Shall his new nickname be Wrench–as in Allen, as in tool?
Lame, sorry…
Heh, very Orin Scrivello:
Charitable to the point of naivity? Probably. I suppose that it just makes more sense to me that a politician would botch a bit of off-script points-scoring than that the same politician inadvertantly revealed his racism.
There are two elements that lead to a charge of racism: (1) the use of a racial slur, and (2) the use of the phrase “welcome to America”. While I certainly can’t claim to know why exactly these phrases were used, I share the confusion of many posters as to why a politician would be so offensive intentionally. To combat this confusion, I envision a scenerio in which both statements are intended to be innocuous – or if not innocuous, inoffensive.
As I posted on the first page, it is plausible that non-racist adults might use archaic racist slurs without knowing there true origins. Many adults are unaware of the racist origins of the phrase “gypped.” If someone grew up in a home where their said “nigger-rig” to mean fixing something (us PC folks know it as jury-rig) and they were unaware that “nigger” is a racial slur, then I doubt they would see any problem with the regular use of the phrase. My mother called misbehaving children Tojos because her father did, and moreover, so did I (!) until I took an interest in WWII propaganda posters and realized where the word comes from. She stopped once she became aware of the true meaning of the word. It may be being too charitable to suggest that Allen’s mother used “macaca” when he was growing up in the same way that my grandfather used “tojo” when my mom was little.
I have also theorized that Allen meant “welcome to the real America” rather than simply “welcome to America.” I’ve posted numerous examples of the uses of this phrase on page one, and it would bore everyone but Miller for me to post them again. I believe this because of the wording found elsewhere in the speech, including in last half of the sentence that begins “Welcome to America” and ends “and welcome to the real world of Virginia.” He also says “welcome to the real world” earlier in the speech, and in much the same sense that Miller noted he contrasts that real world to the world of “beltway Washington” and “Hollywood.” It may be being too charitable to suggest that Allen forgot to add “the real” between “Welcome to” and “America.”
I realize that this is a bit of a stretch, and requires more than a bit of suspension of disbelief. I want to make it clear that my motive is not to be an Allen apologist, but rather to make sense in my own mind of why Allen would have thought it appropriate to make these statements. As many posters have noted, his statements are shockingly rude. Politicians are not in the habit of saying things which are shockingly rude in front of microphones and video cameras that they know are turned on. I’m trying to bridge the disconnect with a theory that makes sense to me.
YMMV, of course, and if you’re not willing to make the leaps that I’m making I certainly don’t blame you. 
:rolleyes: I am not disputing what you keep asserting: that he directly and specifically addresed “Macaca”. I’m saying that you simply digest the words that prededed it, the words that entered your ears or your eyes directly before the words you fixate on, his meaning is clear. And it’s not what you wish it were. This part of your pittiing is all in
There you go. I was going by the information you provided. If you had other info, all you had to do is provide that, as well. I never said your claim was wrong, I simply asked how you knew that to be the case, as one could not tell from the video.
For those who feel Allen was actually calling Webb a macaca by proxy, I’ll point out that he actually used the word more than once. And specifically said, “This fellow here over here with the yellow shirt, Macaca, or whatever his name is.” Be careful trying to figure out an interpretation of that line that doesn’t have Allen refering to Sidarth - you could strain something.
I just want to clarify that I was posting in response to eleanorigby asking if anyone had ever heard a white politician suggest that another white politician was not a “real American.” It’s not an automatically racist argument, but I don’t think that’s proof that Allen’s use of it was not fueled by racist intent. Given the context, I think it’s reasonable to infer a racist motivation behind that part of the speech, given that the rest of the speech used explicitly racist terminology.
Also, magellan, Apos, I don’t think your arguments are mutually exclusive. Yes, he’s talking about Webb. He’s also directly addressing the staffer, and his comments seem clearly pointed at both of them. Given the slurs already used in the speech, the context seems pretty clearly to be, “My opponent and those who work for him are outsiders, as exemplified by this dusky-hued intruder in our very midsts.”
No, the claim is that the “welcome to America” bit was addressed to Webb and not Sidarth. No one questions that Allen was calling Sidarth “Macaca.”
This whole situation is just one big tar baby.
I can’t believe no one has hit on Allen’s real reason for using ‘macaca’. He’s taking it back. Must be a Kevin Smith fan.
Fred D --If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…
And you should join the SDMB.
I pity the voters of “Virginny”–in more ways than one.
You’re lamely desperate. The words before don’t change anything at all. He clearly says, and in the video its even clearer: let’s welcome macaca HERE to america. His comments are directed RIGHT AT the kid. Webb was not “there” even if Allen was ragging on Webb before. You are trying to make this seem ambiguous, but your argument is pathetic.
This is exactly the point I am making to magellan. No matter how in denial you are, you can’t just pretend away the fact that he’s most immediately directing his comments in that last sentance right at the staffer. He even addresses him by his “monkey” name as he asks the crowd to welcome him. Is this all in the service of ragging more on Webb? Of course. But that doesn’t in the slightest change the fact of what he said and who he said it to.
Oh, and Miller, by “you” I meant megellan, not you.
I guess the most amazing thing here is that George Allen addressed his comments to a cameraman, who, assuming Allen had a teensy bit of temporal awareness, was documenting the entire bit, and not to Allen’s advantage. That is incredibly stupid, point blank. I really can’t imagine a politician being that dumb, to load the opponent’s camera with vitriol, unless he thought that sort of talk plays well with voters. But, he’s just handed some prime footage to his opponent, carte blanche.
Doesn’t make sense to me, so I’ll go with stupid, and no awareness of media savvy. Glad we get it over now, rather than have to see this guy’s foolishness in a future big political race.
Seconded.
Oh good grief.
http://www.redstate.com/stories/elections/2006/tramm_hudson_destroys_himself
HOW COULD HE HAVE SAID IT WHEN HE KNEW THERE WAS A CAMERA THERE!!!?!??!!
Answer: because we often say stupid things without thinking about how they’ll sound, even if we’re practiced politicians.
Well, that proves everything. Wow, now I can see that you are 100% right! :rolleyes:
Look genius, if you are so insistent on painting Allen the way you want, knock yourself out. But your absurd insistence that you shouldn’t take things in context just reveals you to be the blind partisan you evidently are and will convince only those who already think as you do. But please explain, how the FUCK could you possibly be arguing FOR taking things OUT of context?
I’m not for it: why are you for lying into our faces about whether Allen was addressing “macaca here” and asking for a big round of applause to welcome him to america and the real virginia?
Face it, you’re the partisan that scrambled for some angle on this for cover. You did your best, and fell on your face. Give it up now.
Context, Macaca. Context.
Here is what he said again. This time I will point your myopic little eyes to just one little word. It must be there for the context-challenged, as it specifically links what preceeds it with what comes after it. The context would be there even witihout it, but having it there is like training wheels for those so kneejerk-partisan that they can’t accurately decipher what they hear or read.
And since you insist on mischaracterizing my point, I refer you to this by Miller:
(bolding mind)
Now if you still stick to your out-of context interpretation, at least it will be entertaining.
God that’s pathetic. Sorry, but “so” doesn’t change anything at all. Watch the video doofus.
“So let’s give a welcome to Macaca here.” How could anyone claim that this was directed at anyone other than “macaca here”? It could be argued that it was also being delivered to Webb, by proxy. But you can’t get away from the fact that the kid is the one standing right there, and he is who he addresses the welcome to.
Did you know there are limits to how full of shit you can be? Please stop before it starts coming out your ears.
Sorry, magellan, but you’re simply wrong. There’s no way you can conclusively show that Allen was not directing his remarks directly at Sidharth. Even given the full context of what he was saying, it’s clear that he was speaking specifically to and about the man he was addressing. That’s the plain text of the comments. That he was also talking about Webb is a virtual certainty, but that’s an extrapolation. It’s not the irrefutable interpretation you insist on making it out to be.
I also don’t see any place in this thread where Apos mischaracterizes your point in any way that would make the post of mine you quoted relevant.