It’s a fact that minorities (and the elderly) are less likely to have those forms of ID.
If they’re Hispanic and likely to be targeted by profiling laws, yes, they do have reason to oppose those laws.
Again: they do disproportionately affect minorities. Here’s a freebie: when Republican governors reject the ACA Medicaid expansion, guess who is hurt the most?
Bull. When southern conservatives passed poll tax laws and literacy tests, do you think they were surprised by the result that black people couldn’t meet the standard to vote? They designed these laws for black people to fail.
And they also were part of the system that kept black people poor and uneducated enough so they would fail to meet the standards.
Saying that black people are inherently stupid or unemployed is racist. Saying that black people are not currently receiving good educations or job opportunities is not racist. Acknowledging that black people are the victims of racism is not a form of racism.
Yeah, he does that a lot.
Coulter/Palin is the correct pairing for this film.
Perv!
IIRC Jeb was actually specifically invited to represent his brother and father, as their recent health issues were known at the time. I do not know the given reasons for his absence.
George W. Bush did have a stent procedure recently, but he was well enough to play golf a day or two after the I Have a Dream events. I’ll make a humongous understatement and call that “bad optics.”
I despise Bush as much as anyone, but it seems his heart condition was much more perilous than we were first led to believe. I’ll give him a pass and charitably assume that his doctors advised against the trip.
I agree, Bush had no reason to not want to be there and I imagine he would have if possible.
My understanding is that he was playing golf the day after the memorial events. Although on further review he may have just been at a golf course to support a charity; if he was walking around and didn’t actually play it’s not a big deal.
Bush has made almost zero public appearances since leaving DC for good, and the news media have shown close to zero interest in anything he might have had to say, either. I don’t know of any other ex-President who has both received and, apparently, desired such complete disinterest.
Which makes me wonder if the faint hints that he’s crawled back into the bottle, perhaps starting even during his tenure, are plausible. It would explain many of his actions and statements while in office, and lack of them afterward. Maybe the High-Powered Washington Type community knows it and tacitly agrees not to try to coax him off his isolated ranch where he’d only be an embarrassment?
And this is why you’re losing with minorities.
The problem with the GOP is that they think everyone else must be thinking of minorities in the same way they are. The GOP is racist and wants to reduce minority votes, so they enact voter ID laws, rail against immigration, health care, food stamps, etc. They think that the Dems enact laws opposing those things because they too must be racist!
What the GOP doesn’t understand is that Dems know things like immigration reform or food stamps is good policy, it helps people, and that’s all they want to do. They’re not doing it to help a particular race, it is just a happy coincidence that many minorities see those laws as beneficial to them. Its been stated in other topics before that food stamps and things that help the poor help poor whites a lot more than poor minorities. That’s because there’s a lot more white people than minorities, but if you ask a Rep, they’ll say that its the Dems trying to help blacks and other minorities
Please don’t assume everyone thinks like you. Some of us do things because they are right, not because it helps our party
No, I don’t think that’s it. The major issue here is that a lot of people don’t understand that a policy can be racist even if it wasn’t written by a guy wearing a pillowcase and a white sheet. If a policy disproportionately affects minorities, it’s not stereotyping or racist to point that out. On the other hand casual stereotyping of welfare queens, to name only one example, can sound awfully racist. And if a party is supporting a whole bunch of policies that are all bad for minorities and it talks about those minorities in a dismissive way, then people are going to say that’s racist. It really isn’t just a Republican thing because everybody finds it easier to identify outspoken racism and focuses on things like racial slurs instead of complex policies. But there is a great deal of plausible deniability racism in the Republican platform right now, and taken in total, it looks really bad.
I’m no fan of GWB, but this sounds like a load of speculative bullshit.
It’s okay for two women to have sex for the entertainment of men. It’s only wrong if they get married.
Observations of how laws affect people aren’t inherently racist. Blacks tend to be poorer, tend to vote Dem, and are more likely to be without picture ID, just like the poor in general.
The reason the law is racist and classist is that this disproportionate effect is the intentional effect of the law.
It’s a fact that no one even asks the last President his views on anything at all, even how the Rangers are going to do next season, and that’s been the case since, well, even before he left office. It’s a fact that this is not the historical pattern for former Presidents. The reasons are speculative, sure, but isn’t it fair to wonder?
PS: It’s also fact that he’s an alcoholic, whether or not he’s stayed dry since his famous ultimatum moment.
His track record in baseball wasn’t that great either.
He’s been out of the spotlight, but I’m not convinced the press is avoiding him as opposed to the other way around. He’s done some speaking gigs here and there but I don’t think most of the country wants to hear from him.
I don’t think we disagree a whole lot. Anything can be racist, sure, and I don’t think Democrats sometimes make well-meaning laws that are racist, but I feel that jtgain’s examples of racism are off-base because those laws are both unintended to disproportionately affect one race and ultimately good laws that helps a particular race. As Seinfeld once said, “If I like their race, how can that be racist?” In the common usage of the word, “racist” is bad. But if I went around helping people of a particular race, I wouldn’t consider that racist nor bad. The issue that jtgain is confusing is that Democrats may make laws such as immigration that helps a certain race disproportionately, but its not a bad law because 1) it helps them, and 2) it was unintended to single out race, as much as a Republican would protest
The mistake comes when a Republican thinks “That Democrat must be supporting immigration reform because he wants to help hispanics” rather than the correct thinking of “That Democrat must be supporting immigration reform because its a good policy”
I agree his examples are off-base. He’s misunderstood why people complain about these laws and the thought process that goes into that. That’s the mistake here. He’s saying “you’re just assuming racial minorities don’t have photo ID!” when it’s actually a fact. I think there are more white people than nonwhite receiving food stamps, but if you’re talking percentages…