Who Are the Real Racists?

[corplinx]

The brouhaha over Rush Limbaugh's ESPN comments got me to thinking about how low the bar has been set for accusing someone of being racist.

So you know what sorts of things chap my hide?

People like Howard Dean. Howard Dean made his Trent/Lott Martin Luther King quip during the black caucus's debate. However, Trent Lott has done more for minorities than Howard Dean ever has and probably ever will. Yet Howard Dean can make such a quip and the marks in the audience laugh.

Look at Howard Dean's gun stance and read between the lines.

If you say “gun control” in Vermont or Wyoming, people think it means taking away their hunting rifle. If you say "gun control" in New York City or Los Angeles, people are relieved at the prospect of having Uzis or illegal handguns taken off the streets. They’re both right. That’s why I think Vermont ought to be able to have a different set of laws than California

Yes, let white bred vermont have loose gun laws but make sure to restrict those dangerous LA blacks from owning guns. I mean, hello.

Remember the U. of Michigan affirmative action case? Ed Bradley at 60 Minutes did the most damaging expose of that system and in his expose he interviewed a university bigwig (white of course). The bigwig was going on about how diversity is great for the classroom. Said female bigwig (I forget the name) extolled the possible value of having a black student in a class during a discussion about decriminalizing crack cocaine. No uproar, no backlash, no nothing. This person was a liberal. A member of the protected class who can say anything. I don't think anyone even read between the lines on what this lady meant.

There is a protected class in this country who can say anything or even extoll racist policies and who get a blind eye from the NAACP. However, if you are a libertarian or conservative, god help you if you even opine about a black person.

If the "free state" is booolshiznite free, I'm moving in.

 

[peptoabysmal]

He doesn't specifically mention black or a black person. He just mentions Uzis and handguns in L.A. Uh... let's see now, who could that be. That's how they get away with this stuff, they will never say a direct reference, just hit at the behaviors that they associate with those they hate.

This kind of stuff must cause liberals to develop split personalities. Now, do I support the anti-gun statement because I hate guns and am afraid of what I don't understand or do I get mad because he's inferring a different set of laws for minorities... ummm...

 

[Michael Redman]

We all are. What do I win?

 

[Tmy]

Rushs comments probably arent so bad on their own, thing is that RUSH said them. He already has a rep for being a bigot. When Rush first got the job how many of us were shocked cause we were just waiting for him to say somthing contraversial, and he did.

Imagine Jesse Jackson as an ESPN anncouncer saying "Brett Farve gets a pass from the media cause he's a good old boy hillbilly." You dont think that would cause a bru-ha-ha.

 

[Tony]

The left wing is home to most of the racists and racist politics today.

 

[KelvinG]

The left wing is home to most of the racists and racist politics today.

No, the right wing is.

 

[Tony]

No, the right wing is.

Im sorry, you're wrong, the facts speak for themselves.

The left is home to the mexican nazis (cruz bustemonte is one) and the black nazis (Nation of Islam, New Black Panther Party, and the NAACP). Not only is this racism tolerated, it is accepted, my the mainstream leftists.

 

[c0rbin]

They aren't called "reactionary" for nothing.

I know, I know. You didn't call them reactionary.

I'm sorry white brothers, but Affirmative Action just doesn't frighten me.

 

[Michael Redman]

Tony, those are interesting irrelevant anecdotes, but where are the facts you say support your claim that there are more racists on the left than on the right? Or was that just an opinion?

 

[Tony]

Tony, those are interesting irrelevant anecdotes..

Huh? How is it irrelevant?

 

[KelvinG]

Im sorry, you're wrong, the facts speak for themselves.

The left is home to the mexican nazis (cruz bustemonte is one) and the black nazis (Nation of Islam, New Black Panther Party, and the NAACP). Not only is this racism tolerated, it is accepted, my the mainstream leftists.

Nope, sorry, you are wrong. You have (as usual) chosen to clump certain radical groups into the all encompassing camp of "the left."
By that logic, the right wing is the sanctuary for racism because of the KKK.
Just because you want it to be a certain way Tony, because it fits into your narrow minded view of the world doesn't mean it actually is that way.

Yes, one can certainly present arguments that groups such as the above mentioned do exhibit racist tendencies, but to simply conclude that this mean "lefties" tolerate racism is ignorant.

At the same time, a good spin doctor can make those above mentioned groups appear as ones that fight racism, rather than promote it.
Sometimes I get the feeling your idea of racism includes anything racial oriented that you don't agree with.

 

[Tony]

Nope, sorry, you are wrong. You have (as usual) chosen to clump certain radical groups into the all encompassing camp of "the left."
By that logic, the right wing is the sanctuary for racism because of the KKK.
Just because you want it to be a certain way Tony, because it fits into your narrow minded view of the world doesn't mean it actually is that way.

Then how come such groups enjoy the support they do?

If a white candidate for governor was known to once belong to a racist group and refused to renounce ties to that group, he would be condemed by both the left and the right.

The fact that Cruz Bustemonte still enjoys the support he does despite the fact that he is a racist is telling of the hypocrisy of the left.

No, you are wrong. The left tolerates racism as long as it is anti-white (affirmative action).

At the same time, a good spin doctor can make those above mentioned groups appear as ones that fight racism, rather than promote it.

The same could be said for anything, including the KKK.

 

[KelvinG]

The fact that Cruz Bustemonte still enjoys the support he does despite the fact that he is a racist is telling of the hypocrisy of the left.

No, you are wrong. The left tolerates racism as long as it is anti-white (affirmative action).

Strom Thurmond seemed to enjoy a huge amount of support from the Republican party up until his death despite his racist past.
Can we now assume the right is guilty of hypocrisy?

 

[Tony]

Strom Thurmond seemed to enjoy a huge amount of support from the Republican party up until his death despite his racist past.
Can we now assume the right is guilty of hypocrisy?

Thurmond (who was once a democrat), like Robert Byrd (a current democrat), renounced his racist past. There's a difference between them and Bustemonte.

But the left ignores Byrd's racist past (he was once a member of the KKK) but continues to hound on Thurmond's (who merely supported segregation, I say "merely" because supporting segregation is not as bad when compared to being an ACTUAL MEMBER OF THE KKK). More hypocrisy.

 

[c0rbin]

I think it might have something to do with the fact that historically, it has been a white majority that has, through passing laws and codes and acts of violence and oppression, acted to keep minorities as second class citizens in this, the nation of opportunity.

Is this not true Tony?

I think this is why "such groups enjoy the support they do"--no one likes a bully.

 

[c0rbin]

Only a simpleton, IMO, would base politicol choices solely on party.

That people (which include the sub-groups Republican and Democrat) can be and do good and bad is of no suprise to anyone willing to put bigotry and ignorance aside.

 

[Tony]

I think it might have something to do with the fact that historically, it has been a white majority that has, through passing laws and codes and acts of violence and oppression, acted to keep minorities as second class citizens in this, the nation of opportunity.

Is this not true Tony?

Yes its true, but I dont care.

What I do care about is what is happening now. Racism in the past is not excuse for racism in the future.

 

[KelvinG]

I think it might have something to do with the fact that historically, it has been a white majority that has, through passing laws and codes and acts of violence and oppression, acted to keep minorities as second class citizens in this, the nation of opportunity.

Is this not true Tony?

I think this is why "such groups enjoy the support they do"--no one likes a bully.

Didn't you hear Corbin? Black and whites are now totally equal in your country. Racism has disappeared. Well, except for racism now perpetuated against us poor white folks.

 

[Tony]

Only a simpleton, IMO, would base politicol choices solely on party.

A simpleton or a partisan.

 

[tamiO]

People like Howard Dean. Howard Dean made his Trent/Lott Martin Luther King quip during the black caucus's debate. However, Trent Lott has done more for minorities than Howard Dean ever has and probably ever will. Yet Howard Dean can make such a quip and the marks in the audience laugh.

I am skeptical of this claim. I don't know what either of them has done for minorities. Where can I find a list detailing the good things both Trent Lott and Howard Dean have done? In further thinking about this, has Trent Lott had more opportunities to help minorities than Dean? You also seem to know what Howard Dean will do in the future. Can you use your powers to give me the winning lottery numbers this week? I could use the money.

Look at Howard Dean's gun stance and read between the lines.


Yes, let white bred vermont have loose gun laws but make sure to restrict those dangerous LA blacks from owning guns. I mean, hello.

You are perpetuating the myth that black people are dangerous. Try just reading what is said, I have the feeling that when people try to read between the lines what they see is a reflection of their own preconceptions and prejudices.

Remember the U. of Michigan affirmative action case? Ed Bradley at 60 Minutes did the most damaging expose of that system and in his expose he interviewed a university bigwig (white of course). The bigwig was going on about how diversity is great for the classroom. Said female bigwig (I forget the name) extolled the possible value of having a black student in a class during a discussion about decriminalizing crack cocaine. No uproar, no backlash, no nothing. This person was a liberal. A member of the protected class who can say anything. I don't think anyone even read between the lines on what this lady meant.

Whether the university bigwig was black or white had nothing to do with it. Decriminalizing crack cocaine is not a race issue, it is a social and political issue. Were you a part of the silent support for her suggestion?