• 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!

Democrats Refuse to Take Back Charges of Racism over Lynch Nom

blackjack50

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
26,629
Reaction score
6,661
Location
Florida
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Democrats refuse to take back racism charges
Democrats refuse to take back charges of racism over Lynch nom - CNN.com

Washington (CNN)Democrats refuse to retract their accusations that the voting delay on Loretta Lynch's attorney general nomination is racially motivated, despite GOP protestations otherwise.

The two-time U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York would be the first African-American woman to serve as attorney general, but Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has pledged to delay a vote on her confirmation by the full Senate until the chamber completes consideration of sex trafficking legislation.

Lynch, who was nominated in November, has waited longer for a vote in the full Senate than the past five nominees to the post combined, her supporters say. In a press conference aimed at pushing McConnell to schedule a vote on Lynch, House Democrats touted her qualifications and the bipartisan vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee to send her nomination to the full Senate.

Repeating charges laid out by other Democrats earlier in the week, several said they believed her race was one reason for the hold up.

"If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck and it is clear to me that there is hidden racism rampant in the House and the Senate," said Rep. Corrine Brown of Florida. "Let's call it what it is. I mean, I know it's not comfortable to talk about it, but that's what it is."

Those remarks followed comments Wednesday by Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, the second-ranking Democrat in the chamber, who said Republicans were asking Lynch to "sit in the back of the bus" when it comes to the Senate calendar. Members of the Congressional Black Caucus also said Lynch's race was playing a role in the delay.

The accusations, which have angered Republicans, come as the GOP is aiming to expand its appeal to attract more minority voters heading into the 2016 presidential race.

New York Rep. Carolyn Maloney cited several "isms" involved in the current standoff -- obstructionism, feminism and sexism. She noted the battle over the Senate bill was about issues of importance to women, since the legislation had broad bipartisan support until Democrats discovered it contained a provision that would prevent the use of victims compensation funds for abortions.

Republicans have repeatedly said race is not a factor in the delay and that it is up to Democrats to allow a vote on the trafficking bill.

"It has nothing to do with race whatsoever," said Sen. John Hoeven, R-North Dakota. "What the Republicans are working on right now on the floor is trying to pass the human trafficking legislation."

A procedural vote to end debate on the bill failed for the third time on Thursday.

Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona took to the Senate floor earlier in the day to blast Durbin for his "back of the bus" comments, calling them "totally inappropriate."

"Such inflammatory rhetoric has no place in this body and serves no purpose other than to further divide us," McCain said. "I think he owes this body, Ms. Lynch and all Americans an apology."

McCain noted that Durbin helped hold up the nomination of an African-American woman, Janice Rogers Brown, to a federal appeals court in 2005. The nominee was eventually confirmed after members struck a deal.

"The senator from Illinois voted against the historic nomination. I would never suggest, even with veiled rhetoric, that Judge Rogers Brown's race was the reason for the senator from Illinois' opposition to her nomination," McCain went on to say. "He should extend that same courtesy to me and my colleagues."

Durbin, who spoke on the floor immediately after McCain, did not apologize.

When in doubt: play the race card. Anyone else think this lends further credence to the the whole race baiting debate that has been going on recently?
 
Democrats refuse to take back racism charges
Democrats refuse to take back charges of racism over Lynch nom - CNN.com



When in doubt: play the race card. Anyone else think this lends further credence to the the whole race baiting debate that has been going on recently?

They need something to complain about. Hell, if they actually paid attention to her previous actions and stances, most of them wouldn't confirm her either. Good thing for her Dems are only trained to say Yes Mr. Obama and not actually read or think.
 
They need something to complain about. Hell, if they actually paid attention to her previous actions and stances, most of them wouldn't confirm her either. Good thing for her Dems are only trained to say Yes Mr. Obama and not actually read or think.

Like what? What actions and stances make her unfit, besides being nominated by Obama?
 
Like what? What actions and stances make her unfit, besides being nominated by Obama?

Her defense of asset forfeiture without a conviction for one. Another, she is like Holder, a crusader for "black justice" that seems to blame the justice system for the number of blacks in prison, not the individual criminals.
 
Her defense of asset forfeiture without a conviction for one. Another, she is like Holder, a crusader for "black justice" that seems to blame the justice system for the number of blacks in prison, not the individual criminals.

Well, we know it couldn't possibly be the system. It's perfect.
 
Democrats refuse to take back racism charges
Democrats refuse to take back charges of racism over Lynch nom - CNN.com

When in doubt: play the race card. Anyone else think this lends further credence to the the whole race baiting debate that has been going on recently?

So republicans try and pass a bill that every one agrees is a good idea, but they put in a poison pill so they can claim democrats are against stopping human trafficking, and then they hold up an important nomination out of spite because denmocrats did just what they tried to make them do, and what do you comment on? A few people who claim racism? Really, that is the important part of all this to you?

For the record, I doubt race was a motivating factor in this for republicans. It is just generally being a douche like normal that is the motivation, and screwing people over in order to try and score political points.
 
Democrats refuse to take back racism charges
Democrats refuse to take back charges of racism over Lynch nom - CNN.com

When in doubt: play the race card. Anyone else think this lends further credence to the the whole race baiting debate that has been going on recently?

GOOD! It's about damn time the Democratic party showed a spine against those assholes.

By the way. I get a kick now every time that conservatives whine about Eric Holder. All they have to do is let this fully-qualified candidate in, and Holder goes away!
 
So republicans try and pass a bill that every one agrees is a good idea, but they put in a poison pill so they can claim democrats are against stopping human trafficking, and then they hold up an important nomination out of spite because denmocrats did just what they tried to make them do, and what do you comment on? A few people who claim racism? Really, that is the important part of all this to you?

For the record, I doubt race was a motivating factor in this for republicans. It is just generally being a douche like normal that is the motivation, and screwing people over in order to try and score political points.

A few people, the 2nd ranking democrat in the senate is hardly just another person. Why is is so unimportant that such repugnant language can be used by the leaders of our government ?

You act like democrats have never held up a nomination to score political points not to mention blocking a legitimate nominee by calling them sexist and racist

This type of holier than thou hypocritical rhetoric is exactly why people like Durbin can spew their vile hate speech without fear of repercussions because they know no matter how far they cross the line democrats will fall in line to defend them.
 
Her defense of asset forfeiture without a conviction for one. Another, she is like Holder, a crusader for "black justice" that seems to blame the justice system for the number of blacks in prison, not the individual criminals.

Damn it man, a defender of black justice! Hell no, we can't have that in America. Lets get back to the good ole days!

Lee Atwater:You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger"—that hurts you, backfires.
 
So republicans try and pass a bill that every one agrees is a good idea, but they put in a poison pill so they can claim democrats are against stopping human trafficking, and then they hold up an important nomination out of spite because denmocrats did just what they tried to make them do, and what do you comment on? A few people who claim racism? Really, that is the important part of all this to you?

For the record, I doubt race was a motivating factor in this for republicans. It is just generally being a douche like normal that is the motivation, and screwing people over in order to try and score political points.

How old are you? How long have you been observing federal politics? Should it shock you that they resort to petty poison pill tactics? Piggy backing certain crap in that we don't need or want? Cramming 1000 page bills into existence without ever considering the consequences? I could go on, but it is all white noise and I feel you will get my point.

Yes. I focused on the race card. Why? Because it was a classic "Ad Hom" by the democrats, and further shows just how little they ACTUALLY care about "racism" and use it for expedient political gain. Btw. I didn't focus on that. I didn't know about it till the communist news network reported. Of all networks too.
 
Damn it man, a defender of black justice! Hell no, we can't have that in America. Lets get back to the good ole days!

Lee Atwater:You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger"—that hurts you, backfires.

How about we have just a defender of justice instead? Shouldn't justice be blind, and by that token not give a damn if someone is white or black or green? No. We can't have that! Never mind that we have a clear example of democrats pulling the expedient race card for political gains, showing that it really isn't ABOUT race to that party.

Maybe we could try fixing the damn system? And our head law enforcement can focus on dealing with the scum of the earth and NOT politically expedient talking points like inserting racism into something not motivated at all by race.

Just remember:

#blacklivesmatter (but only if they are voting democrat and aren't business owners...and their livelihood is irrelevant if it is a legitimate movement because it is better to burn those buildings to the ground in a community with almost no examples of legitimate black prosperity...it is better to keep them on food stamps and protect the drug dealers because you don't want them climbing out of the inner city with legitimate businesses and becoming aware that democrats want to TAKE the money from legitimate business and exploit the "black vote" by race baiting and inserting racism into cases not about racism).
 
How old are you? How long have you been observing federal politics? Should it shock you that they resort to petty poison pill tactics? Piggy backing certain crap in that we don't need or want? Cramming 1000 page bills into existence without ever considering the consequences? I could go on, but it is all white noise and I feel you will get my point.

Yes. I focused on the race card. Why? Because it was a classic "Ad Hom" by the democrats, and further shows just how little they ACTUALLY care about "racism" and use it for expedient political gain. Btw. I didn't focus on that. I didn't know about it till the communist news network reported. Of all networks too.

Just to make the point, when democrats did it, I bitched about it. I do not like the practice. Period. Unlike you, I do not base what is right or not on who did it.
 
How about we have just a defender of justice instead? Shouldn't justice be blind, and by that token not give a damn if someone is white or black or green? No. We can't have that! Never mind that we have a clear example of democrats pulling the expedient race card for political gains, showing that it really isn't ABOUT race to that party.

Maybe we could try fixing the damn system? And our head law enforcement can focus on dealing with the scum of the earth and NOT politically expedient talking points like inserting racism into something not motivated at all by race.

Just remember:

#blacklivesmatter (but only if they are voting democrat and aren't business owners...and their livelihood is irrelevant if it is a legitimate movement because it is better to burn those buildings to the ground in a community with almost no examples of legitimate black prosperity...it is better to keep them on food stamps and protect the drug dealers because you don't want them climbing out of the inner city with legitimate businesses and becoming aware that democrats want to TAKE the money from legitimate business and exploit the "black vote" by race baiting and inserting racism into cases not about racism).

Sometimes minorities need a little extra, they tend to be easily oppressed.
 
Just to make the point, when democrats did it, I bitched about it. I do not like the practice. Period. Unlike you, I do not base what is right or not on who did it.

Way to go!!!
 
Just to make the point, when democrats did it, I bitched about it. I do not like the practice. Period. Unlike you, I do not base what is right or not on who did it.

I made 0 comment on it. Frankly: my opinion of federal politicians is that they are all narcissistic sociopaths that we could cull regularly and never notice the difference. Ever seen futurama? Torgo's executive powder? We could make a politician powder that could prevent athlete's foot. Only local politicians matter that much in reality.

But as I said above: this isn't about that to me. This is about the race card being pulled from the deck because they didn't have any other good cards. It is reminiscent of the Michael brown event...there is a group that wants to thrive on the race baiting and they see a chance. Remember the election of Obama? Republicans didn't vote for him because he was black. No. Didn't vote for him because we are repulsed by democrats. Not that that should be surprising. But it was politically expedient to do it so they did. Same here.

I'm sick of it. Sick of the card being pulled. As is pretty much every other single non minority in my age bracket. It makes ignorant morons think they have traction hating black people (note I didn't say it does). Put the card back in the deck and save it for when a bunch of moron frat rats yell racist chants. Not politics.

So why not bitch that this race card bs is wrong? That hurts your cause? Nah. Gotta stick with the LBJ tactics.
 
Sometimes minorities need a little extra, they tend to be easily oppressed.

No. Sorry. Maybe 40 years ago. This isn't the 60s and 70s anymore. Equality in opportunity. That is the only true form of equality. Everyone should have fair access regardless of skin color. And certain groups shouldn't get special treatment because of skin color. That started the problem.
 
So republicans try and pass a bill that every one agrees is a good idea, but they put in a poison pill so they can claim democrats are against stopping human trafficking, and then they hold up an important nomination out of spite because denmocrats did just what they tried to make them do, and what do you comment on? A few people who claim racism? Really, that is the important part of all this to you?

For the record, I doubt race was a motivating factor in this for republicans. It is just generally being a douche like normal that is the motivation, and screwing people over in order to try and score political points.

Actually I wouldn't call it a poison pill. Just a distasteful pill to Democrats apparently. The Fed's stance on providing funds for abortion has been well established LONG before this bill. And that stance is that its a no go. Democrats know this. If they use this as a reason to not vote the bill in then its a very weak excuse and could hurt them.

As to the charges of racism, I think they're bogus. And I must say that I have NEVER seen a more divided federal government since I started paying attention to politics and crap like this just makes that divide even wider. If I were in Obama's shoes I'd be demanding that Durbin apologize also.

Also, I think passing a bill on human trafficking is far more important than appointing some judge.
 
Damn it man, a defender of black justice! Hell no, we can't have that in America. Lets get back to the good ole days!

Lee Atwater:You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger"—that hurts you, backfires.

Equal Justice for all, not "justice" by race.
 
Sometimes minorities need a little extra, they tend to be easily oppressed.

You do understand that the justice system is about finding criminals, bringing them to court and punishing them for crimes when guilty, right?

Why they became criminals is not the job of Justice. What race they are is not supposed to be a consideration when meting out justice. If a greater percentage of a race end up in prison for committing crimes, it is not the Justice Departments job to give a damn, the only time they should consider such things is when accusations are made against a member of their department, period.

Bringing accusations against police departments because they don't have the "proper" racial mix, stepping into local investigations to promote racial "equality", or spending millions on BS investigations to bring "civil rights violations" against people when found innocent of a crime by a jury of their peers is not their job.
 
Equal Justice for all, not "justice" by race.

Of course equal justice for all. But there was a time in this country when the black race received none. In the course of time they have fought for and gained much justice, but there's still discrimination against them, and they need additional attention, not additional favor.
 
You do understand that the justice system is about finding criminals, bringing them to court and punishing them for crimes when guilty, right?

Why they became criminals is not the job of Justice. What race they are is not supposed to be a consideration when meting out justice. If a greater percentage of a race end up in prison for committing crimes, it is not the Justice Departments job to give a damn, the only time they should consider such things is when accusations are made against a member of their department, period.

Bringing accusations against police departments because they don't have the "proper" racial mix, stepping into local investigations to promote racial "equality", or spending millions on BS investigations to bring "civil rights violations" against people when found innocent of a crime by a jury of their peers is not their job.

I'm not talking about the justice system. I'm talking about an ugly practice by white people, that was essentially institutionalized. All (with few exceptions) of overt racism has been eliminated, but it still festers in dark places, and as minorities, and due to the fact that they began the American experience in chains, I've no problem with giving racism the extra attention it deserves.
 
The Dumbos are too stupid to realize that THEY are the ones blocking her confirmation vote.

As long as they complain about the Abortion thing in the Human Trafficking bill, her vote is on the backburner.
 
Back
Top Bottom