NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100401762_pf.html

Gee, I thought only those wascawwy Wepubwicans could be racists! :p

From the admittedly limited understanding of this foreigner, wasn't the Democratic party the one (in contrast with the Republicans) that supported slavery, and continued to maintain a lot of support for this reason amongst the South after the Civil War?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100401762_pf.html

Gee, I thought only those wascawwy Wepubwicans could be racists! :p

What a lovely strawman you've just knocked down! Mommy New Mitanni would be proud.

From the admittedly limited understanding of this foreigner, wasn't the Democratic party the one (in contrast with the Republicans) that supported slavery, and continued to maintain a lot of support for this reason amongst the South after the Civil War?

Yep, but in the early sixties the democrat party shed it's racist policies, and southern democrat racists like Strom Thurmond fled to the Republican party thus soiling the legacy of Abe Lincoln.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100401762_pf.html

Gee, I thought only those wascawwy Wepubwicans could be racists! :p
You seem to be lacking in the point department.

Hey, you know, it could be worse. She could have been a pederast congressmen that the republicans knew about but let keep on harassing kids.

Who cares about this? Where is the racism in what was said?

Is this a public official or a candidate for public office?

Put the Party of Pederasty out of office in november!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100401762_pf.html

Gee, I thought only those wascawwy Wepubwicans could be racists! :p


was it wrong of me to laugh out loud at that story and at the incredibly lame epithet "macacawitz"?

There are gay republicans, why not racist democrats?


Keep in mind, I'm not saying either one of them make much sense to me.

Until the 60's the Democrats were the party of all good southerners. My grandfather was a horrible old racist and a yellow dog democrat. Then the dems and republicans flip floped.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100401762_pf.html

Gee, I thought only those wascawwy Wepubwicans could be racists! :p

Err... what universe do you live in where Woodrow Wilson (known KKK member), George Wallace, Lester Maddox, Robert Byrd (known KKK Klegal), Ernest Hollings, etc. etc. ad nasueum, were Republicans?

Yep, but in the early sixties the democrat party shed it's racist policies, and southern democrat racists like Strom Thurmond fled to the Republican party thus soiling the legacy of Abe Lincoln.

As I thought.

Err... what universe do you live in where Woodrow Wilson (known KKK member), George Wallace, Lester Maddox, Robert Byrd (known KKK Klegal), Ernest Hollings, etc. etc. ad nasueum, were Republicans?

And point proven. ;)

You mean there is more to a person than their political affiliations?!

I'll alert the media.:rolleyes:

There are gay republicans, why not racist democrats?


Keep in mind, I'm not saying either one of them make much sense to me.


Why would that not make sense? The GOP is the party of Barry "You don't have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight" Goldwater and Lincoln, while the Dem. Party is the party of Wilson, Wallace, and Byrd.

Now, having actually read the article *chortle*

I see that she wasn't even racist.

She was ACCUSED of being anti-semetic, i.e. anti-jew. Not racist. She wasn't even being anti-semetic, but the campaign she was working for was too PC for a joke she made about a racist comment SOMEONE ELSE MADE (Sen. George Allen (R-Va.) ).

So all you've done by showing us this link is show us proof that these particular democrats are uptight and with almost no sense of humor. Nothing we didn't already know.

And point proven. ;)

And the "Aw! poor benighted stupid niggers can't succeed on their own, so let's give 'em Affirmative Action" of the Dems hasn't even been breached....

:::dons emergency fire proof suit for the reactions that's liable to bring on...:::

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100401762_pf.html

Gee, I thought only those wascawwy Wepubwicans could be racists! :p

Wow. One underling in a campaign says something anti-Semitic, and now the whole party hates Jews. Never mind that the person was "taken care of," whatever that means. Frankly, I looked at it as more attacking George Allen than as attacking Jews. It was insane, sure, but more just plain stupid than racist. And both Republicans and Democrats are more than capable of being stupid.

Why do we consistently try to label a party based on a single person in it. We should judge each person individually. There are bad people in each party. Lets judge based on our agreement or disagreement with POLICY, not with their ability to throw trash at one another.

Why would that not make sense? The GOP is the party of Barry "You don't have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight" Goldwater and Lincoln, while the Dem. Party is the party of Wilson, Wallace, and Byrd.

It doesn't make sense because the vast, vast majority of Republicans are homophobic and have in fact voted multiple times to restrict their rights, while the ACLU, an organization that fights for civil rights, is OVERPOWERINGLY filled with democrats.

See why I can't make sense of it?

The party that those men belonged to was so different from the party of today as to be wholly seperate. The same is true of Abe Lincoln. You really can't call anyone before FDR a member of your party, and even then there was about a twenty year transition period.

And the "Aw! poor benighted stupid niggers can't succeed on their own, so let's give 'em Affirmative Action" of the Dems hasn't even been breached....

:::dons emergency fire proof suit for the reactions that's liable to bring on...:::

More like the blacks have been shit on by slavery, jim crow, and racism for so long that a program to give them jobs and better access to education might help them rebuild their communities and achieve economic equality. The slaves who toiled to build this nation's economy weren't able to earn money for their kids to inherit and use to build businesses and strong communities, so affirmative action helps even the economic score.

The party that those men belonged to was so different from the party of today as to be wholly seperate. The same is true of Abe Lincoln. You really can't call anyone before FDR a member of your party, and even then there was about a twenty year transition period.

Robert C. Byrd - known member of the Klu Klux Klan (Kleagel and "Exalted Cyclops") is a current Senator.

From the admittedly limited understanding of this foreigner, wasn't the Democratic party the one (in contrast with the Republicans) that supported slavery, and continued to maintain a lot of support for this reason amongst the South after the Civil War?

Correct.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100401762_pf.html

Gee, I thought only those wascawwy Wepubwicans could be racists! :p

Who said only republicans could be racist? The difference here is the Democrats fired the staffer and the Republicans would of asked if she had any underage sons they could have pictures of.

It doesn't make sense because the vast, vast majority of Republicans are homophobic and have in fact voted multiple times to restrict their rights, while the ACLU, an organization that fights for civil rights, is OVERPOWERINGLY filled with democrats.

See why I can't make sense of it?

the democratic party is more of a coalition than a monolith.

for a long time, most union members were democrats because republicans are traditionally anti-union. a racist union member can be a democrat because he knows that they will fight for his right to organize and still hate every member of the aclu.

an upperclass gay man can be a republican because of their stance on taxes knowing that the changes in gay rights will continue no matter what his fellow repubs want.

its all in your priorities eh?

Yep, but in the early sixties the democrat party shed it's racist policies, and southern democrat racists like Strom Thurmond fled to the Republican party thus soiling the legacy of Abe Lincoln.

You do know Lincoln was himself an ardent white supremacist, yes?

Robert C. Byrd - known member of the Klu Klux Klan (Kleagel and "Exalted Cyclops") is a current Senator.

Yeah, because nobody makes mistakes in their youth and changes when they grow up. NAACP gives Byrd a 100% rating on civil rights legislation.

Who said only republicans could be racist? The difference here is the Democrats fired the staffer and the Republicans would of asked if she had any underage sons they could have pictures of.

Exactly. And "Macacawitz" is a parroting of Allen's own reference to someone whose ethnicity I forget as "Macaca." The staffer has been fired (allowed to resign) but Allen's still running, right?

You do know Lincoln was himself an ardent white supremacist, yes?

I didn't know that.

I didn't know that.

Ah.

Nor did the Republicans oppose slavery per se. They opposed the extension of slavery, so they could reserve new territories exclusively for whites. In fact, Lincoln supported a proposed constitutional amendment that would have prohibited the federal government from ever interfering with slavery.

Lincoln looked into slavery plans like sending all blacks back to Africa.

the democratic party is more of a coalition than a monolith.

for a long time, most union members were democrats because republicans are traditionally anti-union. a racist union member can be a democrat because he knows that they will fight for his right to organize and still hate every member of the aclu.

an upperclass gay man can be a republican because of their stance on taxes knowing that the changes in gay rights will continue no matter what his fellow repubs want.

its all in your priorities eh?

Yes, they're somewhat of a coalition of the willing. :p

If by "union members", you speak of civil-war era democrats, then forget it - it's fundamentally changed since then and is no longer applicable as being the same two parties they were.

Also, he -COULD- be a democratic racist who likes what the ACLU does yet hates their skin color, but again, it doesn't make sense, much like racism in general.

The republican example makes more sense, though it seems like the homosexual issue in politics is so fierce on the republican's end that if you were to have nothing but tax preferences similar to that of a republican but everything else is different, you'd just be an independant rather than align yourself to have the same title as so many who hate what you are.

A field organizer for Democratic congressional candidate Al Weed resigned yesterday after it was discovered that she referred to Sen. George Allen (R-Va.) as "Macacawitz."
Wow. That sure is some scoop you got there. The death of the Democratic Party. We might as well cancel the midterm elections and hand all seats over to the Republicans in the face of such moral depravity. :rolleyes:

is it really racist to point out the known racist that's ashamed of his jewish ancestry (it'll make him look bad to his pals in the CofCC, after all)? it's not a particularly good insult-nickname, and probably not the best move in democratic political circles, but racist?

Oh COME ON! I mean, really, the woman made a joke about the guy speaking Yiddish, woopty f*cking doo. It takes so little these days to be branded a racist. I mean, I'm nt a racist but I still laugh at (clever) racial humour, it's funny, jesus people need a sense of humour and absurdity.
You know what? I'm gonna tell a way more offensive racist joke right know, just to spite my old enemy...political correctness.

"what do you say when you see your TV floating in the night?"
"Freeze ******!"

"Why do they put cotton in Tylenol bottles?"
"To remind the black floks where they came from!"


There, a couple of bad racist jokes, but hardly enough to cause a scandal, this is so retarded and overblown.

It really wasn't so much a slur as a reference to a slur made by him. They wern't saying "Ohmygod, he's a jew, don't vote for him" They were saying "Hey, remember when he called that jewish guy Macaca? That actually applies to him too!"
It was a slightly dirty tactic, prone to backfires like this one, and that's why the staffer was fired.

Yeah, because nobody makes mistakes in their youth and changes when they grow up. NAACP gives Byrd a 100% rating on civil rights legislation.
I swear, if I had a nickel for every time a Republican apologist pulled out Byrd as an equivalence for the institutional racism inherent in their own party, I wouldn't be eating Ramen Noodles this week, that's for damn sure. I especially like how Daistallia didn't name a Republican after 1970 who was an outstanding proponent of civil rights (though they certainly exist) and didn't name a racist Democrat from after that time (though they certainly exist as well). Wonder why that is?

I've tagged along to more then enough local political functions to now that the Democrats are FAR from saints when it comes to judging racism. You'll hear the slurs, the complaints, and condescension slipping into casual conversation... Publicly I doubt they'd get called out for it but hey, what the hell are you going to do.

This, however, is not even the pale shadow of something that should be taken seriously

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100401762_pf.html

Gee, I thought only those wascawwy Wepubwicans could be racists! :p

Funny. It doesn't sound to me like it was a racist comment. Sounds more like he was accusing the guy of hypocrisy.

The guy (George Allen) reluctantly, and peevishly, admitted that he was Jewish, but then issued a lengthy press release explaining how not Jewish he was (I have a Jewish grandmother, but I eat ham and pork chops!!! please vote for me racists. pleeeeease!) because he knew that he had a racist conservative base. "Macacawitz" sounds like a jibe accusing him of being a racist's racist who is a member of one of the races that the racists hate.

This sounds more like how people called the South Park movie racist because it contained racism, but did so to mock it. But this guy just didn't want to bother with the battle over it and tried to leave quietly. I guess when conservatives are this desperate to find a Democrat, any democrat, who can be faulted for anything they'll find a racist organizer, an OCD dogcatcher, a flatulent librarian. Anything they can to distract attention from being the party of child molestation and torture.

Democratic senator Robert Byrd was a member of the KKK. Thanks wikipedia.

Democratic Senator Robert Byrd used to be the leader of the Ku Klux Klan. So as far as racists go, both parties have them, dems and republicans. In fact, just about where ever you go you shouldn't have a problem finding someone who is racist.

My point is.....is it's very rediculous to pin point racism to one party.

Why would that not make sense? The GOP is the party of Barry "You don't have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight" Goldwater and Lincoln, while the Dem. Party is the party of Wilson, Wallace, and Byrd.

Well, you're an idiot for bringing up Byrd. He was in it as a teenager and when he grew up, he grew up and got the fuck out of the KKK and has spent his adult life trying to make up for it.

The Democrats haven't been the party of Wilson and Wallace since LBJ. He predicted, accuratly, that the party would loose people of that stripe because of the civil rights act. Because the south is full of racists who have now gone over the the Republican side. You know, like the Democrat Strom Thurmond who switched over to the Republican side when the Democrats went anti racist and, in his words, "forced the families of the South to allow the ****** race into their restaurants, swimming pools, and movie theatres."

So you're an idiot for bringing them up too. Look up the word Dixiecrat. The Republican party has long since abandoned the beliefs of Lincoln and Goldwater.

Democratic senator Robert Byrd was a member of the KKK. Thanks wikipedia.

Democratic Senator Robert Byrd used to be the leader of the Ku Klux Klan. So as far as racists go, both parties have them, dems and republicans. In fact, just about where ever you go you shouldn't have a problem finding someone who is racist.

My point is.....is it's very rediculous to pin point racism to one party.

Byrd was given a 100% rating on his civil rights voting record. He was a Klansman once, but now he's a defender of civil rights. If I were a democrat I'd be proud to have him in my party.

Democratic Senator Robert Byrd used to be the leader of the Ku Klux Klan. So as far as racists go, both parties have them, dems and republicans. In fact, just about where ever you go you shouldn't have a problem finding someone who is racist.

My point is.....is it's very rediculous to pin point racism to one party.

A Local Leader. Not The Leader.

You've got one example of a Senator who has been trying to make amends for his past for his entire political career on one hand, and a party of current racists who try to dress their racism up in euphamism on the other. There is no equivalence there.

He was in it in his 20'sn ot teens. Again, thanks wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd#Participation_in_the_Ku_Klux_Klan)

Byrd vowed never to fight: "with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds."
You just can't make up for things like that.

He was in it in his 20'sn ot teens. Again, thanks wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd#Participation_in_the_Ku_Klux_Klan)


You just can't make up for things like that.

Yes you can. You can make up for it by fighting against racism and improving opportunities for those who are oppressed. That's exactly what Byrd is doing. The NAACP thinks he's doing a fine job. Who are you to say they're wrong, cracker?

Now, having actually read the article *chortle*

I see that she wasn't even racist.

She was ACCUSED of being anti-semetic, i.e. anti-jew. Not racist. She wasn't even being anti-semetic, but the campaign she was working for was too PC for a joke she made about a racist comment SOMEONE ELSE MADE (Sen. George Allen (R-Va.) ).

So all you've done by showing us this link is show us proof that these particular democrats are uptight and with almost no sense of humor. Nothing we didn't already know.

Yeah, I think that this entire thread was a bit of an overreaction.

He was in it in his 20'sn ot teens. Again, thanks wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd#Participation_in_the_Ku_Klux_Klan)


You just can't make up for things like that.

Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd#Views_on_race_and_race_relations) also records Byrd's current views on racism:

Byrd said that he regrets voting against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and would change it if he had the opportunity. In explanation of his vote he said, "We who were born in a southern environment...ought to get ahead of the curve and take down those [white only] signs ourselves. We shouldn't need a law to require us to do it." Byrd, however, said that he realized people were too set in their ways to integrate society on their own and therefore the Civil Rights Act became necessary. Byrd has also said that his views changed most dramatically after his teen-age grandson was killed in a 1982 traffic accident, which put him in a deep emotional valley." The death of my grandson caused me to stop and think," said Byrd, adding he came to realize that black people love their children as much as he does his.[23]

His voting record seems to be pretty good as well:

In the NAACP's [31] Congressional Report Card for the 108th Congress (spanning the 2003–2004 congressional session), Byrd was awarded with an approval rating of 100% for favoring the NAACP's position in all 33 bills presented to the United States Senate regarding issues of their concern. Only 16 other Senators of the same session matched this approval rating. In June 2005, Byrd [32] proposed an additional $10 million in federal funding for the Martin Luther King memorial in Washington, DC, remarking that "With the passage of time, we have come to learn that his Dream was the American Dream, and few ever expressed it more eloquently."

If it makes you feel better to blame Racism on Republicans then more power to you. As far as I know there isn't any more all white schools such as the all Black schools that we now have. Sorry, I forgot that isn't racism towards the whites.

"Im going to make New Orleans a chocolate city, once again." not an exact quote but pretty close to it by mayor Nagin who is a democrat.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBI2OY1joLA&search=nagin

then there's this......
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/03/11/moran.jews/

and then there is this.....
http://www.columbiachronicle.com/back/2004_spring/2004-04-19/opinions4.html

If it makes you feel better to blame Racism on Republicans then more power to you. As far as I know there isn't any more all white schools such as the all Black schools that we now have. Sorry, I forgot that isn't racism towards the whites.

"Im going to make New Orleans a chocolate city, once again." not an exact quote but pretty close to it by mayor Nagin who is a democrat.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBI2OY1joLA&search=nagin

then there's this......
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/03/11/moran.jews/

and then there is this.....
http://www.columbiachronicle.com/back/2004_spring/2004-04-19/opinions4.html

As someone said up above, you can find racists of just about any political stripe. If you read the article about what happened, you saw that the Democratic staffer who made the "Macacawitz" remark is gone, resigned, fired, let go, history. George Allen, who made the original "Macaca" remark, is still out there campaigning with the support of his party.

Didn't somone already say this? Oh, wait, it was me! :rolleyes:

He was in it in his 20'sn ot teens. Again, thanks wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd#Participation_in_the_Ku_Klux_Klan)


You just can't make up for things like that.

So we are condemned by the actions of our youth? We have no hope to ever overcome our previous mistakes? Can he retract those statements? No. Does that matter? Not particularly. Why doesn't it matter? Because he is a man who has helped push civil rights ahead by leaps and bounds, more than almost any other congressman.

Funny. It doesn't sound to me like it was a racist comment. Sounds more like he was accusing the guy of hypocrisy.

The guy (George Allen) reluctantly, and peevishly, admitted that he was Jewish, but then issued a lengthy press release explaining how not Jewish he was (I have a Jewish grandmother, but I eat ham and pork chops!!! please vote for me racists. pleeeeease!) because he knew that he had a racist conservative base. "Macacawitz" sounds like a jibe accusing him of being a racist's racist who is a member of one of the races that the racists hate.

This sounds more like how people called the South Park movie racist because it contained racism, but did so to mock it. But this guy just didn't want to bother with the battle over it and tried to leave quietly. I guess when conservatives are this desperate to find a Democrat, any democrat, who can be faulted for anything they'll find a racist organizer, an OCD dogcatcher, a flatulent librarian. Anything they can to distract attention from being the party of child molestation and torture.

no fair - you can't use facts and truth to fight republicans. reality has a well known leftwing bias. using it against them is just fighting dirty. how would you like it if you were constantly being attacked for all the stupid and evil shit you actually had done and were continuing to do?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100401762_pf.html

Gee, I thought only those wascawwy Wepubwicans could be racists! :p

I'm from South Carolina. Strom Thrumond was originally a Democrat.

Democrats bad, Rebuplicans worse. Nothing makes me happier than to see this nation united going in to elections.

no fair - you can't use facts and truth to fight republicans. reality has a well known leftwing bias. using it against them is just fighting dirty. how would you like it if you were constantly being attacked for all the stupid and evil shit you actually had done and were continuing to do?

ROFL.

No, liberals just change reality to fit the perspective they reached when they were 5 and knew everything. And if reality won't comply, you can always just ignore it.

From the admittedly limited understanding of this foreigner, wasn't the Democratic party the one (in contrast with the Republicans) that supported slavery, and continued to maintain a lot of support for this reason amongst the South after the Civil War?

Historically speaking, yes. Also, Woodrow Wilson, Democrat(Good leader-personal beliefs, no so much) was a huge bigot, from what I hear. And so forth and so on.

However, it's kind of shifted gears in recent years, with the democrats becoming the staple "diversity" party, and the Repubs being the "White dudes only" party, in lamens. This is largely self-evident when you look at the biggest Racist area, the south(Not saying all southerners are racists, here, but it has a higher concentration, especially in the more rural areas, than other parts of the country for many cultural and historical reasons). Historically, they voted Democrat up until sometime in the mid-ish 20th century, however, this rahter quickly changed into the Repubs basically turning into the Dems(Merely outward appearance anyway), and the Dems int o the Repubs.

Strange really how the two party completely shifted into the common thought of role of the other.

Until the 60's the Democrats were the party of all good southerners. My grandfather was a horrible old racist and a yellow dog democrat. Then the dems and republicans flip floped.

Uh, a common misconception. The second round of Civil Rights Acts was widely supported by Republicans in office. The South continued to elect Dixicrats until the rise of the neocons in the 80’s.

That hardly seems racist or derogatory towards Jews.

Tell me, has there been an uproar amongst the Jewish community?



And you don't have to worry about breaking the news that democrats can be racist:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd#Participation_in_the_Ku_Klux_Klan

Byrd has been in the Senate for 47 years.

Already 3 more apologists have brought up Byrd, in spite of all the posts detailing Byrd's repentance and good works to make up for his past. Tell me, Surf Shack--which group is it again that refuses to change its perspectives in the face of overwhelming evidence? :rolleyes:

That hardly seems racist or derogatory towards Jews.

Tell me, has there been an uproar amongst the Jewish community?

nope.

i suspect that what's at work here is that the morons over in the allen camp understand that calling allen a racist was a fairly effective attack, and they think that power is in the words themselves. it's a common mistake among the idiots of the world.

This is hilarious. What she said in no way compares to the allegations against Allen. I'm surprised that the rightwingers aren't decrying "PC-Bullshit getting an Organizer fired!"...

This is hilarious. What she said in no way compares to the allegations against Allen. I'm surprised that the rightwingers aren't decrying "PC-Bullshit getting an Organizer fired!"...

It would be more in keeping with their MO.

In case anyone missed the 87 times it was brought up, Byrd was in the KKK.

It's important, when discussing an example of a racist Democrat, to bring up the only good example there is of another racist Democrat.

This is from 2001 when he was interviewed on TV....... http://www.jewishworldreview.com/michelle/malkin030801.asp

and here is his vote record regarding immigration...you decide.... http://profiles.numbersusa.com/improfile.php3?DistSend=WV&VIPID=881

In case anyone missed the 87 times it was brought up, Byrd was in the KKK.

It's important, when discussing an example of a racist Democrat, to bring up the only good example there is of another racist Democrat.

You must've missed my earlier post of a few different racist democrats.

In case it escaped your notice, the OP has fled off into the night once again.

In other words, please don't feed the troll.

You must've missed my earlier post of a few different racist democrats.

None of which matters, the possible racism of individual members of the Democratic Party does not erase the fact that democrats in general have been much more responsive to minority issues.

All you are doing is proving the foregone conclusion that racism is not monopolized by one political party.

None of which matters, the possible racism of individual members of the Democratic Party does not erase the fact that democrats in general have been much more responsive to minority issues.

All you are doing is proving the foregone conclusion that racism is not monopolized by one political party.

I see......"none of which matters," but when it is Republicans like Trent Lott it does matter......So basicly it is okay for democrats and their racial remarks but Republicans on the other hand should immediately resign.

How is that right? Actually, I am sure I could come up with a lot more racist comments from democrats who were allowed to remain in office without any backlash. In fact, it is typically brushed aside as no big deal but quite the opposite for republicans. How come?

I see......"none of which matters," but when it is Republicans like Trent Lott it does matter......So basicly it is okay for democrats and their racial remarks but Republicans on the other hand should immediately resign.

How is that right? Actually, I am sure I could come up with a lot more racist comments from democrats who were allowed to remain in office without any backlash. In fact, it is typically brushed aside as no big deal but quite the opposite for republicans. How come?

Did I say that a democrat should get away with racist views? I'm pretty sure I didn't.

I only said that this instance does not sound a bit racist, and that, if it did, it doesn't show that the Democratic Party as a whole is racist, as the policies they have generally pursued imply quite the opposite.

And ultimately, it is up to the voters to decide whether someone pays for their racist views.

I see......"none of which matters," but when it is Republicans like Trent Lott it does matter......So basicly it is okay for democrats and their racial remarks but Republicans on the other hand should immediately resign.I don't know, has Allen resigned? Has the Democrat Organizer resigned?

How is that right? Actually, I am sure I could come up with a lot more racist comments from democrats who were allowed to remain in office without any backlash. In fact, it is typically brushed aside as no big deal but quite the opposite for republicans. How come?Do it.

Here's a list....... http://members.tripod.com/~GOPcapitalist/democratrecord.html

and how bout Hillary....http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/06/elec04.s.mo.farmer.clinton.ap/index.html

hmmm.....I wonder....... http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=15893 ..... nah couldn't be.

could this be true.... http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/3554.html .....if your a democrat, of course not......to the real world.....Absolutely

hmmm.....I wonder....... http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=15893 ..... nah couldn't be.


Uh, that's common knowledge, I thought? However, the current incarnation of the Republican party and Democrat party are vastly different from their 19th century counterparts.

Bigotry exists on both sides.

I really do not see what is being argued here... that Republicans are all for Civil Rights because of what they did 150 years ago, that Dems are all racists because of a few of them?

Well, history, and life, just is not that simple. That's all I really need to say. Rash generalizations are not only counterproductive, but also proove nothing. The fallacy of inductive reasoning at it's finest.

Here's a list....... http://members.tripod.com/~GOPcapitalist/democratrecord.html

and how bout Hillary....http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/06/elec04.s.mo.farmer.clinton.ap/index.html

hmmm.....I wonder....... http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=15893 ..... nah couldn't be.

could this be true.... http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/3554.html .....if your a democrat, of course not......to the real world.....Absolutely

Hmmm. Hillary made a bad and tasteless joke and apologized. There's a huge fucking gulf between that and hanging a noose in your law office, and if you can't see that, you're a fucking idiot.

The Human Events Online article acts as though civil rights legislation stopped being passed in the 60s--completely ignores history since then, which it has to in order for its thesis to stand up--and lies about the Michael Steele Oreo event. In short, it never happened.

The HNN link does address post-60s events, but makes it sound like 1) Reagan and Bush were champions of African Americans when they weren't, simply by ignoring the time period and 2) makes it sound like Clinton had supreme power and deliberately ignored situations like Rwanda, when it was clear from the beginning of that crisis that the Republican Congress had absolutely no desire to intervene either. Clinton is not blameless on that score, but he certainly doesn't deserve to hang alone.

I'll take the record of the post-60s Democrats over the Republicans anyday of the week, and so will most African-Americans. There's a reason Dubya's approval rating among them was at 2% last year--they aren't stupid. They know how enough Republicans feel about them.

My point is simply for those convinced that the dems are 100% for the minorities. So yes I felt it appropriate to display the facts and no it is not about "150 yrs ago" it's from the past to the present and I expect it to play a part in the future. On both sides of the ball not just the Republican side.

My point is simply for those convinced that the dems are 100% for the minorities. So yes I felt it appropriate to display the facts and no it is not about "150 yrs ago" it's from the past to the present and I expect it to play a part in the future. On both sides of the ball not just the Republican side.

Except that your facts are specious at best. Are there racists on both sides? Certainly. But where are there more of them? Which side sports support from the CCC and other white supremacist groups? Which side traditionally gets support from African-Americans? Answer those last two questions honestly, and you'll answer the second one too. You might not like the answer, but you'll have it all the same.

Hmmm. Hillary made a bad and tasteless joke and apologized. There's a huge fucking gulf between that and hanging a noose in your law office, and if you can't see that, you're a fucking idiot.

The Human Events Online article acts as though civil rights legislation stopped being passed in the 60s--completely ignores history since then, which it has to in order for its thesis to stand up--and lies about the Michael Steele Oreo event. In short, it never happened.

The HNN link does address post-60s events, but makes it sound like 1) Reagan and Bush were champions of African Americans when they weren't, simply by ignoring the time period and 2) makes it sound like Clinton had supreme power and deliberately ignored situations like Rwanda, when it was clear from the beginning of that crisis that the Republican Congress had absolutely no desire to intervene either. Clinton is not blameless on that score, but he certainly doesn't deserve to hang alone.

I'll take the record of the post-60s Democrats over the Republicans anyday of the week, and so will most African-Americans. There's a reason Dubya's approval rating among them was at 2% last year--they aren't stupid. They know how enough Republicans feel about them.


Do have Rev. Jackson or AL Sharpton next to you.....sounds like it. I know it's hard to face the hard facts some times, no need to be so jumpy or irritated.......I was just stating some facts that they're are many racist people out there that aren't republicans...No need to over react.

Also, I do believe Trent Lott apologized and I personally don't feel that he made a strong racist comment.....He was simply praising a 90 yr old or however old he was 100, maybe for his birthday.

Except that your facts are specious at best. Are there racists on both sides? Certainly. But where are there more of them? Which side sports support from the CCC and other white supremacist groups? Which side traditionally gets support from African-Americans? Answer those last two questions honestly, and you'll answer the second one too. You might not like the answer, but you'll have it all the same.

Predictions:

Byrd was Part of the KKK
"Traditionally" the Repub party got more support from blacks originally
"Traditionally" the Dem party got more support from the white supremes originally

Just what I predict.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100401762_pf.html

Gee, I thought only those wascawwy Wepubwicans could be racists! :p

You know what (this isn't directed to the OP) This is the OP's topic so I am well in the topic debating the fact that "only those wascawwy Wepubwicans could be racists!"

So WTF are you, NAZZ, getting so defensive on me bringing up the fact that Racism is in the heart of the democratic party from past to present.

I know, sometimes it's hard being a democrat to face the truth...To you, I say, Get over it and move on.......Next.

Do have Rev. Jackson or AL Sharpton next to you.....sounds like it. I know it's hard to face the hard facts some times, no need to be so jumpy or irritated.......I was just stating some facts that they're are many racist people out there that aren't republicans...No need to over react.

Also, I do believe Trent Lott apologized and I personally don't feel that he made a strong racist comment.....He was simply praising a 90 yr old or however old he was 100, maybe for his birthday.

What the fuck is that supposed to mean?

Except that your facts are specious at best. Are there racists on both sides? Certainly. But where are there more of them? Which side sports support from the CCC and other white supremacist groups? Which side traditionally gets support from African-Americans? Answer those last two questions honestly, and you'll answer the second one too. You might not like the answer, but you'll have it all the same.

I think you need to read the OP again.....did he ask who has more racists? I think not.

You must've missed my earlier post of a few different racist democrats.

No. You confuse "must've missed" with "dismissed as entirely irrelevant to what this stupid staffer said". We can all point at examples of both parties saying racist shit. Not the point.

You know what (this isn't directed to the OP) This is the OP's topic so I am well in the topic debating the fact that "only those wascawwy Wepubwicans could be racists!"

So WTF are you, NAZZ, getting so defensive on me bringing up the fact that Racism is in the heart of the democratic party from past to present.

I know, sometimes it's hard being a democrat to face the truth...To you, I say, Get over it and move on.......Next.

It was in the past. No one here has denied the Democratic party's racist past. You know why? Because we know it and are rightfully ashamed of it, and have busted our collective asses for the last 40 years to rectify those mistakes.

You're the one who can't seem to face the truth that your party--and don't try to play that "I'm unafflliated" bullshit card here because no one's buying it--your party is the one that took up the mantle of racism when Nixon ran with the Southern strategy and has held it ever since then.

And the proof is in the voting, because to claim otherwise is to claim that African-Americans are too stupid to know which party is best for them. Are you ready to make that argument? Well?

I think you need to read the OP again.....did he ask who has more racists? I think not.

We've moved well beyond the OP. Don't try to hide behind him now that you're being outed as the racist you apparently are--or was there some other reason for that bullshit Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson crack?

It was in the past. No one here has denied the Democratic party's racist past. You know why? Because we know it and are rightfully ashamed of it, and have busted our collective asses for the last 40 years to rectify those mistakes.

You're the one who can't seem to face the truth that your party--and don't try to play that "I'm unafflliated" bullshit card here because no one's buying it--your party is the one that took up the mantle of racism when Nixon ran with the Southern strategy and has held it ever since then.

And the proof is in the voting, because to claim otherwise is to claim that African-Americans are too stupid to know which party is best for them. Are you ready to make that argument? Well?

If that were true, of African americans, then how come the dems did their damnest to prevent Condi Rice from her current position. You'd think the dems would have been happy about having the first female African American in the States Department. So can you explain why the dems fought tooth and nail to see that she didn't get that position? If you really believe that the dems are not racist today, then you really are a fool. Not to long ago didn't Howard Dean make a confederate flag remark, Hilliary's not so funny jokes, and the list goes on and on in today's society not only yesterdays but todays.

We've moved well beyond the OP. Don't try to hide behind him now that you're being outed as the racist you apparently are--or was there some other reason for that bullshit Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson crack?

Yes I am really a racist.......hmmm that's why one of my roommates is a male cuban with a cuban son....this is also the reason I opened my home to an Asian pregnant female. Yes I am so racist......and I am white....go figure.

and yes there is a reason for that Al Sharpton and Jackson comment......because as they do they speak out freely how racism is only in the Republican party in todays world as you do so Yes I felt it was a fair comparison.

Try again.....

If that were true, of African americans, then how come the dems did their damnest to prevent Condi Rice from her current position. You'd think the dems would have been happy about having the first female African American in the States Department. So can you explain why the dems fought tooth and nail to see that she didn't get that position? If you really believe that the dems are not racist today, then you really are a fool. Not to long ago didn't Howard Dean make a confederate flag remark, Hilliary's not so funny jokes, and the list goes on and on in today's society not only yesterdays but todays.

Let me try to explain something to you. We fought Condi Rice for Sec State (and we didn't fight all that hard) because she was an inept NSA. It had nothing to do with her skin color--or are you suggesting that she should have gotten a pass because she's black? Who's the real apologist here? She did a shitty job as NSA and she hasn't done much better as Sec State, so it seems the Dems were a better judge of character than the Republicans were--as per usual.

Yes I am really a racist.......hmmm that's why one of my roommates is a male cuban with a cuban son....this is also the reason I opened my home to an Asian pregnant female. Yes I am so racist......and I am white....go figure.

Try again.....Your words testify against you.

If that were true, of African americans, then how come the dems did their damnest to prevent Condi Rice from her current position. You'd think the dems would have been happy about having the first female African-American...
You aren't that thick in real life, are you..?

If that were true, of African americans, then how come the dems did their damnest to prevent Condi Rice from her current position. You'd think the dems would have been happy about having the first female African American in the States Department. So can you explain why the dems fought tooth and nail to see that she didn't get that position? If you really believe that the dems are not racist today, then you really are a fool. Not to long ago didn't Howard Dean make a confederate flag remark, Hilliary's not so funny jokes, and the list goes on and on in today's society not only yesterdays but todays.

Maybe because Condi is an incompetent bafoon? Seriously, just because they tried to make sure someone whom they thought unqualified to get a job does not make them racist. Also, party politics plays alot. Trust me, the Repubs would have done the exact same thing, regardless of who was nominated. And hell, so would the Dems. If Mr. Caucasian himself were nominated by the Repubs, there would be a flurry of Dems trying their hardest to make damn sure he/she didn't get through.

And, using your own faulty logic: The Republican's largest support area is the south, which is widely known for not only past, but also present, racism. Thus, Republicans are very racist.

Let me try to explain something to you. We fought Condi Rice for Sec State (and we didn't fight all that hard) because she was an inept NSA. It had nothing to do with her skin color--or are you suggesting that she should have gotten a pass because she's black? Who's the real apologist here? She did a shitty job as NSA and she hasn't done much better as Sec State, so it seems the Dems were a better judge of character than the Republicans were--as per usual.

Wow you sound as if you are a democratic rep or senator. Are you? If you are that will explain the "oh so intense" on the defensive side.

Wow you sound as if you are a democratic rep or senator. Are you? If you are that will explain the "oh so intense" on the defensive side.

Nice point out someone as being “Defensive” when they do a fairly good showing you the errors of your ways.

Wow you sound as if you are a democratic rep or senator. Are you? If you are that will explain the "oh so intense" on the defensive side.
Wow, you sound like Corny, only ever so slightly more intellectual.

Nice point out someone as being “Defensive” when they do a fairly good showing you the errors of your ways.

On that, I disagree. I simply had links of facts of racism in the democratic party and he nearly had a stroke. That's okay though, I understand the Dems don't like to face the facts when they're directed at them.

Wow you sound as if you are a democratic rep or senator. Are you? If you are that will explain the "oh so intense" on the defensive side.

Classic flaw of logic. Ad hominem. When you no longer can argue effectively, your argument turns into an attack against the person himself, rather than on the validity of the argument. This in turn shows that you have(usually) been bested.

Wow you sound as if you are a democratic rep or senator. Are you? If you are that will explain the "oh so intense" on the defensive side.No, I'm just a partisan Democrat who grew up and lived most of his life in the south, and has seen firsthand the switch of the racism of the parties. I'm a Dem in large part because I despise racism and all it stands for. So go ahead, try to cheapshot your way out of this discussion--it won't work.

On that, I disagree. I simply had links of facts of racism in the democratic party and he nearly had a stroke. That's okay though, I understand the Dems don't like to face the facts when they're directed at them.

Obviously you missed the post where stated the exact opposite, and stating that the Dem party is working damn hard to rectify their errors of the past.

Of course, selective "hearing" or reading in this case, is prevalent.

You mean there is more to a person than their political affiliations?!

I'll alert the media.:rolleyes:

Yeah. Like that'll do any good...you can alert them, but they never really seem terribly alert, do they?

hmmm......well the fact remains that there are racists throughout both parties not only of the past but in fact, the present too. I have also learned that you really cannot win a debate, when you attempt to do so with one sided minds.

I have already gave numerous links showing how there are plenty of racist democrats in today's politics.....you have chosen to ignore the facts...that's your problem not mine.

I showed the links to debate the OP on racism of one party which is totally absurd. It lies within both parties whether or not you like it. It is a Fact and if you choose to show a blind eye to it so be it, it is your right to do so.

hmmm......well the fact remains that there are racists throughout both parties not only of the past but in fact, the present too. I have also learned that you really cannot win a debate, when you attempt to do so with one sided minds.

I have already gave numerous links showing how there are plenty of racist democrats in today's politics.....you have chosen to ignore the facts...that's your problem not mine.

I showed the links to debate the OP on racism of one party which is totally absurd. It lies within both parties whether or not you like it. It is a Fact and if you choose to show a blind eye to it so be it, it is your right to do so.

Nobody is disputing that there are racists in the Dem party-what is being argued is that the Democratic party is

A)No longer on the extreme racism end
B)Now generally working towards "diversity"

Nobody is disputing that there are racists in the Dem party-what is being argued is that the Democratic party is

A)No longer on the extreme racism end
B)Now generally working towards "diversity"

It won't matter how many times we write that. King Bodacious has a terminal case of the false equivalencies, and there's no known cure.

On that, I disagree. I simply had links of facts of racism in the democratic party and he nearly had a stroke. That's okay though, I understand the Dems don't like to face the facts when they're directed at them.And you're independent? You seem pretty republican to me.

If it makes you feel better to blame Racism on Republicans then more power to you. As far as I know there isn't any more all white schools such as the all Black schools that we now have.
*snip*


Regardless of its color, perhaps you should have paid more attention to the teachers at your school....

So we are condemned by the actions of our youth? We have no hope to ever overcome our previous mistakes? Can he retract those statements? No. Does that matter? Not particularly. Why doesn't it matter? Because he is a man who has helped push civil rights ahead by leaps and bounds, more than almost any other congressman.

If anyone should be agreeing with this, it should be Bush supporters. Hell, W didn't figure out how to not do coke and drink his body weight until he was forty. FORTY! So I think we can let Byrd go for having racist parents in a racist environment which he didn't pilosophically escape until his late 20s. He's done a far more admirable job of atoning for the sins of his youth than W.

Well... can we at least all agree that racism is inherently stupid and wrong?
(start with common ground, then eventually we'll find harmony :D)

KILL ALL RACISTS!

Historically speaking, yes. Also, Woodrow Wilson, Democrat(Good leader-personal beliefs, no so much) was a huge bigot, from what I hear. And so forth and so on.

However, it's kind of shifted gears in recent years, with the democrats becoming the staple "diversity" party, and the Repubs being the "White dudes only" party, in lamens. This is largely self-evident when you look at the biggest Racist area, the south(Not saying all southerners are racists, here, but it has a higher concentration, especially in the more rural areas, than other parts of the country for many cultural and historical reasons). Historically, they voted Democrat up until sometime in the mid-ish 20th century, however, this rahter quickly changed into the Repubs basically turning into the Dems(Merely outward appearance anyway), and the Dems int o the Repubs.

Strange really how the two party completely shifted into the common thought of role of the other.

Come on up to rural North Dakota if you'd care to sample racism. It's not overt at all, but if you live here a while, you'll start seeing it. Rural northern areas, I've found, tend to be racist on the basic principles of A) they don't have a lot of different races around, B) having select races like Beaners (ask Carlos Mencia, I can use that term) doing field grunt work or Native Americans on reservations either dirt poor or casino rich. It's less to do with geography and more to do with population density. And no, I'm not condemning all rural areas in the midwest, mountains or north, but just going on what I've experienced in Atlanta and Orlando versus what I've experienced in Burley, Idaho and Williston, ND.

Byrd was given a 100% rating on his civil rights voting record. He was a Klansman once, but now he's a defender of civil rights. If I were a democrat I'd be proud to have him in my party.I wouldn't. Acid rain's a bitch.

Wait a sec -- I have the solution to this endless bickering...even though only one side's bickering...Bodacious bickers and Nazz points out how he's misinformed or some such, and Bodacious changes courses. Like arguing with a teflon snake.

Anyway, I'll bow out of here with the answer, from Avenue Q
EVERYONE'S a little bit racist!

There. Problem solved, let's all get on with life.

Come on up to rural North Dakota if you'd care sample racism. It's not overt at all, but if you live here a while, you'll start seeing it. Rural northern areas, I've found, tend to be racist on the basic principles of A) they don't have a lot of different races around, B) having select races like Beaners (ask Carlos Mencia, I can use that term) doing field grunt work or Native Americans on reservations either dirt poor or casino rich. It's less to do with geography and more to do with population density. And no, I'm not condemning all rural areas in the midwest, mountains or north, but just going on what I've experienced in Atlanta and Orlando versus what I've experienced in Burley, Idaho and Williston, ND.

I live in Minnesota, so I know how it gets. However, in this area there is a different type of racism than "hatred", usually. There is still racism here, but it's more along the line of racial stereotypes and where different people's "places" in term of society, depressing that such stereotypes still exist, really.

Come on up to rural North Dakota if you'd care sample racism. It's not overt at all, but if you live here a while, you'll start seeing it. Rural northern areas, I've found, tend to be racist on the basic principles of A) they don't have a lot of different races around, B) having select races like Beaners (ask Carlos Mencia, I can use that term) doing field grunt work or Native Americans on reservations either dirt poor or casino rich. It's less to do with geography and more to do with population density. And no, I'm not condemning all rural areas in the midwest, mountains or north, but just going on what I've experienced in Atlanta and Orlando versus what I've experienced in Burley, Idaho and Williston, ND.

I don't think it's a coincidence that in general terms, the most openly racist areas tend to be the most rural. It's because there's a lack of diversity, a lack of experience with the other, and since we fear what we don't know, there's a lot of irrational fear of other races in places where there's not much diversity.

The exception to this is, of course, the rural south, where racism against blacks is abundant, even though they've been living side by side for generations. And there are some people who attribute it to a fear of displacement--poor whites are afraid that they'll be displaced by poor blacks economically and socially, and so they lash out as a result.

I live in Minnesota, so I know how it gets. However, in this area there is a different type of racism than "hatred", usually. There is still racism here, but it's more along the line of racial stereotypes and where different people's "places" in term of society, depressing that such stereotypes still exist, really.

Good point. More inexperience than hatred.

You mean there is more to a person than their political affiliations?!

I'll alert the media.:rolleyes:

Too late, the media is onto the morality of politicians like white on rice.They have found this cesspool to be a veritible gold mine and Joe Sixpack at home watching the 6 O'Clock news eats it up.

Am I the only one that is actually heartened by the fact that a “racist democrat” is so rare (or perceived so rare) that it warrants this sort of attention when one isn’t?

I live in Minnesota, so I know how it gets. However, in this area there is a different type of racism than "hatred", usually. There is still racism here, but it's more along the line of racial stereotypes and where different people's "places" in term of society, depressing that such stereotypes still exist, really.

Same here ... from small town minnesota as well

Am I the only one that is actually heartened by the fact that a “racist democrat” is so rare (or perceived so rare) that it warrants this sort of attention when one isn’t?
It is a good feeling, isn't it?

Same here ... from small town minnesota as well

You know where Detroit Lakes is? Well, that's where I was born. Went to school in a small town a few miles away though, lived in the middle of freakin nowhere. Quite depressing during the winter.

From the admittedly limited understanding of this foreigner, wasn't the Democratic party the one (in contrast with the Republicans) that supported slavery, and continued to maintain a lot of support for this reason amongst the South after the Civil War?

It's actually a bit complicated. In the civil war, the Republicans were the anti-slavery party, and the democrats were basically the southern party (pro-slavery).

In the late 19th century, the Republican party increasingly became the party of Big Business, and so people who were not in favor of the latter didn't particularly like the Republican party. So, from then on until the 1960's, the Democratic party had both the most conservative (socially) people in the nation and the most liberal ones as well.

Then in the 1960's, that changed, and the liberal wing of the democratic party took over basically, helped by Lyndon Johnson pushing through several civil rights laws, and so that drove most of the southern racist democrats out of the party and into the Republican party.

That's a simplified summary of it. Someone will probably find a reason to argue with me on some minute point of it.

It's actually a bit complicated. In the civil war, the Republicans were the anti-slavery party, and the democrats were basically the southern party (pro-slavery).

In the late 19th century, the Republican party increasingly became the party of Big Business, and so people who were not in favor of the latter didn't particularly like the Republican party. So, from then on until the 1960's, the Democratic party had both the most conservative (socially) people in the nation and the most liberal ones as well.

Then in the 1960's, that changed, and the liberal wing of the democratic party took over basically, helped by Lyndon Johnson pushing through several civil rights laws, and so that drove most of the southern racist democrats out of the party and into the Republican party.

That's a simplified summary of it. Someone will probably find a reason to argue with me on some minute point of it.
The only ones who will argue with you are the ones like New Mitanni and King Bodacious who want to convince people that Republicans are still the party of Lincoln instead of the party of Strom Thurmond and Trent Lott.

Wait a sec -- I have the solution to this endless bickering...even though only one side's bickering...Bodacious bickers and Nazz points out how he's misinformed or some such, and Bodacious changes courses. Like arguing with a teflon snake.

Anyway, I'll bow out of here with the answer, from Avenue Q
EVERYONE'S a little bit racist!

There. Problem solved, let's all get on with life.

Oh noes! We cannot all be a bit racist! Have you not seen the NS "are you a racist" polls in which only one person replies yes? Have you not seen the righteous finger pointing and condemning to hell of ANYONE who admits to ever having used the "N" word? There is no room for grey in our colorblind world you know. Only black and white. Only we cant use the terms black or white anymore because those are racist terms which divide us. So we only have room for absence of light and full spectrum light in our brave new world thank you very much. Sit down shut up and quit making waves or prepare to be struck down for seeing the emporers lack of clothing in a wave of anti racist hysteria.

You know where Detroit Lakes is? Well, that's where I was born. Went to school in a small town a few miles away though, lived in the middle of freakin nowhere. Quite depressing during the winter.

St. Joseph (Farming town sort of by St. Cloud) here

Family origionaly from the Virgina minnesota area (I was born down here though)

It is a good feeling, isn't it?

I thought so … he was trying to point out a flaw in the “Steriotype” but thinking about it and how much people are assholes all over the spectrum … it is kind of a good thing that this is perceived as a not so common occurrence on the left

My favorite racist in the Democratic party is Jesse "hymie-town" Jackson. He cracks me up.

St. Joseph (Farming town sort of by St. Cloud) here

Family origionaly from the Virgina minnesota area (I was born down here though)

Ah, a SOUTHERN Minnesotan. Ah, you're all a bunch of thin-skinned fat-cats, sitting on your purple cushions eating Caviar and drinking Champagne.:D

Okay then let's try this...... http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/3554.html
and then their is this..... http://www.washtimes.com/metro/20051103-120701-5604r.htm & again.... http://www.washingtontimes.com/metro/20051101-104932-4054r.htm
here's this.....I'm sure you will deny it all (as History as taught us)..... http://www.akdart.com/lib8.html

Ah, a SOUTHERN Minnesotan. Ah, you're all a bunch of thin-skinned fat-cats, sitting on your purple cushions eating Caviar and drinking Champagne.:D

Lol I spend an awful lot of time up in gilbert and bawabik to be called compleatly a fat cat lol

Honestly, none of you have shown me facts of evidence that the dems are the party of diversity and champions of civil rights......All you have done was attempt in flaming and flame baiting.......None of you have shown any proof on this "genuine champion of civil rights better known as Democrats"......You have proven to me one thing.........You just don't get it......blah

Okay then let's try this...... http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/3554.html
and then their is this..... http://www.washtimes.com/metro/20051103-120701-5604r.htm & again.... http://www.washingtontimes.com/metro/20051101-104932-4054r.htm
here's this.....I'm sure you will deny it all (as History as taught us)..... http://www.akdart.com/lib8.html

Again, no matter how many times the Washington Times and other right-wing sources say it, there is absolutely no proof that the Oreo incident happened. And are you really going to call Steve Giliard, a black blogger, a racist because he called out a black politician? Spare me.

Honestly, none of you have shown me facts of evidence that the dems are the party of diversity and champions of civil rights......All you have done was attempt in flaming and flame baiting.......None of you have shown any proof on this "genuine champion of civil rights better known as Democrats"......You have proven to me one thing.........You just don't get it......blah
You've proven one thing, yourself--you wouldn't change your mind no matter what proof you're shown. You've been pwned throughout this thread and you refuse to answer any proof that shows you to be wrong.

Honestly, none of you have shown me facts of evidence that the dems are the party of diversity and champions of civil rights......All you have done was attempt in flaming and flame baiting.......None of you have shown any proof on this "genuine champion of civil rights better known as Democrats"......You have proven to me one thing.........You just don't get it......blahWell, for someone harping on about "facts" that are predominately "history" according to the articles and editorials you cite, you don't really get it either.

Well, for someone harping on about "facts" that are predominately "history" according to the articles and editorials you cite, you don't really get it either.

Actually, I did show quite a few links to current racist democrats, quite a lot of them. But since I am obviously talking with left wingers it is virtually impossible for the likes of you to except it and to brush it aside. That's typical politicians stances....Denial.

Nobody on this topic has shown me any evidence to convince me other wise. I sure the hell won't take your words for it. Where's the proof that Democrats are genuinely non-racists?

Actually, I did show quite a few links to current racist democrats, quite a lot of them. But since I am obviously talking with left wingers it is virtually impossible for the likes of you to except it and to brush it aside. That's typical politicians stances....Denial.

Nobody on this topic has shown me any evidence to convince me other wise. I sure the hell won't take your words for it. Where's the proof that Democrats are genuinely non-racists?
It's funny how this thread has progressed:

--> Democrats are RACISTS!!!
--> Your referring to a statement that was much less "racist" than the one its referring to, by a Republican, who happens to be under allegations of not only using racist slurs, but also placing the severed head of a deer in a black family's mailbox. This is your evidence that Democrats are racists?

Besides: Robert Byrd
--> You're saying Democrats aren't racists!
--> No, no one is saying that!
--> I can't talk to leftwingers. They don't listen to my splendid points.

Get a grip.

The only ones who will argue with you are the ones like New Mitanni and King Bodacious who want to convince people that Republicans are still the party of Lincoln instead of the party of Strom Thurmond and Trent Lott.

Oh good. I'd be troubled if those types didn't disagree with me.

Oh good. I'd be troubled if those types didn't disagree with me.
I take great pride in it.

More like the blacks have been shit on by slavery, jim crow, and racism for so long that a program to give them jobs and better access to education might help them rebuild their communities and achieve economic equality. The slaves who toiled to build this nation's economy weren't able to earn money for their kids to inherit and use to build businesses and strong communities, so affirmative action helps even the economic score.

In a hurry. I'll try to get to that later.

Err... what universe do you live in where Woodrow Wilson (known KKK member), George Wallace, Lester Maddox, Robert Byrd (known KKK Klegal), Ernest Hollings, etc. etc. ad nasueum, were Republicans?


I swear, if I had a nickel for every time a Republican apologist pulled out Byrd as an equivalence for the institutional racism inherent in their own party, I wouldn't be eating Ramen Noodles this week, that's for damn sure.

I don't trust the man on that at all.

I especially like how Daistallia didn't name a Republican after 1970 who was an outstanding proponent of civil rights (though they certainly exist) and didn't name a racist Democrat from after that time (though they certainly exist as well).

Err... Robert Byrd is current and Ernest Hollings only retired last year (and you can't tell me that shitheel wasn't racist).

Wonder why that is?

1) Because it wasn't a list of Republicans.
2) That isn't true. 2 of the 5 I named are current of very recent.

I haven't read all 9 pages, so forgive me if somebody has already said this, but; does anyone else suspect that congressional candidate Al Weed is a pseudonym?

Anita Bonghit anyone?

Exactly. And "Macacawitz" is a parroting of Allen's own reference to someone whose ethnicity I forget as "Macaca." The staffer has been fired (allowed to resign) but Allen's still running, right?
OP is a great example of strawman - and desperation by GOP apologists.

This whole issue stems from poor, maligned Allen refering to S.R. Sidarth, who was filming the an Allen campaign stop as a "tracker" for the opposing Jim Webb campaign, as a "macaca" not once, but twice.
For those of you who don't know, the term "macaca" is a racial slur.
According to Wikipedia:
"Macaca" is a dismissive epithet used by francophone colonials in Central Africa's Belgian Congo for the native population. It may be derived from the name of the genus comprising macaque monkeys. The word macaque has also been used as a racial slur. The macaque's genus name, Macaca, is a latinization of the Bantu (Kongo) ma-kako, meaning "monkey".
(have to give Allen his dues: he certainly knows his racist taunts - I'd never heard of this slur before now)
Thus we have a US senator calling a someone with dark skin a bush monkey and proceeding happily on his way, with no outcry at all from people like New Mitani.
And then we have someone else flinging the term back at said US senator - and being fired from their job because of it - and now have to suffer an huge indiginant roar of disapproval from the increasingly desperate GOP supporters.

If the hypocrisy wasn't so galling, it'd be amusing.

Okay then let's try this...... http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/3554.html

After reviewing all of the evidence, many believe America would have never experienced racism to the degree that it has, had not the Democrats promoted it through:

Racist Legislation
Terrorist Organizations

You're really going to want to find some more credible links.

Today many white Democrats are opposed to paying African Americans trillions of dollars in Reparation Pay, money that should be paid by the Democratic Party.

Like I said... you're really going to want to find more credible links.

Also, that's an editorial, not a news source by any means. Keep trying.

Ehm.... there are certainly some racist people in almost every political party in the world.

Plus there was Woodrow Wilson way before this... (although his League of Nations idea was at least good).

Yes I am really a racist.......hmmm that's why one of my roommates is a male cuban with a cuban son....this is also the reason I opened my home to an Asian pregnant female. Yes I am so racist......and I am white....go figure.
"Ohhh...I'm not a racist! I let a slanty-eye in my house! So there!"
("It happens so rarely that I can tell you exactly who they were, when it was and why but that doesn't mean anything!")

What next? Gonna tell us that you're not racist cause you let a black man mow your lawns?