Republican: Yes, We're Racist

Discussion in 'Race Relations' started by Not The Guardian, Jan 30, 2014.

  1. Not The Guardian

    Not The Guardian Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2011
    Messages:
    2,686
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    What a refreshing truth! Explaining the difficulty of getting an immigration bill passed, Lindsey Graham (R) finally admits:

    I like this new honesty!
     
  2. rayznack

    rayznack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    3,033
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    48
    There's nothing wrong with his reasoning; racism is not an inherently illogical or incoherent stance. The Republican wasn't claiming 1 + 1 = 3, or that the earth was 6,000 years old, or that humans stopped evolving from the neck up.

    In this case, the stance is perfectly rational, as there is no actual evidence that illegal (non-White) Hispanic immigrants are currently a benefit to our society, or will be if they become citizens.

    Diversity also results in numerous social problems: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/?page=full

    So, apart from whining about someone saying something the opinion elites have made taboo, opposing amnesty on racial grounds is perfectly justifiable and reasonable.

    But hey, why let facts get in the way of cheap rhetoric?
     
  3. Duhtee

    Duhtee New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2014
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Only the wyte man is Republicans and they all hate black men. They racist and we peaceful people
     
  4. SteveJa

    SteveJa New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2014
    Messages:
    2,378
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I like how stupid they both sound. Republicans are not racists, there are racist republicans as well as democrats
     
  5. Mr_Truth

    Mr_Truth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    33,372
    Likes Received:
    36,882
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I guess this proves the point:


    [​IMG]
     
  6. HogWash

    HogWash New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2014
    Messages:
    357
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What part of those quotes weren't true? Every one of them were right ON. Deny, deny, deny. Now whip out your Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton race card. I like the one on the lower right the most...the democrat underground.com actually ID'ed itself.
     
  7. toddwv

    toddwv Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    30,444
    Likes Received:
    6,429
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nope. It's just the way the discussion is framed. For instance, James Bowman made his comments because he was upset that the move "12 Years a Slave," failed to show happy slaves and so he deemed it anti-slavery propaganda.

    Jim Brown? Well, he just seems to be a dumbass with ignorant views. It's ironic that there are GOPers complaining that they are "slaves" because of taxes but (*)(*)(*)(*)heads like Brown make comments like being owned and treated as chattel was just fine.
     
  8. rayznack

    rayznack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    3,033
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Yes, too bad Jim Brown didn't say slaves were treated just fine; but that they were kept slaves by keeping them ignorant (obviously that would mean they were not treated just fine).
     
  9. mutmekep

    mutmekep New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Messages:
    6,223
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Generalizations are unwise , yeah some may be racist or homophobes or hate left handed people but so what ? i bet that the vast majority is not
     
  10. Mr_Truth

    Mr_Truth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    33,372
    Likes Received:
    36,882
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    amazing how a Republican admits to his party's racism and forum right wingers start to criticize those who quote him - if he's wrong why don't you right wingers criticize him instead????
     
  11. toddwv

    toddwv Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    30,444
    Likes Received:
    6,429
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "Basically slave owners took pretty good care of the slaves and livestock..."

    So he's espousing the idea of the beneficent slave owner, a meme that pops up under the GOP banner way too many times. The idea that blacks were better off under slavery than they are today,

    Let's COMPLETELY ignore the maiming, raping, and torture. Let's forget that slaves were considered on par with livestock. Let's put aside what humans are capable of when they are able to dehumanize their fellow humans. That slaves weren't allowed BY LAW to learn to read and write.

    And listen to this right-winger who is implying that slavery was just OK for the slaves because they were considered property, and nobody ever wants to damage their property, right?

    I don't know what's a sadder example of right-winger thought, the original quote by Jim Brown, or you trying to defend him.
     
  12. Smartmouthwoman

    Smartmouthwoman Bless your heart Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    55,907
    Likes Received:
    24,863
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    The ancestors of Black Americans were treated better by plantation owners than they are by today's Democrats. Keep em down and keep em voting Dem has reeked havoc on black communities. 73% of all black babies are born into single family homes. More black babies were aborted than born in NYC in 2012. Unemp among young black men is close to 60% in some areas.

    At least slaves were taken care of and not just used as political pawns.
     
  13. rayznack

    rayznack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    3,033
    Likes Received:
    69
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Too bad the quote doesn't say that.

    Most of the time, people don't want their property damaged, hence the analogy.

    Makes perfect sense to me.

    - - - Updated - - -

    What are you talking about?

    I totally agree with the quote.

    What I'm criticizing are those taking a quote out of context, such as the slavery quote, as has been done several times so far.
     
  14. After Hours

    After Hours Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2013
    Messages:
    5,359
    Likes Received:
    233
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Lmao, good god.
     
  15. Mr_Truth

    Mr_Truth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    33,372
    Likes Received:
    36,882
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male


    The Bible imposes the death penalty on those who kidnap for slavery. To say "slaves were taken care of" is absurd.
     
  16. superbadbrutha

    superbadbrutha Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2006
    Messages:
    52,269
    Likes Received:
    6,446
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    This has to be the ramblings of a fool.
     
  17. TheSteve

    TheSteve Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2013
    Messages:
    158
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Sure there are Racist republicans, There are also a lot of Racist Democrats. In the 60's the Democratic party fought tooth and nail to defeat the 1964 Civil Rights Act, 1965 Voting Rights Acts and 1972 Equal Employment Opportunity Act. All allowing people of other races, as well as women to enjoy the freedoms promised to all men. After exclusively giving the Democrats their votes for the past 25 years, the average African American cannot point to one piece of civil rights legislation sponsored solely by the Democratic Party that was specifically designed to eradicate the unique problems that African Americans faced. Congressional records show that all previous legislation (since 1964) had strong bi-partisan support, even though some Democrats debated and voted against these laws.

    Both sides of the isle need to look back to their pasts before a finger is pointed. Though Bias education, terrorist organizations, racist legislation and though their negative media the democrats promoted the hate that was spawning after slavery had been abolished. Many political historians believe that it would not have escalated as far as it did without the Democrats.
     
  18. Mr_Truth

    Mr_Truth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    33,372
    Likes Received:
    36,882
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    [​IMG]



    shame on this clown and those who defend him
     
  19. Adagio

    Adagio New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,560
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Explain that to me. Show me why it's a logical position to hold.
     
  20. Adagio

    Adagio New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,560
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Slaves being compared to livestock? Human beings as live stock? That's true alright. That's exactly how they were seen. The problem is with people that see others in that way. In the quote by Bowman with his criticism of 12 years a slave, he states; " yes there was much cruelty and hardship in the slave-owning south, BUT....(?) There's an old saying that says nothing before the word "but" counts. The "but" indicates a justification that is about to follow. Bowman is justifying slavery by suggesting that there was "nothing else". What else?? Is he leaving out the "Way down south in the land of cotton, good times there are not, forgotten"? From what reference point is speaking from? Who's experience?

    Paul Ryan presents a sweeping generalization of men not even thinking about working and learning the value of culture and work. Like he would know how those people that he's describing actually think. Can he be any more presumptuous? This is a man that is the biggest hypocrite in congress. What does he actually think about anything?

    Paul Ryan claims to have rejected Ayn Rand’s atheism. He claims that when he found out later in life that her philosophy was an "atheist philosophy" he rejected her in favor of St. Thomas Aquinas. I read Rand when I was in my early 20's. There's no mistaking where she was coming from. It leaps out of every page. How could he not know she was an atheist? Ayn Rand's philosophy is rooted in the concept of strident individualism. She wrote a book titled The Virtue of Selfishness in which she claims that any thought of self-sacrifice was abhorrent and should be purged from our being. Self-Interest was at the core of everything she was about. She addressed it in every page of dialogue in her books. "If any civilization is to survive, it is the morality of altruism men have to reject." ~ Ayn Rand.

    Ryan claims to be a Catholic, and as a solid Catholic I'm sure he accepts the fact of the canonization of Aquinas. He certainly claims to follow his teachings. He named Aquinas specifically as his inspiration. Catholics pray to Saints. Aquinas is high on Ryan’s list of all-time great Saints.

    In the words of St. Thomas Aquinas,
    I would like for Paul Ryan to square this position with the Tea Party and the conservatives that have every right to think that this is contrary to what they've been led to believe about him. It appears that he's literally hosing them for political gain. To go from Ayn Rand to St. Thomas Aquinas is quite a shift in position. So...Mr. Ryan, I don't think you can cherry pick what you like about a Saint and what you don't and still claim to be a Catholic. You claim to accept the teachings of a designated Saint of your own church. You either accept the teachings of Aquinas as you claim, including the quote above....OR you don't. If you don’t, then obviously you are rejecting the teachings of the Saint you claim to draw your inspiration from. If you do, then you are accepting the teachings of altruism that is poison to Rand’s philosophy and is likely to upset the Tea Party conservatives that support that view. So where exactly do you stand, with Rand or with Aquinas? If it's Rand, it's unbridled Self-interest she calls, “A Virtue of Selfishness”. If it's Aquinas, it’s Self-sacrificing altruism as taught by your faith. We just want to know where you stand...today?

    And so on the Ryan quote, I'm left asking what on earth would give him any authority to tell me or anyone else what others think with regards to work, or culture?
     
  21. Adagio

    Adagio New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,560
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't either. Watch how each of these posts offer a justification for a racist or pro-slavery view. And then watch to see what ideology is promoting those views.
     
  22. Adagio

    Adagio New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,560
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    0
    According to who? YOU? Better to be a slave then for somebody like you to claim they're political pawns? That coming from a person that is trying to justify slavery? How white of you to suggest that. Since blacks are predominantly liberals to begin with and vote overwhelmingly Democratic and hold major positions within the party, and formulating policy, including the White House itself...are you saying that they are using themselves as their own pawns?

    - - - Updated - - -

    What part of people as property makes sense to you?
     
  23. rkhames

    rkhames Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2013
    Messages:
    5,227
    Likes Received:
    1,285
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The answer to your question is simple. Graham did not say what the OP's cut and paste claimed that he said. Graham stated that there were some Republicans in the House that believed that Race is an issue in Immigration Reform. He did not say that all Republicans, or even all Republicans in the House, believed this way. The OP tried to make it look like he was admitting that all GOP believe this way. You will notice that the OP did not provide a link to the statement.

    Graham's statement, and the view expressed by most to this topic, is tainted by the false belief that the only Illegals in this country are from Mexico. A fact that is completely untrue. There are Illegals from a large number of countries and races. So, this is not a racial issue. It is a Sovereignty issue.

    The biggest issue is that the DNC is refusing to address the issue of a lack of border security to stop the influx of Illegals. They insist on making the same mistake that Regan made.

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3117681/posts
     
  24. iamkurtz

    iamkurtz Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,316
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No doubt that color is the most important thing to dems. The more they have in their ranks, the more they can claim inclusiveness. Never mind the dems racist historical quotes and their admission as to their motives for 'helping' blacks.
     
  25. Adagio

    Adagio New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,560
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If this statement is true; and I believe that it is. Then the parties have nothing to do with racism. You can be a racist as a Republican or a Democrat. So what is it that appeals to the racist if it's not the party? There's something else in play here. Democrats were not always liberals, and Republicans were not always conservatives as we see today. If a person was a racist and his party decided to embrace a civil rights platform, would he willingly go along with that, or would he resist it? If the Democratic Party suddenly adopted States Rights over civil rights, how may blacks or liberals would remain democrat? A committed racist is going to put his idea of white supremacy over the desires of his party. He's more willing to change parties or reject them altogether then change is ideological views on race.

    So the parties really have little to do with racism. A party doesn't make a person a racist. It doesn't make him conservative or liberal. His ideas on race precede that. If a party is sympathetic to those views, he signs on. If it rejects those views, he'll go elsewhere.

    Again, what you're saying is true. So if it's not the parties themselves...then what is it? When I look at the posts on this and other threads, I see a common "thread". Conservatives seem ready to justify things like slavery and even racist positions while liberals oppose them. It's my contention that it's the philosophies or ideologies that dominate the parties that shape their agenda. Not the other way around. Martin Luther King Jr. pointed to this in 64 with the nomination of Goldwater.

    King writes this about the 1964 Republican National Convention:


    Aside from his home state of Arizona, he won 5 deep south states. LA, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and SC. The most conservative states in the country. King had no particular antagonism toward the Republican Party or the Democratic Party. It was about the ideologies represented. The Dems opted for civil rights. The Republicans opted for States Rights, and States Rights has always been a justification for segregation in the south.
     

Share This Page