In the Arena

Reid v.Lott

There should be no surprise that Republicans have raised a considerable dust storm about Harry Reid’s obnoxious private comments about Barack Obama. Democrats would do the same, if the situation were reversed, and often have. But it is just so much baloney to find moral equivalency between Reid’s support of a black man for President (in large part because Obama–light-skinned, militantly middle class–defied the racial caricature) and Trent Lott’s wistful regret that Strom Thurmond, a stone segregationist for most of his career, hadn’t been elected President. These sentiments, both crude, are at the opposite ends of the political spectrum: Reid stands for the ultimate symbol of racial equality, a black man as President; Lott would have voted for a candidate who wanted black people at the back of the bus.

Obviously, the Republican campaign won’t get Reid ousted–although it will hurt his tenuous re-election campaign in an increasingly non-white state. But, for what it’s worth, Lott’s comments shouldn’t have resulted in his defenestration, either. They were obnoxious, but affectionate hyperbole: the occasion was a party celebrating the ancient Thurmond’s career. In any case, we’ve had too many witch-hunts, too overheated a public arena, in recent years…and there’s serious work to be done.

Related Topics: Barack Obama, Strom Thurmond, trent lott, Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    The Phony War: Obama and Romney Are Debating Character, Not Policy

    More than five months from Election Day, the back-and-forth about Mitt Romney’s record at Bain already feels played out. Unfortunately, there’s good reason to expect the campaign continues in this vein indefinitely. Neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney are terribly interested in dwelling on policy platforms. Romney’s plan to slash spending and keep taxes low on the wealthy isn’t especially popular, at least not at any level of detail beyond a blithe promise to shrink the deficit. Meanwhile, Obama’s signature first-term achievements, like health care, the stimulus and Wall Street reform, are all unpopular or tricky to sell. (The Dodd-Frank bill is the most popular of these, but hyping it means offending wealthy donors.) So what we’re getting instead is a superficial duel about character–and, worse, one that’s based on the largely false premise that the better man can better “manage” the economy back to health.

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    Audacity of Dope: Tales of a Toking Teenage Obama

    We knew Barack Obama smoked weed in high school because he wrote about it in his books. What we didn’t know until Buzzfeed posted these choice nuggets (I’m so sorry) from David Maraniss’s new book on the President’s younger years, is the giggle-worthy details of his “Choom Gang” lifestyle, which are right out of a buddy stoner flick. Obama and his friends drove around the lush Hawaii countryside, hot-boxing their VW bus and re-upping with a long-haired pizza-tossing dealer named Ray, who Obama thanked in his yearbook “for all the good times.”

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    You do know that the problem lies with how the media handles these kinds of issues and not with those who take offense to the statements. Of course, in this case the GOP is upset because black folks are not demonstrating in the streets, which makes it clear that they have little understanding of what it takes to sound racists, which I guess explains their propensity to open mouth and insert their racist foot so often. Now I get that they want to bloody a Democrat, but fortunately, black folks are too politically astute to fall for this kind of crap. In fact, the only thing the GOP has accomplished is to remind black voters, as well as other voters of color of how racially insensitive they are. This tactic of false equivalency that they are playing and that you have so readily bought into serves only to magnify their tin ear. .
    .
    You can’t very well embrace teabaggers carrying signs portraying Obama as a witch doctor or in white face and not say one word to denounce the daily racial diatribes for the Limbaughs and the Becks and then turn around and chastise Reid for what amounts to a clumsy compliment and political assessment of the mores of white voters. I mean really in a campaign where the media openly discussed whether the president was black enough to get the black vote are we really saying that Reid said something racists? Give me a break! Once again the GOP comes across as the political opportunists that they are and the media comes across as the whores they are for trying to sell something no one is buying. With a lack of outrage so obvious, now the media is trying to stoke it, they had to go find Doug Wilder in order to find someone black to even comment negatively and even he says that there was a big difference between what Reid said and Trent Lott’s transgression.

  • spob

    First of all Joe, let’s deal with this quote:
    .
    “Obviously, the Republican campaign won’t get Reid ousted–although it will hurt his tenuous re-election campaign in an increasingly non-white state. But, for what it’s worth, Lott’s comments shouldn’t have resulted in his defenestration, either. They were obnoxious, but affectionate hyperbole: the occasion was a party celebrating the ancient Thurmond’s career.”
    .
    Lott’s comments should have resulted in his defenestration. A nostalgia for de jure segregation is simply unacceptable in an elected official. Yeah, Lott gets a little mitigation because of the situation, but the bottom line is that Lott’s words sent a message to citizens he is supposed to represent–one that is antithetical to equality before the law.
    .
    As for Reid, well, the issue is the double standard. His comments were very problematic, and obviously reflect poorly on him. Had a Republican made those comments, Reid himself would be calling for heads. Moreover, Harry Reid has played the race card himself–comparing opponents of Dem HCR to segregationists. Why does he get a free pass here? Moreover, Obama’s reactions to racial things need scrutiny. Why does Reid get a pass from Obama, but Lott did not. Why does Obama get away with trivializing a racist assault on a white victim as a “schoolyard fight”.
    .
    Joe, when you can deal with these issues, pontificate. Else, your blog post looks like a shill for Dems.

  • spob

    No Dee, we’re just tired of the racial double standards. And smearing the “tea party” movement with the actions of a very few is pathetic.

  • spob

    It really is amazing–people who see racism in mere opposition to Obama are shilling for Harry Reid. Wow.

  • spob

    Well, dee, then why did Reid feel the need to apologize?

  • hellslittlestangel

    Has any person of color besides MC “This Melanin for Hire” Steele expressed offense at Reid’s remarks?

  • Jim, Foolish Literalist

    **Lott’s comments shouldn’t have resulted in his defenestration, either. They were obnoxious, but affectionate hyperbole: the occasion was a party celebrating the ancient Thurmond’s career. **

    Which were taken in a context of his larger, longer career, such as his affiliation with the Conservative Citizens’ Council, with Southern Partisan magazine, his votes against renewing the Civil Rights Act, recognizing MLK, his support of displaying the Confederate flag…

    C’mon Joe, would it really risk your Reasonable credentials to admit, at this late date, that if Trent Lott isn’t a racist, he’ll do till one comes along?

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    Hey I call it like I see it. Perhaps I’d be willing to cut you some slack if just once one of the so-called members of the Republican leadership had spent one-tenth as much time rejecting the outlandish and racists statements that have become a staple of teabagger’s protests and gatherings as they did trying to gin up faux outrage over Harry Reid’s statement. You’re hardly in a position to call anything a double standard when the GOP uses double standard as a political tool on a regular basis, elevating hypocrisy to a new art form. This is just a few examples of GOP dual standards philosophy:
    .
    1) Obama had a briefing on Yemen by the previous administration and we were still attacked by someone from Yemen. — George bush was briefed by the previous administration about Al Queda but we were attacked on 9/11 by Al Queda — well that’s different.
    .
    2) How dare Obama be on vacation when the undiebomber took his shot and take 3 days to come before the American people? Oh Bush was on vacation when he had his shoe bomber and he took six days — well that’s different.
    .
    3) Obama is trying the undiebomber in civilian court! Oh Bush tried his shoe bomber in civilian court? Well that’s different.
    .
    4) Republicans claimed that any dissent or even questioning the president at a time of war was unpatriotic, un-American and amounted to treason. Oh Cheney did that? — Well that’s different.
    .
    I would be hard pressed to ever completely exhaust this list. the lengths to which the GOP has switched gears, changed the bars and just plain lied to try to paint Obama as being beyond the pale is unprecedented. You want to talk about double standard please. Like I said a along, when you clean your own house, starting with the daily racial diatribes of boss Limbaugh then you can speak, until then you have no truth to tell.

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    Dee, you live in a bubble.

  • apr2563

    Joe: Please scroll down and read Karen’s posting. This topic has been thoroughly discussed. This addition just gives spob another excuse to say the same thing over and over and over. Yes, my response to him is always the same out of the hope he will say something constructive and new.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Is this-
    “He was wowed by Obama’s oratorical gifts and believed that the country was ready to embrace a black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama — a “light-skinned” African American “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one,” as he said privately. Reid was convinced, in fact, that Obama’s race would help him more than hurt him in a bid for the Democratic nomination.”

    The same as-
    “Reid’s support of a black man for President (in large part because Obama–light-skinned, militantly middle class–defied the racial caricature”?
    .
    No.

    As for Lott he was shoved aside not by the media or Democrats. Bush wanted, and got, a malleable republican Senate Leader. Frist was their boy all along.

  • apr2563

    You are so right Paul. I forgot how anxious the administration was to get rid of Lott. They needed someone that would not only drink the KoolAid but share it with the rest of the Senate.

  • shepherdwong

    “Harry Reid’s obnoxious private comments about Barack Obama…”
    .
    People like you and David Gregory are turning this country into a sad joke. Do you think anyone outside your Beltway zoo thinks what Reid said was the least bit controversial “obnoxious” or racist?

  • ilikechips

    DEE- do you now how foolish you look. The double standard and liberal hypocrisy is astonishing. If a Republican says anything ” they are a racist. If a Democrat say’s anything..and apologizes..That’s fine. DEE your absolute blind following and defenses of Obama and libs is ridiculous. If Obama called somebody a fudgepacker. (as opposed to teabagger) you would defend him saying he is talking about baking fudge. And you also sound like an idiot complaining about the media, talk about biting the hand that feeds. The media couldn’t be anymore in the tank for Obama and Dems.They are spinning already to defend Reid..ala liberal fata$$ Joe Klein

  • ilikechips

    I can only imagaine how the media would have been drooling all over themselves to bash Mitch McConnell if he were the one to say it. Posters here( especially Dee) would have immediately cried ” racism!! racism!!!”

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    Better a bubble called the real world than an alternative universe called the fox news diaspora.

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    That’s the only response Dee knows. It’s reflexive accusations of racism, followed by blind follow the leader dogma.

  • rose83

    How exactly was the substance of Reid’s comments racist? It’s a sincere question because I honestly don’t even understand the criticism. I saw Liz Cheney this morning repeatedly call Reid’s comments racist, but not once did she explain why. I get that using the word “negro” is odd, but is that all this is about? Because we don’t call the NAACP racist because of the outdated language in its name.

    Frankly, it seems that if Reid was being racist, his racism was entirely directed at whites. The obvious implication from his comments is that he didn’t think whites would vote for a darker-skinned candidate who sounded more “black”. If that’s racist towards blacks, then saying West Germans in the 1950s wouldn’t have voted for a Jewish Chancellor would be antisemitic. Which is obviously absurd.

  • apr2563

    Ah, the spob arguement. If, if, if a R said that…well, well, well…liberal media, unfair…

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    Too bad you neither live in the real world nor do I belong to the Fox news right wing. You should read Joe Klein’s print edition piece, “Village Idiots.” In a rare moment of clarity, JK pointed out that the left-blogosphere is as much an insular, reality denying village as inside the beltway. Your retorts are reflexive, your caricatures broad and unrealistic, and your support for the President tortuously blind and doctrinal. Your rants rarely resonate with anyone other than you. Bubble, indeed, Dee. Bubble, indeed.

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    Of course, aside from your propensity to use the most impolitic language, you do realize that the reason why your argument sounds so absurd is because Mitch McConnell as well as the rest of the Republican leadership would never have said that they were wowed by Obama’s oratorical gifts. And they would never have embraced his run for president. But if you think this wasn’t a factor on their encouragement of running Colin Powell for president you are sadly mistaken. This is a fact of life in Black America and just because Steel needed an issue to get his latest gaffe of of the front page, doesn’t mean I am less of a person because I’m not helping yo to do it. If it wasn’t for this faux issue w would be talking about Steele’s challenge to fire him or shut up. Of course, when the issue is race its pretty handy to have your token black guy handy == I suppose the urgent conference calls have been suspended temporarily.

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    Hey Rose!

  • rose83

    Hi Dee! Good to see some of the regular commenters here, and some new ones too.
    .
    Still no answer to my question yet… You’d think if Reid’s comments were definitely racist someone could explain why!

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    Don’t hold your breath for an explanation Rose. As far as I can tell if they could they would but they can’t so they won’t. So far they’ve been limited to having a tantrum because we didn’t get mad at Reid for mentioning race during a campaign where race was a constant issue. It is ludicrous to make this a big deal when we had a debate on whether the president was really black enough. They claim that Liberals always get a pass, but Bill Clinton didn’t get a pass, although eventually he was forgiven. Perhaps the reason the GOP doesn’t get forgiven is because their actions suggest that when they do apologize they don’t really mean it. How many people think the right wing was really sorry about that Barack the Magic Negro joke? Same word, completely different context and no apology from Rush and he was Republican was punished the same way that Lott was punished, by his own peers who didn’t want to associate with that. Limbaugh lost his spot in the NFL consortium and Lott lost he support among his fellow Republican Senators.

  • stuartzechman

    This “issue” is all politics –highly dysfunctional politics– and zero substance.
    .
    Americans deserve better than this from both parties and all ideological camps. What we’re doing and how we’re behaving solves nothing. In the current state of affairs, we’re both cheapening and worsening our problems with ethnicity and race. The only positive thing that can be said for us is that, unlike the rest of the world, we actually believe that these problems can be solved. It is to our credit that we even try. It is to our discredit that we make the situation worse by structuralizing dishonest discussion and debate.
    .
    The appropriation of racial tensions, the exploitation of natural tribal hostilities, and the politicization of language debase our culture and our democracy. One would think that, if our grand experiment in true, multi-ethnic pluralism survived the Irish potato famine migrations, that we might be able to put our own legacy of apartheid behind us, but that’s not apparently on anyone’s agenda.
    .
    Once again, I’m not so much disgusted by what someone said as by the various, yet predictable reactions to what was said, and what the resulting conflicts means in terms of this nation’s ability to treat its own self-inflicted wounds.
    .
    We need a better system for dealing with our issues than this one we have now. The first step in beginning to acquire that better system is probably to cease allowing the politicization of language, and to take the power to make scandal out of these statements out of the hands of political media and the public relations wings of our political institutions.
    .
    That kind of step would also mean that we would need to give up the occasional thrill of dancing on our political enemies’ graves. We would be required to relinquish opportunities to congratulate ourselves on membership in the “good people” political tribe, and to denounce those others in that “bad people” political tribe over there. We’d have to demand from ourselves that we not tend to believe the worst about those other Americans based on what was reported about what was said. We’d have to start to prize honesty above sensitivity in our politics, while openly acknowledging what our language sometimes says about our common assumptions regarding other Americans.
    .
    We’d have to be better in order to demand better.
    .
    So what do you think? Are we up to it?

  • lawchic22

    Well, Joe Klein certainly cleared a couple of things up for me with this post. It’s good to know that when a Senator waxes nostalgic about how there wouldn’t be “all these problems” in this country if segregationist Strom Thurmond had won the presidency in 1948 it’s merely “affectionate hyperbole” and not a true reflection of his political beliefs.

    I’m sure Lott had no idea that Strom made outrageous statements during that campaign like: “All the laws of Washington and all the bayonets of the Army cannot force the Negro into our homes, our schools, our churches.” Or what about this gem: “We stand for the segregation of the races and the racial integrity of each race.” I’m also sure that Lott had no idea that segregationists that take this kind of rhetoric (and political belief system) to the extreme have been using it for years to oppress minorities and deny them their basic rights as citizens.

    But thank you Joe Klein for that little pat on the head about what should be dismissed as “affectionate hyperbole.” I’m confident that all the people in this country that lived through (or who have relatives that lived through) de jure segregation, Black codes, and crazed lynch mobs appreciate that point of view.

    As far as Reid is concerned, his comments are offensive, but not surprising. They remind me of a point I was making about the options Blacks have between the Repubs and the Dems.

    The *Repubs are delusional and hysterical and use the head in the sand technique when it comes to issues involving race; racism doesn’t exist unless you accuse white people of being racists. The *Dems, on the other hand, are condescending and paternalistic and think that the scraps they give Black voters in terms of certain legislation and/or appointments means is enough to placate you. Should Reid lose his post over this? Who knows. His comments are offensive, but not the worst thing in the world, though they do reflect a tone deafness that I don’t want in a majority leader. More alarming to me, however, were the comments that he made a few months ago about the detainees — those comments sealed his fate with me in terms of his grasp of the issues and his effectiveness as a leader.

    *I make the qualification that these statements do not apply to ALL Repubs or Dems.

  • ilikechips

    Hey Dee..anybody home..Rush Limbaugh didn’t come up with Barack the Magic Negro. It came from a March 19th article in L.A Times..but keep telling yourself that he’s a racist for repeating it. Don’t hear you complaining about the liberal L.A. times. And i especially like the line from your above post that when Republicans apologize..they don’t mean it. Glad to hear that you not only call everybody who disagrees with Obama a racist..but you can also read peoples minds to state that Dems mean it when they apologize and republicans don’t..you are too much Dee. I half think your posts are not serious..just a goof to see other peoples reactions

  • stuartzechman

    Rose:
    .
    Liz Cheney is exploiting the political media’s tendency to confuse evidence of potential racial insensitivity with evidence of potential racism.

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    Yeah but he was the one that publicized it on his radio show and don’t tell me he didn’t because i heard him do it. Or do you think nobody pays attention to the enemy. It’s not as if it wasn’t one of the reasons Steele got elected to Chairman, because one of the guys up for election sent it a round as a joke. Now he might have apologized but Rush made it clear that the guy didn’t have anything to apologize for…

  • rmrd

    Limbaugh had a song writer format the line into a song and promoted it on his radio show.
    .
    A large part of the reason that African-Americans reject the the GOP is because they do not want to encounter folks like you..

  • Cliff

    rose – to me it doesn’t sound like Reid was being intentionally racist, but I hear an implication in his words that blacks, by and large, don’t speak English properly.
    .
    And I don’t think he consciously meant to imply that (and the word Negro didn’t help). But I think it’s one of the default assumptions of people who grow up in small Western towns full of white people (and I speak from experience here).

  • Dee in Columbia MD

    Exiled once again you are predictably wrong. That article you referred to led to a thread where I took the position that what I call litmus-testing progressives were acting just like wing nuts when they attempted to castigate moderates for not wanting to kill health care over the public option. I advocated for tolerance so the idea that I am reflexive is not only absurd but better describes you I think since you didn’t even bother to rad that thread because if you had you wouldn’t have suggested I read the article that produced it. I am opposed to litmus testing qualifications and purging those who don’t adhere to strict dogma. But as usual, because you do realize that everytime we get into a comment war it’s because you draw conclusions based on misinformation and call me names rather than combat my arguments. Now, when you’re ready to tell me what part of what I said was a reflexive accusation of racism when in this thread I am being hounded for not making an accusation of racism I’ll accept your apology. Moreover, if there is anyone who is guilty of being predictable it’s you, since you can’t seem to find another communication opening other than the personal attack. Perhaps next time Neo you might just try saying hello.

  • rose83

    stuart, Aside from the use of “negro”, I don’t see how Reid’s comments could possibly be seen as insensitive. I imagine the vast majority of African-Americans, including Obama, would agree with the substance of what he said.
    .
    My best guess about Liz Cheney is that she was arguing it’s racist to refer to skin color. Which is the kind of argument people falsely attribute to opponents of racial inequality. It’s like an over-the-top parody of political correctness.
    .
    cliff, I personally can’t see the implication, although obviously such an implication would be racist. It’s no secret that different ethnic/socioeconomic/regional groups tend to have distinct speech patterns, just as men and women tend to. And it’s no secret that there is a hierarchy of how those “dialects” are perceived.

  • Cliff

    It sounds like you’re asking for a better class of people, which you’re not going to get.
    .
    I think, at best, you’ll get a percentage of people to say, “This is ridiculous, let’s move on,” when this sort of thing crops up.

  • Cliff

    It’s that perception that can be construed as racist, in this case.
    .
    It’s the perception that because some blacks don’t say the whole word, or drop words from the sentence, they are, on the whole, less educated and less intelligent than people who do speak “proper English”.
    .
    The flip side is the assumption that when a black person talks like a white guy, they’re doing really well. “Oh, it’s so good that you’re speaking properly like us now!” seems to be the unspoken phrase attached here.
    .
    It’s very subtle, in Reid’s statement, but that’s what I see there. And again, I don’t think it was intentional or particularly concerning, it’s more just a part of his background.

  • tjoyce994

    Good post.

  • apr2563

    As Roland Martin stated on CNN, most blacks agree with Reids assessment. They will not be shocked.
    Obama is a light skinned Negro
    He is well spoken
    He can use African American cadence when needed.

    Like Jackie Robinson, Obama has had to control his passions. He has been accused of being arrogant (uppity) and an angry black man. Unfortunately, for “Negroes” in this country, perception is everything.

    Listen to Hilary Clinton. When she speaks to a southern audience uses a southern cadence.
    Listen to how Bush used his Texas drawl for a boy raised in prep schools.
    Listen to Sarah Palin drop those Gs. Depending on her audience.
    Now what seems to shock people is the word Negro. Well, the disignation is used on our census forms. It is a term from his generation. Not so offensive.

  • tjoyce994

    No, because the intent was obvious. Both Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson acknowledged that it was a poor word choice, state that they understood the sentiment, and look forward to working with Reid in the future. Only “Rent A Negro” Michael Steele is offended. And it’s his job to be offended.

  • stuartzechman

    Rose:

    I don’t see how Reid’s comments could possibly be seen as insensitive.

    Aren’t you perhaps forgetting those professionals and amateurs who look for whatever offense could be construed from public figures’ statements?
    .
    The point isn’t that what is said could be reasonably judged to be indicative of a person’s offensive, anachronistic disregard for others, it’s that what is said could be interpreted or construed in good or bad faith by anyone, even those pretending for agendas’ sake to be offended, to be somehow indicative of character flaw or political ineptitude (a far worse crime in political media circles) with respect to race.
    .
    Remember how it was suggested that Hillary Clinton’s “tears” be “analyzed” in light of what tears she may or may not have shed for “victims of Katrina”?
    .
    You seem to be assuming that “how Reid’s comments could possibly be seen as insensitive” is the premise behind the discussion, when it is far more likely that the premise behind this discussion is how his (or anyone’s) comments could be portrayed as insensitive.

  • Paul-no not that one

    It’s nice to have Rose engaging again.
    .
    I hope you stick around Rose.

  • tjoyce994

    Let me offer you a different take on this, and maybe you will understand why minorities aren’t angry. Reid saw what everyone else saw — that Obama was a brillant speaker who was able to touch people with words. He was smart, and there was little there to offend white America, including his skin color. He wasn’t some racial sterotype of how too many white Americans see black men. Harry Reid felt that Obama had everything it took to go all the way.
    -
    My deceased grandfather was a big baseball fan, and he used to tell me about the Negro leagues. His opinion, and that of his friends, was that Jackie Robinson wasn’t anywhere near the best baseball player in the Negro Leagues, but he was the one that Branch Ricky chose to intergrate baseball. Jackie Robinson was the one that would be least offensive in color, deportment, etc.
    -
    “The first” anything gets all the name recognition, but they also get the headaches. When have we ever had people take their children out of school because our president was going to speak to them? However poorly he worded his comments, Harry Reid gave Obama the ultimate high five. He believed in him.

  • tjoyce994

    I thought the dialect comment referenced the cadences that some black politicians (i.e. Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and in his day Dr. King) use when they give speeches. It isn’t something that you hear a white politican do. Interestingly, Obama does it every once in a while, when he hits his stride in a speech. Not often though.

  • rmrd

    When Republicans forcefully address the Limbaugh’s, monkey doll carriers, etc., then they will begin to receive some respect on isues of race. Unfortunately, The GOP is now welcoming the John Birch Society into it’s ranks.
    .
    The same dismissal that Al Sharpton receives from Republicans as a race pimp is equal to the dismissal that Republicans receive on issues of race from The African-American community.
    .

  • tjoyce994

    I have to say that I am amazed by the hype over a poorly worded comment of praise. And I am confused by who is doing the hype.
    -
    CNN contacted AL Sharpton, and his reaction is pretty much that of most blacks. The statement was poorly worded, but the sentiment was clear. He looks forward to working with Reid in the future. Since Sharpton doesn’t have anything negative to say, the media isn’t interested anymore. Ditto for Jesse Jackson.
    -
    The media has air time to fill, so I understand their interest in keeping this an issue. But what is up with the rest of white America? I am truly curious. The comment was made about African Americans, and, with the exception of Michael Steele, we aren’t offended. In fact, it made perfect sense to me. Assessing the fact that Obama will be more acceptable to white American because he wasn’t very dark, and spoke like a Harvard graduate was common sense. Blacks already knew that having fair skin can be a real asset. (REally, now, how many blue-black African Americans TV anchors can you recall?)
    -
    If we aren’t offended, why are you? And some of you have the audicity to be annoyed with us because we aren’t offended! When did I lose the right to determine what is offensive to me? Are these the same people who complain about “blacks turning everything into a race issue?”
    -
    African Americans represent a larger percent of the unemployed, make up most of the prison population, have poorer access to health care, get poorer health care service even when we have the same coverage. And this is the “racist” hill where white American wants to plant it’s flag? Who the hell cares what Harry Reid said about Barack Obama two years ago? Correction. Harry Reid said that he could be leader of the free world. Who cares HOW he said it?
    -
    This isn’t an idle rant. Some one please enlighten me. What am I missing?

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    Hello Dee~
    Actually the article to which I referred -and this was quite clear in my initial post- was the print article in TIME Magazine, which obviously has no thread attached to it as it was delivered to my home. So, I see no possible situation in which I could have read your post on that article, so I haven’t a clue what you’re talking about. “Village Idiots” by Joe Klein in the latest edition of TIME’s print magazine. Again, perhaps you should read it.
    ~
    As for your reflexivity:
    Of course, in this case the GOP is upset because black folks are not demonstrating in the streets, which makes it clear that they have little understanding of what it takes to sound racists, which I guess explains their propensity to open mouth and insert their racist foot so often.
    .
    In fact, the only thing the GOP has accomplished is to remind black voters, as well as other voters of color of how racially insensitive they are.
    .
    You can’t very well embrace teabaggers carrying signs portraying Obama as a witch doctor or in white face and not say one word to denounce the daily racial diatribes for the Limbaughs and the Becks and then turn around and chastise Reid for what amounts to a clumsy compliment and political assessment of the mores of white voters.
    ~
    Now, I am not a Republican, but this is utter reflexivity at work. GOP=racists, Obama=good. This is your formula for every post. Now while I do see improvement in that at least you’ve limited your commentary in this post to Republicans, rather than conservatives, it still demonstrates a complete stereotypical understanding of an entire political faction, while you bemoan the “mores of white voters” as stereotyping all blacks into one single package. Time and time again, Dee, you broadly characterize all Republicans, or all conservatives, or even all whites, while duplicitously expressing your (valid) trepidation at the same elementary analysis of black communities. You have every right to push back against blanketed perceptions of black culture, especially those that fall well below the mark. However, to do so while simultaneously painting your political opponents with the broadest of brushes is utter hypocrisy.

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    My above post at 9.1 should be in reply to Dee’s post at 10.4

  • mg393

    While there is some truth to what you stated I disagree with the part about it being how the media handled it. It’s not how the media handled it or how people took or didn’t take offense to it. It’s that it was said at all. I do agree with you that the “teabaggers” and all others who throw about how racist they really are, are totally out of line also. But I DO stand up against those people. When I meet anyone who wants to try and convince me about anything racist or even begins to speak racist I let them know I wont stand for it. I happen to be white but so what? Ancient man began in Africa and began from the black color. We have so much technology with us today and we have so much proof of blood lines and DNA strings and yet we find ourselves, as people all over the world, still being racist. Racism is ridiculous. IF anyone took their time to study the truth about blood lines they would understand that “race” doesn’t really exist. We are all human beings. Our bloodlines, when traced with the new DNA tests, show surprising results. People who classify themselves as Hispanic actually many times have more European DNA than anything else. People who classify themselves as of European decent many times have more African American DNA. There are four major bloodlines, aka, DNA strings for “race”. They are Asian, American Indian, African American and European.

    In answer to your last question, I care. Everyone should care. People, ALL people need to understand they shouldn’t say anything they don’t want to end up being published or read one day. And you are right again, MANY so called “white” people don’t fully understand that we are all equal. That we are all human and that we all have the right to stand up against what is wrong. However when you ask me why I am offended if you aren’t, my answer is because I am a HUMAN being, just as you are. I’m not so offended that he chose to make remarks about the African Americans, I am offended that he chose to make “racial” remarks about ANYONE. I am offended because we should be long past this kind of ignorance and yet here we sit, still fighting race wars, still arguing whether affirmative action is valid, still saying things that we somehow think are okay simply because we hold a certain office in any government. That’s why I’m offended. I’m offended at anyone who chooses to attack any other human being for simply being of a different color, nationality, religion, sexual preference or any other of the hundreds of prejudiced things they think they have the right to attack.

    Only when we, as a collective human family, can understand that it is our differences we should embrace instead of attack, can we begin to work together for a common good instead of “raging against the empty machine” that our governments have become.

  • rose83

    cliff, I think to plausibly and fairly draw that interpretation one would have to know the context of Reid’s comments, including their precise wording. Otherwise this is kind of like the storm around HRC’s reference to RFK: the ingredients for an offensive comment are there so an assumption is made about how they fit together even though there is no actual evidence they were used in an inappropriate way. In this case, Reid’s age and geographic background are cited as reasons to imagine an offensive meaning, but that is of course doing precisely what Reid is accused of.
    .
    And then everything gets lost in circular reasoning…
    .
    stuart, you’re right of course. I admit I am still amazed by how much time and energy can be spent analyzing a few words without even looking at what the words actually mean.
    .
    P-NNTO, thanks! I hope I have time to post a little more.

  • textee

    Given the fact that the race baiters (i.e., members of the Democrat party) don’t consider Obama calling his own freakin’ grandmother a “typical white person” to be racist, is it safe to say that the same race baiters don’t consider calling Obama a “typical half-black person” to be racist as well? I wouldn’t take that bet, boys and girls …. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2008/03/21/ferraro-offended-by-comparison-to-pastor-wright/

  • jcapan

    “We’d have to be better in order to demand better.”
    .
    -Stuart Smalley, err Zechman
    .
    Seriously, wonderfully put but I’m with Cliff. Also agree with his comment at 5:12. It’s amazing how these goons get to their lofty positions without a capacity to measure their words. Reminded of Biden’s gem: “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.” The country would be so much better off if these fools were told to STFU once in a while. Or at least a little British parliamentary debate.

    I’d add that there are many wonderful reasons to cheer for Reid’s defeat (or any of house of lords), though I’d prefer at the hands of a progressive primary opponent as opposed to the likely GOP victor. But this would demand a political discourse that focuses on issues and not faux controversies.

  • abdullah69

    In politics, especially as practised by the GOP, moral outrage is just another term for masturbation.

    Move along people, nothing worth seeing here.

  • FlownOver

    Yeah, we should all wet ourselves about an injudicious word choice by Reid, while ignoring the overt racism of the anti-Obama loons.

    Yeah. Sure.

  • girliewoman

    Dee,
    I enjoyed your response in 1.3. You nailed down the argument. Case closed.

  • apollyon07

    HAHA referencing Sharpton and Jackson as if either of them are relevant/important. These two smooth talkers are two of the most racist POS’s in the country. Also, Reid is not a Republican, hence their acceptance of what he said.

  • apollyon07

    Equating Harry Reid to Rush Limbaugh…isn’t one the Senate Majority Leader and the other does not even hold elected office? If the Democrats had to apologize everytime people like Maher or Olbermann said something stupid/offensive, then they’d get even less done!

  • tjoyce994

    Textee, please explain to me why you consider the phrase “a typical white person” racist? I can’t imagine why you want to call Obama a typical half black person, but if it makes your day, have at it.
    -
    We have to agree to disagree about Democrats being race baiters. I don’t think race baiting is party specific. As a person of color, I have to say that the Naional GOP has gone out of its way to offend people of color for years.

  • doylycarte

    Frankly, it seems that if Reid was being racist, his racism was entirely directed at whites. The obvious implication from his comments is that he didn’t think whites would vote for a darker-skinned candidate who sounded more “black”. If that’s racist towards blacks, then saying West Germans in the 1950s wouldn’t have voted for a Jewish Chancellor would be antisemitic. Which is obviously absurd.

    Are you really that naive or just baiting the opposition?
    First, would the racism be OK if it was directed towards whites? Is racism OK under some circumstances but not others? Who exactly adjudicates when it gets a pass? Is it for those who feel they have been aggrieved to decide? Is racism merely a function of social justice; and moreover, if we interpret it so narrowly, how will we ever achieve a day without social injustice if the systemic existence of the injustice is the sine qua non for respectful standards of discourse? Must the be so inextricably bound that the latter cannot exist without the former?
    But more to your point, the racism is not so much in the intent of the statement, which is what Reid’s defenders are falling back upon; but rather, in the way it is delivered. This is not a simple poor word choice. That would be if he had simply said the word “negro” rather than “African American.” At heart is the very backhanded nature of his compliment.
    I am from the South. I have heard some people direct comments of praise towards African American football players at the Universities of Auburn and Alabama that you probably would not take such a magnanimous view of. Truly, I cannot imagine that you would have listened to what I did and say, “My what a generous backhanded compliment, sir! Next time, though, please don’t make such a poor word choice.” I rather suspect you would sit there in stunned silence and wonder upon how this person can genuinely believe they are being complimentary.
    The point is that Reid didn’t simply say that his race might be an advantage for him because he wouldn’t trigger strong prejudicial responses. Reid implied that using prejudicial phraseology. This is why your analogy to West Germany and a Jewish Chancellor is fatally flawed. A valid analogy would be to claim that it would not be racist to say that being Jewish could be an advantage because of “blue eyes” and “no discernible countenance of the Wandering Jew, unless it is desired.” See the difference? No, you probably don’t, which is a far greater tragedy than Reid’s remarks.

  • spob

    A few things in here are really funny.
    .
    First, the attempt to spin “Negro dialect” as something less than perjorative is funny. Especially from people who see racism in the mere opposition to Obama. Much in the same way I have been called racist in here because I point out that Sonia Sotomayor, despite being a federal judge for 17 years couldn’t figure out whether Ginsburg’s dissent would have affirmed the Second Circuit’s decision in Ricci.
    .
    Second, the attempt to deflect blame from Reid because people like Rush Limbaugh are supposedly worse is pathetic (note: when Limbaugh wanted to buy a football team, you guys had to manufacture quotes–by the way, the “magic Negro” wasn’t one of them).
    .
    Third, as pretty much conceded around here, there is a double standard.
    .
    Fourth, Harry Reid has a history. His assessment of Justice Thomas certainly was open to criticism that he was singling out a black Justice for unjustified and erroneous criticism.
    .
    Fifth, Harry Reid hasn’t been shy about imputing racism to others. (The MSM isn’t going to cover that bit of history.)
    .
    Joe, maybe you can answer these points without looking like a Dem shill.

  • gysgt213

    Oy vey.
    .
    Ousted Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich says he’s “blacker than Barack Obama” and tells Esquire magazine that he was a real person in a political arena dominated by phonies.

    Bl.agojevich, referring to the president as “this guy,” says Obama was elected based simply on hope.
    .
    “What the (expletive)? Everything he’s saying’s on the teleprompter,” Blagojevich told the magazine for a story in its February issue, which hits newsstands Jan. 19.
    .
    “I’m blacker than Barack Obama. I shined shoes. I grew up in a five-room apartment. My father had a little laundromat in a black community not far from where we lived,” Blagojevich said. “I saw it all growing up.”
    .
    The White House refused to comment.
    .
    http://www.click2houston.com/politics/22201965/detail.html

  • Matt

    The language used by Harry Reid in describing then-candidate Obama was unacceptable. But the fact remains that it is hardly the worst thing uttered by a member of Congress and is not even close to comparable with Trent Lott’s open wish for a return to segregation and Jim Crow.

    http://www.political-buzz.com/

  • rustyreturns

    The sad part in my mind is that so long as this type of thing continues, the goal of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and Martin Luther King’s “dream” will never be realized for blacks in America. But, also the “dream” for everyone in America no matter what their color. This in my opinion is what set King apart from all others. He was truly color blind, period.
    .
    Harry was probably wrong for using the word “Negro”. As it has been said, it was probably a very poor choice of words. You first have to look at the intention, the context, and then the history of that individual.
    .
    Republicans are wrong for making such a big deal out of nothing in my mind. It simply keeps people from being able to understand each other, better. It is occassions like this which remind us of our past, which is a good thing in my mind, but to take this stand does not allow us to continue moving forward.
    .
    So long as events like this are perpetuated then blacks will never fully assimilate into our society, and “the dream” will never be realized, not just for blacks in America, but everyone. This is the sad thing about this entire non-issue. For those who believe that this was somehow “racists”, then you are perpetuating the continuation of pre-1964 beliefs, and in my mind guilty of racism.
    .
    We have a black President. He is a great orator, perhaps the best in our lifetime. Time will also be the judge as to how he will be remembered as a President from this actions, not just his words. The same will be true for Harry Reid.

  • kathy

    Dee – very well said, and there’s little reason for me to give my original comment, because you’ve said it better.

    Reid committed the unforgiveable washington sin – he spoke the truth. Inartfully, to be sure, and in cringeworthy language, which was another sin.

    It was whites he insulted, of course, and not blacks. During the campaign others said much that Reid said,in more elegant language, without a kerfuffle.

    And yes, much of it is media driven.Big news out of book: Potential presidential contender in 2012 has a problem with lies according to her former campaign official? What’s the big deal. Majority leader tells the truth in icky language? OMG!

  • freeinpa

    You are correct that the Repubs are making way too much of this. But you have to admit the entertainment value of the watching the liberals tripping over each other justifying and rationalizing is priceless.

    The circus is back in town!

  • freeinpa

    Truth never fits with Demo logic. It did play nicely into Dee’s “Yeah but” defense

  • freeinpa

    SZ:

    I always respect your opinion but you are looking for a pipe dream that was destroyed over the past 40 years. This country has welcomed people into this country and while it has never been smooth, the goal was to have all folks assimulate into the people of the United States of America. Now groups are pitted against each other while celebrating their own group. What we had was not perfect but all groups moved toward a common goal. Now each group moves toward its own goal.

    We will never move forward as a united country as long as we have race and multi-cultural goals that have now transformed into a growth industry. We are now further away today from MLK’s goal of “being judged by the content of our character thn the color of our skin” than we were in the 1980′s.

  • rmrd

    rusty gets it right, the outrage is ridiculous. freeinpa, textee, exiled, spob, etc exemplify why African-Americans dislike the GOP.
    .
    When the Jon Birchers and the birthers receive the same reaction from Conservatives as Reid’s silly comment, then there will be a sense that the Republicans understand the situation.
    .
    It’s hilarious to watch Conservatives excuse away the teabaggers, birthers, Limbaugh’s and feign outrage when Reid makes a comment.
    .
    Try comparing Harry Reid’s voting record to Trent Lott’s and you may get a clue as to why Lott received the heat that came his way.
    .
    Pat Buchanan has said things as hateful as Jesse Jackson’s hymie-town about Latinos and Blacks, yet Pat gets cover from Conservatives. Buchanan is an MSNBC analyst,but Jackson gets ridiculed by Conservatives.
    .
    Double standard indeed.

  • http://theblindspotsofgod.wordpress.com lawyermommy

    What is all this hoopla because Reid made a remark that is embedded consciously or subconsciously in the minds of the average American.

    I remember many years ago, I addressed a group of female lawyers (like me) and at the end of the speech, a woman approached me and said that I was well spoken. HAHA. I thought that was hilarious.

    I have an advanced degree in law and I am admitted to a few jurisdictions so should the shock have been if I did NOT speak impeccably??? However, I have come to understand that for most people of color, speaking well is considered an added attribute and not something that is necessarily expected with significant educational achievements.

    In both White America and Black America, a well spoken person of color is sometimes viewed with confusion. It is insane but true.

    Anyhow, my point is that Reid should not be singled out for voicing what so many sometimes think but are afraid to voice or do not even know they have these biases.

    Yawnnnn…. could everyone get over this Reid blah blah already and get on with the business of the day. :)

    LM
    http://theblindspotsofgod.wordpress.com/2010/01/08/technology-savvy-nigerian-criminals-are-the-greatest-threat-to-national-security/

  • 53_3

    “Obviously, the Republican campaign won’t get Reid ousted–although it will hurt his tenuous re-election campaign in an increasingly non-white state. But, for what it’s worth, Lott’s comments shouldn’t have resulted in his defenestration, either.”
    .
    Wow, Joe, wow.
    .
    Lott shouldn’t have been defenestrated for his “comments”?
    .
    A forty-five minute tirade on the virtues of segregation is not a “comment”!
    .
    And Joe, you numbskull, what do you think the Black Community would say?
    .
    Don’t you think that before you make an idiotic comment like that, that maybe you should consult with them?

  • apr2563

    Free: Really, the countries goal has always been assimilation? Well, yes for some white immigrants.
    Not those pesky native Americans. Keep them on the reservation.
    Until recent history it was important to keep black people segregated from our schools and neighborhoods. It has been the last 40 years that has allowed some assimilation.
    Let’s see. Orientals were brought in to build our railroads and then sent home. Japanese were put in concentration camps.
    Jews, until relatively recently, were kept from clubs and neighborhoods by racial covenants.
    Latinos have suffered from job discrimination, as have all of the above groups.
    All of these nonassimilation factors were slowly removed in the last 40 years. How have things gotten worse? Are you saying the Civil Rights Act slowed assimilation?

  • 53_3

    Nailhead, Dee, nailhead!
    .
    It is like talking to a brick wall.
    .
    They get affirmation of their actions from the mouths of those who purvey the hatred, then use that as a claim to innocence!
    .
    I wish there was a way to convey the very idiocy of the practice in an unassailable way. Hell, when I see the number of Black Americans who have come online here in the past few days, trying to tell them so, they discount it as “liberal brainwashing”*!
    .
    Which serves only to reinforce the image they continually try to argue away!
    .
    What Idiocy!
    .
    *or a similar mechanism

  • georgiac

    Note to spob (1.1) and all those who “debated” this issue on the weekend programs: double standards, racial and otherwise, exist. Republicans are hypocrites, excoriating Democrats for what their “own kind” do. Democrats are hypocrites, excoriating Republicans for what their “own kind” do. Why on earth can’t we all–those in public life, those in the media, those who respond to blog postings and news stories, those in private life, ALL of us, carry on a reasonable, mature discussion? Aren’t we ever going to tire of this silly back and forth?

  • 53_3

    Have either of you really considered the idiocy of your claims?
    .
    Are telling the very people who know this subject the best that they know nothing?
    .
    I like chips is a lost cause, as are most others, but Exiled, this is total crap! And I mean total crap. Look at I-70 which took those who don’t know the Black community by surprise.
    .
    To paste the “liberal brainwashing” theory on the foreheads of everyone in the Black community is to stand in total ignorance of the facts – and I think you know what they are!
    .
    It is the absolute, unadulterated arrogance to try to argue a 97-3 split in consensus (believe me, if we had splits like that in science, we’d be approaching the norms for “unassailable facts”!) in such an idiotic manner.
    .
    It is you who is living in a bubble! Look at who surrounds it and supplies you with affirmation!
    .
    Have you noticed, it is not the Black Community?!?!?!
    .
    Maybe you need to take another approach to this whole thing and help conservatives to get
    rid of these who claim your leadership!

  • stuartzechman

    Thanks so much for reading and responding to my commentary, folks.
    .
    These responses are very interesting, there is much to think about.
    .
    For anyone who supported Obama’s anti-cynicism stance in the last election, or who listened appreciatively to his beautiful Philadelphia speech on race, it is intriguing to consider that the appropriate response to my “Are we up for it?” is “You poor naive fool.“.
    .
    For anyone who has been on the receiving end of the liberal/Democrat condemnation double standard when it comes to language, who has been made aware that, for many liberals/Democrats, the meaning and acceptability of speech is more dependent on who says it than what was said, I’m genuinely sorry…we’re working on that.
    .
    There is an honest-to-God ideologically-based difference of opinion on the politics of speech within communities of liberals, and we’ll get that resolved eventually. I can say with reasonable certainty that the phenomenon of some liberals/Democrats using accusations of racial wrongness as an everyday political and ideological weapon will someday be merely an anachronism. Of course that lets you all know on which side of that intra-liberal divide I come down. I’m sure that many liberals/Democrats will take significant issue with my characterizations (and therefore question my being “progressive on race”), but there it is.

  • 53_3

    This I can absolutely respect and understand.
    .
    Excellent commentary, Rusty.

  • 53_3

    Blagoyavich is right up there with the Balloon Boy hoaxer…

  • 53_3

    Joe!
    .
    Pay Attention:
    .
    One mans’ “affection” in this case, can be another mans death.

  • stuartzechman

    Thanks for this commentary, Rustydog.

  • freeinpa

    SZ:

    Very thoughtful response. I think your response “You poor naive fool” may be a little harsh. Anyone who listened to Obama’s speech in Philadelphia came away that maybe there was hope. I believe that folks took him at his word and believed things were possible. I think the fault lies with the media who took a guided tour in the campaign and were and still are cheerleaders. The campaign was carefully and beautifully orchestrated but as is becoming clear had no substance.

    ===
    “I can say with reasonable certainty that the phenomenon of some liberals/Democrats using accusations of racial wrongness as an everyday political and ideological weapon will someday be merely an anachronism.”

    I hope you are right. As you can see apr2563′s responses to my post, the knee jerk reaction that all of America is bad and racist is the growth industry of which I speak. I could not have planned a better response to prove my point. I would also offer that there are still conservatives (yes there are neaderthals in both idealogical camps) who must ignore those folks and make a sincere effort to help those who need help. Giving up is the easy solutions but that only worsens the problem. There are still not enough Jack Kemps in the active conservative world and still too many Dan Burtons.

    ===
    apr42563

    Thank you for making the case better than any conservative could. If you bothered to read my post you would have read that the assimilation has occurred and since woman’s rights and civil rights it has been less about assimilating as Americas and gaining rights as groups. After fighting for equal rights we now have a more separate society than ever. Asians and Africans and Middle Eastern folks risk life and limb to come here (legally), learn the laws and the language and work hard to succeed. Groups that were here and benefited from the struggles of prior generations now expect an equal outcome and not equal opportunity and folks like you are part of that growth industry the SZ and I speak about that uses race as an ideological weapon.

  • freeinpa

    Every party has abn Earl Butz

  • apr2563

    Free: Perhaps I misunderstood your statement about America’s desire for assimilation. It was not clear you meant that desire began with the Civil Rights movement.
    I do disagree that things are worse during the last 40 years. There has been a significant rise in the minority middle class. One cannot generalize about the motives and actions of others.

  • freeinpa

    “African Americans represent a larger percent of the unemployed, make up most of the prison population”

    These are quite interesting points you bring up that certainly require more discussion. The easy answer is to assume racism. But racism by whom?

    Right now you have an African American president and the unemployment rate has skyrocketed. I am not blaming Obama but I believe there are other issues that go unexplored or unsaid. Historically many black men have been employed in construction. The Democrats enthusiastically passed the Davis Bacon act (Obama I believed re-instated after Bush had suspended it). This forces large construction jobs to use “the prevailing wage” or union wage rate. Unions then bring in crews that, like the unions themselves” are largely white. Many smaller black firms that would normally win as low bidder is shut out. For those who believe that a higher minimum wage has no effect should note that that under the current rate unemployment of young people, and especially young black men has risen. Some states have taken note and are looking to have the rate lowered. The higher cost of any good or service to a business will always limit the purchase or hiring.

    As far as being the large portion of prison populations, once again the question is why. First, let’s acknowledge that sentencing for minor crimes non-violent crimes blacks do serve longer terms and needs to be addressed. But to quote Jesse Jackson “there are more blacks in jail than Yale”. He neglects to give the reason: entrance requirements for Yale are more difficult. Saying higher crime is the result of poverty is easy way out. We have always had poverty. Studies have shown that Appalachia, one of the poorest regions, has a lower crime rate than the national average. Others factors must be at work.

    The lack of sound policies are at the basic root and the blame cannot be laid at the foot of plain racism.

  • freeinpa

    apr42563

    Agreed.

    I tried to point out that since the Civil Rights Act, we have actually become more separatist than when as a society we were physically so.

    With every new legislative action, groups status rules. Other than a political cudgel why would we need a hate crime bill and certainly hate speech regulation on many education campuses is the antithesis to the spirit of freedom of speech that is a bedrock of our country.

  • 53_3

    Spob, Exiled, Freeinpa, Ilikechips, Apolloyon07, and all other conservatives:
    .
    I am going to make my final comments for the day on this.
    .
    My point has been, and has been consistently this:
    .
    You claim duress over the fact that many “on the left” tag you with a stereotype i.e. racists. To make clear, unequivocally, I understand this! There are, in fact, many, many conservatives who are neither racist nor ignorant.
    .
    However, even given this is true, we are discussing the perception of racism in speech and actions. I emphasize this because all of us have debated about what we should see, and not what is actually taking place.
    .
    I’ve seen, I think, about 10 commenters over the past 3 days post who I believe might be Black Americans, and only one of them has even gone so far as to confine her commentary to the ‘here and now’ to convey her feelings, which were still negative of the GOP and conservative movement.
    .
    Nearly unanimously, the Black community has come onto this blog and others and tell you that you are wrong, and, more specifically why.
    .
    You persist in the utter insanity of discounting and discarding the opinions of everyone in the very group that is not only the target, but also the most invested in the problem.
    .
    I do not even need to go tit for tat on this to demonstrate the sheer ridiculousness of your positions, being as they are clearly not supported by the community concerned.
    .
    This should tell you something.
    .
    What it should be telling you is that it is not the fault of the Black community, nor those of us who agree with them for the furtherance of the perception about the GOP and conservatives in general.
    .
    It is your problem! It is your leaders whom you need to address, not the Black community, nor democrats in general.
    .
    If you want to solve the problem, then do not tell the Black community they should change. That is patently ridiculous. Instead, you need to tell your leadership to change their approach!
    .
    And in that, you will find a solution to these problems!

  • freeinpa

    The gospel according to 53.

    Concrete proof that progress will never be made.

  • apr2563

    Excellent post 53. This dialogue has exhausted me. I do not want to stereotype all conservatives and Republicans as racists. However, we have learned through history silence can be as injurious as words.
    Argueing with true racists is non-productive. For a while I lived in a very racially polarized town in eastern Washington. From the police to the political establishment there was a dominating culture of racism. The police would drive through black neighborhoods yelling racial epithets. Because it was and is a farming community, Mexicans were encouraged to come pick crops but leave immediately when the season was over. Native Americans were encouraged to stay on the reservation. Motel owners were given private lessons on how to avoid renting to minorities.
    This was happening well after the passage of the Civil Rights Act.
    At a dinner I attended there were a bunch of Birchers. Believe me Birchers never go away. They started condemning marriage among racially diverse people. I told them I was looking forward to marrying Sidney Poitier someday and bearing his children. Well, conversation ended and the table cleared. Still wish that fantasy had happened.
    When Republican leaders stand in front of crowds spewing violent and hateful speech, no one expects censorship. We do expect them to use their speech to refute and condemn the content.
    The Southern strategy has worked for a long time. My
    hope that it is losing its power as it purveyors lose their power.
    Signing off this post with wishes for not a politically correct society, but one that recognizes the reality of hurtful speech and actions, speaks up to combat it and respects all people of good will.

  • rmrd

    freeinpa.
    .
    There has been progress and there will be further progress in matters of race. You will sit on the sidelines as you are passed by, an grouch yelling for people to get off his lawn. Your comments are unimportant.
    .
    The solid matter that you see is the concrete thought compressing your brain.

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    53_3~
    Generally, I respect yours opinions, and while I may disagree, I can see a cogent argument. This, however, is utterly obfuscating. I saw nothing in your post that was relevant whatsoever to my post to Dee. “Liberal brainwashing”? Huh? Did I make any observations about the black community, whatsoever? No, I did not, so this is rather odd:
    To paste the “liberal brainwashing” theory on the foreheads of everyone in the Black community is to stand in total ignorance of the facts – and I think you know what they are!
    First of all, I never mentioned any liberal brainwashing theory. Secondly, since when is Dee representative of the entire black community? I hardly think that one can assume anyone speaks for the entire black community, or any community for that matter. You’re off the mark, 53_3. You’ve obviously drawn some erroneous conclusion from my commentary.

  • freeinpa

    apr2563

    Yes silence on the left is just as injurious. I found you discussion of Washington interesting. Can you offer an explanation as to why you experience such racists attitudes in a liberal and supposedly enlightened state. Or has the “southern strategy” worked its way toward Canada.

    rmrd:

    Proof once again liberals know nothing of what they speak.

  • apr2563

    Free: It shows you know nothing of Washington politics. Eastern Washington is as red as Idaho and Wyoming. The state has Democratic Senators because of the population disparity between east and west of the Cascade Mountains.
    My father in law was a campaign manager for Catherine May, a republican US Congrss woman from the town of which I spoke. I got to know many of the major figures in the Rep establishment. I even had dinner with young Reps and met Gerald Ford. Forgive me but the dinner was free. I have many relatives living in Eastern Washington and it continues to be very red. The Southern strategy has worked well.
    Just as parts of California, the state I live in now, are exceptionally conservative so are parts of WA.
    You see Free, there are no “real Americans” based on geography or what state they live in.
    If you knew much about Canada, you would also know the eastern portion of Vancouver Provence is very conservative. Before you accuse someone else of ignorance learn your facts. Why Canada even has a conservative PM.
    I vowed not to respond anymore to the original post. But, just as I thought I got out, Free, you pulled me back in.

  • rmrd

    Proof once again liberals know nothing of what they speak.
    .
    Nope, the fact is that you and your cohorts are out of the loop. you are dismissed on issues of race because you lack insight. deal with the problems within your own GOP before worrying bout others.
    .
    Do you have any problems with the John Birch Society being let in the GOP door?
    .
    The point of apr2563,s comment was about Birchers she encountered. You wonder how Birchers can exist in a “Liberal” state, Washinton. Did you also wonder why abolitionists who worked with the Underground Railroad could exist in slave-holding states?
    .
    It is your comments that show a lack of reason.

  • rmrd

    apr2563
    .
    I now realize that trying to have a serious discussion with freeinpa is equal to expecting Glenn Beck be have a rational thought (on anything).

  • rmrd

    freeinpa
    .
    The idea that we are more separatist now than during segregation may exist in you mind because it is only now that you are hearing voices from ethnic communities. The good old days of Ozzie and Harriet on TV were an illusion. The only Negroes seen were Amos N’ Andy. An idealistic period for some. A stifling era for others.
    .
    Regarding the hate crimes issue, a Gay person may take the point of view that because attention has not been paid to physical crimes against Gays in the past, a mechanism needs to exist to force the issue. Why trust government lawyers to just do the right thing in prosecuting crimes?
    .
    When the issue of forcing NFL teams to interview African-American and other ethnic groups for head coaching jobs, I remember a WSJ columnist on ESPN saying that the best solution was to wait for NFL team owners to accept the message of diversity. Passage of time would correct things. To me that seemed extremely naive if not cruel.
    .
    Why should a qualified African-American coach have to wait to get a job which he could perform? Why remain in a subservient, lowering paying job and just wait? Within short order of the forced interviews we had two African-American coaches competing in the Super Bowl..
    On many things, I find Conservatives just tone deaf on issues of race.
    .
    I just see Conservatives yelling from the sidelines while progress is made.
    .
    Among the younger generations, I see more togetherness. You may be mired in concrete in seeing separation.

  • apr2563

    rmrd: Yes the Birchers are making a comeback. They are invited to CPAC. Coo coo never goes away. Free rarely addresses the point of a posting but returns to the same shibboliths.

  • http://randomkirk.wordpress.com randomkirk

    Reid meant what he said. Well, after all, Reid IS a Mormon, and everybody knows Mormon’s are racist and intolerant, right Dee? I mean just look at them! They’re all the same…just like those reprehensible Republicans! Tolerance, indeed.

  • rose83

    The point is that Reid didn’t simply say that his race might be an advantage for him because he wouldn’t trigger strong prejudicial responses. Reid implied that using prejudicial phraseology.
    .
    Convince me that he did in fact use prejudicial phraseology, and you’ll convince me of your argument.

  • rose83

    I don’t think it’s possible, or even desirable, to avoid politicizing language in a democracy. How can political discourse be meaningful if words don’t matter?
    .
    It also seems a little defeatist to end discussion about race, language and politics because that discussion is usually carried out badly by political and media elites. Almost like how politicians (both Democratic and GOP) take power and govern incompetently, and then say that government doesn’t work so everything needs to be deregulated and nothing should be done about serious problems like health care.
    .
    The bottom line is that words matter. The whole idea that words don’t wound and there are no real negative consequences to prejudicial discourse is a myth. That doesn’t make this easy. People need to be more honest, more thoughtful, more precise and avoid the temptation of misinterpreting words for political gain. Maybe I’m being a “poor naive fool,” but I am hopeful that people can do better.

  • freeinpa

    I am sure your father in law considers his daughter a disappointment.

    Glad to hear there are conservatives in CA WA and Canada. The future of the world may not be so bleak after all.

    “deal with the problems within your own GOP before worrying bout others.” Quite interesting. I suggest you follow your own prescription and cure what ails the Democrats before worrying about the GOP and who they are. Control of both houses, and the White House and the HC bill looks like the food fight from Animal House.

    And one rarely has a serious discussion here with liberals. I have suffered th e rath and bile and the normal charges of racism, homophobic and others. The standard playbook from the left who then summarily dismiss everything as not relevant or lacking the (faux) intelllectual insight of the left. Check the calendar kids. November is coming and us uninformed uneveolved fools are going to see your sorry butts put back out to pasture.

    The reality the ideas of the left are unpalatable to the majorioty of this country. You had your shot and in less the 9 months you proved what was apparent to many “mentally exhausted and morally bankrupt”.

  • rmrd

    free
    .
    What ideas has the GOP offered?

  • http://randomkirk.wordpress.com randomkirk

    How about: Take responsibility for yourself?; or, Everyone is entitled to equal opportunity, not equal outcome?; or, Government isn’t a bottomless well of money that can be thrown at every ill, and that even if it was, there will never be enough?

  • 53_3

    Exiled:
    .
    It might have been a bit shotgun, because I covered issues that were raised in the previous thread so for that I will respectfully withdraw that comment. You did not say that, and I apologize for implying you did.
    .
    But it does not change the argument, you have stated that Dee, who is a member of the Black community, and whose views on this have been echoed unanimously by all but one potentially Black commentator, that she lives in a bubble.
    .
    She indeed does not! And her anger at the situation is entirely called for as the conservative house is by far the dirtiest in this regard!
    .
    You and other conservatives have been arguing over the heads of every Black commentator on this blog, as if you know better than they what should and what should not be perceived. Utter, complete arrogance.
    .
    My anger is directed at people who are not Black (such as myself) who insist on such ridiculous and flimsy approaches. It is entirely justified, as every one of you should know better than to try this approach, which has been the standard for 35 years.
    ,
    You and others complain constantly of being brushed by too broad a stroke, yet you either tacitly or overtly circle the wagons around those who have claimed the leadership in your movements who make such inflammatory and degrading comments
    .
    I do not live on a different planet from either you or Dee, but I can say this:
    .
    I have yet to hear of a concerted effort on the part of conservatives to force their leaders to stop such inflammatory speech.
    .
    See my comment 29 as an additional swipe at this practice.
    .
    If you want to stop the perception that the GOP and conservative movement in general is not rife with racism,
    then you had better get your leadership to STFU!
    .
    They are your problem, not us!

  • 53_3

    “Take responsibility for yourself?”
    .
    Then why don’t you help get your leaders to stop projecting that image by engaging in inflammatory speech?
    .
    BTW, you might take note of several things about the blogs the past few days:
    .
    1. Rusty, who vehemently disagrees with Obama has not been attacked by those commentators from the Black community. Why? (hint, go look)
    .
    2. Nearly all of the potentially Black commentators have come down against your claims.
    .
    3. Nearly all of those in the Black community have stated that Reid may have been a bit coarse in his assessment, but they are perceptive enough to be able to discern the difference between what he said, and what Rush Limbaugh says on a daily basis.
    .
    Take note of these developments…

  • rmrd

    randomkirk
    .
    In the world of meritocracy that you envision, was Sarah Palin the best that the GOP had to offer? Did Alberto Gonzales to us proud?
    .
    If youth are told “Don’t Squeal” only supports criminal activity,, why was Scooter LIbby a GOP hero?
    .
    Wall Street Bankers expect profit even when they collapse a bank. I think the meritocracy that you speak of is not practiced by the GOP.
    .
    ACORN was considered a criminal organization while a company that electrocuted military personnel continued to receive government funds.
    .
    We just don’t see Conservatives or the GOP as exemplifying anything close to promotion based on merit.

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    53_3~
    I appreciate the retraction. However, I still have a problem with your latest post.
    .
    You wrote:
    You and other conservatives have been arguing over the heads of every Black commentator on this blog, as if you know better than they what should and what should not be perceived. Utter, complete arrogance.
    .
    However, I wrote to Dee:
    Time and time again, Dee, you broadly characterize all Republicans, or all conservatives, or even all whites, while duplicitously expressing your (valid) trepidation at the same elementary analysis of black communities. You have every right to push back against blanketed perceptions of black culture, especially those that fall well below the mark. However, to do so while simultaneously painting your political opponents with the broadest of brushes is utter hypocrisy.
    .
    Is this unreasonable or arrogant? Not in reality. Maybe in the bubble world, though. Furthermore, who are these other commenters who I have been arguing over? With the exception of Dee, I don’t recall ever discussing this racial component with anyone. Check your facts before you accuse, 53_3. You’re better than that.
    ~~
    You also wrote:
    You and others complain constantly of being brushed by too broad a stroke, yet you either tacitly or overtly circle the wagons around those who have claimed the leadership in your movements who make such inflammatory and degrading comments.
    .
    Disregarding your little caveat about tacit defense, which is strictly a matter of opinion, I have uttered not a word concerning what anyone has said. I haven’t commented on Reid’s statement. I haven’t defended Lott. I haven’t defended Limbaugh. Simply because I see Dee’s post as yet another instance of her double-standard when it comes to race doesn’t imply that I support or oppose any other commentary. My sole point was that Dee engages in the precise conduct that she lambastes others for doing. I’m not circling any wagons, real or imagined, overtly or tacitly. Pick another victim, 53_3, perhaps one who is actually warranting of your hostility.

  • http://cozella.wordpress.com cozella

    All of this outrage from people who send “Barack the Magic Negro” greeting cards and we’re supposed to believe that they are outraged at Reid’s statement.

    Hopefully the GOP and their conservative minions will remain in exile.

  • 53_3

    In defending Dee, I am not defending a particular statement she made and I should not attack those that you made. However, her comments were and are echoed by most in the Black community, and here is where you are off the rails.
    .
    They are the ones most invested in this problem and also the most knowledgeable.
    .
    I’ve never seen you defend or attack anyone who has made racial comments, and so I will grant that I am shooting too close to you. Maybe it would be better to try to instead make my point as clearly as I can, without inadvertently putting you in the cross hairs:
    .
    I am angry at the sheer ridiculousness of the arguments on the part of conservatives. They cannot ignore their leaders and so-called entertainers. Maybe you represent one step forward Exiled, but you cannot deny that they represent ten steps back.
    .
    Rush Limbaugh is a GOP kingmaker. He has also claimed the mantle of “leader of the conservative movement”. Glenn Beck is more than just an entertainer, as he is appealing to one of the oldest of the GOP bases, and we both know who they are. The Black community paid close attention to Steele’s conflict with Rush, and I can say, their observations of those proceedings are not complementary.
    .
    These and other individuals have long, and on a daily basis, inflammatory racial speech from among them. Even if you disagree with this (I’m not saying you do or don’t), that is how they are perceived in the Black community – and – outside it (other Democrats and many Republicans).
    .
    To make an additional point, those Republicans who have spoken out against such speech are vilified (John McCain after Palin’s rallies went OOC*, and, of course, Colin Powell’s final expressions of disgust at GOP practices).
    .
    Yes, you personally are unfairly tarred with the epithet, but my contention it is not our fault.
    .
    It cannot be addressed by arguing over the heads of the commentators in the Black community. I personally believe that it is a problem you will have to bear with, because until the GOP and the conservative movement figures out a way to silence it’s own, few in the Black community will ever see the GOP brand (and conservatives) any other way. Unfortunately, even though these individuals are not specifically your leaders, they are the main reason why the perception persists.
    .
    *OOC – Out of Control

  • stuartzechman

    Rose:

    I don’t think it’s possible, or even desirable, to avoid politicizing language in a democracy. How can political discourse be meaningful if words don’t matter?

    How can political discourse be meaningful if words, i.e., conventions, protocols, etiquette, rhetorical devices and colloquialisms are more important than their meaning?
    .
    Politicizing language is dangerous and wrong because it prioritizes how something is said over what is said. The effect of speech then becomes divorced from intent, meaning, and substance. What the statement may sound like to some people can’t possibly be more important than the objective content of the speech, or communication is reduced to that which can be expressed with the least possibility of misinterpretation by the parties most hostile to (or most ignorant with respect to) the speaker.
    .
    It is possible to de-politicize language in a democracy, but it requires that people try to understand the intent and substance of what is said before rendering judgment on the speaker. To the extent that citizens accept the role of carnival crowd before their political ring-masters, and react as quickly and with the least mental effort to the interpretation they are given of what is said, then the task of communication in a democracy with adversarial factions is difficult, certainly. This does not absolve us of the responsibility to try to understand those who speak –even our political enemies.
    .
    Words do not matter in comparison to intent and content, or we are ruled not by reason, but by rhetoric. Political discourse is meaningful only to the extent that language is given less judgment than substantial relation to facts, and the merits of proposals.

    It also seems a little defeatist to end discussion about race, language and politics because that discussion is usually carried out badly by political and media elites.

    Yes, this is true. I hope that you have not misunderstood what I have said such that you believe I have advocated for an end to discussion. I have advocated for an end to discussion in which the object is the control of debate through enforcement of language protocols. When the language of political opponents can be used to disqualify them in light of rules of “appropriate” speech a priori to engaging their arguments, those whose arguments are weak will enjoy an ill-gotten advantage. That systemic shallowness serves noone except the arbiters of speech conventions. It is also highly un-democratic to invest the power of that arbitration in elite, private interests.

    The bottom line is that words matter. The whole idea that words don’t wound and there are no real negative consequences to prejudicial discourse is a myth.

    I respectfully disagree.
    .
    Words do not matter.
    .
    Words do not wound, actions do. Words without the power of hierarchy behind them are meaningless. That’s why, if you were to say to me “You’re an idiot, you’re fired.” it would have no consequences whatsoever. Likewise, if I were to say to you “Your application for this loan is denied, because I don’t feel that women are truly capable of financial responsibility.“, it would have similar effect, i.e. none in real terms. You might have feelings of anger or sadness about those words, but that is not going to stop you from getting a loan. Only the power of hierarchy can do that.
    .
    Prejudicial discourse is not harmful. It harms noone to know that others harbor prejudice against the group to which some might belong. It isn’t pleasant, it isn’t right, it doesn’t make us feel good to know that prejudice against us exists, but knowing what others actually think and believe is useful. Keeping prejudice hidden –therefore unable to be confronted– is much more dangerous than exposure to prejudicial discourse.
    .
    Language which alienates the hearer from the speaker or the speaker’s group is not a threat. It is only when the worst result that can be had from prejudicial language is offense or ostracism that we know that we are safe. “I hate you for who you are!” means nothing in terms of actual harm, and so sanctions against its use are voluntary acts of good faith on the part of objective listeners as far as it is consistent with verbal abuse of any sort. “I’m going to go get a rope and come back to string you up!“, on the other hand, means everything in terms of actual harm, and so cannot ever be tolerated, not legally, not socially in any context, never.
    .
    The only possible way that prejudicial discourse could be considered genuinely damaging is if one accepted the idea that suppression of speech would somehow lead to the suppression of harmful ideas (like inappropriate prejudices) themselves.
    It is ironic that this largely unexamined premise also leads movement conservatives to stop themselves from saying the word “gay” in front of children, as if utterance of the very word had the power to cause its existence.
    .
    For those of us who do not accept the validity of the notion that harmful ideas like racism (or impulses to racist hierarchy) can be somehow be eradicated from human existence through suppression of all racist expressions, it is the sanctification of “words wound” that is the myth.

    People need to be more honest, more thoughtful, more precise and avoid the temptation of misinterpreting words for political gain. Maybe I’m being a “poor naive fool,” but I am hopeful that people can do better.

    We can only be honest in an environment in which our imprecision and lack of forethought with respect to our words on difficult subjects can be assumed to be forgiven and understood in good faith.
    .
    It’s funny, in spite of our disagreements, I am also hopeful that people can do better.
    .
    Thanks so much for objectively considering arguments with which you probably have visceral opposition, Rose. I very much appreciate you having taken the time to read all of this.

  • apr2563

    Free: My goodness. My post was the first knowledge that there are conservatives located in other areas but the south and middle America.
    You sort of lumped may comments and rmrd’s together. That is ok. I think we are of a similar mind.
    Now if you could only address the subject of my statement. Instead you go on a rant about how you are picked on by the left.
    Please, when you comment know your facts (eg: Eastern Wa and Canadian conservatism). Then maybe you will not look so foolish and can have rational and productive dialogue.

  • apr2563

    Since we have been discussing tolerance for several days, I would like to offer my respect to Miep Gies. She died today at age 100. This is the woman that hid Anne Frank, her family and friends so bravely.
    Her actions were so much louder than any words. I hope the if I and my country are ever tested to that extent that we all rise to confront bigotry and hate.
    Shalom

  • tjoyce994

    Freeinpa, your points are well taken, but overlook the obvious. There are very few “always” and “nevers”, but this is one of them. Unemployment figures are ALWAYS higher for African Americans, regardless of who is president. Outside of slavery, there has never been a time when our unemployment figures were lower than those of white Americans. Statistically, we make less money doing the same work as whites, even when we are more qualified on paper (I say on paper, because “qualified” is a relative term defined by the employer). 60 Minutes, Nightline and various news shows have sent in their own teams to illustrated that is more difficult for us to get hired, even when we have superior credentials.
    -
    I think we can agree that there are a world of possibilities between jail and Yale. Most white Americans don’t qualify for Yale either. But they are less likely to end up in jail. Statistically, very young men of all colors go though a problem period of their lives. African American men are more likely to come out of that period with an arrest record, while a young white male who committed the same offense is charged with a misdemeanor.
    -
    I agree with you that being poor isn’t equivalent to being a criminal. 60 Minutes did a story a few years ago regarding massive drug arrests of (surprise!) African Americans in this small Texas town. The movie American Violet was based on the incident. The arrests didn’t make sense, and were based on trumped up information. These people hadn’t done anything wrong. But once you have been through the criminal justice system, how do you get your good name back?
    -
    So, I repeat my original question. Why is white America so determine to plant their flag on this hill of racism?

  • rmrd

    freeinpa
    .
    When a comment was made that John Birch Society members were encounterede in Eastern Washington state, you praised the fact that Conservatives were in the area. You then lament that you are being linked to racism, homophobia, etc. Your own words which equate Birchers to Conservatism make your protests of unwarranted association with bigots meaningless.

  • http://randomkirk.wordpress.com randomkirk

    53_3,

    What are these “claims” of which you speak? I have made none. Now, to clarify…I am not a member of the GOP. rmrd asked a question, and I answered it. I thought it was a quest for enlightenment.

    Here is the one claim some on the right have made I will agree with…without question, if a member of the Republican Party or any popularly known conservative had used the exact same words as Harry Reid, they would have been vilified in the press and on the steps of the Capitol. For the record, I also believe Obama would have accepted an apology, though possibly not as gracefully.

  • http://randomkirk.wordpress.com randomkirk

    rmrd,

    Please don’t trot out a litany of Republican blunders as evidence that what I have said don’t matter.These are values we should all live by. I recognize there is hypocracy in the Republican Party. It’s one of the reasons I am not a member. Regardless, their basic values are something I believe in, even if some of their own don’t. That being said, there is plenty of hypocracy to go around on the Democrat side, as well. If you want me to trot out the names of some from the left who haven’t exactly practiced what their party preaches, I’m happy to do so, but spare me the sanctimosity.

    I have always found it amusing that the left brings up Sarah Palin for her lack of experience, intelligence (their words, not mine), etc. as showing how desperate the GOP was, yet are perfectly willing to accept on the face of it the notion that a one-term senator with virtually no real-world experience in business (but made wealthy from writing a couple of books) is so much better qualified to lead than the man he defeated (I realize everyone likes to characterize the last election as Obama vs. Palin because he shows up better than McCain vis a vis experience).

  • rmrd

    randomkirk
    .
    Personal responsibility is important. I just don’t see that principal as anything more than a talking point for the GOP. You don’t identify as a Republican for a reason.
    .
    I don’t see any true Republican value other than gaining power in DC, than proving that it is ridiculous to elect people who don’t believe in government to run the government.
    .
    You might ask Hillary and Bill Clinton if they got “double standard treatment” on the issue of race during the Democratic primaries.
    .
    Conservatives trot out the Southern strategy, ignore instances when Democrats have been called on racial issues, and resort to the usual GOP song, the whine.

  • http://randomkirk.wordpress.com randomkirk

    rmrd,

    First, I didn’t say I didn’t identify as a Republican, merely that I am not a registered member of the party. And yes, there is a reason. I don’t see any need to contribute money to a political party that can’t keep its priorities straight. That being said, I reiterate that I believe in the values Republicans have traditionally stood for…so I am a Republican.

    Second, if I get your meaning, it is that people who don’t believe in more government as the answer to every ill that besets mankind should not be entitled to participate. Do I have that correct? I know of no person, Republican or otherwise (I don’t personally have any anarchists as friends or aquaintances) who doesn’t believe SOME government is necessary for the good of society. Where we part ways is the amount of governemnt and its priorities.

    Third, while there was some media scrutiny over the Clinton affair, I maintain it never reached the crescendo it would have had if, say, Sarah Palin’s husband made the same stupid comments Bill made. Under the “normal” press and political protocols there should have been heated debate over whether Hillary should suspend her campaign, etc. There was none of that.

    Before you jump on the Sarah Palin comment and parrot all the garbage about how stupid she is, tell me when, exactly you were elected governor of a state. And while we’re at it, if raw intelligence were a requirement for the Presidency (or any elected office) many of the elitist liberal wing of the Dem Party’s greatest heroes would never have been elected. (Oh, and Richard Nixon is acknowledged to have been among the most intelligent Presidents in our history. Go figure.)

  • rose83

    This is a dead thread but I’ll briefly make two points/clarifications.
    .
    First, when I say words matter, I mean that the meaning and intention behind the words matter. I think our disagreement on this point is more about what the effect of words say about the meaning and intention behind them. I generally assume that adults who speak English well, which includes the vast majority of the political and media elite, understand the effect of colloquialisms and rhetorical devices. They understand the aspects of etiquette which relate to language, and they know what they are doing when they breach that etiquette.
    .
    In short, because they are capable of predicting the effect of their words, it is reasonable to assume that the effect of the words they choose is intentional.
    .
    BTW, I am really struggling to think of occasions where I have criticized a politician’s comments merely because of their form. I remember with Ferraro’s comments about Obama, for example, that I criticized their meaning.
    .
    Second, the research and data I’ve seen have led me to conclude that it is an empirical fact that words alone wound. (I believe I once linked to a study about women’s math scores varying depending on what they heard about women’s mathematical abilities? If not I’d be happy to link it.) It would be really great if that were not the case. It would be wonderful if a loan officer could tell a client that he does not believe women are capable of financial responsibility without making it more likely that she will doubt her own capability, or, if she is confident of her financial capability, feel like she is somehow less of a woman. Unfortunately that is not the case.

  • stuartzechman

    Rose:
    .
    Obviously you and I have different definitions of the term “wound” as well.
    .
    It would be interesting to compare what you think constitutes harm, to what I think it is, and to see if our gender socialization has anything to do with my linkage to physical violence and bodily damage vs your linkage to confidence and self-esteem issues.
    .
    Very, very interesting. It seems that, somehow men are being taught something different than women about words. I can tell you from my own experience that boys are given instruction in self-defensive insensitivity. It’s the opposite of sensitivity training, whereby boys specifically learn how not to be affected by speech, and to resist sensitivity and emotional reactions to words as a part of courage training. They are taught how to test another boy’s readiness to aggression and resoluteness through the use of negative words and repetition.
    .
    This training is very, very valuable in competitive environments where signs of weakness, e.g. sensitivity to criticism or aggression or attempts to undermine self-confidence will be exploited. By “competitive environments”, I of course mean the world of physical danger, threats, fear and violence that is boy childhood socialization, and then the hierarchical work and play world beyond –where violence and physical dominance continues to be a (less frequent) part of the masculine experience.
    .
    Thanks for having this conversation, Rose, I really appreciate it. I hope that you got to read this.

  • rose83

    Oh, guys are wounded by words too! Actually some of the studies I was thinking of concerned racial minorities, both men and women. You might be right that boys are taught anti-sensitivity training more than girls, although probably less so for women of my generation. I would say any difference is perhaps due to boys being taught that words shouldn’t get to them, even more than girls are, and they have somehow failed if they feel hurt. Obviously that would promote a culture of denial, and of course that may leave men worse off because they can’t accept what’s happening and act accordingly.
    .
    And in the example I used, it’s unlikely a women would notice what was happening. Women too are taught that we should be “strong enough” to not let words get to us. As someone who has written math tests, I’ve never once thought, “Oh, my confidence is being damaged by all the societal messages I have received about women’s inferiority in mathematics.” But statistically speaking, there is a substantial chance my confidence – and performance – was damaged.

blog comments powered by Disqus