Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I truly appreciate the time you took to respond to my post, but I don't even know how to respond back
" hundreds, if not thousands of sources that show many incidences of GOP members on the national stage that say sweeping negative generalization of comments about all sorts of minorities and show clip where the people will applaud."
Hundreds, if not thousands??? And on the national stage??? Okay, even though I have been a voracious reader and news follower for 45 years, I must have been living on a different planet---please give FACTS, not bigotry and closemindedness. I hear racial slurs against whites all the time (especially from black comedians, film stars, and athletes) and I ignore them or certainly don't dismiss a WHOLE RACE or Party as racists. There are jerks made of every color.
I also do not think the whole GOP are racist. I have voted for local and state republicans. I am just mentioning that on a national level (federal representatives/senators/presidential candidates) when they campaign a majority of GOP candidates make sweeping generalizations of black people and other minorities. I am not going to go back through the years but you must be deaf/blind if you do not remember Newt Gingrich in the debates just a week or so ago and the crowd applauding him when he was generalizing black people as poor and needing to have their children work as janitors to learn hard work. I posted earlier in the thread an interview of a black republican who said that blacks should be forced to go on a plantation to learn how to work hard. Ron Paul had racist newsletters for over 10 years that for some reason he didn't know about. Herman Cain said that black people didn't come out for his announcement of his candidacy for president here in Atlanta, where I live which is majority black and has a large wealthy black population, because black people are too poor to travel to Tea Party events. I work 2 blocks from where he made his announcements. I will give you four links. Off to google, here you go:
“So I’m prepared,” he said in Plymouth, N.H. “If the N.A.A.C.P. invites me, I’ll go to their convention, talk about why the African-American community should demand paychecks and not be satisfied with food stamps.”
“It is a shame that the former speaker feels that these types of inaccurate, divisive statements are in any way helpful to our country,” Mr. Jealous said in a statement. “The majority of people using food stamps are not African-American, and most people using food stamps have a job.”
Mr. Jealous is Ben Jealous (his name always makes me smile )who is the head of the NAACP currently.
At a Sunday campaign event in Iowa, Santorum said, “I don’t want to make black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money. I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money.”
Asked why more African Americans haven’t joined him at tea party rallies and conservative conventions like the Faith And Family Conference in DC this weekend, the millionaire ex-CEO has a different explanation. African Americans, Cain told TPM, are too poor to tea party.
“They can’t afford to,” Cain said.
Please take not that this event was in DC which has a large majority black population and a lot of middle class and wealthy black people in the metro area.
Perhaps I am wrong, but it feels like you are seeing everything through race-identity filters which only serves to divide us more---example--I was afraid to put the head-smacking icon up because who knows what distant racial connotation it may have to you. I live in a mature community with plenty of blacks, whites, asians, and hispanics all working, eating, raising children together---most of us have moved on past this racial nit-picking ridiculousness. I am proud of my community as people are very forgiving and accepting and if there is ever TRUE racism that appears the perpetrators are exposed and boycotted quickly.
You are wrong. I didn't say that I thought personally that the GOP was racist. I do not actually. I grew up in a very integrated neighborhood and I don't have a problem with anyone. All I did was address the reasons why many black people do not see the GOP as an alternative to Democrats based on the use of stereotypical rhetoric regarding black people as poor, ignorant, criminals, and on welfare.
I am sorry you felt insulted by my using the word "teat." I agree it was not the best choice! I was not thinking in terms of race using that particular word--I use it also when referring to corporate welfare. But I (and probably most Americans) had no idea it was such an inflammatory word to blacks--I will email a couple of my black friends tonight and get their response and see if I need to be more informed and sensitive on this, or if it is another example of political correctness gone awry. I could point out MANY parts of your posts that could be interpreted as insulting to whites, but I choose to ignore them as I know you are not intending them to be insulting or bigoted, and we can both relate on higher ground then.
I personally would not take offense to the word "teat" but some people (like my husband who is way more racially sensitive than I am) would. I understand your connotations and I also understand that it may not have been a personal quote from you but more than likely from a politician. I have heard politicians use that phrase before.
BUT please give us FACTS on the hundreds, maybe thousands of racist statements by Repubs that have gotten such enthusiastic applause--I know there have been some horrible remarks by both Dems and Repubs in the last few years (how about Clinton saying Obama would have been serving him coffee? and Joe Biden made a couple of racial zingers himself), but not hundreds or thousands just by Repubs.
I don't deny the racist things that Democrats say about black people. For me personally, both parties say equally offensive things. But like you pointed out in your post, the Dems usually hide their negative portrayals under the guise of "helping." I see this as actually worse than I see the GOP and their stereotypes in a way since the Dems imply in a lot of areas that black people need to be helped by them to get ahead. For me that constitutes needing a surrogate parent of some sort or insinuates that I am too dumb and ignorant and lazy to take care of myself and my family. So I do not have a high regard for Dems and I do not have a high regard for the GOP either, which is why I am an Independent.
You have pointed out instances where Dems are stereotypical and use generalizations yourself. I am only saying that the GOP does the same thing and when they do it, they say it vehemently and the masses applaud with great fervor. Also Dems will lump all poor people together in the same category in a lot of instances. They are less likely to single out black people or hispanics, whereas a GOP candidate, like in the above links will specifically say who they are talking about and because the majority of blacks do work and are not on food stamps or are not criminals, the GOP's representation of us is disturbing and upsetting, which in turn will make a black person vote more for a Dem than the GOP. Dems frequently use "working poor." They will speak of "our fellow Americans who need a helping hand." They will not say "black people who use food stamps" like some GOP candidates do. They are slicker with their speech.
Also wanted to note that I was not personally addressing or attacking you and if you felt that was what I was doing, I assure you I was not. I was just giving a response to points and questions that you had in your post. It was a good post.
This is a lot to responded to above, I'm just going to comment on food stamps, Newt said "more American's are on welfare," not more blacks.
As far as "welfare teat," I've not heard one Republican say that about blacks, now it's been said about American people. Which, I find offensive, seems to me more people who immigrant here, are on the welfare teat, then Americans are.
Just trying to understand why Republican's get this thrown at them, that they don't like anyone, unless, there white
The other day Kirsten Powers was speaking and she said, "Dem's care more for the blacks and poor people, then Republican's. If that's not stereo-typing their people, then what is.
Seems to me most Republican's address people as, American's first, your culture/gender second. Isn't this the way it should be??
This is what Newt said about "CHILDREN", not to black children............You say to somebody, you shouldn't go to work before you're what, 14, 16 years of age, fine. You're totally poor. You're in a school that is failing with a teacher that is failing. I've tried for years to have a very simple model," he said. "Most of these schools ought to get rid of the unionized janitors, have one master janitor and pay local students to take care of the school. The kids would actually do work, they would have cash, they would have pride in the schools, they'd begin the process of rising."
Your points are well taken, and it certainly appears that we agree on most of these things at the core.It seems to me we just have more a problem of differing perceptions. An example would be the Newt thing and our different takes on it. But I want to preface this with I am NOT a Newt supporter (I am Independent and voted for Obama, but may not again--still undecided).
When Newt first gave his speech at Harvard, I read excerpts right directly from that original speech before the liberal press started spinning it as so racist. As much as I don't trust Newt, (and clearly it is not feasible to fire janitors and hire poor children to replace them) I focused on the gist of what he was trying to say about actually DOING something to solve the poverty entrapment in these poor communities. He had the guts to actually talk about it. Does Newt put his foot in his mouth? yes, on a regular basis, but I did not perceive it as "racially" insulting as I felt he was just as well speaking to the huge amount of Appalachian whites that are also entrapped in poverty. This type of poverty-entrapment is a fact. And I personally want something beside rhetoric, and entitlements to be done about it. So I was not perceiving his speech as insulting to Blacks, but as a clumsy way of addressing the need to start actually DOING something about it for ALL poor communities.
I want more of these ideas on the table, whacky or not, at least we are talking/debating/studying the problem instead of trying to ignore or hide from the elephant in the room, and being muffled by the PC police hoping magically if we throw enough money at it, it will all go away. Poor children as janitors won't work, but from that idea maybe we can glean something that will springboard to other ideas and hopefully start motivating us to actually DO something--that's what I was taking fromm his speech.
There IS a work-ethic problem in many of these communities ---but we aren't allowed to talk about it. Newt did it insensitively, but at least it got out there. I taught in some of these communities, and as I mentioned somewhere above I had third-generation welfare kids who couldn't write about career choices and weren't interested in any available job opportunities because they had no role models--no one in their neighborhood had ever worked. So I feel we are failing these kids by NOT getting it out on the table and admitting this--whether by Newt or whoever has the guts to truthfully address it and all the political/personal risks that will entail. I'd rather risk some hurt feelings, than watch another young generation of these entrapped communities get lost to gangs and drugs. Is that racially insensitive? I don't think so; I know it as CARING.
Blacks on food stamps: Are there too many blacks on food stamps? yes. fact. So now lets actually DEAL with it--political incorrectness and all. We've seen what the consequences of ignoring, blaming, victimizing and placating do---I think Blacks can handle a few people tossing out racial insensitive rhetoric if it gets us to the REALISTIC talking table which we never really get to do.
Whites and corporate greed: Are there too many of the corrupted corporations run by whites? yes. fact. So let's deal with it---I don't find it racially insensitive when black comedians or actors bring this up--it's a fact--I want it out on the table where everyone can see it, so we can shame these guys into changing their behaviors.
Perceptions are slippery things, and I am NOT trying to say mine are accurate--just that we have different ones on some important issues due to our life experiences, yet also have very similar experiences and views on other important issues. Isn't this what makes life so mysterious, humbling, and exciting?
Your points are well taken, and it certainly appears that we agree on most of these things at the core.It seems to me we just have more a problem of differing perceptions. An example would be the Newt thing and our different takes on it. But I want to preface this with I am NOT a Newt supporter (I am Independent and voted for Obama, but may not again--still undecided).
When Newt first gave his speech at Harvard, I read excerpts right directly from that original speech before the liberal press started spinning it as so racist. As much as I don't trust Newt, (and clearly it is not feasible to fire janitors and hire poor children to replace them) I focused on the gist of what he was trying to say about actually DOING something to solve the poverty entrapment in these poor communities. He had the guts to actually talk about it. Does Newt put his foot in his mouth? yes, on a regular basis, but I did not perceive it as "racially" insulting as I felt he was just as well speaking to the huge amount of Appalachian whites that are also entrapped in poverty. This type of poverty-entrapment is a fact. And I personally want something beside rhetoric, and entitlements to be done about it. So I was not perceiving his speech as insulting to Blacks, but as a clumsy way of addressing the need to start actually DOING something about it for ALL poor communities.
I didn't see it as originally insulting to black people but I did feel that his response to Juan Williams, who was baiting Newt to make him seem like he was a racist, was ignorant. He fell into Juan's trap and I feel he should have stated what you stated above, that he was not speaking of only poor black children, that he was speaking of all children who needed to learn the value of hard work.
I want more of these ideas on the table, whacky or not, at least we are talking/debating/studying the problem instead of trying to ignore or hide from the elephant in the room, and being muffled by the PC police hoping magically if we throw enough money at it, it will all go away. Poor children as janitors won't work, but from that idea maybe we can glean something that will springboard to other ideas and hopefully start motivating us to actually DO something--that's what I was taking fromm his speech.
There IS a work-ethic problem in many of these communities ---but we aren't allowed to talk about it. Newt did it insensitively, but at least it got out there. I taught in some of these communities, and as I mentioned somewhere above I had third-generation welfare kids who couldn't write about career choices and weren't interested in any available job opportunities because they had no role models--no one in their neighborhood had ever worked. So I feel we are failing these kids by NOT getting it out on the table and admitting this--whether by Newt or whoever has the guts to truthfully address it and all the political/personal risks that will entail. I'd rather risk some hurt feelings, than watch another young generation of these entrapped communities get lost to gangs and drugs. Is that racially insensitive? I don't think so; I know it as CARING.
You can get all of this out on the table without using throwing race into the picture. It is not necessary. That is all I am saying in regards to the poor. There is no reason to only focus on black welfare recipients. There are more welfare families than black ones. Also black children are not the only demographic who can potentially be third generation welfare kids. IMO there is no need to bring that up. I know it happens (the racial rhetoric) and honestly it doesn't bother me, but it will make me dismiss a candidate as a serious contender when they say things like that, to me it is ignorant. I think racist, even true KKK or NOI or skinhead racists are ignorant and I don't give a crap about what they say because ignorant people don't know any better. But I surely will not vote for someone who I see as ignorant, that is the gist of it.And this perpetual ignorance is the main reason why I would never vote for Newt, that and other ignorant things he says, he spews a lot of ignorance IMO, even more than Herman Cain did, but he and Santorum are equally ignorant in my eyes.
Blacks on food stamps: Are there too many blacks on food stamps? yes. fact. So now lets actually DEAL with it--political incorrectness and all. We've seen what the consequences of ignoring, blaming, victimizing and placating do---I think Blacks can handle a few people tossing out racial insensitive rhetoric if it gets us to the REALISTIC talking table which we never really get to do.
Again, not only black people are on food stamps. Why must black food stamp users be brought up anyway. Why can't someone say "we need to find a way to reduce food stamp usage, there are too many people on food stamps." I see someone telling a crowd of mostly white people that "black people use food stamps too much" and I see ignorance like what I said above. More than just black people use food stamps. Black people do not constitute the highest amount of food stamp usage (also I know about the percentages so no need to bring that up in regards to population percentage of black people versus total black population I know all that and regardless black people don't spend the majority of food stamp dollars). Also in regards to Santorum he failed to realize that working people get food stamps. That is also ignorant. How can I vote for someone who doesn't know that people who work can qualify for food stamps?
Whites and corporate greed: Are there too many of the corrupted corporations run by whites? yes. fact. So let's deal with it---I don't find it racially insensitive when black comedians or actors bring this up--it's a fact--I want it out on the table where everyone can see it, so we can shame these guys into changing their behaviors.
On corporate greed, which is a big topic for dems, do they say "white people are on corporate welfare?" I have never heard or seen anyone say this, if they did, they would get put into the ignorant pile as well. That is my point. You can speak of corporate greed without bringing someone's racial background into the picture, just like you can speak of farmer subsidies without bringing in race or welfare, or food stamps, or Medicaid.
Perceptions are slippery things, and I am NOT trying to say mine are accurate--just that we have different ones on some important issues due to our life experiences, yet also have very similar experiences and views on other important issues. Isn't this what makes life so mysterious, humbling, and exciting?
I agree that differences are what make life exciting. And want to note that I am not at all very racially sensitive and don't let much get to me at all. I figure life goes by fast enough than to sit around being upset. When people say ignorant things I laugh it off and it doesn't bother me, I just know that they are ignorant and so I don't listen to them with any seriousness any longer. Actually here on CD I get a lot of laughs about things and is a relaxing place IMO, even here in POC of all rooms.
Responses in bold.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)who is the head of the NAACP currently.
This guy certainly has opinions about the GOP & Democrats Skip to 4:40