Today the talk shows have been filled to the brim with talk of Senator Harry Reid’s admitted gaffe from a private conversation regarding President Obama. From Yahoo News:
WASHINGTON – The top Democrat in the U.S. Senate apologized on Saturday for comments he made about Barack Obama’s race during the 2008 presidential bid and are quoted in a yet-to-be-released book about the campaign.Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada described in private then-Sen. Barack Obama as “light skinned” and “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.” Obama is the nation’s first African-American president.
“I deeply regret using such a poor choice of words. I sincerely apologize for offending any and all Americans, especially African-Americans for my improper comments,” Reid said in a statement released after the excerpts were first reported on the Web site of The Atlantic.
“I was a proud and enthusiastic supporter of Barack Obama during the campaign and have worked as hard as I can to advance President Obama’s legislative agenda.”
Soooo, Senator Reid manned up and said he used a poor choice of words. I agree. First of, I would have to know with whom he had his PRIVATE conversation before I got too judgemental. Let’s examine the word ‘Negro, which also appears on the 2000 census and the 2010 census. Is that word outdated, out of vogue, or just plain racist? If it appears on the census and is used in organizations like the United Negro College Fund, should it be changed immediately?
RNC chief Michael Steele was quite outspoken in his disapproval of Reid’s choice of words. In the Washington Post this morning, Steele called on Reid to step down:
Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele said that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) should resign from office after acknowledging that he had described President Obama as “light skinned” and possessing no “Negro dialect” in a conversation with reporters.
“There is this standard where Democrats feel that they can say these things and they can apologize when it comes from the mouths of their own,” said Steele in an interview with “Fox News Sunday. “But if it comes from anyone else, it is racism.”
Steele, who is African American, compared Reid’s comments about Obama to remarks made by then Senate Majority Leader Trent Lot in 2002 in which the Mississippi Republican, at a birthday party for South Carolina Sen. Strom Thurmond, said that “all these problems” might not have occurred if Thurmond had been elected president in 1948.
Last week Steele made the unfortunate remark, ‘honest Injun’ when attesting to his own truthfulness. He seemed unaware that someone might consider that expression offensive. Talk shows were filled with various talking heads who compared what Reid said to Imus’s reference to teenage basketball players as ‘nappy headed ‘ho’s.’
I think we can all agree that there are very few instances where the term ‘Negro’ is appropriate. Much has changed as far as polite terms since I was a child. When I was a kid, ‘Negro’ was the polite term that people used. Our ‘PC’ has changed, often drastically. We have other terms to choose from. Unless we are making historical reference, there are just much better ways of speaking. However, to not understand the difference between the Reid remark and the Imus remark is just plain ignorant.
It will be interesting to see how our contributors feel about this latest round of Democrat vs. Republican. I shied alway from this topic all day. However, it is a live, viable topic that people are talking about. I have decided to risk life and limb and post an Anti thread on the subject.
sounds racist to me… if a Republican had said this the $hit would hit the fan.
And what is racist about it? Expound please.
As with a lot of other controversial news items (is this news?), Reid’s comments will be considered by some to be offensive. Others will not find the comments very offensive.
I’m prepared to go on record: those that are offended will be Republicans; those that are not very offended will be Democrats.
I also love how the far left choose to explain it away… “I think we can all agree that there are very few instances where the term ‘Negro’ is appropriate.”. It’s funny that you also think it also depends on who he told this to before you get too judgemental.
Just curious, who would he have to talk to for you to find these words okay and who would he have to talke to for you to think it’s no big deal?
On the one hand, I can understand that Harry Reid was trying to comment on the political situation instead of his own personal views. Since I often times make comments on political realities vs. my own personal views, I have some sympathy for his words being taken somewhat out of context.
However, I also feel that Harry Reid should be held to the same standard that was applied to Trent Lott in 2002. Trent Lott was driven out of his position as President of the Senate over comments he make at Strom Thurmond’s 100th birthday party that were less racially tinged than what Harry Reid said. I think the Trent Lott affair was blown way out of proportion, but there does seem to be a bit of a double standard on racial comments based on the party of the speaker. If I remember correctly, then state Senator Obama called for Trent Lott’s resignation.
And lastly, no discussion about possible racism in the Senate is complete without reminding everyone the current President of the Senate, Robert Byrd was once a leader in the West Virginia Klu Klux Klan. I know most people have ‘moved on’ from that issue, so I won’t harp on it, but I firmly believe that it is a national disgrace that a Klansman should ever hold a leadership position in the US government. That he is 3rd in line to become President is an even greater shame. If we want to look for racists to remove from the Senate, Robert Byrd is the logical place to start.
The Democrats made a big deal about Trent Lott’s comments. Now the Republicans will make a big deal abuot Harry Reid’s comments. It’s the typical tit-for-tat thing.
However, it does seem to me that Harry Reid’s comments aren’t having the same standard applied to them that the Democrats applied to Trent Lott’s comments. They were made at a birthday party and really, was an emotional thing commenting on Thurmond’s years of service for his 100th birthday. This was an observation about Obama and how his race would or wouldn’t affect the presidential race, due to his lighter skin color, etc since his mother was Caucasian. I also find it hard to believe it wasn’t his own personal belief, rather than just an observation about the presidential race.
If Lott wasn’t forced out in 2002, then I wouldn’t think Reid should be forced out either. But, with what happened to Lott, I have a very difficult time not applying the same standard to Reid, quite frankly.
And I would say, think about if a REPUBLICAN had made the same exact statement Reid did, saying it was just an observation about the presidential race and not his own views. Don’t you think the Dems would have been very loudly calling for his removal now? I can just imagine the very vocal hue and outcry. It’s interesting when one of their own makes it and they just explain it away.
And I don’t think it was that the word “Negro” was used. It was the part about Obama being “light-skinned” and also the part about how he didn’t speak like a Black man, (and I didn’t even use the word “Negro” there but it still shows how it isn’t the best thing to say) as to why he would be more acceptable to the American public. It is a true statement I’m sure, but if a Republican said it – even without the word “Negro” I just know the Dems would be going after him big-time! It’s a double standard basically, that a Democrat can make a statement like that and be given a pass, but imagine if a Republican said it!
Moon… The racist part about it is that Reid seems to think that it’s a plus that Obama doesn’t sound like a ‘negro’ when he talks. That’s not racist to you?
Also, you didn’t answer my question to you. Who would he have had to say this to for it to not be racist and who would he have said this to that you would find it to be racist? Just asking because of your statement – “First of, I would have to know with whom he had his PRIVATE conversation before I got too judgemental.”
I thought it was a realistic political assessment. The real “problem” it that he thought he was talking to someone he could trust. Commenting on all strategic aspects of a political race is fair game… and race certainly is a consideration. I can only imagine what was said about Hillary.
We have to get over this “one strike and you’re out” mentality. The Political Black Caucus supports Reid because of his long history of supporting Civil Rights. If I were to criticize anyone, it would be the person who broke this confidence to make a buck or get their fifteen minutes of fame.
Also Moon, what is “Negro dialect”? If someone had a “Negro dialect” would they sound ignorant? Who has a “Negro dialect”?
According to Reid it’s also a good thing that Obama is “light skinned” and has the ability to use a “Negro dialect” if he wanted to.
I see Opinion, so it’s okay to say racist comments as long as you say them to someone you can trust…. nice.
I am offended.
Hello, calm down. I went back to bed after I brought the dogs back in. I wasn’t dodging your question. Why would it matter who he was talking to? Depending on where a person might might live might have to do with the type of language they used. Also a person’s age might have to do with his words.
The NAACP has said it wasn’t offensive but it was awkward. I tend to agree with their assessment.
On to Trent Lott. I don’t think he should have been removed. I think he was kidding and it was a stupid thing to say. He should have been able to apologize. I also heard on TV yesterday that Bush was behind his removal. I don’t know if this is true or not but I heard it on several stations. Lott also was laughing and praising Strom Thurman’s run for president. That’s a littl e creepy. Strom Thurman ran on a segregation ticket in (I think) 1948. No foreign policy, nothing but segregation. Lott roasted that things would be fine if Strom had won. Now Lott was a child when all this originally happened. but he shouldn’t have brought it up. Is that the same as what Harry Reid said? Far from it.
On to realitites. Would Barack Obama have been able to win the presidency if he had talked like Marion Barry? Would Obama have had enough supporters to even make him a viable candidate? The reality is it still counts how you talk and sound if you want a job. The job of president is no different.
Of course the Republicans are going to make hay while the sun shines with this one. Too bad both parties are so blood-thirsty.
Hello, how do you feel about Michael Steele saying ‘Honest Injun’ last week? Just curious.
Would Obama have been elected if he looked like Chris Rock, talked like those guys in the barber shop in Eddie Murphy’s “Coming to America” and was born and raised in Compton?
So Moon, if Reid was talking to a white guy from the far south would it have been racist? Or what about a guy from Vermont? Which is it?
Poor choice of words from Steele, if he hasn’t already he should apologize for it. Are you asking me if I think what he said was racist?
Steele has apologized. He said if anyone was offended he apologized.
Hello, you are missing some major points here. I don’t think what Reid said was racist. I think he made some poor word choices. There is a huge difference.
Often one’s audience has a great deal to do with how you conduct a discussion. Actually the east coast never occurred to me. I was thinking of some old time from his home state of Nevada, to tell you the truth.
More importantly, I hope we never get to the point of deciding how someone talks is unimportant. Those wanting good jobs need ‘to learn to talk like the man in the 6 o’clock news’ (Good Ole Boys like Mr lyrics), not have piercings and tattooes, etc. It doesn’t matter if you are black, white, asian, American Indian or what.
Compare Michael Steele (since we are talking about him) to Marion Barry. Who would you hire?
El Guapo, my point exactly. In a nutshell–NO.
@Saved
There’s a legal concept of having “standing” which is another way of saying you actually have a dog in this fight. Since the NAACP, the Congressional Black Caucus, and the President have “standing” and aren’t offended, I think the issue is moot. The only ones who care are Republicans… the few that are left in the House and the Senate. This certainly doesn’t add to their bona fides for future employment there.
A white person who is “offended” strikes me as part of the self-appointed Liberal aristocracy who think they know what everyone else is thinking or what’s best for “the rest of us.” Give me a break.
It’s true about Obama and how he talks, that makes him more acceptable to some folks. However, I thought the “light-skinned” remark actually was worse. Does anyone really think THAT would have made much of a difference in regards to Obama’s chances, if everything else was the same (he still talked the way he does, etc.). I personally don’t think the shade of his skin color would make much difference, personally. Yes, I’ll give that the way he talks makes him sound more “educated” and “acceptable” to some people, obviously.
So I thought the “light skinned” remark was actually more objectionable than the “Negro dialect” part.
And, while the trial was a circus and stuff was always blown out of proportion – i remember the big hue and cry during the OJ Simpson trial when one of the witnesses said he heard a black man shouting a few words, at the time of the murder. There was a big attack on this person – who was white, as to how he could identify someone as being black just from the sound of his voice.
OK, that was 15 years ago or more, and times have changed, and that trial was a circus and OJ’s defense did anything they can to discredit potential eyewitnesses (OK, in this case an “earwitness”) but still what that witness said was highly objected to at the time and good ole Johnny Cockran said “what a racist remark”! Of course, it was all in the name of getting OJ off, and maybe outside that courtroom no one would have challenged it so much – if you can identify a man as being black just by hearing him talk and say a few words. Obviously, in many cases, you can. The prosecution used this witness to say – there appeared to be a black man at the scene of the crime, around the time the crime allegedly took place. I just remember the hue and cry over that. AGain, of course everything in that trial was blown hugely out of proportion, and in any normal courtroom that might not have been attacked so much, nor in the press.
I have to agree with Opinion, in the end if Obama, and all those groups say they aren’t offended, than the whole issue is moot. Seems like back with Lott, there were Republicans who wanted to get rid of him so they joined with the Dems in calling for his ouster. Was it fair? No. But in this case since Reid has the support of Obama, the Black Caucus, etc. it does seem like this is something that’s going to blow over fairly quickly, I think.
@Opinion
Opinion, you are making some seriously flawed assumptions as to why this whole affair offends me. Do you mean to imply that you know what my race is? Do you imply that because I am or am not part of a particular ethnic group, I do or don’t have standing to be offended? The fact is, you don’t know what the color of my skin is. I am curious as to why you commented thus. Please explain your rationale, so I don’t leap to conclusions as well.
I like what Morgan Freeman had to say about “race relations”:
“You’re going to relegate my history to a month?” Freeman asks Wallace. After noting there is no “white history month,” he says, “I don’t want a black history month. Black history is American history,” he tells Wallace.
The notion of a special month for black history may be hurting rather than helping efforts for racial equality, Freeman believes. When Wallace wonders whether racist attitudes may be harder to eradicate without the education that Black History Month provides, Freeman retorts: “How are we going to get rid of racism? Stop talking about it!”
Freeman believes the labels “black” and “white” are an obstacle to beating racism. “I am going to stop calling you a white man and I’m going to ask you to stop calling me a black man,” he says. “I know you as Mike Wallace. You know me as Morgan Freeman. You wouldn’t say, ‘Well, I know this white guy named Mike Wallace.’ You know what I’m saying?”
What Mr. Reid said was merely a personal observation. What Mr Lott said in an attempt to flatter Strom Thurmond, was in the same category.
America must never be a place where we have banned words or thoughts. While [n—–] is considered by a few as impolite, it is not a word that should be banned or reduced to being printed or said as, “the N-word” (a childish and stupid, dodge) The term Negro is not pejorative and is only seen as offensive by those ignorant of the English/American language.
We who have moved forward into the Twenty-first Century are tired of the time wasters who fill their dead air time with political correctness gotcha games.
Partisans from all sides need to dismiss these attempts to distract from legitimate discussions of the issues of our day as the tripe that they are.
[Editor’s note: I removed the word. While Mr. Tyler Ballance is certainly free to his opinion, he may use the N-word on his blog, not on ours. That word has been determined universally offensive by most of America, at least in public. We do not want it on this blog. I am marking it for immediate moderation.]
I agree with Opinion also about having ‘standing.’
There are just some topics that will be forever awkward between blacks and whites. This is one of them. The political reality is, certain conditions had to be met before there could be a black president. Someone of mixed race had to be the forerunner. Remember that we have yet to elect a woman president or vice president. Have we had a jewish vice president? We have only had one Catholic president. No Mormon. It’s a big country with lots of voters.
Hello, there are people in this country who have had very few experiences with black people. I have an older friend in rural Washington State. Let’s call her Carrie. When Obama was first campaigning, she kept telling me she thought that ‘colored fellow’ might get her vote. She wasn’t a racist. She lacked exposure. I couldn’t get her to self correct no matter how often I said things the ‘right way.’ She never realized she was being offensive. I will admit to cringing every time I heard her say it. That is how she grew up and thought she was being polite. Nothing in her environment taught her that there were more politically correct ways to say things.
GR, If the news will leave it alone. It was a slow news day yesterday and today. I am still speechless that I heard supposedly journalists comparing Reid’s words to Imus’s words and not seeing the difference.
@Saved
Why do you assume I was talking about you? …and why do you really care what I think if you are comfortable with yourself and your point of view? …and why would you possibly think I need to rationalize my opinion to you? You’re over-analyzing a point of view with very little back-end potential (value).
I really don’t “give a damn” about people looking for nuances in private, out of context snippits of conversations between other people… and suggest the world would be a better place if more people joined me. Judge Harry Reid (and others) by their deeds (in Reid’s case, his record in the Senate), not by an inadvertent slip of the tongue. His live (anyone’s life) shouldn’t be measured by one conversation.
Freeman is a good man… and he’s welcome to his opinions. The fact is, race does matter. If it didn’t, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. (IMHO) only a fool would think otherwise.
Michael Steele is in a far more precarious position than Harry Reid. He has pissed off the powers that be in the GOP. He will soon be in for the fight of his life.
Opinion,
Since your comment was directed at me (see the quote above), I assumed you were directing the comment to me. What would you think? I am still offended. Oh, that’s right, you think I don’t have standing, and should just be quiet.
I found his remark humorous, but then I find many things funny that others don’t. My first thought from this was, “Light skinned? He’s of both races. Why isn’t he described as a dark-skinned? Why is his “negro-ness” (I know, not a word) the template to base his color instead of his than his “Caucasian-ness”? That said, I think that since the mantra of the Democrats is always, “Republicans are racist!” whenever they think that they can make it stick, and the press explodes with manufactured outrage, Reid should be held to the same standard.
However, I don’t really want him to be out. He makes a great public face for the Democratic Senate. Every time he opens his mouth, the Democratic party loses fans.
Is this ok? That Romney guy is good looking and he only has one wife at time instead of three like his fellow Mormons.
Or is this ok? Leiberman is a nice enough looking guy and you don’t even seem to notice his Jewish nose when he smiles.
Hillary is so sharp on her foreign policy and you hardly notice the large hips with her pretty black pantsuits and colorful blouses.
I like and support all of the above politicians, so does that make it ok for me to be rude?
We used to refer to comments like Reid’s as backhanded compliments.
Really, if a Republican had said what Reid said, even in a complimentary way as I’ve done above, they would have been skewered in the press. I am not saying they should have been skewered because I happen to agree with the NAACP that it was awkward and not racist. But there still is a double standard with the racist title being applied to certain people saying something similar and others getting the pass when something like that is said.
And I also have a problem with awkward comments being excused just because one person supported the other person when they said it. It’s great that Reid liked Obama but referring to a “Negro dialect” was stupid. Would it be okay to say Obama is absolutely terrific and I noticed that he eats other foods besides fried chicken at state dinners? Both assumptions assert stereotypes that offend people so ALL people should stop doing it whether they like Obama or they don’t like Obama.
As far as Imus, that is no comparison. Imus was way out of line. Trent Lott’s comment was different because it was said in a joking manner at a roast type function. I think this incident would more similar to the Donavan McNabb comment if you had to compare.
Cargo, you bring up an interesting point. I believe though, that the history of this country mandated the distinction centuries ago. People of mixed race are known by their degree of blackness rather than whiteness, at least in the United States. I don’t see that changing, regardless of how much we want to wish it away.
And that is what much of this thread is really about. First off, we have the ‘gottcha element’ that both political parties seem to thrive on. Then we have the real history behind 2 groups of people whose reconciliation will probably never totally happen. It is within that historical context that we really have trouble expressing ourselves or burying old feelings that we might not even be aware we have.
Are you serious? Steele is in a far more precarious position than Reid?!? HA, oh boy, that was a good one Moon. 🙂
Reid is the majority leader trying to get major legislation passed with back room deals and closed door negotiations even though he co-sponsored the ‘Honest Leadership and Open Government Act’, he also has a dismal 33% approval rating… in his home state and now this!
Reid is gone, done, end of the road… but Steele is in a more precarious position? Huh, I suppose your right in that logic since Reid is done at the end of his current term.
Hello, I meant as far as being disengaged from his present job….Senate Leader vs RNC chair. I have no clue what will happen in the next election. And yes, I was very serious. Have you looked at what is being done to Michael Steele? The GOP is devouring its own.
Ruth Mareus best summed up my take on the Reid remarks in this morning’s post. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2010/01/harry_reids_ill-advised_accura.html
I see what your saying… present job. Ill give you that I suppose but Reid is a lame duck. He has no chance of another term. As a leader he has engaged in the very type of politics he swore not to and didn’t blink an eye. He is the type of scum that we don’t need in DC.
he is being beaten by former UNLV baseball player Danny Tarkanian and television reporter Sue Lowden in the polls. He is going to go the way of Tom Daschle and be ousted by voters while being the majority leader.
Maybe, maybe not. It is light years away from an election. Best not to get too overly confident. Both he and Pelosi are junkyard dogs and do what they were brought in to do. It sort of doesn’t matter what either of us think. Consider this time being almost a year out. Think how much can change.
I am not a huge Harry Reid fan. Just a realist.
As for Reid, if he has nothing to lose, that is when he is the most dangerous. Now that is a scary thought.
I heard on the radio that Al Sharpton found Reid’s
remarks offensive, but apparently feels we have more important fish to fry, citing the jobs bill and healthcare reform.
So the old coot could have opened up with the full-out “n” word and been excused. The Dems can’t spare a single vote. “W” word, anyone?
Opinion, I totally agree. Great summary.
It seems quite obvious that Reid was ruminating over how the Democratic Party could nominate a Black to the Presidency and get him elected. That he thought it possible because Obama was light-skinned and did not have a Black “dialect” does not speak well of any of us, including Harry himself. I am just wondering to which element of the electorate Harry was referring. Couldn’t have been the Republicans. You have to assume that most of them would vote against the Dem candidate regardless of color. It had to be independents and probably a certain portion of the Democratic Party’s natural constituency. In effect, Harry seems to have been opining that what his party would be trying to attract is voters whose attitudes toward race would not bring them to vote for someone who was obviously Black in skin color and speech. That was a technical political judgement on Harry’s part. But, from a racial aspect, it sure doesn’t reflect well on the voters he was trying to gather in or on him for the fact that he was seeking to bring such voters into his fold.
Obama is Black — well, half-Black, anyway. So what? Steele is Black. So what? Charles Rangel is Black. So what? Walter Williams is Black. So what? When are we going to get over this thing?
Or Obama is half white. Funny no one ever looks at it from that point of view.
We are a long way from gender and race not counting.
Sarah Palin is coming to Fox News as a commentator. No comment.
I recall in the election there was debate in the African American community if Obama was black ENOUGH? At one point it seemed like the guy couldn’t please anyone. In some ways, I think Obama was a rorshach ink blot that many people just projected their own vision on and he fit the vision they had of him, good and bad.
I wish Wolverine we were color blind, cultural blind, religious blind etc etc. But the reality is that we are not, and part of that reason is that there is still social and economic disparity between races and ethnicities, and I think until that issue is fully addressed, our society will remain the way it is I think.
We are a very young nation as far as color blindness goes. I don’t even think we are half way there.
Good analogy, Elena re rorschach ink blot
As a young nation, we are much less color-conscience than our European counterparts. I don’t know if everyone knows what’s going on in Italy lately, or what’s been happening in France for many, many years, but anyone who gets worked up over what Europe thinks about our acceptance of one race or another needs to get out of the country a bit more.
Moon, granted that we are still young; but I think we are now old enough to know better. As for the social and economic disparities noted by Elena, my own view is that these will never disappear. I cannot think of a society in which that has happened as a natural course of things. But maybe it could here — if we get rid of the color and racial fixation first and start talking straight to each other. I think one of our biggest problems is that, when we try to give a genuine and honest opinion that something is wrong or something isn’t working right, we too often get the race card played. Then all comity tends to disappear in a flash of argument over racial attitudes.
Speaking on behalf of down-the-center moderates, I don’t think this should cost Harry Reid his job, and I don’t think what Trent Lott said should have cost him his job. Racist? It couldn’t have been racist, because only Republicans make racist comments, and Al Sharpton, THE arbiter of all things race-related, has said that Harry Reid basically advanced the cause of all colored people by at least 20 years with his remarks about Oblamo. The best part about all of this is that the voters will have yet another good strong whiff of Democratic hypocrisy, which smells similar to putrefying flesh. This can only help out in November! What’s even better will be if Brown beats Coakley in Mass. and the Dems delay his swearing-in until after the single most unpopular bill in US history passes. That ought to stay in the voters’ noses for a good long time. All in all, I’d say this is a positive experience!! The “honest injun” thing! Funny!
With respect to the “honest injun” thing, which I heard about today on CNN (and Moon), I’m thinking about the stink that gets made over the Washington Redskins and the Atlanta Braves, and my College, the Shippensburg Red Raiders. It rarely goes anywhere, and people are pretty sick and tired of it. I think most Native Americans (and I mean real Native Americans, not Mexicans, regardless of what they’d have you believe), have figured out that people aren’t dancing around them, pointing at them and singing “nanny-nanny, boo-boo” when we buy a ticket to a Washington Redskins game.
Maybe I was one of the few people that understood what Reid meant by “Negro dialect” though I groaned when I read it. The is indeed a dialect spoken by some African Americans. It is called AAVE – African American Vernacular English, formerly known as “black English”. AAVE is a bonafide linguistic category with morphological, phonological, and syntactic features. Many sociolinguists consider AAVE to be a dialect of English, and not substandard English as some may think. Originally AAVE was creole derived from English and various West African languages, and over the years the process decreolization occurred and more standard English was mixed in with the creole to create the modern version of AAVE. I do take issue however with Reid’s assumption that Obama could speak with an AAVE dialect if he so chose. Just because one is black does not mean one can automatically speak with an AAVE dialect anymore than I can speak with a brogue because my grandmother did. As far as the “light skinned ” comment, I’m not sure if that is negative or not, as it is a descriptive word that is used quite frequently even among African Americans to describe people of their own race. I don’t know if Obama’s skin color would have made a difference in the election outcome. Would it be different if he was darker? Maybe, or maybe not.
Slowpoke, I was all set to agree with you…then you deviated.
I don’t think that Trent Lott should have lost his job. He was roasting Strom Thurman who was ancient at the time. Not the best taste but put it all in perspective. I agree with whoever earlier said this one strike you’re out mentality is non-productive.
I also don’t think that Honest Injun should be an ouster of anyone. I think it says much more about our speech patterns and expressions than it does about what’s inside us. I was thinking last night of all the various things we say that probably insult someone. I think mine would be ‘Mexican Standoff.’ I am not even sure of the etimology of that expression. It is just part of my speech pattern. I try not ot say it but every once in a while it pops out.
I also got myself in trouble once for saying in a group that none of us were sacred cows. Wouldn’t you freaking know it….there was a Hindu in the crowd who demanded to know what I meant. Life’s too short.
The Democrats and Republicans have got to stop this gotcha stuff. It is totally old and the media needs to find something else to dwell on.
Wolverine, I don’t disagree with you. However, if people are honest, then they pay and pay and pay for their honesty. There is just so much that cannot be discussed.