Dude. Weak. I meant I'd never called the Clintons or anything they or their campaign had said racist. Of course I've called Jorge's posts racist. I've done that for years now, because he loves pressing those buttons -- during the campaign and before it, most especially with regard to Arabs and Muslims. Did you think I meant I'd never used the word racist in any context toward anyone in the world in the last year? Weak.
Yet again, you have avoided the question - why is that? I'll ask a 3rd time. When she said these words: Sen. Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans Was she referring to 3 different groups of people, or one? Simple question. We know she was talking about voters and demographics. That's not what I'm asking. You either know the answer or you don't.
I also love how every one of your examples of me being "a liar" was a post to Jorge, who has repeatedly referred to Obama here as Balack (or Half Balack) Hussein Osama. So he makes racial jokes about Obama's name and heritage, I call him on it and I'm the one playing the race card. The only exception was a quote from an article I posted today describing the exact situation I have clearly indicated I believe crosses racial lines. If you're going to pick a fight with me at least play fair.
now that Hillary has crossed a line in talking about white voters it is OK huh? So before when you used it, it was just in debating people about the election. I see, so you didn;t lie you just forgot? Or you just overstated your non-use of the word?
I am not picking a fight I am just calling you out on your statements that are untrue. In this thread http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?p=3233849&highlight=racist#post3233849 You called RoxRan or his argument Racist Was this not an attempt to shut down an argument early without having to actually argue?
Ok lets say she is talking about 1. That would mean what middle class whites? If she is talking about 3 that would mean middle class, middle-upper, (or middle lower working 2 jobs etc) and then whites. Can you tell me how either of these is racist?
Here's the audio for anyone that wants to judge for themselves: <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PfidftLe5Z0&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PfidftLe5Z0&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
Sounds like she is talking about blue collar white americans. Which last time I checked is the largest demographic in this country. She is claiming she has their support thus has a better chance of winning the general. How is this racist?
Oh lord, CaseyH... I'm sorry if you misunderstood me. I thought it was pretty clear that I was saying I hadn't called any of Clinton's previous statements racist -- not that I hadn't literally used the word in any situation toward any person for a year. I stand by each of my uses of the word over the last year. As for the Roxran thing, with no explanation at all of any other reason he was bringing Harold Ford up, he said he preferred Ford to Obama. What is that if not a racial comparison? Nobody was talking about Ford, Ford actually hadn't even been in the news since he lost his Senate bid in 2006 and he just out of the blue said he preferred him. He was obviously saying I like this black guy better than this other black guy. That to me is racist. Sorry, to me it is. You can argue that I ought to be more judicial in my use of the word; maybe I ought to. But that's a whole other argument. And, in any case, in situations with Jorge and Roxran I was only responding to them bringing race into the conversation in the first place -- in both cases inappropriately and out of the blue. But you didn't catch me in anything here. I was responding here, in a thread about Obama vs. Clinton, in which there was question as to which camp may or may not have played the "race card" and in which you said that you were so sick of that that you hadn't heard it from me. That's apples and oranges from calling someone on the board out for making racial or racist comments.
So, you're saying you don't know? You're vehemently defending a statement you don't even understand? If she's talking about 1, then each of those is a descriptor of the same group. She's saying working Americans = hard-working Americans = White Americans. That's problematic. If she's talking about 3 different groups, then why are "working Americans" separate from "hard working Americans". And why are "white Americans" separate from those two? It doesn't make sense to be three different groups, unless you suggest that "working Americans" and "hard-working Americans" are different types of people - and that Obama doesn't have their support. Obama does better than Hillary amongst the middle and upper-middle classes, so by your definition, the statement doesn't fit either.
I'll let Major take it from here. He has it well under control and I'm bored. Wake me up when judoka gets back.
Just to be clear - these aren't racist statements. They are racially-tinged statements. They are simply designed to bring race to the forefront of the conversation - and remind people over and over to think about race. That's always the way its been with them. She could have simply said "working class Americans" - but she went back and added the "white" descriptor. Its a tactic she used a lot around South Carolina with terrible results.
I have heard it and I can address your arguments. I think it is one group, but first let me talk about this. I explained earlier it could be hardworking means working 2 jobs, working just means general blue collar and white americans is kinda self explanatory. But I think now it is one demographic. The largest demographic in the country of white blue collar workers. No she is not. She is narrowing down the field. "Working class" is an actual term. It means not a professional or executive, so she said working, then corrected that to "hard working" because that sounds better and makes people who makes less money feel better. Like I said all along its demographics. Its odd you don't know that "hard working americans" means "working class".
Thus back to my original problem which you sidestepped to get me in this crap. She said "hey I have a bigger backing of the largest demographic in the USA" And it was not shot down with, any stats or claims about baracks demos, it was countered with "thats racist"
So blue-collar / working class is now considered upper-middle class? You said that's who "hard working" was referring to. Wealthier and more educated generally fill the upper-middle class, and those people tend to support Obama.
Dissecting Dem primary voters as if they were bipartisan respondents to an exit poll on November 4 is really funny. For a huge portion of this primary fight, Dem voters were happy with either candidate. Some of the polls have seen a change in that recently, but once Obama is officially the guy, that will again change... and quickly. Sure, there will be some Hillary types that will not vote for Obama... but many will vote against McCain and even more will vote for Obama. And that's what puts the fear in Repubs. Dems aren't just voting against the Republican this election... a huge number will be voting for Obama, which means money and organization and commitment and volunteers... and victory. That's why our resident Administration mouthpieces are so apoplectic and distraught regarding Obama.
It doesn't need to be shot down. More people have voted for him - doesn't that mean, by definition, he has a bigger coalition of voters?
