Gonna sit right down and lower my expectations.

I think I was just called a bigot. I think we are going back to 2004 to fight the present primary wars. The funny thing is that I have not weighed in on the Obama/rap singer situation. I had stayed out of it.

Governor Dean's comments from 2003 were used in a post to show that no one could defend Obama unless they had attacked Dean in 04. Think about that. How very odd.

Here are his exact words, which he had said all during the year. No one had raised hell about them.



I posted a column by Constance Rice which defended Dean, and all hell broke loose. Why would I do that, I was asked loudly and over and over. Why would I post about what an African American 2nd cousin of Condi wrote to defend Dean back in 2003? I still don't get how that makes me bigoted...but here is the op ed by her.

She knew what he was attempting to do, many people did. It was his own party and Fox News which turned it into a racial thing which it was not meant to be.

Confederate Flap: Stand Firm, Howard Dean



She ends with this statement:



And there was another unlikely advocate for Howard Dean, who knew what he was attempting to say and do. He was William Saletan of Slate. He pointed out it was Dean's opponents who had made the most noise over this issue.

He also points out Dean had used the same line early in the year in a speech in California in front of the party and the candidates. No one said a word then.

Confederate Flog. The new bum rap on Howard Dean.



I am no bigot. Dean was no bigot. None of our candidates are bigots, not a single one of them.

So now I am gonna sit down and try that expectation lowering thingy again.

you happen to try to have a rational discussion about why people might disagree about the proper course of action to take in some situation involving race or sexual orientation, and dare to express a thought that doesn't conform to the latest politically correct set of talking points.

Or, as I learned from one thread last night, if you have the insensitivity to use the word "histrionics."

Don't let it bother you, please. DU is not the real world.

Edited to remove a little of my "insensitivity."

long enough before the last GE, but I NEVER thought DU was so divisive and downright nasty! I thought Democrats were the "big tent" party, but have even found myself lowering my standards several times.

I am trying not to get in the gutter about our candidates even though I don't agree with Hillary Clinton. But I know she has a following and I have seen some very very "snarky" posts back and forth. It's almost like some feel the need to be as vile as possible just to make a point!

It's pretty sad and I try to overlook it, but it's not easy! I suppose there will come a time that I opt out and try to find my sanity again.

If I don't blame all your personal shortcomings on your penis, why bring my uterus into the conversation?

The word is a Freudian relic derived from the belief that the possession of a uterus makes one irrational. That, in my book, is a sexist term.

Just my tuppence.

From Merriam Webster Online, the definition of "histrionics":
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/histrionics



I don't see anything about a uterus there.

Maybe the word was originally derived from something like what you refer to, but do you really think everyone who uses the word knows that? I sure didn't (although reading your post rang a bell that I may have heard it somewhere before) - I grew up hearing the word used just as MWO defines it, without any additional connotation that I was aware of. Maybe I'm just dense? But hey, I'm supposedly "educated" ( a couple pieces of paper I haven't gotten around to hanging on the wall), so if I don't know it maybe there's a couple other people out there who also don't know it?

p.s. Be careful about assuming who has or doesn't have a penis or a uterus. Do you really know? Isn't it sexist to insinuate that you know, based on someone's writing?

edited to add link to MWO definition.

I've been staying out of this recent whiny pissing match myself, but I'm glad somebody has spoken up and voiced some good, Progressive common sense.

NGU.

The Democratic leaders, now the bloggers, are taking too many opportunities to say things that will harm his tenure as chair.

No one here takes up for him but me, and I get accused of worship.

Amazing how it is done.

by those that use the same playbook and styles as the right wingnuts and Faux news. They claim to be liberals, but sure don't seem to have the liberal heart.

favorite words here. And if you post something the disagree with they whip out those terms.

I quit caring about that crap a LLLLLLOOOOOOONNNNNNNNGGGGGG time ago. That's all some people have is to whip out the old race/bigotry card.

That is what I am doing.

I guess you think that millions of black folks (and others) must be suffering from some kind of a mass hallucination when we bring up our experiences with racism. It's folks that think like you who are the problem.

out over ANYTHING. Don't like Hillary, mysoginist. Don't like Obama, racist. Same with being anti-illegal immigration (no matter what you base your reasons on).

Don't be an ass. Don't read shit into statements that isn't there. And don't diminish the real effects of racism and bigotry with ignorant statements.

YOU are the problem.

People who don't get that are no different from Bush who uses the political loyalty test for everything.

I don't, at the moment, think we need the Republican or Independent votes like some here believe...but that may be because I think we already have them. They'll follow us like little lost lambs; we don't have to follow them.

We've been pampering ourselves with the idea that we're better than the Republicans, all sweet and prejudice-free. That's crap. I learned at 17 that liberals just use different words for theirs. It's not that we're not bigots. It's that we actually try to overcome it. We mostly fight the clannish impulse which is so strong in everyone. I mean, there are people who won't speak to people who support the wrong baseball team. Baseball doesn't matter to me so I'm cool with it. Support Oxford over Shakespeare, however...

We are going to accuse each other of it. Hypocrisy. Bigotry. Everything bad. We are going to throw boulders thru the walls of our glass houses. It's hypocrisy. We're full of it just like everybody else. We are. And our primary system allows it. It's what happens AFTER the primaries that matters.

We ain't gonna get the messiah. We're going to get a frail, ambitious human we'll have to watch like a hawk because the presidency has WAY too much power. And if we fail in that oversight, two years later will give the Congress right back to the Republicans. So we have ONLY and EXACTLY two years to fix the mess this country is in and we have only imperfect, biased, pissy, ambitious people (okay, I'm going to admit to a few saints in that bunch and wonder how they managed to get in) to do it with and we MUST be able to work with them. That's what we have.

if you are told over and over that you need to vote GOP, by your preacher, by your radio, by your local press, and they constantly say, almost in unison, that democrats are evil, you tend to believe it. WE have been attacked, demeaned, insulted, lied about, and more, and for the msot part, many of our leaders simply took it.

do we have real differences? sure. every group does. are there unnecessary insults, you bet. I wrote one comment criticizing the actions of some states (plural) and was attacked for insulting DUers in Colorado, to the point where one person demanded that I apologize. Nothing in that post could be considered an insult to any DUer, much less one state. So, your statement that we do accuse each other, for the reasons mentioned, is also spot on.

It's not that we're not bigots. It's that we actually try to overcome it.

I've always considered myself to be an unbiased person. But it wasn't too many years ago that I agreed that homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to teach in schools because of the danger of them preying on our youth. It took a rational discussion with another liberal, far more educated than I on the subject, to explain to me than homosexuality and pedophila were two distinct things, and that there were vastly more "heterosexual" pedophiles than otherwise. It was like a lightbulb went off in my head after that. Now note, it wasn't that I was consciously aware of my own prejudice; it was just something I hadn't really thought much about and consequently had fallen into the trap of ignorant misinformation.

One of my favorite stories that serves to remind me that liberals can be bigots without really realizing it: my sister was giving a talk in church on prejudice vs. minorities. After the service, a woman came up to her, congratulated her on the sermon, and earnestly said, "But you're preaching to the choir here, you know. None of us are prejudiced in this town. You should go to _______ (neighboring town). Those people are all bigots."

Raising awareness by participating in discourse here really happens, if one allows it. Yes, there can be a lot of nastiness in some of the exchanges, but every once in a while someone posts whose words absolutely clarify why a particular minority feels the way they do about some ongoing injustice, slur, or misrepresentation, and then that little lightbulb goes off in my head as I realize how that particular minority has been maligned. And that's one of the reasons I love this place, even with all the messy arguing.

kids about acceptance! Then a funny thing happened, my son is now working for a very famous tennis star and her partner and he absolutely LOVES them! Says you couldn't find any better people and told me he's glad I brought him up to respect others.

I myself have played some tennis in my time and he actually said I have an invitation to bat a few balls back and forth with her real soon! I am honored by the invite, but there's NO WAY I'll get on the court with her! I did say I'd love to have my picture taken with them, but my tennis is very rusty and I can't afford the embarrassment!

Also, I have two neighbors living together and we have become good friends! Ya know, THEY don't have FOUR EYES and SIX LEGS and droll green slobber! Hypocrisy and racism is DUMB! I could have used stronger words, but DUMB works!!!

good post

I'm sort of new at this, but up for the "ride"!!!

But welcome to DU. One is never quite ready for all that happens.

:hi:

UNITY isn't a "biggie" with the Democrats and perhaps that's the REAL problem after all!

hitting yourself in the crotch about 17 times with a stick. That might help a bit to get you used to DU during primary season.
Welcome!

Trying not to laugh at the image that brings forth. ;)

It gets frustrating around here at times. I don't think some people actually want to exchange ideas. It's more like, "it's my way or the highway"

Connie Rice is a Civil Rights attorney who is the polar opposite of her cousin. People need to do a google search on her.

Ms Rice's opinion was posted in order to make the point that if a black person (Ms Rice) had no problem with it, then there was no reason for any black person to be offended by Dean's "confederate flag" statement

A black poster took offense at the suggestion that she could not be offended because Ms Rice thought it was OK

When you can't defend what is said...you just keep saying it over and over.

1) You just confirmed that I accurately reported the argument that was made against you (ie "you just keep saying it over and over.")

2) I didn't post in that sub-thread so I couldn't possibly be repeating something I said

I'll look for a link

and it was made to sound like I was being racist.

SO keep on keeping on my friend. You have done this before.

You asked her if she was calling you a racist. Her response to you was "I don't think you're either a racist or a bigot. I DO think it's extremely bizarre for you to offer a quote from ONE black person as proof that Dean's comments weren't offensive to BLACK PEOPLE."



So in your world "I dont think you're either a racist or a bigot" means she was calling you a racist

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3647148#3647266

That links to the post MF made about Ms Rice. The response did NOT call her a racist or a bigot, as you can read for yourself. In response, MF asks if she is being called a bigot, and the answer was "I don't think you're either a racist or a bigot. I DO think it's extremely bizarre for you to offer a quote from ONE black person as proof that Dean's comments weren't offensive to BLACK PEOPLE."

Here was the repsonse to me.

My goodness.

I see that there was considerable discussion regarding being offended but there were some posts that actually discounted Connie Rice because she is Condi's cousin.

but the poster MF referred to praised Ms Rice. That poster only said two things that might possibly be considered criticism:

1) She disagreed with Ms Rice
2) She said Ms Rice doesn't speak for all black people

IMO, neither of those discount Ms Rice in any way.

by pointing out that she is Condi's cousin.

One of the problems with message boards is that messages are frequently misinterpreted and because of the passion(or the pride) many people don't want to admit that they misunderstood any points. They form conclusions that are erroneous and people are labeled something that it untrue.

I understood why madfloridian posted the article from Ms. Rice. I would never have thought that he posted it as proof that all blacks share her opinion. I don't think that was the intent.

Personally, I was not offended by Deans remarks and my opinion should be no more discounted than Ms. Rice's.

People here are frequently being referred to as bigots, racists, freepers and stupid mainly because of a misunderstanding of the words posted on this board.

It would be wonderful if there was an attempt to truly get an understanding here and not jumping to false conclusions.

"One of the problems with message boards is that messages are frequently misinterpreted and because of the passion(or the pride) many people don't want to admit that they misunderstood any points. They form conclusions that are erroneous and people are labeled something that it untrue."

1) The poster MF is referring to did not diss Ms Rice. Others did.
2) No one called MF a bigot or a racist.
3) MF was asked several times to explain WHY she posted Ms Rice's opinion. Instead of explaining herself, she got offended because she mistakenly thought she was being called a racist or a bigot
4) MF was explicitely and clearly told that she was NOT being called a racist or a bigot

"I understood why madfloridian posted the article from Ms. Rice. I would never have thought that he posted it as proof that all blacks share her opinion. I don't think that was the intent."

MF was asked WHY she posted it. She never answered, and instead got offended because she mistakenly thought that the questioners were calling her a racist or bigot even though she was told several times that was not the case.

"I understood why madfloridian posted the article from Ms. Rice. I would never have thought that he posted it as proof that all blacks share her opinion. I don't think that was the intent."

Then you didn't understand the OP. The OP wasn't saying that everyone must think it was offensive, and that anyone who didn't was a racist/bigot/idiot/etc. It was how about people dismissed those who felt offended as being not really offended, overly sensitive, unconcerned about winning the election, etc.

"It would be wonderful if there was an attempt to truly get an understanding here and not jumping to false conclusions."

There's be a better chance of that happening if posters like MF explained themselves instead of starting a new thread complaining about how poorly she was treated

I read the thread and that's the impression I got.

and how it is way too freely used.

You don't sound as though you think in abstract terms.

;) ;) ;) ;) ;)

I have been called a racist and a bigot here at DU.

The irony of that statement is that I was raised in a family of racists and bigots and freaky superstitious Irish folklore. Growing up, I NEVER came in contact with any minority (race or sexual orientation) Ever. I then earned a Masters in Theology from a full-tilt batshit loony fundie college. My thesis argued both sides of the salvation issue (is it a perpetually cleansing slate or does the penitent have some responsibility in staying right), punctuated meticulously with scripture, concluding it was, in fact, selective exegesis used to substantiate an already entrenched POV steeped in hate.

I declared I was an agnostic and let the church door hit my ass on the way out.

Because of my upbringing, I apparently don't choose the right words and talk the talk, so to speak. And so I am either eviscerated or ignored, with no acknowledgment that I actually walk the walk with my involvement and support of many wonderful projects (separation of church and state, DNA justice in our lopsided court system, equal rights for all legislation, keeping abortion safe and legal legislation, outreach hospice care here in SF, and rebuilding NOLA).

I am an imperfect being, but I always thought walking the walk was what was important; I am being told here at DU it isn't enough.

I apologize on behalf of people that dilute such incendiary terms by keeping them in their arsenal to use as a weapon.

On edit: One of the brightest lights here at DU PM'd me that they are leaving DU permanently because of the ugliness here. It is a crying shame.

I seldom agree with you on much of anything, but your goodness is always apparent in your posts.

I can be very mean sometimes, but I try to limit it to people who seem insincere and are working a point only to blindly support a candidate at any cost.

You are never like that, and I appreciate you for it.

thank you

for being "prejudiced" http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3647148#3647653

In fact, MF asked if she was being called a racist or a bigot, and the response was NO (link posted above)

You are not doing the poster any favors by repeatedly referring back to her statements.

"Actually I have stood up against all kinds of bigotry on this board.
Edited on Thu Oct-25-07 11:52 PM by madfloridian
Sorry you never noticed".


(1000+ posts) Thu Oct-25-07 11:55 PM
Response to Reply #53
55. "What does THAT have to do with this discussion?
"standing up to bigotry" is not a get-out-of-jail-free card that means you can't be challenged when someone thinks you're out of line. And you still have yet to offer a rational explanation for why you thought that Rice's comments were an appropriate response to a discussion about the fact that many blacks were offended by Dean's statement."

See, I never said anything like that. I presented Rice's column with very little comment.

It will be a great loss to our forum.

:cry:

Didn't want to be nosy.

Class Consciousness
Pat Smith
Poster reads:
“Class consciousness is knowing which side of the fence you are on.
Class analysis is figuring out who is there with you.”
http://lazarapress.ca/books/broadsides/class

I haven't actually heard Obama saying anything equivalent.

Dean was acknowledging the existence of the people whose views we/he find offensive in those respects, and pointing out that their true interests were represented by the Democratic Party.

He wasn't inviting the Sons of the Confederacy (I'm making that up, just in case there is such a thing) to perform at his events.

And the people he was talking about hadn't actually made a career out of spewing hatred.

His point seemed to be that bigotry divides people who are really on the same side of the fence, to the detriment of both the hated and the haters (whose children really do deserve health care as much as anyone else's, for instance). I think that's something we'd generally agree with. That's exactly what bigotry does -- obviously much more often and much more gravely to the detriment of the hated.

Dean wasn't approving the choices to which he referred. He actually sounded as though he was expressly disapproving them, since he saw fit to mention them in this context. It's really hard to see inviting a public figure who espouses hatred to perform at one's events as even very similar to wanting to persuade people to set aside their bigotry and vote in their own and other people's interests.

That's seriously fucked up. Did you alert on them?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

You seem to be following my every post lately.

All Democrats are required to be very good in the art of apologizing. Dean was viciously attacked all over the country, and he apologized.

Dean: 'I apologize' for flag remark



Nobody ever asked the other Democrats who lambasted him to apologize.

I won't bother to post their statements.

And that group gave him a burst of applause when he said it.

While some are still trying to defend bringing Dean in 03 into the Obama 07 thing, I stand by every word I have posted.

We should not be posting things from 2003 to justify any candidate in 2007.

I think everyone here knows our candidates are not anti-gay or racists, but too many posters are getting away with using it.

Dean's Appeal to South Cuts Across Race



The rest of the article covers the ugly attacks from fellow Democrats. I won't post that part.

Being veterans of the Dean Campaign and witnessing the methodical takedown by the right wing of the party , using a veteran liberal at that.

I'm convinced that to these folks, they feel it is far more beneficial to them financially and powerbasewise, to remain the minority. There's really no other reason I can see for the behavior of the Democratic congress or the huge push from the top down for certain candidates.

Everyone at this forum knows Obama is no bigot, and the event is being used to hurt him badly.

This is scary stuff, and some are going to make life hard for me because I pointed it out.

Capn Sunshine may be right. It may be time to look upon things going on now as indicative of how the candidates operated against each other in the past.

I am supporting no one in the primary, but I will take up for someone when they are being unfairly attacked in my opinion. This article points out the utter ridiculousness of the attacks on Dean over this issue. And the attacks on someone else here now may be bordering on the ridiculous.

Confederacy of dunces



Joan wrote more about the issue.



And just for a little more enlightenment about things working during primaries....I found this article by Roger Simon from 2003 almost made me laugh at loud at the way they were all trying to be so proper.

It is too often not about anything real and sincere...it is puffing oneself up with importance.

I won't post anything from it, just read it. Read all of it. Kind of a sad, funny look at politics.

Just Buzz Me

Pretty indicative of our party now. Shut up the ones who try to be real, and pump up the pretty phrases.

Well, since you twisted my arm, just a little part of it but no names.

That other thread is absolutely craptastic.

And there is no need for it. Anyone should know that none of our candidates are bigots or racists, and it is alarming it goes on.

More upsetting was to dredge the thing about Dean.

I just found the Southern Strategy speech he presented, and that Jesse Jackson, Jr. also supported him as well as his being lauded by the Black Commentator.

Racism and bigotry has no place here, and neither does making people feel like you are accusing them of it slyly.

Still irate this would be used to defend or attack candidates in this race.

Jesse Jackson, Jr. wrote about Dean's new Southern Strategy.

Blacks and Whites Together - Focused on Education and Health Care



And the Black Commentator understood that Dean was using Nixon's Southern strategy reference to point out the way we should be going in the South.

Dean makes racial political history



They quote part of his speech, with the whole speech given at the bottom.



This statement made clear what risks Dean took taking this attempt for change.

because they've been forced to lurk and just read, because of the vitriol.

I understood what Dean meant when he said it...to the horror of many DU'ers who couldn't get past the 'flag issue.' We can't be one issue candidates. But, it doesn't mean we can't fight for our point of view. We just have to try to think harder before we react about the consequences if we act too fast and don't see where the real anger is coming from and how we can be manipulated by it and influenced in ways that have unintended consequences.

An Excellent Post. Thanks for the links to back it up.

K&R!