Harry Reid's comments were racist.

[johnlal]

There should be no double standard between Trent Lott's remarks and Harry Reid's remarks. Both were racist remarks. Once you determine that, it seems kind of foolish to defend Reid on being less racist than Lott. The comment that was reported showed a kind of insensitivity and ignorance that should disqualify Reid from being the leader of the Senate-- or the leader of anything for that matter. He should be asked to step down. Fears that this would somehow weaken the Democratic party should be balanced against the reality that the Senate is being led by a stupid racist.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

1. what a crock

[Enrique]

2. why do you think Obama and the Black Caucus support Reid?

you think they want a racist to keep that position?

[Better Believe It]

25. Because Senator Reid and the Mormon Church have been such strong fighters for equal rights?

The Mormon leaders did one hell of a job in California on Proposition 8.

Ya .... they've been strong advocates of civil and human rights since the Civil War!

[BolivarianHero]

67. I dunno...

Why would a Mor(m)on support a descendant of Ham. Isn't that against their religion?

[dionysus]

88. that's a nice twist, they have reid's back...because he's mormon....

can a get a hit of what you're smoking?

[crazyjoe]

64. health care reform

[11 Bravo]

3. Horseshit.

Ill-advised, yes. Racist, no.

[hlthe2b]

4. A lot of people seem to feel that way...

--all on the RW or Free Republic...:eyes:

[FrenchieCat]

5. Fuck that shit!

Barbara Lee speaks for me!



"Over the years, I have had an opportunity to work with Majority Leader Reid," Rep. Barbara Lee, chairwoman of the caucus, said in a statement.

"Senator Reid's record provides a stark contrast to actions of Republicans to block legislation that would benefit poor and minority communities."

Lee added that she looked forward to Reid serving as majority leader.

"There are too many issues like the economy, job creation and energy for these regrettable comments to distract us from the work that must be done on behalf of the American people," she said.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/11/reid.obama/index.html

[cali]

6. No. They. Were. Not.

This says it better than I ever could. It's beyond stupid and disgusting to compare what Reid said with what Lott said. Now how about you refute this:

t's not Harry Reid who should be apologizing



His remarks about Obama, however indelicate, carried an unfortunate truth. The real scandal is comparing him to Trent Lott, as Republican Michael Steele did.
By Sandy Banks

January 11, 2010


Harry Reid doesn't owe me an apology.

Sure, it was a little odd to see the term "Negro" used outside of a history class or documentary. Sounds like Reid is stuck in the last century.

But the Senate majority leader didn't say anything many Americans -- especially us Negroes -- don't already know.

If you're black, it is easier in this country to be light-skinned.

That's borne out not just by anecdote and experience, but by research documenting favorable treatment for fair-skinned blacks in criminal cases, employment prospects, even social and romantic liaisons.

Studies have shown that darker-skinned blacks are more likely to be unemployed, earn less and hold lower-prestige jobs. In the criminal justice system, convicted murderers with "stereotypically black" features are more than twice as likely as light-skinned defendants to receive death sentences from juries.

Don't blame Reid for the preference. Blame bigotry. Blame history.
<snip>

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-reid-banks11-2010jan11,0,3963271.column

[LaydeeBug]

79. +1 nt

[blondeatlast]

7. FAIL. No difference? Too ignorant to be taken seriously. nt

[Warpy]

8. Grow up

There's a difference between the tacky and the racist.

People say tacky things all the time, especially when they're tired or stressed. I'll bet even a pinnacle of perfection such as yourself has from time to time.

Racism means denial of opportunity and access due to race.

Get it?

[blondeatlast]

9. FAIL. No difference? Too ignorant to be taken seriously. nt

[freddie mertz]

10. I don't think he meant any harm. He's an old coot from squaresville.

Using antiquated language to make what was, in fact, an honest and accurate evaluation of the American electorate's prejudices.

[johnlal]

56. It's no accident that the Senate's full of those old coots. n/t

[Gidney N Cloyd]

11. Your entitled to your opinion. Or FreeRepublic's. nt

[Tom Rinaldo]

12. What was racist about making an observation that was routinely affirmed at DU?

The debate here at the time was over how much difference racism would make in hurting Obama's chances, not whether or not it would be a factor. And I don't think there was anyone here so naive as to believe that Barack Obama, like Jackie Robinson a long time before him, was ideally suited to be the break through personality shattering racial ceilings because he had a white mother, went to Harvard, and was incredibly "well spoken" aloong with his obvious talent. It is simply a fact that Obama was less threatening to some white voters than a Jessie Jackson or Al Sharpton would have been.

Neither we nor Harry Reid were discussing the world as it should be, we were all discussing the world as it actually is.

[janedum]

23. Poor Senator Reid... a victim of the R-W media again.

Fact is, if BO were as dark as his dad, and spoke like a jive turkey, HE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ELECTED President.
Period!

[Schema Thing]

30. lol, haven't heard "jive turkey" in a long time.

It's kinda quaint; I hope the hep cats bring it back.

[Berry Cool]

42. Yeah, I see him as having made an observation. There is a big difference

between making an observation about how the world is and expressing approval of or agreement with it. I think Reid, who bugs me in many other ways but was not wrong here, was expressing what you might call an inconvenient truth. Obama has had plenty of trouble with racism to be sure, but his trouble has come primarily from pure 100% racist pigs who didn't want to see a black man in the White House no way, no how, and those who "think" they're not racist but, when push comes to shove, really are. He has enjoyed a level of acceptance among non-blacks that he probably would not have enjoyed had he been what constitutes a "Scary Black Man" to many of them.

Saying this doesn't mean one approves of the situation, or likes it, or is happy it is so. It just means that, well, Harry Reid is a little smarter than Bill Clinton, who thought it would be easy to marginalize Obama in the mind of the electorate as "The Black Candidate" and found out that wasn't going to be the case.

[mdmc]

13. I heard the daughter (an Author) of a black professor

She could tell the color of the skin of anyone her mother (the black professor) spoke to on the telephone based on her mother's speech patterns.

I don't think there is much debate in America - most black people speak two kinds of English - professional and urban.

[Captain Hilts]

17. Yes. In fact, THE top focus group training school in the US - RIVA - is run by a black

family. They're GREAT. But one of the reasons they're so good is that they can speak various forms of English.

[opihimoimoi]

14. No way racist...its a projection by Steele....the irony of it all is stunning

[Captain Hilts]

15. No, they were not. Stupid, yes. Racist, no. nt

[blondeatlast]

16. Johnny Hit and Run? Or do you have the courage to back your OP up? nt

[johnlal]

33. Back it up with what?

I heard the comment. I judged it to be racist. Harry Reid evaluated Obama's political viability based on the color of his skin, and his mannerisms against a racial stereotype. Harry Reid, at the time and now, was a powerful player in the Democratic Party. These remarks formed some of the basis for Reid's support for the president. Reid and others like him are gatekeepers to power. To support somebody based on racial stereotypes is wrong.

[pnwmom]

18. Wrong. Reid correctly acknowledged the continuing existence of racism in America,

while erring in using the outdated term, "Negro."

Lott, on the other hand, mourned the passing of segregation.

There is a world of difference between the men and their statements.

[johnlal]

62. I agree that they are different, and I will even accept that Lott's comments were worse...

but does that mean Reid's remarks weren't racist remarks?

[crikkett]

19. It sounds like his comment was observational.

It did expose his prejudice about blacks. I support Pres. Obama's graciousness towards that old white man, and that's why I don't think that Reid should step down over that issue. Had the President given a different signal I'd call for Reid's resignation over that issue.

Reid should resign because he's squandered a supermajority in the Senate.

[pnwmom]

28. Reid has done as well as anyone could with what is NOT a supermajority in

the Senate.

We have 58 Democrats of multiple philosophies, plus Sanders, plus Lieberman -- the wildest of the wild cards. He almost ran with McCain, according to recent reports. He can never be counted on to help the Democrats.

[DJ13]

20. No, it wasnt really racist, but it IS a deliberate smoke screen

The MSM is trying to keep the main focus off Bill Clinton's really racist remarks.

[crikkett]

24. What? You mean Bill's comments on the campaign trail are related to Reids

in some way other than they were both spoken by old white men?

[karynnj]

49. Not likely hitting Reid could have an impact on the Senate

which in the next week or so will probably pass landmark healthcare legislation. They would like to throw a monkey wrench in and they would like to make it harder for him to win.

The thing to consider is that just from the excerpts, we know the book shows many Democrats in awkward bad positions - including Reid, Clinton (his comment and the purported affair while HRC was running (which if true was a huge betrayal), Schumer (pushing Obama to run in private while a loyal HRC person in public - how does that affect whether he can be trusted), Elizabeth Edwards. (I didn't add John because he was already down and out.) Just in a few pages.

In 2007, at the first book event the Kerrys had, Charlie Rose asked Teresa Heinz Kerry about Halperin's 2004 book. Her first answer was a succinct "He's not a friend", then when prodded she ignored the book and gave a ringing endorsement to her husband's vision and what he worked for. Compared to just what was in the excerpts, the 2004 book which Teresa rightfully said was not written by a friend was mild - even though it praised Drudge's dishonest attack while admitting they were lies.

[leftynyc]

66. That's stupid

When has the MSM ever layed off Bill Clinton - especially when it can hurt both Hillary and Pres Obama? Absurd.

[TheKentuckian]

21. No that's off base and utterly ignores his record and the context

Now, if you want to talk about stupid, out of touch, out of date, and further evidence of his ineptitude then I'm with ya but you can take the GOP talking points and kick rocks.

[crikkett]

22. Reid should resign because he's squandered a supermajority in the Senate. n/t

[pnwmom]

31. Lieberman's not a Dem or a progressive. There's no super-majority. n/t

[cali]

26. let me explain the difference, honeypie.

Lott was endorsing Thurmond's hideously racist past and agenda when he said that Thurmond would have been good for America as President. Reid was explaining, albeit in anachronistic and offensive phraseology, the reality that white Americans are still bigoted against black politicians that they perceive as "too black".

Even a total fucking moron should be able to grasp that, sweetheart.

[johnlal]

38. Thanks for educating me.

I get it now. Reid wasn't being racist. He was bemoaning all of the other white people in this world who are racists. THEY are the ones who value the lighter skin over the darker skin. (Not Harry!) THEY are the ones who don't like it when people talk like negros. Certainly Harry's not that way. (Although it wasn't all the other racists saying this garbage-- it was Harry Reid).

[cali]

47. very good. by george, I think you've got it.

He was pointing out that white voters will not vote in large numbers for Jesse Jackson or Jim Clayburn. Sad truth about the white American electorate as a whole.

[omega minimo]

40. Your game is very bizarre, cali

"let me explain the difference, honeypie."

"Even a total fucking moron should be able to grasp that, sweetheart."

[Nye Bevan]

95. Some DUers have their own little quirks.

The Magistrate likes to use "Sir" and "Ma'am".

NanceGreggs is partial to "Just Sayin' ".

Cali likes "Honeypie" and "Sweetheart".

etc.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

27. Idiotic

Equating Reid's remarks with Lott's is just the Republican meme. Lott was saying that if Strom Thurmond had been president we would have been better off, basically saying that if civil rights had never happened things would have been better in this country.

What Reid said was basically true, although somewhat insensitive and clumsy. Obama forgave him end of story.

[jobycom]

29. Lott said that America would be better off without desegregation and Civil Rights.

How is that comparable to Reid's comments?

[johnlal]

54. Reid implied that a person of a certain skin color

or who conforms to a racial stereotype, should give up hopes of being electable.

[leftynyc]

68. Where is the untruth to that statement?

Do you disagree with that statement?

[jobycom]

75. No he didn't.

He said Obama had certain qualities that made him a good candidate. He didn't say anything about any other qualities being unelectable, and he didn't imply they were unelectable. He said that the qualities listed were assets. He wasn't even comparing Obama to other African American candidates, since none were running. Now, if he had said "Jesse Jackson is not electable because he has a Negro dialect and looks Negro," or whatever, that would be a different discussion. Listing a candidate's assets isn't the same as saying someone without those assets is unelectable.

That discussion is always held. Sarah Palin was attractive--that didn't mean less attractive candidates were unelectable. John Kerry had a learned oratory style, that didn't mean people without that style weren't electable. I've worked on campaigns of African American candidates, and those are traits they name about themselves in private conversation. Yeah, no one likes having to talk about it, but they do. They talk about a candidate's weight, their attractiveness, their age, their smile, their skin tone (even white candidates)

It's not my favorite part of politics, but it's a discussion that happens every election cycle. Superficial details are listed as strengths and weaknesses. Within that context, Reid showed himself to be out of touch with current terminology, but that doesn't make him racist, and the Black Caucus, the NAACP, and all the other African American groups who have supported him and his record have said. Hell, Biden has said worse things publicly.

Lott, on the other hand, told an audience that America would have been better off if an avowed racist who opposed desegregation and other Civil Rights efforts had been elected president in the 40s, when he ran on a platform opposing those rights. What Reid said wasn't even on par with what Lott said. Not even in the same ballpark.

[jaysunb]

32. No they were not !

Take it from this former colored negro...among other things. :evilfrown:

[Schema Thing]

34. Obama's comment to johnlal: negro please.

[sui generis]

35. oh good FUCKING grief what a stupid assertion

I am sick to death of every silly goose screaming "racist" or "homophobe" whenever somebody doesn't agree with you or they make an questionable observation.

And I'm queer in more ways than just the usual, so I get to say that.

The reality is somebody who ACTS on hatred is a racist / homophobe / whatever. Merely observing something, however cynically, DOES NOT FUCKING QUALIFY.

And another thing - I'm REALLY tired of wonderbread running around being outraged on everyone else's behalf.

[johnlal]

78. He did act on it.

He backed Obama based on how Obama stacked up against a stereotypical negro. How is that not racist?

[ProfessorGAC]

84. If You Could Leap Physically, The Way You Do Logically. . . .

. . . you would be a lock to win the Olympic long jump. You might hit 60 feet.
GAC

[sui generis]

86. We disagree - racism is hatred

From the first microsecond I heard this it sounded like an assessment, and I didn't need to hear it from anyone else since I am perfectly capable of thinking for myself.

By every standard you hold I am an arch-racist and a homophobe . . . so for very obvious reasons I have to discount your rationale.

[Caliman73]

36. Reid should step down, but not because of his comment.

he should step down for his failures in leadership. This issue is being raised by Republicans searching for anything with which to hit out at the Democrats. Reid's observation may be hamfisted, but it is not racist. He was actually acknowledging the presence of racism in America that would keep an intelligent candidate, who was darker skinned, and who used colloquialisms in their speech, out of national office because people could not reconcile those issues. Reid being the leader of the Senate actually weakens the party more than his stepping down would, but to say that this statement is the issue that should remove him is short sighted and plays into the false piety bullshit the Republicans always like to spin.

Trent Lott's statement supported Stom Thurmond, an avid segregationist. Lott said that if we had listened to Thurmond, which basically means that if we had denied equal rights to Black American citizens, that we would not have the problems we have in society today. Translation: Black citizens having civil rights and full integration into society has caused the problems that the nation faces today.

Now you tell me, where are those two statements are anything like each other?

[watercolors]

37. Somebody needs to get a life,

It is such nonsense, a NON issue!

[spanone]

39. i disagree, harry was making an observation...lott was wishing he'd never heard of civil rights

[johnlal]

41. The same people got upset with Rush Limbaugh's jokes

about "Barrack the Magic Negro" and "Halfrican American". Others got offended by the Press hacks who were asking if candidate Obama was "black enough". Harry Reid's comments were calmer, but they were an evaluation of Obama's viability based on racial stereotypes. You can't deny that. And when you have a powerful white democrat in the Senate judging a candidate's viability based on how he matches up to a racial stereotype, it is a form of racism. And I can't believe so many people here are twisting and contorting to defend racism just because it comes from a Democrat.

[retread]

50. "...just because it comes from a Democrat." No, we are seeing the standard response.

[Caliman73]

57. Not a "form" of racism, an acknowledgment of racism.

Harry Reid was acknowledging that America would not elect a candidate based on racial stereotypes. He was not disparaging Barack Obama by using racially loaded words. There is a difference. If someone said or told me that I might or might not be electable or employable because of my Latino heritage and the way that I speak or present myself, that would not be a racist statement. That would be a statement of opinion. If someone told me that I was stupid or lazy because Mexicans are just that way, then that would be racism. No one is defending what Reid said. It was stupid and inarticulate. What we aren't doing, is jumping on right wing talking points and acting like the sky is falling.

[johnlal]

59. Yes, he was talking about all those OTHER white people...

Not ME, mind you, but other white people would probably not vote for a darker skinned man. Those people are the racists, not me. Some of my best friends are negroes. Just sayin'.

[Caliman73]

72. Yawn...

Acknowledging that racism exists is not the same as being a racist. Perhaps Reid is a racist, but you cannot pin that claim on the statement he made. Also, when people say, "just sayin" it is because they have no logical argument left so they have to rely on sarcasm or inference.

[johnlal]

74. OK, How's this for direct?

Reid compared Senator Obama against a hypothetical African American man with darker skin and who speaks like a stereotype "negro" in order to judge his viability as a candidate. That's racist.

[quiller4]

43. Inartful,? Yes. Racist? No. Reid's comments were a reflection on why Obama

was viewed as less threatening by many white voters. It is rather a comment on the racism in our society rather than a racist statement.

Trent Lott didn't comment on society's racism. Rather, he said a racist, former Klansman should have been elected.

[johnlal]

45. Suppose then-Senator Obama had been a shade darker...

Or had let a bit of urban slang slip during an interview. Would that be enough to lose Senator Reid's support? If the Senate Majority Leader had decided that Senator Obama was just "too black to win" would that not be a racist decision? Or would it be a pragmatic decision?

And IF it's just a pragmatic decision, what happens when other candidates come along who are a little bit darker, or have a vocabulary that's just a little more colorful? Should they just give up on getting Senator Reid's backing because they're just "too black"?

[johnlal]

52. A reflection of Reid's perception of what's less threatening

...to white voters. What was he doing? Reading poll numbers on how white people vote-- or was he giving his opinion on how black a candidate can be before he's electable?

[karynnj]

44. I think the comment was ill worded and something that should have been said very carefully

- even if it was a private off record conversation. It is very hard to say a comment that is really saying that he had the potential to run successfully for President was racist. It was admitting that the country was not color blind. The fact is that given the closed group he was speaking to, there was obviously much left unsaid - namely all the positive characteristics that led to him pushing one of the most junior members of the Senate to run for the highest office in the country.

Now, I know the wording can in no context have been ok - but we do not know the context. I would imagine that the question of "Can a black win?" was raised - just as in 1960, there was a question of whether a Catholic could win. This affirmative answer was likely in response to such a question.

[johnlal]

55. A Catholic DID win, despite common wisdom to the contrary

That's why the comments were so bad. OK, so he didn't say "A black man can't win", but he did imply that "a blacker man can't win". That eliminates a LOT of people, just on the basis of physical traits and mannerisms. Without judging a person by his individual merits. Without judging a person on his education or accomplishments. Just on the color of his skin. That's racism.

[ieoeja]

73. By your logic every time someone complains that African-Americans are treated unfairly in the US ...

... they are being racist.

Actually, I *do* read that assertion all the time by ignorant Rightist fuckwad bigots. I am just shocked to see their twisted logic being used on DU.

:eyes:

[karynnj]

90. A BLACK won too

My point is that he was making the case that a very junior Senator had what it takes to win. I agree that what he said was said poorly and not PC, but the context was in making a case that these "potential liabilities" were not something that Obama's skills and talents would not overcome. This was a conversation where people knew Obama - and what was unspoken because they all agreed was admiration for his intelligence, eloquence, calm and likable personality, and his skill in getting the ethics amendment agreed to. There would have been no discussion if not for his unique individual merits - including education and accomplishments. This was a discussion on whether he would make the best President, but whether he could win.

The fact is that within the party there will ALWAYS be discussions on what can win or can't win. I saw many Edwards supporters arguing in both 2003 and 2005 that someone with a "Massachusetts accent", who was born into a socially elite family could not win because Southerns thought that elitist. They argued that only a Southern Democrat could win - one who sounded like Clinton. Now, this was not racist but what similar to saying that portions of the country would be uncomfortable with someone speaking in a black dialect.

Hillary herself has raised the issue that she thinks some voted against her thinking a woman could not win. In this case, there were some concerned about not winning - though here, most made the decision early that she was the most likely to win in 2008.

[chaska]

46. Only ignorance of the facts of the two examples could end with that conclusion.

That or stupidity.

[OI812]

48. But what said was true. How are facts "racist"? I'm confused about that.

(I don't know if Reid is a racist -I doubt it- but if he is, those particular comments are not evidence of it...)

[Stephanie]

51. Joan Walsh:

"One guy is talking, perhaps inelegantly, about why he's wholeheartedly supporting our first black president; the other is wishing the country had elected a racist. That's exactly the same thing!" --Salon


I'm kind of amazed at what DU's become these days. Bigger is definitely not better.

[Davis_X_Machina]

53. Levo-Free-Republic. n/t

[Quantess]

58. Translated: "libs are such hypocrites"

RWers love to claim that liberals are the truly racist ones, and that liberals are hypocrites for allowing racism in their own party. They routinely call it a "double standard".

RWers see no distinction, no nuance, between blatant racism and an isolated incident of poorly chosen words.

[blondeatlast]

60. Best post on this faux controversy yet. I wish I could recommend it.

:applause:

[Quantess]

70. Thanks. I like to think that I learned something from reading RW message boards,

and that it wasn't a complete waste of time to see what RWers say about us.

[BlueMTexpat]

65. Great call! n/t

[wisteria]

61. Reid's remarks were insensitive, but were meant to be complimentary.

Lott's remarks were not meant as a compliment and implied that things would be easier if blacks did not gain equal rights.
And, besides that, the Republican's haven't gained a sense of righteousness and support for the Black community- they are playing politics with this. If they can force Reid out, the Governor of Nevada-a Republican- gets to appoint a new senator- and I am 100% sure it would be a Republican, so there goes health care reform right out the window. Is that what you want? Reid apologized and President Obama has accepted his apology-I think it should end there. The voters of Nevada will have their say so soon.

[johnlal]

82. Compliments...

Like he's clean and articulate? He doesn't go around saying "Yo, MFer, I want some ice tea?"
He can serve in the senate as long as the voters in Nevada want him there. But I think he shouldn't have the position of Senate Majority Leader with such a small mind.

And as far as healthcare goes, maybe they can put somebody else in his place who will hold the Senators' feet to the fire, scrap the current bill and build something that will really help people.

[BlueMTexpat]

63. No.

Enough of this "double standard" BS. There is no comparison between Lott's words and Reid's and especially no comparison between Lott's actions and associations and Reid's.
Actions and associations speak louder than words. I am no great admirer of Harry Reid, nor were his words well-chosen. But they expressed what many, including many African-Americans, see as sad fact in these United States of America. Even today.
Shame on us all!
And shame on you for jumping on the bandwagon to throw Reid under the bus for this particular misstep!

[TexasObserver]

69. FAIL! Comparing Lott's remarks about a lifelong racist v. Reid's FAILS.

There is no comparison.

What Reid said was unwise, impolitic, and stupid. What Lott said was in praise of a man who actively opposed civil rights for decades, and whose very presidential campaign was based upon racism.

[seeinfweggos]

71. i'm sorry you can't tell the difference

life must be frustrating for you with such a cognitive disadvantage.

[ncteechur]

76. you don't know the difference between shit and apple butter

[MrScorpio]

77. Ahem, Bullshit

Sounds like a GOP talking point

[johnlal]

80. Talking points? Like these?

1. Poor choice of words.
2. Inartful, but accurate assessment.
3. Calling it like I see it.

These are all the talking points that come out after somebody makes a racially insensitive comment. In fact, they were the same talking points when Trent Lott made his comments.

[ecstatic]

81. The difference in my opinion: Lott is a true racist bigot, Reid is just typical

although he used an extremely outdated term (a true WTF moment).

I don't like what Reid said, but if most Americans walked the walk that Reid has walked over the past 30 years, there would be no institutional racism in this country.

Institutional racism is the only racism that really matters at the end of the day. Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me (at least not physically or economically).

What good is it to smile in someone's face (as repugs have done with Steele), and then turn around and block rights and the pursuit of happiness at every turn?

[DainBramaged]

83. Ahhhh a lone voice of inflamatory in the woods

A racist like say Rush Limpballs?

[ProfessorGAC]

85. You Should Let This Go

You've been eviscerated on this thread. You're repeated attempts to justify your silly logical leap do not further your case. It merely makes you look more and more and more ridiculous.
GAC

[dionysus]

87. it wasn't. what he pointed out was awkward, but true. if obama spoke "ebonics", do you think he

still would have won?

[johnlal]

92. Against whom?

[NJmaverick]

89. Grenade

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/grenade.htm

[oldcoot]

91. Reid's Voting Record

http://www.issues2000.org/SENATE/Harry_Reid.htm

Let's face it, actions are more important than words. Look at his voting record and decide if you still think he is a racist.

[anonymous171]

93. It isn't racism. At worst, it's prejudice. nt

[EmeraldCityGrl]

94. It's residual racism.

Racism ingrained in us from the time we were children. It's in the media , pop culture, in our educational system. Our teachers, relatives, friends, co-workers
were exposed to subtle messages of racism in their lives and those messages are passed on to us regardless how well intentioned we may be. Each one of us are
responsible for self-checking ourselves on a regular basis. Being honest and truthful about the racist baggage we carry and doing everything possible to recognize
it when it rears it's ugly head so that we can end it once and for all.