212 years later and coastal Cities still the same. Very strange!

The comment was about people's reaction to economic ruin in small-town Pennsylvania. It also happens to be true all over the world. When times get tough, people dig deeper into violent, intolerant ideologies. It's all a matter of scale.

But I guess my liberal brainwashing just makes me prejudiced against intolerant bible thumpers.

 

This is America. You are free to burn a pile of Qur'ans in front of your church or protest the very existence of gay people, but that doesn't mean that someone trying to find a common denominator to those actions makes them prejudiced.

 

It is your liberal brainwashing. How much time have you spent in Appalachia or the Rust Belt? His characterization is so far from the truth as to be unrecognizable.

 

Those people exist. He was describing a natural trend in human behavior that Americans are not exempt from. Neither of us know what Obama saw in small-town Pennsylvania, if anything. He could just be talking out his ass. That doesn't make his assessment of people's response to job loss and economic ruin and unfulfilled promises by their leaders any less true.

 

It's a disparaging of an entire people that don't think they're "clinging" to their guns and religion. To them, those things are a bedrock on which they stand, not a last resort to which they cling. And THAT's where your prejudice comes to the fore.

 

What people think and what their actions are are often very different.

I don't see the difference. I would argue that one "clings" to the very foundations of one's ideology when external forces strips bare many other aspects of life that one once enjoyed. People lose their livelihood and their leaders lie to them, so they regroup and hold to their traditional ways of life that aren't so fleeting: self-defense and self-assurance through faith.

I still don't see how I am prejudiced for pointing out some basic human behavior.

I could see, on the other hand, how Obama was being prejudiced since he's simply a politician and therefore everything he says is for the sole purpose of getting votes. It just so happens that what he said had some merit. Although, mentioning anti-immigrant and anti-trade philosophies along with guns and religion as if they are in the same category was pretty indicative that he hadn't really thought out what he was saying.

 

Thank you very much. that is spot on. Never thinking of or speaking for a large segment of the American population will indeed cause foot in mouth disease.

However, this was not a one off event, he does it damn near every time he speaks. Did anyone else cringe when he first spoke the "Red line" phrase? I know it can not be just me.