chess online
| From | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
 Black skin not enough to be black. |
||
|
dmaestro 13-Dec-12, 21:59 |
|
||
|
The Black culture is one of the worst oppressors ever. You better be on-board with the plan or you will be a "UT and an Oreo". You'll get called worse. For a group of people that like to call themselves inclusive, Democrat liberals are anything BUT. For a group of people that like to call "angry, old White guys" as racist, Democrat liberals are the pot calling the kettle Black. |
||
|
It reminds me of the 'no true scotsman' fallacy. Angus says to Gregor: No true scotsman wears underwear under his kilt Gregor replies: But, I'm a true scotsman and I'm wearing underwear under ma kilt Angus replies: Then ye canny be a true scotsman, because no true scotsman wears underwear under his kilt! |
||
|
More Left Wing Race Card Politics Asked for her analysis on MSNBC's "The Cycle," Mitchell swiftly claimed that Rice's withdrawal would be bad for Republicans because she is a black woman -- intimating that her skin color and gender were somehow a factor. "I think that this had become sort of an impossible challenge for her to be confirmed, that she realized that -- the White House realized it as well. I think they know that they are on good political solid ground," Mitchell said. "This is not going to ... help Republicans at all, the fact that a woman and a woman of color has been forced out of a confirmation process even before she was nominated." Never mind that the first black female secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, was nominated by a Republican, George W. Bush. In fact, both parties can lay substantial claim to diversifying the nominee pool for that post. Under Bill Clinton, Madeleine Albright became the first female secretary of state. Under Bush, Colin Powell became the first black secretary of state, only to be succeeded by Rice. Republican opposition this year to the possibility of a Rice nomination was rooted in complaints about her Sept. 16 comments on the Libya terror attack, in which she claimed the strike was the result of a "spontaneous" demonstration spun out of control. Despite the diversity of recent secretaries of state under both parties, Mitchell is hardly the first to suggest that opposition to Rice was rooted in racial reservations. Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C., earlier this year said those calling Rice incompetent were using "code words" that people who grew up in the South are familiar with. Brad Blakeman, Republican strategist and former adviser to George W. Bush, called the racial claims "ridiculous." "It's easy for the Democrats. ... It's as old as their class warfare argument," he said. "The problem is time has passed by their argument." Pointing to diverse appointments under the Bush and other administrations, Blakeman said: "Republicans have been as diverse or more diverse than the Democrats themselves." Susan Rice, for her part, cited Republican opposition to her possible nomination. She said she did not want to subject the Obama administration to a "lengthy, disruptive and costly" confirmation process. Mitchell said Thursday that she thinks Rice was Obama's choice, but that course "became untenable." "The critics began to look through all sorts of other aspects of her background, her finances, the kinds of things that would normally come out in a confirmation -- but she didn't have the defense, the group around her that you would have if you were the nominee from the White House if you had been vetted and had that whole array of defenses. She was on her own, really, and left hanging," she said. Read more: www.foxnews.com |
||
|
dmaestro 14-Dec-12, 11:07 |
|
||
|
dmaestro 14-Dec-12, 11:25 |
There will be payback There is going to be payback for this lynching--count on it! |
||
|
dm And, you have shown yourself to not oppose violence in order to show how much you disagree. You and the New Progressives, same as the old Marxists. |
||
|
Dress it up however you like, it doesn't change the fact that it is totally unacceptable. All things like this do is promote racial barriers. People should be free to associate with whoever they like and hold any political opinion they like without being labeled for it, and without being made to feel they are betraying their heritage or ethnic background. Defending these objectionable perceptions as ''social norms'' is nothing short of sweeping the problem under the carpet. If it is normal, it shouldn't be, and anyone who considers themselves to be 'liberal' should see that. |
||
|
dmaestro 14-Dec-12, 12:52 |
complain if you are too white. But it cuts both ways. These guys should not claim to speak on behalf of blacks either. |
||
|
DM |
||
|
Itchy ... |
Log in 
