Any chance Colin Powell will endorse Obama?

Great Debates
81

[QUOTE=Renob]
Why? Since Fox News leans to the right? That makes them automatically racist?
[/quote]

No, they’re racist because they use blatantly racist language and tactics in trying to trash the first black candidate for President with a serious chance. It’s not that they’re right wing, but that they’re actually racist. The Jeremiah swiftboating is racist. So is garbage like “Obama’s baby mama,” and Sean Hannity crowing about a “whitey” tape that doesn’t exist. It’s not their political stance (which is often just incidentally racist), but actual, intentional racism.

No has yet been able to explain why that term is racist. You just keep declaring it over and over again with no explanation.

What a condescending, self-righteous thing to say. Who are you to say what black people are obligated to find offensive?

82

[QUOTE=WhyNot]
Is somebody opening a fried chicken stand in Harlem because they did some market research and found that 80% of the residents would most likely shop at a new chicken stand racist?

That is - same action, different motivation. One is basing a decision on skin color, the other on behavior. Are both of them racist?
[/QUOTE]

Umm. I did not intend to highjack, either. :stuck_out_tongue:

He is opening his stand based on an actual study (street poll)?

Then no, not racist. It’s based on data gathered, supplied by the customers themselves (I assume), as opposed to an assumption made based on skin color.

83

[QUOTE=mlees]
Before a moderator lands on me with both feet for name calling, let me clarify:

I do not think Diogenes is a racist or a race hater.

By “soft” racism, I mean in the absent minded kind of way, the way a statement made, not intended to insult, but never-the-less shows a bias or stereotype.

Someone opening a fried chicken stand in Harlem because they think that all black folk like fried chicken is not attempting to belittle anyone, but still holds a bias/stereotype in thinking as it relates to his target customers, based on race.

My apologies to Dio if I worded my quoted post poorly. I did not mean to offend.
[/QUOTE]

I’m not offended, but I hope I explained that my objection to Juan Williams was based on more than his ethnicity, but in his willingness to participate in the racist denigration of his own ethnicity.

84

[QUOTE=WhyNot]
Is somebody opening a fried chicken stand in Harlem because they did some market research and found that 80% of the residents would most likely shop at a new chicken stand racist?
[/QUOTE]

The key here is in the meaning of “prejudice.” If you’re doing the market research and you know what people actually want, you’re not being prejudiced by opening the store. You haven’t judged in advanced, you’ve judged based on the facts. If you open the store because you just assume black people like fried chicken, you’re prejudiced and you’re an idiot. [This is the hypothetical “you,” not WhyNot.]

Renob, saying Fox - they of the “terrorist fist jab” and so forth - and racist is not an indictment of all conservatives. I think one can easily come to the conclusion that Fox has engaged in race-baiting during this election and is racist without saying anything about all people who lean to the right.

85

[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
I’m saying it doesn’t compare “black people” collectively to slaves. It compares a certain kind of modern behavior to a certain kind of historical behavior – and as I said upthread, it denotes a voluntary subservience.
[/QUOTE]
Let me make sure I’m understanding you. You’re saying that calling one black man a “houseboy” does not mean that the user of the term is comparing all black people to slaves. If that’s what you mean, I guess I don’t disagree with that.

My point was that using that term against someone is comparing that individual to a slave – a very specific type of slave – and yes, the behavior stereotypically attributed to that type of slave. But you can’t extract the implied behavior without making the analogy to being a slave.

I think what you’re trying to communicate is that since the comment was not directed at or attributable to all black people, the term does not fit your definition of racist. I’m staying out of that argument. But just understand that, from my point of view, at least, calling someone a houseboy carries an inexorable linkage to slavery.

86

[QUOTE=Frylock]
I don’t know Merijeek’s political persuasion, but I am a Liberal, and I’ve been sitting here for about ten minutes trying to figure out how best to chastise Merijeek. I ultimately decided not to because I’m not usually the best at that kind of thing. But I’ll register that I found his use of language ludicrous and morally deficient.
[/QUOTE]

Yup.

Whether or not it is racist according to some semantic definition, it is certainly racially-tinged and in poor taste.

87

[QUOTE=Frylock]
You’re right, he shouldn’t denigrate his race, because he shouldn’t denigrate any race.

But you didn’t call him a house boy because he denigrated any race. You called him that because he denigrated his own race. You’re telling him what he should and should not do because of his race. You’re using his race as part of your moral judgment of his actions. You are using the term, then, in a racist fashion.

If all you’re upset about is his denigration of a race, then you should call him a racist. Instead, you’re upset about his denigration of his own race. This view that people owe a special loyalty to their own race above all others is racist.

There are other reasons your use of the term is racist, but I’ll just leave it at that for now.

-FrL-
[/QUOTE]

All you’re doing is helping to clarify that there is a distinction between being a racist and ingratiating yourself to racists. Juan Williams is not a racist. he he just sucks up to them and tells them what they want to hear.

88

[QUOTE=mlees]
Then no, not racist. It’s based on data gathered, supplied by the customers themselves (I assume), as opposed to an assumption made based on skin color.
[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Marley23]
The key here is in the meaning of “prejudice.” If you’re doing the market research and you know what people actually want, you’re not being prejudiced by opening the store. You haven’t judged in advanced, you’ve judged based on the facts.
[/QUOTE]

Ok, we agree. So why is a comment about Colin Powell’s observed behavior*, not his skin color, (ETA: Or predicting behavior based on his skin color) racist?
*Again, I hasten to add, misinterpreted, IMHO. I think Powell really meant what he said when he said it. **Merijeek **doesn’t, but not out of racism.

89

[QUOTE=Asimovian]
Let me make sure I’m understanding you. You’re saying that calling one black man a “houseboy” does not mean that the user of the term is comparing all black people to slaves. If that’s what you mean, I guess I don’t disagree with that.
[/quote]

Yes, that’s what I’m saying.

There is a linkage, yes, but it’s not a collective linkage or a racist linkage.

90

[QUOTE=WhyNot]
Ok, we agree. So why is a comment about Colin Powell’s observed behavior*, not his skin color, (ETA: Or predicting behavior based on his skin color) racist?
[/QUOTE]

I laid out the reasons as best I could earlier on. It’s a comment on his observed behavior that takes the form of a comment on his race, and it degrades Powell and black people in general.

91

[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
No, they’re racist because they use blatantly racist language and tactics in trying to trash the first black candidate for President with a serious chance. It’s not that they’re right wing, but that they’re actually racist. The Jeremiah swiftboating is racist. So is garbage like “Obama’s baby mama,” and Sean Hannity crowing about a “whitey” tape that doesn’t exist. It’s not their political stance (which is often just incidentally racist), but actual, intentional racism.
[/quote]

Jeremiah Wright made arguably incendiary statements. Calling in to question Obama’s association with him is legitimate, if weak. McCain’s relationship with similar (white) incendiary personalities is also legitimate.

I suspect that even if Obama was white, Hannity would have still overindulged himself with clips of Wright. Hannity’s speciality is exaggerating news stories, not Klan rallies.

However, I will not defend “Obama’s Baby mama”, which is extremely tacky IMO, and the non existant “whitey” stuff, or Obama’s possible Muslim/Madrassa childhood, which appears to be “race baiting”.

OT:

I like Brit Hume, Chris Wallace, Neil Cavuto (even though buisness news bores the piss out of me), they seem to have integrity.

O’Reilly. Hmm. Sometimes I agree with him, sometimes I think he’s a pinhead. :stuck_out_tongue:

Greta Van Susteren seems to know law reasonably well. But she (and Geraldo) occasionally succumb to the over-sensationalised or over-sensationalising of some stories for me, IMO.

Hannity, though, is as about far right (and sensationalised) as FNC gets. I wish Combs could reign his butt in, sometimes. :slight_smile:

92

[QUOTE=Liberal]
Juan is also Britt Hume’s whipping boy. Britt just loves to glare at him, and spit lessons at him after Juan says something stupid (which happens frequently enough). And then there’s Mara (Liasson), allegedly with NPR. Her job is to set up softies for Bill Kristol, so he can wear his Cheshire grin while sounds that resemble words ooze from his mouth like a syrupy river of rhetoric. The only person Fox News has that’s worth more than a wad of snot is Chris Wallace. He’s biased, to be sure, but he hides it better than anyone at FNC — and frankly, better than most on other networks, like Lou Dobbs or Joe Scarborough.
[/QUOTE]

Williams didn’t used to be that way. He was tougher, and took less bullshit and (I think) more honest when he was at CNN. That’s one of the reasons I think he’s a genuine sell out, and not just sincerely deluded.

93

[QUOTE=Marley23]
I laid out the reasons as best I could earlier on. It’s a comment on his observed behavior that takes the form of a comment on his race…
[/QUOTE]

So are all comments on race racist?

Well, yeah, that I’ll give you. I think most insults are meant to degrade the people they’re about.

This is the part I’m not following. Don’t act like a houseboy and you won’t be called a houseboy. If someone wasn’t acting like a houseboy* and they were called a houseboy *because *they were black, I’d be right there with you.

sigh I guess that’s too much like the “there are niggers and there are black people” routine, right?
*IMerijeek’sHO, of course.

(The weird thing about this whole debate is that when I hear “houseboy”, I think of Agador (sp?) from The Birdcage, not black slaves.)

94

[QUOTE=WhyNot]
…(The weird thing about this whole debate is that when I hear “houseboy”, I think of Agador (sp?) from The Birdcage, not black slaves.)
[/QUOTE]

I think of the old Green Hornet TV series, with Bruce Lee as his “houseboy”.

95

[QUOTE=WhyNot]
sigh I guess that’s too much like the “there are niggers and there are black people” routine, right?
[/quote]
That is the exact quote that has been running through my head since this thread derailed.

96

[QUOTE=WhyNot]
Ok, we agree. So why is a comment about Colin Powell’s observed behavior*, not his skin color, (ETA: Or predicting behavior based on his skin color) racist?
*Again, I hasten to add, misinterpreted, IMHO. I think Powell really meant what he said when he said it. **Merijeek **doesn’t, but not out of racism.
[/QUOTE]

Because the “house boy” comment implies that Powell willingly betrayed his race, when in fact his actions (if he knowingly lied to the UNSC) betrayed a much broader group of people.

“House Boy” has decidedly racial overtones. If, instead, the term “Bush stooge”, or “lying spokes-hole” was used, no one would have squaked. (Much. :stuck_out_tongue: )

97

[QUOTE=Asimovian]
That is the exact quote that has been running through my head since this thread derailed.
[/QUOTE]

I figured. And me too, honestly. But at the end of the day, “houseboy”, to me, isn’t quite as pervasively black only as “nigger”. See above re: Guatemalan and Asian houseboys in entertainment.

Minority, yes. Subservient, yes. Black? Not always.

Not that this particular example didn’t connote black, certainly it did, if only because the target is black. But sure, it could have been leveled at a subservient boot-licker who wasn’t black.

While I can see why every black person would be realistically afraid of being called a nigger at some point, and that therefore the “only some black people are niggers” argument is bullshit (or at least an attempt at revisionism), I just didn’t think “houseboy” was widely enough and exclusively enough used to denigrate black people to be similarly taboo. But what do I know? I’m a white trash bitch. :wink:
Obligatory whack at the straw man: Yes, I’m typing out “nigger” instead of “the n-word”. Fuck it, we’re not fourth graders here.

98

[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
No, they’re racist because they use blatantly racist language and tactics in trying to trash the first black candidate for President with a serious chance. It’s not that they’re right wing, but that they’re actually racist.
[/quote]

Besides the “baby mama” thing, I’m unsure what racist language they used. But if they did, I have no problem condemning them. I am really not a fan of Fox News and I think they cheapen our political discourse.

The Jeremiah Wright thing is legitimate news to a certain extent, although it’s been overblown by conservatives. But attacking Wright’s views is certainly not racist. The Whitey tape thing is just stupid on Hannity’s part. But it’s stupid because no tape exists. If Michelle Obama did say something like that which was alleged, I think that would be legitimate news. Again, that’s not racist.

Since the implication underlying the statement is that all black people must think alike (or that your skin color determines your political views), I’d say that’s a pretty racist premise. And since it’s calling someone, essentially, a race traitor, I think that qualifies, too.

The only thing I’m saying is that it’s racist for anyone – black, white, Latino, whatever – to think that your political views are determined by your skin color. And it’s ignorant to say that you are a traitor to your race if you hold certain political views.

I realize that. Again, I’m not a fan of Fox News. Discussions about whether Fox News is racist may be an interesting topic, but it would sidetrack even further an already sidetracked thread.

99

[QUOTE=Renob]
Why? Since Fox News leans to the right? That makes them automatically racist? I find it interesting that you have such a finely tuned sense of racism that you can affix that label to Fox News but you jump through hoops to justify the usage of a cleary racist term. Interesting world you live in.
Black, white, whatever – calling someone an “Uncle Tomming house nigger” is just ignorant. You get no pass because of your skin color. It’s just as racist when you use it, since it stems from the racist thought that having a certain skin color means that you must think a certain way. In your view “black=liberal.” That type of stereotype is certainly racist in my book.

And in this view if a black person isn’t a liberal then he is some kind of race traitor. It’s the same type of thinking that leads Klansmen to label liberal whites race traitors, except somehow calling someone an “Uncle Tomming house nigger” is more socially acceptable.
[/QUOTE]

Wrong! I called him that for selling out his own doubts about the veracity of the evidence he presented to the United Nations.

And I give two craps about what society thinks, it’s even more hypocritical and f’d up than I am.

100

[QUOTE=WhyNot]
I just didn’t think “houseboy” was widely enough and exclusively enough used to denigrate black people to be similarly taboo. But what do I know? I’m a white trash bitch. :wink:

[/QUOTE]

You mentioned something about Guatemalan houseboys in entertainment, but I don’t know the reference. As far as I know, “houseboy” is only a denigrating term (in American English, I guess I should say) when applied to black people.

-FrL-