Game Change and the future of Harry Reid

[Big Lutz]

For those that pay attention to politics, you may have noticed what was the equivalent to a nuclear bomb being dropped on the political scene yesterday by the early release of a book that provided many dirty secrets from the campaign last year. From Elizabeth Edward's Psychotic rants, to John Edwards own rant about his campaign aid not coming to him to tell him to stop screwing a intern, to two admittedly racist remarks from two very high up Democratic Leaders.

The biggest one, and most shocking came from the leader of the Senate, Harry Reid. Who said and I quote from the book "a "light-skinned" African American "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one,"

Now alot of people are making comparisons to another infamous Senate Majority Leader, this time Republican Trent Lott, who made a stupid, but admittedly less damming line back in 2002 at a birthday party for a Senator who was a former Segregationist 40 years before.

"When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We’re proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over the years, either"

The reaction from Trent Lott's admittedly stupid remark was deafening from the Left.

‘His apology does not take away the sting of his divisive words…‘ - Barbara Boxer

'I can tell you if a Democratic leader said such a thing, they would not be allowed to keep their position,’ - Mary Landrieu

‘What he said was insensitive as hell; it’s very offensive,’ … ‘Race is serious stuff. It’s not something you kid about.’ - Joe Biden

‘…the GOP must decide whether Lott ‘represents the views of the majority of Republicans in the Senate and in our country.‘ - Hillary Clinton

“The Republican Party itself has to drive out Trent Lott. If they have to stand for something, they have to stand up and say this is not the person we want representing our party.” - Barack Obama

So I figured I would make my first topic in the Soap Box Forum, after everything you have seen that I have posted, should the Democratic Party thus force Harry Reid to resign his post as Senate Leader, just as they called for the resignation of Trent Lott in 2002? Also what do you think of the book and some of its secrets revealed, should some of the deepest darkest campaign and admittedly private secrets of our leaders during the Presidential Campaign be released for the public to read?

 

[Eredar Warlock]

The political spin from the Democratic leadership (I.e. Tim Kaine) is that it was in the context of a positive compliment. The issue I think is the fat that it was racially based and it's a bit hypocritical to not call him out on it. In his own state (which I live in) it doesn't matter because he's in deep trouble as it is.

 

[Fig]

I don't know whether african-american or non-african american should be the one most offended by the remark.

Is it more offensive to be told you have to be fairly light-skinned and "not talk negro" to be elected, OR to be told you're too racist to vote for a "dark" black/someone who "Talk black"?

 

[Eredar Warlock]

In either case, it just seems like a bad statement.

 

[Nicoleta01]

As a bi-racial, it doesn't bug me what Harry Reid said. It didn't bug me either with Imus and the "Nappy-headed hos" thing. I don't see how it's supposed to offensive. Not all black people are super dark-skinned and not all black people have that "ghetto talk." (Which I find to be annoying, mainly because I can't understand the poor English)

 

[Phoenicks]

Reid was stereotyping against all black people Nicoleta.

I think this is scandalous, but it doesn't change things much. Reid had no future before, and he has no future now. The 'change' doesn't apply.

 

[Nekusagi]

I don't know whether african-american or non-african american should be the one most offended by the remark.

Is it more offensive to be told you have to be fairly light-skinned and "not talk negro" to be elected, OR to be told you're too racist to vote for a "dark" black/someone who "Talk black"?

I always have seen the whole "talking black" thing this way:

A white man runs for office with a southern dialect (from, let's say, Alabama) and gets called a "good old boy" by his constituents. His dialect/accent may even be seen as a positive thing (as proof he's not one of those elites and isn't giving up his heritage).

If a black man, who grew up in a historically black part of town (think Harlem, since I'm going off hypotheticals here anyway), spoke in a "black" dialect, he'd be called out by whites for sounding "uneducated".

On the other hand, I've heard of some blacks who get upset if a person, especially one in a position of leadership, talks "white" and sees them as selling out the race to gain ground with whites.

Unfortunately, it only seems to be okay to speak in a way reflective of your culture if you're white, and even then, depending on where you live certain WHITE dialects/accents can give you crap (the "valley girl" of the West Coast and the "redneck" of the Appalachian area for two examples of speech patterns that have been used as negative stereotypes, and I won't get into the stereotyped Irish/Jewish/Italian accents). It seems like black politicians/leaders are stuck between a rock and a hard place with speech- no matter what they do, to someone they're "doing it wrong".

As far as Reid goes, I think this is a case of "they're not in your party, so let's use it against you." I'm sure the Republicans will go after the Democrats just as hard as they went after Lott. It's a chance to make the other party look bad, which seems at the root of American politics these days, rather than working out the REAL problems (which is why nothing seems to be done anymore.)

Lott said some pretty stupid things, and IMO, so did Reid. They're equally stupid and racist in my mind, and point out we still have a lot of work in this country in regards to racism.

Still, it's also worth noting that when the campaigns were starting, a certain senator complemented Obama for being "articulate."


That senator was Joe Biden. Make of that what you will.




holy shit that was a tl;dr post

 

[Eredar Warlock]

Didn't you also post it somewhere else? I seem to remember reading it somewhere.

 

[Big Lutz]

Still, it's also worth noting that when the campaigns were starting, a certain senator complemented Obama for being "articulate."


That senator was Joe Biden. Make of that what you will.

Yeah but to quote Obama from the same book

“How many times is Biden gonna say something stupid?

People expect Joe Biden to say stupid things, he is a idiot and its in his nature to speak with out thinking. That same line of thought does not apply to Harry Reid, also you have the fact that Harry Reid is in the senior leadership, Joe Biden was just a senator at the time running for President on a long shot ticket. Thus the level of retribution is different, the voters can not vote for Joe Biden in the primaries to show their displeasure, right now the voters cannot kick Harry Reid out of the Senate Leadership, so thus the responsibility falls on the Democrats to paraphrase Hillary Clinton.

‘…the Democrats must decide whether Reid ‘represents the views of the majority of Democrats in the Senate and in our country.‘

 

[Nekusagi]

Yeah but to quote Obama from the same book

“How many times is Biden gonna say something stupid?

People expect Joe Biden to say stupid things, he is a idiot and its in his nature to speak with out thinking. That same line of thought does not apply to Harry Reid, also you have the fact that Harry Reid is in the senior leadership, Joe Biden was just a senator at the time running for President on a long shot ticket. Thus the level of retribution is different, the voters can not vote for Joe Biden in the primaries to show their displeasure, right now the voters cannot kick Harry Reid out of the Senate Leadership, so thus the responsibility falls on the Democrats to paraphrase Hillary Clinton.

‘…the Democrats must decide whether Reid ‘represents the views of the majority of Democrats in the Senate and in our country.‘

Oh okay, so Reid being in the senior leadership and Biden being just a stupid senator makes Reid's moronic racist comments worse than Biden's moronic racist comments (even though they were essentially the same sentiments, worded differently).

In both cases it was middle aged/senior citizen rich white men expressing an attitude that is still held by many whites about black people. Intelligence and position are not factors at all; people say stupid and sometimes racist stuff and end up with egg on their face when it's found out.

I'm not saying either should be booted or not (imo they SHOULD apologize for their insensitivity in some way), I'm just pointing out that it's doubtful the Democrats will give Reid anything less than a slap on the wrist because it's their own party.


The Repubs will rage and take every opportunity to make the Democrats look bad, Reid will issue some half-assed apology and probably backpedal like crazy, and the next huge political clusterfuck will push this whole thing out of everyone's mind in time.

 

[Big Lutz]

Oh okay, so Reid being in the senior leadership and Biden being just a stupid senator makes Reid's moronic racist comments worse than Biden's moronic racist comments (even though they were essentially the same sentiments, worded differently).

No, but they make the retribution different, the Democrats couldn't do much to Biden, they can strip Reid of his leadership.

In both cases it was middle aged/senior citizen rich white men expressing an attitude that is still held by many whites about black people.

And of the two one is the leader of the Senate and thus held to a higher standard than the public at large, he is even held to a higher standard than a average Senator.

I'm not saying either should be booted or not (imo they SHOULD apologize for their insensitivity in some way), I'm just pointing out that it's doubtful the Democrats will give Reid anything less than a slap on the wrist because it's their own party.

That depends on the Republican outcry, right now if the Democrats do not strip Reid of his leadership they look like hypocrites. Worse yet the Republicans have every right imaginable to say that by allowing Reid to stay they are endorsing that line of thought.

The Repubs will rage and take every opportunity to make the Democrats look bad, Reid will issue some half-assed apology and probably backpedal like crazy, and the next huge political clusterfuck will push this whole thing out of everyone's mind in time.

I really don't see this going out of mind, it was a racist comment, and these things tend to stick around especially during a election year. If the Democrats do not punish such a comment then the Republicans have every right to string it out all the way through November. And with the Democrats poised to lose the House come this fall, can they really afford to alienate Blacks in a election year? That is the quickest way to lose the House AND the Senate.

 

[Nekusagi]

I really don't see this going out of mind, it was a racist comment, and these things tend to stick around especially during a election year. If the Democrats do not punish such a comment then the Republicans have every right to string it out all the way through November. And with the Democrats poised to lose the House come this fall, can they really afford to alienate Blacks in a election year? That is the quickest way to lose the House AND the Senate.

I never said it would be smart for them to keep him around. Just that it's unlikely they'd boot him over that.

Also, wow, capitalizing "blacks". You stay classy.

I'm really starting to get the impression this thread is less of a discussion on racism and more of a "Democrats said something stupid, let's crow about it" thread. It was a mistake to hope for this thread to be anything better than that.

 

[Big Lutz]

I never said it would be smart for them to keep him around. Just that it's unlikely they'd boot him over that.

And they will pay the price for it.

Also, wow, capitalizing "blacks". You stay classy.

I capitalize many words that I do not need to, usually when I am speaking about a specific title, person, object, group, or something that I am trying to draw interest to, it is just how I type, you should know it by now instead of trying to infer any type of specific motives from it.

I'm really starting to get the impression this thread is less of a discussion on racism and more of a "Democrats said something stupid, let's crow about it" thread. It was a mistake to hope for this thread to be anything better than that.

Actually this thread is about numerous things, the book for one which is making huge waves, it is about Harry Reid's future which as you will notice from the title, it is about a major political event that is happening right now, and it is about if private conversations should be made public as numerous ones were including ones on the right side of the isle about Sarah Palin were in the book.

 

[Nekusagi]

I capitalize many words that I do not need to, usually when I am speaking about a specific title, person, object, group, or something that I am trying to draw interest to, it is just how I type, you should know it by now instead of trying to infer any type of specific motives from it.

Backpedal faster, you might set a land speed record.

Actually this thread is about numerous things, the book for one which is making huge waves, it is about Harry Reid's future which as you will notice from the title, it is about a major political event that is happening right now, and it is about if private conversations should be made public as numerous ones were including ones on the right side of the isle about Sarah Palin were in the book.

If it's actually about that, then I think yes. The people have a right to know about stupid shit politicians do and say, we might elect fewer morons to office to have them fuck up later. And for someone in the public eye, NOTHING you say is ever private- I wish they'd realize just because you don't think you'll be heard is NOT an excuse to say stupid fucked up stuff.

That goes for everyone- Harry Reid, Sarah Palin, Nancy Pelosi, Dick Cheney, EVERYONE. I've always been for calling people on stupidity, whether they say it on facebook, twitter, or whatever.

I'd put a bit more faith in this post, though, if you did some more calling out of Republicans. So far it STILL seems like a "lol Reid said something dumb" thread.

 

[Phoenicks]

Lutz, your Shift Key is clearly being racist against black people. You need to tell it to apologize.

 

[Big Lutz]

Backpedal faster, you might set a land speed record.

Umm it's the truth, if you have not noticed that I do such a thing then that shows your lack of attention you pay to my posts.

Lutz, your Shift Key is clearly being racist against black people. You need to tell it to apologize.

Seeing how I would have capitalized Whites if I were talking about White Voters, wouldn't it be racist if I didn't capitalize Blacks?

If it's actually about that, then I think yes. The people have a right to know about stupid shit politicians do and say, we might elect fewer morons to office to have them fuck up later. And for someone in the public eye, NOTHING you say is ever private- I wish they'd realize just because you don't think you'll be heard is NOT an excuse to say stupid fucked up stuff.

That goes for everyone- Harry Reid, Sarah Palin, Nancy Pelosi, Dick Cheney, EVERYONE. I've always been for calling people on stupidity, whether they say it on facebook, twitter, or whatever.

I'd put a bit more faith in this post, though, if you did some more calling out of Republicans. So far it STILL seems like a "lol Reid said something dumb" thread.

Well lets take a less political tent to it, ( And I am not going to purposely pick a Republican when right now the biggest leaks have been directed toward Democrats ) one of the main leaked areas of the book was based on the affair that John Edwards had. Now people have a right about the stupid things their elected officials say in public, but as the leaked pages show it goes more into his family life, including personal and embarassing fights he had with his wife, culmulating with his wife exposing herself at the airport to him after fighting about the affair.

While John Edwards was a public official at the time, I cannot see how such a revealing and embarrassing event being publicized could be in the public interest.

 

[evkl]

The difference between Lott and Reid is that Lott endorsed segregation, while Reid is just too old to understand what's PC.

My grandparents still say "colored people." They don't mean any ill will towards anybody, they're just stuck in their ways. It's often embarrassing and sometimes infuriating, but...what can you do?

 

[Big Lutz]

The difference between Lott and Reid is that Lott endorsed segregation, while Reid is just too old to understand what's PC.

Did Lott endorse segregation? He made a stupid comment, but the senator he was talking about was known alot more than for ideas he held nearly 60 years ago. It would be like saying saying nice about Senator Byrd would be endorsing the KKK. As for Reid, while he wasn't being PC, he was being insulting toward Blacks.

My grandparents still say "colored people." They don't mean any ill will towards anybody, they're just stuck in their ways. It's often embarrassing and sometimes infuriating, but...what can you do?

Well you can show that such language is not permitted in this day and age in what is considered one of the highest political bodies in the world, by stripping him of his leadership, as Democrats demanded against Lott.

 

[evkl]

Did Lott endorse segregation? He made a stupid comment, but the senator he was talking about was known alot more than for ideas he held nearly 60 years ago. It would be like saying saying nice about Senator Byrd would be endorsing the KKK. As for Reid, while he wasn't being PC, he was being insulting toward Blacks.

The campaign Thurmond ran was based on segregation. That's nothing like saying Byrd is a nice guy. Lott basically endorsed Thurmond's presidential campaign, which was built around the segregation policies of the post-Civil War era. Nothing at all like your analogue to Byrd.

Well you can show that such language is not permitted in this day and age in what is considered one of the highest political bodies in the world, by stripping him of his leadership, as Democrats demanded against Lott.

As I showed they're two different things. I don't think my grandparents are going to stop saying "colored people" suddenly if Harry Reid loses his job. He's just old. And old people say things like that. If he called Obama a nigger that'd be much more troublesome, but "negro" is just the old PC. I'm sure Reid thought nothing of it. And yeah, "negro" isn't really PC today, but what are we going to do about it? Round people up? Put old people who still say "negro" in front of a death panel...?

This is the culture shock that occurs when 70 year olds interact with 20 year olds.

 

[Big Lutz]

As I showed they're two different things. I don't think my grandparents are going to stop saying "colored people" suddenly if Harry Reid loses his job. He's just old. And old people say things like that. If he called Obama a nigger that'd be much more troublesome, but "negro" is just the old PC. I'm sure Reid thought nothing of it. And yeah, "negro" isn't really PC today, but what are we going to do about it? Round people up? Put old people who still say "negro" in front of a death panel...?

This is the culture shock that occurs when 70 year olds interact with 20 year olds.

Here is the problem, your grandparents are not presiding over the Senate, thus they are not held to a higher standard than Harry Reid. Nor have I suggested rounding up people for saying Negro, I however have suggested that Democrats match their rhetoric from 2002, and strip Harry Reid of his Senate Leadership for what was clearly racist language.

Being old, is not a excuse for being a racist.