Diest, Clarence Thomas is a good example. When he was going through the confirmation process, it was a very ugly, very ugly process, and he was accused of lots of things, one being he was an Uncle Tom for the simple fact that he was standing as an individual not as a black person per se. Remember, he wasn't black enough according to many black folks, and some of the people that skewered him the worst were of the black community. Republicans never accused Democrats of opposing the man because he was black. And the truth is it was all about politics.
In contrast, here we have Obama running as a black person, and those that don't vote for him have been accused of racism, and count on it - we will hear lots more about it. At the beginning, some black leaders claimed or debated whether he was "black enough," and the meaning of that could be debated as a subject in and of itself, but in order to gain the support of many in the black community, he had to prove he was "black," which apparently involves a whole lot more than skin color. Again, it is about politics, plain and simple, not color of skin.
By the way, I think the pictures show Clarence Thomas to have alot blacker skin than Obama.On a serious note, Clarence Thomas has turned out to be one fine justice. I have heard him speak, and he speaks common sense, I like and respect the man a great deal, especially knowing what he has gone through to be an honorable individual to buck the poison thrown at him.
All of this is so plain as day, Democrats see people as groups, Republicans see people as individuals. This is a generalization, but I think a valid one, everyone is different, but in general, more Republicans think and act independently, than do Democrats or liberals. I will be skewered for this generalization I am sure.
Diest TKO wrote:Commonly held? This theory that minorities can't be racist is now "common?" You're out of touch okie.
T
K
O
I don't know about prevalent or dominant, but I believe it has been common, at least in some important political circles. I will post the following link, which more or less explains the theory behind it. In short, the belief that reverse racism cannot exist is because according to the theory for racism to have an impact, it has to be accompanied with power, and without power, it has no influence, hence it isn't racism. Thus any minority can hate, call names, and attempt to harm members of the majority, but it isn't racism because as the theory goes they have no majority power to exercise their desires.
Contrary to what you might believe, this concept has been around a long time, and expressed by a number of people. I can't find links now, but I have heard a number of people as guests on talk shows express the theory as one they support and believe. I was looking for a link in regard to Jesse Jackson, Sharpton, and others believing this, which I think I have heard, but I could not find the links, at least easily.
Actually, the whole idea of affirmative action is based on the belief that special treatment is not racial when practiced to further a minority, even if discrimination against a member of the majority is required to do it. Affirmative action would not involve the full meaning of the theory, but it does incorporate an element of it, and even you would have to admit that this practice is not only commonly believed as valid, but it has been government policy.
I don't know who Tim Wise is, but he explains aspects of the theory in the following link:
http://www.raceandhistory.com/selfnews/viewnews.cgi?newsid1024893033
,80611,.shtml
Those flyers are outrageous, Foxfyre. I have been turning against Obama more and more, but that makes my stomach turn.
Here is the flyer Obama is circulating in Kentucky in advance of the primary vote there:
Other side:
[img]http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll30/EconGradStud/Barack.jpg[/im
g]
