Home Mobile Archives Reader Blogs Register Login

Friday, March 28, 2008

Condoleeza Rice Addresses The Issue Of Race In America In Straightforward Way

In an interview with the Washington Times she makes a straightforward and honest assesment of the race issue - without the type of vitriolic condemnation that often accompanies the subject:

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said yesterday that the United States still has trouble dealing with race because of a national “birth defect” that denied black Americans the opportunities given to whites at the country’s very founding.

“Black Americans were a founding population,” she said. “Africans and Europeans came here and founded this country together — Europeans by choice and Africans in chains. That’s not a very pretty reality of our founding.”

As a result, Miss Rice told editors and reporters at The Washington Times, “descendants of slaves did not get much of a head start, and I think you continue to see some of the effects of that.”

“That particular birth defect makes it hard for us to confront it, hard for us to talk about it, and hard for us to realize that it has continuing relevance for who we are today,” she said.

She goes on to say that there has also been enormous progress concerning race. progress that has allowed her to become a very prominent person on the world scene.

Read the whole thing. Rice talks about the Olympics and the possibility of a boycott because of China’s repression of Tibet. Her take? What would be the point? Our boycott of the 1980 Olympics didn’t change a thing as far as Russian policy went toward Afghanistan and only hurt athletes that had trained their entire lives for the event. More refreshing common sense.

It’s an interesting piece. Could this be the first shot fired at the VP spot?

Comments

Avatar for Jeugenen

RICE FOR OBAMA!

Jeugenen on March 28, 2008 at 05:20 am

I respect her view which is somewhat personal.  Some Irish peoples might have a different perspective as well as the penal colonies of Georgia and some other states.  Certainly others were brought here in chains, but it is true that slavery was prevalent in the world back then.  Not now.  Things sometimes change.  Now we have perpetual gangs and internal slavery.


Communism is evil

Chief RZ on March 28, 2008 at 05:43 am

Chief RZ: You may be blurring the line between two different issues: The legitimate concerns expressed by thoughtful African-Americans like Condaleeza Rice about the shameful history of black slavery in America, and the criminal, thug element now to be found in every corner of this nation.

Slavery may have been prevelant in the 18th Century, but it was the subject of agonizing and bitter conflict between the patriot Framers in Philadelphia. Most of them knew it was evil, some defended it on economic grounds, leading to the shameful 3/5th clause.

Not our finest moment.


"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

“As a conservative, I will not be overly enthusiastic about voting for John McCain on November 4 - but I will be sprinting to the polling place to do so!”
Matthew May, conservative commentator, The American Spectator

pparets on March 28, 2008 at 08:41 am

Chief: 

but it is true that slavery was prevalent in the world back then.  Not now.  Things sometimes change.  Now we have perpetual gangs and internal slavery.

I wish others could better understand what you were saying, I agree with you!

It is always difficult to relate modern social values-mores to those of previous generations. Who feels good today about slavery, how Native-Americans were treated, how Japanese-Americans among many others were treated, but the attitudes of the times dictated public policy then as it does today? On the other hand, we seem to have wholly accepted the more paternal soft slavery to the welfare state and public dole of minorities as acts of national compassion. Maybe a hundred years from now we will be condemning this newer form of slavery, or as I suspect with the Nanny-America Democrat Party most Americans by then will be enslaved to the state.


No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Neiman on March 28, 2008 at 09:12 am

Both of you have good points.  First, I was not glossing over past bad things, but we need to keep in perspective and contrast to the Roman slaves, the Communist slaves, the African slaves that still exist now and the virtual slavery that exists in the community so to speak.  The 3/5ths compromise was about representation.  It did acknowledge that slaves were both property and people which for that time was pretty visionary.  The other point is:  How long are these people going to play the victim game.  There are many who could drag up slavery from the USSR who came here, who swam in 1957, who came here with just the clothes on their backs.  They learned English, they followed laws, they worked and still do today.  They marry, have children and teach them to follow the laws of this free country.  Many do not.


Communism is evil

Chief RZ on March 28, 2008 at 09:26 am

Most of them knew it was evil, some defended it on economic grounds, leading to the shameful 3/5th clause.

Basic misunderstanding there.  The “Free” North didn’t want to count the slaves at all, because it would give the South greater representation in govt.  The “Slave” South(a wrongful generalization, btw, since only a majority of Southerners owned and used slaves) wanted the slaves counted as full citizens for the purpose of representation.  In other words, the 3/5 rule wasn’t “shameful” at all, but a compromise between the slaveowners and the rest of the country; it didn’t speak to the personhood of the slaves, but was done strictly for political purposes.


Media uncovers more Palin stories in one weekend than Obama stories in two years. Still no bias detected

Obama: more experienced than Bristol Palin

robert108 on March 28, 2008 at 09:29 am
Avatar for Dustin

SLAVERY? GET OVER IT!! The same morons who moan all the time about the poor black race and slavery are the ones who blame all their problems on it. ITS OVER. Im suprised she didnt go a step lower and ask for repirations. Blacks get the same if not more opportunities in this country than whites due the joke called affirmative action. The only real racism in this country against blacks is against the thug wanna be gangsters who keep their own race down with black on black violence. Any respectable african american in this country can get just as far as any respectable white. At what point will they shut up, bringing up the issue constantly and beating the dead horse of their past doesnt help other races treat them like equals. Does Condi not think she has been given the american dream?? Obama is probably going to be the next president does that not tell you how far past this issue we are?

Dustin on March 28, 2008 at 09:31 am

Dustin.  I have commented here before.  This is also about class.  Miss Rice has maintained classy behavior.  Yes, their gangsters are now their masters and the community in many cases is being terrorized.  They need to break free and fight these people just like the patriots did at Lexington and Concord.


Communism is evil

Chief RZ on March 28, 2008 at 09:55 am

Robert108:  Thomas Jefferson, in his own words, called the 3/5th clause “shameful”.  In effect, the clause ‘legitimzed’ slavery on constitutional grounds which is exactly what the south hoped for.

That it was inserted for political purposes - and what part of the document wasn’t? - is irrelevant. It must still be difficult for thoughtful black Americans to explain to their children why this nation, at one time, equated them as worth 3/5th of a white man.


"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

“As a conservative, I will not be overly enthusiastic about voting for John McCain on November 4 - but I will be sprinting to the polling place to do so!”
Matthew May, conservative commentator, The American Spectator

pparets on March 28, 2008 at 10:02 am

In effect, the clause ‘legitimzed’ slavery on
constitutional grounds which is exactly what the south hoped for.

I repeat, the South wanted 5/5, the North wanted zero, so the 3/5 was a political compromise for representation purposes, and was not a statement of “worth” in any way.  You repeat the current race-card politics of the lefties.
Being from the South, TJ’s “shameful” comment was probably about not counting the slaves as full persons for representation purposes.  He owned slaves, you know.


Media uncovers more Palin stories in one weekend than Obama stories in two years. Still no bias detected

Obama: more experienced than Bristol Palin

robert108 on March 28, 2008 at 10:15 am

No, Robert108: He was refering to slavery itself, which explains why he released his. You blithely overlook the southern concern for their ‘peculiar institution’; an agrarian, plantation economy dependent on slave-labor.

Yes, they would have loved to count slaves as citizens for the first enumeration, but their chief concern was economic.

You tend to want to win all debates. This won’t be one of them.


"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

“As a conservative, I will not be overly enthusiastic about voting for John McCain on November 4 - but I will be sprinting to the polling place to do so!”
Matthew May, conservative commentator, The American Spectator

pparets on March 28, 2008 at 10:21 am

You blithely overlook the southern concern for their ‘peculiar institution’; an agrarian, plantation economy dependent on slave-labor.

Wrong again.  Once again, the 3/5 rule was about political representation.  It has nothing whatsoever to do with economics or the shame of slavery, which are realities that aren’t germane to this issue.  Once again, you repeat the race-card lies about “worth”, which are simply untrue.
I don’t know why you think the 3/5 rule had any economic significance, but it didn’t.  Once again, representation in the political process.  The North wanted zero, the South wanted 100%, purely for political purposes in both cases.  You can look it up.


Media uncovers more Palin stories in one weekend than Obama stories in two years. Still no bias detected

Obama: more experienced than Bristol Palin

robert108 on March 28, 2008 at 10:28 am

pp: BTW, this isn’t a debate; it’s a matter of history.
You may choose to make an inaccurate interpretation, but that doesn’t change the truth.


Media uncovers more Palin stories in one weekend than Obama stories in two years. Still no bias detected

Obama: more experienced than Bristol Palin

robert108 on March 28, 2008 at 10:30 am

Does Condi not think she has been given the american dream??

She clearly does and says so in the article.

There’s a difference between recognizing the past and its impact on us and bemoaning it and blaming every bad thing that happens on it.

She was doing the first, not the latter of the two. And showed some class while she was at it.


Election ‘08 - We Are So Screwed

Pilgrim on March 28, 2008 at 10:41 am

Robert108:  This is a debate about the history of slavery in our nation and the truth has not changed.  Thomas Jefferson and other patriots abhorred the idea of legitimizing slavery in the constitution. You know that as well as I do.  Voluminous sources are out there for your enlightenment.


"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

“As a conservative, I will not be overly enthusiastic about voting for John McCain on November 4 - but I will be sprinting to the polling place to do so!”
Matthew May, conservative commentator, The American Spectator

pparets on March 28, 2008 at 10:44 am

Thomas Jefferson and other patriots
abhorred the idea of legitimizing slavery in the constitution.

The 3/5 rule didn’t do that.  Once again, you parrot the race-card playing propaganda.  It was for the purpose of determining the State population, which determined the number of representatives in the House, and for the Electoral College.  It didn’t make slavery any more legitimate than it was before.


Media uncovers more Palin stories in one weekend than Obama stories in two years. Still no bias detected

Obama: more experienced than Bristol Palin

robert108 on March 28, 2008 at 10:50 am

Once again you parrot the race-playing card propaganda.

Tell me, robert108, are you incapable of conducting a discussion without inserting personal affronts?


"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

“As a conservative, I will not be overly enthusiastic about voting for John McCain on November 4 - but I will be sprinting to the polling place to do so!”
Matthew May, conservative commentator, The American Spectator

pparets on March 28, 2008 at 10:56 am
Avatar for Hannitized

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said yesterday that the United States still has trouble dealing with race because of a national “birth defect” that denied black Americans the opportunities given to whites at the country’s very founding.

At this point im wondering why all the Republihypocrites aren’t whining about Condeleezas hateful speech about America?

A birth defect?  How can you say she loves this country if she thinks our founding fathers were handicapped in their thinking?

This Blame America First rhetoric is something you expect from thoughtful, educated people such as Liberals, not Republicans.

As a result, Miss Rice told editors and reporters at The Washington Times, “descendants of slaves did not get much of a head start, and I think you continue to see some of the effects of that.”

Ah yes, it’s still “Whiteys” fault.  Right Rob and Pilsbury?  Because so many poor white men owned slaves.  Right Pilgrim?

Why aren’t you crying about here statements that take away the personal responsibility of blacks today?

Oh wait, some of you are being true to your principles (see Dustin)

Others, well, let’s just say that they are being less than honest.

“That particular birth defect makes it hard for us to confront it, hard for us to talk about it, and hard for us to realize that it has continuing relevance for who we are today,” she said.

Continuing relevance?  Relevance?  You don’t say?  So then, you mean it’s OK to talk about how slavery impacts blacks today?  Yes.....wow.

That sure is a departure from the typical Republican meme’s.

Good thing she is following Obama’s lead.  Otherwise I doubt she would have addressed this at all.

Now we know what Condoleeza REALLY thinks about race in America.  It’s almost like she didnt think of it at all.  Or, at least until Obama and his church brought it to the forefront of discussion.

Thank you Wright.

Hannitized on March 28, 2008 at 11:02 am

Tell me, robert108, are you incapable of conducting a discussion without inserting personal affronts?

You mean like the erroneous generalization you just made?  Actually, I thought you just didn’t know any better, being a product of public schools, etc.
And, you are repeating the race-card playing propaganda.  The 3/5 rule neither “legitimized slavery” nor was it a statement about personal worth.  Those two canards are part and parcel of race-card playing propaganda.  If you have a personal investment in either of those two propaganda statements, I understand why you take my refuting them as an affront, but that is a consequence of your choice.


Media uncovers more Palin stories in one weekend than Obama stories in two years. Still no bias detected

Obama: more experienced than Bristol Palin

robert108 on March 28, 2008 at 11:03 am
Avatar for Hannitized

If Democrats are smart, they are going to T off on this blatant flip-flopping from Republicans and acknowledge that if it wasn’t for Obama and his church, this discussion would continue to be ignored by the so called black leaders in this country.

I said, black leaders in this country, who coincidentally fail to address the problems blacks continue to face today.

Condamneesia?  I think I see why he used that word now.  Up until this moment, she would not have said a word.

Watching the conservatives squirm over this is going to be interesting.

It may have taken a few silly statements from a Pastor such as Wright to get this discussion going, but at least the discussion is being had.

Now, when blacks claim they are facing troubles due to slaver from the past.  We can point the finger straight at Condi.  Right Pligrim?

Hannitized on March 28, 2008 at 11:08 am

Robert 108: It’s been my experience that when people run out of valid arguments, they resort to effrontery.

once again you parrot…

thought you didn’t know any better

being a product of public schools, etc

Speaks volumes about your lack of serious evidence and your misunderstanding of basic constitutional history, doesn’t it?


"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

“As a conservative, I will not be overly enthusiastic about voting for John McCain on November 4 - but I will be sprinting to the polling place to do so!”
Matthew May, conservative commentator, The American Spectator

pparets on March 28, 2008 at 11:10 am

Hannitized:

Your intellectual dishonesty knows no bounds. If a liberal were to have said the same thing you’d be falling all over yourself to justify it.

She wasn’t trying to make excuses. She was discussing the issue. There’s a difference.

Read the article and then answer your own question:

Now, when blacks claim they are facing troubles due to slaver from the past.  We can point the finger straight at Condi.  Right Pligrim?

Wrong, hannitized.


Election ‘08 - We Are So Screwed

Pilgrim on March 28, 2008 at 11:13 am

pp: You’re just wrong, that’s all, and now you’re trying to invalidate my truth with “style” complaints.  Won’t work.  Even though Wiki isn’t the best source in general, they got it right on the 3/5 rule:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-fifths_compromise

It is you who have faulty understanding here.


Media uncovers more Palin stories in one weekend than Obama stories in two years. Still no bias detected

Obama: more experienced than Bristol Palin

robert108 on March 28, 2008 at 11:15 am

pp: I think you got the personal stuff going when you began a sentence with “You blithely ignore...” when you went off-topic.  What goes around comes around.


Media uncovers more Palin stories in one weekend than Obama stories in two years. Still no bias detected

Obama: more experienced than Bristol Palin

robert108 on March 28, 2008 at 11:18 am

Hannitized:  Conservatives aren’t going to squirm over this at all.  We are proud of African-Americans like Rice, Powell, Thomas, and yes, Obama.

Ms. Rice is a brilliant, highly-educated woman who can reflect on the tragedy of slavery in the history of our country without race-baiting.

No “God damn America”, “KKK-USA”, “Chickens come home to roost” from her.


"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

“As a conservative, I will not be overly enthusiastic about voting for John McCain on November 4 - but I will be sprinting to the polling place to do so!”
Matthew May, conservative commentator, The American Spectator

pparets on March 28, 2008 at 11:19 am
Avatar for Hannitized

Your intellectual dishonesty knows no bounds. If a liberal were to have said the same thing you’d be falling all over yourself to justify it.

Pilgrim,

Do you live in some alternate universe where sarcasm is now literal, white is black and black is white?

Because I am quite certain that at no point do “I” criticize her, but instead, I am criticizing you for being intellectually dishonest/hypocritical.

What you just proved, was that she is making Liberal statements, in response to Obama having already addressed them, in a straight forward way.

The only problem for Condamneesia is that she is a day late and dollar short.

Wrong, hannitized.

Oh it’s THAT simple, eh Pilgrim? 

Why don’t you explain to me then, how a black person cant say they are still struggling in todays world because were still suffering consequences from slavery in the past, and not point to Condileeza to justify his statements?

You cant, you wont and thank you for ignoring this comment.

Hannitized on March 28, 2008 at 11:23 am

Hannitized: I don’t believe, as best I can recall, that either Rob or anyone else suggested that slavery did not occur in our past or that it has no role whatsoever in the lives of their descendents today. The point is that wallowing in the stye of our racist past, blaming all the ills of poor people of color on racism today is only crippling people of color in their appropriating the fullness of the American dream.

Further, Obama did not suffer racism, he did fully participate in the American dream and gained ample rewards in the promise that is America by hard work and not accepting the color of his skin as a barrier in his life. So, when he raises the question of race, he would appear to be doing so solely out of a lust for power and position as stirring up feelings of racism is a sure vote getter among people of color.

We can all talk about color, we can all appreciate Rice speaking out about the last vestiges of our racist past still impacting some lives, especially among older people of color; but there is absolutely no racial barrier today for anyone seeking to prosper in this land, except as they are told by disingenuous leaders among people of color that they are not poor because of laziness, lack of drive or addiction to the welfare state, but because whitey wants to keep them down due to the color of their skin. These people, like you, are only too happy to stir up the now nearly cold embers of our long ago racist past for selfish reasons, it is the politics of hate, getting people of color to hate whitey and vote for a person of color no matter how it might hurt the country, take money away from bad old successful whitey and at last people of color will be happy, especially if they can drag hard working people down in the gutter.

Democrats, including Obama see many reasons for keeping people of color poor and dissatisfied with their lives. They choose just to throw money at them, making them dependent upon their daily bread to Democrats. Conservatives prefer to give everyone the tools necessary to succeed on their own, to supply their own food and not depend upon anyone or anything but their own hard work and sense of personal responsibility. Democrats through preferences tell people of color you cannot succeed without your Democrat Massah’s caring for you, we conservatives believe everyone, no matter their color are able to seize the full rewards of the American dream if government just gets the hell out of the way and encourages them to succeed.


No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Neiman on March 28, 2008 at 11:30 am

robert108:  So, armed with Wiki as your weighty evidence, you’re going to argue that 600,000 Americans perished in the Civil War over voter apportionments? I don’t think so.

BTW:  “Blithely ignore” is a comment on your procedure, not your person, while “being a product of public schools” is a comment on my person. An odd one at that, since Ronald reagan was a public school product, while John Kerry, Teddy kennedy and Ruth Bader Ginsberg were not.


"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

“As a conservative, I will not be overly enthusiastic about voting for John McCain on November 4 - but I will be sprinting to the polling place to do so!”
Matthew May, conservative commentator, The American Spectator

pparets on March 28, 2008 at 11:30 am

So, armed with Wiki as your weighty evidence, you’re going to argue that 600,000 Americans perished in the Civil War over voter apportionments? I don’t think so.

Robert108, respectfully, I want to hear the answer to that proposition as well! I cannot believe apportionment had much to do with it either.


No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Neiman on March 28, 2008 at 11:32 am

robert108:  So, armed with Wiki as your weighty evidence, you’re going to argue that 600,000 Americans perished in the Civil War over voter apportionments?

I said nothing of the kind.  You just made that up, so maybe you can explain that idiotic statement you made.  If you think the Civil War was fought over the 3/5 rule, you are all alone on that.  In fact, it was fought over the Tenth Amendment, but most race-card players claim it was fought over slavery.  Oh well.
BTW, I didn’t “blithely ignore” anything, so your feeble attempt at personal attack fell flat there.

I only used Wiki because it was easy to find; I have known the truth about the 3/5 rule since I was in grade school.  RR went to public school before PC propaganda indoctrination started there.  Duh.


Media uncovers more Palin stories in one weekend than Obama stories in two years. Still no bias detected

Obama: more experienced than Bristol Palin

robert108 on March 28, 2008 at 11:50 am

Robert108 and Pparets: This is a very good debate about the cause of the Civil War, but having been there several times and perhaps on occasion being at fault in anger getting involved in a debate, I don’t think either one of you are trying to insult the other person. So, please leave those feelings aside and stick with the cause of the Civil War, it is educational and constructive. You both have a lot to add to the discussion!


No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Neiman on March 28, 2008 at 11:59 am

RR went to public school before PC propaganda indoctrination started there.

So did I.  Duh.


"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

“As a conservative, I will not be overly enthusiastic about voting for John McCain on November 4 - but I will be sprinting to the polling place to do so!”
Matthew May, conservative commentator, The American Spectator

pparets on March 28, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Avatar for Dustin

Quit the childish-ass bickering about off topic issues and remember we’re talking about a modern official condemning the forefathers of this country and blaming problems of blacks on an issue that was settled over a century ago.

Dustin on March 28, 2008 at 12:04 pm

So did I. Duh.

If you knew that, why did you mention him as a defense, then?  You were being dishonest.


Media uncovers more Palin stories in one weekend than Obama stories in two years. Still no bias detected

Obama: more experienced than Bristol Palin

robert108 on March 28, 2008 at 12:10 pm
Avatar for Hannitized

Further, Obama did not suffer racism, he did fully participate in the American dream and gained ample rewards in the promise that is America by hard work and not accepting the color of his skin as a barrier in his life. So, when he raises the question of race, he would appear to be doing so solely out of a lust for power

Give me a break.

So you can say for certain, that he doesn’t do it out of a desire to help the black community to which he is certain he is a part of?

Of course you can’t because you don’t know him or any of his family.  I do.

It is of no surprise to me that you would debase his honest concern for blacks in America.  You do this because you can not accept that he has not turned his back on the black community as has Rice.

Rice is the one speaking out, NOW, much later than Obama and she has not been the one putting herself in the black community to understand it.  Obama has.

Now that she is possibly seeking a VP spot, she comes out and says something about race.....NOW?  Some 8 years later as a black leader in this country.

And you have the gaul to tell me that Barack is only talking about race because he craves power?  Give me a break.

Nobody is buying that transparent excuse.

We can all talk about color, we can all appreciate Rice speaking out about the last vestiges of our racist past still impacting some lives, especially among older people of color; but there is absolutely no racial barrier today for anyone seeking to prosper in this land, except as they are told by disingenuous leaders among people of color that they are not poor because of laziness, lack of drive or addiction to the welfare state, but because whitey wants to keep them down due to the color of their skin.

So, our racist past still impacting some lives, GOT IT.

So here is the question for you then Neiman.  Don’t you think this is in direct contrast to the Conservative position, yes or no?

These people, like you, are only too happy to stir up the now nearly cold embers of our long ago racist past for selfish reasons, it is the politics of hate, getting people of color to hate whitey and vote for a person of color no matter how it might hurt the country,

Like me?  You just described Condi, not me you spin-miester.  I am not going to be insulted by your false accusations, because I take too much pleasure pointing out your illogical conclusions and hypocrisies.

Democrats, including Obama see many reasons for keeping people of color poor and dissatisfied with their lives.

Hahaha.  Yeah, that has been his plank for years.  That’s why he has so much of the support of the country behind him.

Keep lying to yourself Nieman.  It’s clear you don’t have a concept of what Obamas church stands for.  It is FAR, FAR, FAR more conservative than you think.

Conservatives prefer to give everyone the tools necessary to succeed on their own, to supply their own food and not depend upon anyone or anything but their own hard work and sense of personal responsibility. Democrats through preferences tell people of color you cannot succeed without your Democrat Massah’s caring for you, we conservatives believe everyone, no matter their color are able to seize the full rewards of the American dream if government just gets the hell out of the way and encourages them to succeed.

Again, its clear you have no idea what Trinity stands for, you only know what you limit yourself to knowing.

You can pat yourself on the back and beat others over the head if it makes you feel warm and fuzzy, but your hyperbole and mischaracterizations suit only the demented pictures of enemies in your head, not the real opponents in next to you in reality.

Hannitized on March 28, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Avatar for Hannitized

Quit the childish-ass bickering about off topic issues and remember we’re talking about a modern official condemning the forefathers of this country and blaming problems of blacks on an issue that was settled over a century ago

.

Exactly, exactly.  The one true conservative speaks.

A good conservative would argue that “at the time” it was culturally acceptable to have slaves.

Our founding fathers had no understanding that what they were doing was wrong.  It wasn’t until later, that they figured it out.

Condamneesia is belittling the founding fathers, and you guys are praising her.  She is also changing history by saying that blacks helped in the founding of this country.

How many of you believe that to be true?

Hannitized on March 28, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Avatar for Freedum is

“It’s very interesting when you think about it, the slaves who left here to go to America, because of their steadfast and their religion and their belief in freedom, helped change America.”

bush
Dakar, Senegal
9/8/03

Freedum is on March 28, 2008 at 12:28 pm

“Another example would be the Dred Scott case, which is where judges, years ago, said that the Constitution allowed slavery because of personal property rights. That’s a personal opinion. That’s not what the constitution says. The constitution of the United States says we’re all — you know, it doesn’t say that. It doesn’t speak to the equality of America.”

George W. Bush
Oct. 8, 2004


“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

realitybasedbob on March 28, 2008 at 12:39 pm

Hannitized that needs desperately to be sterlized:

I don’t now why I or anyone else here tries to discuss anything substantive with you. You are like a little child yelling to the top of your lung power, “I did not! They did it!” No rational replies, just nonsensical non-sequitors, as your conclusions never follow in any rational logical way the comments made by others on which your answers are based.

What did I lie about? I want the exact lie and the objective, documented facts that I lied or shut your pie hole!

So you can say for certain, that he doesn’t do it out of a desire to help the black community to which he is certain he is a part of?  Of course you can’t because you don’t know him or any of his family.  I do.

Of course I cannot say I am absolutely certain, neither can you in the opposite direction. But, why don’t you show us, with actual documented facts this time, how he gave money to and personally worked to help the black community before he ran for public office. Support out of political convenience doesn’t count!

It’s clear you don’t have a concept of what Obama’s church stands for.  It is FAR, FAR, FAR more conservative than you think.

Well we know its pastor, their spiritual leader, taught hatred for America, for Jews and for white people. Those things are part of the public record. But, I’ll give you a break, please give us documented teachings or sermons wherein he used words supportive of America, spoke well of white people and Jews and was otherwise teaching things differently that the words we have on the record.

Since you know Osamabama so well, please tell us how close your personal relationship is with him, how often you were with him in Pastor Wright’s services and how often you were privy to Wrights private counsel etcetera, so we might believe you really know him. Okay?

You are not Obama, you have have failed miserably to dazzle us with any brilliance, so now your only resort is to try and befuddle us without your constant, inane bullshit! You are failing!


No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Neiman on March 28, 2008 at 12:54 pm

Neiman,

Since you know Obama so well, please tell us how close your personal relationship is with him, how often you were with him in Pastor Wright’s services and how often you were privy to Wrights private counsel etcetera, so we might believe you really know him. Okay?

Your are full of sheet as usual.


“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

realitybasedbob on March 28, 2008 at 12:59 pm

RBB: You are wholly irrelevant in any discussion at SA! You are wholly irrelevant to the world in which you live!


No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Neiman on March 28, 2008 at 01:16 pm

But I still love you Neiman, do you love me?


“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

realitybasedbob on March 28, 2008 at 01:19 pm

robert108: 

dishonest

There you go again.....


"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

“As a conservative, I will not be overly enthusiastic about voting for John McCain on November 4 - but I will be sprinting to the polling place to do so!”
Matthew May, conservative commentator, The American Spectator

pparets on March 28, 2008 at 01:24 pm

Wait a minute.

Neiman, cutting/pasting a question - you yourself posed - back to you is wholly irrelevant?

Not answering your own question and calling me irrelevant is the cowards’ way out of not answering a fair question.

Good luck to you Neiman.
I pity you and will pray for your salvation.


“If a conservative is still a republican after the last 13 years, he is blind to the fact that his party of choice has failed him utterly.” – Realitybasedbob

realitybasedbob on March 28, 2008 at 01:26 pm

Neiman.  Well summarized.  Yes, it was economic, over the 10th and egos were involved as well.  I went back and read the entire Washington Times article.
This seems to have been overlooked:

Miss Rice also said that what “attracted” her to candidate George W. Bush during the 2000 presidential campaign was not foreign policy, but his “no child left behind” initiative, which she said gave equal opportunities to black and white students.

The equal access to education, which is being thrown away (my emphasis and construct) by shall we say, “those descendants of slavery.” There is no excuse for anyone now to say that they do not have an equal opportunity, nor need any more extra help.


Communism is evil

Chief RZ on March 28, 2008 at 01:34 pm
Avatar for Hannitized

You are like a little child yelling to the top of your lung power, “I did not! They did it!” No rational replies, just nonsensical non-sequitors, as your conclusions never follow in any rational logical way the comments made by others on which your answers are based.

Ad hominem will get you everywhere!  Because you know, they are so substantive and mature.  I ignored your first character assassination attempt on me, and now your pattern is repeated again.  You aren’t here to debate with people Nieman, you are here to espouse your views as a response, not as any counter point.  It’s lame.

Care to point out where I did not answer your question and only offered insults?  No, you cant because I didn’t.

What did I lie about? I want the exact lie and the objective, documented facts that I lied or shut your pie hole!

Well, first you lied when you claimed I was the type of person who plays the race card:

“they are told by disingenuous leaders among people of color that they are not poor because of laziness, lack of drive or addiction to the welfare state, but because whitey wants to keep them down due to the color of their skin. These people, like you, are only too happy to stir up the now nearly cold embers of our long ago racist past for selfish reasons, it is the politics of hate, getting people of color to hate whitey and vote for a person of color no matter how it might hurt the country, ”

That, I would say, is a pretty good lie.  Not only is it a lie, it is a tired right wing meme that doesn’t correctly represent the commitment to the black community the Democrats demonstrate.  Nothing I can say can persuade you to part from your self deluded point of view on the matter.

But, going back to your original, stupid question, I assume that you are referring to the comment where I said “you are lying to yourself”.  That of course is an expression.  It’s an expression that characterizes how you dishonestly look at your political opponents.  It’s an expression that represents how you dishonestly mischaracterize Trinity.  Is that a rational reply?  I think so.

Of course I cannot say I am absolutely certain, neither can you in the opposite direction. But, why don’t you show us, with actual documented facts this time, how he gave money to and personally worked to help the black community before he ran for public office. Support out of political convenience doesn’t count!

Neiman.  You have to be joking.

So the only way Obama can demonstrate to you he is committed to helping the black community is to personally rescue it by donating financial aid???  And here is where the illogical and deceitful accusations you throw at Obama are exposed.

First you whine that Democrats give hand outs to to blacks, thus perpetuating keeping them dependent.  Then, when Obama, who is for personal responsibility, doesn’t give hand outs you complain he is not really for the black community.

Do you see what you are doing?  You are essentially pigeon holing him to your warped view of democrats, then chastise him for not fitting your false suit.  THAT is why I said what I said.

My points are only to poignant for you to understand.  Probably because I don’t spell them out for your subtle mind.

Hannitized on March 28, 2008 at 01:34 pm

Hannitized:

You cant, you wont and thank you for ignoring this comment.

You’re welcome, but don’t make too much of it. Ignoring you is a pleasure, not a chore.


Election ‘08 - We Are So Screwed

Pilgrim on March 28, 2008 at 01:45 pm
Avatar for Hannitized

The equal access to education, which is being thrown away (my emphasis and construct) by shall we say, “those descendants of slavery.” There is no excuse for anyone now to say that they do not have an equal opportunity, nor need any more extra help.

Chief,

You essentially just proclaimed that slaver is now no longer an issue....as of 2001.

That doesn’t quite remove any concerns black people have to day who went to school in the 50s, 60, 70s, 80, 90s.  If you know whatumsayin?

Hannitized on March 28, 2008 at 01:48 pm

What did I lie about? I want the exact lie and the objective, documented facts that I lied or shut your pie hole!

Well, first you lied when you claimed I was the type of person who plays the race card:

This is why debate you you is an exercise in futility, like debating a ADD child: (a) You did not offer any quotation by me on the subject. You did not document any lie, you just claimed I charged you with something and I lied. (b) To suggest that you would play the race card is to interpret your remarks and offer a personal opinion on your motives and character. You may disagree with what I say and believe, but it is hardly by any description of or reasonable definition of a lie. (c) I notice you failed to talk about your close, personal relationship with Osamabama, why? (d) In this and your other responses you argue against yourself, almost never against the person making the comments. You simply put an argument in our mouths, pretend to overcome it with false logic and think yourself wise and victorious.

I did not make Obama have a 20-year intimate relationship with an American hating, Jew and white hating, Muslim terrorist loving so-called Christian minister. I didn’t force him to rely upon this racist, or have him marry Barak and Michelle or baptize his children. No, Osamabama made those choices and now he must win or lose based on his personal choices and because you havew to know he is at the least somewhat guilty of a bad decision in staying with Wright, it seems to be eating you up inside. If you want to blame someone for this problem, it is isn’t me, Rob, or even Wright, it is Osamabama’s responsibility, he made the choice to admire and seek counsel from what appears to be a dispicable character, even Osamabama now admits that to be true.

The problem now is this: Since Obama says that he disagrees with Wright and rejects those beliefs, he and he alone must convince the country that for 20 years either he was either a disinterested fool (didn’t pay any attention), an ignorant ass (didn’t understand what Wright was saying) or a calculating politician that rejects now what he embraced then; and he must to some degree embrace at least some of those beliefs even today as it is doubtful that he is able to turn his back completely on 20 years of indoctrination into racial, anti-American and pro-Muslim terrorist dogma. I don’t think he can! He will fail completely when even his most ardent worshippers, like you, cannot come to terms with Wright’s extremist beliefs and Obama’s acceptance of many of them, at least for many years.

It would all sound more credible if you had agreed tghat Wright has expressed some very unseemly, extremists views in his ministry which should be rejected, Obama was at least tardy in not leaving that ministry and exposing himself, his wife and children to those teachings no matter how infrequent, and that Oabam must convince people that as POTUS none of his policies or actions would reflect any of Wright’s extremist views, not one iota. Until then, you have the appearance of an unthinking zealot and Obama does not seem to have understood his errors in this affair. In my opinion!


No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Neiman on March 28, 2008 at 02:01 pm

Hannitized.  No.  Those were her words why she joined the 2000 campaign.  NCLB is a federal initiative.  We integrated in 1970.  No one entering school after that date has an excuse.


Communism is evil

Chief RZ on March 28, 2008 at 02:05 pm

Discussing the issue - which is an historical fact and one that can’t and shouldn’t be ignored - and accusing or blaming are two entirely different things.

The article also presented her point of view this way:

On the one hand, she said, race in the U.S. “continues to have effects” on public discussions and “the deepest thoughts that people hold.” On the other, “enormous progress” has been made, which allowed her to become the nation’s chief diplomat.

How in the name of literacy can you criticize that?

The race pimps, the Wrights and the Jacksons and the Sharptons and the Farakhans, can’t hold a candle to this woman. She wasn’t whining or using the issue to her benefit.

pparets nailed it:

Ms. Rice is a brilliant, highly-educated woman who can reflect on the tragedy of slavery in the history of our country without race-baiting.

No “God damn America”, “KKK-USA”, “Chickens come home to roost” from her.


Election ‘08 - We Are So Screwed

Pilgrim on March 28, 2008 at 02:55 pm
Avatar for Hannitized

. But, I’ll give you a break, please give us documented teachings or sermons wherein he used words supportive of America, spoke well of white people and Jews and was otherwise teaching things differently that the words we have on the record.

Interesting how you change the argument from blacks being affected by our history of slavery to racism.  Way to change the subject.  Sneaky, but not sly.  Youre busted.

Since you know Osamabama so well, please tell us how close your personal relationship is with him, how often you were with him in Pastor Wright’s services and how often you were privy to Wrights private counsel etcetera, so we might believe you really know him. Okay?

As stated before, I know his sister very well.  I dated their hanai sister.  Her family and Obama’s/Sotoro’s were close family friends.  Since before he decided to run for president I have been close friends with Maya.  I go to dinner with her and her family and over time we finally talked about her brother, a subject she saves for trusted individuals.  Over long periods of at length discussions I get a clear picture.  I am also working on his campaign here in Hawaii.  I don’t need to go into too much detail here, but there is no racism in this familiy and there certainly is no history of victimhood that was taught to him or his sister.

Here’s what you fail to recognize about the Senator:

1) Senator Obama explicitly acknowledges that welfare policies have likely contributed to the erosion of black families.

2) Senator Obama acknowledges and praises how many men and women have over come the odds how many were able to make a way out of no way for those like him who have come after him.

3) Senator Obama emphasizes that this path means embracing the burdens of our past, without becoming victims of their past, and it means taking full responsibility for our lives by demanding more from our fathers and spending more time with our children and reading to them and teaching them that while they may face challenges and discrimination in their own lives, they must never succumb to despair or cynicism.  They must also believe that they can write their own destiny.

You are not Obama, you have have failed miserably to dazzle us with any brilliance, so now your only resort is to try and befuddle us without your constant, inane bullshit! You are failing!

You are an idiot who has to create a character in order to tear it down.  I have proved it and you are going no where.  Fast.

Hannitized on March 28, 2008 at 03:20 pm

Hannitized.  I believe what you just wrote above.  This post is about Miss Rice’s words about race in America based on the past which included slavery.  I oppose Mr. Obama based on his votes in the Senate.  I oppose Mrs. Clinton for the same reason.  I do not fully support Mr. McCain for the same reason(s). 
Did I ask you about the book on Hawaii’ history, To Steal a Kingdom?


Communism is evil

Chief RZ on March 28, 2008 at 03:32 pm

Chief: By implication, since you agreed with H that he was right that I was off the subject of the thread, you are saying that I am the guilty party. Next, very few threads at SA stay on topic and thus the tendency to stray is very common. If you wanted to be fair, since you are accusing me of the infraction, you should go back through all the comments (53) and document who indeed took the discussion off the subject of the thread, rather than accuse others without bothering to check the facts.

I admit to being a bit offended in this matter!


No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Neiman on March 28, 2008 at 03:54 pm

H: The pretty sophistry you attribute to Obama sounds nice, but one of his mentors(Alinsky) is a Marxist, and another one(Wright) is a practitioner of black liberation theology, which teaches black separatism, that Jesus was black(an historical inaccuracy) and who has engaged in vitriolic race-based hatred of America.
At the very least, to be intellectually honest, you might attempt to deal with those facts, and not just feed us pie-in-the-sky rhetoric.


Media uncovers more Palin stories in one weekend than Obama stories in two years. Still no bias detected

Obama: more experienced than Bristol Palin

robert108 on March 28, 2008 at 04:03 pm

Hannitized:
For the first time in my recollection in all your many comments at SA, this one above appears to be a bit more rational and direct than we have come to expect from you. Although, your declaring yourself a victor in anything is a bit premature and self-serving, neither of which shock me in the least.

1. While you might have said it elsewhere, this is the first time I knew you were a paid staff member of the Obama campaign in Hawaii. It would have proved enlightening and more honest had that been part of your signature or avatar, in the spirit of honest disclosure.
2. I hope you will understand that just because you know Obama’s sister or other family members, while it may give us all more insights into the family and their thoughts about what he believes, it is still less definitive than a direct relationship with Obama. My sister has impressions of my political beliefs and positions at variance with what I have actually stated and believe, so this may shock the hell out of you, but sisters can be full of shit about what a family member actually believes. Although, that relationship does slightly increase your credibility on what Obama may believe.
3. I would like to see the positions you and sister attribute to Obama that are part of his public record, versus just word of mouth about what someone may think he believes about this or that, not that I think you would be deliberately dishonest to promote Obama’s candidacy, of course. The positions you stated as belonging to Obama do sound very rational and more conservative than one would expect when placed beside his other anti-War, high tax, socialized medicine, and other pro-socialist messages. So, I would appreciate references to the speeches wherein he expressed these views so I can understand their context and prove he actually has these views.

My compliments on your first half-way decent reply to anyone here at SA. I am still waiting for my documented lies against you from my previous comments.


No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Neiman on March 28, 2008 at 04:14 pm

Robert108: Thanks! As usual you find a unique and great way to get at an issue, and stating the extreme views of Obama’s counsellors was direct and to the point.


No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Neiman on March 28, 2008 at 04:15 pm

Neiman: Thanks!  Whatever he may have believed when he lived in Hawaii, and whatever he may or may not have shared with his sister, when he went to Chicago he selected those two for his political mentors, and that says a lot about his inner core, IMO.  My tendency is to think he will govern more like Alinsky and Wright than what his sister may believe about him.


Media uncovers more Palin stories in one weekend than Obama stories in two years. Still no bias detected

Obama: more experienced than Bristol Palin

robert108 on March 28, 2008 at 04:23 pm

H:

1) Senator Obama explicitly acknowledges that welfare policies have likely contributed to the erosion of black families.

Then why does he want to continue these same policies?  You can look through the last week’s news for maybe half a dozen examples where he is doing exactly that.

Something doesn’t quite jibe here.

Carrick on March 28, 2008 at 04:31 pm

Neiman.  I reviewed my posts on this thread but do not see where I disagreed with you on anything or accused you of straying from the post.  I admit I do but try to do it by way of contrast or putting in perspective.  Carrick, I’m with you on that.  Mr. Obama’s voting record as well as his “shared prosperity”


Communism is evil

Chief RZ on March 28, 2008 at 04:47 pm
Avatar for Hannitized

I oppose Mr. Obama based on his votes in the Senate.  I oppose Mrs. Clinton for the same reason.  I do not fully support Mr. McCain for the same reason(s). 

And I think your reasons for opposing Obama are fair.  A presidential candidate can only ask to be taken to task on issues.  Senator McCain deserves credit for staying on track and condemning those on his campaign who stray from that course.  I applaud the Senator for keeping this race, clean, so far.

Did I ask you about the book on Hawaii’ history, To Steal a Kingdom?

You know, I have struggled to keep distance from this subject publicly.  I know this type of discussion can easily be looked at as anti-Americanism and I really do try to stay away from that as much as possible.  Although, I have been quietly investigating so I can educate myself on the issue for my own knowledge. 

It seems that this book is taking a middle ground approach here?  Is that what you would conclude?  Are you suggesting I pick it up?  If you are making this recommendation, then surely it can’t be too offensive to my Republican friends.  I will definitely try to pick this one up.

We used to have a radio show here called “Equal Time” with Fred Hemmings.  I used to badger Fred on a whole series of issues.  But over time (and as a member of the frequent caller crowd) we became friends with mutual respect for each other.  Fred is a fierce proponent of the benefits of the colonization of Hawaii and a fierce opponent of the situation happening in our country right now (Mexican immigration).  I always ask him to consider our own history, before we come down to harshly on those we need to, such as the Mexcians (dont mean to change the subject here).  He never understands that argument, but never-the-less, maybe there is something here to add to that discussion?

Anyway, I will digg into it one weekend and let you know what I learned and check out this new perspective.  Thanks.

Hannitized on March 28, 2008 at 05:45 pm

slavery was prevalent in the world back then.  Not now.

I wish that were true.

There are still people being taken as actual slaves in places like Sudan.

And in a lot of places slavery has become a major part of the “sex industry.”

Young girls from Russia, Ukraine, and other parts of the Russian sphere are tricked into becomming