• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Reid apologizes for 'no Negro dialect' comment

I was trying to use the examples you provided as to what makes someone appear "very Arab".

  1. Does being well groomed make you appear "very Arab" (and therefore unlikely to be elected)?
  2. Or, is it that "not well groomed" makes you appear "very Arab" (and therefore unlikely to be elected)?

Because the Arab-American Sununus didn't get elected in New Hampshire by looking Arab, did they?
 
Racism is power for minorities, that's why the Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons of the world exist. It's a business. It means money, power and influence. Those guys would love for you to believe that white people run around all day and when they see a black person they think, "oohhh look at that negro, oooh I hate that negro, they are subhuman." That's how they make their money and promote policy where none is needed. It's pretty disgusting to me.
 
A ignorant racist remark from a prominent Democrat. Right-wing pundits will keep this one alive for as long as possible.

Maybe if Harry Reid put it on a CD or a mass email the GOP would be more understanding.

Maybe if there wasn't a double standard Reid would have offerd up his resignation by now. But its all good, he will be out of Washington soon enough. Now its time to work on Pelosi. The communist bioch has got to go.
 
Does anyone find it odd that black groups and liberals were up in arms a few weeks ago when it was disclosed that the term "negro" was a choice for ethnicity on the census form??

Suddenly, the word is perfectly acceptable.
 
Huffington Post - LOL - nice try though.

Anyway - Barak hanging out with William Ayers and Reverend Wright...........

Food for thought:

Maybe Reid had something there when he said Obama is light skinned and doesn't talk with a negro dialect - meaning he could easily get away with his ties.

There you go again, attacking the messenger.:roll:
 
Huffington Post - LOL - nice try though.

Anyway - Barak hanging out with William Ayers and Reverend Wright...........

Food for thought:

Maybe Reid had something there when he said Obama is light skinned and doesn't talk with a negro dialect - meaning he could easily get away with his ties.

There you go again, attacking the messenger.:roll: :spin:
 
I say we keep the pressure on. If this were reversed would liberals be opining on how we need to move on? I don't think so.

Earlier I addressed a liberal member with direct quotes said at the time of Trent Lott's fall from power over a stupid line uttered at a Birthday Party of a long time member of Congress. The utter contempt for Lott, and the precedent set is clear. I got a response of not how they were different, but only that they were, and if I wanted to know how just ask. That was nearly 24 hours ago, and the poster has since responded to other posts in this thread so I know they had seen my direct call for them to explain.

Trouble is that they can't. Liberals can not explain away a statement, no matter how benign, by a leader in the Senate, but for the designator behind his name, they would call for the immediate resignation of. And did with Lott.

However, hypocrisy is not at real issue here, because the Liberals have worn that on their sleeve since 2006 with empty words on the way to their majority that they have all but cast aside the moment they were in power. No, what is at issue here is whether or not the repubs are going to show the same ruthless political courage in not letting go of this, or are they going to recede to the usual course of forgiving it in some sort of veil of taking the high road, some sort of rouse of bigger fish to fry? I hope not. We don't have even enough of a minority to be let in to simple negotiations, let alone affect anything legislatively, so they need to ramp it up.

I don't care if the entirety of the Black community rises up in feigned support of Reid, the repubs need to hold true to the precedent that Reid, and his despicable cohorts in the Senate set with Lott, and force the issue. Use Allensky against them with the rule of make your political enemies hold true to their stated values. If it was good enough for Trent Lott, then by God, it's good enough for Reid.


j-mac
 
Everyone knows, had the letter R followed Reid's name....if articles started with Reid(R-Nev), he would have already been gone, the Rev. Sharptons and race baiters in this nation escorting him out the door.

This national upset over supposed racial statements....is fake. It's political and thus selective outrage, this is just another example in a long line of them. You'll see the Sharptons now in denial, the NAACP speaking to Reid's record. It will all be forgiven and forgotten...until the Dems need the race card played again.

Perhaps the next time "wolf" is cried, people will be more aware of it.
 
I watched the Daily show a few nights ago and learned that democrats own the racial card and the republicans hold the tough on terrorist card.

Also, in my own opinion I believe that the democrats hold the Hitler card and the Republicans hold the pinko commie card.:)
 
Racism is power for minorities, that's why the Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons of the world exist. It's a business. It means money, power and influence. Those guys would love for you to believe that white people run around all day and when they see a black person they think, "oohhh look at that negro, oooh I hate that negro, they are subhuman." That's how they make their money and promote policy where none is needed. It's pretty disgusting to me.

This is very true.

The unfortunate truth is if we as people could get over racism and view people as just people. The Jackson's and Sharpton's of the world would have no more power.

Unfortunately racism does exist on all sides. If it did not groups like "Stromfront" and the "Black Panthers" etc would not exist.
 
This is very true.

The unfortunate truth is if we as people could get over racism and view people as just people. The Jackson's and Sharpton's of the world would have no more power.

Unfortunately racism does exist on all sides. If it did not groups like "Stromfront" and the "Black Panthers" etc would not exist.

Racism is a cottage industry. :(
 
You accused the GOP of saying Obama was a terrorist.

I want proof.

Obama was a buddy of Ayers, a known terrorist.
It makes you question Obama's judgment, as does his 20-years at the feet of Wright.

But terrorista? We didn't accuse him of that, but we accuse him of having abysmal judgment.

And it was Obama that touted his "judgment".
An Epic Fail as we are living and learning... in all manner of ways... daily

YouTube- Barack Obama: Judgement to Lead

.

Assuming you're a Republican, then your own post indicates that the Republicans, or at least some of them, were trying to paint Obama as a terrorist.

I remember quite a few such statements being made during the campaign, and I'm pretty sure it wasn't Democrats making them.

Sara Palin got in a few digs, too:

Palin hits Obama for 'terrorist' connection

Sarah Palin: Barack Obama 'palling around with terrorists'

 
Assuming you're a Republican, then your own post indicates that the Republicans, or at least some of them, were trying to paint Obama as a terrorist.

I remember quite a few such statements being made during the campaign, and I'm pretty sure it wasn't Democrats making them.

Sara Palin got in a few digs, too:

Palin hits Obama for 'terrorist' connection

Sarah Palin: Barack Obama 'palling around with terrorists'


Try again...

Comments on terrorist connections and palling around with terrorists is not calling anyone a terrorist except Ayers.
 
Assuming you're a Republican, then your own post indicates that the Republicans, or at least some of them, were trying to paint Obama as a terrorist.

I remember quite a few such statements being made during the campaign, and I'm pretty sure it wasn't Democrats making them.

Sara Palin got in a few digs, too:

Palin hits Obama for 'terrorist' connection

Sarah Palin: Barack Obama 'palling around with terrorists'


Ayers is an admitted terrorist. Obama is his close friend (and protoge). Is that not "palling around with terrorists?"
 
Ayers is an admitted terrorist. Obama is his close friend (and protoge). Is that not "palling around with terrorists?"

Our founding fathers were considered terrorists by the bloody british.:spin:
 
Ayers is an admitted terrorist. Obama is his close friend (and protoge). Is that not "palling around with terrorists?"

Except, of course, that he's not. They both served briefly on the same committee, along with a bunch of Republicans as well.
 
Ayers is an admitted terrorist. Obama is his close friend (and protoge). Is that not "palling around with terrorists?"

Could be. Does that mean that Obama is a terrorist himself?
 
Racism is a cottage industry. :(

That's why I refer to the Civil Rights Industry vice the Civil Rights Movement. Liberals, Democrats, Leftists, etc. are making millions, not only in dollars, but in political capital off the Black community in America.
 
Except, of course, that he's not. They both served briefly on the same committee, along with a bunch of Republicans as well.

You're claiming the self-admitted member of the Weathermen isn't a terrorist?

You clearly prefer the strawberry or raspberry kool-aid, so long as it's some pinko color.
 
Keepers of liberal agenda are enemies of truth.
 
You're claiming the self-admitted member of the Weathermen isn't a terrorist?

You clearly prefer the strawberry or raspberry kool-aid, so long as it's some pinko color.

No, he's claiming that Obama, far from "palling around" with terrorists, just served on a committee with one.

And, so did some Republicans.

Now, if you're a Republican, and want to defend your party, there's the statement that has to be challenged.

Is the Republican party the party of terrorists?:shock:
 
And Bill Ayers is considered a terrorist by all decent human beings today. Your point?

I am sorry but I would have to educate you before I explain because you can not understand my point.

You assume that you know everybody who is a decent human and it's a fact just because you say so.

I think that Nixon was a terrorist. He tried to poison his own people with paraquat.

Ayers lived in the era of the Kent State Massacre and Nixon who would have wound up in prison if not pardoned by Gerald [bite the bullet] Ford. When you live in an era of tyrants it makes some people get really pissed off.
 
Last edited:
I am sorry but I would have to educate you before I explain because you can not understand my point.

You assume that you know everybody who is a decent human and it's a fact just because you say so.

I think that Nixon was a terrorist. He tried to poison his own people with paraquat.

Ayers lived in the era of the Kent State Massacre and Nixon who would have wound up in prison if not pardoned by Gerald [bite the bullet] Ford. When you live in an era of tyrants it makes some people get really pissed off.
You think you have what it takes to educate Right, after this crap you just spewed? :roll:
 
I am sorry but I would have to educate you before I explain because you can not understand my point.

You assume that you know everybody who is a decent human and it's a fact just because you say so.

I think that Nixon was a terrorist. He tried to poison his own people with paraquat.

Ayers lived in the era of the Kent State Massacre and Nixon who would have wound up in prison if not pardoned by Gerald [bite the bullet] Ford. When you live in an era of tyrants it makes some people get really pissed off.

Funny how JFK, a Dem, sent troops into Nam, then Johnson, another Dem, escalted the war like no tomorrow with not much from the press - not until Nixon inherited their mess was the war and Nixon's part pounded in the press.

Oh, and let's not forget that the Dems got us into WWI, WWII, Korea and Vietnam, and that was all good until Nixon inherited Vietnam.

The Germans didn't hit our mainland, yet it was OK for the Dem president to send U.S. troops - and our losses were massive.

The Koreans didn't hit our mainland, yet it was OK for the Dem president to send our troops - and the lossses were great.

The Vietnamese did not hit our mainland, yet a Dem president sent our troops - and the losses were great.

Our biggest city was hit on 9/11, Bush took it to them, and out came the whining, hypocrital assholes. Bush went after the the ones who hit our mainland - and the losses are nothing compared to the losses under Dem presidents.

We lost tens of thousand on given days with the Dem's wars - thousand in individual battles, let alone throughout the wars - Bush's taking it to them for hitting us here resulted in excellent results with minimal losses.

It is evident that liberal loons are the most backward, asshole people on the planet.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom