Iriemon

I didn't mean to parse words; I got the phrase from your OP and quoted it verbatim.

It's closer, though in the former category you are using racial characteristics to describe people involved in an isolated incident instead of a descriptive fact attributable to an identifiable subgroup.

But I can see why you'd find the statement objectionable. Again, it's the same reason I find "Muslims abuse their kids" type statements objectionable. It is using an overbroard group description to attribute to a much smaller subgroup.

I didn't read the "white folks greed" as reference to the cruise ship, though I agree that is one way to read it.

I don't specifically recall Obama saying his grandmother was racist, but that she was afraid of black men on the street or something like that.

Context means a lot.

Reverend_Hellh0und

So you do find the white man's greed statment objectionable then based on racial grounds?



In the quote, it talks of cruise ships throwing out more food than Haiti can use (paraphrasing) and this was "white folk's greed versus a world in need" example.

To me meaning that the greedy white folks who take cruises are apathetic (he also mentions the apathetic west and apartheid thing in the same quote) to the struggles of the world....

While I submit that I am in agreement as whole of a people in this country, we mostly do not consider the needs of people in say haiti. But to call it "white man's greed" to me is a racist and incorrect statment and I wonder why that brought him to tears.


He said in his race speech, paraphrasing, that he could not disown wright no more than he could disown his white grandmother, who crossed the street when she saw black people and made "racial utterances"....

The next day in a radio interview when asked about it he stated that his grandmothers racism was "typical of white people".....


to me both of these reek of racism.




Which is why I started this thread.

__________________
كافر
Caith siar é agus ná lig anair á

Iriemon

More accurately, based on an overbroad description of the group.

The quote says what it says.

That's one way to read it.

I'd have to read the book in context to venture a speculation.

We've discussed the grandmother comment in other threads. I'll defer to those rather than regurgitating the discussion again here.

Reverend_Hellh0und

You are correct Iriemon, we would go round and round..... so lets not do that.


Can you, may I ask, appreciate why a rational person would consider those remarks as racist and also agree that in doing so would not be taking them then out of context?


I thank you for the discussion.

__________________
كافر
Caith siar é agus ná lig anair á

Iriemon

Substitute "could" for "would" and yes, as I have stated.

Based on your objections to using an overbroad descriptor "white folks" when describing the actions of a smaller group, do you therefore also object to using the overbroad descriptor "Muslims" (or any other group) when describing the actions of a smaller group? Or are your objections to overbroad references to group or race only antagonized when it is white people that are referred to?

Reverend_Hellh0und

If someone says "Muslims are not doing enough to combat terrorism" this is ok as one is opining on a group as a whole.


If you say muslims are blowing up people and are terrorists, as I always have stated this is bigoted.


"Muslim folks terrorism" is equally bigoted as "white folks greed", which is why I am careful to refer to terrorists of islamic faith as Islamic terrorist savages..... I try to get specific.

__________________
كافر
Caith siar é agus ná lig anair á

shiznit770

Why the huge leap in logic? Talk about the comment itself, not generalizations. I've no problem talking about racial inequality. Statements such as 'white folks greed runs a nation in need' does little to describe the situation. Its a crappy rhyme which instills a negative stereotype on white people. If you can't see the problem with this type of sermon...lay off the kool-aid.

Zyphlin

The grandmother comment I don't see as racist. The first one I can see as potentially racist. Its along the lines, but less obvious in my mind, as the McCain "gooks" comment from some time back.

But then, I'm also of the mindset that its very easy to say something with no intention for it to be racist or even really not thinking much on it, but it to come out sounding incredibly racist due to the way its phrase or the context around it. I also believe people can make racist comments at times without truly being a "racist", just as I dont' think someone that says a big lie once in a while is a "liar" or someone that insulted someone once in a while is an "asshole".

I also don't really think racial stereotyping is necessarily "racist", and I hate that somehow racial stereotyping is bad but people stereotype men, women, teenagers, kids, adults, old people, gamers, jocks, geeks, preps, gays, straights, conservatives, liberals, and every other type of thing and its not problem.

As such, I rarely allow a single comment here or there to influence me on the amount I think someone is legitimately a racist or not but its more a large sum of their parts. I don't think Obama is a racist, nor McCain.

Also, I do agree with IT. The links he posted were legitimate I believe as was not pointing to specific examples. Every one of them was an example of this same line of conversation, with many of the same people already discussing about these same kind of comments and on whether or not they were racist, etc. If you, in those other threads you started, couldn't understand peoples arguments as to why those things may or may not have been racist yet ANOTHER thread on it wasn't going to really change things. People only want to talk about things so many times, and if you just keep hammering it over and over again its not going to change their mind, its just going to make them annoyed.

__________________
Political buy outs, "my way or the highway" attitude, ignoring of rules and traditions because it suits your purpose...

Yep, gotta love the "Change from politics as usual" in this "post-partisan" era.

Alex

It sounds to me like Obama is reading something. How do we know he did not read it and then stated, "I disagree with the racist comment"? (Or something like it.)

That sample of his speech may not be reliable because it could be missing important elements. That is why it may be taken out of context.

Is there a complete recording of the speech available?

independent_thinker2002

Now I'm committing suicide at Jonestown?

Anyway, most slogans and bumper stickers do little to describe a situation. Yet people adore them anyway. People have different interpretations. Not all white people are running the world. Therefor he isn't talking about all white folks. He highlights the racial component of class warfare. He isn't insulting trailer park residents in rural Nebraska.

__________________
☠☠☠☠☠

I am a Tiki Bar Tarte, you wanna mount Le Penseur Bronze