It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Where is the outrage from the Left?

page: 2
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by MaxBlack
 


Thanks for the well thought out post! The term racist has certainly evolved with particular attention to the past year. That label has been used as the default attack and defense in virtually all left vs. right debates over Obama's policy decisions and his ideologies.

Trent Lott got strung up for saying far less back in 2002. The pressure was so great that his own party put the clamps on him.

Unfortunately, all innocent tea party members were lumped together and thrown under the bus by the usual talking heads based on the ignorance of some heavily highlighted and featured dolts at these events. These dolts exist on both sides of the aisle but only those that appear from the right get MSM air time. If I could use an argument from the left, I would say that these extreme dolts were plants from the left to deflate the tea party movement.

Oh well. The double standard has always been there and always will until the general public says enough is enough.




posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by AllexxisF1

Originally posted by jibeho

Actually most of the complaining is about the flaming double standard that exists within the left. The Undeniable double standard!


So let me get this straight.

Republican racists are peeved off because Reid isn't getting the same share of people being pissed off.

Speaking of double standard, I don't remember you making a thread about the considerable racist posters during the tea bagger idiot parades.

Yet you find time to lambast a comment by a Democrat spoken off the record two years ago.

That's the text book definition of a double standard.

Thanks for playing the fake outrage of the week from the RNC.


Wow! Please identify the "peeved off Republican racists". Classic response tactic. You have just further dicounted your comments into the circular file.

So the comments made by the Senate MAJORITY LEADER are ok because he made them off the record two years ago. Great!!

Nice try comparing Reid to some idiot posters who were banned for making inane comments on ATS. I see what you're trying to play...

Thanks for sharing. Check your rose colored glasses at the door.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 11:09 AM
link   
Although I agree with some of the posts in this thread calling out some of the obvious comments made by some right members of this political piece of crap we call the congress, I must say that this isn't sitting well with many of my minority friends.

Anyway, here is the response from the left:


Dems rally behind Reid...

Not much outrage really.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 11:26 AM
link   
Plenty of people on "the left" are unhappy about his comments, if you're talking about actual left-leaning voters and not the media or the Democratic party leadership (who aren't leftist, for heaven's sake, by anyone's standards other than certain factions of the American public). And a lot of said leftists wouldn't mind Reid stepping down at all, at least from what I've heard.

Some Democrats probably don't see it as quite as much of a double standard because in their view, people like Reid are racist off-the-record and still support measures they see as fighting racism, while Republicans who make similar comments are seen as worsening the situation for minorities all-around. And they have to cling to the idea that Democrats have ideals in line with theirs when they feel that Republicans are actively working against those ideals. There are two choices and people who go for a third are "throwing their vote away," don't you know.


Personally, I'd rather not be represented by people like Reid who have such antiquated ideas, but that's what you get with these career politicians.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho
Trent Lott lost his leadership position for saying far less back in 2002. Obama even called for his resignation back in his Senate days. Simply because Lott praised the career of a fellow ELECTED Congressman.
[edit on 11-1-2010 by jibeho]


Okay...Trent Lott said far less? Let's take a look...



The comment in question was delivered one week ago during a 100th birthday party for the retiring Thurmond -- a party that often resembled a roast of the South Carolina Republican.

Lott noted that in Thurmond's 1948 presidential campaign, whose centerpiece was opposition to integration, Mississippi was one of four Thurmond carried.

"We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years either," Lott said.

archives.cnn.com...

Hmmm.

Okay Lott said that integrating the south was a mistake and if the rest of the country had kept segregation, you know...not letting blacks drink from the same water fountain etc, the USA "wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years"

and Harry Reid said...



Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid apologized Saturday following reports he had privately described then-candidate Barack Obama during the presidential campaign as a black candidate who could be successful thanks in part to his “light-skinned” appearance and speaking patterns "with no Negro dialect


Harry Reid said something dumb during a private conversation....and it was dumb.

Trent Lott suggested the country would be better off if African Americans weren't allowed to attend school with white children and they should ride the back of the bus..literally.

And you say...



Trent Lott lost his leadership position for saying far less


Wow....BS much?



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by maybereal11

Originally posted by jibeho
Trent Lott lost his leadership position for saying far less back in 2002. Obama even called for his resignation back in his Senate days. Simply because Lott praised the career of a fellow ELECTED Congressman.
[edit on 11-1-2010 by jibeho]


Okay...Trent Lott said far less? Let's take a look...



The comment in question was delivered one week ago during a 100th birthday party for the retiring Thurmond -- a party that often resembled a roast of the South Carolina Republican.

Lott noted that in Thurmond's 1948 presidential campaign, whose centerpiece was opposition to integration, Mississippi was one of four Thurmond carried.

"We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years either," Lott said.

archives.cnn.com...

Hmmm.

Okay Lott said that integrating the south was a mistake and if the rest of the country had kept segregation, you know...not letting blacks drink from the same water fountain etc, the USA "wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years"

and Harry Reid said...




Interesting that what Lott said tuned out to be incorrect. Why? Because a democrat (Reid) was still saying racist things in the 21st century even though the country did not follow the path outlined years earlier by Thurmond and mentioned by Lott ...

And what about the very negative quotes from obama and reid about the Lott issue at the time it happened?

Obama: "The Republican Party itself has to drive out Trent Lott. If they have to stand for something, they have to stand up and say this is not the person we want representing our party."

Still looking for Reid's exact quote back when Lott resigned, but it was to the effect that "any democrat saying such a thing would be driven from the democratic party".

Pure hypocrisy on the part of the democrats exposed for all to see, and somehow libs here are still defending it, or failing that to deflect the thread onto some other issue.



[edit on 1/11/2010 by centurion1211]



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by maybereal11
 


No surprise. You are the second person that has rationalized his comments because they were made privately. If the comments were so private they would not be detailed in a new book. Reid was finally called on his comments.

In my opinion, Reid's comments are more capricious because he directed them precisely toward Obama. A true reflection of his inner being.

Lott is no boyscout and got reamed for his comments. Reid should meet the same fate.

BTW. Your statements on the topic are nearly identical to those on Media Matters today. Good Work.

edit to add:

At the time of Strom's movement forced integration may not have been the best solution for the South. In our modern day, forced integration was tried in our cities schools throughout the country and it failed miserably.

www.adversity.net...

[edit on 11-1-2010 by jibeho]



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by adifferentbreed
 


Actually that is a highly racist comment and very offensive to Native Americans.

And he should be flamed for it.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by adifferentbreed
 


Actually that is a highly racist comment and very offensive to Native Americans.

And he should be flamed for it.


Deflection attempt.

The thread is about Reid, not Steele.

Try to stay on topic, or start your own thread.

[edit on 1/11/2010 by centurion1211]



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 02:03 PM
link   
Reid should resign and never be heard from again. What an horrible thing to say.

Just looking at his picture, he looks like a surly old white guy that seriously needs to retire and shut up.

As for Obama, he says the least about race, and has made the least issue about it out of anyone.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
Interesting that what Lott said tuned out to be incorrect. Why? Because a democrat (Reid) was still saying racist things in the 21st century even though the country did not follow the path outlined years earlier by Thurmond and mentioned by Lott ...


Let me see if I can follow this logic...

Lott said that the country wouldn't be in such a mess if we had followed Thurmond's example and resisted integrating the south and dismanteling segregation.

Reid says something along the lines that he thought the POTUS, then a candidate, had stronger odds of being elected because he was, in his opinion, "lighter skinned" and without a "negro dialect".

Thus...What Lott said turned out to be "incorrect"?

I agree that what Lott said was incorrect...and what reid said was stupid...but fail to follow your logic here.

As far as comparison...privately commenting on then Candidate Barack Obama's appearance and speaking style in the context of his race and how it might effect his candidacy...it was stupid.

BUT saying it was "far worse" than Lott publically declaring that we should still make African Americans sit in the back of the bus, use seperate drinking fountains, attend seperate schools...

really? That is the case you are making?
I know everyone has their political bias glasses on, but you have to have some reality monitor in the back of your head speaking reason.

Or maybe some folks just don't understand what a racist is?
In the end it is about context. As is proven often on ATS you don't have to use the N word to be a racist...it is what you are communicating...the context..that matters.

[edit on 1/11/2010 by centurion1211]



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by adifferentbreed
 


Actually that is a highly racist comment and very offensive to Native Americans.

And he should be flamed for it.


Deflection attempt.

The thread is about Reid, not Steele.

Try to stay on topic, or start your own thread.

[edit on 1/11/2010 by centurion1211]


If this thread was only about Reid...why was there a comparison to a comment by by Trent Lott in the OP?

That door was opened in the OP...derragotory and racist things said by politicians as compared to what Senator Reid said.

No deflection...just those afraid of intelligent discourse on the issue for obvious reasons.


[edit on 11-1-2010 by maybereal11]



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   
They have been brainwashed just like the right was and still is. It is all just a game and we are very good at playing it and even though we never land on free parking we keep rolling the dice. It is sad that don't see what is right in front of us. It is a testament to how stupid we are and how smart they are. Look back into history and watch the old propaganda films people will believe what you tell them the population is for the most part stupid and apathetic.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by maybereal11
 


No, the thread title is: Where is the outrage from the Left?

And so where is it?

So far, all we are seeing from the left here are deflection attempts of the "well, the Republicans did it, too" variety.

Come on. Everyone knows that blacks think the word "negro" is a derogatory term - 1 strike against Reid. But the whole statement he made boils down to "the average black person is not electable unless they have light skin and talk like an educated white person". Second and third strikes against Reid.

Would a Republican be allowed to say that and survive? We all know the answer to that.

So, step up and do your part to break the double standard because it's the right thing to do.

Or are there not any of you that are capable of criticizing one of your own?

My call stands as originally posted.

[edit on 1/11/2010 by centurion1211]



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


Not a racist comment, maybe a bigoted one, but not racist. no different than me being called a cracker. Grow up, every body plays the vctim now. I guess when I was a little kid playing cowboys and injuns I was being racist too? Reid is in office and made comments that would have all of the professional victims, ala Al and Jessie out in force, if he wasn't a demoncrat. Get over it.........



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
the whole statement he made boils down to "the average black person is not electable unless they have light skin and talk like an educated white person". Second and third strikes against Reid.
[edit on 1/11/2010 by centurion1211]


yes. That is essentially what he said. It was an observation about the American voters....and are you ready for it....I agree with him.

I think his choice of words was stupid, but he wasn't declaring the inferriority of African Americans...or suggesting segregation was good, like Trent Lott did, he was saying he thought Barack Obama had a chance of being elected because he did not speak in a manner most white Americans expect a black man to speak in.

And because his skin color was not dark.

An observation about voters...not a personal declaration of racist views.

They have done extensive studies about the typical white voters and as idiotic as it sounds..it bears out. Skin tone plays a role...

Here is a great study from November last year



A new study suggests that people's political views may affect how they perceive President Obama's skin tone, with liberals tending to "lighten" his skin and conservatives tending to "darken" it.

"Our beliefs, you know, in this case our political beliefs, can really have pretty profound effects on how we see the world," says Eugene Caruso, a researcher at the University of Chicago's Booth School of Business. "Our data suggest that people's beliefs affect how light or dark they perceive someone to be."

www.npr.org...


How many Black Presidents have we had before our current POTUS? Why not?

Hmm...while you are pondering the "why" ...ask yourself how many times Jesse Jackson ran for President? Do you think his oratory style or skin tone hindered or helped him?...or do just think the American public doesn't think about race?

While you are thinking about what made Barack Obama more electable than Jesse Jackson...it just wasn't oratory style, or skin tone BTW...

Ask yourself this...If Barack Obama for all of his qualities ...spoke like Tracy Morgan (30 Rock) what would have been his chances?

Tracy Morgan exagerates the "black dialect" for satire BTW.

Reid commented on racism in American voters....and history and research supports what he said...many black people said and thought the exact same thing at the time of the election...


I know you want the man hung out to dry as a racist...your politics drive you that way...not reasoned thought.

I think he chose his words stupidly...and didn't need to give voice to the obvious. Not the brightest of politicians, but not a racist.

And he was right about the American voter in aggregate...

the rest of it is just spin...

Just my opinion.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
Come on. Everyone knows that blacks think the word "negro" is a derogatory term -


...martin luther king jr had no problem with the word negro... see for yourself in his famous I Have A Dream speech (linked below) in which he used the word negro over a dozen times...

www.usconstitution.net...

...but surely your comment was posted in jest and not out of ignorance or prejudice or a misguided sense of superiority which makes you believe that you possess the power to know what everyone else knows...

...in response to the op: why should there be an outrage because a politician said something stupid?... unless you're still very young and naive, you should be used to it by now, especially after 8years of the idiot dubya...



posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 12:52 AM
link   
...And the "Left" and the "Right" battle it out, while TPTB, who pull the strings for the leadership of both factions do what they Will, cackling at the success, once again, of the Divide and Distract tactic...

I am most certainly NOT a lefty and I've a helluva lot of problems with the so-called right as well, and i don't have television service, but reading what was said, my take is that, although his choice of words was poor, his reference was to the general mindset of the American electorate- TPTB wouldn't have been able to usher him in if he was more "ethnic" than he is and less "establishment". And YES- those words have racial undertones but not RACIST intent or meaning. The "norm" is perceived as "white" and "ethnic" is anything else. And the "establishment" is made up predominantly of rich, white males... Hence if he didn't "blend in" as well as he does, the electorate would have rejected him. Hell- a good percentage ADMITTED voting against him, even "blending in" and pretty much BEING part of the "establishment". Imagine the undercurrent were he NOT so...

And this from a visibly mixed-race person... with degree in linguistics, among other things...



posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 07:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wyn Hawks

Originally posted by centurion1211
Come on. Everyone knows that blacks think the word "negro" is a derogatory term -


...martin luther king jr had no problem with the word negro... see for yourself in his famous I Have A Dream speech (linked below) in which he used the word negro over a dozen times...

www.usconstitution.net...

...but surely your comment was posted in jest and not out of ignorance or prejudice or a misguided sense of superiority which makes you believe that you possess the power to know what everyone else knows...

...in response to the op: why should there be an outrage because a politician said something stupid?... unless you're still very young and naive, you should be used to it by now, especially after 8years of the idiot dubya...


The outrage is based on the incessant double standard within the LIberal movement and within the major news outlets.

Yes, politicians do and say many stupid things. Joe Biden is just about to take the crown that has been shared by Dan Quayle and Gore over the years.

However, liberals come out swinging for Reids defense while at the same time they are tongue lashing Obama's critics as racists without any substance to back the claims.

There has been some comparisons between Reid and Lott and their now infamous statements. Lott made his statements IN PUBLIC at Strom's 100th birthday party. Since then, Lott's critics have been trying to paint him every which way. It was a light hearted comment honoring Strom on his birthday. Ever tell your grandpa that he's the best when you know he just a grumpy curmudgeon. If Lott really meant what his dissenters ASSUME he meant, he did himself in publicly. Doubtful. The liberal witch hunt did him in and should take Reid out as well.

Reid spoke in private, from his gut and thus reflected his true feelings/beliefs about Obama, his ethnic background and common stereotypes. Yet, his defenders attempt to rationalize the statement because it was made off the record. Instant mulligan for Reid.

It is the private statements that reflect the true nature of the person. Reid or any politician can turn on the charm when they know they have an audience of potential voters. However, these personal and private comments are what truly defines anyone's character.



posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 08:14 AM
link   
reply to post by adifferentbreed
 


Go ahead and walk onto a reservation and use that term. I dare you.


Words that were commonly used to describe a population deragatorily had to be fought to be removed.

Grow up? Your looking for excuses to marginalize a portion of society. Oh the horrors! To not be able to publicly practise racisim.

People who claim that things such as this have never been discriminated against, and need to grow up.




top topics



 
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join