• 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 think I heard Sharpton excuse this as Reid speculating how Obama would play amongst the electorate. If that is what Reid was doing then he was displaying his opinion of an America ingrained in racism.

If that interpretation is correct, then, yes, I'll concede that it's not a racist remark. I would find it cynical and sad, but, I guess that just makes Reid a politician. *sigh*

...yeah, possibly. But then why do we refuse to make the same cosideration for O'Reilly's comment (which I happened to have heard when it took place). In context, he was also referring to a common stereotypical societal opinion. Or, how about Lott's comment regarding Strom Thurmond? In context Lott was acknowledging Thurmond's legislative strengths while foolishly ignoring his racist past. But in that case, for the Left, the details didn't matter.

Assuming Sharpton is correct, there is no issue here. Just as there shouldn't be for Lott and O'Reilly. What is interesting is how many of us play the double standard when something like this happens.

It's been awhile, but, I just went back and listened to the O'Reilly quote again, and I still hear him including himself in that group of racists:

I couldn't get over the fact that there was no difference between Sylvia's restaurant and any other restaurant in New York City. I mean, it was exactly the same, even though it's run by blacks, primarily black patronship.

The way the story came up was an assertion that people need to just "get over" the effects of racism, which I find problematic in itself. I can't speak for anyone else, but, these are the reasons I found O'Reilly's remarks objectionable.

I thought that the hullaballoo over Lott's remarks was a bit silly, however.
 
I'm sorry for giving you a compliment. I just lost my head. It won't happen again. :lol:

And again, you are back to attacking the messenger instead of the message.
 
Had to laugh at Liz Cheney - again - when, on ABC's 'This Week', she tried to advance the ridiculous accusation of racist comment by Reid.

Even uber conservative George Will had to admonish her of her idiocy. She stammered and stuttered, amazed that a fellow con would speak to her in such a way...LOL

Does anyone, besides the 'liberal media', take her seriously?
 
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkqwspFr3D8"]YouTube- Barack Obama Speaks So Well (Audio)[/ame]
 
Had to laugh at Liz Cheney - again - when, on ABC's 'This Week', she tried to advance the ridiculous accusation of racist comment by Reid.

Even uber conservative George Will had to admonish her of her idiocy. She stammered and stuttered, amazed that a fellow con would speak to her in such a way...LOL

Does anyone, besides the 'liberal media', take her seriously?

You mean like when liberals accused Trent Lott of Racism for being nice to Strom Thurmond on his birthday?

Karma's a bitch isn't it?
 
People are allowed to be idiots in private, and people should have some reasonable assumption that what they say will be private. To me the problem is not that Reid made a stupid comment, but that we even know about it. Politicians do deserve private time, just like any one else.
Yeah, well he still spoke his heart.
 
Ah, Zim... this is all great information. I, however, reject that the Democrats who voted against all the civil rights stuff were liberals in any way shape or form. All of the Democrat policies that you mention are, ideologically, conservative by today's standards. This is why your particular argument never holds any water. You are talking about folks who are resistant to change, folks who were fairly strict constitutional constructionists, folks who jumped to the Republican party (after 1964) after many of their positions were defeated. You are confusing political party with political ideology.

And one other point. Roosevelt interning Japanese-Americans during WWII was absolutely wrong, but was not Democrat policy. It was policy of the time. If a Republican had been President, same thing would have happened.

Did you notice the voting percentages inserted?

It holds water.

Did you notice Republicans have been central to EVERY race measure passed?

It holds water.

.
 
I agree with our conservative friends; it definitely was a foolish and shameful thing to say, as were Biden's ignorant racial comments.

I do find it odd, however, that no conservatives on this board have condemned similar foolish and shameful race-related comments made by RNC Chairman Michael Steele.




Or, perhaps it's not odd at all. ;)


Added for emphasis:

I find it odd that you didn't jump into this thread and call Reid a "house Cracker" or a "racist honkey" or some other such slur instead of just "foolish and shameful".

Or perhaps, not odd at all. ;)

You were saying something about partisanizing stuff?
 
People are allowed to be idiots in private, and people should have some reasonable assumption that what they say will be private. To me the problem is not that Reid made a stupid comment, but that we even know about it. Politicians do deserve private time, just like any one else.
Oh come on.

He was talking to REPORTERS.
 
To me this is a "big deal" situation. Was it stupid and insensitive? Sure. Are there bigger things to worry about? Definitely.

If it was intentionally racist it'd be a different story, but I don't get overly sensitive about inadvertent stupidity.
 
And again, you are back to attacking the messenger instead of the message.

That is only providing the reader understands the message. For the life of me, I am at a loss as to what your message is.
 
Oh come on.

He was talking to REPORTERS.

I can find no reference to reporters in the story. Nor do we know if he was talking on the record, or just chatting.
 
That is only providing the reader understands the message. For the life of me, I am at a loss as to what your message is.

If saying that politicians deserve some privacy is too complex a message for you, I am sorry.
 
People are allowed to be idiots in private, and people should have some reasonable assumption that what they say will be private. To me the problem is not that Reid made a stupid comment, but that we even know about it. Politicians do deserve private time, just like any one else.

Why didn't you say that in the first place? :confused:

You where saying?
 
Screw that. They chose their profession, and all the drawbacks that come with it.

My problem is that if you subject that kind of added pressure to the job, the only ones who will want it are ones whos drive solely for power overrides their drive for a seminormal life. In other words, we end up with a lot less of the type of politician we want.
 
My problem is that if you subject that kind of added pressure to the job, the only ones who will want it are ones whos drive solely for power overrides their drive for a seminormal life. In other words, we end up with a lot less of the type of politician we want.

See, I'm of the belief that we want intelligent people in office, so those who can't handle the pressures and end up doing stupid **** like this are the ones we want weeded out.
 
texmaster said:
You mean like when liberals accused Trent Lott of Racism for being nice to Strom Thurmond on his birthday?

Uh no, I was talking about Liz Cheney and George Will basically telling her to shut up, you're stupid, this morning on ABC's 'This Week'...:lol:

What are you blathering about?
 
Back
Top Bottom