19
   

Harry Reid: racist or political realist?

 
 
Reply Sun 10 Jan, 2010 04:07 pm
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0110/Harry-Reid-racist-or-political-realist

Imagine if a Republican has said these same words.
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Jan, 2010 04:09 pm
He is a racist, plain and simple.
ebrown p
 
  2  
Reply Sun 10 Jan, 2010 04:19 pm
Stop Whining.

What Republican lost his or her job after saying something racist?

Republicans routinely say worse.... the difference is, Republicans don't have the decency to apologize after people take offense.

djjd62
 
  2  
Reply Sun 10 Jan, 2010 04:20 pm
he's both

but let's not kid ourselves, if he looked or spoke like fiidy cent, they'd have axed him to leave
0 Replies
 
tsarstepan
 
  2  
Reply Sun 10 Jan, 2010 04:25 pm
@ebrown p,
ebrown p wrote:

Stop Whining.

What Republican lost his or her job after saying something racist?

Republicans routinely say worse.... the difference is, Republicans don't have the decency to apologize after people take offense.

You should read the article more carefully.
Quote:
Then, a Republican Senate majority leader (Trent Lott) was ousted because he, too, made insensitive racial remarks: The nation would have been much better off if Strom Thurmond had won his presidential bid in 1948, Senator Lott told Mr. Thurmond at Thurmond’s 100th birthday celebration. Thurmond’s 1948 platform backed racial segregation.


I think Senator Reid should step down from his position as Majority leader simply because he's an abject failure as the head Democrat.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Jan, 2010 04:25 pm
@ebrown p,
Are you really that forgetful?
Lets start with Trent Lott, for remarks he made at Strom Thurmonds birthday party.
His remarks werent racist, but the left took them that way.
He was forced to step down from his leadership position.

http://www.seattlepi.com/national/1110ap_us_obama_reid.html

Quote:
GOP Chairman Michael Steele, in appearances on two Sunday news programs, compared Reid's predicament with the circumstances that led Senate Republican leader Trent Lott to step down from that post in 2002. Lott had spoken favorably of the 1948 segregationist presidential campaign of Strom Thurmond, and in spite of apologies for those remarks at Thurmond's 100th birthday, Lott was forced out as leader.

0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  2  
Reply Sun 10 Jan, 2010 04:33 pm
@ebrown p,
ebrown p wrote:

Stop Whining.


This is becoming one of your favorite replies, always followed by a huge dose of your own whine.

ebrown p wrote:
What Republican lost his or her job after saying something racist?


One might consider this a ridiculously ignorant question.

Either Republicans and Democrats should not be criticized for these sorts of comments or the consequences should be the same. Don't you agree?

This would not be the first time Reid uttered an idiotic comment.

Recall his complaint about sweaty and smelling ordinary citizens having the nerve to visit the Capital.
ebrown p
 
  2  
Reply Sun 10 Jan, 2010 04:56 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
I am not a big fan of Reid (he is too conservative for my taste)-- and I would probably be at least as happy as you would be were he replaced (Russ Feingold would make a great leader).

There is a fundamental difference between Republican racist comments and Democratic racist comments.

Many Republicans embrace the idea that the White Christian culture should be the dominant culture in the US, and considering the concerns of minorities religions or ethnic groups or races hurts "true Americans".

This ideology permeates Republican rhetoric and policy. They oppose strict punishment of hate crimes. They want Christian religion to be given a special place over all other religions. They oppose any remedies for the fact that White males are have most of the opportunities while minority males make up most of the prison population. They support racial profiling-- the singling out of certain ethnic groups for law enforcement.

It is not the offhand comments or individual remarks taken out of context that are bothersome. It is the ideology of White Christian dominance.

Of course, politics are politics. Whether there will be consequences is up to his constituents.

But as far as the issue of hypocrisy goes -- Find me a single person who didn't already hate Harry Reid who is bothered by this incident (after the apology). This is a made up phony outrage by people who are just looking for an opportunity to attack Reid.

With Steve King, Michelle Bachmann. Jim Demint-- It is more than just comments... these people have a deep-seated animosity toward minority groups and religions.




JTT
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Jan, 2010 05:27 pm
@mysteryman,
Quote:
He is a racist, plain and simple.


Leap to conclusions much?
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  4  
Reply Sun 10 Jan, 2010 06:29 pm
Mysteryman, are you kidding?
You wrote:
Quote:
Lets start with Trent Lott, for remarks he made at Strom Thurmonds birthday party.
His remarks werent racist, but the left took them that way.
He was forced to step down from his leadership position.


His remarks weren't racist? According to who? Not one GOP member of the Senate stood up to defend Trent Lott's idiotic remarks, not one. That's some rather significant lock step behavior there, eh?

Harry(as soon as Healthcare is passed, I hope he retires.)Reid made the remarks about Obama to a writer and promptly forgot about them. As soon as they became public, Harry(too conservative for me and getting older every day)Reid apologized and received forgiveness.
You are in favor of forgiveness, right? Maybe Britt Hume of Fox should advise Reid to reach out for Christian absolution for his errant Mormon ways.

Joe(this is just another frigging distraction)Nation
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Jan, 2010 06:32 pm
@Joe Nation,
Haven't looked further on the thread, but nods.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Jan, 2010 06:38 pm
Well, I'll just talk up and be bald. Only some of us get to be president, and it has been that way for a long time. It made clear political sense that a black man (though how black, yadda) with wit and brains could make it, as some fair - scratch that, some significant portion of the US is tired of proscriptions of whole groups.
To me, Reid was only speaking realism on whatever day at whatever time.

Not only that, I think that anyone who doesn't get that is prevaricating.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Jan, 2010 06:40 pm
@ossobuco,
I'm sorry he apologized, though I take the reasons.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 10 Jan, 2010 08:24 pm
I would not call it racist, if it could be proven that it was true. Perhaps, it was true, since this nation has a history of racism, and many white folks do feel more comfortable with lighter skinned Blacks, and Blacks that speak standard English with no inner-city accent stereotypical (aka, it is my birfday). So, rather than accuse him of racism, perhaps it would be more to the point of saying it was an "insensitive" thing to say, since many do not like to be reminded what might just be more truthful than falsehood? This reminds me of the fable The Kings New Suit of Clothes.

For those that live in the East, some might agree with me that the West Indian Black accent, that sounds to many ears as a British accent, does give many Black West Indians a degree of positive feedback. Perhaps then the shade of the President's complexion is really an archaic thought; however, I do believe how one speaks does effect how one is treated. And, that is whether one is Black, White, Asian, Hispanic, etc., etc.

Perhaps, then he was sort of correct on the speech point, but not on the complexion point. Must we ruin someone for a possible error in their perceptions?

The belief that it was racist does not address the point that there is no reason to believe there was malicious intent. So, without malicious intent, how could it be racist? And, only insensitive, if the person that said it knew that it might be offensive to those whose sensitivities would possibly like to forget the history of the nation. I would wonder if it would have been considered racist if the comment included that only an educated Black man could get into the Presidency? Would that have been racist? Therefore, it seems to me the comments were just rehashing the obvious, to anyone that knows this country's history.
revel
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Jan, 2010 09:53 am
I never liked Reid, but I am not sure he meant to be racist though his choice of words are racist.

Quote:
Senator Reid is quoted in a new book by two journalists about the 2008 campaign, “Game Change,” as saying privately that the US would be “ready to embrace a black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama " a 'light-skinned' African American 'with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.’ ”


Look at the context of his statements, he is saying that because Obama is light skinned with no ghetto dialect (feel more comfortable with that word) he would have have more of a chance of success of being elected than an African American with darker skin and ghetto talk. I agree about the latter simply because in order to succeed in almost kind of career you would need to have correct grammatical skills; moreover more than half the reason he appealed to his supporters is his elequence and calm reasoning way of speaking. However, I think it would have made no difference had Obama not been light skinned among Obama's supporters.
aidan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Jan, 2010 10:12 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
I think he was just saying what he believed to be true about the electorate and Obama's chances of election with them.

It would have been racist if he'd said, 'Thank God we don't have a dark-skinned, hip-hop acting and jive talking black man running for President- this one's more palatable'. But he didn't. He made an observation he believed to be true about the American people. He said nothing about Obama - except to describe what he believes made him acceptable to the American people- and it very well could be true.
I myself wouldn't vote for a presidential candidate who couldn't communicate on an international platform in such a way that he gained peoples' respect and belief and understanding- no matter what color his or her skin.

I think he's a political realist.
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  5  
Reply Mon 11 Jan, 2010 10:43 am
@revel,
Reid essentially called the electorate racist. He didn't express racists thoughts himself.
Pemerson
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Jan, 2010 10:58 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Did Bill Clinton get in trouble with the Democrats when he said America would never vote for a black man for president? Or, when he called the idea of Obama becoming president of the U.S. a "fairy tale."

ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Jan, 2010 11:07 am
@Pemerson,
Quote:
Did Bill Clinton get in trouble with the Democrats when he said America would never vote for a black man for president? Or, when he called the idea of Obama becoming president of the U.S. a "fairy tale."


Well, we sure showed him, didn't we.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  2  
Reply Mon 11 Jan, 2010 12:04 pm
@engineer,
True, but the term "Negro" is questionable but maybe he is merely old fashioned.

Some have brought up Trent Lott as a comparable situation. The difference is in the context of the statements. Trent was lamenting the desegregation and Reid was merely talking about electability of a minority in today's political climate. I just quibble with his choice of words and it was right that he apologized.

I am not a huge fan of Sharpton but he's got it right here
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Harry Reid: racist or political realist?
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 10/25/2021 at 02:41:02