Harry Reid's comments in Game Change (Enter with civility, please!)

[Erica in PA]

Am I a bad conservative if I see little wrong with Harry Reid's comments about candidate Obama? Of course, I'm referring to his comments reportedly quoted in the new book Game Change. Here's the passage:

 

 

Harry Reid 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.

 

 

 

 

 

Although perhaps insensitively put, I really don't see what's wrong with this. It sounds to me like a positive opinion based on a fact and that everyone's making a PC storm out of it.

 

 

 

 

Am I missing something?

 

 

 

 

Imo, you may be missing something... the implication is that a "light skinned" African American is preferable to a darker skinned one. It reflects racist thinking. What if Obama had had a very dark skin tone-- would he be less qualified to be president?? Not to mention the mention of a "Negro dialect"--- what does that even mean? Imo, Reid's comments make it clear that he thinks negatively of the average African american, and thought that Obama would be successful because he was *different* from that negative stereotype.

 

I do not understand the various comments I've heard in the media that this was a poor "choice of words." Even Obama, in an attempt to defend a political ally, chalked it up to mere "inartful language." It's not a matter of word choice... it is the *concept* that is offensive, not the words.

[Margaret in GA]

Imo, you may be missing something... the implication is that a "light skinned" African American is preferable to a darker skinned one. It reflects racist thinking. What if Obama had had a very dark skin tone-- would he be less qualified to be president?? Not to mention the mention of a "Negro dialect"--- what does that even mean? Imo, Reid's comments make it clear that he thinks negatively of the average African american, and thought that Obama would be successful because he was *different* from that negative stereotype.

 

I do not understand the various comments I've heard in the media that this was a poor "choice of words." Even Obama, in an attempt to defend a political ally, chalked it up to mere "inartful language." It's not a matter of word choice... it is the *concept* that is offensive, not the words.

 

I agree, but I think it was more ignorant than racist. In my opinion he did not intend malice. I am not sure he needs to lose his job over it. But, I also don't think it should go away and be swept under a rug.

[astrid]

Imo, you may be missing something... the implication is that a "light skinned" African American is preferable to a darker skinned one. It reflects racist thinking.

 

Yes, I agree--- that's what leads me to interpret the remarks as Reid drawing a conclusion about race relations in our country. Maybe I'm out in left field, but I read it as such.

 

astrid

[Mrs Mungo]

Trent Lott said, "I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either," Thurmond was a Segragationist and racist. He conducted the longest filibuster ever by a lone U.S. Senator in opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1957. Any politician that would extol the virtues of a known racist deserves what he gets. While what Harry Reid said was stupid and ignorant, it hardly compares with what Lott said.

 

 

 

:iagree:

I interpreted it as a condemnation of the state of tolerance in our country as well, not as a personal attack on the President.

 

astrid

 

:iagree:

 

Imo, you may be missing something... the implication is that a "light skinned" African American is preferable to a darker skinned one. <snip>

 

I disagree. His judgment here is not on dark-skinned African-Americans, it's on the American people. He's saying the American people aren't ready for a "dark" president. I don't think he's being directly racist, he's saying Americans are still too racist.

 

Not to mention the mention of a "Negro dialect"--- what does that even mean?

 

Most leaders of the Black community have been preachers and have spoken in a particular way-Dr. King, Reverend Jackson, etc. Many of this stripe *have* run for office and have not been elected. I agree that the word "Negro" was an extremely poor choice of words but other than that, I think it's the American people being condemned by Reid.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

:iagree:

 

 

:iagree:

 

 

 

I disagree. His judgment here is not on dark-skinned African-Americans, it's on the American people. He's saying the American people aren't ready for a "dark" president. I don't think he's being directly racist, he's saying Americans are still too racist.

 

 

 

Most leaders of the Black community have been preachers and have spoken in a particular way-Dr. King, Reverend Jackson, etc. Many of this stripe *have* run for office and have not been elected. I agree that the word "Negro" was an extremely poor choice of words but other than that, I think it's the American people being condemned by Reid.

 

:iagree::

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Yes, I agree--- that's what leads me to interpret the remarks as Reid drawing a conclusion about race relations in our country. Maybe I'm out in left field, but I read it as such.

 

astrid

 

:iagree:

[Erica in PA]

NM

Edited January 12, 2010 by Erica in PA

[Audrey]

 

They are INCREDIBLE insults. There are few things worse than being called a 'cracka' in Atlanta (or most of the south). It is the 'white' person's equivalent of the 'n' word.

 

 

a

 

 

SLightly off topic, but Asta... I have not seen that word in so very, very long. And it hit me in the gut like you wouldn't believe. No one here understands why I don't even like to hear it as a joke. My dh thinks it's funny (because there is, indeed a cow called a Florida Cracker). It makes ME want to crawl in a hole and cry. People are so d*mn mean. Words really do hurt. I'm not sure why people can't just accept that these words ARE hurtful. Even if it doesn't hurt YOU, it does hurt others. A lot.

 

I know you get that, Asta... I'm just saying...

[Donna T.]

 

:iagree:

 

It sounds to me like he was saying that America isn't really ready for an African-American president but maybe Obama would be acceptable. And, I think, if that's what he was saying, he was speaking the truth. I wish everyone would leave him alone. It was a private conversation and what he said is probably true. I was stunned when his situation began to be compared with Trent Lott's.

[TXMary2]

Trent Lott said, "I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either," Thurmond was a Segragationist and racist. He conducted the longest filibuster ever by a lone U.S. Senator in opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1957. Any politician that would extol the virtues of a known racist deserves what he gets. While what Harry Reid said was stupid and ignorant, it hardly compares with what Lott said.

 

Margaret

 

Well, I am sure we could find some deep seeded racism in Harry Reid if we overanalyzed it like that. Trent Lott was just trying to say something nice about an old man who was going to die soon, I hardly think it was as sinister as him wishing blacks had no civil rights. :001_rolleyes:

[mom4him]

Am I a bad conservative if I see little wrong with Harry Reid's comments about candidate Obama? Of course, I'm referring to his comments reportedly quoted in the new book Game Change. Here's the passage:

 

 

Harry Reid 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.

 

 

 

 

 

Although perhaps insensitively put, I really don't see what's wrong with this. It sounds to me like a positive opinion based on a fact and that everyone's making a PC storm out of it.

 

 

 

 

Am I missing something?

 

 

 

I haven't read any of the other post on this. I am a conservative and there hasn't been much about Pres. Obama that I have liked. The color of his skin has nothing to do with it though and I believe this remark a "light-skinned" African American "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one,"was out of line.

The man was running for president. I believe that we need to look at and be 'swayed' by the kind of leader that person will be. The color of his skin, whether he has/had a negro dialect has nothing to do with how he will lead the country.

I am white. I get really tired of all the hype about the persons skin color. Look at their life and whether it shows someone that you want to be leading the nation.

[Erica in PA]

Trent Lott said, "I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either," Thurmond was a Segragationist and racist. He conducted the longest filibuster ever by a lone U.S. Senator in opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1957. Any politician that would extol the virtues of a known racist deserves what he gets. While what Harry Reid said was stupid and ignorant, it hardly compares with what Lott said.

 

Margaret

 

I have never understood this position, at all. I don't have an opinion either way on Trent Lott (probably more negative than positive, if I had to choose), and I strongly oppose any racist views, but I do not see anywhere in Lott's comment that suggest that he agrees with Strom Thurmond's views on race. He had a very long political career, and stood for lots of other things as well. I have never understood why people made the leap from this statement to Lott sharing his views on race specifically.

[Heather in WI]

It sounds to me like he was saying that America isn't really ready for an African-American president but maybe Obama would be acceptable. And, I think, if that's what he was saying, he was speaking the truth. I wish everyone would leave him alone. It was a private conversation and what he said is probably true.

 

See, I didn't take it that way at all. I, like Martin Luther King Jr's niece, find the comment "sadly outrageous".

 

This wasn't a private conversation that the authors of the book clandestinely got a hold of. This was an insider's insider meeting between Reid and and the authors discussing the election of 2008.

 

 

 

Harry Reid isn’t talkative. But the Senate majority leader chatted freely with the two disarmingly charming book authors who came to his office at the Capitol shortly after the 2008 election.

 

{snip}

 

Reid was talking about the reasons why, even though he had publicly professed neutrality in the vicious Democratic primaries of 2008, he had secretly encouraged then-Illinois Sen. Barack Obama to challenge another member of his caucus, then-New York Sen. Hillary Clinton. And amid all the talk of Obama’s oratorical gifts, he let slip something else: Obama could win the White House because he was a “light-skinned†African-American “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.â€

 

 

 

The authors write in “Game Change,†published this weekend, that Reid had made the remark “privately.†They did not say he had said it to them.

source

 

 

Can you imagine if Newt Gingrich (or some other Republican leader -- I don't know the name of the past Senate leader!) expressed support for Colin Powell or Condoleezza Rice because they were "light skinned with no negro dialect"?

 

Would the same people here be defending a Republican leader who made the comment?

 

The thing is, is that I think it should be condemned no matter who said it.

[astrid]

Here's how I take Lott's remarks: (my interpretation in red below)

 

Trent Lott said:

 

"I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. (We are proud of voting for Thurmond, and the racism and segregation he extolled) And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either," (and if the rest of the country and rejected Civil Rights and left segregation in place, we wouldn't have all the problems that have arisen, such as urban poverty, crime, etc.)

 

Again, my interpretation. YMMV.

 

astrid

[Stacy in NJ]

This is by NO means offered up as an equivalent, but how would you feel if you read the following:

 

Rush Limbaugh was wowed by Colter's oratorical gifts and believed that the country was ready to embrace a female talk show host, especially one such as Colter -- a "bottle blonde who only sounds like an airhead when she wants to," as he said privately.

 

Would you feel empowered as a woman? Accepted by mainstream society? Hopeful for the future? etc.

 

I love this game; I want to play.

 

Newt Gingrich was wowed by Sarah Palin's ability to communicate with her audience and believed that the country was ready to embrace a female V.P, especially one such as Palin -- a "curvaceous hot mama who only sounds like trailer trash when she wants to," as he said privately.

 

How's that???:D

 

ETA: I really like Sarah Palin. I actually like that she's a curvaceous hot mama who only sounds like trailer trash when she wants to. I guess that means I'm sexist or racist or something bad.

Edited January 12, 2010 by Stacy in NJ
more

[Margaret in GA]

Here's how I take Lott's remarks: (my interpretation in red below)

 

Trent Lott said:

 

"I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. (We are proud of voting for Thurmond, and the racism and segregation he extolled) And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either," (and if the rest of the country and rejected Civil Rights and left segregation in place, we wouldn't have all the problems that have arisen, such as urban poverty, crime, etc.)

 

Again, my interpretation. YMMV.

 

astrid

:iagree:

Exactly. He's saying that he wishes Strom Thurmond had become President of the United States. A guy that vehemently opposed the Civil Rights movement. That's messed up.

[TravelingChris]

Personally I think this is far from the worse thing that Harry Reid has said. Just a few weeks ago, he was comparing senators who are against the current health plan to slave owners- huh? Then there was the time when he declared that we lost the war in Iraq which I thought was not only wrong (and it has turned out to be wrong) but also completely bad for morale in the armed forces, particularly those deployed and their loved ones home.

But even if he doesn't step down, it doesn't look like we will have to listen to his gaffes for too much longer. His approval ratings in Nevada are in the low 30s which is not a good spot for an incumbent running for re-election.

[Danestress]

I'm confused!

 

If Newt is still considering running for office, I think that was an incredibly stupid thing to say. Please tell me he didn't really say that.

 

Apart from any comment on Sarah Palin, I think that is pretty insulting to people who live in trailers and do not consider themselves "trash" for doing so. It seems like such a "trashy" thing to call people "trailer trash" that I have a hard time believing that Newt would do that. He's got a big personality and we love him for it (or hate him for it) and he has definitely lived out loud, lol, but .... he didn't really ... right? That was a hypothetical?

[Margaret in GA]

Personally I think this is far from the worse thing that Harry Reid has said. Just a few weeks ago, he was comparing senators who are against the current health plan to slave owners- huh? Then there was the time when he declared that we lost the war in Iraq which I thought was not only wrong (and it has turned out to be wrong) but also completely bad for morale in the armed forces, particularly those deployed and their loved ones home.

But even if he doesn't step down, it doesn't look like we will have to listen to his gaffes for too much longer. His approval ratings in Nevada are in the low 30s which is not a good spot for an incumbent running for re-election.

 

I do think that when you say stupid stuff these days (24 hour news cycle + internet) it will eventually catch up with you and then you'll have to explain yourself back home, where it matters.

[Stacy in NJ]

I'm confused!

 

If Newt is still considering running for office, I think that was an incredibly stupid thing to say. Please tell me he didn't really say that.

 

Apart from any comment on Sarah Palin, I think that is pretty insulting to people who live in trailers and do not consider themselves "trash" for doing so. It seems like such a "trashy" thing to call people "trailer trash" that I have a hard time believing that Newt would do that. He's got a big personality and we love him for it (or hate him for it) and he has definitely lived out loud, lol, but .... he didn't really ... right? That was a hypothetical?

 

No, sorry. He did not say that. I was just picking up on Stripe's theme .... total fiction.:D

Edited January 12, 2010 by Stacy in NJ

[Liz CA]

She just signed a contract with Fox News.

 

I agree with Sis, I think Reid was saying America is dumb and racist.

 

eta: I haven't watched the pundits, so I don't know what they are upset about. Are they saying that the remark is racist? That Reid was saying blacks aren't smart? I don't think that's what he was saying. I'm not sure that what he *was* saying was much better...or that I disagree with him to a certain extent.

 

Also, what is Reid then saying about the "darker" black man who may speak with an accent?

[Erica in PA]

Here's how I take Lott's remarks: (my interpretation in red below)

 

Trent Lott said:

 

"I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. (We are proud of voting for Thurmond, and the racism and segregation he extolled) And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either," (and if the rest of the country and rejected Civil Rights and left segregation in place, we wouldn't have all the problems that have arisen, such as urban poverty, crime, etc.)

 

Again, my interpretation. YMMV.

 

astrid

 

I understand that some interpret it that way, but why? Why would that be *the one thing* about Thurmond, out of an incredibly long political career (longest ever, from what I recall), that Lott would be referring to? Isn't it more likely that he was referring to his conservatism, for example? Suggesting that if the country had stuck to a more conservative approach, we wouldn't have had "all these problems?" It sounds much more logical to me. There is nothing in Lott's comment that leads me to believe that Thurmond's racism is what he was applauding.

[BabyBre]

Imo, you may be missing something... the implication is that a "light skinned" African American is preferable to a darker skinned one. It reflects racist thinking. What if Obama had had a very dark skin tone-- would he be less qualified to be president?? Not to mention the mention of a "Negro dialect"--- what does that even mean? Imo, Reid's comments make it clear that he thinks negatively of the average African american, and thought that Obama would be successful because he was *different* from that negative stereotype.

 

 

 

His comments don't reflect how he feels about Obama or the black race, but about how he thinks the electorate feels. I would probably agree that a lighter skinned black man who spoke clear, proper English would stand a better chance of being elected than a darker skinned man who didn't. Obama connects with a larger percentage of the population - white (because he's not "too black"), black (because he's not "too white"), and otherwise.

[Mrs Mungo]

Also, what is Reid then saying about the "darker" black man who may speak with an accent?

 

I think he's saying that there are Americans who would hold those things against such a man. I think he's partly right, even if he worded it in a clumsy manner. For example, Jesse Jackson has never come close to getting a presidential nomination.

[astrid]

I understand that some interpret it that way, but why? Why would that be *the one thing* about Thurmond, out of an incredibly long political career (longest ever, from what I recall), that Lott would be referring to? Isn't it more likely that he was referring to his conservatism, for example? Suggesting that if the country had stuck to a more conservative approach, we wouldn't have had "all these problems?" It sounds much more logical to me. There is nothing in Lott's comment that leads me to believe that Thurmond's racism is what he was applauding.

 

Because IMHO, Thurmond's racism and refusal to support Civil Rights trumps a long career.

 

astrid

[Erica in PA]

Because IMHO, Thurmond's racism and refusal to support Civil Rights trumps a long career.

 

astrid

 

I agree with you on that point. It's despicable. However, I don't believe that Trent Lott displayed racism himself when he praised Thurmond. Politicians of both parties praise those on their side of the aisle all the time... it doesn't mean they agree with everything that person has done or said. I think it's absolutely ludicrous that he was pushed to resign over it. I don't even think Reid necessarily needs to resign, and I think what he said actually *was* racist. I think the voters in his state should remember this when he runs for reelection, though.

[TXMary2]

I agree with you on that point. It's despicable. However, I don't believe that Trent Lott displayed racism himself when he praised Thurmond. Politicians of both parties praise those on their side of the aisle all the time... it doesn't mean they agree with everything that person has done or said. I think it's absolutely ludicrous that he was pushed to resign over it. I don't even think Reid necessarily needs to resign, and I think what he said actually *was* racist. I think the voters in his state should remember this when he runs for reelection, though.

 

 

Were there Democrats who said nice things about Robert Byrd? They are all racists too if they did because after all Byrd was a racist and once a KKK member/leader.

[Margaret in GA]

Were there Democrats who said nice things about Robert Byrd? They are all racists too if they did because after all Byrd was a racist and once a KKK member/leader.

 

Praising a flawed politician is one thing, wishing a dedicated racist had become PRESIDENT (remember he ran in the late forties on a Segregationist platform) is another. Which is what Lott said- that he wishes he had become president. Again, remember that Thurmond holds the record for longest individual filibuster which he conducted AGAINST the Civil Rights Act. How can you disassociate that from him? I agree that it's goofy to ask for everyone's head everytime they say something dumb, and I agree that people should not have asked for Lott's resignation. But, you cannot compare the two things.

[BabyBre]

I agree with you on that point. It's despicable. However, I don't believe that Trent Lott displayed racism himself when he praised Thurmond. Politicians of both parties praise those on their side of the aisle all the time... it doesn't mean they agree with everything that person has done or said. I think it's absolutely ludicrous that he was pushed to resign over it. I don't even think Reid necessarily needs to resign, and I think what he said actually *was* racist. I think the voters in his state should remember this when he runs for reelection, though.

 

 

:iagree: I agree (except that I don't believe what Reid said was racist), and they will remember.

[theresatwist]

Well, I am sure we could find some deep seeded racism in Harry Reid if we overanalyzed it like that. Trent Lott was just trying to say something nice about an old man who was going to die soon, I hardly think it was as sinister as him wishing blacks had no civil rights. :001_rolleyes:

 

I did not have a problem with Reid's argument, only his wording. I do not believe his statement was racist. In fact, as I said earlier his point was that racism still exists in this nation. I do not believe a darker black man with an accent would be able to get elected in America today, not because his features would somehow disqualify him, but because there is still too much racism is this country.

 

I don't remember Trent Lott's exact words and I haven't gone and looked them up. But, whether what he said should have gotten him kicked out of office or not, if you don't believe Reid made a comment that could be interpreted as racist (which I don't) then the question of what should happen to Reid (nothing, in my opinion) has nothing to do with Trent Lott. In this sense, the liberal view isn't that Democrats can be excused for racist comments and Republicans can't. It's that Reid didn't make a racist comment. In my mind the two cases have nothing to do with one another.

[Senorita Tuna Fish]

After reading comments about 80% of African Americans speaking non standard english and jet black people with fros I just figured that I'd say something before I exploded. Where do people get this kind of information? considering that alot of African americans I know speak proper english. I'm sure that you know this because all the people you see on tv or on the radio are 80% of the black population right? I knew that as soon as I read the original post that nothing good would come of this. Just a rehashing of old political and nasty feelings. Democrats are this and Republicans are that. This is a double standard and that is a double standard. But to use this kind of comment( Harry Reid's) to start conversations about racisim is never gonna work. You wanna talk about race relations and what should be said and what shouldn't quotes coming from any politician is not a good place to start. There needs to be a better discussion starter than that. I'm just kinda hurt that those type of streotypes exist. 80% of Africans Americans in "da hood" or else where speak many diffrent things. and for that matter what's "da hood". Anyway enough of this rant.... I said all of that to say that:

I don't think that the comment by Harry Reid was meant to say anything about the color of Obama's skin nor was it an insult to Obama or to dark skinned people. It said more about what he thought of the American people. There is racisim in America plain and simple. He was talking about the electability of a Black man and to be honest with you as a Black woman I think that had he been darker there's a possibility that the fight to get elected would have been harder. But the 80% comment has me hot and mad right now!!

[asta]

After reading comments about 80% of African Americans speaking non standard english and jet black people with fros I just figured that I'd say something before I exploded. Where do people get this kind of information? considering that alot of African americans I know speak proper english. I'm sure that you know this because all the people you see on tv or on the radio are 80% of the black population right? I knew that as soon as I read the original post that nothing good would come of this. Just a rehashing of old political and nasty feelings. Democrats are this and Republicans are that. This is a double standard and that is a double standard. But to use this kind of comment( Harry Reid's) to start conversations about racisim is never gonna work. You wanna talk about race relations and what should be said and what shouldn't quotes coming from any politician is not a good place to start. There needs to be a better discussion starter than that. I'm just kinda hurt that those type of streotypes exist. 80% of Africans Americans in "da hood" or else where speak many diffrent things. and for that matter what's "da hood". Anyway enough of this rant.... I said all of that to say that:

I don't think that the comment by Harry Reid was meant to say anything about the color of Obama's skin nor was it an insult to Obama or to dark skinned people. It said more about what he thought of the American people. There is racisim in America plain and simple. He was talking about the electability of a Black man and to be honest with you as a Black woman I think that had he been darker there's a possibility that the fight to get elected would have been harder. But the 80% comment has me hot and mad right now!!

 

'da hood is what my neighborhood was referred to by the people who lived there. You can see some of its finer points if you look around the intersection of I-85 and the Lakewood Freeway in East Point, Georgia. Where the people who tried to come in and refurbish houses to a livable standard were burned out by the crack dealers. Where there was literally no way for a kid of color to get ahead because ALL of the schools in the district save 2 or 3 were failing - and those ones were "magically" in the far reaches of the district where "whites" lived.

 

I spoke two languages when I moved there and three when I left. It isn't social commentary, it is reality. My friends wanted to make sure I could operate in the neighborhood without too much trouble. I am forever in their debt. To pretend that whole neighborhoods don't exist (and I only lived in one of many in the greater ATL area), or that large swaths of people aren't speaking in a certain manner is disingenuous. Now, were my friends who had moved there from Ohio appalled at what they had brought their kids into? You bet. Did they all have to pick up and learn the same stuff I did? You bet. Survival of the fittest.

 

And as far as it "going both ways" - How do I know how bad the racism is? Because me and my girlfriend tried to register her 2 boys for school one day at one of those "good" schools. I walked in the door first, and they were all smiles and sunshine and happiness and "yes we have a spot for your child" to ME - little miss white, wearing her nasty sweatpants, no make-up, and a ratty shirt. But when my impeccably dressed and made-up PUERTO RICAN girlfriend came in behind me, suddenly there was no room at the inn.

 

Like I said, people hate. For whatever reason. Sometimes they look for a reason. When we moved there, the first sports team I put my kid in happened to be (almost) all white. Those kids were vicious to him. They wouldn't talk to him, or even pass the ball to him. Their parents wouldn't talk to me. We had the exact opposite experience at our second club, which happened to be all black. Which happened to be in da hood.

 

Yes, I'm sensitive about this. I've lived in some seriously cr@ppy neighborhoods in my life. I've met some really awesome people. I've heard some REALLY bad English and some really great other languages. I don't define people by where they live, the color of their skin or by their language. The world at large, however, does. Like I said, if we want our children to rise up on the world stage, we have to allow them the opportunities to speak well, present well, and be the best "self" that they can be. And axing a keschun isn't going to get them to the Presidency or anywhere else. Being a strong orator, however, just might get them many things.

 

/rant

 

 

a

[Senorita Tuna Fish]

You can say that because you lived in "da hood" that you know and this and that....but be a black person living in that hood and then tell me what it really is. I've heard poor language spoken everywhere and I mean every where. Please please please don't tell me that your experience living in "da hood" can ever live up to the reality of mine as a black person growing up in it for most of my life! Point blank if me my friends or anyone i knew talked like this third language that you speak of the taste would have been slapped out of our mouthes. Uneducated sounding people live every where not just in the hood. I'm not picking on you but really please!! That hood that you speak of has and will produce great things and people so don't under any circumstances label all of "us" as jumping on the band wagon of this non standard, sub par, third language. Hate is hate is hate and all I'm saying is what Harry Reid said had more to do with the hate he sees this country is capable of not a putting down of the president. He said people wouldn't vote for him if he was darker and spoke like a street thug. There is a diffrence if you can't see that well then what ever. But I for one am not going to get all up in arms about him saying that the country is still too racist to vote for a darker person. Truth is truth. But that 80% of African Americans speaking non standard english is bull hockey!

[asta]

Yes, I'm sensitive about this. I've lived in some seriously cr@ppy neighborhoods in my life. I've met some really awesome people. I've heard some REALLY bad English and some really great other languages. I don't define people by where they live, the color of their skin or by their language. The world at large, however, does. Like I said, if we want our children to rise up on the world stage, we have to allow them the opportunities to speak well, present well, and be the best "self" that they can be. And axing a keschun isn't going to get them to the Presidency or anywhere else. Being a strong orator, however, just might get them many things.

 

/rant

 

 

a

 

I never commented on any statistic, 80% or otherwise. I only gave my personal experience, my opinion of Harry Reid (poor, as it has pretty much always been), and my hope that we all do best by our children.

 

(bowing out)

 

 

a

[asta]

(bowing in after reading the news)

 

Two articles from Slate magazine:

 

Code Black: Of course Obama talks differently to different groups. So do most politicians.

 

When Did the Word Negro Become Taboo? In 1966 or soon thereafter.

 

 

a

[TXMary2]

I think he's saying that there are Americans who would hold those things against such a man. I think he's partly right, even if he worded it in a clumsy manner. For example, Jesse Jackson has never come close to getting a presidential nomination.

 

That's probably because he isn't likeable, not because he is black.

[TXMary2]

I did not have a problem with Reid's argument, only his wording. I do not believe his statement was racist. In fact, as I said earlier his point was that racism still exists in this nation. I do not believe a darker black man with an accent would be able to get elected in America today, not because his features would somehow disqualify him, but because there is still too much racism is this country.

 

I don't remember Trent Lott's exact words and I haven't gone and looked them up. But, whether what he said should have gotten him kicked out of office or not, if you don't believe Reid made a comment that could be interpreted as racist (which I don't) then the question of what should happen to Reid (nothing, in my opinion) has nothing to do with Trent Lott. In this sense, the liberal view isn't that Democrats can be excused for racist comments and Republicans can't. It's that Reid didn't make a racist comment. In my mind the two cases have nothing to do with one another.

 

Yeah, this seems to be the Democrat talking point...."there's no comparison..."

[theresatwist]

Yeah, this seems to be the Democrat talking point...."there's no comparison..."

 

I'm not arguing that Lott should have gotten kicked out. I would have to go back and carefully look at what he said again before I made a judgement on that.

 

However, speaking of Democratic talking points...I heard an interesting argument on the radio about how Lott could have kept his position if the Bush administration had been willing to get behind him (use political capital) as the Obama administration has been willing to for Reid. He still would have taken a ton of heat, especially from the left, but the commentator I heard argued that Lott was forced to step down because even prior to his comment at the ceremony for Thurman he had already caused the Bush administration a bunch of trouble and they weren't willing to spend any more political capital on him. In contrast, Reid is a strong ally of Obama's (and I imagine anyone on the right would agree with this statement) and so Obama has far more incentive to stand behind him.

 

Basic point: The Bush administration and not the left ultimately made the decision about whether Lott should be forced to step down or not. It wasn't a fight they were up for.

[unsinkable]

Because IMHO, Thurmond's racism and refusal to support Civil Rights trumps a long career.

 

astrid

 

IMHO, Mary Jo Kopechne should have trumped any career that occured outside of a prison cell. The good people of MA thought otherwise.