How To Get Away With Racist Comments
Image via Wikipedia
Harry Reid made a quip about Obama’s lack of a Negro dialect. Bill Clinton arguably said something far worse. And now some people want those men to be roasted over the fire of racial outrage just as Trent Lott and Don Imus before them. Some Republicans are even crying that there is a racially insensitive comment double standard: One conservative commentator was so sad that he couldn’t get away with calling Obama a light-skinned, coffee fetching, well-spoken Negro I thought he was going to cry into his Morning Joe. Interestingly, I don’t hear many Republicans saying that Harry Reid was wrong: i.e. that America is perfectly ready for a dark-skinned African-American candidate who speaks with a “dialect.” But I suppose that’s besides the point.
A number of people have told me that if Harry Reid was Mitch McConnell, I’d be screaming for McConnell to be fired on the spot.
I don’t know about that. But I have forgiven Joe Biden’s surprise at the President’s ability to speak and bathe. Joe the Veep gets a lot more racial rope (with which to hang himself) from me than, say, Dick Cheney.
Does that make me a hypocrite? Hardly. Does that make me a slavish shill for the Democratic Party? Well, not on this issue. Instead, I think we do live in a world where some people can say things that others cannot. Equality doesn’t require me to treat everybody exactly the same. There is a language double standard, one that I’m perfectly comfortable with.
Here’s the thing that about verbal gaffes, they’re not gaffes if you mean it. There’s a huge difference between accidentally saying something you don’t mean, and saying something you mean that you didn’t intend to say.
And you know what, people rarely say things that they don’t mean. The number of verbal mistakes drops to infinitesimally small when you look at politicians and other public figures who make a living off of the words. When Harry Reid says that America was ready for a black candidate: “especially one such as Obama — a ‘light-skinned’ African American ‘with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one,” I’m forced to believe that the statement fairly captures what Reid meant to say. When Bill Clinton cracks that Obama should be getting him coffee, I’m almost positive that President Clinton would have preferred Obama the coffee maker to Obama the guy that was stealing the nomination from his wife. And for what it’s worth, I’m pretty sure that Trent Lott meant to say that the racial problems in this country wouldn’t be as troubling if segregationist Strom Thrumond had been elected president.
If we assume that these people say what they mean to say, we have to put their words into context. Not just the context of the larger point they were trying to make, but into the context of their entire career in public life. It’s really not that difficult of an exercise, especially when you are talking about politicians. We can draw on their extensive public appearances, their voting records, and their general penchant for making provocative and controversial statements.
Joe Biden: It’s not really that he talks out of his ass, it’s that he poops out of his mouth.
Trent Lott: Was a segregationist. He supported segregationists, something tells me he doesn’t think segregation is that bad of an idea. I blame Senate Republicans for knowingly voting a segregationist as their leader, then wondering why they can’t get any black votes.
Bill Clinton: All I know is that Bill Clinton wasn’t a racist when he was the president. We’ve got eight years of President Clinton to go on. You want an example from the other side of the aisle? I’m also sure that George H.W. Bush isn’t a racist. If he said Obama should be getting him coffee, I’d assume the comment was based on extreme old age instead of racial animus.
And then there’s Harry Reid. Reid hasn’t hit the right note on an issue since he became majority leader. I blame South Dakota for voting out Tom Daschle. I blame moderate Senate Democrats for not giving this thing over to Chuck Schumer — who would have ordered a hit on Joe Liberman by now. I blame dark skinned Negros who speak with a dialect for not taking time out of their Vegas vacations to go up to Carson City and make friends with the Senator.
Does Reid get a pass here because he’s a Democrat? No. Instead, he is going to get away with this because it’s hard to link up Harry Reid’s statement with other, racially offensive words or actions he’s taken in the past.
It is a double standard: all white politicians who make silly statements about race are not created equal.
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
Well put.
Glad to see your input on this. Makes good sense.
Mr. Mystal,
For my part, the bigger issue here is the role of the political parties. The Republican Party craves and actively seeks the votes of racists and keeps them voting for the GOP by defending racism. The Democrat Party has a very large base of non-whites and others who support the advance of civil rights. As a result the Democratic Party generally, if unevenly and often unenthusiastically, opposes racism.
What this means is that when a Democrat says something like what Mr. Reid said, it was not an appeal to racists to vote for him. If anything it hurt him politically. Moreover, in the context of what he said, it was basically supportive of Mr. Obama, albeit in clumsy and “inartful” fashion. Mr. Reid’s statement hardly betrays a racist political agenda, rather the opposite.
In contrast, when a Republican says something like what Mr. Lot said, it is a pretty clear appeal to racist voters to vote for him as he will defend racism. Mr. Lott’s comments exposed, in a very naked fashion, the fact that the Republican Party actively courts the racist vote. (AAA, no Republican has come forward to say what Mr. Reid said was wrong).
In a criminal proceeding, there are two things that need to be proven to convict someone of a crime, the mens rea and the actus reus. The actus reus is the criminal act, the deed itself which illegal while the mens rea is the “criminal mind”, usually intent or motive. In this case, Mr. Lott’s statement revealed a racist intent or motive, it was in his interest, both as an individual and as a party leader, to endorse racism. In contrast, Mr. Reid has no clear motive or intent, endorsing racism neither benefits him nor his party.
There is no double standard.
Because you only speak for yourself and
not all blacks, we will give you a pass
like you give the democrat racist mr reid
who by the way dishonors the constitution which is
owned by the people and no owned by the govern
ment
I loved this, Elie.
I love it too….mr Reid only
speaks for the racist segment
of the white community….
He is their spokesman
“Does that make me a hypocrite?” Most definately. “Does that make me a slavish shill for the Democratic Party?” Absolutely… It’s very apparent to people when you use the race issue when it suits your agenda and not evenly and consistantly. Again, you lose you credibility…
Elie… You are comfortable with double a double standard. That make you a racist. I reckon you’re comfortable with that, too. White people deserve to be hated, my brother.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
He gets away with it because it was the truth. You can’t fire or banish every person who makes a truthful statement about race.
He gets away with it becasue the POTUS has forgiven him his misstep.
If its good enough for Obama, then its good enough for me.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by lewisdvorkin, Tweets Tube, Good Coffee Maker, Black in America, glennsnews and others. glennsnews said: How To Get Away With Racist Comments http://bit.ly/8rrWrQ [...]
Many of these comments trouble me. I think Elie said it best “they’re not gaffes if you mean it.” That is not a double standard.
As a white man, I for one, was excited when Eric Holder said that we needed to come together as a nation for a discussion on race. I was less enthused when he said we were a nation of cowards. I do not feel that it is cowardice, but realism that precludes the discussion from happening. When people try to have the discussion, they are subject to the treatment that Reid is currently recieving.
Thankfully, we have passed the point in this country where the greatest threat to racial harmony is a bunch of hicks in hoods trying to kill, maim, and intimidate black people. Now the challenge is much more daunting. We must confront our racial tendacies that are not so obvious. Rather, all sides- black, white, asian, latino- must all look inwardly and examine our subconsous racial prejudices. This is not easy, because with introspection, we do not always like what we see.
Racism is a fact of life, but it is one that must be confronted. Talk to a white person in rural Alaska or one who lives in Hawaii. Ask them if they have experienced racism from the native people. They have. Racism is not specific to one race or one society. Unfortunately, it is a part of the human condition. As with most things, we must examine it and educate ourselves about it in order to have any chance to overcome it.
Any time you confront a problem, such as this one, that contains such subconcious overtones and raw emotions, people will say stupid things. Things they do not mean. People are limited by language in expressing their thoughts. Even gifted writers will experience this limitation.
In order to have the conversation that Eric Holder called for, we must accept the fact that linguistic limitations will cause difficult moments. People are not perfect. We have to forgive those moments. We must forgive when Reid makes an off putting comment about the negro dialect. We must forgive when Obama makes an off putting comment about bitter people with their God and their guns, or when he says that a white cop acted stupidly.
In the previous examples, emotion and a lack of preparation led to an inability to harness adequate language to truly convey what Reid and Obama probably meant to. However, when your words and your actions are in harmony, as they were when Trent Lott praised segregation, you lose the assumption that you were just rash or inarticulate. When your past actions are in accordance with your words, it is not wrong to assume that your words fairly represent your position.
“we have passed the point in this country where the greatest threat to racial harmony is a bunch of hicks in hoods trying to kill, maim, and intimidate black people.” I have not heard, nor read of any KKK’s lately killing and maiming blacks. What I do see is the New Black Panther party intimidating voters and Eric Holders Justice dept dismissing it.