Anytime a criteria is established or stated that is based on race it is, by definition, a racist statement.

As for bringing Rush into this, please let's stick to the topic at hand.

I am constrained to point out that it was not I who brought Rush into the conversation. He's yer date, not mine... :D

Please get in the last word as we all know you have to comment last

Of course. I have a reputation to uphold, after all.. :D

and let's move on to something more entertaining.

Wanna talk about the new Star Trek film coming in Dec 2010? :D

Michale.....

Once again ... you are working way too hard. The rest of the world has already moved on as it's really not that big of an issue.

As for bringing Rush into this, please let's stick to the topic at hand. Were Reid's comments racist? No. Were his comments dumb? Yes.

Please get in the last word as we all know you have to comment last and let's move on to something more entertaining.

David

That is P -> Q does not imply Q -> P.

Now ya've gone and done it! You pushed my logical button! :D

You are correct as far as you go.

However, your examples list absolutes. There can be no dispute regarding the designations of "squirrel" and "mammal" as those designations have set definitions that are easily provable and not in dispute.

With regards to my example. It consists of an action whereby someone can or cannot do something based on, in this case, a racial criteria.

So, you are correct. The CONVERSE is not what makes it a racial statement.

*Any statement that establishes a criteria based on race* is what makes a statement racist.

Example:

Denzel Washington is incapable of being a college professor because he is black.

That is a racist statement.

Denzel Washington is perfectly capable of being a college professor because he is black.

While the second statement is a converse of the first statement, it's the establishment of a criteria based on race that is the determining factor.

So, mea culpa. I was wrong. Converse is not the defining characteristic. :D

But let's apply this lesson to Reid's statement.

Let's alter the prose to say the same thing, just in an opposite way.

Harry Reid was disappointed by Obama's oratorical gifts and believed that the country was not ready to embrace a black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama -- a "dark-skinned" African American "with an obvious Negro dialect, unless he didn't want to have one," as he later put it privately.

I think we all can agree that it is a racist statement.

Therefore, logic would certainly indicate that Reid's original statement was also a racist statement.

But I will definitely agree that racist comments don't necessarily imply that a person is a racist.

Common ground.. Such a wonderful thing :D

Even if your logic were correct, it still seems more likely that your statement about winning elections is more a commentary on the electorate and the views they hold than on any ability of African-Americans. It's not saying that African-Americans don't belong in the race, that they wouldn't make good elected officials, that whites need to govern. What it's saying is that because of the time we live in, it is more difficult to get elected because many people still judge based on skin color.

That's the same reasoning that Rush Limbaugh used when discussing the Donovan McNabb alleged "racist" comment.

And I agree with you. Reid's comment CAN be construed as more of an indictment on the American electorate, rather than a racial jab at Obama.

So, there is logic to support your (and Rush Limbaugh's) position. :D

However, there is one teensy weensy detail.

Let's change the statement a little bit again.

He [Dick Cheney] was wowed by Obama's oratorical gifts and believed that the country was ready to embrace a black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama -- a "light-skinned" African American "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one," as he later put it privately.

What do you think the Democrat's reaction to THAT would have been??

Don't bother, I think we BOTH know the answer to that, eh? :D

I rest my case...

Michale......

That is P -> Q does not imply Q -> P.

Here's an example. If Sally is a squirrel then Sally is a mammal. This is true. However, the converse, if Sally is a mammal, then Sally is a squirrel can not be proven true. There is not enough information. Sally could be an elephant or a human for example. You simply don't know.

So your comment that if a statement is true, then you HAVE to agree that the converse is true is not logical :)

But I will definitely agree that racist comments don't necessarily imply that a person is a racist.

-Dave

p.s. Even if your logic were correct, it still seems more likely that your statement about winning elections is more a commentary on the electorate and the views they hold than on any ability of African-Americans. It's not saying that African-Americans don't belong in the race, that they wouldn't make good elected officials, that whites need to govern. What it's saying is that because of the time we live in, it is more difficult to get elected because many people still judge based on skin color.

But your argument still doesn't rebut the main point of my last comment.

If saying that a person CAN'T win an election because of the complexion of his negro skin is racist, then by default, saying a person CAN win an election because of the complexion of his negro skin is also racist.

Let me ask you this..

He might be able to win the election if he weren't such a dark-skinned negro.

Is that a racist statement?

If your answer is yes, then you HAVE to agree that the converse of that statement is also racist.

If your answer is no, then we obviously do not agree on the definition of what constitutes a racist statement.

Why would Reid have been wowed by Barack's oratorical gifts and excited at the idea of a black President if he were racist?

You are trying the Sotomayer Obfuscation.

I am not claiming that Reid is a racist.

I am claiming that it's likely that Reid made a racist comment.

Those are two totally distinct and separate issues.

A person can make a racist comment and still not be a racist.

It's like saying that, since a robin is red and a robin is a bird then all birds must be red.

It's an illogical leap from evidence to conclusion.

I just hope the next distraction is more interesting. Something more entertaining.

Considering what is happening up in MA, the next "distraction" may likely be fatal for the Democratic Party. :D

Or maybe jobs and the economy. Nah ... that would never fly on right wing radio.

The economy and jobs have certainly been ignored by the Obama Administration.

Michale.....

I give you points for trying but your argument is tough to sell. Reid is saying race plays a role in elections - in a very crude and insensitive fashion.

If anything, this is a comment that our electorate is racist because light-skinned African-Americans may be statistically more likely to win elections.

Why would Reid have been wowed by Barack's oratorical gifts and excited at the idea of a black President if he were racist?

I just hope the next distraction is more interesting. Something more entertaining.

Like "death panels" or some more tea partying. Or maybe jobs and the economy. Nah ... that would never fly on right wing radio.

-David

Consider this statement..

He might be able to win the election if he weren't such a dark-skinned negro.

Now, wouldn't any reasonable person (or someone from the Left :D ) consider that to be a racist statement?

I would think that it WOULD be a racist statement.

So, if saying someone CAN'T win an election because they are a dark-skinned negro, why is it NOT a racist statement to say that someone COULD win an election because they are a light-skinned negro?

It seems to me that what Reid did was establish a criteria based on race.

The very definition of racism.

Michale.....

If Reid hadn't pulled his boner, you can bet the talk of the town would have been Clinton and his, "a few years ago, this guy {Obama} would have been getting us our coffee" statement...

I am sure you would agree with me that THAT is a bald-faced and obvious racist statement..

Yet the LEFT is strangely quiet about Bubba's statement..

Why do you think that is??

Iddn't it funny how whenever the conversation starts with racist statements, we always end up back to the hypocrisy of the Left...

Michale.....

My assessment of whether or not a statement is racist is SOLELY, COMPLETELY and UNEQUIVOCALLY based on the statement itself.

For the vast majority of those on the LEFT (and, to be fair, those on the RIGHT as well) the assessment of whether or not a statement is racist is based partially, sometimes COMPLETELY, on WHO said it.

And therein lies the hypocrisy.

It's the same issue with the Sotomayer statements. I never claimed that Sotomayer was a racist. I merely stated that the statements Sotomayer made were, in fact, racist statements.

You ask me if Reid's statement was racist. I don't think it was, but that is simply my own personal opinion. I can see how someone can take them as racist. The niece of Dr Martin Luther King has, I am sure, more than a passing acquaintance with racism and racist comments. She says that Reid's statements were racist. I still don't think they were but I would bow to King's niece's expertise and give her opinions more weight than my own.

But, as I said (over and over and OVER again :D) my issue isn't the racist/non-racist statements. My issue is how Democrats scream racist at the drop of a hat to anything coming out of the GOP, yet whine and cry and beach and moan when the GOP does the same thing to Democrats.

Michale.....

The afore mentioned Sotomayer comments is another example of the hypocrisy of the Left vis a vis racist comments.

Yes, Michael Steel (he spells his name funny :D) is making a bigger issue out of this than it really is.

Just as Democrats made a bigger issue out of Lott's statements than it really was. Just as Democrats made a bigger issue out of Rush's non-existent racial statements.

The racist (or non racist) comments are not the issue.

The issue is the hypocrisy..

Michale.....

There's no hypocrisy from the left since Reid's comment isn't racist.

Seems like Michael Steele is looking to make a much bigger issue out of this then it really is. Really.

-David

Reid's statement was boneheaded and moronic. Typical of Reid

But the statement is not my issue.

The reaction from Democrats is the issue as far as I am concerned. It is complete and utter hypocrisy. One of MANY examples of late coming from the Democratic Party.

THAT is the issue I am referring to.

Reid's statement is no more or no less racist than many of the statements that come from the Right. Statements that the Left howl and scream about and cry RACIST!!

We are in complete agreement regarding Reid's statement. As shown by the Sotomayer issue, we seem to differ as what constitutes a racist remark. If I recall correctly, you thought that her statement wasn't racist when, in fact, it was.

But, as I indicate, it's the hypocrisy of the reaction of Democrat leaders that is my issue.

Not the statement itself.

However, I do completely and unequivocally agree with your statement that an Un-PC remark is not necessarily a racist remark. But once again, I must point out that, apparently, the Left had not gotten that memo. Because, by and large, the Left screams RACIST at any remark coming out of the Right that is directed to or regarding a black person. See "Jimmy Carter" if you need more convincing..

Michale.....

Do you think his comment is racist? And, if so. Why?

I'm not talking about Left vs. Right and probably shouldn't have used Limbaugh as an example. He's too polarizing. I was just looking for examples that fit the definition and knew he'd said some racist things in the past.

Here is another example attributed to Harry J. Anslinger, 1st Commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics: "Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men."

I have no idea what affiliation Mr. Anslinger was. This is simply used as an example of a racist comment.

So back to Reid. I'm taking the definition of racism and applying it to Harry Reid's statement. He doesn't say anything that suggests superiority or inferiority. So it doesn't fit the definition of a racist remark.

Now applying the definition of "not too bright" to Reid's comments? There I see a match :).

-David

Sounds like how the term "African American" was born... :D

But hilarious to hear who is crying racism and hypocrisy. Where were these same folk when Rush Limbaugh was making really racist comments?

You invalidate your point with the word "really".. Who made Democrats to judges of what is and isn't racism?

Why is it that Democrats think everything out of their mouths is sacrosanct and everything out of the Right's mouth is racism?

The Left makes as many boneheaded, racist bigoted and hypocritical statements as the Right. The simple fact that the Left is silent when their own is the offending party shows that, as I have always said, the Left is no better than the Right.

What is sad, however, is that the mainstream media is not doing any of this analysis. They simply repeat the cries of racism. They don't talk about what it means to be racist or ask anyone who is an expert on the topic. They simply echo the comments.

And yet it is NOT sad when the media does this to the Right??

Why is that??

The difference between Rush's comments and Reid's is that in Rush's comments he treats African-Americans as inferior, as criminals, or as savages.

DO you have cites for those accusations? Or are you going with what liberals have done in the past and say, "I heard someone say that Rush said that"??

I don't see this in Reid's remark. They seem anachronistic. Out of touch, perhaps. Or dated. Hahahahah ...

Of course you don't. Because you don't WANT to see it. You WANT to believe a certain way and therefore that becomes your reality.

But THE reality is much different.

An un-PC comment is not the same thing as a racist comment.

Tell that to the Left..

I don't think they got that memo...

Michale.....

This seems to be the primary axiom of 21st-century conservatives. It really is brilliant from a propaganda standpoint.

But hilarious to hear who is crying racism and hypocrisy. Where were these same folk when Rush Limbaugh was making really racist comments?

Like "Take that bone out of your nose and call me back" to an African-American caller.

Like "Have you ever noticed how all composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?"

The difference between Rush's comments and Reid's is that in Rush's comments he treats African-Americans as inferior, as criminals, or as savages.

True racism implies superiority, that one race is better than another, that one race should rule over another.

I don't see this in Reid's remark. They seem anachronistic. Out of touch, perhaps. Or dated. Hahahahah ... Chris I just looked back at your article and found I'm using the same words you were. Dangit. Now I'll have to admit you wrote the article I wanted to!

Reid is not putting down African-Americans, he is commenting on what it takes to get elected in America. Rush, on the other hand as an example, puts down African-Americans.

Not to say that Reid's comments were the brightest, but not racist. It certainly doesn't merit the huge outcry from the right.

What is sad, however, is that the mainstream media is not doing any of this analysis. They simply repeat the cries of racism. They don't talk about what it means to be racist or ask anyone who is an expert on the topic. They simply echo the comments.

The flaw when assessing Reid's comments is in what it means to be racist. The conservative definition is saying something un-PC. This is not what it means to be racist. Dave Chappelle says un-PC things all the time and they are not interpreted as racist.

This is the trick conservatives play. Change the definition. Say it loudly and with certainty. Throw in some examples to cause confusion - compare the situation to a truly racist remark w/o really comparing it. And then hope that people follow whatever "jump to conclusion" you throw out there.

*sigh*

Maybe I've been reading too much about Bertrand Russell, but it still amazes me how this simple trick seems to work over and over again.

At the heart of this is a definition of racism that I never hear in the mainstream media. And you would think, when discussing such an issue, that they would talk some about what makes a comment racist and what doesn't.

An un-PC comment is not the same thing as a racist comment.
-David

p.s. And Chris, I find it sad if you're saying that resigning is the political reality for those who are demonized most by the nutjobs. (More likely, though, I am taking your argument too far.)

Hopefully, Mr Bowman has the wherewithall to actively seek out a REAL discussion/debate on the issues rather than the Stalinistic style of "debate" that is favored on HuffPo...

Towhit..

Gerald Bowman
With regard to the bizarre and, in my opinion bigoted, opinions of white individuals about the term African-American, give it a rest. Hyphen-Americans are everywhere: Italian-American, Irish-American, you name it it has a hyphenated designation, including white-American.

Ahhhh but, as our illustrious host alluded to, those designations denote a GEOGRAPHICAL (or, more accurately, a nationalistic) point of reference, rather than a racial point of reference.

As I point out above and, as CW pointed out in the HuffPo response, a white American who has ancestors that originated in South Africa is as much an "African-American" as a black American is. At least by the definition demanded by some black Americans. Charlize Theron is more of an "African-American" than the vast majority of black Americans in this country. So is Therese Heinz-Kerry. Although I much prefer Ms Theron to gaze at. :D

Is this not true, my preference for star gazing notwithstanding?

But the common trait for all native blacks in the US is the fact that we are descended from Africans.

What a load of felgercarb!

Using that reasoning, everyone in the US, every US citizen, is an "African American" as we ALL can point to a common ancestry in Africa if we go back far enough.

Using that reasoning, how many Americans should demand to be called Mesopotamian-Americans??

Why not go back further??

I picture Picard and Q standing on an out-cropping of rock, witnessing the birth of humankind in a pond ripe with amino acids..

So, does that mean I can demand to be referred to as a PondScum-American?? And force an entire country to accede to my demand??

Do you see the problem when an ethnic or racial group demands to impose a term that is factually inaccurate and illogical in it's use?

Let me ask you one simple question.

Why do you, as a black person, feel you must combine your race with your nationality?

What is wrong with simply being known as an American?

Michale.....

Good point.. Another way to look at it is, according to the PC-nuts, Charlize Theron (in addition to being one hot babe) is also an "African American".. So is, if I recall correctly, Therese Heinz-Kerry.

I know I am preaching to the choir here with regards to all the PC crap that goes on in the world of politics.

That's probably the ONE issue that we ALL can agree on... :D

Michale.....

Just as Democrats made much ado about very little when it comes to Trent Lott..

Because "Negro" is simply not that derogatory a term, unless uttered with clearly derogatory intent or context.

And yet, black people went thru the roof when it was discovered that the US CENSUS had put "NEGRO" as one of it's race selections.

Which simply shows that all the PC nonsense is utter crap.

The Left has gotten everyone so riled up, deathly scared that any utterance might offend someBODY, someWHERE, that we can no longer have rational discussions about ANY subject.

All thanx to the US's Left Wing..

Thanks a bunch... :^/

Michale.....

I disagree.. The key component of a "slur" is stereo-typing.

Why is it a "slur" to say that a golfer's banquet is going to have to serve watermelon and fried chicken because of Tiger Woods, but it is NOT a slur to state that there is a black "dialect"??

Because each implies a stereotype that may or may not be accurate...

I got branded a racist on HuffPo when I used the phrase, "calling a spade a spade" in the context of a terrorism discussing.

Hay, ya'all CREATED this Politically Correct mess.. Of course, by "ya'all" I mean the Left..

But you are correct.. The GOP attacks on Reid over this are just so much political BS..

Just as the Dem attacks on Trent Lott when he made his gaffe were so much political BS..

It's becoming clearer and clearer that Politics is all BS, all the time..

An Honest Politician. An oxymoron if ever there was one..

Michale....

Now, is it safe to read Dylan Lowew's 'excellent article' ... 'cause I'm not going anywhere near there until I know it's safe. :)