PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues Has the left overplayed the racist card?


Bewbies
06-27-2012, 11:12 PM
Seriously, is there any charge that carries less weight today? Anymore when I see someone (or some group) accused of being racist all I can do is laugh. The argument has clearly been lost. LMAO

Direckshun
06-27-2012, 11:17 PM
I think it's a very hard charge to make, simply because it's so nebulous. Racism cannot ever be definitively proven or disproven. Some people have a very broad definition of it, others have a strikingly narrow one. I try not to argue it unless I can get what the person across from me means by "racism," but their definition is probably just temporarily inflated or deflated to fit whatever rhetorical jab they're throwing at that particular moment.

At the same time, I don't think anybody realistically denies that racism is still very real, and very prevalent. To pretend it doesn't continue play a role in our dialogue is to do just that, pretend.

I largely try to avoid the accusation unless it clearly seems appropriate, beyond a reasonable doubt. I just try to be tolerant, believe in what I consider the best things, and do what I consider to be the best thing. I think that attitude fights racism better than the accusations ever do.

La literatura
06-27-2012, 11:31 PM
Asking this question is actually quite racist.

Bewbies
06-27-2012, 11:32 PM
Asking this question is actually quite racist.

Yes, I'm racist. A well thought out response.

Direckshun
06-27-2012, 11:34 PM
Actually, asking a racist question does not necessarily make one racist.

But don't mind me.

Bewbies
06-27-2012, 11:37 PM
I think it's a very hard charge to make, simply because it's so nebulous. Racism cannot ever be definitively proven or disproven. Some people have a very broad definition of it, others have a strikingly narrow one. I try not to argue it unless I can get what the person across from me means by "racism," but their definition is probably just temporarily inflated or deflated to fit whatever rhetorical jab they're throwing at that particular moment.

At the same time, I don't think anybody realistically denies that racism is still very real, and very prevalent. To pretend it doesn't continue play a role in our dialogue is to do just that, pretend.

I largely try to avoid the accusation unless it clearly seems appropriate, beyond a reasonable doubt. I just try to be tolerant, believe in what I consider the best things, and do what I consider to be the best thing. I think that attitude fights racism better than the accusations ever do.

I'll buy racism in individuals, but when people level the charge against an entire group it's hilarious. Especially when that group is millions of people large, including tons and tons of black folks.

The card has been used so much to try to end debate with legitimate arguments that it's absolutely powerless today. Whoever thought saying you couldn't disagree with someone unless you were racist clearly overplayed their hand.

Munson
06-27-2012, 11:38 PM
Without question, the libs have overplayed the race card. You can go 5 minutes without a "journalist" in the MSM, or a left wing politician, painting conservatives as racists. They can't deal with the fact that there are people who don't like the Dear Leader based on his failed idealogy, policies, and actions.

Direckshun
06-27-2012, 11:50 PM
I'll buy racism in individuals, but when people level the charge against an entire group it's hilarious.

That's fair.

The card has been used so much to try to end debate with legitimate arguments that it's absolutely powerless today. Whoever thought saying you couldn't disagree with someone unless you were racist clearly overplayed their hand.

I wouldn't say the accusation of racism is powerless. Sadly, it's all too powerful. Remember, the GOP has no problem with playing the race card either when they get a chance to do so. It just happens to be far, far less often due to the disparity the two parties have in their demographics.

I won't disagree, however, that people declaring racism are often overplaying their hands. But that's a strategy more often than not, one that we see frequently here in DC: the laziest argument possible, instead of engaging the nuances of what your opponent has actually said or actually believes, simply smother him in hyperbole so thick that he needs to spend all his time slicing through your nonsense rather than actually articulating his position. I have that garbage pulled on me constantly.

It's very, very common, because it's so lazy and easy to resort to.

Racism is still very real, but in most cases, accusations of racism are just some lazy asshole trying to pop somebody else's tire rather than someone being genuinely concerned about race relations.

Bewbies
06-27-2012, 11:58 PM
That's fair.



I wouldn't say the accusation of racism is powerless. Sadly, it's all too powerful. Remember, the GOP has no problem with playing the race card either when they get a chance to do so. It just happens to be far, far less often due to the disparity the two parties have in their demographics.

I won't disagree, however, that people declaring racism are often overplaying their hands. But that's a strategy more often than not, one that we see frequently here in DC: the laziest argument possible, instead of engaging the nuances of what your opponent has actually said or actually believes, simply smother him in hyperbole so thick that he needs to spend all his time slicing through your nonsense rather than actually articulating his position. I have that garbage pulled on me constantly.

It's very, very common, because it's so lazy and easy to resort to.

Racism is still very real, but in most cases, accusations of racism are just some lazy asshole trying to pop somebody else's tire rather than someone being genuinely concerned about race relations.

Yep.

Most people can spot actual racism very quickly, and everyone shits on that person. As they should.

:thumb:

Direckshun
06-28-2012, 12:06 AM
Yep.

Most people can spot actual racism very quickly, and everyone shits on that person. As they should.

Sadly, I think that's a bit naive. I wish it were true.

Too often, we'll just look past racist statements and actions if they are committed by people in our political party.

Ideology trumps all, for too many people.

Aries Walker
06-28-2012, 12:07 AM
Before the 2008 election, I saw a poll taken in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, in which they asked if race was a factor in their choice for President. 25% of each state said yes. It's there.

On the other hand, it's one of the easiest baloney charges to level that there is.

HonestChieffan
06-28-2012, 07:01 AM
The democrats have made the racist charge into a tag line. It now is no more than fodder for that group who think all politics is race based. It makes them feel good but has zero impact with thinking people either republican or democrat.

The real downside is that it has lost its punch so if real racism rears its head, the charge will have no effect.

Racism is not confined to any one group or race and a racist in any color is intolerable.

Saul Good
06-28-2012, 07:25 AM
Before the 2008 election, I saw a poll taken in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, in which they asked if race was a factor in their choice for President. 25% of each state said yes. It's there.

On the other hand, it's one of the easiest baloney charges to level that there is.

Something lie 98% of blacks voted for Obama. Of course it matters to a lot of people.

Predarat
06-28-2012, 08:05 AM
No, not at all. They need to do it more.

petegz28
06-28-2012, 08:14 AM
It's a cop out anymore. You don't like whatever a black man does then you simply don't like it because of the color of his skin.

What it is is an argument rooted in ignorance. People can't come up with a substantive argument for whatever so they simply throw out the race card instead. The irony is when it comes from a black person there are usually heavy overtones of racism in their comments. "He's not black enough". "He's an Uncle Tom". "He's an Oreo". "White people don't like him cause he's black".

Some in the name of racial equality go onto bash and accuse white people, etc. I went to schools that were majority black and what I found funny throughout all those years was they were they first to throw out racial insults then call you a racist if you retaliated in kind. I try to chalk that up to just kids being kids but in the adult world I see it a lot as well. Can you imagine a white person saying a President isn't "white enough"?

|Zach|
06-28-2012, 08:16 AM
It isn't really something I dwell on a lot when talking about politics as someone who is left leaning and gets engaged with a lot of discussions with right leaning friends. I don't think its nearly as big of a factor as fringe "love being the victim" type leftists make it out to be but it absolutely is out there and is a factor.

Having said that I found this pretty interesting.

"The effects of racial animus on a black presidential candidate to find out what surveys miss" (http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~sstephen/papers/RacialAnimusAndVotingSethStephensDavidowitz.pdf)

Abstract:

How can we know how much racial animus costs black candidates if few voters will admit such socially unacceptable attitudes to surveys? I use a new, non-survey proxy for an area’s racial animus: Google search queries that include racially charged language. I compare the proxy to an area’s votes for Barack Obama, the 2008 black Democratic presidential candidate, controlling for its votes for John Kerry, the 2004 white Democratic presidential candidate. Previous research using a similar specification but survey proxies for racial attitudes yielded little evidence that racial attitudes affected Obama. Racially charged search, in contrast, is a robust negative predictor of Obama’s vote share. My estimates imply that continuing racial animus in the United States cost Obama 3 to 5 percentage points of the national popular vote in 2008, yielding his opponent the equivalent of a home-state advantage country-wide.

petegz28
06-28-2012, 08:19 AM
Here is a classic examply of being racial and not intelligent..

http://influencealley.nationaljournal.com/2012/06/black-lawmakers-plot-walkout-s.php

Black Lawmakers Plot 'Walkout Strategy' During Holder Contempt Vote


The Congressional Black Caucus has called a members-only "emergency" meeting on Thursday to plot a "walkout strategy" ahead of the scheduled contempt vote of Attorney General Eric Holder later in the day.

The plans, detailed in an email from the executive director of the Congressional Black Caucus obtained by the Alley, include circulating a letter disapproving of the vote and having lawmakers walk out of the Capitol to hold a press conference during the roll call.

(RELATED: Holder Contempt Vote Going to the Floor)

The letter, a draft of which is being circulated for signatures, accuses the GOP leadership of "rushing recklessly to a contempt vote." The letter is being circulated among the Black, Hispanic, Asian and Progressive caucuses, among other.

(RELATED: Holder to Attend Congressional Picnic--Awkwaaaard)

"We cannot and will not participate in a vote to hold the Attorney General in contempt," says the letter, in which the signers urge that "all members of Congress to stand with us during a press conference on the Capitol Building steps during this appalling series of votes to discuss our nation's most significant priority--creating jobs."

The House is expected to vote on Thursday hold Holder in contempt of Congress for refusing to release certain documents related to the failed "Fast and Furious" gun-running program.

(RELATED: Dreier Hearts Dick Clark)

At moments, the fight has taken on racial undertones, most notably when Holder, who is African American, told the New York Times in December 2011 that he served as a stand-in for GOP attacks on President Obama. "This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him," Holder said, "both due to the nature of our relationship and, you know, the fact that we're both African-American."

A copy of the full draft letter is below:


Dear Colleague:

We write to urge you to stand with us in the pursuit of justice for the Attorney General of the United States of America, Eric H. Holder. In its history, the United States House of Representatives has never held a United States Attorney General, or any other Cabinet official, in contempt.

Instead of focusing on job creation and other critical issues before this Congress, we have been asked to engage in a political stunt on the floor of the United States House of Representatives. Our constituents elected us to do real work, not to engage in meaningless partisan activity.

Over the past 15 months, Attorney General Eric Holder and the Department of Justice have cooperated with the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform's requests for information on "Fast and Furious", an unfortunate operation that began under the Bush Administration and, in fact, was terminated by Attorney General Holder. The Department has made extraordinary efforts to accommodate Congress by turning over almost 8,000 documents--including all the documents that relate to the tactics in this investigation and the other flawed investigations that occurred in Arizona during the Bush Administration. The Attorney General also participated in a bicameral meeting in a good faith effort to satisfy the Committee's information requests. While the Attorney General has advised House Republicans that he is willing to work with them in attempting to reach an agreement, the Republican Leadership is instead rushing recklessly to a contempt vote.

Contempt power should be used sparingly, carefully and only in the most egregious situations. The Republican Leadership has articulated no legislative purpose for pursuing this course of action. For these reasons we cannot and will not participate in a vote to hold the Attorney General in contempt. We adamantly oppose this partisan attack and refuse to participate in any vote that would tarnish the image of Congress or of an Attorney General who has done nothing but work tirelessly to protect the rights of the American people. We must reflect upon why we are elected to this body and choose now to stand up for justice.

We call upon all members of Congress to stand with us during a press conference on the Capitol Building steps during this appalling series of votes to discuss our nation's most significant priority--creating jobs. At this critically important time in our nation, we must work as colleagues rather than political enemies.

petegz28
06-28-2012, 08:20 AM
So instead of acting like adults, realizing there are issues regarding Fast and Furious and Holder's lack of cooperation, they immediately reduce it to "it's a black thang!"

|Zach|
06-28-2012, 08:23 AM
So instead of acting like adults, realizing there are issues regarding Fast and Furious and Holder's lack of cooperation, they immediately reduce it to "it's a black thang!"

Is that what they are saying? Maybe there is something else where they are going that angle but it seems to me they are backing the constituent they are beholden to.

The NFLPA backs up and defends football players when they are under seige because they are beholden to those players. That is what they are as a group.

Congressional Black Caucus doesn't seem to be saying the reason he is being attacked is because he is black. They seem to be backing their own guy.

|Zach|
06-28-2012, 08:27 AM
I have not followed this closely so if there is some other language they have used that shows their cause is different than I described then I would be interested to see it.

petegz28
06-28-2012, 08:27 AM
Is that what they are saying? Maybe there is something else where they are going that angle but it seems to me they are backing the constituent they are beholden to.

The NFLPA backs up and defends football players when they are under seige because they are beholden to those players. That is what they are as a group.

Congressional Black Caucus doesn't seem to be saying the reason he is being attacked is because he is black. They seem to be backing their own guy.


Ok so they should back him simply because he is black? The undertones state it is "because he is black" simply due to the fact that the CBC is the one organizing this. The question one would have to ask and unfortunately we won't ever know the answer is, if Holder was white what would the CBC's stance be on this? I'm sorry but this smacks of "we can't let them attack a black man" regardless of what the charges are. There has been plenty of evidence of Holder being less than honest on Fast and Furious and when people start supporting people simply due to the color of their skin when no other racial attacks are evident then you have a clear cut case of the race card being played.

petegz28
06-28-2012, 08:30 AM
I have not followed this closely so if there is some other language they have used that shows their cause is different than I described then I would be interested to see it.

Basically what they are doing is trying to defend Obama via the race card. Or one of Obama's peeps I should say. There has been evidence of perjury and lack of cooperation by the DOJ. Then Obama put an executive order blocking congress from the documents they wanted of Fast and Furious which appeared to be a last ditch effort to save his buddy. Now that Congress is moving forward what's left, the race card.

Chief Faithful
06-28-2012, 08:31 AM
The biggest irony not only has the left overplayed the racist card, but it has gotten to the point the people crying racism against a group appear to be the biggest racists.

Chief Faithful
06-28-2012, 08:35 AM
Something lie 98% of blacks voted for Obama. Of course it matters to a lot of people.

If someone votes for a candidate strictly because the candidate has the same skin color as the person casting the vote, is that racist?

|Zach|
06-28-2012, 08:42 AM
Ok so they should back him simply because he is black? The undertones state it is "because he is black" simply due to the fact that the CBC is the one organizing this.

Well yes, you can in fact make this whatever you want and claim undertones are pointing to that.

What they actually say be damned.

|Zach|
06-28-2012, 08:44 AM
The existence of the CBC does not make every action they make a reaction to racism.

petegz28
06-28-2012, 08:46 AM
Well yes, you can in fact make this whatever you want and claim undertones are pointing to that.

What they actually say be damned.

You're right. Politicians should always be taken at face value.

petegz28
06-28-2012, 08:48 AM
The existence of the CBC does not make every action they make a reaction to racism.

The fact you still have a CBC in this day and age of proposed racial equality makes their mere existence racist, imo. You can't preach racial equality then segregate a certain race for "it's own". Sorta defeats the purpose, doesn't it?

|Zach|
06-28-2012, 08:50 AM
You're right. Politicians should always be taken at face value.
Is this going to be one of your issues you get all emotional about for a few months and then completely forget?

I really miss the calls for the people to totally gridlock the airports over your TSA rage which seems to be completely gone.

This issue might not be big enough though. Let me know in advance though so I can enjoy the show.

patteeu
06-28-2012, 08:50 AM
Well yes, you can in fact make this whatever you want and claim undertones are pointing to that.

What they actually say be damned.

It seems to me that when SHTSPRAYER's behavior was being debated here on various occasions, undertones rather than what he actually said were all too often* the focus of people like you.

__________________
* There were a couple of times when he actually went over the line, but most of the time we were arguing about supposed racism inferred by his critics.

|Zach|
06-28-2012, 08:52 AM
The fact you still have a CBC in this day and age of proposed racial equality makes their mere existence racist, imo. You can't preach racial equality then segregate a certain race for "it's own". Sorta defeats the purpose, doesn't it?

I think you have a group that represents a group of people in this country who are a minority that have uniqe interests that the CBC wants to make sure are represented.

Really like any other caucus group whether it be ideologically based (Tea party) or religion based or whatever really. We are talking about people and groups with unique interests trying to advocate for those interests.

I don't see that as a problem.

petegz28
06-28-2012, 08:53 AM
Is this going to be one of your issues you get all emotional about for a few months and then completely forget?

I really miss the calls for the people to totally gridlock the airports over your TSA rage which seems to be completely gone.

This issue might not be big enough though. Let me know in advance though so I can enjoy the show.

I think what the DOJ is doing on this particular issue is wrong. They fucked up, got caught and now are trying to lie about it. I still prefer gridlock and I still think the TSA is a waste of time and money.

|Zach|
06-28-2012, 08:53 AM
It seems to me that when SHTSPRAYER's behavior was being debated here on various occasions, undertones rather than what he actually said were all too often* the focus of people like you.

__________________
* There were a couple of times when he actually went over the line, but most of the time we were arguing about supposed racism inferred by his critics.

Your last part says it all. Thanks for your honesty.

I know. You love being shoulder to shoulder with worthless shit heads.

patteeu
06-28-2012, 08:54 AM
Your last part says it all. Thanks for your honesty.

I know. You love being shoulder to shoulder with worthless shit heads.

The last part is a mere footnote. The truth of the first part makes you a hypocrite in post 25.

petegz28
06-28-2012, 08:54 AM
I think you have a group that represents a group of people in this country who are a minority that have uniqe interests that the CBC wants to make sure are represented in this country.

Really like any other caucus group whether it be ideologically based (Tea party) or religion based or whatever really. We are talking about people and groups with unique interests trying to advocate for those interests.

I don't see that as a problem.

That's idiotic, imo. We are supposed to all be equal under the law, yes? You can't segregate a particular race then claim we are all equal. Sorta sets a bad example at the top.

|Zach|
06-28-2012, 08:56 AM
That's idiotic, imo. We are supposed to all be equal under the law, yes? You can't segregate a particular race then claim we are all equal. Sorta sets a bad example at the top.

They are not saying we are all not equal.

|Zach|
06-28-2012, 08:57 AM
The last part is a mere footnote. The truth of the first part makes you a hypocrite in post 25.

It is a footnote that completely changes the first part. lol


"Hey you guys the QB doesn't throw INTs even though you all ridicule him for it on this board.

*Granted, he did throw a lot of INTs in 2011*"

petegz28
06-28-2012, 08:57 AM
They are not saying we are all not equal.

When you take a group of white people and say only white people are allowed it's considered racist. If you take a group of men and say only men are allowed it's considered sexist. To allow the minority to do the same simply because they are the minority does not scream equality.

petegz28
06-28-2012, 08:58 AM
They are not saying we are all not equal.

To elaborate, I am not talking about hings like the NAACP or NOW. Those are, uh-hum, private or non-profit groups. I am talking about our elected leaders specifically.

|Zach|
06-28-2012, 08:59 AM
When you take a group of white people and say only white people are allowed it's considered racist. If you take a group of men and say only men are allowed it's considered sexist. To allow the minority to do the same simply because they are the minority does not scream equality.

You do not have to be black to be a member of the CBC.

patteeu
06-28-2012, 09:00 AM
It is a footnote that completely changes the first part. lol


"Hey you guys the QB doesn't throw INTs even though you all ridicule him for it on this board.

*Granted, he did throw a lot of INTs in 2011*"

No, it doesn't. If you walk out of the room during a Chiefs drive and come back to find out the other team has the ball, you aren't justified in arguing that Cassel must have thrown an interception just because later that season he throws one. Learn to read.

petegz28
06-28-2012, 09:00 AM
You do not have to be black to be a member of the CBC.

I know this, you are avoiding or missing the point.

|Zach|
06-28-2012, 09:04 AM
I know this, you are avoiding or missing the point.

I see no problem with the caucus system. I am not here calling everyone racists or screaming crazy things but I think the existence of the CBC makes a lot of sense because they are representing a large population in the US who is indeed a minority and has a focus on advocating specific issues. Just like any special interest. *shrug*

petegz28
06-28-2012, 09:06 AM
I see no problem with the caucus system. I am not here calling everyone racists or screaming crazy things but I think the existence of the CBC makes a lot of sense because they are representing a large population in the US who is indeed a minority and has a focus on advocating specific issues. Just like any special interest. *shrug*

So you advocate SIG representation in Congress? I don't get it. All people should be treated equal, race, sex and religion should matter not. To effectively do so would require those that write and enforce those laws to lead by example at the very least.

Iz Zat Chew
06-28-2012, 11:06 AM
The left overplays the racist card frequently, it's one of their few weapons in an argument.

Setsuna
06-28-2012, 11:19 AM
Something lie 98% of blacks voted for Obama. Of course it matters to a lot of people.

I'm in da 2%! I ain't racist!

Calcountry
06-28-2012, 01:34 PM
I think it's a very hard charge to make, simply because it's so nebulous. Racism cannot ever be definitively proven or disproven. Some people have a very broad definition of it, others have a strikingly narrow one. I try not to argue it unless I can get what the person across from me means by "racism," but their definition is probably just temporarily inflated or deflated to fit whatever rhetorical jab they're throwing at that particular moment.

At the same time, I don't think anybody realistically denies that racism is still very real, and very prevalent. To pretend it doesn't continue play a role in our dialogue is to do just that, pretend.

I largely try to avoid the accusation unless it clearly seems appropriate, beyond a reasonable doubt. I just try to be tolerant, believe in what I consider the best things, and do what I consider to be the best thing. I think that attitude fights racism better than the accusations ever do.When everything else has been tried, cry racism, if you're black that is.

suzzer99
06-28-2012, 01:39 PM
The left will stop playing the racist card when republicans stop pandering to racists. Google "the southern strategy" if you don't know what I'm talking about. Or just ask that racist POS vailpass what party he votes for.

KC native
06-28-2012, 01:47 PM
It seems to me that when SHTSPRAYER's behavior was being debated here on various occasions, undertones rather than what he actually said were all too often* the focus of people like you.

__________________
* There were a couple of times when he actually went over the line, but most of the time we were arguing about supposed racism inferred by his critics.

ROFL @ you still defending him. When you habitually say racist shit, you don't get the benefit of the doubt.

Sannyasi
06-28-2012, 01:49 PM
Something lie 98% of blacks voted for Obama. Of course it matters to a lot of people.

I hate when this shit gets reposted all the time here. 96% of blacks voted for Obama in 2008, compared to 92% of blacks who voted for Al Gore and 88% who voted for Kerry. A black republican running for President would be the real test to try to prove your point.

Calcountry
06-28-2012, 01:50 PM
ROFL @ you still defending him. When you habitually say racist shit, you don't get the benefit of the doubt.Why not, you do.

vailpass
06-28-2012, 01:51 PM
The left will stop playing the racist card when republicans stop pandering to racists. Google "the southern strategy" if you don't know what I'm talking about. Or just ask that racist POS vailpass what party he votes for.

How my ass taste?

Calcountry
06-28-2012, 01:55 PM
I hate when this shit gets reposted all the time here. 96% of blacks voted for Obama in 2008, compared to 92% of blacks who voted for Al Gore and 88% who voted for Kerry. A black republican running for President would be the real test to try to prove your point.Of course it wouldn't, everybody would KNOW he was just a "tom", sucking up to Republicans.

No, sorry, just ask Ken Hamblin. If you are conservative, you AREN'T black.

The_Grand_Illusion
06-28-2012, 02:01 PM
The left will stop playing the racist card when republicans stop pandering to racists. Google "the southern strategy" if you don't know what I'm talking about. Or just ask that racist POS vailpass what party he votes for.


OMG, this is just beyond ignorant. As a minority, I have a lot of conservative and/or Republican friends. None of them fit in your effed up racist narrative or they wouldn't be good friends. They see me as an individual and judge me on my character like all of us should be by now. Blaming skin color is just an excuse and a bad one at that.

Bewbies
06-28-2012, 02:06 PM
The left will stop playing the racist card when republicans stop pandering to racists. Google "the southern strategy" if you don't know what I'm talking about. Or just ask that racist POS vailpass what party he votes for.

LMAO

Who ended slavery? Republicans
Who brought about equal civil rights? Republicans
Who made up 100% of the votes against equal rights? Democrats
Who invented poll taxes to prevent blacks from voting? Democrats
Who had a KKK Grand Wizard Senator that used the term 'white nigger' on national tv celebrated by their former President? Democrats

But it's always the Republicans that pander to racists. LMAO

Setsuna
06-28-2012, 02:11 PM
I hate when this shit gets reposted all the time here. 96% of blacks voted for Obama in 2008, compared to 92% of blacks who voted for Al Gore and 88% who voted for Kerry. A black republican running for President would be the real test to try to prove your point.

Ok so I was in the 4%, 8%, and 12% respectively. Your point bitch?

blaise
06-28-2012, 02:15 PM
The left will stop playing the racist card when republicans stop pandering to racists. Google "the southern strategy" if you don't know what I'm talking about. Or just ask that racist POS vailpass what party he votes for.

You're right out of the playbook.

fan4ever
06-28-2012, 02:23 PM
OMG, this is just beyond ignorant. As a minority, I have a lot of conservative and/or Republican friends. None of them fit in your effed up racist narrative or they wouldn't be good friends. They see me as an individual and judge me on my character like all of us should be by now. Blaming skin color is just an excuse and a bad one at that.

Paraphrasing, but the portion of King's "I have a dream" speech where he stated "judge me not by the color of my skin, but by the content of my character" is embraced by the left nowadays about as much as Kennedy's "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country".

Bewbies
06-28-2012, 03:03 PM
Paraphrasing, but the portion of King's "I have a dream" speech where he stated "judge me not by the color of my skin, but by the content of my character" is embraced by the left nowadays about as much as Kennedy's "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country".

No shit. :shake:

suzzer99
06-28-2012, 03:15 PM
OMG, this is just beyond ignorant. As a minority, I have a lot of conservative and/or Republican friends. None of them fit in your effed up racist narrative or they wouldn't be good friends. They see me as an individual and judge me on my character like all of us should be by now. Blaming skin color is just an excuse and a bad one at that.

As a republican I know reasoning and reading carefully probably aren't your strong suit - but go back and reread what I said. I said the republican party panders to racists. I didn't say everyone in the republican party is a racist.

Since maybe google is a bit much for you as well here you go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

In American politics, the Southern strategy refers to the Republican Party strategy of winning elections in Southern states by exploiting anti-African American racism and fears of lawlessness among Southern white voters and appealing to fears of growing federal power in social and economic matters (generally lumped under the concept of states' rights). Though the "Solid South" had been a longtime Democratic Party stronghold due to the Democratic Party's defense of slavery prior to the American Civil War and segregation for a century thereafter, many white Southern Democrats stopped supporting the party following the civil rights plank of the Democratic campaign in 1948 (triggering the Dixiecrats), the African-American Civil Rights Movement, the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965, and desegregation.

suzzer99
06-28-2012, 03:16 PM
LMAO

Who ended slavery? Republicans
Who brought about equal civil rights? Republicans
Who made up 100% of the votes against equal rights? Democrats
Who invented poll taxes to prevent blacks from voting? Democrats
Who had a KKK Grand Wizard Senator that used the term 'white ****er' on national tv celebrated by their former President? Democrats

But it's always the Republicans that pander to racists. LMAO

No one gives a shit that republicans used to be progressive and southern democrats used to be racist 40+ years ago. Substitute 'conservative' and 'liberal' if that makes you feel better.

Bewbies
06-28-2012, 03:17 PM
No one gives a shit that republicans used to be progressive and southern democrats used to be racist 40+ years ago. Substitute 'conservative' and 'liberal' if that makes you feel better.

So your history of the southern strategy is legit, and my history is not. Got it. LMAO

(edit) Is Clinton praising Robert Byrd recent enough?

suzzer99
06-28-2012, 03:18 PM
You're right out of the playbook.

What are your thoughts on the southern strategy? Do you think it's not real? Or do you not care that your party tipped the balance of power by convincing southern racists to finally get over their butthurt at the republican party from the Civil War?

suzzer99
06-28-2012, 03:18 PM
So your history of the southern strategy is legit, and my history is not. Got it. LMAO

Yes, funny how history works like that. You don't just get to make up your own shit. The southern strategy is still in action. Hint: any time a republican talks about 'states rights' that's a dogwhistle for racists.

No one with any common sense really doubts the southern strategy was used and very effective. Lee Atwater fessed up and denounced it on his deathbed.

Bewbies
06-28-2012, 03:19 PM
What are your thoughts on the southern strategy? Do you think it's not real? Or do you not care that your party tipped the balance of power by convincing southern racists to finally get over their butthurt at the republican party from the Civil War?

Nobody gives a shit about what happened 50 years ago.

Bewbies
06-28-2012, 03:19 PM
No one with any common sense really doubts the southern strategy was used and very effective. Lee Atwater fessed up and denounced it on his deathbed.

LMAO

Bewbies
06-28-2012, 03:20 PM
Yes, funny how history works like that. You don't just get to make up your own shit. The southern strategy is still in action. Hint: any time a republican talks about 'states rights' that's a dogwhistle for racists.

No one with any common sense really doubts the southern strategy was used and very effective. Lee Atwater fessed up and denounced it on his deathbed.

Holy shit you are amazing. A dog whistle for racists. LMAO LMAO LMAO

suzzer99
06-28-2012, 03:21 PM
So your history of the southern strategy is legit, and my history is not. Got it. LMAO

(edit) Is Clinton praising Robert Byrd recent enough?

Robert Byrd renounced his past and eventually supported civil rights. The other racist dems like Jesse Helms just switched over to the republican party and never renounced anything.

suzzer99
06-28-2012, 03:21 PM
Holy shit you are amazing. A dog whistle for racists. LMAO LMAO LMAO

When you run out of arguments just profess astonishment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States'_rights

States' rights in U.S. politics refers to political powers reserved for the U.S. state governments rather than the federal government. Since the 1940s, it has often been considered a loaded term because of its use in opposition to federally mandated racial desegregation.

mlyonsd
06-28-2012, 03:23 PM
Robert Byrd renounced his past and eventually supported civil rights. The other racist dems like Jesse Helms just switched over to the republican party and never renounced anything.ROFL Haven't heard those names in this forum for a while.

suzzer99
06-28-2012, 03:23 PM
Nobody gives a shit about what happened 50 years ago.

If it wasn't still happening I'd agree with you. Did you watch the republican primaries? Those people are scary. Oh yeah you're probably one of them.

suzzer99
06-28-2012, 03:24 PM
The fact this forum is dominated by hard core right-wingers, and doesn't ban racist shitheads like vailpass - when literally no other forum I know of on the internet except stormfront would tolerate the shit he spews - tells you a lot.

You guys don't have a big problem with racists in your midst.

Inspector
06-28-2012, 03:26 PM
I think Vailpass is a card and is just jerking your chain.

Bewbies
06-28-2012, 03:27 PM
If it wasn't still happening I'd agree with you. Did you watch the republican primaries? Those people are scary. Oh yeah you're probably one of them.

Yes. I'm a racist republican that perks up when I hear someone mention states rights. You've got me pegged. LMAO

Bewbies
06-28-2012, 03:28 PM
The fact this forum is dominated by hard core right-wingers, and doesn't ban racist shitheads like vailpass - when literally no other forum I know of on the internet except stormfront would tolerate the shit he spews - tells you a lot.

You guys don't have a big problem with racists in your midst.

LMAO

Ban these fuckers I disagree with!!

The_Grand_Illusion
06-28-2012, 03:28 PM
As a republican I know reasoning and reading carefully probably aren't your strong suit - but go back and reread what I said. I said the republican party panders to racists. I didn't say everyone in the republican party is a racist.

Since maybe google is a bit much for you as well here you go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

:rolleyes:

Republicans don't pander to racists!!!! I've been in the Republican party (for now) since Reagan and no where have I seen they as a matter of policy, pander to racists.

Maybe in your own screwed up little world it does because you live so much in the past. And speaking of past, you don't realize how Republicans have been for minorities like Bewbies pointed out.

TGI

Calcountry
06-28-2012, 03:30 PM
Nobody gives a shit about what happened 50 years ago.50 years from now, they will.

patteeu
06-28-2012, 03:30 PM
ROFL @ you still defending him. When you habitually say racist shit, you don't get the benefit of the doubt.

If you're talking about a situation where "benefit of the doubt" is an issue, you're talking about a situation where the words alone don't add up to racism. Like I said in that post, you're basing your conclusions on undertones rather than what is actually said. You're admitting that I'm right even if you don't mean to.

patteeu
06-28-2012, 03:32 PM
You're right out of the playbook.

He's a self-described middle-of-the-roader too. I'm detecting a pattern.

Calcountry
06-28-2012, 03:32 PM
LMAO

Who ended slavery? Republicans
Who brought about equal civil rights? Republicans
Who made up 100% of the votes against equal rights? Democrats
Who invented poll taxes to prevent blacks from voting? Democrats
Who had a KKK Grand Wizard Senator that used the term 'white ****er' on national tv celebrated by their former President? Democrats

But it's always the Republicans that pander to racists. LMAOMay he and Ted the Red who was over fed, rest.

patteeu
06-28-2012, 03:34 PM
No one gives a shit that republicans used to be progressive and southern democrats used to be racist 40+ years ago. Substitute 'conservative' and 'liberal' if that makes you feel better.

The "southern strategy" was a Nixon strategy. You know, the Nixon who ran for president 40 years ago.

Bewbies
06-28-2012, 03:36 PM
50 years from now, they will.

Twas sarcasm.

I love this suzzer guy, he comes along an TOTALLY proves my point for me. Thanks Buddy!!

blaise
06-28-2012, 04:50 PM
He's a self-described middle-of-the-roader too. I'm detecting a pattern.

Something about liberals makes many of them ashamed to admit they're liberals.
"I'm middle of the road," is normally code for, "I vote Democrat all the time."

blaise
06-28-2012, 04:51 PM
What are your thoughts on the southern strategy? Do you think it's not real? Or do you not care that your party tipped the balance of power by convincing southern racists to finally get over their butthurt at the republican party from the Civil War?

How do you feel about moon landings?

vailpass
06-28-2012, 04:59 PM
How do you feel about moon landings?

LMAO

KC native
06-29-2012, 10:49 AM
If you're talking about a situation where "benefit of the doubt" is an issue, you're talking about a situation where the words alone don't add up to racism. Like I said in that post, you're basing your conclusions on undertones rather than what is actually said. You're admitting that I'm right even if you don't mean to.

ROFL No, shitty is a racist piece of shit who habitually crossed the line. You're the only one defending him, so clearly the problem must be everyone else and not shitty :rolleyes:

KC native
06-29-2012, 10:51 AM
:rolleyes:

Republicans don't pander to racists!!!! I've been in the Republican party (for now) since Reagan and no where have I seen they as a matter of policy, pander to racists.

Maybe in your own screwed up little world it does because you live so much in the past. And speaking of past, you don't realize how Republicans have been for minorities like Bewbies pointed out.

TGI

Republicans have been for minorities? ROFL. What are you smoking? Can I have some?

patteeu
06-29-2012, 11:42 AM
Republicans have been for minorities? ROFL. What are you smoking? Can I have some?

When it comes to the economy, Republicans are for everyone.