Jeanclaude Spam Banhammer
SUPER Site Supporter
Health care is an important issue and distrusting Obama, or just wanting him to fail, is not sufficient reason to dream up false scare tactics. I hope you are not doing that.

More wild inferences .....
 

Raspy

New member
jpr,

OK, I guess you can't come up with an answer to my repeated question. Simple question really, and one you seem to feel strongly about. So I'll stop asking. But, I wish you could expand on your modalities statement so we could all benefit. Oh well.

I guess I'll stay with my conclusion. And that is that a national health care system, and end of life planning, is not designed to be a death panel and kill off the elderly. Seems so simple and without reasonable controversy.
 

SShepherd

New member
yup! I agree. Alas, politics in general on either side spreads lies, half truths, skewed stats and deception. I see VERY little "serving" the publc from the elected. I see serving the lobbyists and banks. This government as it stads is very corrupt and I see it like Rome before it fell. Saddly it will fall on YOU and ME!


I see it as politicians only caring for themselves and how to get re-elected so they can get more power/fatten their wallets:glare:

....it seems almost a joke how they can lie and say what ever they think the people want to hear, then do what they want once they get into office.
 

Raspy

New member
I see it as politicians only caring for themselves and how to get re-elected so they can get more power/fatten their wallets:glare:

....it seems almost a joke how they can lie and say what ever they think the people want to hear, then do what they want once they get into office.

It is appalling. But for some reason (fear) they just keep getting re-elected. "The enemy we know is better than the enemy we don't know", or something like that. Plus, they do represent the people that vote for them. In the end, you can only blame the voters. All the screaming can really cloud the issues for some and turn off many voters completely.
 
Top