We're a "Nation of cowards"

[Dwight Schrute]

From Ed Hornick
CNN

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- America is "a nation of cowards" when discussing race. That sentiment from the country's first African-American attorney general, Eric Holder, has stirred up pundits, bloggers and readers.

"Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial, we have always been and we -- I believe continue to be in too many ways essentially a nation of cowards," Holder told Department of Justice employees at an event Wednesday celebrating Black History Month.

He said that Americans are afraid to talk about race, adding that "certain subjects are off-limits and that to explore them risks at best embarrassment and at worst the questioning of one's character."

And that impression of race in America has set off a firestorm of criticism. VideoWatch more of Holder's comments »

"Holder doesn't want an honest dialogue about race. In the Age of [President] Obama, 'talking enough with each other about race' means the rest of us shutting up while being subjected to lectures about our insensitivity and insufficient integration on the weekends," conservative blogger Michelle Malkin wrote.

Stephan Tawney, writing on the American Pundit blog, said a glimpse at the national political landscape -- namely the country's first black president -- suggests otherwise.

"Our attorney general is black, both major parties are led by black men, the president is black," he wrote. "Last month, the nation officially honored Martin Luther King Jr. as it does every year, and Holder is speaking during Black History Month. And yet we're apparently a 'nation of cowards' on race."

Ron Christie, a one-time domestic policy adviser to former President George W. Bush, said that for the nation's chief law enforcement officer to raise race issues "was wrong and it was very insulting to the American people."

CNN iReport contributor Jimmy Deol of Toronto, Ontario, called Holder's remarks "a bit strong and needlessly provocative."

"I don't think lack of dialogue on race relations in America makes Americans a nation of cowards. Perhaps most people are uncomfortable with the subject with its complex past. The solution: You tell me," he wrote. See Deol's reaction on iReport.com

Holder -- who said that he wants to "revitalize the Civil Rights Division" at the Justice Department -- said Wednesday that he wants to start a new conversation.

"I think if we're going to ever make progress, we have to have the guts. We have to have the determination to be honest with each other," he said.

And that view is something with which CNN political analyst Roland Martin agrees.

"But what he has asked African-Americans to say is personally, go outside of your comfort zone and begin to embrace folks beyond your particular race," Martin said.

Hilary Shelton of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People agreed that Holder's comments are "provocative."

"We don't talk about race in our country, and he's right. ... We've kind of learned to get along, but we've learned to get along by omitting things," Shelton said. VideoWatch more on the Holder debate »

A reader on the liberal Huffington Post Web site wrote: "How can you read Mr. Holder's comments and immediately decide that he is wrong and should apologize? You are either disillusioned from the real world or caught up in some fantasy to which you believe there is no problem with racism in this country."

The reader added, "Mr. Holder is correct in everything he said. We will never get past this issue until we discuss, confront, understand and then heal."

CNN senior political analyst David Gergen agreed with Holder that there is "too much de facto segregation" on weekends, but he said the attorney general's comments failed to take into account how far the country has come.

"If you look at overall where we've come, we just had a huge, huge debate. And now we've elected a black American, and to seemingly after that to call this a 'nation of cowards,' it's just tone-deaf," Gergen said.

 

[EasyEJL]

And now we've elected a black American, and to seemingly after that to call this a 'nation of cowards,' it's just tone-deaf," Gergen said.

is obama really a black american, or is he half-african? Sounds in some ways like mincing words, but having a number of non-american descent black friends (haiti, dominican, jamaican, barbados, basically all the carribean ) they don't associate much with black americans. Not sure what that really means either, just felt like sharing.

 

[suncloud]

i think this whole thing is a crock. its easy to point the finger back 200 years into history and say "see what you did", yet the same community won't point the fingers back at their tribal chiefs who sold them in the first place, nor do they have any inclination to move back to the "motherland".

the african american culture also now has more liberties than caucasian.

the day i see:
aryan college fund
white entertainment television
the death of racial quotas in government

i will retract my statement.

hopefully a black president will break those barriers down, which is why i voted that way.

 

[CopyCat]

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.


But seriously, I think the race card gets misused and abused in this day and age. The older people in my family all feel that we have made history with Obama. We have, but unlike them I never doubted we would have a minority in the White House. It was just a matter of time. I did always believe that we would have a minority in there before a women though. Sexism is still far wider spread and crosses many more directional boundaries than race does.

 

[semiautoloco4]

americans are not cowards just dum,, were headed into a 1 world goverment and most of us are just to blind to see

 

[RobInKuwait]

But seriously, I think the race card gets misused and abused in this day and age. The older people in my family all feel that we have made history with Obama. We have, but unlike them I never doubted we would have a minority in the White House. It was just a matter of time. I did always believe that we would have a minority in there before a women though. Sexism is still far wider spread and crosses many more directional boundaries than race does.

I always thought it would happen as well, I just never thought it would be someone so radical as BHO. I always pictured a Colin Powell.....a moderate who could unite parties not divide them. BHO spins himself this way, but in practice I think the opposite is true.

 

[EasyEJL]

yes, just like "We have to get spending under control and cut the deficit to under 600 billion by 2012" as he hands out checks for $15 billion more in medicaid...

 

[RobInKuwait]

yes, just like "We have to get spending under control and cut the deficit to under 600 billion by 2012" as he hands out checks for $15 billion more in medicaid...

Did you see this?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/House-Democrats-propose-410B-apf-14450221.html

 

[Lacradocious]

The problem is that no one can state the facts about this issue without being labeled a racist. So the race subject is taboo in many respects because the truth is painful, and it is easier to just label someone a racist. I could say the same thing someone of another race says, but I would be labeled a racist because I am Caucasian.

For me, race has never been an issue though. I acknowledge that I am white, but I don't necessarily walk around the grocery store and feel a kinship with the other white people in the store. (Okay, maybe that ONE time I went to Montana, but that was only because I have never been to a place where there were literally only white people - but even then I identified more with people who didn't have beards more so than anything else)

I rarely voice my opinions on the subject because I don't feel the need to. I do feel like I have been judged because of my race, but I don't care because I am confident in myself as an individual. But I think this can be understandably harder for some individuals to do given the grim statistics in regards to incarceration rates, teen pregnancy, etc among certain segments of the population.

The only thing I do know for certain is that the only person you can blame 99 out of 100 times for your predicament in life good or bad is the person staring back at you in the mirror.

 

[EasyEJL]

Did you see this?

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/House-Democrats-propose-410B-apf-14450221.html

"People are hurting out there, we all need to be more responsible"

The legislation, which includes an increase of roughly 8 percent over spending in the last fiscal year

Inflation was what, -0.5% for the year?

its great, since the media is in his back pocket he can just brazenly say whatever he wants to say, reality doesn't have to intrude.

 

[lutherblsstt]

But seriously, I think the race card gets misused and abused in this day and age. The older people in my family all feel that we have made history with Obama. We have, but unlike them I never doubted we would have a minority in the White House. It was just a matter of time. I did always believe that we would have a minority in there before a women though. Sexism is still far wider spread and crosses many more directional boundaries than race does.

Race is not a card game,it's a real issue that is intricately interwoven into the fabric of everyday American life.

Google this "the invisible backpack",it is a thought provoking read to say the least!

 

[EasyEJL]

Race is not a card game,it's a real issue that is intricately interwoven into the fabric of everyday American life.

Google this "the invisible backpack",it is a thought provoking read to say the least!

yeah, but pulling out and fostering more racism just to reach political goals doesn't make it better. Stating (as many did) that the only reason not to vote for obama was racism to try and guilt people into it was horrifying to me.

YouTube

 

[CopyCat]

Race is not a card game,it's a real issue that is intricately interwoven into the fabric of everyday American life.

Google this "the invisible backpack",it is a thought provoking read to say the least!

I realize it is a real issue and not a game, never said it wasn't. I am however saying that it is not as big of an issue today as it was before. I do not believe many people under 30 are that surprised to see any kind of minority in office. Hell, the majority of congress, senate, and state officials are minorities. I still believe sexism is a larger issue than racism.

 

[Jayhawkk]

Was listning to Donny Simpson this morning and apparently some mayor somewhere was told to step down after sending a photoshopped whitehouse picture with watermelons in the front lawn and a caption stating no easter eggs this year...

I don't have a problem with people being upset over this but what got me was when Donny said it was kay if it were between brothers but not when you're white and say it. Then went on to talk how good the picture looked and how that would get him in the Whitehouse.

Racism is racisn and black people can stereotype and be racist against other blacks. Color of skin should have no say in racist remarks. We should be holding all accountable and not just certain people.

 

[dsade]

I can just as accurately state right at this moment that "My president is white".

IMO, some voted for his so they could claim the first "black president" (I guess 50% works for them), while ignoring his White heritage, whereas other voted for him either IN SPITE OF his race, or because it was what he offered REGARDLESS of his race.

Watch carefully who the true racists are...word choice reveals them every time.

Though character my prove him just another politician, his persona and identity is simply transcendent, and neither one nor the other.

 

[RoadBlocK]

........................
Racism is racisn and black people can stereotype and be racist against other blacks. Color of skin should have no say in racist remarks. We should be holding all accountable and not just certain people.

Ive grown up, worked and caroused in "mixed" urban areas all my life, I have friends and coworkers of various "ethnic" backrounds, and I dont consider myself to be a "racist", I try to spread my hate evenly among the stupid people, not at all based on the color of their skin. And I have run across my share of openly racist whites and blacks, and often it shocks me at how much more racist some black folks are towards other black folks, as well as how vocally open they are towards whites, but then again I guess its better for me to know for sure someone doesnt like me than just think they dont.

 

[lutherblsstt]

yeah, but pulling out and fostering more racism just to reach political goals doesn't make it better. Stating (as many did) that the only reason not to vote for obama was racism to try and guilt people into it was horrifying to me.

That video is quite the extreme example.

Yes many did use it to foster political goals,this is also a tradition in the U.S.where for quite some time blacks could not even vote.

Even as recently as 2000,black voters were illegally prevented from voting in Florida. I have a question,were the people who are outraged (or horrified) by the alleged use of race as a guilt mechanism in the Obama campaign (I can't stand Obama or his bait and switch tactics,by the way) so horrified by the stolen election in the year 2000?

PS For those wondering what I am writing about look for "American Blackout" on google video.

 

[lutherblsstt]

I realize it is a real issue and not a game, never said it wasn't. I am however saying that it is not as big of an issue today as it was before. I do not believe many people under 30 are that surprised to see any kind of minority in office. Hell, the majority of congress, senate, and state officials are minorities. I still believe sexism is a larger issue than racism.

Let me know what you think about the google search "invisible backpack".

 

[EasyEJL]

Even as recently as 2000,black voters were illegally prevented from voting in Florida

When a police car sitting outside a polling place counts as preventing black people from voting, all I can say is get a grip on reality. When requiring that people prove their identity with a photo id is discrimination, I say get a grip on reality.

 

[lutherblsstt]

When a police car sitting outside a polling place counts as preventing black people from voting, all I can say is get a grip on reality. When requiring that people prove their identity with a photo id is discrimination, I say get a grip on reality.

You obviously did not watch the film nor do you know much about what happened.

The official investigation by the U.S. Civil Rights Commission in Florida in 2000 determined that one in seven black votes was simply thrown away, not counted for technical reasons.

The Republican Party challenged hundreds of thousands of people all over the country in that election, resulting in massive numbers of provisional ballots, which were, in the main, chucked in the garbage.

You had a massive non-count of Hispanic and Native-American votes. If you're Navajo, they throw out your ballot. You get provisional ballots, crap voting machines and they just don't count them.

The House Judiciary Committee released a report titled "What Went Wrong in Ohio?" The report cited "massive and unprecedented voter irregularities and anomalies" that were "caused by intentional misconduct and illegal behavior."

The response to the U.S. Civil Rights Commission outing the fact of the non-count of black votes in Florida in 2000 was to remove the chairwoman of the commission. She was just replaced with someone who will be quite pliant and bless the fixing.

 

[carpee]

americans are not cowards just dum,, were headed into a 1 world goverment and most of us are just to blind to see

i agree

a new world order is coming

 

[Dwight Schrute]

Even as recently as 2000,black voters were illegally prevented from voting in Florida. I have a question,were the people who are outraged (or horrified) by the alleged use of race as a guilt mechanism in the Obama campaign (I can't stand Obama or his bait and switch tactics,by the way) so horrified by the stolen election in the year 2000?

They were probably complaining about the massive amounts of dead people and celebrities that all of a sudden moved to poor sections of St. Louis that voted in 2006 and 2008....or they are probably in Minnesota fighting a Senate election that has been stolen so that the Dems can get that 60th seat in the Senate. But I have a feeling you won't see a movie about that....

This idea that race or Republicans have a monopoly on stolen elections is laughable. Those trying to steal an elections could care less if you are blue, red, purple, white or black....they care about party.


If I was trying to steal an election for Republicans I would go to urban areas..why? Because that's where the majority of Democrat votes come from. If I was a Democrat trying to rig an election I would try to inflate the vote count in highly populated urban areas. Either way, race doesn't play a part. Population and party does. Its easier to hide corruption in a district with 60k votes than one with 6k.


The people who say its race either don't understand party demographics, or have a separate agenda they are trying to promote.

 

[lutherblsstt]

They were probably complaining about the massive amounts of dead people and celebrities that all of a sudden moved to poor sections of St. Louis that voted in 2006 and 2008....or they are probably in Minnesota fighting a Senate election that has been stolen so that the Dems can get that 60th seat in the Senate. But I have a feeling you won't see a movie about that....

This idea that race or Republicans have a monopoly on stolen elections is laughable. Those trying to steal an elections could care less if you are blue, red, purple, white or black....they care about party.


If I was trying to steal an election for Republicans I would go to urban areas..why? Because that's where the majority of Democrat votes come from. If I was a Democrat trying to rig an election I would try to inflate the vote count in highly populated urban areas. Either way, race doesn't play a part. Population and party does. Its easier to hide corruption in a district with 60k votes than one with 6k.


The people who say its race either don't understand party demographics, or have a separate agenda they are trying to promote.

There has been historical suppression of black voters in the United States.The documentary American Blackout shows through interviews, documents, as well as images of African Americans waiting in the rain (only to be falsely told they're too late to vote) how districts were systemically trying to exclude blacks from the voting process.

I would love to get your thoughts on it: you can view it in its entirety at google video.

 

[EasyEJL]

There was "historical genocide of jews in europe" that doesn't mean it happens any more. Also, just because a video is on youtube doesn't make it real.

People who are looking to use being discriminated against as an excuse will call anything that happens to themselves discrimination based.

 

[purebred]

yes, just like "We have to get spending under control and cut the deficit to under 600 billion by 2012" as he hands out checks for $15 billion more in medicaid...

AIG was recently bailed out (yet again) and been provided with a $30 billion loan. this will be their fourth bailout if i'm not mistaken. let's not even mention the gov't bailed them out last year with an $80 billion loan.

lots and lots of "change" alright.:far2t:

 

[EasyEJL]

AIG was recently bailed out (yet again) and been provided with a $30 billion loan. this will be their fourth bailout if i'm not mistaken. let's not even mention the gov't bailed them out last year with an $80 billion loan.

lots and lots of "change" alright.:far2t:

"no more insiders", other than the insiders he is putting in his cabinet

and no "bowing down to special interest groups" except for unions, which hmm are a special interest group

 

[purebred]

"no more insiders", other than the insiders he is putting in his cabinet

and no "bowing down to special interest groups" except for unions, which hmm are a special interest group

how about this interesting story:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/02/AR2009030202400.html?wpisrc=newsletter

An Obama spokesman declared the issues "minor" and said the administration is confident that the nomination is on track for a scheduled hearing Monday with the Finance Committee.

yeah sure, i mean, no biggie at all. anyone else owes 10 grand in taxes and they're a delinquent but yeah no, perfectly ok. it's a "minor issue." it's just $10,000 in unpaid taxes. what an insult to intelligence.

 

[lutherblsstt]

There was "historical genocide of jews in europe" that doesn't mean it happens any more. Also, just because a video is on youtube doesn't make it real.

Another out of context extreme example. Did you watch the film or are you just speculating?

Couple interesting facts for you:

According to the Justice Department in its 2005 report entitled Contacts Between Police and the Public, black males are three times more likely than white males to have their vehicles stopped and searched by police.

How about the research by Princeton sociology prefessor Devah Prager,summarized in her book, 'Marked:Race,Crime,and finding Work in an Era of Mass Incarceration' which found that white men with a criminal record are equally or even slightly more likely to be called back for a job interview than black men without a criminal record,even when the men are equally qualified and present themselves to employers in an identical fashion.

The studies are endless but then again so is the denial of many.

People who are looking to use being discriminated against as an excuse will call anything that happens to themselves discrimination based.

Does this apply to the white farmers expelled from Zimbabwe?

 

[EasyEJL]

According to the Justice Department in its 2005 report entitled Contacts Between Police and the Public, black males are three times more likely than white males to have their vehicles stopped and searched by police.

do you think the police actually see the color of the driver of all cars they pull over? Do you think that maybe black males more 3x more likely to have a car with an expired tag, broken taillight or other infraction - speeding, no seatbelt, etc? Stating a statistic like the above is irrelevant to reality, but sounds really great when you are looking for examples of discrimination as i said earlier. It doesn't prove anything.

80% of the terrorists who flew planes into the world trade center held saudi arabian passports too. Doesn't mean a damn thing.

 

[lutherblsstt]

do you think the police actually see the color of the driver of all cars they pull over? Do you think that maybe black males more 3x more likely to have a car with an expired tag, broken taillight or other infraction - speeding, no seatbelt, etc? Stating a statistic like the above is irrelevant to reality, but sounds really great when you are looking for examples of discrimination as i said earlier. It doesn't prove anything.

80% of the terrorists who flew planes into the world trade center held saudi arabian passports too. Doesn't mean a damn thing.

It proves alot but of course not in the mind someone like yourself who refuses to admit that he lives in a country where racism is still a very real problem and considers those who point it out as "looking for examples". No need to look,the evidence is everywhere!


Contrary to your typical deniers response that people are using discrimmination as an excuse,black and brown folks typically "stuff" their experiences with discrimmination and racism,only making an allegation of such treatment after many incidents have transpired about which they said nothing for fear of being ignored or attacked..

Precisely because white denial (In the past I was included in this) has long trumped claims of racism,people of color (again,according to scholarly investigation) tend to underreport their experiences with racial bias,rather than exaggerate them.

When it comes to playing a race card,which is what you are insinuating,it is more accurate to say that we whites are the ones with the loaded deck,shooting down any evidence of racism as little more than the fantasies of unhinged minorities,unwilling to take personal responsibility for their own problems in life.

Are you aware of the study from MIT which found that persons with "white sounding names" are 50 percent more likely to be called back for a job interview than those with "black sounding names"?

In addition,research from Indiana University looked at 14 studies from across the nation and discovered that students of color were three times more likely than whites to be suspended or expelled from school,even though rates of serious school-rule infractions do not differ to any significant degree between racial groups.

 

[EasyEJL]

Are you aware that nothing that you stated changes the factual nature of using statistics to prove what you'd like to prove by only looking at part of a puzzle? It only proves there are people who want to believe that.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

There has been historical suppression of black voters in the United States.The documentary American Blackout shows through interviews, documents, as well as images of African Americans waiting in the rain (only to be falsely told they're too late to vote) how districts were systemically trying to exclude blacks from the voting process.

I would love to get your thoughts on it: you can view it in its entirety at google video.

So what? As I already told you, fraud and voter suppression occurs to give the advantage to a party, not race.

I didn't hear you complaining when the Latino vote in South Florida was being suppressed because of a extraordinary amount of Latinos voting for Bush because of their religious beliefs.

Its not race...its party and it goes both ways. Selectively picking situations is only keeping you from the facts.

 

[thaOrleanyte]

Dont you think it is inherently racist to say Obama is black.

What I mean is that he is BIRACIAL. He is just as much white as he is black, yet since he is half-black........that makes him a black person.

That is rascism by definition

 

[lutherblsstt]

So what? As I already told you, fraud and voter suppression occurs to give the advantage to a party, not race.

I didn't hear you complaining when the Latino vote in South Florida was being suppressed because of a extraordinary amount of Latinos voting for Bush because of their religious beliefs.

Its not race...its party and it goes both ways. Selectively picking situations is only keeping you from the facts.

Do you think that the 1965 Voting Rights Act which made most race-based disenfranchisement illegal was brought about because "Its not race...its party and it goes both ways"?

By the way,several Republican whistle blowers have come to the fore, most prominently former US District Attorney David Iglesias of New Mexico,with evidence that the White House demanded spurious prosecutions to lower black and brown turnout.

But if what you wrote is what you want to believe I don't think there is any amount of evidence to the contrary that will change your mind.

 

[lutherblsstt]

Are you aware that nothing that you stated changes the factual nature of using statistics to prove what you'd like to prove by only looking at part of a puzzle? It only proves there are people who want to believe that.

Wrong,it only proves there is ample evidence to bear out the assertion that I made and that in the face of voluminous evidence people will still deny what is right in front of their face.

Did you ever get a chance to google: "invisible backpack"?

 

[Dwight Schrute]

Do you think that the 1965 Voting Rights Act which made most race-based disenfranchisement illegal was brought about because "Its not race...its party and it goes both ways"?

Its not 1965. The 2000 election is not 1965. The 2006 Congressional races are not 1965. The last election is not 1965. Welcome to the 21st century. You have a black man as President. They must have failed miserably to suppress the vote.

By the way,several Republican whistle blowers have come to the fore, most prominently former US District Attorney David Iglesias of New Mexico,with evidence that the White House demanded spurious prosecutions to lower black and brown turnout.

Yes, Iglesias, a Latino, worked to suppress minority votes.

I'm sure Condoleezza Rice worked to suppress black votes. I'm sure Colin Powell worked to suppress minority votes. I'm sure former attorney general Gonzales, a Latino, worked to suppress minority votes.

...and you are a year late with this "alleged" story.

But if what you wrote is what you want to believe I don't think there is any amount of evidence to the contrary that will change your mind.

You have just described yourself. I actually look at ALL the evidence, not just selective stories or some video on Google to try and reinforce your own personal beliefs that racism is everywhere and that politicians looking to get elected actually give 2 shits about whether you are black, brown, purple or red.

When it comes to politics, party and money trumps race every single day. I'm sure Michael Steele, a black man, head of the RNC is suppressing black votes because he hates black people.

The Republican party is so powerful they can force minorities to suppress minority votes.

 

[lutherblsstt]

Its not 1965. The 2000 election is not 1965. The 2006 Congressional races are not 1965. The last election is not 1965. Welcome to the 21st century. You have a black man as President. They must have failed miserably to suppress the vote.

Are you really not understanding what I wrote? Do you really think that laws made in 1965 are irrelevant now? Or do you not understand that I pointed out that law to show how voter suppression is not only based on political party?

By the way, our country has elected white males from northern European countries going back now 230-or-so years so the election of 1 half black president is just as irrelevant to the conversation as you tried to portray my bringing up of the voters rights act.

Yes, Iglesias, a Latino, worked to suppress minority votes.

I did not say Iglesias worked to suppress minority votes,I said he was a whistleblower with evidence that the White House demanded spurious prosecutions to lower black and brown turnout

DAVID IGLESIAS own words: "there was an attempt to suppress the voting"

AMY GOODMAN: What is “vote caging”?


DAVID IGLESIAS: Oh, gosh. That’s a terrible practice. If it’s not illegal, it should be. I hope Congress fixes that, that problem. It’s when you send voter information to a group of people that you have reason to believe are no longer there, such as military personnel who are overseas, such as students at historically black colleges. And then, when it comes back as undeliverable, the party uses that information to remove that person from the voter rolls, claiming that they’re no longer there or they didn’t the right to vote. It’s a reprehensible practice. I had never heard of the phrase until after I left office.


AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk about what you represented to Karl Rove and then what Karl Rove did?


DAVID IGLESIAS: Oh, yes. I only met Karl Rove one time. He was at a luncheon in Albuquerque. He came over and introduced himself. But, you know, he was looking to broaden the base of the party, and as an evangelical Christian, as a military veteran, and as a Hispanic, I represented the future of the party, and that was all in one package. I had run for office. I’m typically conservative on lots of social issues. And I think Rove saw that I represented the future of the party. But I think he also thought I was the kind of person who would file bogus voter fraud prosecutions, I would—was the kind of US attorney that would rush an indictment if it would help a fellow conservative. And, you know, I wasn’t that—I didn’t do that. And I don’t want to paint myself as the only one, because John McKay in Seattle also refused to file bogus election fraud cases in the Washington state, and Todd Graves in Missouri refused to file bogus voter fraud prosecutions after looking at the evidence. I mean, they thought they had political operatives, and what they had were principled law enforcement officials.

I'm sure Condoleezza Rice worked to suppress black votes. I'm sure Colin Powell worked to suppress minority votes. I'm sure former attorney general Gonzales, a Latino, worked to suppress minority votes.

Rice and Powell are red herrings at best.

Gonzales actually was acting as hatchet man for
ongoing Republican efforts to disenfranchise Black and Latino voters.

A question for you

Several United States attorneys were terminated because of a supposed lack of aggressiveness in cases of voter fraud. But while studies suggest that voter fraud is relatively rare and isolated, there has been a recent escalation of voter suppression and illegal tactics to prevent voting, especially in minority communities. If some attorneys were terminated because they failed to combat voter fraud, why weren't any terminated for failing to prosecute voter suppression?



.

..and you are a year late with this "alleged" story.

First you bring up that something was from way back in 1965 now you bring up that something was from way back in 2008.The story has to be from like 5 minutes ago for it to be relevant to you?

When it comes to politics, party and money trumps race every single day. I'm sure Michael Steele, a black man, head of the RNC is suppressing black votes because he hates black people.

You keep bringing up these individuals who are black as if their loyalties lie with the black population as a whole and not first with the party they belong to and the power and privilege it provides them,that is what you should be rolling your eyes at. Ever heard of Public Choice Theory?

 

[Dwight Schrute]

Are you really not understanding what I wrote? Do you really think that laws made in 1965 are irrelevant now? Or do you not understand that I pointed out that law to show how voter suppression is not only based on political party?

I don't think you are quite following me. I am not talking about 1965. I am not talking about a system in which the rules, demographics and population is based on 1965. I am talking about now.


In 1965, Democrats suppressed black votes. Is that true today? No. Why? Because the majority of black votes are Democrat.

If you want to use that argument then fine. I'll go back to Lincoln who was a Republican...therefore Republicans can't be racist today.

Please join us in the 21st century.

By the way, our country has elected white males from northern European countries going back now 230-or-so years so the election of 1 half black president is just as irrelevant to the conversation as you tried to portray my bringing up of the voters rights act.

Actually, no...America elected white Americans. We can't elect anyone from Northern Europe.

I did not say Iglesias worked to suppress minority votes,I said he was a whistleblower with evidence that the White House demanded spurious prosecutions to lower black and brown turnout

DAVID IGLESIAS own words: "there was an attempt to suppress the voting"

AMY GOODMAN: What is “vote caging”?


DAVID IGLESIAS: Oh, gosh. That’s a terrible practice. If it’s not illegal, it should be. I hope Congress fixes that, that problem. It’s when you send voter information to a group of people that you have reason to believe are no longer there, such as military personnel who are overseas, such as students at historically black colleges. And then, when it comes back as undeliverable, the party uses that information to remove that person from the voter rolls, claiming that they’re no longer there or they didn’t the right to vote. It’s a reprehensible practice. I had never heard of the phrase until after I left office.

See my bolded part. Military personnel vote about 85% Republican while black student vote about 85% Democrat.


Might want to know your demographics before selectively lookig for "black".

DAVID IGLESIAS: Oh, yes. I only met Karl Rove one time. He was at a luncheon in Albuquerque. He came over and introduced himself. But, you know, he was looking to broaden the base of the party, and as an evangelical Christian, as a military veteran, and as a Hispanic, I represented the future of the party, and that was all in one package. I had run for office. I’m typically conservative on lots of social issues. And I think Rove saw that I represented the future of the party. But I think he also thought I was the kind of person who would file bogus voter fraud prosecutions, I would—was the kind of US attorney that would rush an indictment if it would help a fellow conservative. And, you know, I wasn’t that—I didn’t do that. And I don’t want to paint myself as the only one, because John McKay in Seattle also refused to file bogus election fraud cases in the Washington state, and Todd Graves in Missouri refused to file bogus voter fraud prosecutions after looking at the evidence. I mean, they thought they had political operatives, and what they had were principled law enforcement officials.

And how is this different than Begala and Carver suppressing absentee ballots form military personnel which are predominantly Republican?

You act as if the Republican party holds a monopoly on voter suppression...while ignoring every instance of Democrats doing the same. Once again, that selective filtering of yours takes over.



If Gonzales was the future of the party, then I would conclude that Mr. Rove isn't a racist.

Rice and Powell are red herrings at best.

Because it doesn't fit with your argument.

Gonzales actually was acting as hatchet man for
ongoing Republican efforts to disenfranchise Black and Latino voters.

Yes..a latino suppressing minority vote. Do you understand just how ass backwards you sound?

Several United States attorneys were terminated because of a supposed lack of aggressiveness in cases of voter fraud. But while studies suggest that voter fraud is relatively rare and isolated, there has been a recent escalation of voter suppression and illegal tactics to prevent voting, especially in minority communities. If some attorneys were terminated because they failed to combat voter fraud, why weren't any terminated for failing to prosecute voter suppression?

Actually, no...several Unites Stated attorneys were fired for political reasons...much like Clinton did when he was elected ony that Clinton fired them ALL.

Guess you forget that right? Selective history perhaps?
.

First you bring up that something was from way back in 1965 now you bring up that something was from way back in 2008.The story has to be from like 5 minutes ago for it to be relevant to you?

Einstein, you brought up the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Its seems you are still there.

I didn't know 2008 was "way back".

You keep bringing up these individuals who are black as if their loyalties lie with the black population as a whole and not first with the party they belong to and the power and privilege it provides them,that is what you should be rolling your eyes at. Ever heard of Public Choice Theory?

Thank you..you just made my point. If a black man cares more about his party than his race (to the point he's suppressing his own race), you just proved my point. Its not about RACE....its about PARTY.

Thank you very much.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

You keep bringing up these individuals who are black as if their loyalties lie with the black population as a whole and not first with the party they belong to and the power and privilege it provides them

Once again, thank you. Party trumps race. I rememeber somebody said that. Oh, that was me!


:dance:

 

[edgebsl]

i agree

a new world order is coming

I think its kinda funny and Ironic that people are paranoid of this with Obama.

"A new world order" was a Bush slogan. And jr and sr are both almuni of "Skull and Bones" who are very tied to early Knights Templar. A lot of interest and dabbling in the Occult and belief in an eventual "One world government".

At least that's what the conspiracy theorists believe. Many who thought BUSH was antichrist. I think satan's spawn wouldnt have been such a simpleton.

Im not a conspiracy theorist myself, but the idea of Right Wing Conspiracy Theorists I find quite funny. oh wait, when they start qouting Revelations they're not conspiracy theorist just god fearing folk. Right.

Nut job paranoia on both extreme ends of the ideology spectrum.

 

[lutherblsstt]

I don't think you are quite following me. I am not talking about 1965. I am not talking about a system in which the rules, demographics and population is based on 1965. I am talking about now.


In 1965, Democrats suppressed black votes. Is that true today? No. Why? Because the majority of black votes are Democrat.

No,impossible! They must have just been surpressing an area not targeting a race.

If you want to use that argument then fine. I'll go back to Lincoln who was a Republican...therefore Republicans can't be racist today.

You make up a straw man and then ask if I want to use it,no thanks.

Please join us in the 21st century.

A quote comes to mind about ignoring the lessons of history and being doomed to repeat them.

Actually, no...America elected white Americans. We can't elect anyone from Northern Europe.

The point is they were white.

See my bolded part. Military personnel vote about 85% Republican while black student vote about 85% Democrat.


Might want to know your demographics before selectively lookig for "black".

News flash: from the article Bush's New US Attorney a Criminal?

"Timothy Griffin, Karl Rove’s assistant, the President’s pick as US Attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas. Griffin, according to BBC Television, was the hidden hand behind a scheme to wipe out the voting rights of 70,000 citizens prior to the 2004 election.

Key voters on Griffin’s hit list: Black soldiers and homeless men and women.

(snip)

Targeting voters where race is a factor is a felony crime under the Voting Rights Act of 1965. "

You act as if the Republican party holds a monopoly on voter suppression...while ignoring every instance of Democrats doing the same. Once again, that selective filtering of yours takes over.

I never said that,I merely pointed out what happened in 2000 and 2004 and then you went off into the "well the democrats did it too" which is a psychological fallacy known as "pointing to another wrong" used to mitigate blame for wrongs on one side by citing those on the other.

If Gonzales was the future of the party, then I would conclude that Mr. Rove isn't a racist.




Because it doesn't fit with your argument.

What?

Yes..a latino suppressing minority vote. Do you understand just how ass backwards you sound?

How does a Jew helping the Nazis sound? Ever heard of the Jewish Ghetto Police? They were used by the Germans primarily for securing the deportation of other Jews to the concentration camps. Does that sound ass backwards?

How about the Tuskegee Syphilis Study? For forty years between 1932 and 1972, the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) conducted an experiment on 399 black men in the late stages of syphilis. These men, for the most part illiterate sharecroppers from one of the poorest counties in Alabama, were never told what disease they were suffering from or of its seriousness. Informed that they were being treated for “bad blood,” their doctors had no intention of curing them of syphilis at all. The data for the experiment was to be collected from autopsies of the men, and they were thus deliberately left to degenerate under the ravages of tertiary syphilis—which can include tumors, heart disease, paralysis, blindness, insanity, and death. “As I see it,” one of the doctors involved explained, “we have no further interest in these patients until they die.”



Tuskegee Institute nurse Eunice Rivers (a black woman) helped doctors find subjects in Macon and surrounding counties for the Tuskegee Syphilis Study. Does that sound ass backwards?

Actually, no...several Unites Stated attorneys were fired for political reasons...much like Clinton did when he was elected ony that Clinton fired them ALL.

Guess you forget that right? Selective history perhaps?

According to an article in Salon, the Congressional Research Service issued a report that indicated that between 1981 and 2006, only five of the 486 U.S. attorneys failed to finish their four-year terms, and none were fired for political reasons.

Let’s look at a few of these Attorneys:


Washington District Attorney John McKay, a man who received excellent performance reviews, was fired. And coincidentally, his dismissal is widely speculated to have been related to his not bringing (nonexistent) voter fraud charges in the 2004 Gubernatorial election.


New Mexico District Attorney David Iglesias was added to the list of attorneys to be fired on Election Day 2006 after being threatened by NM Senator Pete Dominici (a republican) for not bringing corruption charges against a Democrat before the 2006 election (specifically public corruption charges of Albuquerque's Metropolitan Courthouse construction). Dominici reached out to Karl Rove directly in order to have Iglesias dismissed after both he and NM Representative Heather Wilson leaned on Iglesias to bring indictments before Election Day 2006.


Arkansas District Attorney Bud Cummins, the one US Attorney that Alberto Gonzales and his team backtracked from earlier assertions of "performance related dismissal", was replaced with Tim Griffin, who worked under Karl Rove at the Republican National Committee. Griffin had a large role in "caging" during the 2004 elections:

Another of the most important reasons why Griffin's appointment deserves a harder look is from his involvement in "caging," which "appeared to be" a Republican Party effort to challenge the ballots of thousands of voters in largely African American communities through mailings targeting those who were serving in Iraq. Since they were stationed out of country, they were not at the address to which the mailings were sent, and the letters were returned as "not deliverable," establishing "cause" to strike the intended recipients from the voter roles. Who sent the originating email with respect to this caging "program"? Tim Griffin.


.

 

[lutherblsstt]

Once again, thank you. Party trumps race. I rememeber somebody said that. Oh, that was me!


:dance:

You missed the point of the remark,again. Just because a black person or latino or any other minority is involved in the upper echelons of a party does not in any way whatsoever eliminate their ability to conspire to suppress minority votes.

 

[Lacradocious]

In my opinion, voting is kind of a scam just to give us the impression that we choose our leader freely. Voting doesn't mean jack squat when it comes to the presidential election so to me a white person's vote is just as meaningless as any other persons vote.

I am not necessarily arguing that racism is dead, I just don't think that the vote is a good gauge of it. Because I think voting is kind of a sham.

Part of getting past things like this in my opinion is to accept that these things happen and we will never be able to remove bias as part of the nature of all human beings.

We can only recognize it for what it is and do our best to minimize it. However, I think sometimes we try to do too much and end up encouraging stereotypical beliefs in the process.

 

[lutherblsstt]

In my opinion, voting is kind of a scam just to give us the impression that we choose our leader freely. Voting doesn't mean jack squat when it comes to the presidential election so to me a white person's vote is just as meaningless as any other persons vote.

I am not necessarily arguing that racism is dead, I just don't think that the vote is a good gauge of it. Because I think voting is kind of a sham.

Part of getting past things like this in my opinion is to accept that these things happen and we will never be able to remove bias as part of the nature of all human beings.

We can only recognize it for what it is and do our best to minimize it. However, I think sometimes we try to do too much and end up encouraging stereotypical beliefs in the process.

I agree in the sense that voting sometimes can provide a distraction leading people away from the realization of who really hand picks the actual candidates,however there has still been historical racial suppression in this area and voting does determine the President.

The trick is that the candidates or who we get to choose from is not determined by the general population,lobbyists (as only one example) hold much more sway.

As far as your last comment,define doing "too much".

 

[Dwight Schrute]

You make up a straw man and then ask if I want to use it,no thanks.

I'm following your logic which as you can see, isn't logical.

A quote comes to mind about ignoring the lessons of history and being doomed to repeat them.

Yes. A black man was elected President. We aren't repeating anything.

The point is they were white.

So?

ews flash: from the article Bush's New US Attorney a Criminal?

"Timothy Griffin, Karl Rove’s assistant, the President’s pick as US Attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas. Griffin, according to BBC Television, was the hidden hand behind a scheme to wipe out the voting rights of 70,000 citizens prior to the 2004 election.

Key voters on Griffin’s hit list: Black soldiers and homeless men and women.

(snip)

Targeting voters where race is a factor is a felony crime under the Voting Rights Act of 1965. "

News Flash. Democrats practice the same thing..... For the third time.

Its been going on since the birth of this nation. Might want to look at both sides.

I never said that,I merely pointed out what happened in 2000 and 2004 and then you went off into the "well the democrats did it too" which is a psychological fallacy known as "pointing to another wrong" used to mitigate blame for wrongs on one side by citing those on the other.

Actually its not. Its to prove the same argument that any political operative will tell you in any election center...race means nothing...party means everything. So sorry..but its true.

How does a Jew helping the Nazis sound? Ever heard of the Jewish Ghetto Police? They were used by the Germans primarily for securing the deportation of other Jews to the concentration camps. Does that sound ass backwards?

How about the Tuskegee Syphilis Study? For forty years between 1932 and 1972, the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) conducted an experiment on 399 black men in the late stages of syphilis. These men, for the most part illiterate sharecroppers from one of the poorest counties in Alabama, were never told what disease they were suffering from or of its seriousness. Informed that they were being treated for “bad blood,” their doctors had no intention of curing them of syphilis at all. The data for the experiment was to be collected from autopsies of the men, and they were thus deliberately left to degenerate under the ravages of tertiary syphilis—which can include tumors, heart disease, paralysis, blindness, insanity, and death. “As I see it,” one of the doctors involved explained, “we have no further interest in these patients until they die.”



Tuskegee Institute nurse Eunice Rivers (a black woman) helped doctors find subjects in Macon and surrounding counties for the Tuskegee Syphilis Study. Does that sound ass backwards?

You are really reaching aren't you? Are you really THIS paranoid?

Why don't you just bring up Judas while you are at it?


What is ass backwards is that you associate some of the most extreme situations to the currnet Republcian party.


What was is you were saying about a straw man?

:lol:

According to an article in Salon,

A liberal publication. Hardly credible and extremely biased.


Plus, once again you seem to ignoring the main argument......they don't suppress votes because of race, its because of party.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

You missed the point of the remark,again. Just because a black person or latino or any other minority is involved in the upper echelons of a party does not in any way whatsoever eliminate their ability to conspire to suppress minority votes.

No, your point was very clear.



In reality, party trumps race as I said all along.


Thank you for proving my point.



The Republican party is so powerful that can we can even brainwash Latinos and African Americans to suppress their own race.


We also control Obama.

 

[lutherblsstt]

I'm following your logic which as you can see, isn't logical.

No,you are twisting my statements around and reformulating what I said to make it easier to attack,straw man fallacy again.

Yes. A black man was elected President. We aren't repeating anything.

A half black man is president,that negates what happened in previous elections?

News Flash. Democrats practice the same thing..... For the third time.

For the third time,you went off into the "well the democrats did it too" which is a psychological fallacy known as "pointing to another wrong" used to mitigate blame for wrongs on one side by citing those on the other side.

Its been going on since the birth of this nation. Might want to look at both sides.

You mean you admit that both parties have suppressed votes based on race?

Actually its not. Its to prove the same argument that any political operative will tell you in any election center...race means nothing...party means everything. So sorry..but its true.

Because you say so,right?

You are really reaching aren't you? Are you really THIS paranoid?

Reaching? I gave examples,specific ones,of people acting against the interests of their ethnic group to show how silly your assertion was that Alberto Gonzales playing a part in suppressing Latino votes sounds ass backwards. It only sounds ass backwards to those who know little or no history.

What is ass backwards is that you associate some of the most extreme situations to the currnet Republcian party.

I used some of the situations that happened throughout history as examples to show people acting against the interests of their ethnic group, not to associate them to the Republican Party,the Republican/Democrat battle is your own personal hangup.

A liberal publication. Hardly credible and extremely biased.

Yet another psychological fallacy called "damning the source".

Plato's Phaedrus had a related quote:

"The men of old deemed that if they heard the truth even from "oak or rock," it was enough for them; whereas you seem to consider not whether a thing is or is not true, but who the speaker is and from what country the tale comes. "

Socrates is reminding us that what we should want to know about a statement is whether or not it is true,and that it is irrelevant where the statement originates,whether in a tree or a rock-or a myth for that matter.

Example

A registered lobbyist for a group of lumber interests in the Northwest urges passage of a bill which would open a portion of Olympic National Park for logging by private companies. The following comment appears in the letter column of a local paper, "This town should resist the assault on the National Park system which lobbyists for the lumber interests are trying to put across to their own economic advantage." It may be in the national interest to reduce, maintain, or extend the limits of Olympic National Park.


Comment

The fact that the plan is backed by a source whose strong economic interest provides an obvious reason for anticipating bias does not justify dismissing the proposal without enquiry into its merits.

Plus, once again you seem to ignoring the main argument......they don't suppress votes because of race, its because of party.

You need to realize that repeating something doesn't make it true,do you have any evidence that this is the case? Have you worked in politics? Can you cite someone who has that agrees with your viewpoint?

 

[Dwight Schrute]

No,you are twisting my statements around and reformulating what I said to make it easier to attack,straw man fallacy again.

No, you are crying foul and reduced to debating style rather than substance.

A half black man is president,that negates what happened in previous elections?

That would assume that all previous elections had elements of institutional racism. Some did...most recently they did not.

For the third time,you went off into the "well the democrats did it too" which is a psychological fallacy known as "pointing to another wrong" used to mitigate blame for wrongs on one side by citing those on the other side.

No, I did not go off to anything. I merely brought up the other side which would make your assumptions that Republicans have a monopoly on such practices inaccurate. If you actually believe both parties didn't do this for their benefit, they you are extremely naive and paranoid. Before its might fit into some racist agenda...today, its counterproductive to winning an election. That's reality.

You mean you admit that both parties have suppressed votes based on race?

Where did I ever say they did not sometime in the past?

Once they became a voting block, they became a group to cater too......I'm sorry but whitey or his minority cohorts don't descend into the ghetto to suppress black votes because they are racist. If they do, the do it to suppress Democrat votes ti win an election...

If you don't actually acknowledge that reality, I feel sorry for you.

Because you say so,right?

Because common sense dictates it.

Being racist doesn't win Presidential elections anymore.
In fact, its quite the opposite.

Reaching? I gave examples,specific ones,of people acting against the interests of their ethnic group to show how silly your assertion was that Alberto Gonzales playing a part in suppressing Latino votes sounds ass backwards. It only sounds ass backwards to those who know little or no history.

You gave the most extreme examples in our nations history and twisted that into moder day politics. That's silly....as is your whole argument.

I used some of the situations that happened throughout history as examples to show people acting against the interests of their ethnic group, not to associate them to the Republican Party,the Republican/Democrat battle is your own personal hangup.

Actually, its acknowledgment of reality, something you might want to try someday rather than looking at life through sunglasses that tag racism to everything.

Wait..is this Al Sharpton?

Yet another psychological fallacy called "damning the source".

Plato's Phaedrus had a related quote:

"The men of old deemed that if they heard the truth even from "oak or rock," it was enough for them; whereas you seem to consider not whether a thing is or is not true, but who the speaker is and from what country the tale comes. "

Socrates is reminding us that what we should want to know about a statement is whether or not it is true,and that it is irrelevant where the statement originates,whether in a tree or a rock-or a myth for that matter.

Example

Pretty...but irrelevant.

A registered lobbyist for a group of lumber interests in the Northwest urges passage of a bill which would open a portion of Olympic National Park for logging by private companies. The following comment appears in the letter column of a local paper, "This town should resist the assault on the National Park system which lobbyists for the lumber interests are trying to put across to their own economic advantage." It may be in the national interest to reduce, maintain, or extend the limits of Olympic National Park.


Comment

The fact that the plan is backed by a source whose strong economic interest provides an obvious reason for anticipating bias does not justify dismissing the proposal without enquiry into its merits.

Reaching, yet again.

You need to realize that repeating something doesn't make it true,do you have any evidence that this is the case? Have you worked in politics? Can you cite someone who has that agrees with your viewpoint?

Nor does selectively picking examples that fit your own argument while filtering out or denying anything else that would dictate otherwise.

You can keep digging through history and try to find examples of stupidity..that doesn't justify labeling all as stupid.


Did institutional racism exist? Sure. Does it now? Hardly. Suppressing votes are meant to cater to a "party" winning elections...not to dictate some racisst agenda. Please wake up, join us in reality and realize this simple truth.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

Plus, I never have to worry as long as Dem. Robert Byrd is in office.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FIBJt-c2o0"]YouTube - Senator Robert Byrd says "white niggers" on TV[/ame]




"However, despite his early career in the KKK, Byrd was linked to such "Dixiecrat" Senators as John C. Stennis, J. William Fulbright or George Smathers, who based their segregationist positions on their conception of states' rights in contrast to, for example, James Eastland, who held a reputation as a committed racist.

James Oliver Eastland (November 28, 1904 – February 19, 1986) was an American politician from Mississippi who served in the United States Senate as a Democrat briefly in 1941 and again from 1943 until his resignation December 27, 1978."



Dixiecrat:

The States' Rights Democratic Party (commonly known as the Dixiecrats) was a segregationist, socially conservative political party in the United States. The term Dixiecrat is a portmanteau of Dixie, referring to the Southern United States, and Democrat, referring to the United States Democratic Party. It split with the Democratic Party in the mid-20th century determined to protect what they saw as the Southern way of life against an oppressive federal government.[1]

We can go on all day with examples back and forth but does it describe the entire system? Nope. Is a Republican and/or Democrats the same today as it was in 1965 or even 1985? Hell no.

 

[lutherblsstt]

No, you are crying foul and reduced to debating style rather than substance.

Actually pointing out flaws in your logic is far from "reduced to debating style".I think we can both agree that a fallacious argument should be thrown out of the debate

That would assume that all previous elections had elements of institutional racism. Some did...most recently they did not.

You have any evidence to support this statement?

No, I did not go off to anything. I merely brought up the other side which would make your assumptions that Republicans have a monopoly on such practices inaccurate.

Yet another straw man. I never claimed either party had or has a monopoly on such practices,you are projecting again.

If you actually believe both parties didn't do this for their benefit, they you are extremely naive and paranoid.

I agree,they suppressed minority votes for their benefit.

Before its might fit into some racist agenda...today, its counterproductive to winning an election. That's reality.

Whether you think it is counterproductive or not their is ample evidence that it still goes on.

Being racist doesn't win Presidential elections anymore.
In fact, its quite the opposite.

In 2000 and 2004 suppressing minority votes definitely did win Presidential Elections


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyPnVndc-hg&eurl=http://www.freedocumentaries.org/film.php?id=155&feature=player_embedded

http://www.freedocumentaries.org/film.php?id=107

You gave the most extreme examples in our nations history and twisted that into moder day politics. That's silly....as is your whole argument.

My examples were appropriate but apparently you did not understand them.Not surprising.

Actually, its acknowledgment of reality, something you might want to try someday rather than looking at life through sunglasses that tag racism to everything.


Wait..is this Al Sharpton?

No it's:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldAnV-r4neo"]YouTube - Tim Wise on Obama and Race[/ame]

Pretty...but irrelevant.

Says the man to whom it applies.

Did institutional racism exist? Sure. Does it now? Hardly. Suppressing votes are meant to cater to a "party" winning elections...not to dictate some racisst agenda. Please wake up, join us in reality and realize this simple truth.

You seem not to be comprehending my words so I've resorted to videos.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C55zE_qJd2g"]YouTube - TIM WISE- INSTITUTIONAL RACISM IN AMERICAN SOCIETY IS REAL[/ame]