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.
Shuckin and jivin is racist? I'm pretty sure I've heard that phrase from movies that weren't racist. At any rate, Colin is pretty level headed it's a shame he never ran for president.
Ok, why don't you go into a place full of black folks, say the Varsity in downtown Atlanta. Go up to a group of 20-30 year old black men and loudly proclaim that someone is shuckin' and Jivin'. I would pay good money to see the beat down that ensues.
Sure, but she is about as irrelevant as irrelevant can get...as of now. Do we agree on that as well?
Sarah is irrelevant in the since of policy decisions but public opinion she still influences others. She took the spotlight provided by her failed VP bid and turned it into a podium to spew nonsense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot_Handz
Conservatism hasn't been on the side of "racism". Why? Well the problem lies in context...
traditional values.... What is that? What qualifies as "traditional"?? So, because the Western Family, Heterosexuality and Christianity is an old school value.....and....60 years ago there was segregation...and 150 years ago there was slavery... that means we have to throw the baby out with the bathwater?
That's the problem... people DO want to hold onto old values. But that doesn't mean that you can lump bigotry in with it.
There were many white people that died trying to free slaves...did these people frown upon frugality, a prudent sex life and humility too? Were these people "Liberals" based off this one value they held? You don't understand how your notion that peoples having to fall lockstep with their ideology promotes racial divide. You feed into these. I see it everyday.
Conservatism in the since of an ideology is not inherently racist but the people whom practice these views are infested by ramped racism. Its one thing to hang onto tradition but it’s something else to hang on to racist traditions/views. Conservative positions like family values, religion, etc. I don’t have a problem with that at all. I actually agree with many conservative positions. What I have a problem with is the tradition of bigotry, hate, and subjugation. If these attributes were removed conservatism might be great but as long as they are part of the platform the good views will be lumped in with the bigoted ideas. For example I would never join a coalition for family values if a large percentage of members were racist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot_Handz
Look, I don't know what it was... Maybe it was a Freudian slip...maybe it was benign....maybe it WAS intentionally bigoted. It still doesn't have much bearing in a modern society. Comedians do this stuff "in context" all the time. But it's OK when it's stuffed into the shell of "art"...
Why?
Do you believe that many artists material reflect their personal convictions as well?
A politician in this world has become nothing but an entertainer...you are watching a coached, scripted and paid actor. This is very real.
How can you claim “I don't know what it was” after taking a strong position? That doesn’t make sense. Most people do research prior to taking a side. But then you compare what she said to what comedians say. Do you know the difference between a comedian and a ex-high ranking Republican nominee? Should both these professions use the same tone? What this comes down to is a politician is not an entertainer (contrary to your belief) they are elected representatives.
He was when they needed a "blackface" to prove a point that they were not racist, ask herman
Oh, give me a break!
Colin Powell is no Herman Cain, either. Herman Cain is a brilliant man (I doubt anyone would use the word "brilliant" to describe Powell).
I was a Herman Cain supporter, until you liberals successfully smeared his name, just as you do with all black Republicans. I assume you were around when the attempted to "lynch" Clarance Thomas, one of the most brilliant Constitutional Scholars there is? Perhaps not.
Why is it that it is always Democrats that attack any black Republican candidate for office? Then you turn around and say that the Republican Party is racist?
Conservatism in the since of an ideology is not inherently racist but the people whom practice these views are infested by ramped racism. Its one thing to hang onto tradition but it’s something else to hang on to racist traditions/views. Conservative positions like family values, religion, etc. I don’t have a problem with that at all. I actually agree with many conservative positions. What I have a problem with is the tradition of bigotry, hate, and subjugation. If these attributes were removed conservatism might be great but as long as they are part of the platform the good views will be lumped in with the bigoted ideas. For example I would never join a coalition for family values if a large percentage of members were racist
I would definitely agree that being conservative in itself is not inherently racist. I agree with having family values, belief in God, and things like that. I share those values. What gets me is that so many racist people are attracted to the conservative movement. So many racists have been attracted to the Republican Party. The only explanation I can think of is that the Southern Strategy was part of this. Other than that, I can't think of any other reasons why. No one understands that it is this that keeps alot of Black people, who otherwise might be attracted to the Republican Party, from voting for Republicans. It is people like Sarah Palin, Rick Santorum, John Hubbard, and Newt Gingrich that make alot of Black people not want anything to do with the Republican Party.
Agreed. The phrase minimizes what real racism is all about. There's been plenty of racism throughout this countrys' short history. There's still racism floating around "out there" like a virus. I have a problem with it being bandied around so easily these days though. The word is being used way too cheaply. It's being used as a weapon to try and quiet opposing points of view, to put people on the defensive and to sabotage or sidetrack conversations.
To use the word so cheaply undervalues and marginalizes those who experienced real racism, and those who continue to experience real racism. Use the word so cheaply or use it as a tool often enough, and eventually the word will mean nothing.
Juneaubound, you mention, “I have a problem with it being bandied around so easily these days though.” What measurement are you using as a benchmark to conclude there are excessive claims of racism today? The reason I ask is because from my perspective the accusations of racism have decreased. The country is clearly less racist than it used to be and in-turn the claims have decreased. Back in the day there was discriminating laws against blacks, there was lynchings, job discrimination, infiltration by racist federal agents, assassinations of black leaders, etc. Every one of these issues was highlighted and we fought tooth and nail to get justice and make progress. Today we still have some of the same issues. The major difference is the medium used to report. What you’re seeing is a change in the availability of information. Now technology allows voices to be heard faster and more often. And when you do wrong you’re pointed out 10 times as fast…
Juneaubound, you mention, “I have a problem with it being bandied around so easily these days though.” What measurement are you using as a benchmark to conclude there are excessive claims of racism today? The reason I ask is because from my perspective the accusations of racism have decreased. The country is clearly less racist than it used to be and in-turn the claims have decreased. Back in the day there was discriminating laws against blacks, there was lynchings, job discrimination, infiltration by racist federal agents, assassinations of black leaders, etc. Every one of these issues was highlighted and we fought tooth and nail to get justice and make progress. Today we still have some of the same issues. The major difference is the medium used to report. What you’re seeing is a change in the availability of information. Now technology allows voices to be heard faster and more often. And when you do wrong you’re pointed out 10 times as fast…
Please see highlighted in your post. Real accusations of racism - and real racism - have absoluely decreased. Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. I was referring to the illegitimate accusations of racism that are so cavalierly being thrown out, for the sole purpose of putting people on the defensive and throwing conversation off the rails.
You don't agree with the president, you're a racist. You believe there should be voter ID laws, you're a racist. You attend a Tea Party rally because of concerns about the direction the country is headed, you're a racist. You know the drill - there are many more examples, and a brief search on this board will demonstrate my point clearly.
Of course there are some in the above examples that are racist. But you've been on this board long enough to know how it works - label EVERYONE a racist in the above examples. Shout it. Drown 'em out. That'll shut 'em up.
It's a lazy way to debate. But it happens frequently. And my point was that the more the accusation of "racist" gets thrown out there (and is used as a weapon simply to stop an opposing viewpoint in its tracks) the less the word will mean.
Using the word "racist" so cavalierly, and as a weapon to score points will eventually cheapen the word so much that it will no longer mean anything or carry any weight.
Maj. Powell was the Army spokesman that denied the Mai Lai killings during the Vietnam War. He has always been a political hack, but now he has reached a new low. He is just trying to earn his "street crud", get a seat at the table with Obama, DC parties etc...but now matter what he does, to the Liberals he will always be a Republican Uncle Tom, sell out etc...
You don't agree with the president, you're a racist. You believe there should be voter ID laws, you're a racist. You attend a Tea Party rally because of concerns about the direction the country is headed, you're a racist.
No one on this thread has indicated that, but if you refer to a POTUS as "shuckin and jivin", yes, you are a racist. That ignornant statement she made had nada to do with fiscal responsibility, but brought smiles to those who wish Jim Crow was still the law of the land. At the moment she said it, she had tons in common with George Wallace and David Duke, and nothing in common with respectable Republicans.
Bwwwaaaaahaaaahaaaaa - you cannot be serious? Herman Cain and Clarence Thomas are brilliant, but Powell is not? Yet another reason why people do not take the Republican party seriously
~ButterBrownBiscuit~
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy
Oh, give me a break!
Colin Powell is no Herman Cain, either. Herman Cain is a brilliant man (I doubt anyone would use the word "brilliant" to describe Powell).
I was a Herman Cain supporter, until you liberals successfully smeared his name, just as you do with all black Republicans. I assume you were around when the attempted to "lynch" Clarance Thomas, one of the most brilliant Constitutional Scholars there is? Perhaps not.
Why is it that it is always Democrats that attack any black Republican candidate for office? Then you turn around and say that the Republican Party is racist?
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.
