There is a difference between being racist, and using racism.

[TLM]

Hillary isn't racist. I do not think she hates black people or considers them inferior to her.

However...

Hillary does USE racism as a weapon. And I do think she believes she is superior to most people, not on the basis of race, but on the basis of her own arrogance and sense of entitlement.

For hillary stirring up racist fears and using racism to motivate anti-obama sentiment, is just another weapon in her arsenal.

Sort of a Jim Crowbar, she uses for leverage in campaigns in places where the population is dumb enough to believe that Obama is really a secret Muslim.

That doesn't make her a racist... just unscrupulous.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

1. Exploiting racism is worse than being a racist, IMO. nt

[ekwhite]

24. Yes it is much worse

'Honest' racism is a product of fear and ignorance, from my experience. Exploiting racism for political gain is much worse. It demonstrates a total lack of ethics on the part of the user, and stokes the fires of racism. The ignorant can be educated; I don't know how to cure the unethical.

[QC]

2. The same is true about being a homophobe vs. using homophobia

for political advantage.

As odd as it might sound, I think I prefer an honest bigot over someone who doesn't really have anything against me but is willing to encourage those who do hate me in order to gain some kind of advantage. The latter takes the sin of the former and adds the additional stink of hypocrisy.

[TLM]

6. Exactly.... i agree. At least with a real bigot you know where they stand.

Their beliefs, while stupid and hateful, are still their beliefs.

Whereas in Clinton's case, racism is just one more thing in the kitchen sink strategy.

[QC]

17. So that leaves us with two candidates willing to cater to bigots

in order to pick up a few votes.

That's just one reason among many that it's hard to get excited about this campaign anymore.

[TLM]

23. Yeah McCain and Hillary....

good thing we have Obama as an alternative.

[QC]

31. Well, if we are going to include McCain, then we have three candidates

willing to cater to bigots.

The McClurkin fiasco was nothing more than Obama kissing the asses of fundamentalist bigots in order to win their votes. Period.

I felt favorably disposed toward Obama until then, when he showed me how he really feels about my kind. You can dismiss my feelings as "faux outrage," as seems to be the custom of this place, but I cannot tell you how it hurt to have a Democrat do what Obama did.

I'll vote for him, but I'll never forget what he did and I'll never trust him again.

[AtomicKitten]

3. Race-baiting by a Democrat against another Democrat is unprecedented.

And I think in labeling that 'unscrupulous,' you are being too kind.

[TLM]

7. Not really.... using racism has been around a long time...

It is just that this is the first time a black candidate has had a real shot at wining... so it is being amped up from the more subtle implication and innuendo type racism, to this more outward and in your face type.

[EFerrari]

21. It really isn't, if you go back a bit to people like Wallace

who ran to run on the most de-segregationist platform.

[WeDidIt]

4. I disagree

To use racism in order to further one's desires is indicative of the real person.

Anybody who would sink as low as to use racism is themselves a racist, whether they want to admit it or not.

[TLM]

9. That's like saying anybody who uses a gun is a soldier...

or anybody who waves a flag is a patriot.


I don't buy for a second that hillary actually believes half the shit she says... the race baiting included.

[WeDidIt]

19. Poor analogy

One must have racist tendencies in order for one to race bait.

[TLM]

26. Nope... one just need to know those tendancies exist....

Such as trying to play the latino community against the black community. One need not be black nor latino, in order to perceive that devoid or try to exploit it.

[WeDidIt]

32. IF one had no racist tendencies whatsoever

one could never use racism as a means to an end.

[mmonk]

5. I don't make distinctions when making political decisions.

[TLM]

10. Isn't a decision, be definition, a distinction?

[RaleighNCDUer]

8. Jim Crowbar - that's good.

A perfect descriptor for the pragmatic using of other peoples' racism for your own gain.

[TLM]

12. Thanks.... i thought it was pretty clever....

[BlooInBloo]

11. Racist is as racist does, as far as I'm concerned.

[DemGa]

13. And there's a difference between actually using racism

and being accused of using racism. Just as there is a difference between claiming "new politics" and using character assassination as a campaign tactic.

[TLM]

16. You mean like trying to attack someone by associating them with their scary black pastor?

That's some character assassination, if I've ever seen it.

Or having your staffer say Obama is lucky he's black... etc.


Trying to argue that hillary hasn't been using racism, is as delusional as claiming she can still win the nomination.

[dchill]

14. Don't you think that racists "use racism?"

They use it as an excuse to feel superior, an excuse to hate, and excuse to not vote for someone. A difference that makes no difference is no difference. Someone once said. (William James, Mr. Spock)

[VotesForWomen]

15. so then her supporters are the racists, since they are susceptible to her 'race-baiting.' is that

what you're saying? 1/2 of democrats are racists? so what percentage of the rest of the electorate would you say are 'racists?' with well over half the general electorate being 'racists' it would seem impossible for O to win the GE. or... maybe you're just full of shit and race-baiting.

[TLM]

22. When you feel like addressing what I actualy wrote....

feel free to try again.


However if you just want to make up shit to argue against, in your own little circular logic jerk, you can do that by yourself.

[VotesForWomen]

29. i did; you claim hillary is 'using' race. using it on who is the question. her 'racist' supporters i

guess.

[Beacool]

18. Racists fear????

Oh please, I'm sick to death of this bullshit that the Clintons are racists or used the racial card. Face the truth, Obama is not getting the white working class voters and hasn't gotten them since the early states when he wasn't vetted and the media treated him like he walked on water. It is NOT the Clintons' fault that he's not attracting these voters, Obama's lofty talk and dubious connections to certain individuals, do not appeal to them.

On the other hand, why not question why 9 out of 10 AA vote for Obama. That's not also racial?

You want a united party in the fall? Well, stop with this divisive crap!!!!!!!

[TLM]

28. Sure it is racial that 9 out of 10 AA votes go to Obama....

But it is not because he's out their trying to associate Clinton with her crazy racist neo-con prayer group. It is because the AA voters are excited and energized like never before with the opportunity to elect an AA president. In the same sense that a lot of women are energized and excited about the opportunity to elect a female president.

"Obama is not getting the white working class voters"

Yeah he is... he's just not getting the ones who believe he's a secret Muslim. The exit polls in WV showed that something like half the rural white voters who went for hillary said openly that race was a factor.

Obama is getting plenty of working class whites... but not the Rush fan crossovers who are propping up Hillary.


Trying to argue that somehow no working class white dems will vote for obama in the GE, is exactly the type of race baiting fear crap that Hillary has been using.

So take your own advice.... "stop with this divisive crap!!!!!!!"

[Beacool]

30. You started this post, not me.

The reality is that Obama is not getting the white blue collar workers. I never said that he's not getting any white votes, of course he is, particularly the yuppies like the ones in my town, and the college kids.

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

20. I don't care what she personally is -- that's her problem.

What her campaign has done is destructive and wrong.

[algol]

25. It doesn't feel that way.

To the recipient, it is a distinction without a difference.

[loyalsister]

27. Many differences and subtlties

"Being racist" seems pretty cut and dried to me, an implies that a person holds particular views. Although I think there are many degrees.
Whether it is outright KKK hate, to the other end of the spectrum laughing at the jokes, being willing to endorse stereotypes, etc.

"Using racism" is very vague, and I think can be defined in any number of ways.

I think that the Clinton campaign has "exploited racism."
I think they have used propaganda and language to tap into racist views they know exist.
They have done this knowingly and with an agenda.

People were invited to express racism at the ballot box.

This to me reveals something about Hillary Clinton's values, but I am reluctant to say whether it is a very sick form of opportunism indirectly targeted or more direct racism.
Bill Clinton on the other hand, has been willing to directly target African Americans.

If one were to give him the benefit of the doubt there are two reason why he might behave that way other than some underlying racist views surfacing.
1. He may think that he owes Hillary and that compromising his values is a small price.
2. He was brainstorming about what would be possible ways to win. He thought of the most evil Karl Rove thing a person could do and had no intentions of doing it. But, under the hypothesis of some (that his heart surgery is affecting his behavior) he accidentally said them).

I have tried hard.
My "benefit of the doubt" possibilities seem remote to me.
Other people may find them plausible.
Jim crowbar is a good word.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## DON'T DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our second quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Whatever you do, do not click the link below!