And the Democrats claim the GOP are racist hicks....

[CADsortaGUY]

It's what he does. Sad, huh?

Or not. YOU people are putting the "segregationist" piece into his statement. His statement had nothing to do with that. Lott did not say he was glad Thurmond ran as a segregationist you twits. The supposedly "racist" statement made at a celebration for the guy was in zero way racist.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

So was the attention whore permabanned or just banned?

Hopefully perm as he's got to be a parody poster.

 

[ayabe]

Apparently it's not racist. I will now in the future refer to any black person as a negro.

Maybe behind closed doors - but you're a bedwetter and lack any sort of personal courage I'm betting you won't.

 

[woolfe9999]

I hardly think that using the archaic but non-pejorative term "negro" on a single occasion is sufficient to identify Reid as a racist. Moreover, Reid's comments were accurate as to political reality - he was describing a stereotype adhered to by the electorate without endorsing it. It isn't the same thing as identifying with on old, hard line anti-civil rights, pro-segretationist stance as Trent Lott did. Moreover, if there is some ambiguity as to whether he really meant "negro" in the pejorative sense, Reid's actual voting record on civil rights pretty much clears that up:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Harry_Reid.htm

Voted YES on setting aside 10% of highway funds for minorities & women. (Mar 1998)
Voted NO on ending special funding for minority & women-owned business. (Oct 1997)
Voted NO on banning affirmative action hiring with federal funds. (Jul 1995)
Issue a commemorative postage stamp of Rosa Parks. (Dec 2005)
Rated 96% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance. (Dec 2006)
Recognize Juneteenth as historical end of slavery. (Jun 2008)
Honor the 100th anniversary of the NAACP. (Jan 2009)

Trent Lott:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Trent_Lott.htm

- wolf

 

[OrByte]

I hardly think that using the archaic but non-pejorative term "negro" on a single occasion is sufficient to identify Reid as a racist. Moreover, Reid's comments were accurate as to political reality - he was describing a stereotype adhered to by the electorate without endorsing it. It isn't the same thing as identifying with on old, hard line anti-civil rights, pro-segretationist stance as Trent Lott did. Moreover, if there is some ambiguity as to whether he really meant "negro" in the pejorative sense, Reid's actual voting record on civil rights pretty much clears that up:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Harry_Reid.htm

Voted YES on setting aside 10% of highway funds for minorities & women. (Mar 1998)
Voted NO on ending special funding for minority & women-owned business. (Oct 1997)
Voted NO on banning affirmative action hiring with federal funds. (Jul 1995)
Issue a commemorative postage stamp of Rosa Parks. (Dec 2005)
Rated 96% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance. (Dec 2006)
Recognize Juneteenth as historical end of slavery. (Jun 2008)
Honor the 100th anniversary of the NAACP. (Jan 2009)

Trent Lott:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Trent_Lott.htm

- wolf

Thanks for the legwork and the links!

THose would be facts to support the position that Reid is NOT racist.

THose would be facts to support the position that Lott MIGHT be a "GIANT RACIST"

pretty simple stuff really.

 

[Patranus]

I hardly think that using the archaic but non-pejorative term "negro" on a single occasion is sufficient to identify Reid as a racist. Moreover, Reid's comments were accurate as to political reality - he was describing a stereotype adhered to by the electorate without endorsing it. It isn't the same thing as identifying with on old, hard line anti-civil rights, pro-segretationist stance as Trent Lott did. Moreover, if there is some ambiguity as to whether he really meant "negro" in the pejorative sense, Reid's actual voting record on civil rights pretty much clears that up:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Harry_Reid.htm

Voted YES on setting aside 10% of highway funds for minorities & women. (Mar 1998)
Voted NO on ending special funding for minority & women-owned business. (Oct 1997)
Voted NO on banning affirmative action hiring with federal funds. (Jul 1995)
Issue a commemorative postage stamp of Rosa Parks. (Dec 2005)
Rated 96% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance. (Dec 2006)
Recognize Juneteenth as historical end of slavery. (Jun 2008)
Honor the 100th anniversary of the NAACP. (Jan 2009)

Trent Lott:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Trent_Lott.htm

- wolf

So voting against affirmative action makes you racist?
So voting to end monies to special interest groups is racist?

I am confused as to what point you are trying to make with those items you list.

 

[kage69]

Debate? Debate what?

Exactly. You have nothing relevant to the thread topic to offer. Kudos for proving my point for me.

I'm pointing out specific facts here.

What you pointed out were your own skewed perceptions. Are you ignorant of what the term "fact" means? Apparently!

What I'm not doing is pointing fingers and playing the blame game.

"Power hungry Far left" ring any bells? My god you are dense.

1) Bank bailouts - People didnt want it, we got it
2) UHC - People didnt want it, we got it
3) Amnesty - People dont want it, we'll get it

What the fvck does that have to do with the thread subject?! Your diversions even run contrary to your previous diversions! Take your ax to grind with Dems elsewhere fool, you're just embarrassing yourself.

The list goes on with smaller items. Blah blah blah..

You're so delusional it's amazing, even for hacks like you. News flash - you don't speak for anyone but yourself. If all you can do is present immaterial rants that have little to do with the topic, do us all a favor and step away from the computer.

 

[woolfe9999]

So voting against affirmative action makes you racist?
So voting to end monies to special interest groups is racist?

I am confused as to what point you are trying to make with those items you list.

Not necessarily, no. But when someone uses a word like "negro," as opposed to its obviously pejorative counter-part, the statement is ambiguous as to its intent. I think looking at the person's voting record is a legitimate way to clarify intent. With respect to Trent Lott, I wouldn't identify him as a racist for opposing affirmative action. However, his statement in favor of Thurmond's Dixiecrat campaign is another matter.

- wolf

 

[kage69]

Or not. YOU people are putting the "segregationist" piece into his statement. His statement had nothing to do with that. Lott did not say he was glad Thurmond ran as a segregationist you twits. The supposedly "racist" statement made at a celebration for the guy was in zero way racist.

Not much for changing tactics, eh CAD? Just because you want to play obtuse concerning Lott/Thurmond doesn't mean we have to.
So go ahead, continue this ostrich-like behavior of yours where "segregation" (and approval of it) somehow doesn't have any racist connotations. You're just beating yourself over the head with your own stupidity.

Go wild cowboy!

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

"A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee"

 

[kage69]

"A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee"

Yep, when you've got nothing, attempt to change the subject.

What's missing from your oh so intelligent "Bu Bu But Clinton!" response is the context in which it was supposedly mentioned to Kennedy. Was it a comment on race, or political seniority? Given Bill's much lauded status as the "First Black President," and his outreach to minorities in general, I'm leaning towards the latter.
I'm guessing your perception of context is as lacking as CADs, but then again ol Ted did get pretty hot under the collar about it.

I don't know. And I know you don't either.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Yep, when you've got nothing, attempt to change the subject.

What's missing from your oh so intelligent "Bu Bu But Clinton!" response is the context in which it was supposedly mentioned to Kennedy. Was it a comment on race, or political seniority? Given Bill's much lauded status as the "First Black President," and his outreach to minorities in general, I'm leaning towards the latter.
I'm guessing your perception of context is as lacking as CADs, but then again ol Ted did get pretty hot under the collar about it.

I don't know. And I know you don't either.

Please tell me....what is the subject I'm trying to change? Sharpton's the one who's offended here...I guess his perception of context is also lacking. You're such a tool.

 

[Atreus21]

This thread is truly remarkable.

It reminds me of when those racist quotes were falsely attributed to Limbaugh.

The left's justification was that Limbaugh must be racist, so it's no problem if lies are made up about him.

Similarly, the left's justification for Reid is that he can't be racist, so he can say the most racist things imaginable with no problem.

 

[kage69]

Please tell me....what is the subject I'm trying to change? Sharpton's the one who's offended here...I guess his perception of context is also lacking. You're such a tool.

No, you tell us - what does your quote have to do with the thread subject? Sharpton has already accepted Reid's apology, so there's nothing to that unless you're..trying..to..change the subject.
I'm happy to be the tool that jams the gears of your diversion and obfuscation attempts. Thanks!

 

[OrByte]

This thread is truly remarkable.

It reminds me of when those racist quotes were falsely attributed to Limbaugh.

The left's justification was that Limbaugh must be racist, so it's no problem if lies are made up about him.

Similarly, the left's justification for Reid is that he can't be racist, so he can say the most racist things imaginable with no problem.

you suffer from the same ill-logic as Loki

was what Reid said "the most racist thing imaginable" ?

was what Reid said "racist?" Even by Al SHarpton's standards what he said was not racist. But yet you seem to think it is. Why?

DO you think Reid is racist? if so, why?

Are you having trouble following the reasoning/logic?

 

[Atreus21]

you suffer from the same ill-logic as Loki

was what Reid said "the most racist thing imaginable" ?

For you to even defend this is telling, OrByte.

was what Reid said "racist?" Even by Al SHarpton's standards what he said was not racist. But yet you seem to think it is. Why?

Al Sharpton is not the definer of racism.

Harry Reid said that Barack Obama's advantage was that he was light-skinned, and didn't speak with a Negro dialect.

The implication is that dark-skinned blacks who speak with a negro dialect are inferior. Anyone who excuses this sort of comparison is deluding themselves.

DO you think Reid is racist? if so, why?

Yes. Because he said that light skinned blacks are better than dark skinned blacks.

Pretty cut and dry.

Are you having trouble following the reasoning/logic?

Nope.

 

[werepossum]

This thread is truly remarkable.

It reminds me of when those racist quotes were falsely attributed to Limbaugh.

The left's justification was that Limbaugh must be racist, so it's no problem if lies are made up about him.

Similarly, the left's justification for Reid is that he can't be racist, so he can say the most racist things imaginable with no problem.

Although I tend to agree with everything you posted, I agree with Woolfe that this wasn't a particularly racist thing to say/write. Some blacks prefer to be called 'Negro'; it's a somewhat archaic word, but was never a pejorative. And as a former Keyester, I tend to agree that a dark-skinned black man would have a much more difficult time being elected even today. That's just recognizing some remaining latent racism; there are far better reasons to hate Harry Reid, who's going down in flames anyway. Clinton's comment, on the other hand - wow. Sharpton's cover for him reminds me of the Democrat candidate that actually used the "N" word while addressing the NAACP - and still got their endorsement. So-called black leadership today is just another liberal special interest group. One of the (admittedly few) good things about Obama is that he is not wholly a creation of this leadership, not that Chicago Democrat politics is normally anything to brag about.

On a related note, ain't it funny how today you are automatically considered racist unless you agree that money and opportunity should be apportioned according to skin color and agree that people with black skin cannot (and never will) succeed without Big Brother government interceding for them? Truly being non-racist now actually requires you to judge people first and foremost on skin color and ancestral features. Who'd a thunk it?

 

[Red Dawn]

Harry Reid said that Barack Obama's advantage was that he was light-skinned, and didn't speak with a Negro dialect.

The implication is that dark-skinned blacks who speak with a negro dialect are inferior. Anyone who excuses this sort of comparison is deluding themselves.

The implication is that whites won't vote for a dark skinned black man with a "negro dialect". Doesn't sound like he has much faith in his fellow Cracka's

 

[UberNeuman]

Yes. Because he said that light skinned blacks are better than dark skinned blacks.

No, that's not what he said - but please, roll around some more in your faux outrage.....:awe:

 

[jonks]

What's abundantly clear is very few people seem to know the definition of racism. Hint: talking about race is not racism. FWIW I can't imagine that Sen. Lott was referring to segregation in his statements either, that'd just be really really stupid.

Harry Reid said that Barack Obama's advantage was that he was light-skinned, and didn't speak with a Negro dialect.

The implication is that dark-skinned blacks who speak with a negro dialect are inferior. Anyone who excuses this sort of comparison is deluding themselves.

Atreus, we've had some good debates and I know you're not that dumb so I have to guess you didn't read the full account. He was implying that white voters would be more responsive to a black presidential candidate who was light skinned and who spoke in an erudite, educated articulate manner as opposed to a more southern or inner city dialect or accent. Reid made absolutly zero normative statements about the value of any person, he simply articulated an unspoken politically incorrect appraisal of Obama's presidential chances. And being as honest as you can, do you find his assessment incorrect? Do you disagree that being lighter skinned and not speaking with a "negro dialect" is in fact an advantage if running for president of a country that is 80% white?

I wish a Republican would have said these exact words instead of Reid...it would be refeshing to see the Left run to their defense. /s And who are we kidding here?

When asked in 1995 why white people liked him so much, Colin Powell replied that “I speak reasonably well, like a white person,” and, visually, “I ain’t that black.”

Despite what Dick Cheney asserts, Colin Powell is a Republican.

 

[Atreus21]

Although I tend to agree with everything you posted, I agree with Woolfe that this wasn't a particularly racist thing to say/write. Some blacks prefer to be called 'Negro'; it's a somewhat archaic word, but was never a pejorative. And as a former Keyester, I tend to agree that a dark-skinned black man would have a much more difficult time being elected even today. That's just recognizing some remaining latent racism; there are far better reasons to hate Harry Reid, who's going down in flames anyway.

Let's assume this is true.

Racism is a word as misused as socialist and nazi.

But by democrat standards of racism (when leveled at conservatives), this is most certainly racist. I'm simply subscribing to their standard.

Limbaugh's Donovan McNabb comment was of the same type as Reid's; that is, not racist in itself, but simply an observation of reality. Are liberals prepared to backpedal on denunciation of the McNabb comment?

 

[Atreus21]

What's abundantly clear is very few people seem to know the definition of racism. Hint: talking about race is not racism. FWIW I can't imagine that Sen. Lott was referring to segregation in his statements either, that'd just be really really stupid.



Atreus, we've had some good debates and I know you're not that dumb so I have to guess you didn't read the full account. He was implying that white voters would be more responsive to a black presidential candidate who was light skinned and who spoke in an erudite, educated articulate manner as opposed to a more southern or inner city dialect or accent. Reid made absolutly zero normative statements about the value of any person, he simply articulated an unspoken politically incorrect appraisal of Obama's presidential chances. And being as honest as you can, do you find his assessment incorrect? Do you disagree that being lighter skinned and not speaking with a "negro dialect" is in fact an advantage if running for president of a country that is 80% white?

Alright, perhaps I reacted hastily.

Do you think Limbaugh's McNabb comment was racist?

 

[Rockinacoustic]

Both Lott and Reid's statements are far from being outright racist, but were both in extremely poor taste.

I could think of plenty of other reasons why Reid would be gone come November before this incident- Hopefully the people of Nevada see the same.

 

[FerrelGeek]

Jonks is correct; neither Reid's nor Lott's comments were racist. The outrage on the right is fueled by simple liberal hypocrisy. If ay non lib public figure had said what Reid said, the outraged shrieking from the left would be deafening. No amount of apologizing would be sufficient.

 

[kage69]

Al Sharpton is not the definer of racism.

Harry Reid said that Barack Obama's advantage was that he was light-skinned, and didn't speak with a Negro dialect.

The implication is that dark-skinned blacks who speak with a negro dialect are inferior. Anyone who excuses this sort of comparison is deluding themselves.

Speaking of delusions, it's YOUR implication that blacker blacks who sound different are inferior in lieu of Obama's 'advantage.' I don't recall Reid's statements including anyone but Obama. Sweet jeebus, it's like everyone has forgotten that the man is the offspring of a white woman!