New Rules for Liberal Racial Hypocrisy

[EffieBlack]

Rule #1: If a black Democratic politician criticizes the President, she's the voice of the people.

Rule #2: If a black Democratic politician defends the President, he's a sellout.

Rule #3: If a white progressive commentator criticizes Democrats for not standing up to moneyed interests, he is a noble, brave voice of reason, truth and integrity.

Rule #4: If a black progressive commentator criticizes Democrats for not standing up to racism in their ranks, he is a whiny, divisive, race-card-playing pain-in-the-ass.

Rule #5: If a black academician criticizes the President's supporters, he's a brilliant, plain-speaking truthteller.

Rule #6: If a black academician criticizes the President's critics, she's a race-baiting, racist, elitist charlatan who got her tenure with junk studies and deserves to be compared to the Ku Klux Klan.

Rule #7: If a liberal black woman criticizes a group of white liberals because of a tendency toward racist judgments, SHE's a racist because it's wrong to call liberals racists.*

*Exception: it is acceptable to call a black liberal a racist if that black liberal has criticized white liberals because, while a white liberal cannot, by definition, be racist, a black liberal can be and is racist if she says anything that offends white liberals. However, the converse is NOT true; a white liberal can never be called a racist or prejudiced or insensitive regardless how deeply anything they say or do may offend black liberals because, as noted above, white liberals can never be racist or prejudiced or racially insensitive and calling a white liberal any of these things means that one is themselves a racist.

Rule #8: While it is a horrifying, despicable and unforgivable act for a black woman to accuse any white liberals of racial bias, it's perfectly acceptable for a white man to compare a black woman to the Ku Klux Klan if she steps out of line and gets all uppity by criticizing white liberals for racial bias because, as set forth above, such criticism marks her as a racist and, thus, equivalent to the Ku Klux Klan.

[msongs]

1. #8 - denying a person's rights based on a person's race is racist, words are only opinions nt

[TheWraith]

2. I've heard that "words are just opinions" shit before.

It's another way of saying that pointing out the truth infringes on someone's right to believe bullshit.

[ClarkUSA]

5. Does that apply to "people of no color" as well? Isn't that what you said once?

[Union Scribe]

14. For the severely sarcasm impaired

The post referenced: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=2015015&mesg_id=2015016

I guess the "lol" at the end of it wasn't a big enough hint that it was sarcasm for some.

[ClarkUSA]

71. So what? That is what he does to end all of his one-liners.

[Whisp]

32. if words were only opinions there wouldn't be any deleted posts

locked threads and pizza deliveries here, would there?

If words were only opinions, then Joe Wilson's 'You Lie' should have been accepted by even Liberals as, hell, it's only his opinion.


I don't think you mean that.

[jobycom]

3. Rule #9

Don't step into a debate you don't understand when you haven't had enough sleep to follow it. You probably shouldn't comment on it, either, but some of us just never learn.

[ClarkUSA]

4. You nailed it, Effie. There's no double standard, is there?

:sarcasm:

You should send this to MHP. But I guess she already knows, doesn't she? After all, she wrote about it.

We just had to see it for ourselves in real time.

[Number23]

6. Nothing new here, Effie

Absolutely nothing new here at all. The backlash against MHP for writing about the double standard didn't do anything but reveal the double standard to the nine people who didn't already know it existed.

it is acceptable to call a black liberal a racist if that black liberal has criticized white liberals because, while a white liberal cannot, by definition, be racist, a black liberal can be and is racist if she says anything that offends white liberals. However, the converse is NOT true; a white liberal can never be called a racist or prejudiced or insensitive regardless how deeply anything they say or do may offend black liberals because, as noted above, white liberals can never be racist or prejudiced or racially insensitive and calling a white liberal any of these things means that one is themselves a racist.

You nailed it. Absolutely nailed it.

[tblue]

11. So if people just freaking STOP calling each other racist

maybe we can get back to solving some of our real problems.

Once you start generalizing about people or assuming you know their motivations, you enter a dangerous place and you shut down communication.

Stop thinking of our president as "The Black President"!!!! He doesn't even call himself that and he has never indicated that he even wants us to do that. Why can't he just be "our president"?

[OneGrassRoot]

15. Perhaps you can consider this:

While I fully realize that no one wants to be overtly or subtly accused of being a racist or a bigot or anything else that is offensive which doesn't apply to them, I believe the last two days have proven rather definitively that, whenever anyone raises the issue of racism or bigotry and suggests that "some" people may be making decisions based on these factors (unknowingly at times), the overwhelming response is a defensive one.

Instead of discussing the matter itself -- the issues of racism and bigotry and how they are affecting all aspects of our society, including politics -- people shut down conversation because they incorrectly interpret the "some" as meaning "everyone," including them.

The person who suggests that racism or bigotry may be a factor isn't the one shutting down conversation. It's the people who refuse to discuss the issue further, including an ongoing conversation about why they disagree. Instead, the focus becomes how offended they are.

Racism and bigotry ARE part of our very real problems and lie at the heart of a multitude of issues and policies which perpetuate economic inequality and all types of social injustice.

For those so focused on "policy," please be mindful that these discussions about systemic racism and bigotry ARE pertinent to policy discussion, as they are foundational aspects of what is wrong with our system.

[Number23]

17. Really nice post.

Excellent. :thumbsup:

[vaberella]

22. +1. Hey...I didn't read your post. I said that in response to the same post.

[tblue]

39. "Racism and bigotry ARE part of our very real problems"

True. But not in this case, I don't believe. How can you call someone racist against Obama when they voted for him?

[OneGrassRoot]

45. I think I could write a novella in response to your very short comment here...

but I don't have the time nor energy right now. I'll simply respond thusly:

1. The point I have been trying to make over and over again in the aftermath of the MHP piece is that I feel VERY strongly that we shouldn't be so focused on racism as it pertains to Obama. I realize that's what MHP wrote about, but I see it as an opening to discuss the MUCH larger issue, which is how racism and bigotry affect our entire society in myriad ways, not the least of which is politics.

Limiting it to Obama is just that....very, very limiting. The discussion as it pertains to Obama should be the opening to a much larger discussion.


2. Since you recognize that racism is a problem in our society, can you say without hesitation that you don't believe anyone who voted for Obama doesn't hold some (even unknowingly) racist views which affect their actions and decisions?

I can't. And I therefore feel it should be examined. There are many people who have fairly racially tinged and/or bigoted opinions -- including amongst those who consider themselves liberal -- which do affect their choices, and they aren't even aware of it.

As to "How can you call someone racist against Obama when they voted for him?" I'm going to let others answer that, as no doubt they will. Please hear this, however: No one is saying that all criticism, or even the majority of criticism of Obama by "white liberals" is racially motivated.

What I am saying is that, even if it is true for a handful of people, it's worthy of discussion. And, given how pervasive racism is in this country, I feel comfortable saying there is no doubt at least a small minority of white liberals who fit this description.

[OneGrassRoot]

56. To add a small point: Herman Cain

To your question asking how could anyone who voted for Obama be racist?

First, I think any racist or bigoted views amongst liberals is likely much, much more subtle than the racism we see in the Tea Party crowd, for example. I think those who consider themselves liberal aren't even aware of it themselves in many cases, which is exactly why it's very important we bring these things out into the open.

I've had a few aha moments myself in the last two days, seeing something in a way I've never seen it before even though I'm someone who is hyper alert regarding these issues.

But to your question....

Do you feel that any of the Tea Party members who vote for Herman Cain are racist?

I can think of many reasons why they would vote for him, including people who are racist beyond any shadow of a doubt for any thinking person.



edit for typo

[r0nr0ntaiwan]

112. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

If I were to tell people that I disagree with Obama, don't like the direction he's taking the country and would like to see someone else run on the Democratic ticket in 2012, I would be called a racist... not by everyone, but there would be people out there assuming it. If I were to vote for Cain, though, some of those very same people would still call me a racist.

So, not wanting a black man in the White House is racist. But voting for a black man to be in the White House is racist?

Most of this thread just points to the clear fact that the words "racist" and "racism" have lost much of their meaning. People are all too quick to use the words in an attempt to demonize political opponents. To me, it's a mockery of real, legitimate, actual racism.

[Empowerer]

117. Self-deleted - changed to an OP

[tblue]

58. Tell me you have NO bias whatsoever toward people who are different from you.

Consider undocumented immigrants, people with really thick accents, homeless people begging for money, or people who vote Republican. Or people who are not as smart as you, or those who are wealthy, white and privileged, or who are obese, or who don't have teeth, or who smell. Any way a person can be different from you.

Now please tell me that SOMEONE ELSE can tell you that deep in your soul you might have 'tinged and/or bigoted opinions.'

Tell me that you look at everybody just the same and that nothing you have ever done, said, or thought could give ANYBODY a reason to think otherwise. Please. Tell me.

But don't expect me to believe you, because of course you'd deny it, and (according to your example) I am entitled to slam you and call you a bigot anyway. That's what your'e doing.

[OneGrassRoot]

60. I DO have bias....

I don't look at everyone the same.

I have prejudice in ways I'm only discovering, and no doubt more in ways I'm not even aware of.

I am open to discussing it and learning by listening to others.

I never said I don't; I'm just encouraging others to be open to the fact that they might or do.

:shrug:

[boppers]

93. This ^^^

The most discriminatory people in the world are the ones who use sentences with phrases like "I'm not a ____ BUT ____".

I have all kinds of unfair bias in my head, and I work my ass off to deal with it.

[Empowerer]

61. I have biases and prejudices

Anyone who thinks they don't is deluding themselves.

[boppers]

94. "How can you call someone racist against Obama when they voted for him?"

Seriously?

You don't think somebody saying "I'd rather have a N*r than a Republican" is racist, or you never considered it as a possible line of thinking?

Voting for a black man, in one election, does not mean that a person who is casting the vote is not a racist.

That'd be like the nation voting for Clinton or Carter being "proof" that the north doesn't still have issues with the south, or more specifically, that liberals in the north lost all prejudice toward the south simply because of a single election vote.

Consider, for a second the following stereotypes about black people, and Obama's often racist liberal detractors:
1. Jim Dandy, a traditional minstrel character. Always dressed up, but also always disconnected from education and common issues.
1a. Obama is an "empty suit", "elitist", who cares about his "image".
Seen that in criticism?

2. Uncle Tom, the story teller, but who is ultimately an ally to the system.
2a. Obama "Gives good speeches", but "protects the status quo", and is a "sellout".
Seen that in criticism?

3. Shuck and Jive, a line about only working when under scrutiny, but talking and not working otherwise.
3a. Obama is "all talk", "not working hard enough", "we're holding his feet to the fire".
Seen that in criticism?

4. House N*r, the idea that once a black person has elevated their status enough, they are no longer part of the working people.
4a. Obama has "wall street buddies", "rich friends", "works for the wealthy", "not on the side of workers", and is "disconnected".
Seen that in criticism?

Nobody on DU, or in the press, actually comes out and says "He's a House nigger now, who shucks and Jives, because he's an Uncle Tom now, and was a Jim Dandy before".... because, well that's offensive and wrong to say by most current social standards.

People will, however, say the same damn thing with whistles and keywords. The people saying as such will often not see the racism inherent in their statements, because racism isn't always that overt. Sometimes, it's just built into the culture.

For extra mental credit, people can try to figure out what their homophobia and sexism key-phrases are. Here's an example: "who wears the pants"?

[OneGrassRoot]

95. It's insidious.

I consider myself to have a good sense of humor, so there are aspects of our various cultures and races and lifestyles that we can kid around with one another about, truly in good fun and not in a demeaning way, with no animosity whatsoever.

I have learned throughout my life that, even if there is no ill intent, there are certain words and phrases that cut very deep for some people. Often we create pain for others and we're truly unaware; we're simply ignorant in the true sense of the word. We can choose to learn and be more mindful -- without putting ourselves in a straitjacket about every single word we utter -- or simply throw up our hands and say, fuck it, everyone else is too sensitive.

But, for those who have been immersed in racism and bigotry and have been for a long time (as an observer but most especially as the victim of such views), there are times when it is very, very evident that comments are filled with superiority about whomever they're talking about, be it individuals or groups of people. There are times there is no doubt whatsoever that a person is a flat-out racist and usually a bigot as well; these are the people I have known most of my life. They are actually proud of it, and it's only been since Obama became president -- and Limbaugh told them all to deny they're racists -- that they deny the label (I think they've now talked themselves into their new reality that they're NOT racist).

I say it's insidious because I recognize more and more that people DO "kid around" or even make statements and have views that do have an air of superiority, entitlement and even resentment toward other groups of people. They do this and they're not even aware of it.

Now, there are certainly times where, as tblue keeps saying, we DON'T know what the other person's feelings and intentions are. That's true. And it's why I simply try to open respectful dialogue to discuss these matters, in case the other person -- or I -- can see something a different way.

Because the crux of the matter to me, and what I WILL call out every time I see it, is when this behavior dehumanizes, or has the potential to dehumanize, another.

Demeaning another is the first step toward dehumanizing others. When we dehumanize others, including groups of people, all manner of horrors become more possible.

The left has a tendency to dehumanize others as well. Honestly, I think the practice by some to refer to police -- as a group -- as "pigs" is dehumanizing. There are without a doubt some police officers, perhaps many in some cities, who do inhumane things. But there is so much danger in dehumanizing large groups of people, in my very sincere yet humble opinion. We don't need to do the exact thing we are fighting against. Sure there are some people who may not deserve the label of human beings, but I think it's very, very dangerous to do that to groups of people, when we don't know the individuals within that group.

So, even if there are small groups of people within a larger umbrella who might have the potential to dehumanize others, it needs to be addressed, imho.

And it's not necessarily in the form of an accusation, but simply in the form of an invitation to discuss the matter to understand where it's coming from. This invitation is slapped down 99% of the time.

Even if it's uncomfortable and we resent having to have the conversation and we feel there are "more important things" we need to focus on, we need to multitask and have these conversations. These matters lie at the core of everything else.

How we view others affects every single thing we do, including how we vote, including how policy is formed, etc.

[TheKentuckian]

121. You have set up definitions that are not bounded by logic.

1. Are you saying that there are no empty suits? Or that a white politician is never referred to as such? Or is it that a black politician cannot be such?

2. No white politician serves the status quo or is that a black politician is immune from such efforts?

3. We're holding his feet to fire is racism? Why did Obama himself set up such a theme?

4. No white politicians are friends to the wealthy and elite, works for the rich, or isn't on the side of workers or is it again that black politicians are immune to. Like if we were talking Alan Keyes it would be racist to say his policies benefit the wealthy?

What you see as racism is common to politicians. Is it racist when white politicians are called for the same exact things? Nobody has labeled Joe Lieberman, Hillary Clinton, Blanche Lincoln, Evan Bayh, Ben Nelson or Max Baucus in similar ways? Never were George W Bush empty suits, right?

[boppers]

122. Rhetoric is not bounded by logic.

Humans who think in rhetoric often "forget" this.

[Empowerer]

96. People here often point to the fact that "there are black racists, too!"

Considering that black voters have voted overwhelmingly for white Democratic candidates for decades, does that mean that there are no black racists since "how can you call a black person racist when they vote for white candidates?"

Or are all of the black racists voting Republican?

Or, maybe, the fact that a person sometimes votes for someone of another race does not mean that that person is free of racial prejudice.

[Tarheel_Dem]

57. Can I just say....?

:applause:

[vaberella]

21. Why can't he just be "our president"? Answer: Because of RACISM.

Sad to say...the mere fact we still use White/Black in order to show the difference between us is a perfect example and a sort of accepted byproduct of racism. If we are sure we are all part of the human race...then color specificity don't play a role. But that's hardly the case...and no one even really realizes how this pushes a racist initiative and keeps it alive.

I don't think there are generalizing made. I think there's a good majority---and to those who know they are not in that way---they shouldn't be offended. My friend who is a White Liberal would hardly be offended by anything said because he knows his own mind. I find the ones that protests the most---start slipping in how they address people at times and come across racist.

If we just look at the responses MHP received we can see that of the so-called non-racist liberals---many comments were down right racist and offensive. But no one really called it out. One of those comments was even posted here as a truth-teller---and very few people said anything against the language used.

I agree that it can lead to a communication shut down---but there are justifiable reasons for stating that someone comes across racist. In my experience-- racism comes in different forms. A lot of people don't even realize they might be doing something racist or borderline racist until he's called out on it. For instance my cousin married an Irish-American guy, we're Haitian-American. And while my sister, my mother and I are in the car---we were on the subject of hair. And he says..."I'm so glad our kids came out with the good hair." To him, he was not being offensive. He didn't see it as racist. To us, it was racist. It was a racist comment. He's obviously not a racist man to be married to a woman of color and live with said woman's family. But his comment was racist.

I don't see how this shuts down communication? I think what happens is that if we were to tell him his comment was a racist comment he could have done one of two things---apologized profusely without understanding why or be offended and then ask why. And there in lies the key. Why is my comment racist? What is wrong with what I just said. If people just get offended and go on a pedestal about how they're either married to someone Black or friends with Black---as some people did mention---that doesn't help. It's not about that. It's understanding what line you crossed that could have been offensive.

In one instance in my post I was accused of being anti-LGBT. However, the assumption was made that I accused people in the LGBT of being racist (especially when this is multi-ethnic/cultural group). Which was definitely not said in my comment. However, this cousin-in-laws statement was straight offensive.

As a final note....RACISM is a REAL problem.

[tblue]

40. Are you a mind reader?

I just think it is wrong to ascribe someone to racism when you can't read their mind. You don't know anyone's motivations and deepest beliefs. You might assume you do. You may think you have proof. But you don't. Do I know your motivations? How could I?

Please take a minute to point me to those comments you're talking about because this makes no sense to me yet.

[EffieBlack]

54. So you believe that NO discussion of racism, even among Republicans and conservatives is appropriate

because we "can't read their minds?"

A significant part of the discussions on DU -aside from conversations about race - involve a reading and interpretation of people's motivations and beliefs. Are you saying that ALL of that is off-limits because we must have absolute, objective proof of everyone's motivations and beliefs before we can discuss any political issue?

And, if that's the case, I will look forward to seeing you raise your objections in various non-race-related threads with the same fervor that you do against discussions about race.

[tblue]

62. You don't KNOW what anyone else believes!

I have no idea what you're suggesting I do. Really. Raise my objections to what??

Whatever, Effie. If you want to call out people for being racist, go ahead and do it and I hope that gets you the result you want, whatever that is. Because I have no idea where all this is supposed to be leading us. If the idea is to make people stop saying anything about Obama that you don't approve of, it ain't gonna happen no matter who you accuse o what.

And when people say 'to hell with it' and get turned off from his campaign, that is when I'd seriously, seriously worry about Obama's chances.

Tried to be nice. Tried to hang in. I am done here.

[vaberella]

115. You are intentionally misunderstanding my statement.

Where did I call anyone in my post a racist. However, I gave examples where a comment is fully racist. And a comment can be racist when it is offensive to the other party and feeds off a negative racialized stereotype.

For instance this post found on the MHP article posted as an "important" statement to counter MHP's article:

Secondly, if white lefties are actually abandoning Obama, it's because they're finally sick and tired of centrist policies from Democratic presidents, and because they don't feel any racial bond to Obama like black lefties do.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x780039

The statement above is a racist and offensive attack. One I would think Liberals would have walked away from but instead promote. For you, it may mean shit...for those of us in the Black community that is a direct attack on us to suggest that we only care about Obama because he's Black. So our racial bond supersedes all. There are plenty more, go to the MHP article.

This is not news. You can choose to ignore this and presume race is not involved but it very much is involved with what's going on.

[boppers]

103. "our kids came out with the good hair"

Seen the Chris Rock movie on the topic?

Epic and amazing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Hair

[vaberella]

116. Yes I have.

I have the film. It could have been better, because I felt the whole Atlanta hair show seemed to dominate everything and there was a referendum on Black women's use weaves---as to say Black women will spend their savings on such thing. And he didn't spend enough time talking about natural hair and what we, who have natural hair think.

[boppers]

Well, part of the issue is the *lack* of natural hair.

How many women, that you know, do not go to a place (or do it at home) to cut, dye, shape, curl, uncurl, or otherwise alter their hair?

I've met 2 people in the 39 years I've had here who don't "fake" hair. Even they do cut it, every ten years or so, so *they* are still "lying to the camera" about themselves.

In the US, it's like trying to find people who identify as women who don't wear makeup.

(Hint: Blemish concealer is makeup)

[boppers]

123. Well, part of the issue is the *lack* of natural hair.

How many women, that you know, do not go to a place (or do it at home) to cut, dye, shape, curl, uncurl, or otherwise alter their hair?

I've met 2 people in the 39 years I've had here who don't "fake" hair. Even they do cut it, every ten years or so, so *they* are still "lying to the camera" about themselves.

In the US, it's like trying to find people who identify as women who don't wear makeup.

(Hint: Blemish concealer is makeup)

[r0nr0ntaiwan]

113. A simple answer to this question...

... by Morgan Freeman:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2d2SzRZvsQ

[Fearless]

91. +1

[StarsInHerHair]

110. they'd rather be divided & fall separately

[Wait Wut]

139. This is he only comment that hasn't made my head hurt.

Democrats don't need any more reasons to divide themselves. Right now, glancing over the many avatars on DU, I don't know who is Black, White, Asian, Hispanic or Albino. I do know who I normally agree with or not. I don't ask what color someone is before forming my opinions. Just like I don't ask their religion or heritage.

I'm going to assume that you aren't a dog. If so, I like cats better, but I still won't judge you based on your canine heritage. :hi:

[Cali_Democrat]

7. Link?

[Mr Deltoid]

8. Why don't you just come out and say it?

[vaberella]

19. Come out and say what? I figured the OP clearly stated her point. n/t

[tblue]

9. Oy gevalt on a popsicle stick!

Okay okay. Effie, sweetie, please, I know you're upset. I feel your anger and your hurt. I do This thing has gotten way out of control. I think all this accusing is a real danger to all of us. Honest. Something's about to blow. Cooler heads need to prevail or this will not end well for anybody.

[vaberella]

20. I think it needs to blow.

I have to say...I seriously think a lot of us in the AA community on DU have internalized this shit for a long time. I'm not saying we need to go all disrespectful. But some venting and ranting is definitely deserved.

[tblue]

43. That is really sad.

It's cool to vent and rant. But what is left of the coalition that elected President Obama is about to be blown to smithereens.

I can handle critiques of the president. He's a politician and he's president. He's not my king. I wish him all the success in the world but I am not about to say I approve of what I don't approve.

And I am just as black as Obama. You gonna call me a racist, too?

[boppers]

104. Being black doesn't make somebody free of racism.

A rather brutal and hilarious take on the topic:
http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=24400

[Mr Deltoid]

88. Are blanket accusations deserved or disrespectful?

Tell me how these blanket attacks against white liberals aren't racist?

[boppers]

105. There were no blanket attacks against white liberals that I saw.

There were certainly accusations about *racist liberals*, but such a person (a racist liberal) could be of many colors, including "black", "yellow", "red", etc.

Racism isn't limited to white folk.

[Empowerer]

27. "all this accusing is a real danger to all of us?"

Notwithstanding your patronizing comments, the OP doesn't sound upset, angry or hurt. Instead, the OP is a very reasonable, eloquent presentation of a point of view, one that many people, including me, agree with wholeheartedly. In fact, it is considerably calmer and more rational than some of the ignorant and downright hysterical comments that have been made on this issue in the past several days. Pointing out the absurdity of some of the "rationales" used here to ignore the existence of racism and to attack and marginalize those of us who point it out is not "all this accusing" - it is simply stating a reality.

How does a discussion of racism on an online discussion board put "all of us" (or even any of us) in "danger?" Danger of what? What's going to "blow" as a result of people writing and thinking and discussing racism on DU?

[tblue]

42. Danger of absolutely obliterating Obama's chances for reelection.

If you want to go there, that's you. I don't.

[EffieBlack]

51. Anyone who would vote against President Obama because of something some anonymous person wrote

on an online discussion board doesn't want to vote for him anyway and is just looking for a convenient excuse.

But I'm glad to see that you weren't suggesting with such language as "a real danger to all of us" and "something's about to blow" and "will not end well" that discussions about race on DU would result in violence or physical injury.

[tblue]

59. Oh no, sweetie.

Not violence. I would never go there. I am really worried about people saying 'Screw it' because they get so turned off. (Hope you don't mind I call you sweetie.)

Have a great day, Effie.

[EffieBlack]

74. I'm not offended by your calling me "sweetie"

I just can't imagine why you feel the need to do so ...

[Union Scribe]

65. True, I'm not holding it against Obama

that some of his followers are obnoxious.

[FrenchieCat]

10. Majority wins,

Minorities lose.

That's the math of it, period.

[ClarkUSA]

12. Except in the last election cycle. Therein lies the rub.

For Barack Obama, the backlash started then. And has kept on coming.

[Tarheel_Dem]

13. +1. And they'll never let him forget that "they voted for the black guy".

At least that's what Michael Moore said.

[Karenina]

23. I couldn't believe it!!! BWHAHAHAHA!!!

:spray::rofl::rofl::rofl:

Another SLAM DUNK!

[treestar]

29. Exactly and because he was the best one for the job

And his performance in the job has been stellar. The feeling that it should have been "salvific for the nation" was to make whites who voted for him feel like they'd personally ended all racism, of course an impossible dream.

[SwampG8r]

16. was there a vote on the rules?

i missed it
these dont look very realistic
did the vote happen or are these just proposals?
because this list of rules seems like it is cut from whole cloth
i dont think any of the circumstances it describes actually occurred in the manner they are being represented
so i would vote no on these rules as they are drawn from a false premise

[vaberella]

18. K*R. I really get the feeling some people need to be a bit more introspective.

Because they are seeming to play right into Melissa Harris-Perry's critique. I don't even think they realize how they sound.

[These Eyes]

24. You nailed it...

Let's see how long it takes for the dismissive comments to begin.

Not too long ago, someone (it may have been Empowerer) conducted a thought experiment. The post, actually there were two of them, dealt with the number of black hosts on tv. When I read the posts, it was clear that the poster was going to the extreme to make a point. But I declare some folks lost their minds! Covers were being pulled off folks right and left. That's the effect the MHP article has had around here. The more they try to hide, the more they're exposed.

[shellgame26]

25. That's it!

[ProSense]

26. A lot of people prefer not to talk about it, but it exists and some of the loudest critics

are guilty of it.

This piece is from July 2010 (read the entire commentary):

...It is really about the relitigation of health care reform by opponents from the "left" like David Sirota. Actually, I don't think he deserves the label "left" (he famously once compared Obama voters to the KKK on Twitter, before apologizing and deleting his tweet only after the highly regarded scholar of the Jim Crow era, Professor Blair Kelley, pointed out to him via Twitter what an egregiously ahistorical analogy that was -- it was a comparison I find difficult to spring naturally from the heart and mind of someone truly of the left), but he spends most of his time on left-leaning blogs, I'll stick with it by default.

<...>

Glenn Greewald tweet comparing an Obama supporter to Leni Riefenstahl

Here's is Greenwald's apology

September 26: Clueless About Race: David Sirota

Read Sirota's tweets in the piece. Like Greenwald's apology, they reek of self-righteous indignation.

[treestar]

28. You've nailed it to the wall!

Perfect summation.

[Empowerer]

30. Rec'd to 0

You really hit a nerve - again.

*Exception: it is acceptable to call a black liberal a racist if that black liberal has criticized white liberals because, while a white liberal cannot, by definition, be racist, a black liberal can be and is racist if she says anything that offends white liberals. However, the converse is NOT true; a white liberal can never be called a racist or prejudiced or insensitive regardless how deeply anything they say or do may offend black liberals because, as noted above, white liberals can never be racist or prejudiced or racially insensitive and calling a white liberal any of these things means that one is themselves a racist.

The circular reasoning involved in the pushback would be funny if it weren't so pitiful.

[Beacool]

31. How about simply forgetting about a person's race

and just judging him/her by their actions?

Most times white people walk on eggshells to avoid being labeled a racist. The criticism that they wouldn't hesitate to dole out to a white politician they feel that they have to cushion when that person is of color. If Obama were 100% white, liberals would probably have been even harder on him. Isn't it part of considering someone an equal feeling free to criticize that person without fear of being called a racist?

Harris-Perry never pointed out specific people. Which white liberal journalists, pundits or bloggers have used racial terms to criticize Obama?

Obama is the president and criticism comes with the job.

:shrug:

[OneGrassRoot]

33. That's why we need to be able to have open dialogue about the general subject

It would be really nice if we could forget about race and be a color-blind society, but we're not (we all know this, I'm not being condescending), and we won't be in our lifetime, that's for certain.

That why I feel it is most important that, instead of discussion being shut down when the words racism or bigotry come up, it should be the BEGINNING of the conversation.

Yes it's uncomfortable. No one wants to feel they're being lumped in or labeled in a negative way, and that pertains to white people, black people, Hispanics, people who are gay, religious persons, homeless persons, etc. And most of us -- amongst all of the various groups -- to some degree probably walk on eggshells more than we realize.

I know I have questions I really want to ask others here, based on their personal, individual experience as an African-American here during Obama's presidency, but I won't because of the toxic environment.

But we need to have ongoing civil discussion about all of these issues to understand one another's perspectives and experiences.

I don't think anyone can deny racism and bigotry are prevalent in our society still, which means that to SOME degree -- however small -- it must be present amongst those who are white and consider themselves liberal. That's why MHP's didn't offend me.

I don't think people realize how much these issues affect our daily lives, be it those who have suffered (and continue to suffer) indignities as a result of racist/bigoted attitudes, or others who walk on eggshells and don't fully address issues or ask important questions for fear of offending. Acting like it doesn't exist or wanting to "rise above" it just isn't working. It continually erupts as we're seeing here.

I've been surprised (as another white person) by how vehemently some have responded, being very offended by what MHP wrote. I can disagree with it without being offended whatsoever.

I wonder if part of what is in play here is an underlying resentment by some white people that they feel they can't openly say things or ask questions for fear of offending and being labeled a racist, as you say here, Beacool. Therefore, this underlying resentment and feeling of being restricted as far as being able to voice criticism came out in the form of what was, to me, an over-the-top reaction of being offended at MHP's piece.

(As I type that, I recognize an eerie resemblance to how I describe people I know who listen to Rush Limbaugh, and this same underlying resentment has been cultivated and now seethes beneath the surface, causing them to have a very skewed view and resent others. No, I'm not comparing people here to Limbaugh listeners; hopefully anyone reading will understand the parallel I'm trying to draw as it pertains to what happens when any discussion is repressed, for any reason.)

Bottom line, people on all sides of this equation are likely to continue to be offended in myriad ways, sometimes rightfully so, other times not so much, because they've misinterpreted something or don't understand others' perspectives and resent having to have this discussion at ALL in 2011.

BUT THAT'S WHY WE NEED TO HAVE AN OPEN DIALOGUE ABOUT IT and not squelch it because people are offended, or because some feel it does Obama a disservice or any other reason.

These issues affect every aspect of our society, in ways many don't stop to think about and not the least of which is political and economic, so it is a critically necessary discussion, imho.

[These Eyes]

35. Oh, boy...

"If Obama were 100% white, liberals would probably have been even harder on him."

How would you describe Obama? Mulatto? Quadroon? Octoroon? In which century do you live?

Is it possible that you want to forget race because the discussion of it is uncomfortable for you? I take it you're one of those white people you to whom you refer that walks around on eggshells for fear of being called a racist. Well, I say -- free yourself! Whatever criticism you have of this president that you would voice if he were, in your words, 100% white, you say it. Let it rip. There is nothing inherently wrong with criticism. In fact, it can be good -- if it is constructive. If you disagree with policy, then say so. However, much of the criticism I see on this board has devolved into personal attack, and nothing more than piling on. "Fool." "Naive." "Milquetoast." "Weak." "Capitulator." "Caver." "Spineless." "No Balls"." "Serving His Masters." "Corporate Whore." I could go on, but I'm sure you get the point. None of this adds to an intelligent discussion of policy differences. And some of the labels are steeped in racism, or have racial overtones. If one doesn't want to be labeled a racist, then one should stay away from name-calling and stick to discussing policy.

By the way, when someone looks at me, I want them to see what I am and who I am. The color of my skin, the shape of my nose and lips, the texture of my hair all connect me to a people, a history, a genesis. Yes, I know that underneath it all, we are more similar than dissimilar. But how I feel, think, love, exist -- are all connected to the body in which I am housed. I have no desire to change that -- it is who I am. I know people mean well when they say they don't see color -- but that's simply not true. You can see color on a black and white tv. To say that you don't see my skin is to say you are denying a part of ME.

Just something to think about...

[Beacool]

44. The tone of your first sentence is insulting and not conducive to open talk.

What century do I live in? Well, is Obama biracial or not? That is just a statement of fact, not a judgment.

As for not discussing things openly. Please, I get in trouble all the time around here precisely because I speak my mind.

None of the descriptions that you have placed in quotes are racist. There are many white politicians who have been accused of the same and using the same terminology.

BTW, no one is arguing that there isn't racism in this country and that Obama has to confront challenges that no other president had to contend with due to his race.

[These Eyes]

70. Your description of Obama not being 100% white is insulting...

You believe that what is said about the president has been, and would be, said of any president. Possibly, but because of the color of his skin and this country's ugly racist history, those words take on a different connotation. Well, let's take one example -- the assertion that he has no testicles. It has amazed me (well, not really), the fascination folks have had with the presidential genitalia since Obama was elected. I've seen comment after comment about him needing to grow some. Does he have any, and if so, how many?

Historically, in this country, the image of the black man had been one of an over-sexual, less-than-human being. Watch your wives and daughters if there's a black man around. He'll surely try to rape them to satisfy his animalistic sexual urges. In fact, when a black man was lynched, he was castrated and his genitalia kept as a souvenir. Black men are still subject to castration in this society, maybe not physically, but psychologically. You know, he's 'weak', 'naive', 'he doesn't have what it takes for the job', 'he's the worst (fill in the blank)... EVAH!'

By the way, as quiet as it's kept, if you looked in your family tree (and not the sanitized one), you'll probably find you're not 100% white either.

[Beacool]

73. We are all aware about the image of the black man in the past.

Goodness knows that enough innocent black men were hanged after some white woman accused him of rape. But, do you really think that the current accusations against Obama are a throwback to that era? Isn't that a bit of an overreach? There have been legitimate concerns during the past two years that Obama has caved to Republican demands repeatedly. Case in point is the debt ceiling fiasco. That's why many liberals have called him weak. They are not really questioning his masculinity in the sense that you are implying. They are just stating that he does not stand up to the Republicans often enough.

[These Eyes]

75. Liberals have been calling him weak from the beginning...

And, believe it or not, we are not ALL aware of the image of the black man. Moreover, the way we view the same incident may be different because of our life experiences. What you may view as harmless as a white person may indeed cause offense to a black person because of his/her life experiences and this nation's history.

[Jakes Progress]

120. Give it up. This in another one

who will not brook a true discussion. It is a shame, but there are those who will use race to divide if it will give them some advantage.

[Beacool]

126. Yep, it's no use discussing these issues on the internet.

It ends up being a waste of time because everyone is entrenched in their beliefs and no one changes anyone else's mind.

:(

[Tarheel_Dem]

47. >>>>>>

;)

[These Eyes]

63. AAAAAHHHHH! :rofl:

Give some warning first! I'm in the library working on a project and you're about to get me put out!:rofl:

[EffieBlack]

55. Beautiful

By the way, when someone looks at me, I want them to see what I am and who I am. The color of my skin, the shape of my nose and lips, the texture of my hair all connect me to a people, a history, a genesis. Yes, I know that underneath it all, we are more similar than dissimilar. But how I feel, think, love, exist -- are all connected to the body in which I am housed. I have no desire to change that -- it is who I am. I know people mean well when they say they don't see color -- but that's simply not true. You can see color on a black and white tv. To say that you don't see my skin is to say you are denying a part of ME.

Absolutely dead on perfect.

[Beacool]

64. The second response you received is one of the reasons why people

won't get into these type of discussions. It only leads to gratuitous insults.

:shrug:

[Empowerer]

38. Another perspective for you to consider

In this country, not thinking about race is a luxury/privilege that only white Americans enjoy. Minorities are confronted daily with issues of race and must constantly consider whether, when and how to address them.

As an individual, you may be fair, open-minded, non-prejudiced, unbiased,treating every person you encounter without regard to their race. That's wonderful. But everyone is not like you. And if even only one out of every hundred white people that a black person encounters in a given day is not like you, that can have a negative impact on our lives. And since we can't always tell who is who, we always have to be on guard. That is a terrible burden, a burden we carry with us every day, every minute. And we are constantly having to calibrate our behavior, language, and responses to address it.

For example, if you're turned down for a job or promotion or treated badly at work, you can usually assume it was for one of a variety of reasons, but not because of your race nine times out of ten. When this happens to a minority, we have to weigh more things, take a racial temperature and decide whether race was a factor, decide whether and how to respond and then bear the brunt of being attacked for "playing the race card."

These are extra burdens that white folks rarely have to deal with.

I would love to just forget about it, to assume everyone has the best intentions, to give everyone the benefit of the doubt unless and until they prove themselves otherwise. And I usually try to. But there's a risk in that - we often get caught off-guard and knocked off balance when we get too comfortable and too trusting. It's painful and frustrating.


And regardless how we deal with racism, we're always second-guessed and criticized for it. For example, President Obama is regularly attacked for not standing up to and facing down racists by progressives who think he's too passive. But I'm sure that if he were to get more aggressive, he would be accused of "making a big deal about race," etc. by some of the same people.

Just look at the birth certificate issue. When the President finally said, "aw, screw it! Here's the damned birth certificate!" he was roundly attacked on DU for "caving" in to racists. But you'll notice that few minorities criticized him - because we know what it's like to have to regularly choose when and how to respond to racism. And we know that it is a very difficult and personal choice.


This second guessing is frustrating and, frankly insulting, especially coming from people who have never once had to make the numerous daily choices about how do respond to racism that minorities have to make.

So, while I would LOVE to "just forget about race," that's just not possible yet. No matter how much I try to forget about and just be "one of the people," I will be reminded of my black skin and that it still makes a difference to many people in this America.

As Thurgood Marshall once said, "I've never once had to hold my hand up to my face to know that I'm black."

[Whisp]

41. K&R this post.

It is very hurtful to be told your feelings and thoughts and experiences just do not matter - that you should just shut up, be quiet, don't be so sensitive, don't feel that way, don't make waves, don't make me feel uncomfortable.

[Beacool]

68. Thank you, very thought provoking post.

The fracas over the birth certificate was just appalling. Some segments of the Republican party have lost their minds.

:hi:

[joshcryer]

86. Wonderful post, thank you. Being a white male I've come to appreciate these perspectives the most.

I personally have never really encountered all of the issues that other races or minorities face each and every day. And it's been a long fought battle to understand these issues because for me and those who I am supposed to be with most of these issues are not issues, so it's a really sick kind of self-perpetuating blinders.

Wonderful wonderful post, well done.

[fishwax]

100. +1

[The Green Manalishi]

127. "In this country, not thinking about race is a luxury/privilege that only white Americans enjoy"

One of the first intelligent responses to the discussion of race that I've encountered on DU.

[tblue]

49. People are acting like they are not adult enough to handle a black president.

You are so right, Beacool. When did Obama even SAY to defend him because he's black? Has he ever indicated he'd want that? Has he ever done that for anybody else?

I am just as black as Obama. But I don't look at him and think "Black president," must cut him slack. He's president. He does some good and some bad. That is just a fact. And calling people racist and holding him to a lower or higher standard than you would a white president is just wrong.

[Beacool]

67. Thank you, I'm glad that you said it.

Look at some of the responses to my post. It's not worth the effort to openly discuss race on an online board. It's far more productive to do so in person with people who know where you are coming from and don't automatically assume that you're a racist.

My point was that crying racism every time that someone criticizes Obama is like the fable of Peter and the Wolf. Peter cried wolf so many times than when the real wolf was threatening him and his flock, no one believed him.

:hi:

[Supersedeas]

87. identity politics

[Karenina]

138. Perhaps YOU can forget about YOUR skin colour. It's "normal."

Many ever so slightly darker "others" are never allowed to forget about theirs.

"Most times white people walk on eggshells to avoid being labeled a racist."

Most times POC people walk on eggshells to avoid being labeled a criminal, a threat, someone who's NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THERE, too "upptiy," a THEM rather than part of US...

"If Obama were 100% white..." :freak: My children are bi-racial and THERE IS NO QUESTION that THEY are considered 100% BLACK by the majority of the dominant community, JUST BECAUSE OF THEIR ever so slightly darker SKIN COLOUR. One exception was when I first took my very white-skinned newborn to the grocery store for the first time. A woman asked me if I was "babysitting." I said no. She ran to the manager to report a black woman who had likely stolen a white baby. Fortunately, the manager on duty KNEW me as a regular customer and had been there on my last stock up the night before I went to the hospital. He chased her out of the store. Only those who are considered 100& white by the dominant community consensus needn't concern themselves about such matters.

"Isn't it part of considering someone an equal feeling free to criticize that person without fear of being called a racist?"

Ever heard of that linguistic term; REGISTER?

[wndycty]

34. K&R

:kick:

[frazzled]

36. Does anybody remember when leftist women began to realize the left was sexist?

I sure do. It was the late 1960s, and all of a sudden bright, activist women realized that groups like SDS were essentially chauvinistic, patriarchal organizations that had marginalized them greatly, excluded them from any leadership roles, rejected their writings, and objectified them crudely as sexual objects. The guys didn't like that characterization so much, but it was demonstrably true.

I think some serious analysis is due here: when a left-leaning journalist like Gene Lyons (not surprisingly of that generation of men of whom I am speaking, though I can't attest one way or another to his attitudes at the time) starts comparing a reasoned, strong, left-leaning intellectual woman like Melissa Harris-Perry to the Ku Klux Klan, we are seeing more than just a disagreement about ideas. We are seeing a full-fledged racially/sexually motivated attack that has no place in liberal orthodoxy. None. In its very backlash, it belies its own argument and gives credence to Ms. Harris-Perry's original conjectures.

[OneGrassRoot]

37. And I believe the inability to have open, ongoing civil dialogue...

about the issues of racism and bigotry of all forms has led to this.

This whole topic of discussion needs to come out into the sunlight. Too many people are evidently walking on eggshells and resent others because of it.

For cryin' out loud, instead of staying mired in a victim mode of being all offended when this topic comes up, let's talk about why we're offended -- and really listen to what others have to say about their personal experiences and observations -- and really get to the root of it all.

We all have a lifetime of experiences that inform our views about these issues. And all are valuable and deserve to be heard so others may be able to see something differently.

Progressives are supposed to be the more open-minded of groups, right?

Agh, sorry, frazzled. I need to focus on work and shut up. I'm being a pain chiming in everywhere about this.

I really appreciate what you wrote here and elsewhere.

:hi:

[bvar22]

46. It is painfully clear what happened here.

ALL of these enthusiastic Obama Supporters from 2008
suddenly changed into RACISTS!!!

That is the only possible explanation.


Solidarity!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[tblue]

50. Who knew?! Just look at all these racists:

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Whisp]

52. nonsense. can we not have these grenades thrown please?

How many times does it have to be pointed out that Perry's statement did not say 'all'.

This may be a way to choose the path of least resistance in your mind and avoid confronting what we are really talking about. Just hitching onto some bloggers wrong interpretations and agendas on this is unproductive and goes no where. Maybe that's the whole point.

[Union Scribe]

66. You're urging on this bullshit and complain about "grenades"?

Are you feeling okay, because I hear irony in large doses can be toxic.

[Whisp]

69. what bullshit are you talking about?

[Mr Deltoid]

81. This OP is a grenade

NT

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CakeGrrl]

72. Rec. That's what we're seeing. -nt

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

77. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Dr Fate]

78. I agree. Calling liberals racists for not supporting a politician is SPOT ON.

It's a good way to get them back to supporting DEMS more too.

And the liberals who dont appreciate being told the truth- they need to either ADMIT their racism or make up for it by pledging to support Obama no matter what.

Instead of arguing about this lady for labeling them with something as awful as being racist, they should take a long look in the mirror and realize that she is right. If you disagree with this president, you are probably a racist.

[Puglover]

80. LOL Dr. Fate!

:thumbsup:

[Bobbie Jo]

82. Sarcasm FAIL

WTF does that mess even mean?

[Dr Fate]

84. It means that Obama's falling poll numbers indicate that many Liberals are racist.

Just like Harris and the centrist bloggers all say.

[Bobbie Jo]

85. mainly because half the people I was with believed it until I explained the situation..

[Dr Fate]

89. same here.

Nt

[rury]

79. K&R!! Witty, succinct and straight to the point!!

[Puglover]

83. Why are you spending so much energy trying to

ferret out racial hypocrisy from Liberals when you have the real deal no holds barred thing going on with the Tea Party and the GOP?

But hey, whatever works for you Effie.

[Name removed]

90. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RFKHumphreyObama]

92. You rock EffieBlack

A word for word accurate depiction of how it is:yourock: :thumbsup:

[toddaa]

97. Wish I knew what the kerfuffle was about

Too lazy to google. Can someone summarize what's going on here? This is some really top quality satire. I'm guessing it has something to do with Melissa Harris-Perry's article.

But to add to the list:

Rule #9: Now that we live in a post racial America, anyone who voted for Obama gets a lifetime absolution from ever having to deal with icky topics like racism.



If this is about the Harris-Perry article, I guess I'm a bit confused where I fit, because I never supported Obama in the first place. I just voted for the lesser of two corporate minions. Can I still claim Rule #9? I'd use the some of my best friends are black defense, but some of my best friends are gay, so I've already used that excuse.

[EffieBlack]

98. :-)

This is mostly about the Melissa Harris-Perry hysteria, but is reflects arguments and attitudes I've seen here and elsewhere for some time.

I love your #9 - great add!

I don't think there's a quota for "my best friend" defenses . . . this "get out of jail free" card has been whipped out so often that some folks should have theirs laminated.

Thanks for the smile this morning . . .

[boppers]

106. You win the thread.... but:

"the lesser of two corporate minions" is:
a) a "house N*r" meme
b) a "corporation USA" meme

The two are not exclusive, which leads to a lot of finger pointing, especially in a context where slavery (both very real, and imagined (side note: overtime is not being beaten to death)) to corporate entities is involved.

Is Obama any less corporate than a GM Unionized worker? Both are minions of the machine, after all.

Is Obama any less 'Uncle Tom' (see upthread) than Hillary was?

Why can't Hillary be an 'Uncle Tom' to corporations? Ron Paul? Kucinich? Sanders?

Are there *any* politicians who were not outright corporate owners, or minions?

[toddaa]

107. "Are there *any* politicians who were not outright corporate minions"

I rephrased your question, so that I can answer it with absolutely no misunderstanding.


No

[boppers]

124. So, is there a solution to this?

Or should we just make them wear sponsorship suits?

NASCAR meets politics, no?

[Number23]

109. That most definitely should be rule #9. Well done

Welcome to Post-Racial America! 2008-????

:crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:

[Name removed]

99. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Akoto]

101. If this is about the whole MHP thing ...

I felt she was entitled to her opinion, as is everyone, and I won't get on her for expressing it. I choose to keep my opinion on what she said to myself.

The meat of that article aside, I felt she was overly harsh on Joan Walsh, and I still do. Some people simply make "professional friends" on looser terms than MHP, and maybe Walsh genuinely felt as she stated.

[last_texas_dem]

102. Really? A couple of irrelevant blowhards unknown to 99%

of the American population get crossways with one another and say some out-of-line things... and this justifies calling out liberals as a group for their "new" racially hypocritical views?

This has to be one of the most ridiculously over-the-top threads I've ever had the "pleasure" of seeing on here. Proud to unrec this garbage.

[Jakes Progress]

108. What? You didn't know you had all those views?

What would we have done without the OP to tell us how racially biased we are? And create such an atmosphere of trust and good will too. And here I thought my years of fighting for civil rights was motivated by something other than my deep-seated racism.

Golly. I'm so bad. I don't blame Obama for not wanting me to vote with him.

[r0nr0ntaiwan]

111. There's more.

Rule #8: If a black commentator criticizes the Tea Party, he/she's standing up against brewing institutionalized racism.

If a black person defends the Tea Party, he/she's an "oreo": http://www.hapblog.com/2011/09/cbc-attendees-say-tea-party-is-racist.html

Rule #9: If a black liberal makes blanket statements about other black people, that's fine and acceptable.

If a black conservative makes blanket statements about other black people, that black conservative is racist against black people: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/09/30/cornell_belcher_cains_brainwashed_remark_was_a_racist_bigoted_statement.html

[flamingdem]

114. bookmarking. too much for my brain at the moment nt

[Empowerer]

118. More rules

#9: When a white commentator says "some" it's assumed that "some" means "some" and not "all."

#10: When a black commentator says "some," she really means "all" and is making a blanket statement about everyone who shares the same race of the "some" to whom she's referring.

[AtomicKitten]

119. Good synopsis of the last week or so here.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

125. And who, precisely, do you think is governed by these rules? N.T.

[Whisp]

128. I am wondering, if some here insist that there is no white liberal racism

not even 'some', do they also think there are no white liberal pedophiles, murderers, shoplifters, cheaters, etc.?

Point is, every group has some bad eggs in it. That is why we should judge and assess by individual character, not by the group they are assigned. I don't understand how this is so hard for some people here to grasp.

Thanks for your thoughtful posts.

[EffieBlack]

129. It's very odd to me to see so many people continually (purposefully?) ignore the word "some"

and insist that whenever anyone criticizes SOME white liberals, they are criticizing ALL white liberals - even after they've been told repeatedly that that is not the case.

It is really bizarre. The only thing I can think of is that some people (yes "some") are so accustomed to being part of a group that determines how, when and whether to identify minorities according to their racial subsets but are not used to being so identified themselves that even the mildest identification of them as "white" throws them into such an unfamiliar place that all they can see is that they are somehow being abused. They can't see past this obsession, so you can tell them until you're blue in the face that they are not within the "some" that is being discussed, but they don't care. "Some" white people are being criticized and, therefore, ALL white people are being criticized.

It's like the Obama derangement syndrome - it makes no sense whatsoever and would be funny if it weren't so pathetic.

[r0nr0ntaiwan]

130. Completely agree

[Mr Deltoid]

131. I think some people are racially obsessed

[seaglass]

132. Melissa Harris Perry did not qualify her charge with *some*.

"The 2012 election may be a test of another form of electoral racism: the tendency of white liberals to hold African-American leaders to a higher standard than their white counterparts. If old-fashioned electoral racism is the absolute unwillingness to vote for a black candidate, then liberal electoral racism is the willingness to abandon a black candidate when he is just as competent as his white predecessors."

Where does it say some in the quote above?

The title of the article is "Black President, Double Standard: Why White Liberals Are Abandoning Obama"

It is not "Black President, Double Standard: Why *SOME* White Liberals Are Abandoning Obama

http://www.thenation.com/article/163544/black-president-double-standard-why-white-liberals-are-abandoning-obama

[EffieBlack]

134. My post didn't reference Melissa Harris-Perry (who did, btw, qualify her comments throughout)

I was referring to the insistence by some people here to ignore the word "some" in any criticism of white liberals for racial insensitivity in any context, regardless how explicitly it is stated.

The reality here (and elsewhere) is that some white liberals shut down any discussion of race and complain that THEY are being called racist (painted with a broad brush, blanket accusation, etc) the minute anyone says that SOME or ANY white liberals have any prejudice or bias. It happens consistently and virtually on cue.

And, most tellingly, it is always the same people who do it - and the people who do it always, always, always claim to do it because they are SO concerned about the tenor of the debate and want to preserve the ability to address "real" racism when it "really" occurs. Yet these very same people never, ever, ever bother to speak out against ANY instance of bigotry or racism against minorities. The only time they ever seem to be concerned about bigotry or racism is when they think that whites are the victims of it. Any other reference to it in respect to how any white person treats blacks or other minorities is, according to them, an attack on and victimization of all white people (and them, in particular).

It's almost laughable how predictable it is that the same people will jump into just about any thread about racism and bigotry to defend those engaging in it, explain why it's not REALLY racist, and to attack those who are pointing it out. How many threads on race have been spit on with the insertion of "Oh, no - not this sh*t again! Give it a rest!"? You can almost set your watch to it.

And in those few instances in which even they can't do this with a straight face, they never seem to find their way to actually criticizing racism or defending any minority who bears the brunt of it. Nothing but crickets from them in those instances.

That's why I'm not impressed with all of the "You're calling us racist. You're making it harder for President Obama. You're making it impossible for us to fight REAL racism when it REALLY comes up (and YOU don't get to decide when it comes up - I'LL tell you when it happens) so in the meantime, shut up because you make me uncomfortable" arguments." Until the people who consistently make these arguments start to evidence ANY interest in actually addressing racism or ever stepping up to defend minorities against it or criticizing any white person for engaging in it, I will continue to see their attitude as pure insensitivity and hypocrisy in action.

[Mr Deltoid]

136. You are flogging a dead horse

Why don't you just come out and say it?

[lunatica]

133. Wow. That's some knot you tied there

It's mind blowing.

[JNelson6563]

135. lol I think you struck a nerve!

:toast: Well done!

[Mr Deltoid]

137. Indeed

Blanket accusations of racism against white Democrats should always be congratulated.