Who's the Racist in this Exchange?

#1
volinbham

volinbham

VN GURU
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
69,798
Likes
62,539
#1
#5
#5
volinbham said:
Newt, David, neither or both.

David Gregory Accuses Gingrich of Racism for Calling Obama a 'Food Stamp President' - President Obama - Fox Nation

I say neither but it is interesting that Gregory automatically assumes a reference to Food Stamps is racially based.

I'm so tired of this narrative - oppose entitlements in any way and you are racist (nevermind most entitlement recipients are white)
Click to expand...


There is merit to your contention that too many criticisms of entitlement programs are dismissed as racist. And had Gingrich's argument been ... well .... and argument, I might have put it in that group.

But it wasn't an argument. It was a label.

Labels I tend to be suspicous of because by their nature the idea is to throw out a few words to get at, impute, evoke, invoke, or generally refer to, a whole bunch of words you know you shouldn't say.

"Food Stamp President" is such a label.

I'd be more upset about it if I thought that Newt would get more than 5 votes in the entire GOP primary. Alas, not an issue.
 
#7
#7
When it is argued that social programs have hurt blacks, the left will quickly point out that more whites depend on them than blacks. Very conveniently, when something like this comes up.... the left plays the race card.

You can't have it both ways.... unless the MSM is the judge of how something will be reported.
 
#8
#8
sjt18 said:
When it is argued that social programs have hurt blacks, the left will quickly point out that more whites depend on them than blacks. Very conveniently, when something like this comes up.... the left plays the race card.

You can't have it both ways.... unless the MSM is the judge of how something will be reported.
Click to expand...

So stating a fact is "convenient"? I don't understand your reasoning.
 
#10
#10
lawgator1 said:
There is merit to your contention that too many criticisms of entitlement programs are dismissed as racist. And had Gingrich's argument been ... well .... and argument, I might have put it in that group.

But it wasn't an argument. It was a label.

Labels I tend to be suspicous of because by their nature the idea is to throw out a few words to get at, impute, evoke, invoke, or generally refer to, a whole bunch of words you know you shouldn't say.

"Food Stamp President" is such a label.

I'd be more upset about it if I thought that Newt would get more than 5 votes in the entire GOP primary. Alas, not an issue.
Click to expand...

What on earth in Gingrich's comments are racially-tinged as Gregory suggests?

To find any racial content you have to believe that entitlements are race-based in some form or that when he says entitlements he really means race.

Hardly responsible journalism to reach either conclusion. Could it be that Gregory himself thinks entitlements are racially based thus criticizing them has a racial component?

Interesting too that Gregory felt the need to throw in that Obama is a "black" president. Gingrich didn't say that when he made original comments about him being the FoodStamp president.
 
#11
#11
volinbham said:
What on earth in Gingrich's comments are racially-tinged as Gregory suggests?

To find any racial content you have to believe that entitlements are race-based in some form or that when he says entitlements he really means race.

Hardly responsible journalism to reach either conclusion. Could it be that Gregory himself thinks entitlements are racially based thus criticizing them has a racial component?

Interesting too that Gregory felt the need to throw in that Obama is a "black" president. Gingrich didn't say that when he made original comments about him being the FoodStamp president.
Click to expand...

to avoid the topic is to absolutely avoid all of Obama's political history.
 
#15
#15
Wait.... Isn't Obama a product of a multiracial family?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#18
#18
tim said:
Wait.... Isn't Obama a product of a multiracial family?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

relavance? it's pretty clear which side of the family he identifies with. you know with his racist grandma and all.
 
#20
#20
I must admit to a soft chuckle at the notion that its the liberals who associate food stamps with poor black people. That's clever.
 
#21
#21
lawgator1 said:
I must admit to a soft chuckle at the notion that its the liberals who associate food stamps with poor black people. That's clever.
Click to expand...

if they don't associate it with black people why is going after food stamps racist in their eyes?
 
#22
#22
lawgator1 said:
I must admit to a soft chuckle at the notion that its the liberals who associate food stamps with poor black people. That's clever.
Click to expand...

you are one of the ones that does - we've seen it time and time again in here.

where would Gregory get his "racially-tinged" comment if he didn't make the link himself?
 
#23
#23
droski said:
if they don't associate it with black people why is going after food stamps racist in their eyes?
Click to expand...

volinbham said:
you are one of the ones that does - we've seen it time and time again in here.

where would Gregory get his "racially-tinged" comment if he didn't make the link himself?
Click to expand...



Its the invoking of that old standard by Newt to raise the hackles of the bigotted on the right that pisses us off.

Educated liberals understand that the perception that there are a disproportionate number of black people on food stamps is because there are a disproportionately high number of black people who are poor.

The audience Newt aimed that comment at can't get past the initial observation, and use that observation to feed their impression that black people are lazy, undeserving of assistance, and a drain on their tax dollars.

Invoking that connection to Obama was the point of saying it. Its the same tired "He's out to help black people at our expense" theory which underlies roughly 2/3 of the entire GOP attack on him since day one.

It plays great to the people paying attention to GOP presidential politics at the moment.
 
#24
#24
lawgator1 said:
Its the invoking of that old standard by Newt to raise the hackles of the bigotted on the right that pisses us off.

Educated liberals understand that the perception that there are a disproportionate number of black people on food stamps is because there are a disproportionately high number of black people who are poor.

The audience Newt aimed that comment at can't get past the initial observation, and use that observation to feed their impression that black people are lazy, undeserving of assistance, and a drain on their tax dollars.

Invoking that connection to Obama was the point of saying it. Its the same tired "He's out to help black people at our expense" theory which underlies roughly 2/3 of the entire GOP attack on him since day one.

It plays great to the people paying attention to GOP presidential politics at the moment.
Click to expand...

Look at how much you had to imagine to come up with the explanation.

Amazing.
 
#25
#25
The destruction of the black family in America has been primarily caused by 2 factors:
1. The perverting power of welfare.
This has created cycles of dependency and has massively contributed to the spike in single parent families. Sperm donors who are often children, feel no obligation because they know that the Daddy state will care for their children and often due to another disgusting victimization cultural mentality they feel that the state "owes" it to them.


2. The war on drugs.

The war on drugs is not only unconstitutional, it has a dramatically disparate impact because of the ease in policing drug dealers and users in high density urban areas as opposed to spread out rural areas. By the time the sheriff pulls up to your trailer, you have already gotten the stuff flushed or out the back door thanks to Cletus calling you, but if you are in a high rise and the cops Terry stop and frisk you because you are bugging out in a north face jacket in the hall when it is 75 degrees outside and they are on their way to see about something else, you are going to jail.

I am a libertarian, and would see both problems ended pretty simply by the federal government doing what it was supposed to do, and not building housing or giving out food or locking poor people up while rich drug addicts buy their pills from their doctors.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top