UBinVA Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0209/18999.html This nation has done more to promote race relations and good will than any other on earth and he calls us cowards? This guy is a travesty. We have our first 1/2 black President and he is the first black Attorney General and he says this? Less than 100 years after the slaves were freed, blacks have progressed to the highest level of office this land has to offer after a great struggle and now we hear this? You may feel this way Mr. Holder but I don't. Maybe you are the coward sir by allowing your party to continually patronize and put down the black's in this country. If it wasn't for the Republican's of the 1860's and 1960's, your people would never be in the position you are today. By the way sir, I believe Mr. "KKK" Bird is still a Democratic Senator today. Do we have race issues in this country, you bet. But you can't account for a few peoples backward way of thinking by calling the entire country cowards on race. The fact of the matter is, we can't honestly talk about race relations without being called a bigot or something else. This P.C. stuff has to stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Was really beyond me why he needed to say this, especially at this juncture. This conversation he wants to foment is stupid. And I think we're all going to be more than a little surprised at what the 2010 census tells us regarding this, vis-a-vis interracial marriage, dating, paternity, etc. --- provided it's written even halfway intelligently. Nevermind that, yaknow, Mr. Holder, I think we've got bigger !@#$ problems than this 'Woe is us' crap right now. Get Bernie Madoff behind !@#$ bars, dude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0209/18999.html This nation has done more to promote race relations and good will than any other on earth and he calls us cowards? This guy is a travesty. We have our first 1/2 black President and he is the first black Attorney General and he says this? Less than 100 years after the slaves were freed, blacks have progressed to the highest level of office this land has to offer after a great struggle and now we hear this? You may feel this way Mr. Holder but I don't. Maybe you are the coward sir by allowing your party to continually patronize and put down the black's in this country. If it wasn't for the Republican's of the 1860's and 1960's, your people would never be in the position you are today. By the way sir, I believe Mr. "KKK" Bird is still a Democratic Senator today. Do we have race issues in this country, you bet. But you can't account for a few peoples backward way of thinking by calling the entire country cowards on race. The fact of the matter is, we can't honestly talk about race relations without being called a bigot or something else. This P.C. stuff has to stop. I think you're misunderstanding his quote a bit, and that the two of you actually agree. He seems to be criticizing the fact that there isn't an open dialogue regarding race, that's what he means by cowards I think. Based on the last line of your post, it seems you're in agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 I think you're misunderstanding his quote a bit, and that the two of you actually agree. He seems to be criticizing the fact that there isn't an open dialogue regarding race, that's what he means by cowards I think. Based on the last line of your post, it seems you're in agreement. Of course you are right, but this is America after all, and while the word coward might sit well with other people, it sure as hell doesn't with us. It is a little strange that a lawyer, or the Attorney General USA, couldn't figure out the right words to say, or what not to say. But who knows, he may simply be trying to get our attention. If that is the case, he better have a killer 180/follow up if he's gonna start out with the word "coward". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UBinVA Posted February 19, 2009 Author Share Posted February 19, 2009 I think you're misunderstanding his quote a bit, and that the two of you actually agree. He seems to be criticizing the fact that there isn't an open dialogue regarding race, that's what he means by cowards I think. Based on the last line of your post, it seems you're in agreement. You're right, I read the whole quote again and it does seem he is saying we need to be more open and talk about race. The word about being cowards is not the right message nor the right phrasing in my opinion, and should not have been used in that context. If he used the word coward in describing peoples fears of being called a racist if they speak openly about race then he should say so in a more straight forward fashion. Look at Bill Cosby for example. He speakes some truth about his own peoples culture and everyone turns on him like he's crazy. If a white person said the things he said, that person would be lambasted and called every name in the book inclusing a racist bigot. If being called a racist by the PC police and risking losing your job or reputation by being honest about race in America, then it's not about being a coward more than it is about self preservation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 To me the guy said a whole lot of nothing. No substance to his statement. Strange Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Im just trying to figure out why the Attorney General, who just got in office, if giving a referendum on the Nation's Social Issues. Whats he going to tackle next? The traffic on our commutes? Youre not Jackie Robinson. Youre not even (Now here's to you) Mrs. Robinson. STFU and do the job you were hired for, Eric. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Im just trying to figure out why the Attorney General, who just got in office, if giving a referendum on the Nation's Social Issues. Whats he going to tackle next? The traffic on our commutes? Youre not Jackie Robinson. Youre not even (Now here's to you) Mrs. Robinson. STFU and do the job you were hired for, Eric. The more I think about it, isn't this pretty typical of leftist dems these days?? It's all uncontrolled idealists with no answers. Only "emotional" statements that go no where. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Was really beyond me why he needed to say this, especially at this juncture. This conversation he wants to foment is stupid. And I think we're all going to be more than a little surprised at what the 2010 census tells us regarding this, vis-a-vis interracial marriage, dating, paternity, etc. --- provided it's written even halfway intelligently. Nevermind that, yaknow, Mr. Holder, I think we've got bigger !@#$ problems than this 'Woe is us' crap right now. Get Bernie Madoff behind !@#$ bars, dude. I disagree about Madoff- put in some hole somewhere, make him work for the rest of his life and garnish at least 90 percent of his wages- and give that money to the people he ripped off- justice should be served! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Look at Bill Cosby for example. He speakes some truth about his own peoples culture and everyone turns on him like he's crazy. He did - after many years. Folks like Ward Connerly and Niger Innis have been ridiculed and scoffed at for years by the race racketeers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 You're right, I read the whole quote again and it does seem he is saying we need to be more open and talk about race. The word about being cowards is not the right message nor the right phrasing in my opinion, and should not have been used in that context. If he used the word coward in describing peoples fears of being called a racist if they speak openly about race then he should say so in a more straight forward fashion. Look at Bill Cosby for example. He speakes some truth about his own peoples culture and everyone turns on him like he's crazy. If a white person said the things he said, that person would be lambasted and called every name in the book inclusing a racist bigot. If being called a racist by the PC police and risking losing your job or reputation by being honest about race in America, then it's not about being a coward more than it is about self preservation. Good post, I've got a lot of respect for Mr. Cosby for being a prominent member of the black community and having the ability to hold a mirror up to his own people and say that he doesn't like what he sees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsNYC Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Didn't Obama refuse to address race? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 I think the choice of words was unfortunate because OBVIOUSLY people homed in on "coward" and not the context. Maybe that was intentional. But I tend to agree...it's a very emotional and often divisive topic, yet it should be addressed because honest, constructive discussion usually helps walls come down. However people shy away from it, either because they don't want to give offense or they don't know how to have the conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 I think the choice of words was unfortunate because OBVIOUSLY people homed in on "coward" and not the context. Maybe that was intentional. But I tend to agree...it's a very emotional and often divisive topic, yet it should be addressed because honest, constructive discussion usually helps walls come down. However people shy away from it, either because they don't want to give offense or they don't know how to have the conversation. Heh, Blz. You know and I know that this crowd is going to get rid the concept of a government by the people. Did you notice the executive order by Obama, that all government contracts in excess of 25 million must be awarded to a company that is union? They will become the Sturmabteilung Been following that jump-in-front-of-the parade Dem law that will put the kibosh on used clothing, a billion dollars' worth of toys, kid's books in public libraries, and so on? I guess you need to blame Bush for that. Unless it was stuck in among a dizzying array of other bits of legislation. Remember when a Rep. Congress took action against those crammed bills? To allow a President a line item veto. How Clinton thought that was a wonderful thing - and then when your Dems, lead by the Prince of Pork, sued and cried for their "right" to piss on that? Our OH Governor Strickland issue an order that if any soup kitchen, a church social, etc. needs something like a broken window pane repaired, that if even one person walking through their doors happens to have food stamps, a medicare status...well, if that window is not repaired by a union member, they, their good works will be subject to prosecution. You must be aware of the "Buy Union America" thing in this recovery spending bill. Wait and see the US companies that go belly up and axe workers as other nations put up administrative block after block. Foot-dragging works... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Heh, Blz. You know and I know that this crowd is going to get rid the concept of a government by the people. Did you notice the executive order by Obama, that all government contracts in excess of 25 million must be awarded to a company that is union? They will become the Sturmabteilung Been following that jump-in-front-of-the parade Dem law that will put the kibosh on used clothing, a billion dollars' worth of toys, kid's books in public libraries, and so on? I guess you need to blame Bush for that. Unless it was stuck in among a dizzying array of other bits of legislation. Remember when a Rep. Congress took action against those crammed bills? To allow a President a line item veto. How Clinton thought that was a wonderful thing - and then when your Dems, lead by the Prince of Pork, sued and cried for their "right" to piss on that? Our OH Governor Strickland issue an order that if any soup kitchen, a church social, etc. needs something like a broken window pane repaired, that if even one person walking through their doors happens to have food stamps, a medicare status...well, if that window is not repaired by a union member, they, their good works will be subject to prosecution. You must be aware of the "Buy Union America" thing in this recovery spending bill. Wait and see the US companies that go belly up and axe workers as other nations put up administrative block after block. Foot-dragging works... I have no idea how this rambling POSt is a response to mine. Or even what you're trying to say. That makes two of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 Between sessions of covering my ears and loudly singing "Take Me Out to the Ballgame" whenever that c--- Eleanor Clift was speaking (often), on the "McLaughlin Group" over the weekend, someone made the great point. I think it was Monica Crowley. I think Holder did have a valid point, even if "cowards" was too strong a word for it (I see it more an uneasiness). If America wants to have this discussion... really wants to have this discussion... then there's got to be an end to politically-correct backlash whenever someone says anything. If you want honest discussion, you need to stop slapping wrists with rulers. The Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons of this world need to stop showing up and crying 'You're a racist! Where's my $500M!?!?!' and then have the kind of standoff as what happened with Imus on Sharpton's radio show (the one where on every station break, Sharpton went into the control room with the same look as a boxer in the time-out corner and got fluffed by his staff). When someone makes an apology, accept the apology and move on "with malice toward none." Otherwise, thought stays secretly inside of heads, is never shared, and is never experientially changed by real interaction. If it's going to be real, this stuff needs to stop. Personally, I don't think this country is ready for it. A huge step was recently made. (A step that I think America had been ready for, for awhile but only lacked a decent candidate not rooted in the '60s mindset who could build and walk across the bridge rather than just set up a first pilon). We need to take some smaller steps now before we take another big one. We need to settle into the Obama presidency a little, and he needs to really fill the office. And as I said above, I think the 2010 census will have a lot of interesting things to show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted February 23, 2009 Share Posted February 23, 2009 I think you're misunderstanding his quote a bit, and that the two of you actually agree. He seems to be criticizing the fact that there isn't an open dialogue regarding race, that's what he means by cowards I think. Based on the last line of your post, it seems you're in agreement. You are correct in your analysis. However, Holder used a poor choice of word when he said "coward.' Perhaps he should have stated what you did in a more positive way. i.e. for the country to take further steps forward in the effort to improve race relations then we must have an open and honest dialogue about both the history and future of race in this country. To do anything otherwise is cowardly and sells all people short. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StupidNation Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 I find nothing wrong with Holder's statement except for those that interpret and use it for media fodder. He is the "coward" for not wanting to repeal "hate crimes" and then he should be honest and stop the cowardly affirmative action. Then we can have a conversation. Until then he is hiding behind political correctness. Pat Buchanan makes some comment on this topic and is called a racist. Racism is interesting in that way, you can just call someone a racist and they have to defend themselves for a lifetime because racism is such a powerful form of demagoguery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/24/wal...eref=rss_latest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted February 24, 2009 Share Posted February 24, 2009 Now the guy they want under him has defended kiddie pornographers, saying that kiddie porn is protected speech. Just when you thought this admin couldn't get any worse... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts