Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Georgia GOP congressman calls Obamas `uppity'

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Georgia GOP congressman calls Obamas `uppity'
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Ya-ta Boy

Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 5:15 am Post subject:

Quote:

voting for someone based on race, gender, or what state they are from is pretty darn stupid

Nevertheless, it is done all the time. And voting 'for' someone is quite different than voting against someone based on hate.

Take someone like Gloria Steinem. She's dedicated her life to changing the status of women in America. Along comes Hillary Clinton, the first woman to have a legitimate shot at the top spot. I can see Steinem supporting Mrs. Clinton simply on the basis of her being a woman. I fail to see how that would make Steinem a sexist.

mises

Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 5:18 am Post subject:

Just to be clear.. A white person who supports McCain because he is white is not a racist then?

flakfizer

Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 5:43 am Post subject:

Ya-ta Boy wrote:

Take someone like Gloria Steinem. She's dedicated her life to changing the status of women in America. Along comes Hillary Clinton, the first woman to have a legitimate shot at the top spot. I can see Steinem supporting Mrs. Clinton simply on the basis of her being a woman. I fail to see how that would make Steinem a sexist.

Really? Sounds sexist to me. I can see her voting for Clinton because she agrees with Clinton's policies regarding women's rights. Would she vote for Palin simply because she's a woman even though she's very pro-life? I'll give Steinem more credeit than to think she would simply vote for the woman regardless of the candidates' policies.

Ya-ta Boy

Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 5:55 am Post subject:

Quote:

Just to be clear.. A white person who supports McCain because he is white is not a racist then?

I would go out on a limb and say a white person who supports McCain because Obama is black is a racist.

Ya-ta Boy

Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:05 am Post subject:

Quote:

I'll give Steinem more credeit than to think she would simply vote for the woman regardless of the candidates' policies.

You're reading more into it than I put. I wouldn't entirely discount issues, but I can see them being of secondary importance to a woman. I think you'd have to consider which issues and just how much disagreement there was. There are issues that are deal breakers for everyone.

I see both of you ignored my comment that there is a difference between voting for someone and against someone else. Does rooting for the home team necessarily mean you hate the opponent? Particularly when the home team has their first chance in history to win?

I'm sure you noticed last winter during the early primaries that the black vote was split with Clinton, then began shifting when Obama began to look like he had a chance.

Last edited by Ya-ta Boy on Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:07 am; edited 1 time in total

mises

Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:07 am Post subject:

Ya-ta Boy wrote:

Quote:

Just to be clear.. A white person who supports McCain because he is white is not a racist then?

I would go out on a limb and say a white person who supports McCain because Obama is black is a racist.

Yeah, but that wasn't my question. I agree with your answer, if it answered my question.

Ya-ta Boy

Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:14 am Post subject:

It seems to me that one is voting to achieve the final change in an historically unbalanced system while the other would be voting to maintain that last scrap of privilege. Seems very different to me.

mises

Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:18 am Post subject:

Then the word you should be using isn't "racist". Too many conditions. Racism is the belief that one group is inherently inferior to another. Should not misuse such a strong word.

Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:01 am Post subject:

Ya-ta Boy wrote:

It seems to me that...

You have gone beyond politics and actually demonized the other side, reducing them to voting against the black candidate because they are racist and voting for "privilege" for unstated reasons. Another reason I cannot and will not stand with your side. I guess it is true as some suggest that deep polarization and civil-war-like conditions are emerging.

Ya-ta Boy

Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 3:57 pm Post subject:

Quote:

and civil-war-like conditions are emerging.

Interesting. At a time when I perceive the country moving away from the extremism of recent years you see it as emerging. Hmmm.

dogbert

Joined: 29 Jan 2003
Location: Killbox 90210

Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:54 pm Post subject:

Obama's wife is beyond uppity -- she's veering dangerously close to Omarosity.

flakfizer

Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.

Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 3:53 pm Post subject:

Ya-ta Boy wrote:

I can see Steinem supporting Mrs. Clinton simply on the basis of her being a woman. I fail to see how that would make Steinem a sexist.

Quote:

Main Entry: sim�ply
Pronunciation: \ˈsim-plē, for 1 also -pə-lē\
Function: adverb
Date: 14th century
1 a: without ambiguity : clearly b: without embellishment : plainly c: directly, candidly
2 a: solely, merely <eats simply to keep alive> <simply cleaned it up and went to bed � Garrison Keillor> b: really, literally <the concert was simply marvelous> �often used as an intensive <simply crawling with geniuses � F. Scott Fitzgerald>

Ya-ta Boy wrote:

TexasPete

Joined: 24 May 2006
Location: Koreatown

Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 5:53 pm Post subject:

ReeseDog wrote:

The Bobster wrote:

Why would someone think the issue of racism is petty? Why would someone consider it petty to wonder whether racists are being pandered to by the GOP, which has a long history of doing exactly this very thing in order to win elections?

You're just the type who keeps this "racist" shit alive.

Let it go, man. Find another hold.

Edited for grammar.

I don't get it. You're saying that if someone says something racist or disparaging or derogatory it shouldn't be called out because it's perpetuating this "racist sh!t"? If we ignore it, it'll just go away? If a 58 year old Georgian is unaware of the racially charged word of "uppity", he's either lying or has been in a coma for 50 of those years.

As for the first claim by Bobster, you're aware that the reason McCain lost his first presidential bid has been largely attributed to the fact of the "whisper campaign" waged in SC where thousands of people were called and told about McCain's "black baby" who is in fact an adopted Bengali of very dark skin, right?

McCain on the matter:

Quote:

"There were some pretty vile and hurtful things said during the South Carolina primary. It's a really nasty side of politics. We tried to ignore it and I think we shielded [our daughter] from it. It's just unfortunate that that sort of thing still exists. As you know she's Bengali, and very dark skinned. A lot of phone calls were made by people who said we should be very ashamed about her, about the color of her skin. Thousands and thousands of calls from people to voters saying, 'You know, the McCains have a black baby.' I believe that there is a special place in hell for people like those."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whispering_campaign

Interestingly enough, that special place in hell is McCain HQ:

Quote:

But early this year John McCain hired Charlie Condon, the very same man who was behind those vicious smears to run his South Carolina campaign. And then several weeks ago he brought Steven Schmidt - leading prot�g� of Karl Rove and master of the political hit job - on board to be his campaign manager and write the talking points for the new negative campaign against Barak Obama.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/michaeltomasky/2008/aug/20/barackobama.johnmccain

It's stuff like this that makes me unable to stomach a vote for McCain. I liked McCain in 2000. I wanted him to win. I hoped that he would have then. I thought he was the man back then...now, not so much. Although, to be fair, i had a much different political philosophy back then.

TexasPete

Joined: 24 May 2006
Location: Koreatown

Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 6:15 pm Post subject:

Gopher wrote:

Ya-ta Boy wrote:

It seems to me that...

And you don't think the extreme Right demonizes the Left???? Are you effing kidding me? Do you have any idea how many times i've heard my patriotism/love of my country being questioned by those on the right simply because i don't agree with Bush's policies?

Any time O'Reilly opens his mouth about the left, it's dripping with venom and contempt. Sean Hannity wrote a book called, Deliver Us From Evil, the evil apparently being the "Left". Ann Coulter idolizes McCarthy and says the 9/11 widows who pushed for the 9/11 Commission enjoyed their husband's deaths. Pat Robertson/Gerry Fallwell said 9/11 happened because we're too tolerant of sin in our country and it's god's punishment (interesting that the 9/11 hijackers thought they were doing god's work!). Incidentally the same Pat Robertson said that there'd be a huge calamity in 2007 in which millions of Americans died so i guess he's not actually on the telephone to god.

You don't see demonization in the words of the GOPs biggest cheerleaders? You're either being intellectually dishonest, willfully ignorant or you just didn't know this stuff (in which case, open your eyes.)

You mention that only now you're seeing these civil war elements coming out and a huge polarization of America. If you're seeing it at all, it's because the right's been demonizing the left since Clinton's administration (i know, i used to listen to Limbaugh and all those right wing hosts and BELIEVE them) and the left finally got tired of it and got angry and decided to speak out. I personally see a lot more hatred and vitriol coming out of the Right Wing than i do the Left, but if you can point out to me some genuinely harsh, mean, divisive Left wing pundits with huge following (not the moron posters who leave comments on their editorials), please go right ahead.

I think that there are some nutjobs on both sides who get a lot more coverage than they deserve (though the GOP is much better at spinning their talking points) and the people in the middle who feel they're reasonable and centrist are left to think that they're surrounded by crazy people.

flakfizer

Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.

Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2008 6:19 pm Post subject:

TexasPete wrote:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/michaeltomasky/2008/aug/20/barackobama.johnmccain

The source seems to be a blogger's "hypothetical script" for an ad.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next
Page 7 of 8

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe