Ok this bears discussing (spinoff thread and a different thought)

[Deudalus]

Ok first of all I'd like to poke a little fun and notice some hypocrisy.

So many times have members the Democrat party thrown the race card around, especially aimed at Republicans accusing them of "bringing back Jim Crow laws if they get back into power" for example.

Also sexism is often thrown out as a major injustice that the left has often tried to overcome as well.


So now of course we have a thread on this very issue on the board saying apparently sexism is more troubling than racism because obviously that's what is deciding this primary for Obama, not the fact that he's a better person or candidate or anything pesky like that.


Wonderfully, we have all of this message boards liberals in that thread saying "now now, there is no racism or sexism going on here the better candidate is winning based on his talent and skills alone" which I think is wonderful but its sad that this can only apparently happen in a Democrat primary where no racism or sexism is allowed to exist or something and everyone is truly equal.......

The hypocrisy there is just way way way too rich.


But I must ask this humble question.......

If:

1: A white male is defeated soundly in every state midwest, north, and south by both the black guy and the white lady (and obviously racism and sexism is not allowed to exist on the left coast period).

2: And then the black guy and the white lady are dead equal for forever and it looks like the black guy is actually going to pull ahead and possibly win a very close primary.

Then:

3: Obviously racism and sexism are both no longer major issues and are way overblown and the race and sex baiting should be greatly lessened if not totally done away with what so ever.


Afterall, it looks like we could very well have our first black president and so far no one has tried to kill him, the sky hasn't fallen, and the south has pretty much accepted him with open arms so far at least and they have definitely preferred him over the white lady.


Can anyone tell me where I'm wrong?

I'm just hoping we can put Sharpton and Jackson out of a job already and we can move on to actually teaching kids things like math without being called "racist and culturally biased."

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Deudalus
...the south has pretty much accepted him with open arms so far at least and they have definitely preferred him over the white lady.


Can anyone tell me where I'm wrong?

For one thing, you're taking the actions of the *democrats* in the south - people who are in the minority and who are more liberals - and generalized it to the whole population.

That's like saying how blacks generally feel about Bush based on a poll of the Black Republican club, other than even many Republicans now finally seeing Bush in a worse light.

 

[Moonbeam]

I can hear McCain now. "Vote for Obama and you'll have to learn math."

 

[Deudalus]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I can hear McCain now. "Vote for Obama and you'll have to learn math."

LOL.

 

[Mxylplyx]

Democrats are first to bring out the racism card/sexism card when it suits them, which quite frankly disgusts me. It's easy to see why they do it. Democrats keep the victimhood sentiment of the black community live and well so they can use it to their advantage. A black man/woman that escapes the cycle of poverty in the black community usually has to leave that sentiment behind them, which means they are no longer reliable democrats, which is why I dont think democrats have any interest in lifting the black community out of poverty.

And dont try to dismiss my statements by calling me a racist conservative or some crap. I very well might vote for Obama.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Mxylplyx
Democrats are first to bring out the racism card/sexism card when it suits them, which quite frankly disgusts me. It's easy to see why they do it. Democrats keep the victimhood sentiment of the black community live and well so they can use it to their advantage. A black man/woman that escapes the cycle of poverty in the black community usually has to leave that sentiment behind them, which means they are no longer reliable democrats, which is why I dont think democrats have any interest in lifting the black community out of poverty.

And dont try to dismiss my statements by calling me a racist conservative or some crap. I very well might vote for Obama.

The fact that all the the Rep candidates were white men doesn't help an argument for diversity (Perennial Keyes notwithstanding) The fact that they all found "conflicts" when asked to participate in black sponsored debates does not help their argument for diversity. Reps may not be racist, but they aren't exactly endearing themselves to minority communities. Pat Buchanan said it's understandable they didn't go to the black debates because they wouldn't be getting the black vote anyway. With reasoning like that, that merely courting the black vote is a waste of time, how can Reps ever possibly expect to get any of the black vote in the future or be taken seriously by black voters?

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: sirjonk

Originally posted by: Mxylplyx
Democrats are first to bring out the racism card/sexism card when it suits them, which quite frankly disgusts me. It's easy to see why they do it. Democrats keep the victimhood sentiment of the black community live and well so they can use it to their advantage. A black man/woman that escapes the cycle of poverty in the black community usually has to leave that sentiment behind them, which means they are no longer reliable democrats, which is why I dont think democrats have any interest in lifting the black community out of poverty.

And dont try to dismiss my statements by calling me a racist conservative or some crap. I very well might vote for Obama.

The fact that all the the Rep candidates were white men doesn't help an argument for diversity (Perennial Keyes notwithstanding) The fact that they all found "conflicts" when asked to participate in black sponsored debates does not help their argument for diversity. Reps may not be racist, but they aren't exactly endearing themselves to minority communities. Pat Buchanan said it's understandable they didn't go to the black debates because they wouldn't be getting the black vote anyway. With reasoning like that, that merely courting the black vote is a waste of time, how can Reps ever possibly expect to get any of the black vote in the future or be taken seriously by black voters?

The price you pay for running on division and fear.

 

[Siddhartha]

If Obama is elected US President will mean that racist activities, for example, police racial profiling, will stop being considered racist?

 

[Deudalus]

Originally posted by: sirjonk
The fact that all the the Rep candidates were white men doesn't help an argument for diversity (Perennial Keyes notwithstanding) The fact that they all found "conflicts" when asked to participate in black sponsored debates does not help their argument for diversity. Reps may not be racist, but they aren't exactly endearing themselves to minority communities. Pat Buchanan said it's understandable they didn't go to the black debates because they wouldn't be getting the black vote anyway. With reasoning like that, that merely courting the black vote is a waste of time, how can Reps ever possibly expect to get any of the black vote in the future or be taken seriously by black voters?

You would have a fantastic point if not for a few reasons.

1: Colin Powell would be the Republican nominee in 2 seconds flat if he decided to run.

2: Condoleeza Rice had a lot of Republican support to run in 2008 as well.

3: Black people and ESPECIALLY black leadership despise any black Republicans. They are instantly called Uncle Tom's, sellouts, and any other horrible tag you can hang on them and Keyes is a perfect example of that.

4: While Keyes might be the lone candidate that Republicans have ever had Democrats haven't had much more its pretty much just Jackson and Sharpton and thats it.

5: Republicans in the southern state of Louisiana also just elected Bobby Jindal which is the first Native American governor ever elected anywhere and is being looked on very, very favorably by Republican leadership to be a future presidential candidate and possible V.P. right now.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Deudalus

Originally posted by: sirjonk
The fact that all the the Rep candidates were white men doesn't help an argument for diversity (Perennial Keyes notwithstanding) The fact that they all found "conflicts" when asked to participate in black sponsored debates does not help their argument for diversity. Reps may not be racist, but they aren't exactly endearing themselves to minority communities. Pat Buchanan said it's understandable they didn't go to the black debates because they wouldn't be getting the black vote anyway. With reasoning like that, that merely courting the black vote is a waste of time, how can Reps ever possibly expect to get any of the black vote in the future or be taken seriously by black voters?

You would have a fantastic point if not for a few reasons.

1: Colin Powell would be the Republican nominee in 2 seconds flat if he decided to run.

2: Condoleeza Rice had a lot of Republican support to run in 2008 as well.

3: Black people and ESPECIALLY black leadership despise any black Republicans. They are instantly called Uncle Tom's, sellouts, and any other horrible tag you can hang on them and Keyes is a perfect example of that.

My point was the Republican party leadership refuses to court the black vote because they view it as a lost cause, thus giving blacks zero reason to view the republicans with anything other than animosity. Pointing to a few popular black party members doesn't change that. Even if Powell or Rice were to run, blacks would still vote democrat, and will continue to vote democrat until the Reps give the blacks a reason why they are worthy of their vote. Just saying "look, we have a black candidate" isn't enough. Go to black events, churches, debates. Engage the black community. Don't say things like "I was suprised the black patrons weren't yelling, I need more iced tea mother effer!" Don't quote this guy and call his rants "spot on." There's a lot of things Reps could be doing to look to the future, but they aren't.

 

[Deudalus]

Originally posted by: sirjonk
My point was the Republican party leadership refuses to court the black vote because they view it as a lost cause, thus giving blacks zero reason to view the republicans with anything other than animosity.

They don't do it and I agree and the reason they don't is because they refuse to go from minority meeting to minority meeting speaking about the necessity of affirmative action and hate crime laws to combat "evil whitey and evil whitey's urges".

Now if Obama wins the nomination and wins the election, wouldn't that prove them right?

Pointing to a few popular black party members doesn't change that. Even if Powell or Rice were to run, blacks would still vote democrat, and will continue to vote democrat until the Reps give the blacks a reason why they are worthy of their vote.

Once again proving my point that it isn't about race its about issues. So why have minority only rallies? Why not have urban rallies? Why not have rural rallies? Why have a black caucus?

Careful, you are standing on my side of that fine line now.

Don't quote this guy and call his rants "spot on."

I haven't read that before but honestly I agree with 99% of what he is saying and I'm about 50/50 on the fence between McCain and Obama right now.