Obama appearantly can also speak "Negro" when necessary

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N10127018.htm

Man, imagine if Reid was a Republican!!!
The Majority Leader of the Senate actually said this!!! Where's the outrage?:laugh4:

And I'm glad Anne painted Poverty Pimp Sharpton in the corner on this as well...
http://www.breitbart.tv/coulter-to-s...negro-dialect/

Pfft. That's so 7 AM this morning. We've moved on by now.

Quote:

---

Man, imagine if Reid was a Republican!!!
The Majority Leader of the Senate actually said this!!! Where's the outrage?

---

because hes a liberal and by definition cannot be a racist. the funny thing is that biden said much the same thing earlier and NO prominent republicans said anything like this. but still the GOP are racists.

If a Republican said it, I'd probably just raise an eyebrow. Likewise for the Democrat. Unless Obama feels personally offended by this, Reid shouldn't do anything

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Subotan

If a Republican said it, I'd probably just raise an eyebrow. Likewise for the Democrat. Unless Obama feels personally offended by this, Reid shouldn't do anything

---

Do you live in the States or reside on the planet Earth?

Gaia.

That's Ebonics, Dave, you sheet-wearing, cross-burning rightwing maniac. Who do you think you are, the Democrat leader of the senate? :laugh4:




Also:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9SP...eature=related

:sweatdrop:

deleted because I'm sure that people wouldn't get it

DD, is this your way of welcoming back Kukri?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

DD, is this your way of welcoming back Kukri?

---

:laugh4:

Just tryin to get that boy workin...:yes:

The republican party is just trying to annoy the democrats. Theres nothing racist about calling Obama a light skinned black man that doesnt have a negro accent....thats what he is. Hes rich and hes only half black.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mooks

The republican party is just trying to annoy the democrats. Theres nothing racist about calling Obama a light skinned black man that doesnt have a negro accent....thats what he is. Hes rich and hes only half black.

---

You think there's a "negro accent"? :inquisitive:

CR

Sometimes I think democrats, especially the ones who enjoy their holy entitlements, are kind of like abused wives who withstand the punishment of the abuser because he buys them nice things, pays the bills and mows the lawn. Harry Reid is only throwing black people down the stairs because he loves them. It's different when they're alone.

I'll let a negro columnist do the talking, since I'm about as ebonic as the Osmonds:

John Cornyn and Michael Steele think that Harry Reid's comments are the same as Trent Lott's.

"In 2002, Democrats expressed outrage at Senator Lott and called on him to step down as leader. That same standard should be applied to Senator Reid and his embarrassing and racially insensitive statements; statements, I would add, that Senator Reid still has yet to clarify," Cornyn said in a written statement.

"As we await his explanation, Senator Reid should do the right thing, follow the example that he himself set in 2002, and step down as majority leader."

I think you can grant that, in this era, the term "Negro dialect" is racially insensitive and embarrassing. That said, the fair-mind listener understands the argument--Barack Obama's complexion and his ability to code-switch is an asset. You can quibble about the "light skin" part, but forget running for president, code-switching is the standard M.O. for any African American with middle class aspirations.

But there's no such defense for Trent Lott. Lott celebrated apartheid Mississippi's support of Strom Thurmond, and then said that had Thurmond won, "we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years.'' Strom Thurmond run for president, specifically because he opposed Harry Truman's efforts at integration. This is not mere conjecture--nearly half of Thurmond's platform was dedicated to preserving segregation. The Dixiecrat slogan was "Segregation Forever!" (Exclamation point, theirs.) Trent Lott's wasn't forced to resign because he said something "racially insensitive." He was forced to resign because he offered tacit endorsement of white supremacy--frequently.

Claiming that Harry Reid's comments are the same, is like claiming that referring to Jews as "Hebrews" is the same as endorsing Nazism. Whereas a reputable portion of black people still use the term Negro without a hint of irony, no black person thinks the guy yelling "Segregation Forever!" would have cured us of "all these problems."

"Negro dialect" and "honest injun" are both insignificant if you aren't dumb enough to make wild assumptions about someone's character based on their use.

But don't they realize how silly they sound calling for his resignation? Why didn't they just point out the fuss made over honest injun and compare it?

Quote:

---

The republican party is just trying to annoy the democrats. Theres nothing racist about calling Obama a light skinned black man that doesnt have a negro accent....thats what he is. Hes rich and hes only half black.

---

this implies republicans made him say this. we dont control his mind.............. yet.


personally i believe negro is an outdated word not a rascist one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

DD, is this your way of welcoming back Kukri?

---

Just when you think he's gone away, race-relations comes up, and Dave always delivers. :) (thanks for that edit Dave; you're right.)

The US commentariat seems mostly concerned with measuring the degree of racism revealed by remarks made by white politicians. So far, on a scale of 1 to 10, Reid's defenders score it a "1", while they see Lott's contribution a "9" or more. The other side paints both as 10's and resign-able offenses.

My problem with Sen Reid's observations of Obama's light-skin and non-negro dialect, is the underlying assumption made: american voters will find Obama more palatable, and less threatening, than other black politicians with darker skin and inner-city dialects. He (Reid) in effect is talking about marketing a black man to a racist nation. I think this shows a fundamental disrespect and condescension toward american voters.

Disrespect and condescension are not fire-able offenses. But if I were a Nevada voter, I'd be looking for someone else who understands and respects me, next election.

Obama appearantly can also smoke "Ganga" when necessary

https://img29.imageshack.us/img29/85...4031660309.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

"Negro dialect" and "honest injun" are both insignificant if you aren't dumb enough to make wild assumptions about someone's character based on their use.

But don't they realize how silly they sound calling for his resignation? Why didn't they just point out the fuss made over honest injun and compare it?

---

Tell that to Trent Lott or Sen George Allen.

Negro dialect???? WTH?


He basically said, Obama is a good president because he's an uncle tom.

If that isn't racist i don't know what is.

Honestly, why does a president have to speak a certain way? I for one would like a president who uses slang sometimes.

Think about it.

"Yo, Khameini. YOU BUGGIN. If you dont stop tryin to enrich uranium we gonna kick in tha do' wavin tha fo' fo'!"

"3rd world countries don't know bout mah defense budget"

"nah mean we gonna keep breakin bread wit europe."

That would be awesome. It really would.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Centurion1

because hes a liberal and by definition cannot be a racist. the funny thing is that biden said much the same thing earlier and NO prominent republicans said anything like this. but still the GOP are racists.

---

Words or wording mean nothing; intent means everything.

I call my sisters bf all the racial slurs I know, and try to come up with a new one every time I see him. Does he mind? No, because he knows that I'm joking and that I mean no harm, so why should he care? On the other hand, if someone he didn't know made the same comments I do, of course he would be insulted and angry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Words or wording mean nothing; intent means everything.

I call my sisters bf all the racial slurs I know, and try to come up with a new one every time I see him. Does he mind? No, because he knows that I'm joking and that I mean no harm, so why should he care? On the other hand, if someone he didn't know made the same comments I do, of course he would be insulted and angry.

---

Let me guess, some of your best friends are black also, right?

Without knowing more about the context this looks like a very pathetic and patronizing thing to say by Reid.

The racism here might not be based on malevolence but rather silly ignorance (not that this is particularly great either)

Perhaps this guy did not realize that things changed a tiny bit during the last 50 - 100 years?

Don't know what's more pathetic: Reid saying what he said or the Liberal wing sweeping it under the rug and pretending that nothing has happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave

Let me guess, some of your best friends are black also, right?

---

Nah, I don't know any Africans. Only arabs, indians, turks and pakistanis I'm afraid....

yes, I know what you're getting at, and I have to say that it's quite misplaced...

There's a certain logic to his words though, isn't there, Obama is about as racial neutral as you can get. He's neither "Black" nor "White" but it a genuinely ballanced mix of the two.

The wording was clearly sledgehammer-subtle, but the point is well made.

Our news here played something from a US news channel about the issue, and they talked to a few black professors/experts, and the general opinion was that while it was rather stupid thing to say, there was, unfortunately, more than a grain of truth to it. There have, apparently, been studies which suggest that people with darker skin (and who speak more like they're from the ghetto or MTV) are not treated as well as those with lighter skin. We're talking electability, job prospects, even greater levels of fear and uncertainty. Sad but true it seems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

You think there's a "negro accent"? :inquisitive:

CR

---

Sociolect would be a better term.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave

Tell that to Trent Lott or Sen George Allen.

---

Something that seems to get lost in the kerfluffle: Dems did not orchestrate Senator Lott's ousting. Somebody else did that. I'll give you a shiny nickel if you can guess who ...

It was no less than the president himself who began the destruction of Mr. Lott. Last Thursday in Philadelphia, in a sharp rebuke that was the political equivalent of cutting off Mr. Lott's legs, the president said that comments Mr. Lott made on Dec. 5, applauding Senator Strom Thurmond's presidential run in 1948 "do not reflect the spirit of our country" and that "any suggestion that the segregated past was acceptable or positive is offensive and it is wrong."

Republicans said that the condemnation was the idea of Mr. Bush, not Mr. Rove, and that the president was well aware that his words would set in motion a chain of events that were likely to lead to Mr. Lott's resignation. Mr. Bush — who began his political education at the side of Lee Atwater, the bad-boy strategist of the first President Bush's successful 1988 campaign — then immediately ordered his staff to speak no more on the subject.

At that point, Republicans said, no one at the White House had to say a word. "When the president made his statement in Philadelphia, it signaled the White House's view on Lott's continuing as leader," one Republican said. "And it was a strong, unmistakable signal that it would be extraordinarily difficult for Lott to be effective as leader."

The next day, Mr. Lott held a news conference in Mississippi apologizing for his comments. Mr. Bush, meanwhile, headed for a weekend at Camp David and maintained a determined public silence on Mr. Lott. Although Ari Fleischer, the White House press secretary, said after Mr. Lott's news conference that "the president doesn't think Trent Lott needs to resign" (a line Mr. Fleischer repeated all week), not once did the president offer any public support for Mr. Lott.

C'mon, Dave, let's have a moment of honesty: If the Dems had been yowling for Sen. Lott's scalp, and the administration had backed him, do you think he would have resigned? I don't mean to interrupt your regularly scheduled outrage with history, context and reason, but let's try to play like big kids for a minute, mmkay?