|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
 Posted: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:56 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| [ My purpose is to show that Republicans have said racist things and none the less remained in office. ? |
Okay, I'll give you McCain and Michael Steele. Who else besides these two have made racist slurs and remained in office in political climate? And let's keep it relevant to today's political climate. |
I only brought these individuals up because Gopher said any Republican making a comment comparable to Harry Reid's would be pushed out. That clearly isn't some universal truth. Gopher says it would be hypocrisy to allow Mr. Reid to stay in office when Mr. Lott was pushed out. I say it would be hypocrisy to demand Mr. Reid's resignation without also demanding Mr. McCain's and Mr. Steele's.
Really, I think the best policy is to simply stop calling for resignations. Point out when your opponents slip up, but let them decide who they choose to represent them. I'll even openly say I would have preferred Mr. Lott remain in his position. Him stepping down helped one group only: Republicans. That's why they pushed him out, after all. It's not because of Democrats or minority pressure; Republicans have proven time and again they care little about either of those things.
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| And saying racist things is not limited to Republicans. Byrd is a good example. |
As I agreed when thecount brought it up, Robert Byrd is a much better point of attack on this topic than Harry Reid. I'm certainly not willing to defend the Democrats on that one.
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| And as far as Reid goes I don't think it was racist per se, but it was certainly thoughtless and offensive. But like McCain he apologized and like McCain his apology was accepted. |
And I agree with this. This comparison, like a comparison with Michael Steele, is much more appropriate than a comparison to Trent Lott in terms of the severity of the offense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ytuque
Joined: 29 Jan 2008
Location: I drink therefore I am!
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 12, 2010 10:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| ytuque wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| [ My purpose is to show that Republicans have said racist things and none the less remained in office. ? |
Okay, I'll give you McCain and Michael Steele. Who else besides these two have made racist slurs and remained in office in political climate? And let's keep it relevant to today's political climate. And saying racist things is not limited to Republicans. Byrd is a good example.
And as far as Reid goes I don't think it was racist per se, but it was certainly thoughtless and offensive. But like McCain he apologized and like McCain his apology was accepted. |
Do you think what Reid said was true? |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| I don't think it was racist per se, but it was certainly thoughtless and offensive. |
|
Should that be taken as a "yes?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Segregation in and of itself isn't necessarily racist. |
That's all you needed to say. It was relevant because you kept repeating that Lott's comment was more racist because of his support of a segregationist presidential candidate. I was merely adding some clarification to your comments.
| Quote: |
| Argue what you like, it doesn't make it true. Anyone reading the entire quote from Reid can very easily see it's nothing more than an analysis of Obama's electability and how his race might impact that. |
Reid isn't a political analyst; he's a politician. Politicians look at a situation and try to find some way for them to profit from it. That's what Reid was doing when he made that comment; he saw a black candidate doing well and saw a way for his party to profit. The candidate was a tool, and his race was the only thing that made him valuable to the party. That's why his statement was racist (and why I think it was more racist).
| Quote: |
| First of all, this is nonsense. Because Republicans lack the support of minority coalitions, minority coalitions don't form a sizeable portion of their voting base. As such, supporting Lott wasn't likely to cost them a substantial number of minority votes, as they weren't going to get those votes anyway. |
Uh huh, so then...
| Quote: |
| The Republican quotes in the article I posted make it clear that Republicans realized Lott's words were so ridiculous that it would hurt their credibility not only with minority coalitions |
...why would they care about their credibility?
| Quote: |
| but with Americans and indeed, the world, if they backed him. |
When was the last time Republicans championed an issue based on how it would reflect on the opinion of the rest of the world (unless it was America being considered 'soft' on something like terrorism)?
| Quote: |
| Republicans at the time realized how horrible what he said was. |
It was horrible! It was! ...but so was Reid's comment.
| Quote: |
| Finally, why do Republicans lack the support of minority coalitions? Because of their own actions. |
That's very true. Unfortunately, that's had the side effect of minorities and those who feel sensitive to their historic injustices ignoring some of the legitimate concerns the Republicans have in regards to minority issues.
| Quote: |
| If you prefer, we can focus purely on the example of Michael Steele's racist quote and it's failure to drive him from office, especially since the fallout from it is occuring roughly concurrently with Reid's fallout. None of the conservatives in this thread seem too interested in addressing that, though, because then they'd have to come to terms with the fact that there's no real hypocrisy here at all. |
I didn't actually see that mentioned. Admittedly, I've skimmed through much of this thread.
Yes, that was also racist, and he is being hypocritical in championing this crusade against Reid.
| Quote: |
| Everyone else is just despartely trying to defend a totally invalid GOP talking point specifically designed to try to score points in the upcoming elections. |
Sometimes talking points are true despite the hypocrisy of the speaker.
| Quote: |
| Of course you don't, you're conservative. You come to a decision, and then try to justify it, not the reverse. |
| Quote: |
| So far in this entire thread, thecount is the only conservative to make a remotely intelligent case. |
If I said anything you found personally offensive, I apologize. Tell me what it was, and I'll try my damnedest to keep from repeating something similar. You're intelligent, and I enjoy discussing things with you... but without the personal insults. Please, Fox. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pkang0202
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 12, 2010 11:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anyone who can sit there and say Reid would've gotten the same treatment had he been a Republican is clearly delusional.
If Reid were a Republican, everyone from the left would be calling for his head.
Say it. I want YOU to say that Reid would get the same level of scrutiny had he been a Republican. You won't say it because you know its not true. You know if he were a Republican, every Dem from Maine to Honolulu would be decrying the "rasict Republican party", calling for resignations, and demanding Congressional Hearings into how "ethical" the Republican party is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 1:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| geldedgoat wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Argue what you like, it doesn't make it true. Anyone reading the entire quote from Reid can very easily see it's nothing more than an analysis of Obama's electability and how his race might impact that. |
Reid isn't a political analyst; he's a politician. |
Politicians -- especially leaders of political parties -- often analyze political situations I would imagine. Especially in private conversations, like this one was.
| geldedgoat wrote: |
| Politicians look at a situation and try to find some way for them to profit from it. That's what Reid was doing when he made that comment; he saw a black candidate doing well and saw a way for his party to profit. The candidate was a tool, and his race was the only thing that made him valuable to the party. That's why his statement was racist (and why I think it was more racist). |
No, he was speculating with regards to whether Obama's blackness would hurt him as a candidate, and decided it probably would not. The case could be made that every political party views their Presidential candidate as a "tool" in some sense, but I don't see how this sort of comment goes above and beyond the norm in that sense. Realistically speaking, these kinds of comments about potential candidates go on all the time between people who are considering whether or not to support them. Every potential flaw, anything that might hurt them with the electorate, is considered. Whether you consider that fair or unfair, I don't see how it's racist.
Honestly, if Obama really had been a Muslim (for example), that probably would have been a deal breaker. Would talking about that behind closed doors when considering whether or not to support him constitute religious insensitivity? I don't think so, it's just an honest appraisal of the political climate in America. Likewise, Reid's comment really does seem to be simply an honest appraisal of the same political climate. A darker skinned, dialect-laden Barack Obama may well have been unelectable. Is Reid racist to admit it? I don't think so, he was just being politically prudent.
| geldedgoat wrote: |
Uh huh, so then...
| Quote: |
| The Republican quotes in the article I posted make it clear that Republicans realized Lott's words were so ridiculous that it would hurt their credibility not only with minority coalitions |
...why would they care about their credibility? |
Because, as I go on to say in the full quote, they thought it could affect their credibility with:
| Fox wrote: |
| but with Americans and indeed, the world, if they backed him. |
Both of which Republicans very obviously do want to appear credible before. My point was that if it only impacted their credibility with minorities, I don't think it would have led to Lott's ousting. But this was something even some of their own supporters probably wouldn't be too happy about, and even if America did often act unilaterally during the Bush years, let's not pretend that foreign opinion means absolutely nothing.
| geldedgoat wrote: |
| When was the last time Republicans championed an issue based on how it would reflect on the opinion of the rest of the world (unless it was America being considered 'soft' on something like terrorism)? |
This concern was discussed by a Republican in the article I posted. If you think he was lying about his concerns, take it up with him. I think he was being quite honest about his reason for helping to push a fellow Republican out of his position, though. Republicans clearly had a reason for turning on Lott after his comment, and I think the article in question sums up that reason pretty nicely.
| geldedgoat wrote: |
| It was horrible! It was! ...but so was Reid's comment. |
No, it wasn't, as is explained in the analysis done by a black linguist, which was posted by Old Gil. It's a pretty good article, I suggest reading it if you haven't.
| geldedgoat wrote: |
I didn't actually see that mentioned. Admittedly, I've skimmed through much of this thread.
Yes, that was also racist, and he is being hypocritical in championing this crusade against Reid. |
Well, I agree that his actions as an individual are hypocritical. However, I think it's important to note that I'm certainly not calling for his resignation over it, and neither are most Democrats. Most of us want Michael Steele in there acting like a buffoon, with his personal hypocrisy and inane statements. That's part of the point I've been trying to convey here. Gopher said I'd call for the head of a Republican if they said something like Harry Reid, but it's quite the opposite. I think many Democrats feel the same way.
| geldedgoat wrote: |
| Sometimes talking points are true despite the hypocrisy of the speaker. |
Sometimes, but in this case I genuinely think Reid was simply analyzing the potential political implications of Barack Obama's race. He wasn't treating the candidate like a tool (any moreso than every candidate is in some sense treated like a tool of their party), he wasn't dehumanizing Obama, he wasn't making some profound hostile statement about race, he was just analyzing the situation in private. And frankly what he said is exactly true. Had Obama been substantially darker skinned, or spoken with a different dialect, his chances of election probably would have been reduced as a result. Why isn't that a valid thing for Reid to consider?
| geldedgoat wrote: |
| If I said anything you found personally offensive, I apologize. Tell me what it was, and I'll try my damnedest to keep from repeating something similar. You're intelligent, and I enjoy discussing things with you... but without the personal insults. Please, Fox. |
I apologize for the statements in question, they weren't constructive. I get a bit impassioned at times in my writing, but I don't bear anyone here any ill will, even if I disagree with what's being said. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 1:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pkang0202 wrote: |
Anyone who can sit there and say Reid would've gotten the same treatment had he been a Republican is clearly delusional.
If Reid were a Republican, everyone from the left would be calling for his head. |
Everyone on the Right is calling for Harry Reid's head, so how is having your head called for somehow different treatment?
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| Say it. I want YOU to say that Reid would get the same level of scrutiny had he been a Republican. |
Well, Harry Reid the Democrat is being attacked by Republicans over his comment. Likewise, I think Harry Reid the Republican would be attacked by Democrats over his comment. So, yes, I think he'd get roughly analogous treatment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asylum seeker
Joined: 22 Jul 2007
Location: On your computer screen.
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Gopher"]
| Fox wrote: |
The fact remains: if a Republican Senate majority leader had said what H. Reid said, you would be militating for his or her immediate dismissal for racism. I expect you will never admit that -- not even to yourself.
|
Now Gopher knows everyone's hidden, inner thoughts and what they will do in hypothetical situations? What utter garbage. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="asylum seeker"]
| Gopher wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
The fact remains: if a Republican Senate majority leader had said what H. Reid said, you would be militating for his or her immediate dismissal for racism. I expect you will never admit that -- not even to yourself.
|
Now Gopher knows everyone's hidden, inner thoughts and what they will do in hypothetical situations? What utter garbage. |
He's right.
What HR said wasn't all that objectionable. Had Mrs. Palin said it.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Old Gil
Joined: 26 Sep 2009
Location: Got out! olleh!
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The difference is that Palin is an utter moron and has proven to be so on many occasions. Reid only hints at it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Old Gil wrote: |
| The difference is that Palin is an utter moron and has proven to be so on many occasions. Reid only hints at it. |
That's very articulate of you.
Ok, so if one is an "utter moron" one has less flexibility in language. Any other rules? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Old Gil
Joined: 26 Sep 2009
Location: Got out! olleh!
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Old Gil wrote: |
| The difference is that Palin is an utter moron and has proven to be so on many occasions. Reid only hints at it. |
That's very articulate of you.
Ok, so if one is an "utter moron" one has less flexibility in language. Any other rules? |
There's tons of rules. The universe is a mysterious place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 9:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| asylum seeker wrote: |
| Gopher wrote: |
The fact remains: if a Republican Senate majority leader had said what H. Reid said, you would be militating for his or her immediate dismissal for racism. I expect you will never admit that -- not even to yourself.
|
Now Gopher knows everyone's hidden, inner thoughts and what they will do in hypothetical situations? What utter garbage. |
He's right. |
He's right that if it had been a Republican who said what Mr. Reid said, I personally would have militated for that individual's immediate dismissal for racism? Because that's what he said in that quote.
As far as if Mrs. Palin had said it rather than Mr. Reid, I'd be so shocked to see an actually realistic political analysis -- no matter how trivial or obvious -- uttered by her that I'm really not sure how I'd react. It would certainly be hard for me to call for her dismissal from office, though, given she quit said office so she could take full financial advantage of the ridiculous mistake Republicans made in selecting her as a VP candidate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 9:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| No. You're an odd one, fox. You claim to be a progressive but are among the most conservative posters here. Well, conservative as I define it. I was speaking more to the establishment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 10:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Old Gil wrote: |
| The difference is that Palin is an utter moron and has proven to be so on many occasions. Reid only hints at it. |
That's very articulate of you.
Ok, so if one is an "utter moron" one has less flexibility in language. Any other rules? |
Exactly. I know you see my points here, Mises, even when we disagree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Do you remember that article I always used to post? About the leftist "hierarchy of sins"? The rules are there, and quite easy to discern. It is annoying as all hell to see them in action.
Though, I feel like the iron fist of political correctness is loosening. Not in the UK, for damn sure. But in the USA, I feel a change. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
