Racism: Democrats are just as racist as any other party

[billvon 2,384]

> I think telling some poor SOB that he isn't good enough and has no hope so
>we'll supplement his existence is a particularly cruel form of discrimination.

As is a GOP candidate telling a gay woman that she is such a disgusting pervert she should not be allowed to marry the person she loves. (In many cases being said while the candidate himself is in a gay relationship.)

Yes, both sides do it. In general I find the democrat's form of racism preferable because it is trying to fix a problem that we, as a society, caused. I think it is the wrong solution but at least they are trying.

[jgoose71 0]

billvon

> I think telling some poor SOB that he isn't good enough and has no hope so
>we'll supplement his existence is a particularly cruel form of discrimination.

As is a GOP candidate telling a gay woman that she is such a disgusting pervert she should not be allowed to marry the person she loves. (In many cases being said while the candidate himself is in a gay relationship.)

Keep towing that party line. You need the Republicans to be racist and hateful.

billvon

Yes, both sides do it. In general I find the democrat's form of racism preferable because it is trying to fix a problem that we, as a society, caused. I think it is the wrong solution but at least they are trying.

It's not fixing the problem, and that is the problem. The Democrats don't see people as individuals. They see them as a voting block and treat them as such.

And as a block you are telling them that Republicans are racists. And if they step out of line or question policies, they get attacked.

So, how much farther did the charges go on Herman Cain after he stepped out of the election?

Martin Luther King most Famously said "I have a dream where men will be judged by the content of their character, and not by the color of their skin."

Unfortunately, things like Affirmative Action actually still ranked people according to the color of their skin. My dream is that one day, character will actually be taken into consideration.

"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

[billvon 2,384]

>Keep towing that party line. You need the Republicans to be racist and hateful.

I predicted you would complain about a stereotype that was just as inaccurate as your own. Funny, that.

>It's not fixing the problem, and that is the problem.

Agreed. Did a lot of good for a while, but both the good it has done and the rationale for it has come and gone.

>Martin Luther King most Famously said "I have a dream where men will be judged
>by the content of their character, and not by the color of their skin."

Yep. He also called for a Negro bill of rights, and demanded that they be compensated via "a massive program by the government of special, compensatory measures which could be regarded as a settlement in accordance with the accepted practice of common law. . . . Such measures would certainly be less expensive than any computation based on two centuries of unpaid wages and accumulated interest."

What MLK asked for came to pass, and for decades it helped make faster progress in bringing a heinously tilted playing field back into a semblance of balance.

[jgoose71 0]

billvon

Yep. He also called for a Negro bill of rights, and demanded that they be compensated via "a massive program by the government of special, compensatory measures which could be regarded as a settlement in accordance with the accepted practice of common law. . . . Such measures would certainly be less expensive than any computation based on two centuries of unpaid wages and accumulated interest."

I have to call "Bull Shit" on this one. Martin Luther King was a Republican and believed in the individual. I did a google search and found nothing. Please provide a reference.

And you will never convince me that blocking people together by policies based on race isn't racist.

Please tell me a policy that the Democratic party has that doesn't break people out by race/gender/sexual orientation.

Or an argument against a Republican policy that isn't based on race/gender/sexual orientation.

Edited to add: and Assassinated by a Democrat.

"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

[winsor 186]

I went through a neighborhood that voted 100% Democrat a couple of days ago and noticed a number of people wearing outfits that would have made the KKK proud (with exception of the choice of fabric).

I have always found the double-standard amusing whereby its okay to make clear distinctions between various groups if the opinion is glowing, but not okay if the opinion is not so good. This goes for gender, ethnic origin, place of birth and so forth.

Any dog or horse breeder can expound at length on the merits and deficiencies of one breed or sex for a particular role, and if you dispute that I ask who you favor in a race between a trained Thoroughbred and a Clydesdale. The differences between peoples are every bit as great as those between variants of other species. Just as there are housebroken and feral cats, there are housebroken and feral people, and the distinction is no less significant.

Social standards differ greatly among groups of people that are ethnically similar, and one may ignore these differences at their own peril. Shrill objections to perceived stereotyping overlook the great pains that all too many people take to fit one stereotype or another.

Marketing makes clear the differences between various groups. Things you can't keep on the shelves in one venue you can't give away in another.

Discrimination has been given a bad name. A discriminating palate can lead to epicurean delight, indiscriminate choices are often bad ones and so forth. Discrimination is the ability to tell the difference, and the difference is often quite significant.

Similarly, 'Diversity' is vastly overrated in and of itself. "E Pluribus Unum" references diversity but the upshot is unity.

When identifying with any group, it is important to understand the distinction between 'us' and 'them' in context, and the ramifications of how you choose to identify. In social situations there may be several lines of demarcation at play, each with its benefits and pitfalls.

In a group of people one might have to decide whether they side with the city folk or the rural crowd, males or females, Marines or Army, Baseball or Hockey fans (and which team, of course), Shiite or Sunni, Baptist or Methodist, Believers or Non, tall or short, fat or thin, black or white, Ibo or Yoruba, Norwegian or Greek and so forth. Opting for the wrong focus of identification can have serious consequences, whether it be wearing Crips colors on Bloods turf or Red Sox duds in Yankee Stadium.

Anyhow, in light of the thread title, Democrats are unabashed in their focus on race, which fits my definition of racism. I do not see racism as 'good' or 'bad' per se, and lump David Duke together with with Al Sharpton.

There are racist Republicans and racist Democrats. Democrats, however, give lip service to 'good' racism vastly more than do Republicans ('Affirmative Action' was passed on Tricky Dick Nixon's watch).

You want racism? Talk to Jesse Jackson - it's his livelihood.


BSBD,

Winsor

[toolbox 0]

>It was known as the Southern Strategy... and the GOP inherited all those good ole boy "conservatives" to the utter chagrin of the likes of Goldwater and other GOP conservatives.

Not buying it. JFK was killed November 22 1963. The democrats were still pushing voter literacy laws in 1965,while republicans fought against the unfair laws that were intended to suppress minorities from voting.
The democrats openly fought against equality for all until the late sixties.
It seems the democrats then flip flopped publically and started giving minorities free stuff because they needed the minority votes.
Of course there is still bigotry in the USA,but not anywhere near what it was in the sixties. In fact the USA is probably one of the least bigoted countries in the world at this point in time,and everyone has equality by law here,yet the liberals keep touting themselves as the champions in the war against inequality.
You will always have some level of bigotry by individuals,or groups no matter where you are in the world,but by law in the USA it is illegal for any public entity to discriminate.
Places like iran,pakistan,dubai,russia,and many other countries give no such equality under law.
As far as individuals,or private organizations are concerned,they have the right to be bigoted, and other citizens have the right to shun said bigots.
This is the price of freedom of speech,and freedom of speech is the biggest part of the foundation of freedom.
The democrats attack freedom of speech more than anyone else by deeming words they do not like as politically incorrect.
Democrats are also the best at taking things that are said out of context,and twisting somebody's words to make them appear to be bigoted.
I find it very funny when liberals get caught in their hypocrisy,like the present administration paying women less than their male counterparts,all while they tout themselves as the champions of equality for women.
Both the republicans and the democrats are disgraceful,but the democrats are the number one hypocrites.

[billvon 2,384]

>I have to call "Bull Shit" on this one. Martin Luther King was a Republican and
>believed in the individual. I did a google search and found nothing. Please provide
>a reference.

Why We Can't Wait Martin Luther King, Jr, 1963.

>And you will never convince me that blocking people together by policies based on race isn't racist.

It is. It is something that MLK wanted to do to address past wrongs.

>Please tell me a policy that the Democratic party has that doesn't break people
>out by race/gender/sexual orientation.

You serious? OK here are a few (from OnTheIssues.org)

Invest in stem cell and other medical research
Pursue embryonic stem cell research
Enable access by the disabled
Equal treatment under law for same-sex couples
DNA testing & post-conviction reviews in death penalty cases
Make college tuition tax deductible
Energy independence to avoid dealing with repressive regimes
Develop renewable energy and efficient vehicles

>Or an argument against a Republican policy that isn't based on race/gender/sexual
>orientation.

OK. Here's one from the same website:

"That is why we will always vigorously oppose the type of tax reform supported by Mitt Romney, which independent experts have found would require raising taxes on typical families with children by at least $2,000 if it were paid for. At the same time, Mitt Romney's plan would cut taxes for those making over $3 million by an average of $250,000 and would create incentives that will lead to hundreds of thousands of jobs going overseas at the expense of American workers. "

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Not buying it. JFK was killed November 22 1963. The democrats were still pushing voter literacy laws in 1965,while republicans fought against the unfair laws that were intended to suppress minorities from voting.
The democrats openly fought against equality for all until the late sixties.

You're full of historical shit. How many times are these revisionist historians going to keep saying this nonsense in Speaker's Corner? How many times do I have to give these brain surgeons a history lesson?

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4634284#4634284

For the zillionth time, people, it wasn't "the Democrats", it was the Deep South Dixiecrats, descendants of the Reconstructionist era Democrats who were anti-Lincoln/Republican, who because of the 2-party-system monopoly were forced in the post-WWII era to remain aligned with Northern Democrats.... and who eventually began to shift over to the GOP in the late 1960s.

Please stop talking to us like we're morons.

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Martin Luther King was a Republican

Really? That claim is highly disputable, and "something that King biographer Taylor Branch has found no evidence or mention of after years of exhaustive research."

Source:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/01/08/288365/-Dr-King-A-Registered-Republican

[jclalor 12]

Andy9o8

Quote

Martin Luther King was a Republican

Really? That claim is highly disputable, and "something that King biographer Taylor Branch has found no evidence or mention of after years of exhaustive research."

Source:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/01/08/288365/-Dr-King-A-Registered-Republican

Not one southern Republican voted for the civil rights bill.

[toolbox 0]

>You're full of historical shit. How many times are these revisionist historians going to keep saying this nonsense in Speaker's Corner? How many times do I have to give these brain surgeons a history lesson?


You sound like a left wing propagandist who reverts to name calling and attempts at belittling all who oppose their ideology.
The dixiecrats were still democrats,and the republicans were against voter literacy laws.
Voter literacy laws were intended to prevent poor minorities from being able to vote,which is racist.

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

dixiecrats were still democrats

http://geek-news.mtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/keep-beating-a-dead-horse.jpg