If Ray Nagin gets re-elected in April

[AFAIKnow]

"I don't care what people are saying Uptown or wherever they are. This city will be chocolate at the end of the day," Nagin said in a Martin Luther King Jr. Day speech. "This city will be a majority African-American city. It's the way God wants it to be."

Uptown is a reference to a mostly white part of the city.

Pressed later to explain his comments, Nagin, who is black, told CNN affiliate WDSU-TV that he was referring to creation of a racially diverse city in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, insisting that his remarks were not divisive.

"How do you make chocolate? You take dark chocolate, you mix it with white milk, and it becomes a delicious drink. That is the chocolate I am talking about," he said.

Bullshit, dipshit. You make milk chocolate that way. And if your mix peanut butter with it you have a not-so-funny commercial. Uptown is filled with your constituents too. Admit it. You want a majority black NOLA so you have someone who will vote for your racist ass. Neopolitan isn't a new flavor, but I guess considering it is equal in color, it wouldn't fit into your agenda.

In his speech, Nagin also said "God is mad at America," in part because he does not approve "of us being in Iraq under false pretenses."

"He is sending hurricane after hurricane after hurricane, and it is destroying and putting stress on this country," Nagin said.

He said God is "upset at black America also."

"We are not taking care of ourselves. We are not taking care of our women, and we are not taking care of our children when you have a community where 70 percent of its children are being born to one parent."

And while you are no contender to Fallwell or Roberts, maybe you should cut back on the God's Will bullshit to justify your racism and political ideals.

[AFAIKnow]

the top of my post got cut off:

I'll move to France with that Baldwin twit.

"This city will be chocolate at the end of the day" (http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/01/17/nagin.city/)

[Garfield226]

CNN reported this morning that Nagin was actually elected by white voters, with the majority of the minorities (heh) voting for his opponent. I don't know if that's actually true, but that's what they said.

Which makes what he said even dumber.

[Ravenman]

Man, I'm probably just out of touch or something, but I just cannot get worked up about the "chocolate city." I think it's kind of funny, what with the thought that making a city into a children's drink is an odd platform. But I just can't see taking offense at the comment: Yes, the comments were not PC, but good god, lighten up, people. I'll not get concerned until he starts advocating policies to get Whitey out of the city.

The whole wrath of God comments, however, are just odd.

[AFAIKnow]

Man, I'm probably just out of touch or something, but I just cannot get worked up about the "chocolate city." I think it's kind of funny, what with the thought that making a city into a children's drink is an odd platform. But I just can't see taking offense at the comment: Yes, the comments were not PC, but good god, lighten up, people. I'll not get concerned until he starts advocating policies to get Whitey out of the city.

The whole wrath of God comments, however, are just odd.

Doesn't suprise me. It seems anytime racism against whites, or by anyone but whites, are ever pitted in this forum, we get this cookie cutter response.

To be fair, we usually have someone try to defend against the pile-on whenever a white is pitted for racism too.

[MacTech]

the problem is, making a city out of a delicious candy is even *less* structurally sound than making the city out of, oh i don't know, more substansial building materials like wood, brick, and concrete

admittedly, a chocolate New Orleans would be much *tastier*, albeit more melty in the hot summer months....

MMMM......the Land of Chocolate!

[dbuzman]

Actually, since he says you mix them to make a drink is he is describing chocolate milk.

[Marley23]

I hear "chocolate city" and think of P-Funk. That doesn't bother me.

But Nagin deserves a Category Five "go fuck yourself" for blaming the people who elected you (among others) for what happened to them. From their own mayor as opposed to a psychopathic televangelist, that's awful. Yeah, Ray, I guess God was really pissed off at the way poor people are running this country. What the fuck?

[Argent Towers]

Is it true that 70 percent of black children are born out of wedlock?

[Sampiro]

Is it true that 70 percent of black children are born out of wedlock?

Yes, but now that Nipsey Russell is dead that figure is expected to go way down. (Nipsey's gift for rhyme gained him opportunities most men only dream about.)

[Marley23]

I hear "chocolate city" and think of P-Funk. That doesn't bother me.
I should restate this. Saying that it's God's will for a city's population to remain a certain way is stupid, and it's a ridiculous way to appeal to black pride. It doesn't bother me as much as his other comments, but whose God gives a crap about Louisiana demographics?

[Argent Towers]

Wait...I just read more about this on the news, and it's just now sinking in.

HOW DID THIS FUCKING MORON GET ELECTED?

Elected officials reflect the attitudes of those who elected them. If these comments are typical fare from this guy, then my opinion of New Orleans' voters is currently a very, very low one.

[crowmanyclouds]

Bullshit, dipshit. You make milk chocolate that way. And if your mix peanut butter with it you have a not-so-funny commercial. Uptown is filled with your constituents too. Admit it. You want a majority black NOLA so you have someone who will vote for your racist ass...No he wants NO to look like it did pre-Katrina,

New Orleans City, Louisiana Statistics and Demographics (US Census 2000) (http://neworleans.areaconnect.com/statistics.htm)

Race
One race 478473 98.72%
White 135956 28.05%
Black or African American 325947 67.25%
American Indian and Alaska Native 991 0.2%
Asian 10972 2.26%
Asian indian 1195 0.25%
Chinese 958 0.2%
Filipino 515 0.11%
Japanese 283 0.06%
Korean 358 0.07%
Vietnamese 7118 1.47%
Other Asian 545 0.11%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 109 0.02%
Native Hawaiian 27 0.01%
Guamanian or Chamorro 29 0.01%
Samoan 24 0%
Other Pacific Islander 29 0.01%
Some other race 4498 0.93%
Two or more races 6201 1.28%

Hispanic or Latino and race
Total Population 484674 100.00%
Hispanic or Latino(of any race) 14826 3.06%
Mexican 2578 0.53%
Puerto Rican 1031 0.21%
Cuban 1615 0.33%
Other Hispanic or Latino 9602 1.98%
Not Hispanic or Latino 469848 96.94%
White alone 128871 26.59%

[AFAIKnow]

No he wants NO to look like it did pre-Katrina,


Why?
He wants the black population to be a majority. He thinks God wants it too. Why in the fuck would he want that? And why wouldn't care what the citizens uptown say about it? You know, the white ones?

[Grelby]

Doesn't suprise me. It seems anytime racism against whites, or by anyone but whites, are ever pitted in this forum, we get this cookie cutter response.

To be fair, we usually have someone try to defend against the pile-on whenever a white is pitted for racism too.

It might be because racism against white people has never been institutionalized into a system that actively or passively works to keep white folks marginalized and poor. Me, I'm not too worried about someone who's black, blue, yellow, green or any other color I can think of expressing racist attitudes about white people. Their words have absolutely zero power to cause actual physical or economic harm to me and my family. This is most certainly not true in the other direction; racism coming from a white elected official is cause for far more serious concern. Racism from a minority politician is plenty of cause for derision, but it doesn't actually scare me.

All that said, I'm not defending the guy. He sounds like a whackjob. Hell, the prejudice aside, the Will of God stuff is pretty bizarre. What an ass.

[Lissa]

It might be because racism against white people has never been institutionalized into a system that actively or passively works to keep white folks marginalized and poor. Me, I'm not too worried about someone who's black, blue, yellow, green or any other color I can think of expressing racist attitudes about white people. Their words have absolutely zero power to cause actual physical or economic harm to me and my family. This is most certainly not true in the other direction; racism coming from a white elected official is cause for far more serious concern. Racism from a minority politician is plenty of cause for derision, but it doesn't actually scare me.

All that said, I'm not defending the guy. He sounds like a whackjob. Hell, the prejudice aside, the Will of God stuff is pretty bizarre. What an ass.

But, he is a Mayor right? That is some power no?

I agree with a history of racism, but divisive politics need to be overcome, on both sides, to have a truly equal and pluralist society.

[Mama Tiger]

I was living in New Orleans when Nagin got elected. CNN was right: His supporters were (a) the rich white folks and (b) the rich and well-to-do black folks. The poor black folks had other candidates and failed to support Nagin in droves.

So he's not blaming the people who elected him. And it's ironic that he's advocating a city that is the exact opposite of the folks who supported him.

That's why I can't see anything sinister in his remarks. Dumb, yes. Grasping at straws, probably -- he's almost universally seen in the lower economic groups of the black community as, at best, a sellout for being a successful businessman rather than earning his money the old-fashioned way, i.e. corruption, so looking for support from those who despite him is probably futile.

And it's really a shame; mostly what he wanted when he got elected was to fix the streets and to try to uproot the culture of corruption and straighten out the city budget. And he was actually doing a great job of that pre-Katrina.

[tomndebb]

Nagin is an idiot. His dithering in the face of repeated warnings (and a call from President Bush) prior to Katrina making landfall and then publicly raging against the Feds (often getting his facts wrong) after the levees failed indicate that he is not competent to be the mayor of any large city.

HOWEVER,
two things should be considered regarding his MLK jr. Day speech:
1) There was a fair amount of speculation following the disaster that rather than rebuilding the city to let all the original inhabitants return, only the city center would be rebuilt for the tourists and the inhabitants of the poorer sections would be allowed to spend the rest of their lives scattered across the country. (No serious proposal was made beyond just abandoning the location altogether, but there was a certain amount of street talk on the topic.)
- I suspect that his remarks were intended to quash those sort of rumors.

2) His speech also included a fair amount of "Bill Cosby"-like chastisement, taking black people to task for fighting each other and tearing apart their own neighborhoods.
- It is interesting that the OP selectively quoted some portions of the speech (ignoring their context) while failing to remark on other portions of the same speech.

[AFAIKnow]

- It is interesting that the OP selectively quoted some portions of the speech (ignoring their context) while failing to remark on other portions of the same speech.


What should I have quoted to make you happy? I quoted where he tried to take the blacks to task on the 'evil ways". And I commented on it. If I had taken anything out of context, please enlighten me.

If his speach didn't boil down to: "I think God wants blacks to be a majority in New Orleans, and I don't care what those white folks uptown think", then I'll eat my hat.

[The Long Road]

Wait...I just read more about this on the news, and it's just now sinking in.

HOW DID THIS FUCKING MORON GET ELECTED?

Elected officials reflect the attitudes of those who elected them. If these comments are typical fare from this guy, then my opinion of New Orleans' voters is currently a very, very low one.


He was elected because he was running against even larger morons. Each election for mayor ends with one of the two black candidates claiming that the other really isn't a true black person and is only a white puppet. Radio commericals during the last campaign said Nagin was a Ronald Reagan clone, playing off the rhyme between their names. One candidate gave a long sob story and made commercials about her brother being murdered in front of her home so she understood crime. Problem is, she left out the fact that her brother was shot by the police after being involved in an armed robbery.

We had hope for Nagin, especially after he started a campaign against corruption and actually did a few high profile arrests. Now it's back to the same old shit. Our family is talking about moving to Texas and I don't think it could possibly happen soon enough.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

There was no racism intended in the "chocolate" remark, it was just intended to be a metaphor for a mixture. There's nothing lamer than white people grabbing any excuse to be offended by any perceived remark which can be interpreted as somehow "anti-white."

And before anybody says it, no, it's not the same as if a white mayor had said he wanted a "vanilla city." That would be racist. This was not, and the rest of the Nagin's remarks make it clear that he had no such intention.

The God remarks were stupid, but so is every single fucking thing every other politician says about God. At least Nagin hasn't started any wars because he thinks God told him to.

[John Mace]

There was no racism intended in the "chocolate" remark, it was just intended to be a metaphor for a mixture. There's nothing lamer than white people grabbing any excuse to be offended by any perceived remark which can be interpreted as somehow "anti-white."

And before anybody says it, no, it's not the same as if a white mayor had said he wanted a "vanilla city." That would be racist. This was not, and the rest of the Nagin's remarks make it clear that he had no such intention.

The God remarks were stupid, but so is every single fucking thing every other politician says about God. At least Nagin hasn't started any wars because he thinks God told him to.
And if "Mayor Whiteman" said that his city would be a majority white city because God wanted it that way, that would be OK, too?

This isn't about chocolate or vanilla, but about a stupid, racist remark. You can't parse it any other way.

He's in the Pat Robertson camp, if you tell me. God is sending hurricanes to the US because we invaded Iraq? Puh-leeze.

[AFAIKnow]

There was no racism intended in the "chocolate" remark, it was just intended to be a metaphor for a mixture. There's nothing lamer than white people grabbing any excuse to be offended by any perceived remark which can be interpreted as somehow "anti-white."



Thank you Mr. Nagin. I'm glad you came down here personally to correct the record. Now, why don't you enlighten us on what the fuck "Uptown" was a metaphor for?

What is lamer is when dipshits try to justify a clearly racial remark only because a white man didn't say it. I have never heard the term "chocolate" as referring to a mixture of people. I have always heard it as a reference to black people. You being deliberately obtuse if you think his "clarifying" remarks were anything other than covering his ass. Who wanted only whites, or a majority of whites to take over New Orleans? No one? Which people "Uptown or wherever" were saying they didn't want a mixture?

Let me make it simple for you. He said he wanted a majority black New Orleans. He didn't say he wanted some of every race. He clearly stated that he didn't care what white people thought. So "chocolate" was clearly a metaphor for majority black despite what white people want to say about it.

And before anybody says it, no, it's not the same as if a white mayor had said he wanted a "vanilla city." That would be racist.

Very hypocritical of you.

The God remarks were stupid, but so is every single fucking thing every other politician says about God. At least Nagin hasn't started any wars because he thinks God told him to.


And I don't remember Robertson, Graham, or any others that you have personally pitted for stupid remarks such as this and having a little addendum stating "at least they aren’t as bad as...."


Now why don't you take your dissembling ass and go fuck yourself.

[Marley23]

There was no racism intended in the "chocolate" remark, it was just intended to be a metaphor for a mixture.
Yes, his metaphor and use of the word "chocolate" is not racist at all. But I think people are bothered by his comments that God wants New Orleans to be mostly black. If tomndebb (in his point #1) is correct about Nagin's intentions, that's great. But the makeup of the city is still probably going to be different. I remember reading months ago that the New Orleans will probably have a much larger Latin presence, for example. Why does God care about that? As I said, it's shameless.

I have no idea what Nagin was like before Katrina, but I'd like to note that I said on September 2 that I thought he was losing it. ;)

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Thank you Mr. Nagin. I'm glad you came down here personally to correct the record. Now, why don't you enlighten us on what the fuck "Uptown" was a metaphor for?
It's not a metaphor, retard, it literally means "uptown."
What is lamer is when dipshits try to justify a clearly racial remark only because a white man didn't say it. I have never heard the term "chocolate" as referring to a mixture of people. I have always heard it as a reference to black people. You being deliberately obtuse if you think his "clarifying" remarks were anything other than covering his ass.
I know you desperately want it to be a racist remark. Nagin obviously had no such intent. The full context of his comments make that vlear. I'm sorry but you don't get to be a victim today. Too bad for you.
Who wanted only whites, or a majority of whites to take over New Orleans? No one? Which people "Uptown or wherever" were saying they didn't want a mixture?
He was responding to fears that New Orleans would become gentrified and no longer diverse.
Let me make it simple for you. He said he wanted a majority black New Orleans. He didn't say he wanted some of every race. He clearly stated that he didn't care what white people thought. So "chocolate" was clearly a metaphor for majority black despite what white people want to say about it.
No, that's what you WISH he said so that you could play the role of a persecuted victim. Fuck you. You're not a victim.
Very hypocritical of you.
Nope. It's quite cool and incisive of me is what it is. :cool:
And I don't remember Robertson, Graham, or any others that you have personally pitted for stupid remarks such as this and having a little addendum stating "at least they aren’t as bad as...."
That's because I would be hard put to find anything to top them. Those guys celebrated 9/11 as vengence from God. It's hard to find anything worse than that.
pquote]Now why don't you take your dissembling ass and go fuck yourself.[/QUOTE]
Oh no. I've been insulted by a moron. Whatever shall I do?

[Martin Hyde]

If Bush had said something in a similar vein, but then followed it up with a lame and barely plausible explanation for what he said DtC would skewer him alive.

But Nagin is a Democrat, and is against the Iraq war, so don't expect an objective analysis.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

If Bush had said something in a similar vein, but then followed it up with a lame and barely plausible explanation for what he said DtC would skewer him alive.

But Nagin is a Democrat, and is against the Iraq war, so don't expect an objective analysis.
1. I'm not a Democrat and I don't give a shit who gets elected mayor of New Orleans.
2. I've said repeatedly that I don't believe GWB is a racist.

[Martin Hyde]

1. I'm not a Democrat and I don't give a shit who gets elected mayor of New Orleans.
2. I've said repeatedly that I don't believe GWB is a racist.

I could care less if you're a member of the American Nazi party. Your actions speak louder than your voter registration.

When I said "in the same vein" I was talking about dubious statements in general. Statements that are in and of themselves inherently stupid, offensive, or both, and that can only be "explained" with very faulty reasoning which most unbiased observers would quickly dismiss.

For example, on Aug. 1, 2005 Bush said he favored the teaching of intelligent design in schools. When he was more intensely questioned he replied, "I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought, and I'm not suggesting — you're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, and the answer is yes."

That's about how smart Nagin looks right now, yet Nagin gets nothing from you and I'm sure if you haven't skewered Bush for the above statement it's because you were not aware of it or you hadn't had an opportunity.

[AFAIKnow]

Oh no. I've been insulted by a moron. Whatever shall I do?

Does "go fuck yourself" ring any bells? ;)

[Diogenes the Cynic]

I could care less if you're a member of the American Nazi party. Your actions speak louder than your voter registration.

When I said "in the same vein" I was talking about dubious statements in general. Statements that are in and of themselves inherently stupid, offensive, or both, and that can only be "explained" with very faulty reasoning which most unbiased observers would quickly dismiss.

For example, on Aug. 1, 2005 Bush said he favored the teaching of intelligent design in schools. When he was more intensely questioned he replied, "I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought, and I'm not suggesting — you're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, and the answer is yes."

That's about how smart Nagin looks right now, yet Nagin gets nothing from you and I'm sure if you haven't skewered Bush for the above statement it's because you were not aware of it or you hadn't had an opportunity.
Of course I skewered Bush for his statement. He was advocating violating the Constitution. His explanation didn't help him any because it betrayed a completely erroneous belief that ID is some sort of legitimate competing theory to evolution. It was the equivalent of saying "flat earth theory" should be taught in order to expose children to other ideas about the shape of the earth.


Nagin said nothing comporable. He used a metaphor which was enthusiastically misconstrued by people who are eager to show how offended they are.

[Martin Hyde]

Of course I skewered Bush for his statement. He was advocating violating the Constitution. His explanation didn't help him any because it betrayed a completely erroneous belief that ID is some sort of legitimate competing theory to evolution. It was the equivalent of saying "flat earth theory" should be taught in order to expose children to other ideas about the shape of the earth.


Nagin said nothing comporable. He used a metaphor which was enthusiastically misconstrued by people who are eager to show how offended they are.

Thank you for proving my point.

[John Mace]

Nagin said nothing comporable. He used a metaphor which was enthusiastically misconstrued by people who are eager to show how offended they are.
In what way is:

"This city will be a majority African-American city. It's the way God wants it to be. You can't have New Orleans no other way. It wouldn't be New Orleans."
A metaphor? It's a statement that says God wants New Orleans to have more Black people living there than White people.

You keep going back to the chocolate reference. I can accept that as a metaphor, even if it's a bit of a streatch. But the quote above? No amount of stretching in the world is going to turn that into anything but what it says.

[cheela]

And if "Mayor Whiteman" said that his city would be a majority white city because God wanted it that way, that would be OK, too?No, it wouldn't be the same, because there is no history, no frame of reference for such a thing. This isn't about chocolate or vanilla, but about a stupid, racist remark. You can't parse it any other way.But see, you can parse it another way because of my above remarks. At this time, it is quite another thing. Similar, but not the same.He's in the Pat Robertson camp, if you tell me. God is sending hurricanes to the US because we invaded Iraq? Puh-leeze.I agree with you here. No shortage of crackpots like Pat Robertson regardless of race. But my previous remarks still apply.

It really cannot be taken in the same way because of the history. In time - should these crackpots continue to hold sway in public opinions - it might be so. But not yet.

A time could come where all racists will be equal, but we have not reached that place yet. Do you really disagree with that?

[Martin Hyde]

No, it wouldn't be the same, because there is no history, no frame of reference for such a thing.

Racism is only bad if it's historical and systematic, gotcha.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

In what way is:


A metaphor? It's a statement that says God wants New Orleans to have more Black people living there than White people.
You're quoting a different sentence. I only said the "chocolate" part was a metaphor.
You keep going back to the chocolate reference. I can accept that as a metaphor, even if it's a bit of a streatch. But the quote above? No amount of stretching in the world is going to turn that into anything but what it says.
All it means is that he wants the city to retain the specific cultural identity it's always had instead of having that identity destroyed by gentrification. I don't think there's anything racist about that that. I'm white. I'm not offended.

[cheela]

By the way, I didn't mean to give Nagin a pass with what I posted. Stupid remarks from him, no question about it.

But they do not hold the same weight as racist remarks from a white person, only because of the history. Let's face it, no white person is going to lose sleep worrying about possible acts of oppression or abuse inspired by what he said. That is the difference.

[cheela]

Racism is only bad if it's historical and systematic, gotcha.Oh no. It is still bad. But it is a different kind of bad.

[John Mace]

You're quoting a different sentence. I only said the "chocolate" part was a metaphor.
But people are talking about the whole speech, not just that one phrase.

All it means is that he wants the city to retain the specific cultural identity it's always had instead of having that identity destroyed by gentrification. I don't think there's anything racist about that that. I'm white. I'm not offended.
I'm not offended either, but that doesn't mean it's not racist. By your logic, those calling for an end to Hispanic immigration are not racist because they just want to maintain the cultural identity that the US has always had instead of having it destroyed by Spanish speaking, taco eating Mexicans.

[cheela]

I'm not offended either, but that doesn't mean it's not racist. By your logic, those calling for an end to Hispanic immigration are not racist because they just want to maintain the cultural identity that the US has always had instead of having it destroyed by Spanish speaking, taco eating Mexicans.But what cultural identity has the US "always" had? Spanish speaking, taco eating people have been here since "always", which in US time is the last couple hundred years.

Really, think about the history, and put the remarks in context with the history. It does make a difference.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Wahh the poor white people. Oh, how you've suffered.

[Martin Hyde]

Wahh the poor white people. Oh, how you've suffered.

The idea that racism or prejudice is okay as long as it isn't systematic is one I wouldn't expect from someone with the philosophies you present yourself as having here on the forum.

What if I was elected to some local government post and took an anti-Scottish or anti-English position, is that okay because it doesn't have a systematic nature in the history of the country?

[Martin Hyde]

Also, last I checked no one was claiming whites have suffered systematic racism, so I have to question how much fun you're having with your strawman?

Most people in this thread are just speaking out against a publicly elected official espousing racist ideas. The fact that they are racist ideas makes them heinous whether they be against a long maligned and persecuted group *or* against a group in the majority like whites.

I'm guessing you just enjoy pointing out how good whites have it compared to blacks. Most whites don't disagree, however that doesn't mean we think it's good to be the target of racism, either.

[John Mace]

But what cultural identity has the US "always" had? Spanish speaking, taco eating people have been here since "always", which in US time is the last couple hundred years.

Really, think about the history, and put the remarks in context with the history. It does make a difference.
You're missing my point. My hypothetical statement was racist. Just as Nagin's statement was. I'm just saying that using Diogene's reasoning, in which he says Nagin's statement isn't racist, you'd also have to say my hypothetical wasn't racist.

Wahh the poor white people. Oh, how you've suffered.
I never said White people suffered. I said Nagin is a racist. But that was a nice attempt at a strawman, and I'm sure it works on some folks. You don't have to target an opppressed group to be racist. Just look at Louis Farakhan. I'm not saying that Nagin is as bad as that, but it's the same principle.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Nagin didn't take an "antiwhite" position, That's the point, He didn't come close to advocating anything remotely discriminatory or racist. He did not say he didn't want white people in New Orleans or that he wanted to treat white people differently than blacks. He just said he didn't want the pre-flood population -along with it's unique cultural heritage- to be displaced by gentrification. His declaration that "God wants it that way" are stupid, but I don't find it vicious in the way that Pat Roberston is vicious, or chilling in he way that GWB's war-whipsering Daemon is chiling.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

You're missing my point. My hypothetical statement was racist. Just as Nagin's statement was. I'm just saying that using Diogene's reasoning, in which he says Nagin's statement isn't racist, you'd also have to say my hypothetical wasn't racist.


I never said White people suffered. I said Nagin is a racist. But that was a nice attempt at a strawman, and I'm sure it works on some folks. You don't have to target an opppressed group to be racist. Just look at Louis Farakhan. I'm not saying that Nagin is as bad as that, but it's the same principle.
He didn't say anything racist. Show me a single thing he said to imply that one race was superior to or should be treated differently than the other.

[Lynn Bodoni]

Nagin didn't take an "antiwhite" position, That's the point, He didn't come close to advocating anything remotely discriminatory or racist. He did not say he didn't want white people in New Orleans or that he wanted to treat white people differently than blacks. He just said he didn't want the pre-flood population -along with it's unique cultural heritage- to be displaced by gentrification. His declaration that "God wants it that way" are stupid, but I don't find it vicious in the way that Pat Roberston is vicious, or chilling in he way that GWB's war-whipsering Daemon is chiling. Nagin seems to be pretty upset that a lot of Hispanic folks are coming in and doing a lot of the reconstruction work. He's upset because they're NOT BLACK. I'd say that is pretty racist. Maybe he can't get laws passed which would favor African Americans above all other people, but I think that his attitude is quite racist. I am appalled by his attitude, just as I'm appalled by white people who have racist attitudes.

[cheela]

I'm guessing you just enjoy pointing out how good whites have it compared to blacks.Between two people on a chat board, it doesn't make a difference. Stupid is stupid is stupid.

But in the real world, there is the possibility of fallout after remarks like this. As I've said, these remarks coming from Nagin have less strength or danger of inspiring actions, than similar remarks coming from a white politician. I'd guess he knows that too.

In the end, it's all about people not being killed or injured, inspired by something stupid someone else said. Hurt feelings or being offended are not on the top of my list of things to worry about. YMMV.

[cheela]

You're missing my point. My hypothetical statement was racist. Just as Nagin's statement was. I'm just saying that using Diogene's reasoning, in which he says Nagin's statement isn't racist, you'd also have to say my hypothetical wasn't racist.I did see your point.

In a certain context your hypothetical would not be racist. Ignorant or wrong, maybe, but not racist.

Originally, I was replying to the idea that there is no double standard for racism or racist remarks. I think there is a double standard. And I think Nagin realized that, and figured he could get away with saying things a white politician couldn't (I'm not saying they were good things or smart things to say - that's another story).

Should we pretend this double standard doesn't exist when we discuss these incidents? I don't see the point of that.

[John Mace]

He didn't say anything racist. Show me a single thing he said to imply that one race was superior to or should be treated differently than the other.
If God wants more Blacks than Whites to live in NOLA, then Blacks must have something over Whites. What is that something-- rhythm?

But if you're correct, then, I wouldn't be racist if I called for America to remain majority white? If I said that God wanted America to remain majority white? If I said that America wouldn't be America if it didn't stay majority white? You'd have no problem with that statement, since you have no problem with Nagin's statement? Current immigration trends will make America minority-White at some point, therefore we must limit non-White immigration to ensure to that America remains majority-White. Nothing racist there, right?

[BobLibDem]

Nagin is an idiot. His dithering in the face of repeated warnings (and a call from President Bush) prior to Katrina making landfall and then publicly raging against the Feds (often getting his facts wrong) after the levees failed indicate that he is not competent to be the mayor of any large city.


I'm not sure about the first point here. According to Media Matters, the claim that Bush pleaded with Nagin to evacuate is groundless. (http://mediamatters.org/items/200509060011) But while numerous conservative weblogs had earlier made nearly identical claims, news reports indicate that Bush called Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco -- not Nagin -- on the morning of August 28 to ensure that such precautions would be taken. Moreover, Blanco stated that Bush called "just before" she and Nagin held a press conference to announce the mandatory evacuation, casting doubt over Hume and Wilson's suggestion that Bush's phone call triggered the decision to evacuate.

As far as the levees, Bush did indeed cut funding from levee projects. (http://www.factcheck.org/article344.html)
In fiscal year 2004, the Corps requested $11 million for the project. The President’s budget allocated $3 million, and Congress furnished $5.5 million. Similarly, in fiscal 2005 the Corps requested $22.5 million, which the President cut to $3.9 million in his budget. Congress increased that to $5.5 million. “This was insufficient to fund new construction contracts,” according to a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ project fact sheet. The Corps reported that “seven new contracts are being delayed due to lack funds” [sic].

Would it have made any difference if the funds were not cut? Probably not. But clearly the administration had not provided the Army Corps of Engineers what they said was needed.

As far as God punishing the US for Iraq, sure it's a reckless statement. I put more stock in that than I do Pat Robertson's version of God's wrath, but Nagin's over the top here.

[you with the face]

What Nagin said was stupid if only for that fact that if he was clearly trying to pander to the people he upset last week when he laid out his ideas for reconstruction. I get the feeling that he could care less if the city is a chocolate one or a vanilla one, honestly. He was only saying whatever he could to smooth over the feathers he'd ruffled, and he ended up slathering it on too thick (especially when he brought God into it).

But I don't get the idea that a "chocolate city" is an anti-white concept. Washington DC and Atlanta are affectionately known as chocolate cities because lots of black people live there. Yet, plenty of whites (and other groups) are present too; that doesn't alter the chocolate factor. I don't perceive any connotations of racial seperatism when I hear of a "chocolate city". But maybe that's because I've lived in such cities all of my life.

Since there have been concerns that the more poorer subset of the NO community--which happens to be disproportionately black--will be displaced from the reconstructed city, I don't think there is anything wrong with assuring folks that NO won't lose it's cultural-racial-ethnic makeup at the hands of gentrification. That's essentially what Nagin was doing with his talk about chocolate.

[Steve MB]

In his speech, Nagin also said "God is mad at America," in part because he does not approve "of us being in Iraq under false pretenses."
"He is sending hurricane after hurricane after hurricane, and it is destroying and putting stress on this country," Nagin said.
It's hard to be religious when certain people are never struck by lightning.

[Steve MB]

His explanation didn't help him any because it betrayed a completely erroneous belief that ID is some sort of legitimate competing theory to evolution.
And Nagin's explanation didn't help him because it betrayed a completely erroneous belief that the racial composition of a city is any of the government's business.

[Clothahump]

If Marion Berry can get re-elected, so can Willy Wonka..err, I mean Ray Nagin.

[you with the face]

And Nagin's explanation didn't help him because it betrayed a completely erroneous belief that the racial composition of a city is any of the government's business.

Just curious: If this issue was about class and not race, would your stance be different?

Race aside, should the government care if huge swaths of poor people are sweeped out of town by rich speculators? Why or why not?

[John Mace]

Race aside, should the government care if huge swaths of poor people are sweeped out of town by rich speculators? Why or why not?
What's a "speculator"? Are they doing anything illegal? If not, then no, the government shouldn't care except in as much as the poor people are thrown into the streets. If they have alternatives elsewhere, they should take advantage of those alternatives. Why should a city WANT to have poor people living there? Usually it makes no economic sense for poor people to live in expensive areas.

[you with the face]

What's a "speculator"?

Investors. People who move into an area with an interest in making money and little else.

Are they doing anything illegal? If not, then no, the government shouldn't care except in as much as the poor people are thrown into the streets.

A lot of people have been thrown into the streets. The hurricane sorta had that effect.

If they have alternatives elsewhere, they should take advantage of those alternatives. Why should a city WANT to have poor people living there? Usually it makes no economic sense for poor people to live in expensive areas.

I'm not arguing that the mayor should want poor people there, even though I do think as a human being he should care that a signficant portion of the pre-Katrina population has been uprooted from the place they called home and lack the means to bounce back. However, my question doesn't have anything to do with that issue. I'm talking about PCness.

If Nagin had stood up and specfically addressed poor people with assurances that NO would still be their city (let's say he said "Blueberry City" as in blue collar...yeah, I'm so lame), would offense be warranted? The implications of the statements (chocolate vs. blueberry) are the same; he is essentially saying that these populations are deserving of a spot in the reconstructed city by virtue of their racial and socioeconomic classification.

[pizzabrat]

But if you're correct, then, I wouldn't be racist if I called for America to remain majority white? If I said that God wanted America to remain majority white? If I said that America wouldn't be America if it didn't stay majority white?

You wouldn't have to - you're confident that America WILL remain majority white, at least during your entire lifetime, if not IT's entire lifetime. You're also secure in your knowledge of plenty of majority white, economically diverse towns across the nation, run by whites themselves. But why jump down the throat of blacks when they voice the fact that they don't want to be minorities 24-7?

[John Mace]

You wouldn't have to - you're confident that America WILL remain majority white, at least during your entire lifetime, if not IT's entire lifetime.
That's a silly argument, but change it to California if you don't like America as an example. CA will certainly be majority non-White in my lifetime if it isn't already.

why jump down the throat of blacks when they voice the fact that they don't want to be minorities 24-7?
Because caring whether your race is in the majority or in the minorty is always racist, under all circumstances. Besides, I'm not jumping down the throat of "Blacks", I'm jumping down the throat of Nagin. To jump down the throat of "Blacks" for what Nagin said would be racist. And like I said earlier, I'm not personally offended by such talk, but I don't think politicians who voice those types of opinions should remain in office. If it isn't racist, is profoundly stupid.

[Askia]

Because caring whether your race is in the majority or in the minorty is always racist, under all circumstances. Oh, please. PUH-LEEZE. That kind of attitude might be a very loose indicator of possible racism correlated with other attitudes/beliefs/actions but there's no way I buy into that, paranoid as even I am. That's contorting racism beyond meaningful definition.

[you with the face]

I'm not arguing that the mayor should want poor people there, even though I do think as a human being he should care that a signficant portion of the pre-Katrina population has been uprooted from the place they called home and lack the means to bounce back. However, my question doesn't have anything to do with that issue. I'm talking about PCness.


On reflection, it seems as if I'm wrong. I asked SteveMB two questions, one of which did ask whether or not the government should care if poor folks are displaced by the rich. My bad.

I think the government should care, or at least act like they care (which gets to the point I answered in my last post). In DC, gentrification has pushed many people out of their communities and has priced out many others, resulting in a rise in homelessness and other problems. Although its not illegal for this to occur, I think it contributes to social instability when this happens too quickly. In the case of NO, many of the people who do come back and try to rebuild may find that they can not because the cost of living there is too high. They will be left on the streets.

Them's the breaks, some will say. And a part of me agrees with that. But I don't think it would be unreasonable for the government to recognize this as a potential problem and put some plans in place to help people out. I certainly don't recommend treating it like a non-issue.

[John Mace]

Oh, please. PUH-LEEZE. That kind of attitude might be a very loose indicator of possible racism correlated with other attitudes/beliefs/actions but there's no way I buy into that, paranoid as even I am. That's contorting racism beyond meaningful definition.
What is your definition of racism, and how does your definition allow the belief that certain races should always be in the majority in certain geographical areas? I'm asking that as a sincere question because I can't think of a reasonable definition of racism that would.

[pizzabrat]

That's a silly argument, but change it to California if you don't like America as an example.

What the hell's so silly about it? I think it's perfectly apt. You've got the comfort of your majority status, so it's easy for you to begrudge those who want the same.

CA will certainly be majority non-White in my lifetime if it isn't already.

How, because of all the white Hispanics moving in?

Because caring whether your race is in the majority or in the minorty is always racist, under all circumstances.

Again, easy for you to say.

Besides, I'm not jumping down the throat of "Blacks", I'm jumping down the throat of Nagin. To jump down the throat of "Blacks" for what Nagin said would be racist.

That's what I meant, blacks, like Nagin, who voice their desire to be in the majority.

[John Mace]

How, because of all the white Hispanics moving in?
No, because of all the non-White Hispanics moving in. Sorry, but Blacks don't get the sole claim to non-White status in the US.

Again, easy for you to say.
The ease with which something can be said has nothing to do with it's veracity or lack thereof.

That's what I meant, blacks, like Nagin, who voice their desire to be in the majority.
OK, I jump down their throats because they're being racist and divisive. What's wrong with that?

[you with the face]

1. Nagin's comment was racist. He suggested that a chocolate NO is preferable to a non-chocolate NO. Which, on its face, is racist.

2. Just because something is racist doesn't mean it is offensive. Jobs shouldn't be lost just because someone utters a racist comment. It has to be sufficiently offensive to warrant that kind of reaction.

3. Two things can be racist and offensive, but rate differently on the offensiveness scale. "Asian people have the prettiest hair" is not anything like "White people are mini-gods; bow down and kiss my converse, nigger!" Yet, amazingly enough, both statements are racist!

4. Context is also important. See below.

5. Nagin's comment--while racist--is no more offensive had he been talking about a "blueberry city" in reference to blue-collar workers instead of blacks. And it was essentially what he was talking about. Gentrification--the concern that he was addressing--is primarily a class issue. Not a racial one. Nagin was assuring people that they would not be economically displaced by the rich. By putting it in terms of skin color, he blurred the fact that he was really talking about green.

Since race and class are so tightly linked in that part of the country, it's not really a surprise that he would do that.

[buttonjockey308]

My .02;

1. Nagin's comments were racist.

2. There is a double standard regarding what kind of statements can be made and who can make them.

3. The Robertson-esque stuff is as scary as it is stupid.

4. He could have phrased that statement a hundred different ways. He didn't, because he knew he'd get press and knew he'd pander to the lowest common denominator.

5. He should be called on it. A black mayor making racist statements in 2006, should be treated the same as if he were a white mayor making racist statements. The history of institutionalized racism, while important overall, is irrelevant in this case. It's not about what was done, we all damn well KNOW what was done, it's about making sure it stops. Nagin's not doing that with his "chocolate city" comment.

6. Both he and Blanco are the reason Katrina did the kind of damage it did to that city. Bush is to blame for standing on the sidelines during the response phase, and allowing FEMA to fail to properly respond.

[crowmanyclouds]

6. Both he and Blanco are the reason Katrina did the kind of damage it did to that city...They made the hurricane do more damage to NO&LA, how the extra hot air?

[Askia]

What is your definition of racism, and how does your definition allow the belief that certain races should always be in the majority in certain geographical areas? I'm asking that as a sincere question because I can't think of a reasonable definition of racism that would. I appreciate the sincerity of your request and will try to answer. Sorry I was gone so long.

Having gone back and forth on the issue for awhile now, I've come to recognize that the only meaningful definitions of racism to me have to have an actual belief in racial superiority (I'm better than you because I am black!), backed by socioeconomic clout and/or the actuality or threat of personal violence to preserve one's "superiority." Without those two elements, everything else can be shelved under "bigotry," "prejudice," "discrimination," "xenophobia" and "ethnocentrism." These are often indicators of racism but the only way they "prove" racism is when they result in hate crimes or biased and unfair socioeconomic actions.

Nagin correctly noted New Orleans was a black majority city in the past, and said he wanted the city's racial (please read: ethnic) composition to soon return to the status quo prior to the forced evacuation last year. He recognizes that New Orleans is a prime piece of real estate and that a large scale flight of its people will open it to money real estate interests of all racial backgrounds -- but, mostly likely, whites who probably won't be from New Orleans who will irrevocably change the character of their city just as Hollywood did when they "discovered" Aspen, Colorado.

Evoking God into his belief was dumb and bigoted. I just don't think it was particularly racist because I don't see where he has expressed a belief in his own racial superiority or any evidence of a willingness to back that up his desires with socioeconomic leverage or violence. His future actions may compel me to retract that. But I think that is unlikely as I do not believe Ray Nagin to be a racist. Louis Farrakhan? Sure. Anti-Semitic, too. Ray Nagin is looking into his political future and the likely redistricting of New Orleans must be weighing heavily on his mind. Self-preservation in politics isn't racist -- usually.

Ethnic peoples holding on to a geographic area as a basis for a culture isn't racist in and of itself. How you do so reveals your racist tendencies. Black Africa isn't racist: the purge of Indians, Asians and whites from many parts of Uganda and from South African Boer homesteads was, just as the apartheid townships that forced the majority of the population to the outskirts of J'burg was. Chinatowns aren't racist, but the racism that forced ethnic Chinese to settle in those areas was real. Sprawling homesteads of Amish aren't racist, the neo-African post-slavery enclaves on the Carolina Sea Islands aren't racist, the high percentage of Jews in New York city in the Diamond Exchange isn't racist, just as the high percentage of blacks in the NBA isn't. The Palestinian and Israeli violence in the Middle East has made them all highly racist -- or bigoted xenophobes, if you prefer. Wanting to benignly preserve those territories cultures and ethnic compositions if you live there isn't racist. Resorting to socioeconomic exclusion, gentrification, territorial grabs and unprovoked and retaliatory violence and/or harassment by police may well be.

[John Mace]

Thanks for the detailed response. I'll get back you tomorrow with a few questions. It's "Lost" night tonight, and I have to get ready for my viewing group. :)

[elelle]

Askia, that was a well-thought post, and I agree.

I think Mayor Nagin really botched that speech, unfortunately. It was a speech given at an MLK rally, and I think he was trying to reach the community ala Dr. King, hence the Preacher Speech references to God's will, but, he is no Martin Luther King, and , really, shouldn't have let himself get carried away like that. Here's (http://www.nola.com/weblogs/print.ssf?/mtlogs/nola_tpupdates/archives/print105585.html) the New Orleans paper article on the speech, a bit of balance.

Yet, I can understand the stresses he must be under. My sister has moved back to NOLA as of October; she says it's depressing and desperate. A friend just returned today, a NOLA native, first time back since Katrina, and the photos he took were heartbreaking. I have a lot of deep NOLA ties as well, and looking at those photos, taken last week, it's just unfathomable what it will take for the city to rebuild. Yes, Nagin is the Mayor, and should hold it together, but, this is such an incredible devastation. I'll give him a bit of leeway in not being cool and collected enough.

New Orleans most certainly was a chocolate city, I think the *most* Black city in the country, in terms of African culture being a vibrant source of the city's identity, for centuries. It 's been a melting pot of many cultures, but is the only place in the US I've ever been too that has an old African-American culture held up as celebration. It was also extremely poor with so many problems, but the way people there dealt with that was exquisite in expression. Jazz, parades, second line dancers, street artists, incredible food...that soundds so touristy, I'm at a loss for words....but i always found New Orleans to be the most people friendly wonderful place in this country.

I can't imagine the pain to see all those people in diaspora as they are now. I hope that all efforts are made to let the heart of New Orleans come back and help rebuild their home. I think that's what Mayor Nagin meant, though he prolly needs a fine politico mind to guide him to more finesse of speech. Maybe FEMA can send him one.

[HPL]

the problem is, making a city out of a delicious candy is even *less* structurally sound than making the city out of, oh i don't know, more substansial building materials like wood, brick, and concrete

admittedly, a chocolate New Orleans would be much *tastier*, albeit more melty in the hot summer months....

MMMM......the Land of Chocolate!

I wonder if Mr. Nagin has been getting kickbacks from a Mr. Wonka to advocate building a city out of a certain tasty material, of which Mr. Wonka happens to specialize in producing.

If so, we've just uncovered another scandel.

[Steve MB]

I asked SteveMB two questions, one of which did ask whether or not the government should care if poor folks are displaced by the rich.
Two questions? They look to me like two phrasings of the same question.

As for the question(s), almost every local government has succumbed to the obvious temptation (gentrification = higher property taxes = more boodle for politicians to buy votes) to enact pro-gentrification policies, which ought to be reversed (but for obvious reasons probably won't be).

[Askia]

Just to follow up on my post yesterday, a definition of some terms, which may answer some of John Mace's questions. These definitions probably won't be found as such in any dictionary

"racism," a stated belief in the superiority of one's race, or a belief in a heirarchy of races. To my mind, proof of a persons racism can be determined by the number and depth of the following indicators:

"bigotry," any prejudice that persists despite facts to the contrary. Most bigotry stems from willful ignorance. Most bigotry is often intractable.

"prejudice," a belief that exists before facts are examined. Unlike bigotry, most prejudice can be eliminated, or at least mitigated, with honest facts and a willingless to have an open mind.

"discrimination," is any preferential treatment that benefits one person over another for posessing a certain quality seemed as desirable. Some forms of discrimination are unlawful and protected: others are quite common.

"xenophobia" is an irrational fear of something or something different. Unlike racism, bigotry, prejudice and discrimination, I believe this emotional response to be largely an unthinking, reflexive and involuntary reaction. Considered on a cultural level, I suspect most xenophobia is the result of a widespread, ingrained and exaggerated bigotry.

"ethnocentrism" is the ordinarily benign belief, common to almost all human civilizations, that the culture you happen to have been brought up in, (and frequently, whatever group associations we seek out and adopt), are the "best" of its kind: its language, its history, its mores, its values, its foods, its naming, marriage and funeral traditions, its rites of passage and common arts forms, its humor, among others. In my opinion, extreme forms of ethnocentrism that are intolerant of other cultures, nearby or afar leads to, among other things, jingoism, language bigotry, racism -- and -- in the internet, NIMMBYism. (Not In My Message Board, Yutz)

A person can have moderate beliefs in ethnocentrism, xenophobia, discrimination, prejudice and bigotry without actually being racist. But realistically? The more indicators I can check off and the more extreme those beliefs are, the worse it looks for the racist.

[John Mace]

Askia: OK, I think I see where you're coming from, and I'm probably about 90% on the same page. I'm just not clear why you would say Nagin statement isn't racist (ie, not racist at all) as opposed to acknowledging the racist tone, even if it isn't a particularly dangerous type of racism-- ie, he's not threatening anyone. I was particularly struck by the comment that God wants NOLA to be majority African-American. That sounds disturbingly close to the type of religious justification that Whites have used (and some still do) for their own racism, even if he was just pandering to his audience.

Since Blacks don't have the history of institutionally shutting out Whites in this country, Nagin's statement doesn't carry the ominous undertones that a White mayor's comments would have if he said God wanted his city to be majority White. In fact, Nagin's comments aren't really threatening in any real way. Despite the progress that has been made, Whites still have an advantage in this country, and that isn't going to go away anytime soon. Still, one can be racist w/o being threatening.

But I do agree with the idea that there is a sliding scale, and while Nagin's statement might be a 2 on a scale of 0 to 10, it isn't a 0. I also don't think that racial prejudice can be completely separated from racism, no matter how benign the prejudice might be. That is simply part of the standard definition, and by that I literally mean what you find in the dictionary.

[Debaser]

It's interesting that people here would defend Nagin's comments when he himself quickly apologized for them. He was obviously way out of line. The comments were racist and stupid.

Last night on Fox News I saw Al Sharpton speak about this. He wouldn't defend the remarks and said he didn't know anybody who would.

Nagin himself, who made the comments, plus Sharpton, who is king of nutty racial comments, both realize that the comments were stupid. Why can't everyone on the SDMB?

[Duke of Rat]

I know retractions and apologies have been made, but I thought there was a bit of irony in the speech.

Nagin wants blacks to move back to NO. No sweat. But God is punishing the US for being in Iraq, the punishment is in the form of hurricane after hurricane.

Looks like, if Nagin truely cares about the blacks, he'd tell them to stay the hell out of NO until the US pulls out of Iraq lest they come back just in time for another round of God-induced wrath. Of course he could then use that disaster as further proof that Bush hates blacks and God hates America.

Or something.

Seems like it would be better for NO to stay white until the US pulls out of Iraq and gets back on God's good side. That way when NO's wiped out again, The Man will have to pay by letting white people be the ones wiped out.

Or something.

The above post was written with tongue in cheek, a bit of sarcasm. I hope that anyone who wants to live in NO can do so regardless of skin color or what Mayor Nagin thinks, and that no hurricanes hit that city or any other city based on US foreign policy. I just thought his rhetoric was a bit ironic.

[Contrapuntal]

I'm white. I'm not offended.Is that your litmus test? If a white guy is not offended it must not be racist? What about when a white guy is offended? Or do you just "know better"? Have you ever supported a white person's claim of racism?

[Askia]

John Mace, I guess I'm just more comfortable calling Nagin's comments -- tone included -- the product of a thoughtless pandering chocolate city lovin' bigot than those of a racist, and that his comments were prejudicial rather than borne of racism. The fact that he retracted and apologized, to me, is agood indicator he probably isn't racist. Racists don't typically flip-flop on their opinions like that. To me, if you sound racist without coming across threatening or exercising power to assure an ethnic superiority, you're more likely to be a bigot or xenophobe than an actual racist.

Here's a quick look at people I consider racist.

The Klan? Socialist Party, The American Nazi Party, John Birchers, segregationists? All racist, and discriminators and mostly bigots. Archie Bunker, George Jefferson, Fred Sanford? Bigots. 'Cuz for all their bluster, disdain and misanthropy, none of them ever seemed to support separatist movements and wouldn't hurt anybody just for being a different color. Old school hardcore Nation of Islam members? Racists, bigots and borderline xenophobes. Five Percent Nation? Bigots with like, one toe over the line being racist. From what I've seen, Asian culture is rife with ethnic discrimination and prejudices and old bigotries, as do certain European nationalities. I no longer believe everything rises to the level of actual racism.

90% agreement is better than I thought I'd do.

Debaser, you could sooner get me to eat an entire jar of bubbling, sun-warmed mayonnaisse than to get the SDMB to agree on a race topic. Hell, we can't even agree that I, in my scholarly perscipacity, am likely the sole accurate infallibale artibiter of perfect wit and hard won experience to know what actually constitutes racism and the rest of you guys way, way overreact.

Chillax, yo.

[Contrapuntal]

Hell, we can't even agree that I, in my scholarly perscipacity, am likely the sole accurate infallibale artibiter of perfect wit and hard won experience to know what actually constitutes racism and the rest of you guys way, way overreact.

Chillax, yo.Maybe not. But in my opinion you are as good as we got. Seriously.

For Swizzle. (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.kbcitv.com/Images/swizzle.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.kbcitv.com/x51637.xml&h=150&w=210&sz=26&tbnid=2z7N-64mtYMOYM:&tbnh=71&tbnw=100&hl=en&start=4&prev=/images%3Fq%3D%2522for%2Bswizzle%2522%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DN)

[duffer]

There was no racism intended in the "chocolate" remark, it was just intended to be a metaphor for a mixture. There's nothing lamer than white people grabbing any excuse to be offended by any perceived remark which can be interpreted as somehow "anti-white."

And before anybody says it, no, it's not the same as if a white mayor had said he wanted a "vanilla city." That would be racist. This was not, and the rest of the Nagin's remarks make it clear that he had no such intention.

"How do you make chocolate? You take dark chocolate, you mix it with white milk, and it becomes a delicious drink. That is the chocolate I am talking about," he said.

I wonder if the same defense would be made for this:

We have to put up with them for now, but I think we should aim for the goal of breeding them out. Brown sugar for all albinos!

I don't see any difference. And yes, Nagin is responsible for innocent deaths of blacks, whites, latinos and every other ethnic group. It is his city, they are his people. He may not have gone to war with another country (that never signed a peace treaty after the cease-fire), the problem is he didn't do anything about the known threat. Lack of action is sometimes worse than a wrong action.

Considering, moreover, how many poor blacks died, and the fact that so many of those poor were against him.....hmmm.

[crowmanyclouds]

...the problem is he didn't do anything about the known threat...
From a blog (http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/005372.php) hostile to the mayor,

New Orleans established a time line for evacuations:

Evacuation notices or orders will be issued during three stages prior to gale force winds making landfall.

> Precautionary Evacuation Notice: 72 hours or less

> Special Needs Evacuation Order: 8-12 hours after Precautionary Evacuation Notice issued

> General Evacuation Notice: 48 hours or less

The mandatory evacuation order came a little less than 48 hours before the storm made landfall,...Further, the precautionary evac notice came about 96 hours before landfall