Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Rhymin' and Stealin'
Atlantic political reporter Marc Ambinder
furrowed his brow at the phrasing in a McCain radio ad: It
sounded a lot like a racial appeal. What
happened next is instructive:
Remember yesterday's post about an ad alleging Obama would "rob" seniors? Here's the spot, recut. No longer does it include that verb.
This brings to mind a comment from Quin Hillyer, a conservative reporter who's had it up to here already with the New Republic's Chris Orr and his assertions that the McCain campaign is closing out the election with coded racial appeals.
I swear, what is WRONG with these lefties who see EVERYTHING through the prism of race?!? For the record, and especially for people like Orr who seem too dim to get it unless it is repeated multiple times: Culture and race are not one and the same. Culture and race are not one and the same. Criticisms of a black man for being radical have nothing to do with him being black. Criticisms of a black man for being radical have nothing to do with him being black. Conservatives do not dislike candidates just because they are "dark-skinned [men] with a foreign-sounding name." Conservatives do not dislike candidates just because they are "dark-skinned [men] with a foreign-sounding name."
I think it's a little more complex than that. Are there traditional Democratic voters who will vote against Obama explicitly because of his race? Yes. Same thing with some independents who will vote Democratic on the rest of the ballot. But Obama is winning, and part of the reason is that it's really hard in an increasingly post-racial America to run against a black candidate and use the arguments you'd deploy against a white candidate. Anti-liberal code words become "racist" code words. Making the candidate look menacing in your attack ads, a fairly conventional tactic in other races, is out of bounds. (Look what's happening in a Minnesota race between a white Republican and an Indian-American Democrat.)
The risk of running an attack that the media and intelligentsia view as racist is extremely high. This isn't because it motivates black voters against you. It's because, as Republicans have known as they drafted black candidates like Michael Steele or Ken Blackwell, there's a preponderance of white voters who don't want to appear racist. And there's always the hope that the Democrats, outraged by the audacity of a black Republican, will make some stupid insult and draw a backlash. It didn't work the way they hoped (I think it jumped the shark with the manufactured "lipstick on a pig" outrage) but why do you think Team McCain blustered so much about "sexism" against Sarah Palin?
It's hard to prove this stuff, but I think the best data point is this: Where's the Jeremiah Wright TV ad? If McCain doesn't run one on Friday, Saturday, Sunday or Monday, he's punted on the most explosive racial problem Obama ever had. Why would he do that unless he's convinced that the backlash would be greater than the impact on Obama?
Guy Montag|10.30.08 @ 11:26AM|#
In addition to all of that, it is a good thing that your candidate picked Sen. Biden as his VP candidate, because Sen. Biden would never make the mistake of saying anything overtly racist, or even implied.
Elemenope|10.30.08 @ 11:27AM|#
But Obama is winning, and part of the reason is that it's
really hard in an increasingly post-racial America to run against a
black candidate and use the arguments you'd deploy against a white
candidate. Anti-liberal code words become "racist" code words.
Making the candidate look menacing in your attack ads, a fairly
conventional tactic in other races, is out of bounds.
So perhaps, and I'm just spit-balling here, but perhaps this means
that candidates ought to stop using code words (of any sort) and
making their opponent look menacing?
Perhaps, and now I know I'm talking crazy, they should talk about
their policy, governing strategy, and temperamental differences
instead.
|10.30.08 @ 11:27AM|#
Criticisms of a black man for being radical have nothing to
do with him being black.
Wouldn't that depend on how the criticisms of phrased?
One could complain about Hillary Clinton's political style and
capacity for making enemies by saying she is unpleasant, stubborn,
quick to anger, and dismissive.
Or one could say she is shrewish, shrill, hysterical, and
bitchy.
BDB|10.30.08 @ 11:30AM|#
Joe, you realize you've just baited every Republican here into moaning about how sexist the media has been towards Palin, don't you?
Elemenope|10.30.08 @ 11:31AM|#
Joe, you realize you've just baited every Republican here
into moaning about how sexist the media has been towards Palin,
don't you?
IT'S A TRAP!!!
|10.30.08 @ 11:32AM|#
Gee, no wonder we have been electing so many black people to
high office!
These blacks sure are lucky.
Naga Sadow|10.30.08 @ 11:33AM|#
Joe,
There is some serious irony in that your post is right next to the
ad that says "Blacks cannot be racist.
|10.30.08 @ 11:34AM|#
Here's the dog that's not barking:
Where are the ads that McCain won't run because he's 'too
honorable," that the pro-republican independent expenditure
campaigns were supposed to be ginning up? The fear of GOPers
revving up Swift Boatish 527s was what Obama used as his reason for
refusing government financing for his general election campaign,
right?
Kevin
|10.30.08 @ 11:35AM|#
Maybe people wouldn't have thought the word "rob" was racist if the rest of McCain's ads were appealing to the worst sentiments of Americans.
Kaiser|10.30.08 @ 11:38AM|#
"Remember yesterday's post about an ad alleging Obama would
"rob" seniors? Here's the spot, recut. No longer does it include
that verb."
I swear I hate liberals....I am not a fan of either side of the
fence but I have an extreme disgust for liberals. They are the
least liberal minded people I know. All this talk of racism and the
so called "Bradley effect" which I have never believed in. They are
just words, now, if the ad has said "Obama is a nigger and he is
going to rob you." OK I would understand the racist out cries.
Also, isn't the assumption that using the term "rob" is racist,
racist in itself? Is that not assuming that a majority of blacks
are criminals therefore by using a term than involves criminal
activity MUST have racial implications?
Guy Montag|10.30.08 @ 11:39AM|#
Reinmoose,
Let me see if I can track the old Leftoid 'thought' process I used
to practice.
If you say a Black fellow is going to "rob" someone, that is racist
because the Black fellow is rellay engaged in "economic juistace"
and it is that white honkey bastard over there who robbed everybody
in the first place.
shecky|10.30.08 @ 11:42AM|#
I swear I hate liberals....I am not a fan of either side of
the fence but I have an extreme disgust for liberals. They are the
least liberal minded people I know.
I Mark Ambinder a liberal?
|10.30.08 @ 11:43AM|#
Guy -
I don't think so, no.
I think it was seen as racist because they were creating imagery of
a black man robbing old ladies, which is seen as exploiting a
sterotype. It's seen as racist because it's engineered (assumption)
to stir racial images, sterotypes, and associated fears.
What my statement was about is that maybe people would have given
the McCain campaign the benefit of the doubt (maybe not made the
assumption above) had he not exploited those sentiments
earlier.
|10.30.08 @ 11:46AM|#
IT'S A TRAP!!!
Admiral Ackbar is a secret Muslim, just like Obama! That's
the trap!!!
|10.30.08 @ 11:46AM|#
Like, as a known libertarian amongst my friends, I don't think if I said Obama was going to "steal from rich people to give it to greedy lazy people" (which I wouldn't, but just for sake of argument), I don't think my liberal friends would go "*GASP* I can NOT believe you just implied that all black men STEAL!"
Kaiser|10.30.08 @ 11:46AM|#
"Is Mark Ambinder a liberal?"
To be honest I have no idea, I forgot to preface my post with that.
I just assumed anyone who saw that ad and though the term "rob" was
clearly racist was a liberal.
|10.30.08 @ 11:50AM|#
The Republican Party in some southern state sent out a mailer
that was supposed to be a "Barack Obama Food Stamp Dollar,"
complete with pictures of fried chicken, Kool-Aid, and
watermelon.
Terrible, racist liberal that I am, I actually didn't pretend not
to understand what they were doing.
Elemenope|10.30.08 @ 11:52AM|#
Admiral Ackbar is a secret Muslim, just like Obama! That's
the trap!!!
At least he wasn't born in the same country as McCain, like MANUEL
NORIEGA!!!
|10.30.08 @ 11:53AM|#
What are the odds that future criticisms of President Obama's policies will, in some quarters are least, be labelled racist?
SIV|10.30.08 @ 11:53AM|#
The Republican Party in some southern state sent out a
mailer that was supposed to be a "Barack Obama Food Stamp Dollar,"
complete with pictures of fried chicken, Kool-Aid, and
watermelon.
cite
|10.30.08 @ 11:54AM|#
Charlie: Is it racist if we don't eat this guy?
Dee: Well, shit, Charlie. Now it is!
Charlie: I'm sorry, Dee! I just-the white guy over here looks
better to me for some reason.
Dee: He looks so much better, doesn't he? What is that?
Charlie: I don't-you know what it is? I-I generally, I don't eat
dark meat.
Dee: No, I prefer the light meat. I always have.
Charlie: Yeah, so it's not that guy.
Dee: No, it has nothing to do with that. It's-the problem is I'm
gonna have a really hard time if we're both cannibals and
we're racists...
Charlie: We're not, Dee. Cannibalism? Racism, Dee? That's-that's
not for us. You know, those are the decisions that are best left to
the suits at Washington, OK? We're just here to eat some dude.
shecky|10.30.08 @ 11:54AM|#
Do they employ any non-liberals at The Atlantic?
Liberal media conspiracy, yes.
Douthat and Ambinder strike me as the conservatives, since Sullivan
moved to Democratic support a few years ago. Though he still
fancies himself a Tory style conservative. I could be wrong about
Ambinder, though.
But does it even matter? The idea that the McCain ad may have
changed to be possibly less offensive would indicate that there may
be a few sensitive new age guys working for the GOP, regardless who
pointed out the dog whistle.
|10.30.08 @ 11:55AM|#
I wonder if race is the reason that I have yet to see a decent parody of Obama.
|10.30.08 @ 11:56AM|#
Here you go, SIV.
http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_S_buck16.3d67d4a.html
Sorry I forgot to mention the ribs.
So, creech, what are the odds that future criticisms of President
Obama's policies will, from some quarters, incorporate racism, as
the above mailer?
Kaiser|10.30.08 @ 11:57AM|#
"What are the odds that future criticisms of President Obama's
policies will, in some quarters are least, be labelled
racist?"
They already are. Even Bill Maher the other night on his show, Real
Time, was talking about it. He was saying that an Obama presidency
was going to suck for comedians because it was so hard to make fun
of him. He doesn't fit the typical stereotypes (fat, lazy, stupid
etc) and the fact that he is black makes it even worse. Because
liberals where so afraid to laugh at anything that has something to
do with race for fear of being "racist." As Bill put it, "Just
because I am making fun of George Bush, doesn't mean I am making
fun of all....retarded people."
Guy Montag|10.30.08 @ 11:58AM|#
What are the odds that future criticisms of President
Obama's policies will, in some quarters are least, be labelled
racist?
100% for your suspicion. Those quarters will be almost every major
news outlet in the Western world.
|10.30.08 @ 12:00PM|#
"So, creech, what are the odds that future criticisms of
President Obama's policies will, from some quarters, incorporate
racism, as the above mailer?"
If Obama wins all criticism of him or his policies will be branded
by the media and his supporters as racist. Any dip in his approval
ratings will be interpreted as a return to the racist bad old days.
The term "racist code word" will become a way to stop all criticism
of the President and the government in general.
Geotpf|10.30.08 @ 12:00PM|#
There are some things that, in fact, you can say about a white
guy that you probably don't want to say about a black guy. And yes,
that might be being overly sensitive, although it is in the
attacker's best interests to phrase it in a way that
can't be construed racially, even if that wasn't
the intent.
And then there are things like joe's example that really are
racist.
Guy Montag|10.30.08 @ 12:01PM|#
When is that tape of Sen. Obama toasting the mouthpiece of the PLO, from around seven years ago or so going to come out? Anybody here at reason worked for the LA Times since then who could shed some light on this issue?
|10.30.08 @ 12:02PM|#
The first time Obama wants to go to war and anyone objects it will be "will the American people be willing to follow a black President to war?" The rethoric writes itself.
Elemenope|10.30.08 @ 12:03PM|#
Original story reported here.
Since joe is lazy with the embedding links thing.
shecky|10.30.08 @ 12:03PM|#
It was in California.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-foodstamps17-2008oct17,0,2506591.story
Interesting thing about this was that the spoof food stamp was a
spoof itself of Republican racists, which didn't seem to register
on the folks who used it for the GOP flyer.
http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_S_gopwomen23.40e45d8.html
|10.30.08 @ 12:04PM|#
Guy,
I have been sending that story to hit and run of about a week now.
They won't touch it. It is an interesting story. It touches on the
election and the big media and the whole issue of how the big media
doesn't seem to want to go with interesting stories that would up
circulation sometimes(like the Edwards case). But they won't touch
it. Won't blog on it. I wonder why.
Ska|10.30.08 @ 12:04PM|#
They should have used the word swindle. White people swindle.
Hmmm....maybe it's too anti-semitic.
Priest and a rabbi walk down the street. The priest asks "Wanna
fuck those boys?"
The rabbi asks "Out of what?"
Kaiser|10.30.08 @ 12:07PM|#
Slightly OT:
While we are on the topic of racism and all, does anyone else see
this ad for "Afro-Romance" at the top of the page? This ad is
great, a site completely devoted to interracial love that has the
slogan (and this is my favorite part) "Where love is more than skin
deep"
|10.30.08 @ 12:08PM|#
Priest and a rabbi walk down the street. The priest asks
"Wanna fuck those boys?"
The rabbi asks "Out of what?"
A+
SIV|10.30.08 @ 12:09PM|#
The Republican Party in some southern state
joe,
That was in CALIFORNIA. Are you running for Miss
Teen South Carolina?
|10.30.08 @ 12:10PM|#
I guess all the Jesse Jackson impersonations I've seen on SNL
over the years were just figments of my imagination, because
everyone is afraid to impersonate a black politician.
I guess the coverage of the Khalidi story on Olberman and Maddow
last night was my imagination, too.
|10.30.08 @ 12:10PM|#
Priest and a rabbi walk down the street. The priest asks
"Wanna fuck those boys?"
The rabbi asks "Out of what?"
A+
Seconded.
|10.30.08 @ 12:11PM|#
When is that tape of Sen. Obama toasting the mouthpiece of
the PLO, from around seven years ago or so going to come out?
Anybody here at reason worked for the LA Times since then who could
shed some light on this issue?
You mean the one that the McCain chaired IRI funded?
BTW, the reason the tape's not being released is because the
reporter promised the source that he wouldn't release the tape. If
the reporter goes back on this, no source will share anything
confidential with the person. It's the whole idea of maintaining
reputation or you lose business.
|10.30.08 @ 12:11PM|#
See, I knew I could get you to read the link, SIV.
So. Anything to say? They're just criticizing him for being a
redistributionist, right? Legitimate policy criticisms can't be
racist, right?
SIV|10.30.08 @ 12:13PM|#
Liberal mindset:
Steal = Black
Obama fried chicken and watermelon food stamps= South
|10.30.08 @ 12:13PM|#
You mean the one that the McCain chaired IRI
funded?
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
The whole "democracy promotion in the Arab world" thing - you know,
which was allegedly the central plank of Republican foreign policy
for the past seven years - goes right out the window when the
chance comes to tie a Democrat to an Arab, eh?
shecky|10.30.08 @ 12:16PM|#
Does the McCain campaign really want the tape released? It provides more ammunition as a mystery, and likely a complete yawn if revealed.
Seward|10.30.08 @ 12:16PM|#
The irony of course is that the seniors who are on SSI are actually robing everyone else.
BDB|10.30.08 @ 12:18PM|#
The irony of course is that the seniors who are on SSI are actually robing everyone else.
This.
Geotpf|10.30.08 @ 12:20PM|#
Guy Montag | October 30, 2008, 12:01pm | #
When is that tape of Sen. Obama toasting the mouthpiece of the PLO,
from around seven years ago or so going to come out? Anybody here
at reason worked for the LA Times since then who could shed some
light on this issue?
You mean the guy that a Republican group that McCain was the head
of gave half a million dollars to? That guy?
|10.30.08 @ 12:21PM|#
Criticisms of a black man for being radical have nothing to
do with him being black.
But if that black man is clearly NOT a radical,then yes, it is not
illogical to assume that those criticisms are at some level
motivated by racism. No one calls McCain a radical, (and he's not a
radical), but he's certainly associated with many people, and
religious figures, just as far right of the mainstream as Wright
and Ayers are left of it.
|10.30.08 @ 12:22PM|#
Liberal mindset:
Steal = Black
So the theory is that the McCain campaign changed the ad because
they wanted to appeal to liberals. You know, those swing-voting
liberals they're going after in the last two weeks of the
campaign.
Face it, SIV. You're out of touch with the vast majority of
Americans. The McCain camp realized this was unfortunate
terminology that would play badly with the public, but I guess to
someone who thinks that ordinary Americans really like Sarah Palin,
John McCain's advertising team and the swing voters they don't want
to offend count as liberals, too.
|10.30.08 @ 12:27PM|#
Why would the source give the tape but say "don't release it"? That makes no sense. Further, the LA Times went back on its word to a source and released and incriminating tape of Arnold a couple of years ago. They didn't seem to concerned then. If this guy is so wonderful, the what is the big deal about releasing a tape of Obama toasting him?
Seward|10.30.08 @ 12:29PM|#
BDB,
Thanks.
joe,
All things being equal, being out of touch with the vast majority
of Americans is not by itself a bad thing.
|10.30.08 @ 12:30PM|#
John,
The LA Times isn't a monolith. Releasing or not releasing the tape
is the reporter's perogative. I'm guessing there were different
purposes. As to why not to release it, maybe the tape makes it easy
to identifier the leaker? I don't know. Why would the guy with the
Arnold tape not want it released? You didn't question that guy's
motives.
|10.30.08 @ 12:33PM|#
If the LA Times were in the tank as much as Guy, SIV and John think, why would they even mention the existence of the tape and describe what the tape's contents were?
|10.30.08 @ 12:35PM|#
Seward,
Heh. Indeed.
Didn't the IRI, chaired by John McCain, give Khalidi's group the
$million AFTER the going-away party took place?
BDB|10.30.08 @ 12:35PM|#
It is really, really pathetic how the Republicans are looking for the OneBigStory that will destroy Obama.
SIV|10.30.08 @ 12:36PM|#
joe,
Are you still trying to cover up your lie?
Or just your knee-jerk bigotry?
joe | October 30, 2008, 11:50am | #
The Republican Party in some southern state sent out a mailer that was supposed to be a "Barack Obama Food Stamp Dollar," complete with pictures of fried chicken, Kool-Aid, and watermelon.
Terrible, racist liberal that I am, I actually didn't pretend not to understand what they were doing.
|10.30.08 @ 12:38PM|#
You've got to love the AfroRomance.com ad popping up on this
page.
I love targeted advertising
Seward|10.30.08 @ 12:39PM|#
joe,
I have no idea who the IRI are or who Khalidi is.
BDB,
Well, the drunk driving story may have depressed Bush's numbers in
2000, so they may be pursuing that line (if that is indeed what
they are doing) in light of that history.
I really wish they would instead take Obama to task for his
economic proposals and discuss what is problematic about them.
Boston|10.30.08 @ 12:40PM|#
It is really, really pathetic how the Republicans are
looking for the OneBigStory that will destroy Obama.
Almost as pathetic as KJLo's constant poll cherry picking with a
"we're still in this guys...right...guys...anybody here?"
Almost
BDB|10.30.08 @ 12:41PM|#
Seward--
I agree, and do it in a way that's not an insult to people's
intelligence (Joe the Plumber, Tito the Builder, Sonic the
Hedgehog!)
|10.30.08 @ 12:42PM|#
SIV, your tears are so yummy and sweet.
So, still nothing say about your assertion that Democrats are
imagining racism?
I didn't think so. Better to throw out some chaff about THE REAL
BIGOTS because I got the state wrong.
BDB|10.30.08 @ 12:42PM|#
Boston--
Look at the archives. In 2006 K-LO was convinced that Santorum was
going to pull an upset, right up to the Monday before the
election.
He got crushed.
"There are no Americans in Baghdad..."
SIV|10.30.08 @ 12:44PM|#
The McCain camp realized this was unfortunate terminology
that would play badly with the public
The risk of running an attack that the media and intelligentsia
view as racist is extremely high.
More liberal mindset:
Public="Media and intelligentsia"
How very democratic of them.
Seward|10.30.08 @ 12:44PM|#
BDB,
If they went down fighting for limited government that would be a
pretty honorable way to finish.
|10.30.08 @ 12:44PM|#
I think bringing up "food stamps" to make the point about
redistribution was especially cute.
They're going to rob people like Joe the Plumber to pay for food
stamps.
BDB|10.30.08 @ 12:45PM|#
But they didn't, they're going down fighting for ignorant populist B.S. and social conservatism.
|10.30.08 @ 12:45PM|#
Food stamps to buy fried chicken, ribs, and watermelon.
Oh, and make sure you put a picture of Obama right in the
middle.
anarch|10.30.08 @ 12:47PM|#
the seniors who are on SSI are actually robing everyone else.
Inducting everyone else into the Klan? Not me they're not, no
Siree!
Anyway, these are dark
times.
Can I say "dark times" here?
Happy Jack|10.30.08 @ 12:48PM|#
When is that tape of Sen. Obama toasting the mouthpiece of
the PLO
Do you have a link to a newspaper article where he is identified as
the spokesman for the PLO?
BDB|10.30.08 @ 12:51PM|#
Just for fun, let's reacap all the BigStories that were supposed
to destroy Obama:
--Rev. Wright
--"Bitter"
--White Working Class Voters
--Rev. Wright Part II
--Birth certificate
--"Whitey" tape
--"Clebrity"
--Tire Gauge
--PUMAs
--Greek Columns
--Sarah Palin
--Lipstick on a Pig
--Bill Ayers
--"Spread the Wealth/Joe the Plumber
--Ashley Todd
--And now, PLO Spokesman tape
Did I miss anything?
SIV|10.30.08 @ 12:52PM|#
joe,
I didn't make that argument.I just called you out for....well what
was it? a lie or bigotry?
That is why the Republican mailers we receive in the south
associate the democrat Party candidates with Massachusetts.It works
better than France because it is so true.
Seward|10.30.08 @ 12:52PM|#
joe,
Isn't at least some of the justication for the Food Stamp program
that it will help American farmers?
|10.30.08 @ 12:55PM|#
joe, back to the original point: do you believe that the term
"rob" was a dog whistle?
I don't blame you for having disgust when dog whistlers deny that's
what they're doing. I'm just not convinced that's the case
here.
|10.30.08 @ 12:55PM|#
BDB, in all fairness, ALL of that + McCain is probably the only reason this election is as close as it is in the first place.
Some Guy|10.30.08 @ 12:55PM|#
It's hard to prove this stuff, but I think the best data
point is this: Where's the Jeremiah Wright TV ad? If McCain doesn't
run one on Friday, Saturday, Sunday or Monday, he's punted on the
most explosive racial problem Obama ever had. Why would he do that
unless he's convinced that the backlash would be greater than the
impact on Obama?
Because it has already convinced everyone it will convinced, and
because Obama has probably already created an ad about Palin's
crazy preacher issues that he can get on the air as soon as McCain
runs a Wright ad.
Seward|10.30.08 @ 12:56PM|#
BDB,
For better or worse, I suspect that if the Wright story had broken
prior to Super Tuesday it would have broken his campaign. Whether
that would have been a fair outcome I guess is up for debate.
Timing is everything.
|10.30.08 @ 12:56PM|#
Oh my goodness, what have we here?
SIV | October 16, 2008, 11:31pm | #
Joe the Plumber was known before the debate.
He was all over the 'net as Obama tipped his hand in answering his
question.Obama wasn't at his own house in Chicago or some tony
neighborhood in San Francisco or Manhattan. He was in a working
class subdivision of Toledo, Ohio and he tells some blue collar guy
in a dirty T-shirt asking about Obama's tax policy that he intends
to SPREAD HIS WEALTH AROUND. I'm not even gonna touch the racial
angle.
BDB | October 16, 2008, 11:33pm | #
There's a racial angle? WTF? On what planet?
BDB | October 16, 2008, 11:38pm | #
Srssly, there's a racial angle? O rly? REALLY? Cause I'm not seeing
it. Is this one of those "dog whistles" they talk about?
joe | October 16, 2008, 11:49pm | #
I'm always accused of being overly-sensitive about racial issues,
but it never occured to me that there was a racial angle.
SIV, you need to get yourself one of those fancy new bags. The ones
that keep the cats inside.
Elemenope | October 17, 2008, 12:40am | #
And what's this about a racial angle?
SIV | October 17, 2008, 1:00am | #
Welfare has a racial angle.
Obama in a presumably predominately white working class
neighborhood telling a potentially undecided working class swing
State voter he intends to spread the citizen's "wealth"
around.
Obama was using the codewords the wrong way.
Those darn Democrats, alway imagining a racial angle in
straighforward policy criticism! The Republicans would never do
that.
BDB|10.30.08 @ 12:57PM|#
TAO--
I don't think it's particularly close. But I can't prove a negative
(this race would not be this close without it), so you may be
right. But we will never know.
But I think when NC is turning blue and GA is a tossup on RCP,
that's pretty good for a Democrat.
BDB|10.30.08 @ 12:57PM|#
Seward, I agree. There's an element of luck that Obama has. Reagan kind of had it, too. Nothing sticks to him and the attacks all come out at the wrong time.
SIV|10.30.08 @ 12:59PM|#
re: Wright
Somebody in Hillary Clinton's campaign wasn't doing their oppo
research.If they were the Wright tape would have been released and
blamed on Republicans.
|10.30.08 @ 1:00PM|#
I know everyone thinks that all of the stories about Obama had
flamed out already, but if McCain's only shot in the campaign was
to be aggressively nasty from the start and just rip Obama to
shreds.
McCain was weak in this campaign.
BDB - sure, there's no proving it, but I can't help but think that
all of those things must have had SOME kind of impact.
FWIW, I stand by my assertion that Mitt Romney never should have
dropped out.
Abdul|10.30.08 @ 1:02PM|#
New McCain ad: Obama's here to eat watermelon and rob seniors,
and he's all out of watermelon.
Hey, why's the focus group hate this?
|10.30.08 @ 1:02PM|#
As an additional aside, the disappointment post-Obama honeymoon is going to be sweeet...there's nothing tastier than the tears of dumb-but-earnest undergrads and hipsters.
|10.30.08 @ 1:03PM|#
TAO,
I'd tend to think this was just poor word choice, because they
backtracked.
Look at poor, flailing SIV up there. If they were doing this on
purpose, they'd be pretending to be all huffy about the mean ol'
liberals "playing the race card," and go on and on about how
they're always being persecuted by the media.
SIV|10.30.08 @ 1:04PM|#
joe,
I bet Obama wishes he could take that one back too. When did he
last take a question from the friendly media,much less a real
voter?
|10.30.08 @ 1:05PM|#
What happens to race relations when people start to hate this
guy's guts like they did Carter? What happens if his Presidency is
a failure. I am sure people like Joe out of great concern for the
good of the country not drop the race card to deflect criticism.
Others I doubt will be so patriotic.
The danger of playing the racecard to deflect criticism or ordinary
political attack is that people may get tired of it after a while,
especially if Obama starts to get really unpopular. People will get
tired of being called racists and every political debate will
become a racial debate. In that environment, people might start to
really become racist. I agree that we are pretty close to a post
racial society these days. But, there is no gaurentee that we will
stay there. Telling one side that criticizing the other is racist
very long, is a pretty good way to ensure that we stop being a post
racial society.
BDB|10.30.08 @ 1:05PM|#
Yeah SIV, Joe the Plumber was so good that...uh...so good that McCain is in trouble in his home state!
SIV|10.30.08 @ 1:05PM|#
I know one thing, I am ready for this election to be
over.
I'd like to see it drag on longer than 2000.
|10.30.08 @ 1:06PM|#
SIV | October 30, 2008, 12:59pm | #
re: Wright
Somebody in Hillary Clinton's campaign wasn't doing their oppo
research.If they were the Wright tape would have been released and
blamed on Republicans.
Then talked about welfare, and whined like an old fanbelt if anyone
dared point out what they were doing.
|10.30.08 @ 1:07PM|#
Joe, Elemenope- Obama $10 food stamp-
Tempest in a teapot. The proverbial pimple on the penis of a
protozoa.
|10.30.08 @ 1:08PM|#
joe - so, the answer is "no, this wasn't intentional dog
whistling".
BDB - yeah, I've decided to be really positive about this election.
The GOP can take the licks it so richly deserves and liberals will
simultaneously be disappointed when Obama starts another war or
something.
Don't hate me, man; it's all I've got.
|10.30.08 @ 1:09PM|#
Joe-1:06
Kinda like the Dukakis campaign releasing the Biden attack video
and blaming the Gephardt campaign? Do you remember? Reminds me of
how sleazy the Brookline Bolzhevik was.
Seward|10.30.08 @ 1:09PM|#
BDB,
Well, there is a very outside chance that the polls are in fact
garbage. That's what that whole 95% confidence level is about. I
still Obama will win with a comfortable margin.
|10.30.08 @ 1:11PM|#
Yeah SIV, Joe the Plumber was so good that...uh...so good
that McCain is in trouble in his home state!
And Obama now has a double-digit lead on the question of who would
do a better job on taxes. Before Mr. Wurtzelbacher, they were
tied.
There are a lot of things to love about this campaign. The complete
and utter failure of the efforts to play what SIV calls a "racial
angle" is my favorite, though.
anarch, apologizing in advance|10.30.08 @ 1:15PM|#
But for all I know, someone here might enjoy this.
|10.30.08 @ 1:16PM|#
libertymike,
I'm not claiming the racist "policy criticism" in that mailer is
important, just illustrative.
TAO, right, that's my impression. Not deliberate, so much as
bungling.
libertymike @ 1:09:
I don't follow. How, exactly, is attributing a leak to someone else
like using codewords to make racist appeals?
Guy Montag|10.30.08 @ 1:19PM|#
Does the McCain campaign really want the tape released? It
provides more ammunition as a mystery, and likely a complete yawn
if revealed.
Idunno, I am not in the McCain campaign and I didn't vote for him.
Does not look like the LA Times takes their "marching orders" from
that campaign either. But I want it released just like it would
have been released if it was McCain or Palin toasting a KKK guy at
one of their rallies (Robert Byrd, David Duke, etc.)
Guy Montag|10.30.08 @ 1:21PM|#
And why don't I get the hottie Black chick dating ad!?!?!? I was
even asking about this the other day.
[kicks pebble]
|10.30.08 @ 1:22PM|#
Joe-
I was playing off of SIV's post that you quoted in your 1:06 post,
i.e., Hillary's campaign releasing the Wright video and blaming the
republicans.
SIV|10.30.08 @ 1:23PM|#
joe,
The post we are commenting on is about the success of playing a
"racial angle" in this campaign.
Obama is winning, and part of the reason is that it's really
hard in an increasingly post-racial America to run against a black
candidate and use the arguments you'd deploy against a white
candidate.
Kaiser|10.30.08 @ 1:25PM|#
Guy Montag:
"And why don't I get the hottie Black chick dating ad!?!?!? I was
even asking about this the other day.
[kicks pebble]"
Well the ad features a black man and a white chick, although I am
sure there are black chicks on the site. The hilariousness is in
the slogan: "Where love is more than skin deep." That slogan on a
site completely devoted to interracial couples? The irony is
amusing.
|10.30.08 @ 1:25PM|#
I think a lot of the "risk" involved in making a statement the
media might interpret as racist revolves entirely around the
candidate himself. McCain is vulnerable to such attacks because he
traffics in the ideology of the elites. Those are the people who
are most vulnerable to such attacks. The less you care in the first
place, the less effective such a tactic becomes. A candidate like
Jesee Ventura wouldn't have to temper his rhetoric at all. Palin
has made numerous comments that would normally illicit cries of
"racism" from the left but her disdain for cosmotarian culture
immunizes her from attack completely.
A cultural analogy to this would be Imus vs Stern. Imus courts the
elites, and they brought him down. Stern could care less about the
elites, and as such he is allowed to use the word "nigger" with
impunity and make as many blatantly racist jokes as he wants.
|10.30.08 @ 1:27PM|#
libertymike,
Ah, gotcha.
Guy sez: But I want it released just like it would have been
released if it was McCain or Palin toasting a KKK guy at one of
their rallies
John McCain authorized a $1 million grant to the equivalent of the
KKK?
Guy Montag|10.30.08 @ 1:27PM|#
Kaiser,
Ah, so I don't qualify for that site. I betcha using my real name
with the long vowel on the end will be pointless too.
Geotpf|10.30.08 @ 1:28PM|#
I get No on Prop 8 ads. I'll bet everybody with an IP traceable to California does.
|10.30.08 @ 1:30PM|#
SIV | October 30, 2008, 1:23pm | #
joe,
The post we are commenting on is about the success of playing a
"racial angle" in this campaign.
Hence, my glee at how miserably you are failing, and what it bodes
for the future.
anarch|10.30.08 @ 1:34PM|#
libertymike, but I'm white! Isn't that reason enough to be always apologizing?
|10.30.08 @ 1:37PM|#
No it doesn't Joe. The race baiters will never go away. They
have nothing better to do.
Even if you vote for Obama, you're still probably a racist,
according to Harvard law professor Charles Ogletree, in his remarks
at a recent panel discussion at my alma mater. Ogletree, Obama's
top advisor on race issues, explains that since Obama is
"biracial," his election won't prove that racism has receded. White
America won't vote for blacks, Ogletree argues, and Obama's
election is possible only because he's partly white. The ABA
Journal predicts that Ogletree, who has long advocated race-based
reparations, will be the Assistant Attorney General in charge of
the Civil Rights Division during the Obama administration.
Legal commentator Walter Olson notes that Ogletree has attracted
controversy over his association with Al Sharpton and history of
plagiarism.
http://www.openmarket.org/2008/10/29/youre-still-a-racist-obama-advisor-says/
Every criticism of Obama will be evidence of racism and failing
that, Obama is half white so even support of him is not evidence
that racism has ended.
Geotpf|10.30.08 @ 1:37PM|#
BDB | October 30, 2008, 12:57pm | #
Seward, I agree. There's an element of luck that Obama has. Reagan
kind of had it, too. Nothing sticks to him and the attacks all come
out at the wrong time.
Luck is a part of skill. Or, to phrase it another way, if one is
sufficiently skilled, one makes their own luck. Obama's campaign,
on a technical level, has been nearly perfect. Such a contrast to
the bunch of boobs who ran Kerry's campaign four years ago.
Kaiser|10.30.08 @ 1:43PM|#
"A cultural analogy to this would be Imus vs Stern. Imus courts
the elites, and they brought him down. Stern could care less about
the elites, and as such he is allowed to use the word "nigger" with
impunity and make as many blatantly racist jokes as he
wants."
Wasn't Imus a shock jock as well? I understand your point but we
shouldn't hold various people to different standards just because
of their lifestyle. Personally I think political correctness is a
joke, I haven't heard anything that has offended me in my lifetime.
Also didn't Imus say "nappy headed hos?" I don't see anything
racist about that statement quite frankly. (I could be wrong about
this because I don't know what Imus said exactly I am just going
off of memory here)
Also since when is it wrong to be offended? If we changed something
or made new laws/rules every time someone got offended this would
be one shitty place to live.
BDB|10.30.08 @ 1:44PM|#
I've already seen the Olgetree thing on every single blog.
Man, if the McCain campaign had as good control over their message
as Republican right wing bloggers have, they'd be winning.
Seward|10.30.08 @ 1:45PM|#
Geotpf,
Or, to phrase it another way, if one is sufficiently skilled,
one makes their own luck.
Since you are basically paraphrasing Machiavelli, I will just state
that Machiavelli argues that 'fortune' (to use his term) cannot not
always be mastered.
BDB|10.30.08 @ 1:47PM|#
Go to NRO Online, the Corner. The story started there, and once the Corner (or sometimes Drudge) starts a story it's parroted endlessly by every single Republican blog and blog commenter. I don't know how they do it, but they have incredible message control.
|10.30.08 @ 1:51PM|#
BDB - that's why I don't believe that the GOP is dead. When the GOP really believes in a candidate, they are SCARY disciplined.
|10.30.08 @ 1:53PM|#
John, you are so full of shit.
No it doesn't Joe. The race baiters will never go away. They
have nothing better to do.
Well, the racists will never completely go away, but watching the
race-baiters fail so miserably at trying to bring down Barack Obama
will probably dissuade such scab-picking in the future.
BTW, even your own spin on Ogletree's statements doesn't add up to
"even if you vote for Obama, you're still a racist."
You're such a pathetic hack. We have almost two solid years of
racist appeals hurled at Barack Obama, and the only racial dynamic
you can think or care about is whether anyone dares to talk about
that.
You know what I would do if I intended to hurl a whole bunch of
racist invective at a candidate, but was afraid of backlash? I'd
write about how terrible it is that people are so sensitive, and
say that baseless accusations of racism are destroying the
country.
THEN I'd send out the flyer with the black guy's face next to
pictures of ribs, watermelon, Kool Aid and fried chicken. That's
what I'd do.
|10.30.08 @ 1:55PM|#
I've already seen the Olgetree thing on every single
blog.
Every time I give John the benefit of the doubt that he's bringing
up an original point he's come up with by himself, I'm
disappointed.
Hack.
BDB|10.30.08 @ 1:55PM|#
TAO--
Yeah. Liberals can sometimes manage to be that disciplined (the
"seven houses" meme comes to mind) but conservatives are much
better at it.
Libertarians, outside of the Paultards (who is a Republican after
all), never manage it ever.
|10.30.08 @ 1:56PM|#
BTW, why did everybody stop talking about ACORN at exactly the
same time?
One day, the usual suspects are bellowing about it on every single
thread. The next, down the memory hole.
BDB|10.30.08 @ 1:56PM|#
I was thinking TallDave of Many Names would be the first to bring it up, or Guy Montag.
|10.30.08 @ 1:57PM|#
joe - probably a measure of "stickiness"; if the talking point doesn't stick, the Machine drops it and tries another.
BDB|10.30.08 @ 2:00PM|#
Anyone want to hazard to guess what the Machine Talking Point will be the day after the election?
|10.30.08 @ 2:01PM|#
BDB - no talking points post-election. The only time the
discipline applies is election years. After that, there's going to
be a lot of infighting.
I'm seriously considering attending CPAC this year just to see what
a fiasco it's going to be.
Look for united talking points against Obama around March or
so.
Just Plain Brian|10.30.08 @ 2:05PM|#
A cultural analogy to this would be Imus vs Stern. Imus courts the elites, and they brought him down. Stern could care less about the elites, and as such he is allowed to use the word "nigger" with impunity and make as many blatantly racist jokes as he wants.
Bad analogy, there's a world of difference between Stern and Imus -
when Stern would get angry at Robin Quivers on the air, he might
yell at her. When Imus would get angry at Robin Quivers on the air
(which happened sometimes when they both worked at WNBC), he'd yell
racial slurs at her.
Stern gets away with jokes because it's clear there's no hate
behind them. It's like the difference between "Blazing Saddles" and
blackface minstrel shows.
Ravac|10.30.08 @ 2:09PM|#
One could complain about Hillary Clinton's political style
and capacity for making enemies by saying she is unpleasant,
stubborn, quick to anger, and dismissive.
Or one could say she is shrewish, shrill, hysterical, and
bitchy.
Isn't that simply reframing? ;-)
|10.30.08 @ 2:10PM|#
Ogletree: Person that no one heard of until right wing websites
promoted him.
Can't you find anyone that says anything idiotic? Is the McCain
campaign racist because of the Obama bucks? Do they take the blame
for equating Obama to Hitler?
BDB - that's why I don't believe that the GOP is dead. When the
GOP really believes in a candidate, they are SCARY
disciplined.
That's why I don't buy the whole "media is in the tank for
Democrats" thing. Compare the message discipline of Fox News with
that of conservative outlets and it's word for word the same.
Whereas Mother Jones and MSNBC (with the exception of Maddow and
Olberman) are all over the map comparitively.
|10.30.08 @ 2:12PM|#
Does anyone want to stake their reputation on the theory that John accurately reported the substance of Ogletree's remarks?
BDB|10.30.08 @ 2:12PM|#
By Monday they're gonna be saying Obama is for reparations, or that Robert Mugabe is his father.
|10.30.08 @ 2:14PM|#
no talking points post-election. The only time the
discipline applies is election years. After that, there's going to
be a lot of infighting.
I disagree. The GOP was very disciplined for pretty much the entire
Bush administration. Remember when every White House member,
Republican politician and conservative commentator would use the
exact same phrase to describe a situation and cover it the same way
(esp. during Iraq and after 9-11). I think that was true up until
Rush said that he was through carrying water for the GOP. That was
the signal for everyone to wait until the general election to get
back on talking points because Bush's number were so far in the
toilet.
|10.30.08 @ 2:15PM|#
"Well, the racists will never completely go away, but watching
the race-baiters fail so miserably at trying to bring down Barack
Obama will probably dissuade such scab-picking in the
future."
And when he does go down it will be because the race baiters
finally succeeded won't it Joe? Every attack on the guy is
dismissed as racist. Socialism is just code word for black and so
forth. When his popularity does fall, like every President's does
or worse yet if he is elected but then gets kicked out of office in
2012, it will be because the race baiters finally won won't it Joe?
Essentially, anything short of unadulterated love for Obama will be
played as a return to America's racist past. People like you will
ensure that any positive effect on race relations an Obama election
results in will quickly be erased. You are going to use the "youre
just racist" stick until it finally breaks and the country at large
is going to be a lot worse off for it.
You think people are bitter about race now. Wait until they start
selling the myth that things were once better when Obama was
President but the race baiters took it away. Yeah, that will
produce a lot of racial harmony.
|10.30.08 @ 2:16PM|#
Actually joe, he accurately copy and pasted Hans Bader, sans
quotes. This was also quoted in the Corner.
Bader:
Even if you vote for Obama, you're still probably a racist, according to Harvard law professor Charles Ogletree, in his remarks at a recent panel discussion at my alma mater. Ogletree, Obama's top advisor on race issues, explains that since Obama is "biracial," his election won't prove that racism has receded. White America won't vote for blacks, Ogletree argues, and Obama's election is possible only because he's partly white. The ABA Journal predicts that Ogletree, who has long advocated race-based reparations, will be the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Civil Rights Division during the Obama administration.
Legal commentator Walter Olson notes that Ogletree has attracted controversy over his association with Al Sharpton and history of plagiarism.
John:
Even if you vote for Obama, you're still probably a racist, according to Harvard law professor Charles Ogletree, in his remarks at a recent panel discussion at my alma mater. Ogletree, Obama's top advisor on race issues, explains that since Obama is "biracial," his election won't prove that racism has receded. White America won't vote for blacks, Ogletree argues, and Obama's election is possible only because he's partly white. The ABA Journal predicts that Ogletree, who has long advocated race-based reparations, will be the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Civil Rights Division during the Obama administration.
Legal commentator Walter Olson notes that Ogletree has attracted controversy over his association with Al Sharpton and history of plagiarism.
|10.30.08 @ 2:17PM|#
Mo - I agree, and I think after the election (when McCain loses), Rush is going to go nuts again about the GOP for the months running up to the inauguration.
BDB|10.30.08 @ 2:19PM|#
Man, they got all the GOP bug-a-boos there.
Ivy League Academic--Check!
Reparations--Check!
Al Sharpton--Check!
A "real racist"--Check!
|10.30.08 @ 2:25PM|#
http://www.openmarket.org/2008/10/29/youre-still-a-racist-obama-advisor-says/
It is from openmarket.org. I pasted the link. Mo are you and Joe
retarded or something? I never claimed it was my language, thus the
link.
Seward|10.30.08 @ 2:28PM|#
BDB,
I am going to push back a tiny bit and note that what the majority
of people hang on when they decide to vote for isn't terribly
different (from the standpoint of whether it deals with policy
proposals, philosophy, etc.) than the stuff shouted out about
ACORN, etc. Call me cynical I guess.
|10.30.08 @ 2:28PM|#
Really, has Rev. Wright said anything that hasn't been said at most Libertarian or Ron Paul meetings? Except, of course, the stuff that was in defense of the black community.
|10.30.08 @ 2:33PM|#
On a more hilarious note, 3 out of 4 white supremacist leaders,
interviewed by Esquire, are supporting Obama (including a guy
that was on the Geraldo show where his nose was broken. The black
supremacist they interviewed is voting for McCain. This article is
full of win, especially the "Likes" and "Dislikes".
John,
Most people attempt to distinguish quotes from their own word by
putting quotation marks, italicizing of blockquoting it off. Rather
than mixing it into your own commentary with a link at the end of a
comment. As a lawyer, you should know that.
|10.30.08 @ 2:34PM|#
Criticisms of a black man for being radical have nothing to do with him being black.
Wouldn't that depend on how the criticisms of phrased?
The PC police would lose their favorite pastime, finding racism,
sexism, looksism, and specieism in every public utterance. We'll
just run it past the ladies at Feministing or the folks at the
NAACP to get the all clear.
One could complain about Hillary Clinton's political style and capacity for making enemies by saying she is unpleasant, stubborn, quick to anger, and dismissive.
Or one could say she is shrewish, shrill, hysterical, and bitchy.
Hillary is shrewish, shrill, hysterical and bitchy. All
words commonly applied to males as well. But if you use them to
denigrate a woman, you are sexist. Yeah, they are more insulting,
clearer and more effective at conveying the impression you wish to
than using "unpleasant, stubborn, quick to anger, and dismissive".
Isn't that the fuckin' point?
America is turning into land of easily feelings bruised
pussies.
gerbils|10.30.08 @ 2:37PM|#
I get it now! John and joe are the same person!
It makes too much sense to be false, how else could they have such
synchronious disagreements.
Fess up John/joe I know you are one!
Elemenope|10.30.08 @ 2:38PM|#
Fess up John/joe, I know you are one!
If you called them Janus, you could preserve the "J" theme.
;)
Kaiser|10.30.08 @ 2:39PM|#
"America is turning into land of easily feelings bruised
pussies."
I couldn't agree more. Unfortunately in combination with the PC
police and people who are part of some minority playing the
"minority card" every time something doesn't go their way we are
just in store for much more of it in the future.
|10.30.08 @ 2:40PM|#
What are the odds that future criticisms of President
Obama's policies will, in some quarters are least, be labelled
racist?
A gazillion squared to one.
BDB|10.30.08 @ 2:42PM|#
That Esquire article is laugh out loud funny. Just when I think I have America all figured out, I read something like that...
Elemenope|10.30.08 @ 2:43PM|#
Hillary is shrewish, shrill, hysterical and bitchy. All
words commonly applied to males as well.
Only by people who have no awareness of (or don't care) what the
origins of those words are or the subtexts that they carry from
those origins. I am of the school of thought that synonymous words
differ in meaning slightly so as to be able to accurately and
effectively convey shades of meaning. That purpose is ruined when
people use words without being cognizant of those gradations.
|10.30.08 @ 2:43PM|#
So, creech, what are the odds that future criticisms of
President Obama's policies will, from some quarters, incorporate
racism, as the above mailer?
Again, A gazillion squared to one.
Guy Montag|10.30.08 @ 2:45PM|#
America is turning into land of easily feelings bruised
pussies.
Yea, especially the ones who whine about the price of some cheap
steak at Giant going up $0.05/lb. and equating that to the massive
middle class starving to death.
Just go shop at The Wal*Mart, or eat out more. Jeesh!
|10.30.08 @ 2:46PM|#
But Obama is winning, and part of the reason is that it's
really hard in an increasingly post-racial America to run against a
black candidate and use the arguments you'd deploy against a white
candidate.
It isn't post-racial when you can't use the exact same arguments
about a black candidate's political philosophy as you do against a
white candidate's political philosophy. At best, that's LESS
racial.
It'll be post-racial when people quit being so fucking thin-skinned
about race and laugh when someone says something that used to be
racially offensive, because it'll seem so silly to care about skin
melanine levels.
We're getting there in Hawaii -- the rest of the country seems to
need to do some serious catching up.
|10.30.08 @ 3:00PM|#
Ogletree, Obama's top advisor on race issues, explains that
since Obama is "biracial," his election won't prove that racism has
receded. White America won't vote for blacks, Ogletree argues, and
Obama's election is possible only because he's partly
white.
That's the reason he beat Alan Keyes? Keyes was too dark? I should
hve figgered that one out myself.
|10.30.08 @ 3:01PM|#
John, getting ready for his dirty work:
People like you will ensure that any positive effect on race
relations an Obama election results in will quickly be
erased.
You are a disgusting wretch of a human being.
|10.30.08 @ 3:02PM|#
I never claimed it was my language, thus the
link.
Oh, is that what a link means?
When you paste a link, it's the same thing as putting quotation
marks around something.
These kids with their texting - they're always making up new
conventions!
|10.30.08 @ 3:06PM|#
Fess up John/joe, I know you are one!
If you called them Janus, you could preserve the "J"
theme.
That was friggin' excellent.
|10.30.08 @ 3:06PM|#
Hillary is shrewish, shrill, hysterical and
bitchy.
Oh, I get it. It's not racist to say blah blah blah, because black
people really are blah blah blah.
Hillary has a number of qualities that could be described using any
number of words. Funny how all of the most common ones just happen
to be gender-specific, and/or derived from words for women.
All words commonly applied to males as well. I defy you to
find an example of a man being called shrewish.
There are none so blind as those who cannot see.
|10.30.08 @ 3:12PM|#
Only by people who have no awareness of (or don't care) what the
origins of those words are or the subtexts that they carry from
those origins. I am of the school of thought that synonymous words
differ in meaning slightly so as to be able to accurately and
effectively convey shades of meaning. That purpose is ruined when
people use words without being cognizant of those gradations.
The origins of words do not equal meanings of words. I look up
etymology whenever I consult a dictionary. To assert that
hysterical or shrill as it is used in present day American
English has gender connotation is preposterous.
It's what race and sex victimologist students do for their term
paper in huckstering 101.
ETJB|10.30.08 @ 3:27PM|#
I it always interesting when people talk "about race" -- in the
context of culture, economics, politics, crime, constitutionalism,
faith, media images, etc.
Do some people cry, "racism" (sexism, anti-Semitism, xenophobia,
homophobia, etc.) where it does not really exist or was not
intended? Yes.
Yet, who gets to be the final judge and jury over what a candidate
says is (explict or coded) racism?
I seen examples of -- what I see are racist or bigoted comments --
in the legal-political context from, basically decent and not so
decent, people from all walks of life.
I remember my shock and horror at the comments during the Jenna 6
(sic?) event where people on both sides where saying things that
were wildly mean and untruth, if not racist.
Or [for example] the case where some college sports stars were --
apparently -- falsely accused of rape. Plenty of deception and
meanness and racial, economic and sexual prejudice to go
around.
Or... when I walk into a local GOP office, to get yard signs for a
family member, and the locals are going on about how Obama is a
Muslim.
Or...people tell me, "Well I am not going to vote for the
Independent or minor party candidate, so I really do not want them
on the ballot or in the debates."
I think we (Democrats, Republicans and Independents) have a serious
problem with the tone and scope of political
discussion-debate-discourse.
Much of it goes back to lack of good, non-partisan civic education,
and, frankly, the artificial narrowing of the debate to two parties
or two (often sound byte polar opposite) views.
|10.30.08 @ 3:27PM|#
Hillary is shrewish, shrill, hysterical and bitchy.
Oh, I get it. It's not racist to say blah blah blah, because black people really are blah blah blah.
Did I say, infer, imply or somehow give any impression that
women are "shrewish, shrill, hysterical and bitch"y. No,
you dishonest fuck, I did not. If I call a Mexican lazy, maybe it's
because I'm convinced that particular Mexican is
lazy.
There are none so blind as those who cannot see.
A hallucination or delusion is seeing things that aren't there.
Your constant prattling about race and gender PC makes me sometimes
question why the fuck are you so intent on finding offense. Did you
get laid once by some lady who admired your "sensitivity" and
decided that tenderness and constant worrying about offending
others would work again?
Fuck every thin skinned professional victim on the planet. The
geezers who take offense at the age shots taken at McCain included.
Grow the fuck up!
Kaiser|10.30.08 @ 3:42PM|#
"A hallucination or delusion is seeing things that aren't there.
Your constant prattling about race and gender PC makes me sometimes
question why the fuck are you so intent on finding offense. Did you
get laid once by some lady who admired your "sensitivity" and
decided that tenderness and constant worrying about offending
others would work again?
Fuck every thin skinned professional victim on the planet. The
geezers who take offense at the age shots taken at McCain included.
Grow the fuck up!"
I completely agree. The problem is, as I pointed out above here,
people aren't willing to take responsibility for themselves. What I
mean by that is, every time something doesn't go their way, whether
it is because of a joke or a bad review at work etc, they play the
minority card. "Oh I am not getting paid as much as he is,
obviously it is because I am a woman." or "He called me lazy,
clearly it is because I am a mexican." etc etc you get the point.
Combine that with the ever growing popularity of being politically
correct and you get the current situation we are in. I think it
will only get worse.
|10.30.08 @ 3:50PM|#
Did I say, infer, imply or somehow give any impression that
women are "shrewish, shrill, hysterical and bitch"y.
No, you said it about Hillary Clinton.
If I call a Mexican lazy, maybe it's because I'm convinced that
particular Mexican is lazy. And your impression of whether any
particular Mexican is lazy can't be influenced by your opinion
about Mexicans as a whole? And if you only use the term lazy to
refer to Mexicans, as you and lots of other people only or
predominately use the terms "shrewish, hysterical, and bitchy" to
refer to women, you know what that means?
A hallucination or delusion is seeing things that aren't there.
Your constant prattling about race and gender PC makes me sometimes
question why the fuck are you so intent on finding offense. Did you
get laid once by some lady who admired your "sensitivity" and
decided that tenderness and constant worrying about offending
others would work again?
Yes, noticing and being offended by racism and sexism is a habit
best understood as a psychological problem.
|10.30.08 @ 5:04PM|#
Did I say, infer, imply or somehow give any impression that women are "shrewish, shrill, hysterical and bitchy".
No, you said it about Hillary Clinton.
Yet your original your reply was
Oh, I get it. It's not racist to say blah blah blah, because black people really are blah blah blah.
implying I somehow denigarted all women, which is why I called you
a dishonest fuck.
If I call a Mexican lazy, maybe it's because I'm convinced that particular Mexican is lazy.
And your impression of whether any particular Mexican is lazy can't be influenced by your opinion about Mexicans as a whole?
Nope. I judge people as individuals. Sometimes they fit the
stereotype. Not my fault for pointing it out.
And if you only use the term lazy to refer to Mexicans, as you and lots of other people only or predominately use the terms "shrewish, hysterical, and bitchy" to refer to women, you know what that means?
Are willing to back up that assertation, that I refer to women more
than men as bitchy, shrewish (an adjective I don't often, if ever,
use) or hysterical (one that I do)?
Didn't think so.
Yes, noticing and being offended by racism and sexism is a habit best understood as a psychological problem.
Imagining it where none exists certainly is.
|10.30.08 @ 6:58PM|#
Priest and a rabbi walk down the street. The priest asks
"Wanna fuck those boys?"
The rabbi asks "Out of what?"
I am still laughing about this one.
Episiarch's cannibal dialogue was pretty good too.
Maybe somebody could draw a cartoon of a lip-stick-wearing pig
routing through the ACORNs under a leafy oak tree.
|10.30.08 @ 7:10PM|#
And if you only use the term lazy to refer to
Mexicans,...
No, that's wrong. Spades are lazy too.
Joe, that was a joke meant only to lighten the mood of the board. I
realize that only Mexicans are lazy.
dave|10.31.08 @ 10:43AM|#
I swear, what is WRONG with these lefties who se EVERYTHING
through the prism of race?!?
Arrogance.
Sheer, unadulterated hubris.
jtuf|11.3.08 @ 4:50AM|#
Well, at least you 1st ammendment means that you can't get thrown in jail for writing something that someone somewhere interprets as racist. Oh no, wait, damn.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245