|
|
|
|
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 10:10:32 AM | More than a few of the people posting messages in these forums are using the word either as a noun or adjective.
Encarta Dictionary has the following entries:
1. Animosity towards others.
Prejudice or animosity against people who belong to other races.
"I am a Muslim and ... my religion makes me against all forms of racism." Malcolm X Speech, Prospects for Freedom
2. Belief in racial superiority.
The belief that people of different races have different qualities and abilities, and that some races are inherently superior or inferior
It is my belief that many people are using those words with other meanings that those listed above.
Here is the chance to explain how are you using those words.
You will be helping me and many others to understand you. | |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 10:17:01 AM | yes they use the term as it fits their idea of what it means kinda like Vencini in the
"Princess Bride" always saying inconcievable.Otherwise they say I am not a racist but... don't you think electing this guy is a b ad idea.......kind of like if you are a phsychopath you don't realize you are a phsychopath because you've always been that way  | |
|
| |
| |
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 10:32:00 AM | In this election cycle, "racist" has become a PC Buzzword.
If folks don't say what some want to hear, they just throw that term out there for the sake of impact, and to avoid having to take logical exception to a given argument, which very well may be difficult to do.
-Suth'nBoy
| |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 11:15:43 AM | Well, many times in this debate, the word racist comes up becomes of one critically important issue - the mentioning of Obama's race in the discussion.
While not directly a question of "race" , we find some concentrating on his "Muslim" religion. Although proven totally false, it's brought back again and again.
We see Obama being labeled over and over again for his associations with people. Strangely enough, that's not done with other candidates. The other candidates that are running have some REALLY interesting connections to people that somehow escape media attention.
I've argued that Falwell was as least as bitter and spiteful as Wright was, and used many of the same concepts while arguing against liberals.
No one started having heart problems when he did.
Hillary's ties to a rather interesting religious group, with rather interesting practices and beliefs, and a leader that admires Mao, Stalin, and Hitler in some regards is a non-story.
McCain's seeking out of John Hagee's endorsement didn't trigger nearly as much interest as Wright did.
I believe that New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive to God, and they are — were recipients of the judgment of God for that. The newspaper carried the story in our local area that was not carried nationally that there was to be a homosexual parade there on the Monday that the Katrina came. And the promise of that parade was that it was going to reach a level of sexuality never demonstrated before in any of the other Gay Pride parades. So I believe that the judgment of God is a very real thing
"America is under the curse of God"
On Jews:
It was the disobedience and rebellion of the Jews, God’s chosen people, to their covenantal responsibility to serve only the one true God, Jehovah, that gave rise to the opposition and persecution that they experienced beginning in Canaan and continuing to this very day.
- Pastor John Hagee
He's called the Catholic religion : 'The Great Whore,' an 'apostate church,' the 'anti-Christ,' and a 'false cult system.'
McCain actively sought Hagee's support , and proudly stood up their on the stage with him for pictures.
Generally a none issue for both the media and even these POF forums - in any comparative sense, numbers wise. Has McCain renounced Hagee ?
Now if a white man has ties to a man with that much hatred, and who says things that are certainly as inflammatory as some of Wright's remarks, and seeks out his approval as presidential candidate and gets a pass on it - I say we are looking at a double standard.
The obvious conclusion, since both Hillary and McCain share the same job as Obama does (Senator) , are all running for the same office, is that somehow the skin color of one is attracting a lot more attention.
I've never seen this level of scrutiny on any American candidate in my lifetime. That leads me to ask why this man attracts it - and the others don't.
The strangest part about this is that Obama is indeed half-white.
Other candidates are not examined for their associations in anyway near the same way or depth. Yet time and again we are bombarded here by people essentially posting whatever they can find to somehow invalidate him.
There's no talk of platform, nor any interest on the discussion of such things when they are offered up - like I did in a thread on the man's ideas.
I think race is certainly a hot button topic in America, and always has been. Any discussion that enters into it quickly becomes a minefield. Although many here claim that it's in the past, my view of even recent America thinks it's something that still must be addressed.
We can see huge arguments starting when race is dragged into an event. Rodney King, O.J. and many other such historical events illustrate this quite clearly. Suddenly, old wounds are reopened, and people tend to quickly divide across generally racial lines in how they perceive the same reality. | |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 11:33:40 AM | Montreal_Guy wrote:
The obvious conclusion, since both Hillary and McCain share the same job as Obama does (Senator) , are all running for the same office, is that somehow the skin color of one is attracting a lot more attention.
I've never seen this level of scrutiny on any American candidate in my lifetime. That leads me to ask why this man attracts it - and the others don't.
Of course it is an issue you could very well elect a member of an ethnic minority to the presidency. I am correct in thinking race is still a big issue in the USA especially in southern states? (maybe not especially). I am also right in thinking black people used to be slaves and it was only 40-ish years ago they were given equal rights (nearly in my lifetime - so what's that a generation ago?).
I think the main issue is "a member of the ethnic MINORITY" leading the majority.
It shouldn't be an issue I really don't see what the colour of his skin has to do with his ability to the job. | |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 12:44:24 PM |
Of course it is an issue you could very well elect a member of an ethnic minority to the presidency. I am correct in thinking race is still a big issue in the USA especially in southern states? (maybe not especially). I am also right in thinking black people used to be slaves and it was only 40-ish years ago they were given equal rights (nearly in my lifetime - so what's that a generation ago?
Leaving aside the issue of Obama who I believe will be your next president btw -I am struck by a new strange type of "racism "
There is the standard type where the mainstream feel under threat because he is a minority group but then there is those who choose him because of who he is as in black .Of course -they come out with a lot of rhetoric to explain all but it boils down to must be seen to be liberal .
But the amazing aspect of it all is this - when supposedly liberal thinking people address racism-the yardstick only seems to be in terms of black.
A regular very liberal minded poster asks....how many black mayors and congressmen in US history ?
I use that as an example only but there are many such instances...in fact all intances .Now obviously I am assuming that hispanics are more recent to the US than blacks but they are of the same number ........do they match in terms of the above ?
But more-what about the Native Americans to both Canada and America -do they match to the question asked ? Did they have it good ? Why don't those same people ask the same question regarding those groups re;hispanics/NA .
They may say-oh its election year/topic etc but scroll back.......there's just one yardstick.
Yes there is a need for a redefination of racism....lol.........
 | |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 1:20:49 PM |
A regular very liberal minded poster asks....how many black mayors and congressmen in US history ?
1776-2008 ?
Black governors - 2 , I believe. (correct me if I am wrong)
Black mayors - The first was only elected in 1967 (Carl Stokes) ( I have some conflicting info in my research on that one, btw).
Black Mayors are in charge of more cities throughout this country than ever before.
As of May, 2003, the National Conference of Black Mayors (NCBM) had the total pegged more than 500.
This is amazing considering there were only 314 mayors in 1990 and 81 in 1970.
http://blacksuccessfoundation.org/black_mayors.htm
Black congressmen ?
Since 1868, 121 African Americans have served in the United States Congress. This figure includes five non-voting members of the House of Representatives who represented the District of Columbia and the U.S. Virgin Islands. In addition, in 1868, one candidate was elected to the House but was not seated due to an election dispute.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Americans_in_the_United_States_Congress
One hundred and forty years, and 121 African American Congressmen.
Just browse through this time line for a moment, and notice the dates as you do. This shows how recent all this is, and provides perhaps a window into the reasons for people like Wright ( born 1941) to perhaps be affected by what they saw growing up.
1942— The U.S. Marine Corps accepts African American men for the first time.
1943—The Naval Academy at Annapolis and other naval officer schools accept African American men for the first time.
1948—On July 26, President Harry Truman issues Executive Order 9981 directing the desegregation of the armed forces.
1949—In June Wesley Brown becomes the first African American to graduate from the Naval Academy at Annapolis.
Businessman Jesse Blanton, Sr. establishes WERD-AM, the first black owned radio station. It begins broadcasting in Atlanta on October 3.
1952—Tuskegee Institute reported no lynchings in the United States for the first time in 71 years of tabulation.
1953—On December 31, Hulan Jack becomes the first African American borough president of Manhattan. At the time he is the highest ranking black elected official in the nation.
1956—On November 11, Nat King Cole becomes the first African American to host a prime time variety show on national television. He appears on NBC.
1958—Louis E. Lomax becomes the first African American newscaster. He works for WNTA-TV in New York City.
1962—On October 1, James Meredith becomes the first black student to enroll at the University of Mississippi.
1966—On January 13, Robert Weaver, President Lyndon Baines Johnson’s nominee to head the newly created Department of Housing and Urban Development, is confirmed for the post by the U.S. Senate. Weaver becomes the first African American to hold a cabinet post.
On January 25th Constance Baker Motley is appointed by President Lyndon Baines Johnson to the Federal Bench in New York City. She becomes the first African American woman elevated to a Federal judgeship
1970—Dr. Clifton Wharton, Jr., is named president of Michigan State University on January 2. He is the first African American to lead a major, predominately white university.
1971—In July Captain Samuel L. Gravely, Jr is promoted to Rear Admiral. He becomes the first African American to achieve Flag Rank in the U.S. Navy.
1972—Over the summer New York Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm makes an unsuccessful bid for the Democratic presidential nomination. She is the first African American to campaign for the nomination.
1975- On October 12, Frank Robinson becomes the first black Major League Baseball manager when he takes over the Cleveland Indians.
General Daniel “Chappie” James of the Air Force becomes the first African American four star general.
1979—Franklin Thomas is named president of the Ford Foundation. He is the first African American to head a major philanthropic foundation.
Frank E. Petersen, Jr. becomes the first African American to earn the rank of General in the United States Marines.
So when one looks back at African American history, one sees that this new era is a very recent development, and that blacks were often minimized (for various reasons) from attaining prominent positions of power.
Just look at the number of black coaches in professional sports, even in ones where blacks are numerous as players.
Look at the Negro League, and the division (by race) of America's favorite pass time. How many of them should have justly deserved to play against some of those "stars" in the Baseball Hall Of Fame - and perhaps taken their rightful place instead ?
So, for just a moment, I'll ask you to reflect on these ideas, and to perhaps, just perhaps, imagine the world through the eyes of a black man who lived through times so much different than the ones we know today.
To imagine the effect on a culture, who were numerous in society - but powerless and not in visible positions of power and control. Excluded for so long from their rightful place as Americans like any other.
To even obtain those basic civil rights, they had to fight long and hard against strong opposition for years.
Imagine what that must feel like, when you've been around since day one as an American, and have contributed greatly, in so many ways to the success of America. | |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 1:44:13 PM |
To imagine the effect on a culture, who were numerous in society - but powerless and not in visible positions of power and control. Excluded for so long from their rightful place as Americans like any other.
Classic post there
I can imagine that and don't you think for a moment those numbers in relation to their numbers show that racisim has been eliminated in a big way ?
That is a statement rather than a question....but my question to you is..............again.
.........what are the figures for Native Americans... supposedly Americans FIRST .? For Hispanics and why not the same questions,the same answers and the same PC PUSH from liberals and governments alike ? | |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 2:26:06 PM |
I can imagine that and don't you think for a moment those numbers in relation to their numbers show that racisim has been eliminated in a big way ?
It's improved greatly, and I've seen it do so over the course of my lifetime. I've never said otherwise.
That doesn't mean it didn't effect people who lived under it, and who are still alive - like Wright. That's the aspect I'm alluding to here, in regards to a general impact on older members of the African American community, and in that sense , African American culture.
Remember, Wright is the figurehead for the essence of this discussion. He's what's triggered this cry of racism from the white population.
what are the figures for Native Americans....? For Hispanics and why not the same questions,the same answers and the same PC PUSH from liberals and government alike ?
Well, the native American population was essentially eliminated in terms of it's numbers, if one compares total populations, and percentages.
In 2005, the U.S. Census Bureau estimated that about 1.0 percent of the U.S. population was of American Indian or Alaska Native descent. This population is unevenly distributed across the country: Native Americans formed more than one-tenth of the population of the states of Alaska and New Mexico, while in five states they constituted only 0.2% of the population.
According to 2003 United States Census Bureau estimates, a little over one third of the 2,786,652 Native Americans in the United States live in three states: California at 413,382, Arizona at 294,137 and Oklahoma at 279,559
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_Americans_in_the_United_States#Population
I'd suggest anyone interested read "Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee", which is an eye opening account of the trials and tribulations of Native Americans.
African Americans ?
40.2 million
As of July 1, 2006, the estimated population of black residents in the United States, including those of more than one race. They made up 13.4% of the total U.S. population. This figure represents an increase of half a million residents from one year earlier.
1790 757,208 19.3%
1800 1,002,037 18.9%
1810 1,377,808 19.0%
1820 1,771,656 18.4%
1830 2,328,642 18.1%
1840 2,873,648 16.8%
1850 3,638,808 15.7%
1860 4,441,830 14.1%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_American
African Americans had already passed the number of Native Americans alive TODAY, by 1840.
The Latino population is a rather recent group, in terms of achieving a large mass of population, and a high percentage of the general population.
Latinos (35 million strong) have increased their presence in the U.S. population by 58% over the last 10 years, and recently surpassed African Americans as the largest ethnic minority (2000 U.S. Census,). While non-white Hispanic population grew by
3%.
http://spanishsts.net/fast-facts.htm
Both the Latino and Native American populations never faced slavery, in the real sense of the African American experience , over the course of their histories.
Blacks , as the largest of the non-white part of society for a longer period of time , should be among the first to rise to positions of prominence - and the time lines and numbers that I've presented don't seem to indicate that occurring until very recently, in historical terms.
Racism does touch those other two communities as well, as it does all non-white elements of society. I'm not saying that it doesn't. There's even a reverse racism that rebounds back from blacks towards whites, or a racism of light skinned blacks towards darker ones.
In America, the term racism is most commonly associated by most Americans to be related to African Americans primarily - and to the other groups you mentioned in a secondary role. | |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 2:49:41 PM | Racism is at the core of a lot of the supposed criticism of Obama. When it's pure nonsense and bullshit and its brought up over and over and over and over, it's because they've got nothing really to say about the guy they can use as ammo .....but it's racism that drives it.
I've never heard in any election in my life how much pitiful, petty focus has been put on associates of a candidate ..........but guess is that between McCain and Clinton, there are hundreds of people in their employ digging every thing they can up about the guy and seeing what kind of twist they can put on whatever juicy tidbits they find.
the problem is, they run out of tidbits...........so the racists just use the same tidbit over and over and over and over again.
Really, the idea of BLACK people in the WHITE House is horrifying to a racist. I wouldnt be surprised if the man was shot in due time by some good old boy from Dixie. | |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 3:08:01 PM |
Both the Latino and Native American populations never faced slavery, in the real sense of the African American experience , over the course of their histories.
Blacks , as the largest of the non-white part of society for a longer period of time , should be among the first to rise to positions of prominence - and the time lines and numbers that I've presented don't seem to indicate that occurring until very recently, in historical terms.
MG-the point of the question is not WHO is the largest non white group but why the racism .The fact is this......the treatment of the Native American must of being severe for them to be reduced in number altho I believe that they intermarried with whites too and easily become white that could be a factor.
Why is slavery a better excuse than genocide ????
And if it matters that the AA were the biggest non white group.....it more than should matter what group you found there on arrival.
Slavery for the African but genocide for the Native.Which do you class as worst or are they on par ? There was a lady on here whose German ancestor and Indian wife were "slaves" as such .If there was one there must be more .
Sorry but I believe the very fact of the reduced numbers of Native Americans and the increase in population of the AA shows that genocide is worse .
So my point is this- it took this PC PUSH on the part of the government and liberals and indeed the very vocal struggle of the AA which resulted in this "achievment" Slaves were the end result of something long established in Africa by them,the Arabs and by Europeans .Now if that PC PUSH hadn't taken place in AMERICA and by America....................its not as if this better situation is exactly the norm in Africa is it in that it was something they had ,lost and wanted again. Let me add that I don't find Rev Wright annoying in any way .He wasn't born into slavery but if he wants to bang the same old story -its his choice....he is not seeking office-is a free agent and like he says politicians will say/do anything to get elected including Obama. As for Obama..........this race element will get him elected .
Slavery and blacks are not the only yardstick of racism .The other groups are secondary only in that their issues are never addressed ........which I find really sad considering all the passion involved over supposed and imagined slights to black people . I do not see that it follows logically that black people should be first to prominence as you say. Logic tells me that Native Americans should be first but if not first--equallly first....call it European logic but I would say its true liberal logic.
An interesting observation from non black minorities I know-how annoying it is to be told ethnic minorities are catered to when only the black community is catered to .Its like a double whammy . Not that they seek attention .
Eg ; Iraqi revenue to rebuilt the Iraq which America flattened......and be grateful please.......yet G8's for Africa (minus Arab countries ) and more coming .................yet..........we are helping the worlds poor..................and then the west wonders why the hostility .
| |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 3:08:42 PM | I don't give a rat's arse... what color the President is. I have so many mixed ethnic DNA composed in my make-up that if I even wanted to be racist, which I don't, I couldn't choose since my ancestors are from sooo many races.
What I do object to is continued 'entitlement'. It needs to stop now! Enough time has passed. The opportunities have been there long enough for all races to grab their fair share. There should be NO race quotas on hiring anymore. Be done with it. Hire who one wants to. Then and only then will race stand a snowball's chance of being minimized.
It won't do the African Americans a bit of good, in many eyes, anymore to scream racism.. nor Latinos, nor American Indians, etc. etc. etc. We are such a melting pot here... that it's dumb for race to be an issue.
As for Obama... it's not his race I object to. It's the 20...20..not one or two.. years of very close association... not casual... with Wright's belief system. Period. Yes, I would not vote for him based on that. Because Obama is a true racist. As is his wife. | |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 3:26:38 PM | I wouldnt be surprised if the man was shot in due time by some good old boy from Dixie.
Just FYI.. In this era, racism is usually considered to be significantly more prevalent in Northern Urban areas, than it is in Dixie!
Places like Boston in particular, and Chicago, D.C. and Detroit.
So you should update your thinking, and get your head out of the 50's and 60's, among other places..
-Suth'nBoy
| |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 3:27:12 PM | Because Obama is a true racist. As is his wife.
Using your logic (not mine)...
You say you cannot be racist because of your mixed ethnicity...
So how can Obama?
How do you... someone who has shown herself, on many occasions now, to be... let's say 'questionably motivated' on racial matters... factually justify calling Obama 'racist'?
I'm seriously asking, because if that old saw 'It takes one to know one' is correct... well, then you might very well be right.
By the way... anyone who says they have no prejudice is a liar. | |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 3:36:55 PM |
Using your logic (not mine)...
You say you cannot be racist because of your mixed ethnicity...
So how can Obama?
How do you... someone who has shown herself, on many occasions now, to be... let's say 'questionably motivated' on racial matters... factually justify calling Obama 'racist'?
I'm seriously asking, because if that old saw 'It takes one to know one' is correct... well, then you might very well be right.
By the way... anyone who says they have no prejudice is a liar.
Please point out my 'questionably motivated' racial matters opinions.
I think I implied it would be nonsense for me to be racist. Not that I absolutely could not be. Reread my post.
Obama can be, in my opinion, due to his very close association and active participation with Wright. I have never had those type of relations with anyone. So, to me, it appears racist.
I never said I have no prejudice... I just don't have it towards race. | |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 3:43:36 PM | You say you cannot be racist because of your mixed ethnicity...
So how can Obama?
I gather you must be addressing the OP? But racism doesn't have anything to do with what color the skin of a person who may feel ethnically biased toward certain others may be.
Any human being is capable of racism. It's a mindset, its not physiological.
It exists in all ethnic groups and all mixed groups.
-Suth'nBoy
| |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 3:56:45 PM | I agree with you on that Suthn...
I was addressing that woman's attempt to dodge any attempts to label her as 'racist' by listing out all her ethnic heritage... as if it made any difference.
... and just for the record... I'll own up that my own brain is full of racist thought... all sorts of kneejerk reactions to various groups crop up and require squelching every day.
I'll see someone in a car and wonder, "How'd he get that car?" or see some group of workers and think, "look at those guys, they look dirty and ignorant... and mean".
Those are the things that pop into my mind... on the lowest level... and it's continuous battle to beat them down.
I think most everyone has some version of that battle going on in their head... the suspicion of the 'other'... the 'not me'...
Some people most likely have less of that... some have more...
But anyone who wants to stand up and say they have none at all... ever...
I just gotta call 'bullshit' on that...
It's not merely having those thoughts that makes you a 'racist', it's how much you let them rule your thinking, your attitudes, and how you live. | |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 4:10:40 PM | Simlasa,
First, when you call BS on someone, it's always better to make sure you have read/heard their words right. I pointed out to you how you misused my thought process.
I do have 'prejudices'. I admitted that. Race is not one of them. Misinterpreting others, I have a real problem with that.
And, yes, I don't like having my intelligence underestimated. When someone attempts to twist what I say rather than simply taking the actual words and seeing them/hearing them, then I tend to get impatient with those people. If that is a 'prejudice' then, I am guilty as charged.
Just know that if you attempt to call BS on something I've stated and it is You who is wrong via your 'assumptions', I won't back off on calling you down on it. Aren't forums great! | |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 4:16:18 PM |
But anyone who wants to stand up and say they have none at all... ever...
I just gotta call 'bullshit' on that...
simlasa, I'm not disagreeing with you in a broad sense, but I guess some of has to do with the society you live in. Canada certainly has racists, but I don't see people of color as a threat.
Perhaps the best way to discuss this is on a personal level.
This isn't really a racial thing, but it is (in a Canadian perspective) much the same type of dynamic. As I've related before, I am a strong federalist here. I was married to an equally strong nationalist for seventeen years.
There was economic "racism"directed towards French Canadians for a long time. They were a majority of the population in Quebec, but many times were forced to speak English, or were served only in English.
I totally understood those factors, although I disagreed on their validity as simply cultural racism. A lot of it had to do with the Catholic church, and it's hold over a people. Think of it a bit like the same factors that contributed to problems in Northern Ireland.
Now we voted together in many elections, including one referendum that could have resulted in the break up of this country I love so much.
It never changed my feelings towards her, in any way, even though this was a critical issue for me at a critical time.
Her Dad was an early member of the RIN, a separatist/nationalist organization. I respected him greatly, and he felt the same way towards me.
Her sister asked her, when we first started going out, if they had to speak English when I came over.
I also told the story here once of being with her family one weekend, one that had accepted me quite easily. I'd been a member of that family for a long time, and had never encountered any problems due to my language.
As I sat there, my ex-brother in law used the our cultural version of the "N-word" in regards to English people in a political discussion . He clearly used it in the same way that a white racist might use it towards a black.
Needless to say, it was one of those priceless moments when everyone's head turned towards me in discomfort.
It was an eye opener, in so many ways.
I've also heard the N-word used by Jamaicans , in reference to Haitians. That was another eye opener.
I also dated a black woman, a rather pretty one, and realized that somehow through all of it I'd never seen her once as a black woman - but simply a rather pretty and intelligent one.
This is a very deep and fascinating subject, and one long neglected. | |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 4:19:03 PM | | The only necessary "racism" is that between the elitist government and "We the people" Color and culture shouldn't matter about anything. We are all being oppressed in the same way. | |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 4:29:18 PM | suth-boy, yes, there is racism in Boston and yet we elected our first black governor by a landslide.
Deval Patrick.
Oh, and by the way, a few months ago I attended an engagement at Fanueil Hall put on by the Mass. Historical Society..........you would have just LOVED it, I am sure! .... on the occasion of publishing the letters betwween John Adams and his wife.... three couples read excerpts from the book...........Mrs. and Mrs. Patrick, Mr. and Mrs. Ted Kennedy and Mr and Mrs. Michael Dukakis.
A lovely evening was had by all.
And Muffie, the old white blue blood who ran against Patrick that served under dear Mitt Romney, who was uniformly hated by every state worker here for the conceited, narcissitic ***hole that he is, was no where to be found.
This race will be about whether America can get over its racism to elect someone young and smart and honest or whether it needs to remain a divided, hateful, paranoid, war-mongering two-bit empire. | |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 4:50:56 PM | Jedi,
I'm pretty sure I've read your posts, current and past, correctly... so I'll stand by what I said.
I'm not going to get in some 'war of quotes' with you in here... that stuff is all on record for anyone who's interested.
and Montreal... I still think everyone has at least a little corner of 'racism' lurking in the back of their mind sometimes... but if anyone here is color-blind I'm willing to believe it's you. | |
|
| Is there a need for a new definition of racism?
Posted: 5/9/2008 5:51:07 PM |
his race will be about whether America can get over its racism to elect someone young and smart and honest or whether it needs to remain a divided, hateful, paranoid, war-mongering two-bit empire.
Young = Prejudice against 'age'
Smart = Votes 98% with the Dem. and will be running against a much more bipartisan man with an 87% vote with his party.
Honest = Betcha both are equally as honest or dishonest as the other.
As to the reference of America as a 'divided, hateful, paranoid, war-mongering two-bit empire'... well, sir... I pity your hate filled mindset. I sincerely do.
All racism should be erased. Unfortunately it isn't. Not here, in the USA, not anywhere. Each and Every Individual should be dealt with according to their own internal being and what they openly display. This is not the case and no amount of debate will change it. Human Nature is what it is. | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
