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.
originally posted by: windword
I wonder how dignified Uncle Clarence Thomas would feel if the Supreme Court hadn't ruled the way it did in 1968 in Loving Vs Virginia, that allowed for mixed race marriages? I wonder how Clarence and his wife, Virginia (VIRGINIA), a white woman, would have held onto their dignity if they were denied a marriage license?
originally posted by: xuenchen
His comments seem racist and are probably socially unacceptable.
But I see many people agreeing.
Glad the 1st Amendment isn't under fire.
Note-taking is important.
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: grandmakdw
Barack Obama never claimed that slavery never took away anyone's dignity.
Thomas is a self-hating, corrupt and compliant mouthpiece for his handlers, appointed purely to shield the Right from the appearance of racism while he toes the party line.
Insisting that dignity can't be taken by enslavement, no matter how many stripes are laid on one's back, or no matter how many times one's family is put on the auction block, is beyond unintelligent and goes past any pale of decency!
It's another form of shaming victims for their state of existence.
So then you are saying it is acceptable to call a black man, a leader in our government, a Supreme Court Judge
"A clown in white face?"
Just because you disagree with his policies?
I disagree a great deal with Obama's policies and have as much respect for him as you do for Clarence Thomas,
so does it then make it ok for me to call Obama "A clown in white face"?
I think not, but if you think it is ok to call any black leader in our country a clown in white face because you don't like their policies or viewpoints. Well, search within yourself to reconcile, or say it is ok to call any black person a clown in white face if we don't like their views or statements.
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: grandmakdw
So then you are saying it is acceptable to call a black man, a leader in our government, a Supreme Court Judge
"A clown in white face?"
Sure! But the insult would be the "clown" part. "Whiteface" isn't an insult.
Just because you disagree with his policies?
No, not because of his policies, but because of his reasoning.
I disagree a great deal with Obama's policies and have as much respect for him as you do for Clarence Thomas,
so does it then make it ok for me to call Obama "A clown in white face"?
I think not, but if you think it is ok to call any black leader in our country a clown in white face because you don't like their policies or viewpoints. Well, search within yourself to reconcile, or say it is ok to call any black person a clown in white face if we don't like their views or statements.
It's not like it's never been done before!
I think it's okay for you to call anyone anything, because of free speech and all. However, if you were representing the highest court of our nation, I'd expect that there would be some backlash for saying something controversial.
No doubt what George Takei said was controversial and maybe even raciest. But his point was that Clarence Thomas' own self hatred betrays black confidence, therefore, the "blackface" accusation. It an accusation of hypocrisy.
originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
a reply to: TinfoilTP
Good thing you have your fake outrage news, takei is an idiot for saying what he said, but you cant keep a good oh pity us story, oh the humanity, what about the children lol.
originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: grandmakdw
George is from my parents generation, thus the black-face comment. If he had been younger he would have called him an oreo. Black on the outside, white on the inside.
originally posted by: grandmakdw
originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: grandmakdw
George is from my parents generation, thus the black-face comment. If he had been younger he would have called him an oreo. Black on the outside, white on the inside.
Still an unacceptable racist comment, regardless of generation.
Doesn't make the comment any less racist.
What if...
Unless liberals are excused from all behavior that conservatives are excoriated for simply because they are conservatives.
originally posted by: intrepid
originally posted by: grandmakdw
originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: grandmakdw
George is from my parents generation, thus the black-face comment. If he had been younger he would have called him an oreo. Black on the outside, white on the inside.
Still an unacceptable racist comment, regardless of generation.
Doesn't make the comment any less racist.
He's just calling as he sees it and, no, I don't see it as racist. He slammed Sir Judge for demeaning the experience of Blacks. That's stand up.
What if...
I don't deal in "what if's". "What if's" are for people without a leg to stand on.
Unless liberals are excused from all behavior that conservatives are excoriated for simply because they are conservatives.
Tired chestnut. These "conservatives" have got to crawl down off their crosses. Martyrdom went out style a long time ago.
originally posted by: grandmakdw
originally posted by: intrepid
originally posted by: grandmakdw
originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: grandmakdw
George is from my parents generation, thus the black-face comment. If he had been younger he would have called him an oreo. Black on the outside, white on the inside.
Still an unacceptable racist comment, regardless of generation.
Doesn't make the comment any less racist.
He's just calling as he sees it and, no, I don't see it as racist. He slammed Sir Judge for demeaning the experience of Blacks. That's stand up.
What if...
I don't deal in "what if's". "What if's" are for people without a leg to stand on.
Unless liberals are excused from all behavior that conservatives are excoriated for simply because they are conservatives.
Tired chestnut. These "conservatives" have got to crawl down off their crosses. Martyrdom went out style a long time ago.
You never responded to the basic question.
I don't deal in "what if's". "What if's" are for people without a leg to stand on.