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]

Originally posted by Tony
The left wing is home to most of the racists and racist politics today.

No, the right wing is.

[Tony]

Originally posted by KelvinG


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]

Originally posted by Michael Redman
Tony, those are interesting irrelevant anecdotes..

Huh? How is it irrelevant?

[KelvinG]

Originally posted by Tony


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]

Originally posted by KelvinG


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]

Originally posted by Tony

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]

Originally posted by KelvinG


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]

Originally posted by 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?


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]

Originally posted by 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.

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]

Originally posted by c0rbin
Only a simpleton, IMO, would base politicol choices solely on party.




A simpleton or a partisan.

[tamiO]

Originally posted by corplinx


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?

[KelvinG]

Originally posted by Tony


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.

So, if Bustemonte renounces his racist past, you'd have no problem with the guy?

And just for the record, I'm not saying I support Bustemonte's past. I find his affiliation with such a group to be most disturbing. But, I don't handpick one such story and try and draw the irrational generalization that "leftists are racists."
Such tactics are the sign of a desperate debater who doesn't like to be wrong, so he pumps his posts full of such inflammatory one-liners in a sad attempt to proclaim the superiority of his position.

Is there racism in the left? Probably. Is there racism in the right? Probably.
But it's not so clear cut that you can condemn a whole shool of thought based on a few bad apples you choose to focus in on.

[c0rbin]

KevinG:
Lawdy be! D'angles done liff me outada feelds an drop me on d'mountain. Hallelullia!

Tony:
Yes its true, but I dont care.

You wanted to know why. The why doesn't happen in a vacuum. I think if you really want to understand something then you need to know where it is coming from.

A scant 40 years ago Tony, in your parent's life time, people were being denied their rights granted to them by this country.

They had to fight for those rights--put their lives on the line for basic human rights.

Imagine how your life would be different if your parents were second class citizens.

[Tony]

Originally posted by KelvinG


So, if Bustemonte renounces his racist past, you'd have no problem with the guy?


It would definately open me up to forgiving him, but he would have to follow through with actions.

But, I don't handpick one such story and try and draw the irrational generalization that "leftists are racists."

This is a strawman, I don’t think, nor did I say that leftists are racists. But I did say that there is more racism and acceptance for racism on the left.


Is there racism in the left? Probably. Is there racism in theright? Probably.
But it's not so clear cut that you can condemn a whole shool of thought based on a few bad apples you choose to focus in on.

I don’t condemn the left for their hypocrisy. I condemn the left for its fascist and authoritarian tendencies and its lack of respect for individual rights.

edit to ad: about the only thing (i can think of right now) that I agree with the left on is their values on workers rights.

[Tony]

Originally posted by c0rbin


You wanted to know why. The why doesn't happen in a vacuum. I think if you really want to understand something then you need to know where it is coming from.


I understand it perfectly well, I just dont accept or sympathize with it.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Tony

edit to add: about the only thing (i can think of right now) that I agree with the left on is their values on workers rights.
Really? How about their pro-choice stance on abortion? How about their resistance to expanding the use of wiretaps? How about their favoring decriminization of drugs? How about thier opposition to religious fundamentalism (all kinds, not just Islam)? How about their tolerance of gays?

I'll bet there are lots of things you agree with the left on.

[Tony]

Originally posted by Tricky

Really? How about their pro-choice stance on abortion? How about their resistance to expanding the use of wiretaps? How about their favoring decriminization of drugs? How about thier opposition to religious fundamentalism (all kinds, not just Islam)? How about their tolerance of gays?

I'll bet there are lots of things you agree with the left on.

Hmm, maybe you're right. ;)

Except for the gay part, i dont tolerate or not tolerate gays. Its a non-issue for me.

[Michael Redman]

Originally posted by Tony
Huh? How is it irrelevant? It's irrelevant because knowledge of the racism of these organizations (assumed for arugment's sake) tells us exactly nothing about the proportion of racists on the right, complared to the left. For that, we need numbers. You say you have facts that show the number of racists on one side is larger than the number on the other side. Those facts must then either be numbers, or have a direct relationship to numbers.

I know this is a tangent, but you recently accused me of losing my skepticism when I expressed my opinion that Rush is a racist, and here you make a statement of fact with only vague opinion and innuendo to back it up. Are you a skeptic? Let's see you support your claim with facts.

[corplinx]

Originally posted by c0rbin

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


Nor I. Its a great concept. The univ of michigan however went overboard on it to where it became racist. Their affirmative action program seemed to be based on the idea that blacks weren't merely disadvantaged but somehow inferior.

[corplinx]

" In further thinking about this, has Trent Lott had more opportunities to help minorities than Dean? "

Of course he has, Mississippi has a much larger black population. Trent Lott has done much for the state run predominatly black universities in Mississippi.

I didnt mean to say "Dean is racist because he has done less for blacks" since that is unfair since there arent many blacks in Vermont.

"You are perpetuating the myth that black people are dangerous."

Once again, I was just trying to be provocative. I think you could argue that his comment about "uzis and ak47s" was basically codewards without it being a reflection of your own soul.


"Whether the university bigwig was black or white had nothing to do with it. "

Think about this for a second. The univeristy bigwig basically implied that because someone is black that they will have valuable input about crack cocaine that the white students don't have. That;'s as offensive as suggesting that a black person would add value to a cooking list by suggesting better recipes for fried chicken and turnip greens.

If a white conservative college bigwig had made this same remark, he/she would be working a job that requires a hairnet right now.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Tony
Except for the gay part, i dont tolerate or not tolerate gays. Its a non-issue for me.
LOL. How do you manage that? Do you deny that they exist? (That's what my grandmother did.)

If you say they are free to go and do as they please, then you tolerate them. That in no way implies that you like what they do or that you would welcome their advances.

[corplinx]

Originally posted by Tricky

LOL. How do you manage that? Do you deny that they exist? (That's what my grandmother did.)

If you say they are free to go and do as they please, then you tolerate them. That in no way implies that you like what they do or that you would welcome their advances.

I think I can manage an answer. Having done theatre for many years, I have been exposed to many homosexuals I might not normally be meet or ever know. However, my apathetic side just doesn't care. Its a non-issue. I don't care if homosexuality is genetic or a psychological problem. I could care less.

Maybe Tony feels like me. Its not an issue of active tolerance. Its more of that whole generation X passive apathy thing.

[tamiO]

Originally posted by corplinx

Think about this for a second. The univeristy bigwig basically implied that because someone is black that they will have valuable input about crack cocaine that the white students don't have. That;'s as offensive as suggesting that a black person would add value to a cooking list by suggesting better recipes for fried chicken and turnip greens.

If a white conservative college bigwig had made this same remark, he/she would be working a job that requires a hairnet right now.

Here is what I originally said:
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?

You had said the bigwig was white and I said her race doesn't matter.

I agreed with you that the bigwig's suggestion that there was possible value of having a black student in a class during a discussion about decriminalizing crack cocaine is racially motivated. I don't believe that decriminalizing crack cocaine is a racial issue.

[Tony]

Originally posted by Tricky

If you say they are free to go and do as they please, then you tolerate them. That in no way implies that you like what they do or that you would welcome their advances.


I dont think so, I tolerate beer, but I dont really like it.


The same cannot be said about my opinion towards gays.


edit to add: what corplinx said

[Lurker]

Originally posted by 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.



Aren't there hispanic gangs using these weapons too? No white gangs at all? Oriental gangs use these weapons too. Maybe his comment was not directed towards black people like you seem to think?

Lurker

[c0rbin]

Nice one, Lurker.

[DavidJames]

"they will never say a direct reference,"

Actually he probably said exactly what he wanted to say and it's people like you who, for reasons you might like to elaborate on, insist on inventing issues. Projecting perhaps?

[Theodore Kurita]

Originally posted by Tony


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.


The NAACP is not RACIST!!!

As for your idea that the Left is racist...
That is one of the most botched arguments that I have ever heard.


Look at the Right... You guys have:

The KKK

Christian Identity Movement

Neo Nazi's

Antisemites

Various Racist Militia's...


Catch my drift?

[Tony]

Originally posted by Theodore Kurita



The NAACP is not RACIST!!!

As for your idea that the Left is racist...
That is one of the most botched arguments that I have ever heard.


Look at the Right... You guys have:

The KKK

Christian Identity Movement

Neo Nazi's

Antisemites

Various Racist Militia's...


Catch my drift?


You dont know what you are talking about little boy, go home and suck on mommies teet.

[Theodore Kurita]

Originally posted by Tony



You dont know what you are talking about little boy, go home and suck on mommies teet.


Blatant Ad Hominem!

What now, are you so desparate that you are trying to turn this into a flame war?

[DavidJames]

I don't know Tony you seem obsessed with bed wetting and now "suck on mommies teet. ".

I think there are some issues you need work through.

[Tony]

Originally posted by Theodore Kurita

What now, are you so desparate that you are trying to turn this into a flame war?


You'd like to think that, but it’s not true. I just don’t feel like entertaining the ignorant contentions of a 16 year old. You said nothing that hasn’t already been addressed.

[Theodore Kurita]

Originally posted by Tony



You'd like to think that, but it’s not true. I just don’t feel like entertaining the ignorant contentions of a 16 year old. You said nothing that hasn’t already been addressed.


Really... Then why did you resort to using an Ad Hominem attack?

Logical Fallacy = Weakness With Argument

[Tony]

Originally posted by Theodore Kurita



Really... Then why did you resort to using an Ad Hominem attack?



Because it sounded like a good idea. And why not? It seems to have given you a sense of legitmacy and purpose. ;)

[JAR]

As I've noticed recently, there isn't an agreed upon definition of the word "racism."

But on the other hand, the definitions do agree on certain points, those points being that it is a belief that at least a portion of character traits can be genetically inherited and that certain genes can make it easier for one person to survive than another.

I'm sure my beliefs fit one of those definitions of the word "racism" so I consider myself a racist.

When it becomes the norm for white people to think of themselves as racists, than accusations of racism will become a waste of time and the liberals will go hide in their holes. At that time, the minds of white people will be liberated from their bondage.