Former Cheney aide calls for TN staffer to be fired over racist Obama e-mail.
Former Cheney aide calls for TN staffer to be fired over racist Obama e-mail.
Yesterday, Tennessee state senator Diane Black (R) continued to resist calls to fire a staffer who sent out a racist image of President Obama. “This is, believe me, not at all anything having to do with being derogatory toward someone in a minority,” said Black, adding that the e-mail by aide Sherri Goforth “does not reflect any of my beliefs.” As proof, Black said that she spent time as a nurse in Haiti working with “people with black skin.” This morning on CNN, former Cheney aide Ron Christie said that it was unacceptable that Black wasn’t firing Goforth:
Racism cannot be tolerated for those who have the public trust. This individual said, “I simply had the wrong person.” Well, she needs to be looking for a new job, she needs to be fired. It’s a poor reflection on her institution that she works in in the state Senate in Tennessee, and a poor reflection on her member. … Racism has to be stamped out, that’s why I said this staffer has to go. I think the appropriate course of action would be for this staffer to be dismissed.
Watch it:
Transcript:
CHRISTIE: I think it’s really unfortunate, John. When you’re a member of a congressional staff, your obligation is to represent not only the member of the state Senate or state House that you represent, but the people from that district. And this racist cartoon reflects very poorly on the member of Congress — or I should say, the state senator — and it’s despicable. We need to stand out for those people who are involved in public service, to a higher calling and a higher standard, and say, “We do not accept any form of racism in public service. This staffer needs to go.” [...]
KING: So this legislative aide — Sherri Goforth is her name, she works for state senator Diane Black — she admits to sending out the e-mail. She says she sent it to the wrong list. Ron, it sounds like she got caught in an “oops” moment there. She did intend to send this e-mail out. So what do you think should be the appropriate course of action that the state senator takes regarding this person?
CHRISTIE: Well John, again, I can’t say it anymore clearly. Racism cannot be tolerated for those who have the public trust. This individual said, “I simply had the wrong person.” Well, she needs to be looking for a new job, she needs to be fired. It’s a poor reflection on her institution that she works in in the state Senate in Tennessee, and a poor reflection on her member.
I will say, however, that we shouldn’t go too far to draw this out as “the Republican party is racist.” This does not reflect on the Republican party. But it’s an incident that Republican leaders in Tennessee, as well as Washington, need to be very cognizant that this sort of behavior cannot be tolerated. It needs to be eliminated immediately. [...]
We need to stamp out racism where it exists. Be it in our places of worship, be it in our places of work, but racism can’t be tolerated. For those who are involved in the political process, they have to recognize that again, this is a public trust. You cannot employ who look at other people as other than equal individuals. We’re all equal under the law, we’re all equal in society. Racism has to be stamped out, that’s why I said this staffer has to go. I think the appropriate course of action would be for this staffer to be dismissed.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Ron Christie is still a GOP tool……
June 17th, 2009 at 3:33 pmHeh. Ron Christie hasn’t yet tumbled to the fact that racism is the norm for the GOP…
Not very bright, is he?
June 17th, 2009 at 3:36 pmAll Ron Christie has is Black Skin.
Black, Gay, Hispanic, Women Republicans= Stockholm Syndrome.
RIP
June 17th, 2009 at 3:36 pmSGT Stephen R. Sherman
C CO 1-5 IN (STRYKER)
KIA 3 Feb 2005
Mosul, Iraq
I will say, however, that we shouldn’t go too far to draw this out as “the Republican party is racist.” This does not reflect on the Republican party.
how many racist incidents does it take before it is a reflection on the republican party?
it’d be one thing is this was an isolated incident.
but hardly a month goes by without someone in the republican party doing something blatantly racist in a very public manner
how many times does it have to happen before we should start to think that maybe the republican party IS racist?
June 17th, 2009 at 3:39 pmMCMetal Says:
Ron Christie is still a GOP tool……
Totally. And his debate style is to simply keep talking over all others. I can’t look at this cross-eyed fool and take him seriously. Gotta get those daily talking points out there! And just like our herd of trolls, those talking points don’t need to have anything to do with the subject at hand.
PEACE
June 17th, 2009 at 3:40 pmYeah, Christie’s outcry smacks against every other thing I’ve ever heard him say. Throws out GOP talking points without backing it up, then whines about anyone that talks while he’s talking.
Yet despite this brief instance of clarity, somehow I know he’ll say something that will reinforce his self-imposed stereotype of, as MCMetal put it, a GOP tool.
June 17th, 2009 at 3:41 pmOMG! Ron Christie – of all people!?
The GOPer oreo of the year? I’m in shock.
Well, Christie is right, Goforth should be fired. But then that would mean we’d have to fire alot of GOPers too – to be fare. Then where would that leave the Rethuglican Party?
June 17th, 2009 at 3:41 pmThen where would that leave the Rethuglican Party?
In the unemployment line where they belong?
June 17th, 2009 at 3:45 pmMCMetal Says
June 17th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
Ron Christie is still a GOP tool……
__________________________________________________________
True. But here, he’s right.
June 17th, 2009 at 3:45 pmChristie has a point. Republicans have, at the very least, a perception problem with racism. To address it they need a zero tolerance policy when it comes to racism.
I feel that being fired for passing on this e-mail would normally be considered an excessive recourse. However, because she works in a Republican office (that cannot afford implications of racism) and that she works in a public office (that requires the atmosphere of equality and impariality), the staffer may need to go.
Although, there should be an opportunity for forgiveness, when people make mistakes, this staffer is in a position which may not afford it.
June 17th, 2009 at 3:46 pmglad to see we can agree on something.
June 17th, 2009 at 3:47 pmand that she works in a public office
Shortened it for you, backup.
June 17th, 2009 at 3:47 pm“‘This is, believe me, not at all anything having to do with being derogatory toward someone in a minority,’ said Black…”
Really? Is that how you want to go with this?
Why isn’t there a clown in GWB’s spot? Why isn’t there a cigar and blue dress in Clinton’s spot? Maybe a bag of peanuts in Carter’s spot? How about Kennedy & Lincoln with giant holes in their heads?
Fire that moronic staffer, and then resign. You obviously think your constituents (and the rest of America) are as stupid as you.
June 17th, 2009 at 3:47 pmmisscoleopteramolly Says:
——————————————————————————–
MCMetal Says
June 17th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
Ron Christie is still a GOP tool……
__________________________________________________________
True. But here, he’s right.
June 17th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut occasionally …….Or , as in this case , a Republican Cyclops……
June 17th, 2009 at 3:50 pmZooey Says:
You obviously think your constituents (and the rest of America) are as stupid as you.
Unfortunately Zooey there are way too many who are, and have been since 2000.
RIP
June 17th, 2009 at 3:50 pmSGT Stephen R. Sherman
C CO 1-5 IN (STRYKER)
KIA 3 Feb 2005
Mosul, Iraq
Backup – give me a break. Every employer has a policy regarding internet and email usage, and every policy I’ve ever seen PROHIBITS personal usage and forwarding “joke” emails.
This staffer works for US. All of us. The American people. WE pay her salary, backup, you and me. I don’t feel like my taxpayer dollars are well used keeping this racist dimwit fed and clothed.
She MUST HAVE KNOWN that she was violating some policy or other. She deliberately broke the rules, and I’ll bet you dollars to donuts that she signed an acknowledgement that she had been provided a copy of the employee handbook when she hired on.
This violation is so egregious that it is NOT forgivable. I’m sick of the Republicans being racist idiots and doing religious proselytizing ON MY DIME.
June 17th, 2009 at 3:51 pmThe whole racist gig the Republicans are trying so very hard to deny is like the old joke about the guy who comes home early and finds his wife in bed with another man (check the Ensign posts for details. He grabs a gun from the night stand and points it at his head. When they laugh at him he loudly cries…
“Don’t laugh. You’re next!”
June 17th, 2009 at 3:51 pmChristie has a point. Republicans have, at the very least, a perception problem with racism. To address it they need a zero tolerance policy when it comes to racism.
when people within the republican party are consistently responsible for racist actions, you do not have a “perception problem” you have a racism problem.
the staffer may need to go.
May?
there shouldn’t be a question in your mind about whether a racist public servant should be told to go look for employment somewhere else… perhaps in the private sector.
June 17th, 2009 at 3:51 pmAide slams staffer? Shouldn’t we be more concerned about the main players, not the help?
June 17th, 2009 at 3:54 pmHere’s part of the problem. People have been making fun of Presidents forever. Caricature’s of their features exaggerated in cartoons.
Bush has been caricatured as a clown, cowboy, Hitler, infant dependent on his father.
Clinton was also caricatured in various ways.
It’s been a respected facet of free speech.
The reality is that when you consider Obama and his features, he is black.
That’s what makes him different than all the other Presidents. That’s what makes him easily identifiable. It is the resource of the caricature.
If you restrict anyone that would normally caricature a President from exaggerating Obama’s race or skin color or features (that are black) – what else to you have?
Are we limiting free speech in the name of racism?
June 17th, 2009 at 3:56 pmdeebaser Says:
Aide slams staffer? Shouldn’t we be more concerned about the main players, not the help?
June 17th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
____________
If Tennessee State Senate offices are anything like U.S. House and Senate offices, the help ARE the main players.
June 17th, 2009 at 3:58 pmbackup Says:
Here’s part of the problem. People have been making fun of Presidents forever. Caricature’s of their features exaggerated in cartoons.
Bush has been caricatured as a clown, cowboy, Hitler, infant dependent on his father.
Clinton was also caricatured in various ways.
It’s been a respected facet of free speech.
The reality is that when you consider Obama and his features, he is black.
That’s what makes him different than all the other Presidents. That’s what makes him easily identifiable. It is the resource of the caricature.
If you restrict anyone that would normally caricature a President from exaggerating Obama’s race or skin color or features (that are black) – what else to you have?
Are we limiting free speech in the name of racism?
this was not a caricature… it was a blatantly racist image of nothing but blackness with eyes.
you’re implying that it is something its not.
you, backup, have a horrible problem of defending people who do things that are inexcusable by comparing them to things of which they are not.
this is not a caricature of obama, it plays off of 100s of years worth of racism in the united states.
June 17th, 2009 at 3:59 pmAgreed. I think the Republican party has problems with racism. Perception covers actual racism in addition to events that appear racists; whether they are or not.
Republicans have a problem with both.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:00 pmAre we limiting free speech in the name of racism?
slander isn’t protected by free speech?
should we allow slander backup?
if you really think this is a free speech issue then you have no character… you are pathetic.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:02 pmbackup Says:
Are we limiting free speech in the name of racism?
June 17th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
Well, it’s obvious you’re condoning racism in the name of free speech.
Doofus.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:02 pmFormer Cheney aide Ron Christie is obviously borrowing off of Cheney’s 1% doctrine. If 1% of Repubs are non racist, that means none of them are, or something.
(Please note; I was being very, very generous when I rounded up to 1% non-racist Repubs.)
June 17th, 2009 at 4:03 pmbackup Says:
If you restrict anyone that would normally caricature a President from exaggerating Obama’s race or skin color or features (that are black) – what else to you have?
June 17th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
____________
Big ears… Goofy smile… Teleprompter… Bad bowler… Joe Biden… There are lots of features to lampoon, and I haven’t seen The Onion or The Daily Show or The Colbert Report holding back just because Obama is black. I really don’t buy the “but won’t someone think of the poor poor comedians” line.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:05 pmBTW b-cup,
This isn’t about free speech. Government is not stepping in to limit what we are saying, or what we send in email.
Racism is socially unacceptable, and Goforth and Black are experiencing social consequences.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:05 pmThe Republican’s main problem is arrogance in which this issue does not help one bit.
What about all of the derogatory ‘caricatures’ of Jewish people during Hitler’s rise to power? It was okay then, but not now, in reality it was not okay then either! I think we all should know better now…it’s not okay in my view.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:06 pmB-cup is here with his semi-regular “pick an indefensible stand and defend it” show.
For some reason, it usually focus on “comments on race”.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:06 pmbackup Says:
Here’s part of the problem. People have been making fun of Presidents forever. Caricature’s of their features exaggerated in cartoons.
It’s not a caricature, for cripe’s sake. Do you think you’d understand it better if it had a caption “feets, do yo stuff!”?
How about a “caricature” of Rahm Emanuel with a big hook nose?
June 17th, 2009 at 4:08 pmdavidual Says:
18. calavzma Says: Christie has a point. Republicans have, at the very least, a perception problem with racism. To address it they need a zero tolerance policy when it comes to racism.
The Republican’s main problem is arrogance in which this issue does not help one bit.
please don’t attribute something backup said to me
i would never defend racism
and have been pretty explicit about holding the republicans responsible for it
June 17th, 2009 at 4:09 pmralph the wonder locust Says:
B-cup is here with his semi-regular “pick an indefensible stand and defend it” show.
For some reason, it usually focus on “comments on race”.
Yes, it seems there is a “racial element” to his stand.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:09 pm…
ron christie’s a good guy.
but he’s no jeff christie.
:|
June 17th, 2009 at 4:10 pmralph the wonder locust Says:
B-cup is here with his semi-regular “pick an indefensible stand and defend it” show.
For some reason, it usually focus on “comments on race”.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:06 pm
He is forced to flail around, trying to find some reason that his own racism is A-ok.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:10 pmcalavzma.
Obama is black. That’s the reality.
What limitations of caricatures were there on other Presidents? What were we restricted from commenting on? Why are we not limited in what we could write or say with the first 43, but restricted when it comes to the 44th.
Many here have successfully argued that a double standard exists, because of a power imbalance among races.
But, in this circumstance, the offender is a staffer for a state senator. And the offended is the most powerful person on the planet.
When you consider the balance of power in this circumstance, do we really need the heavy handed defense of the President?
At some point, the defense becomes patronizing. And the unspoken message is that black people aren’t really as autonomous as others, they need our protection.
I disagree.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:10 pmRon, you hate saying this don’t ya? I wonder how Michael Steele feels? Or Amy Holmes? Or ANY African American who stands with the republican party?
June 17th, 2009 at 4:12 pmbackup,
A caricature can refer to a portrait that exaggerates or distorts the essence of a person or thing to create an easily identifiable visual likeness.
they did the opposite… they did not create an image that resembled obama and exaggerated or distorted his essence.
they removed his essence and left only an image of blackness
this is not a caricature… this is racism at its worst
you’ve consistently demonstrated that you’re an idiot on most things race related. i do recall you were a strong apologist for the “barack the magic negro” “parody” as well.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:13 pmI’ll take this. When a caricature (which this isn’t) focuses on a single racial feature and can be used for any member of that race, then it’s racist.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:14 pmRon needs to take long drive in the south I think he would change his mind
“Black republican” sounds like a oxymoron
June 17th, 2009 at 4:19 pm…
b-cup,
linus will give up his blanket
before you ever give up your straw man.
:
you’re sitting in the urine puddle of
mediocrity. time to stand up and walk
away. be a man. for the love of god,
be a man.
…
agreed?
:
June 17th, 2009 at 4:20 pmI think my attempt to post has been refused because I wrote out the “n” word, comparing this caricature of a “spoo-k” as almost equivalent. This was not simply a caricature of President Obama, which could have been accomplished by drawing big ears. This was use of of a very old derogatory image and label. We as a society cannot tolerate this racism.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:20 pmbackup Says:
calavzma.
Obama is black. That’s the reality.
What limitations of caricatures were there on other Presidents? What were we restricted from commenting on? Why are we not limited in what we could write or say with the first 43, but restricted when it comes to the 44th.
You’re right. We should feel free to refer to Obama as a n!gger, too, because we have freedom of expression. Of course, to do so would suggest to some that we were racists, but at least we’d have our freedom.
A caricature of a PERSON is freedom of expression. A caricature of an entire race is racism. I see you ignored my question about Rahm Emanuel, but maybe you’re fine with the Protocols of the Elders of Zion as well.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:20 pmThis guy is a F*&^%$# Joke!!!!
June 17th, 2009 at 4:22 pmRon Christie can agree with us but backup can’t??????
June 17th, 2009 at 4:24 pmWTholyF??????????????
If one of us were to draw a cartoon like this and show it to our coworkers im sure we would be fired. Racism causes alot of problems in our country and it cannot be tolerated. Goforth works for a senator and she should be fired. Washington D.C. is not hollywood, you cant make a racist comment and then say your going into rehab and everything will be hunky-dory.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:25 pmRead ALTERNET today!!!!
This is of very importance. It is one thing which is missing in TP since ObaOba took office…
Shame: The ‘Anti-War’ Democrats Who Sold Out
ALTERNET
June 17th, 2009 at 4:26 pmI thought it was a pre-req to be a racist in order to be a member of the rethuglican party.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:27 pmSince we don’t have a tradition of honorable suicide, Goforth should have the honor to simply resign in disgrace.
If she won’t, then she should be fired.
period…
June 17th, 2009 at 4:27 pmOkay, b-cup, riddle us this?
The aide, refusing to apologize for the incident, said she was sorry for sending it to the “wrong” people.
Who were the “right” people to send it to?
We’ll wait.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:28 pmdeebaser. you’ve got a point with this.
I am conflicted. On the one hand I see the need to object to racist stereotypes that diminish our society.
On the other hand, I really believe that all men (and women) have equal aptitude. I look at a black man and see someone just like me that has darker skin.
Obama is the man. He has his stuff wired. For our time in history, he is the best person that could lead our country (and arguably help lead the world).
So, when I see people coming to his defense over what could be a caricature – I ask why?
Does this man, who has proven resoundingly capable need us to hold his hand? Isn’t this man as capable as the previous 43. Why weren’t we calling for their defense?
I am concerned that in insulating Obama from caricature, it will lead to an undercurrent that he is somehow not at the level of those that we did not insulate.
I disagree with that idea. Obama is strong. He can handle himself.
But, I agree that when you broaden the issue to Blacks in general, the issue is more difficult. At what point do we accept racially sensitive issues and at what point do we feel compelled to intercede.
And is the intercession appropriate or patronizing?
June 17th, 2009 at 4:31 pmSorry, sacopenapa, but if you really want us to take what you’re posting seriously, you should refrain from silly nicknames for our PRESIDENT!
Makes you like childish (trollish), results in us not caring what you’re attempting to relay.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:33 pmDRxJ. There is no right people. The e-mail is racist and inappropriate, even between close friends.
I’m not debating that. I’m debating the public response.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:33 pm“This is, believe me, not at all anything having to do with being derogatory toward someone in a minority,” said Black.
Is she bloody kidding? Um, no, we DON’T believe you, because it has absolutely everything to do with “being derogatory toward someone in a minority.” And more importantly- at least from the GOP standpoint- it is racist & hateful towards the President, and as we all remember, the GOP says we must show respect to the President at all times (only if he is a Repub, apparently)
June 17th, 2009 at 4:33 pmAnd yes, Goforth should be fired. If any of us – the ordinary working people- did such a racist, hateful thing at work about anyone, let alone the President, we would be turfed out faster than you can say, “Go forth, Goforth!”
I will say, however, that we shouldn’t go too far to draw this out as “the Republican party is racist.” This does not reflect on the Republican party.
If that’s the case, then shouldn’t the leadership of the Republican Party be speaking out against this and asking for the staffer to step down instead of a token (double entendre definitely implied) staffer from the former VP?
June 17th, 2009 at 4:33 pmSo, when I see people coming to his defense over what could be a caricature – I ask why?
backup,
you miss the point entirely… so you can’t be patronizing
this is not about defending obama
this is about attacking obvious racism
there is no way to defend this image as not racist. it is not a caricature. if an image like this were used against michael steele or even flava flav… it would be just as racist as it is when it against obama
the problem we have with this is not WHO the image was portraying but HOW it portrays african americans.
it is unacceptable, and anyone who doesn’t speak out against it is condoning it.
are you condoning this sort of racism backup?
if not there is only one thing to do… speak out against it
June 17th, 2009 at 4:35 pmb-cup,
you’ve got me completely confused on where you stand. The “caricature” you are referring to was two “white” eyes in a complete black background.
That is not a caricature.
It is a blatant attempt at racist humor.
Humor, I might add, which is NOT funny.
Answer my question above, and answer Zooey’s post above. Why were the others not a “caricature”?
June 17th, 2009 at 4:36 pmPerhaps because all were non black???
“Ron Christie, republican strategist”
“republican strategist“; isn’t that an oxymoron?
June 17th, 2009 at 4:36 pmgummitch.
You make a good point, but I’m arguing for balance.
The staffer didn’t use the ‘N’ word. She didn’t create the e-mail. She forwarded a e-mail that depicted Obama as being so dark that only his eyes could be seen.
I disagree with the e-mail. I think it is racist.
But, we’re talking about (in lieu of suicide) Goforth should resign or be fired.
I see the need to oppose racism, but how far do you take it.
If someone exaggerates Obama’s nose or lips, are they making a caricature of Obama or are they racially denigrating all black people?
Is our drive to insulate Obama and Black people from racial insensitivity going to unreasonably limit free speech?
June 17th, 2009 at 4:42 pmb-cup, you posted this:
I am concerned that in insulating Obama from caricature, it will lead to an undercurrent that he is somehow not at the level of those that we did not insulate.
I disagree with that idea. Obama is strong. He can handle himself.
Oh, there is no doubt that PRESIDENT Obama can handle himself on this issue, and he is strong. He has proven that.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:42 pmWhat I’m concerned with (beyond posters not respecting him by addressing him as PRESIDENT), is the young African American child from Tennessee.
Or the old white racist, who thinks he is far above those of colored skin.
And what I’m extremely frustrated with is those that the email was intended for, the “right” people, who could find humor ins such blatant racism.
I thought we as a nation outgrew such idiocies.
I thought wrong, thanks to the defeated GOP!
backup Says:
——————————————————————————–
Does this man, who has proven resoundingly capable need us to hold his hand? Isn’t this man as capable as the previous 43. Why weren’t we calling for their defense?
June 17th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
Reagan and Bush the Boy Blunder were never capable of anything except screwing up ; and they both kept those stellar records in-tact with their garbage presidencies.
They are indefensible………..
June 17th, 2009 at 4:44 pmIf someone exaggerates Obama’s nose or lips, are they making a caricature of Obama or are they racially denigrating all black people?
well you would exaggerate the nose and lips of ANYONE no matter what color their skin in a caricature, so no, had this been a caricature and not blatantly racist, those exaggerations would not have been a problem… if you put a turban on his head and a rocket launcher in his hand though… then you have a problem with racism, maybe i shouldn’t have mentioned that, because undoubtedly that’ll be hard for you to understand.
Is our drive to insulate Obama and Black people from racial insensitivity going to unreasonably limit free speech?
no, the drive is to create a united states in which there are consequences for hateful speech for those who hold a public office of any sort.
racism is hate… spreading racism is spreading hate…. this woman has no business working in any public office.
why is this so hard for you to understand?
June 17th, 2009 at 4:48 pmBackup – as far as I’m concerned, you can remove President Obama from the equasion entirely, and I’d still believe that staffer should be fired. You ignored the post in which I detailed my reasons, so I’ll paraphrase:
This staffer forwarded an offensive racist email – violating the terms of her employment.
Furthermore, we the taxpayers pay her salary, so she’s forwarding offensive racist emails on OUR DIME.
She deserves to be fired. Any questions?
June 17th, 2009 at 4:48 pmcalavzma.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/18/ag-holder-race-makes-us-a_n_167933.html
I agree with Holder. We need candid discussions on race. I think the real problem with racism is not the obvious examples that surface (like the topic of this thread), but the strong uncurrent that isn’t so obvious.
But a candid discussion is not a discussion in which I disingenuously nod my head in agreement, when I don’t.
I understand there is a problem with racism. But, I’m concerned about unrealistically limiting free speech to address it.
I also believe that (maybe not today) but at some point, the efforts to protect Black people from insensitivity of their race, will suggest a patronization that fuels a belief that they really aren’t equal.
That’s what I believe. You may disagree. But it is an attempt at a candid discussion that Holder called for.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:55 pmUh, how does spending time in Haiti prove that someone isn’t racist ?
I know many a person who did a mission trip to some region to help out the poor, pitiful souls.
June 17th, 2009 at 4:57 pmbackup Says:
gummitch.
You make a good point, but I’m arguing for balance.
Now there’s a shocker.
The staffer didn’t use the ‘N’ word. She didn’t create the e-mail. She forwarded a e-mail that depicted Obama as being so dark that only his eyes could be seen.
You still don’t get it. Maybe this will help. I thought my comment above about “feets do yo stuff” might sink in, but apparently not.
I’ve never gotten the impression from reading your comments that you have any life experience at all, certainly none around Black people, or around the casual racism that permeated this country for decades. Hell, for generations. You clearly have no idea how deep-seated that racism is, and how powerful and damaging your acceptance of it can be.
If someone exaggerates Obama’s nose or lips, are they making a caricature of Obama or are they racially denigrating all black people?
Why present a non-case? This clearly isn’t what was done here; this wasn’t a matter of exaggerating a feature but digging up an old racial stereotype. Most of the political cartoonists I’ve seen have exaggerated the size of his ears, because they are an actual feature of an actual face. Obama himself joked about his ears on the Colbert Report.
You still haven’t responded about big hook nosed Jews. Why not?
June 17th, 2009 at 4:59 pmbackup,
free speech does not protect you from the consequences of her words.
she was free to say those things
and now she must suffer the consequences.
any decent employer considering her position would have already fired her.
why is it that bigots think that “free speech” means you can say anything you want and not be held accountable for it.
there is no one limiting free speech
but there are people like you, passionately defending racism.
i would argue that you are the only coward on the board so far. as you refuse to take a stand on this issue, but instead waffle on the issue as if its really debatable.
it makes me sad.
but i’m done with this.
backup… i hope a day comes when you stop defending the indefensible
either that or embrace your racism… at least then you’d have some consistency.
i hope, however, you choose to stop defending the indefensible.
June 17th, 2009 at 5:02 pmb-cup, your like the guy trying to dance on the head of a pin. This person is a stone cold racist, who should lose her job, for trying to spread her racist crap on the tax payers dime.
June 17th, 2009 at 5:02 pmI also believe that (maybe not today) but at some point, the efforts to protect Black people from insensitivity of their race, will suggest a patronization that fuels a belief that they really aren’t equal.
This is just utter bullsh!t. No one is “protecting” Black people. Ask any adult Black person — they’ve heard it all, over and over again.
Did you know that Jews cook and eat little Christian babies? Did you know that Jews control all the banks, all the courts, all the media? No?
You’re hopeless.
June 17th, 2009 at 5:04 pmYou guys have all done an admirable job of filleting b-cup’s argument.
It probably helps that we’ve all seen the same argument before from him, but still, it takes a practiced hand to wield a fillet knife with such precision.
Of course, b-cup’s arguments tend to have incredible regenerative powers, so he’ll be back with the same thing next time…
June 17th, 2009 at 5:06 pmokay. you have an absolute view of this circumstance.
Letterman told a sexist joke about unwed/teen mothers. Should he lose his job for spreading his sexist attitudes?
And does your absolute view apply to Senator Robert Byrd?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd
I think Senator Byrd has served our country well. Was our forgiveness of him misplaced?
June 17th, 2009 at 5:12 pmAs if on cue, b-cup provides evidence of the regenerative powers of his previously dispatched arguments…
June 17th, 2009 at 5:19 pmAnd at what point does our intolerance for racial stereotyping start to resemble the intolerance radical Muslims have for the caricatures of Mohammed?
I oppose racism. I think the e-mail was inappropriate. But, the response should be balanced.
What will be the next slight that will command automatic termination. Will people just choose not to address the topic at all?
There is an issue of free speech on this topic, despite the obvious racist nature of the e-mail.
June 17th, 2009 at 5:19 pmb-cup, you can’t see the difference? For one thing, Letterman is not being paid on my or your dime. Second, if the people who hired Letterman thinks he should be fired, they are within their rights. This person was on her job as a state senate staff member, and passing racist jokes on the job is not the same as what Letterman gets paid to do. See the difference?
June 17th, 2009 at 5:20 pmI’m out for a few hours.
I’ll check back in later.
June 17th, 2009 at 5:20 pmb-cup, take your time, you won’t be missed.
June 17th, 2009 at 5:23 pmbackup Says:
There is an issue of free speech on this topic, despite the obvious racist nature of the e-mail.
June 17th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
No, there is no free speech issue.
June 17th, 2009 at 5:24 pmZooey Says:
backup Says:
There is an issue of free speech on this topic, despite the obvious racist nature of the e-mail.
June 17th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
No, there is no free speech issue.
Backup can parse these things for hours. What if? But, what if?
Accountability is not a word in Backup’s vocabulary.
June 17th, 2009 at 5:27 pmIs it just me, or are this guy’s eyes out of alignment? I always find it a distraction when trying to listen to whatever disingenuous stuff he has to say.
June 17th, 2009 at 5:30 pmWe need to clarify this argument. Some are falling for your red herring on the “free speech” argument and you are neatly getting them to say things like “free speech is limited”, etc. Which is a common tactic used by the right to get the left to shoot down the 1st Amendment while at the same time promoting whatever nonsense position you are promoting.
So lets be clear here.
This is NOT a free speech issue.
Freedom of speech as defined in the Constitution is a public right. Not one that is imposed on private corporations, entities or agencies where one is employed.
Businesses, agencies, (including government ones), organizations, etc, have the right to restrict what is said by an employee or staff member during the course of their employment or affiliation with that body, and with regards to use of official resources, i.e email accounts, network resources, etc. From what we understand this email was sent from her office, while performing her duties for the Tennessee Legislature. Therefore those emails do NOT fall under the guise of “free speech” and are subject to monitoring, censoring and official actions including termination for misuse.
I don’t know of a company, organization or agency out there who doesn’t enforce strict guidelines when using company resources. Even when using private email accounts on company time, you’re still using company resources including their computers, servers, data circuits, etc.
So stow the false flag free speech nonsense.
It’s a red herring designed to weaken criticism against a filthy racist, and nothing more.
June 17th, 2009 at 5:32 pmRon Christy, the tool for the GOP, token, is right on this one. It is just too bad I cannot stand to look at the guy. He is the quintessential nerd from the right. I am amazed that this senator still is backing her aide. I have sent emails to everyone I could think of in protesting this fool and have gotten some good replies back from others who are going to protest by taking their money from the state.
June 17th, 2009 at 5:32 pmbackup Says:
Are we limiting free speech in the name of racism?
We’re calling bigotry what it is.
Nobody passed a law outlawing racist slurs, so put your “free speech” red herring away.
.
backup Says:
You make a good point, but I’m arguing for balance.
No you’re not. You are, for the millionth time, arguing that bigots spewing age-old racist slurs should be left alone and suffer no consequences for their bigotry.
.
backup Says:
I agree with Holder. We need candid discussions on race.
Candid discussion =/= unleash the bigots. Passing around old and discredited caricatures of minority races is not making a comment in a productive discussion.
Maybe using your method I could argue that you can’t argue against us because you’re stifling our “free speech” and prohibiting “honest discussion.”
.
backup Says:
Letterman told a sexist joke about unwed/teen mothers. Should he lose his job for spreading his sexist attitudes?
He should if he was an elected official.
June 17th, 2009 at 5:37 pmbackup said:
“I also believe that (maybe not today) but at some point, the efforts to protect Black people from insensitivity of their race, will suggest a patronization that fuels a belief that they really aren’t equal.”
Bullcrap.
Too little, too late. African Americans don’t need patronization to fuel a belief that we really aren’t equal because, in general, this has been the case for so many Americans since the 17th century, and among some in the population, it’s still the case.
What makes us viewed as not being equal by some in this society?
June 17th, 2009 at 5:41 pmTheir strongly cemented “conservative Christian values.”
And stow the Letterman argument too Backup.
More red herring.
It’s a non starter, because once more it falls onto the decisions of his employer, who in this case is not a state agency but private corporation. If CBS and their chairholders decide to fire him for his comments, it’s perfectly within their rights, and has nothing to do with “free speech”.
It’s not Lettermans show. He doesn’t own it. He works for someone therefore it’s up the them whether to fire them.
But since they’re still probably laughing at the joke (I know I am, I could care less about Palins promiscuous little brat who’s out preaching that everyone else has to abstain from sex but her) and laughing all the way to the bank, I doubt they’ll fire him.
But they can. If they want to. Because it’s not free speech when you’re working for someone.
Just like when Don Imus was fired for racist comments.
And there’s more in this instance. It’s a state government entity she was working for, and there are laws in place to prohibit racism in this country by government agencies, like the civil rights act of 1964.
So once more, your red herring is just more nonsense from a man trying to defend a filthy racist by muddying the issue with free speech, which it has zero to do with.
June 17th, 2009 at 5:43 pmYesterday, Tennessee state senator Diane Black (R) continued to resist calls to fire a staffer who sent out a racist image of President Obama. “This is, believe me, not at all anything having to do with being derogatory toward someone in a minority,” said Black, adding that the e-mail by aide Sherri Goforth “does not reflect any of my beliefs.” As proof, Black said that she spent time as a nurse in Haiti working with “people with black skin.” This morning on CNN, former Cheney aide Ron Christie said that it was unacceptable that Black wasn’t firing Goforth:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ms. Black’s views and beliefs may not have been reflected by the racist image but it appears to follow an undercurrent that is quite obvious in the Republican Party. I as a white man and enjoy working with a variety of ethnic people. I am ashamed when a member of my race perpetuates this bigoted point of view. The episode is not funny. I find no humor in the Republicans continual bigotries. What group of people are they appealing to? Not anyone I want to know, and definitely no one I’d vote for.
June 17th, 2009 at 5:52 pmokay. you have an absolute view of this circumstance.
Letterman told a sexist joke about unwed/teen mothers. Should he lose his job for spreading his sexist attitudes?
And does your absolute view apply to Senator Robert Byrd?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd
Byrd joined the Ku Klux Klan when he was 24 in 1942. His local chapter unanimously elected him Exalted Cyclops.[6]
I think Senator Byrd has served our country well. Was our forgiveness of him misplaced?
DAVID LETTERMAN IS A COMEDIAN!
he does not WORK IN OUR GOVERNMENT!
comedians say offensive things all the time as part of what they do
if you are seriously comparing these two things
you sir are an idiot.
June 17th, 2009 at 5:54 pmHey Ron, she’s a repub. Repubs don’t fire each other, no matter what. If anything, there’s probably a promotion in the works for her.
June 17th, 2009 at 5:55 pmThe repubs are are putting it all on the table now. The greed, the racism, the hypocracy, the hubris and a lot of other things.
I oppose racism. I think the e-mail was inappropriate. But, the response should be balanced.
apparently back-ups idea of a “balanced response” is no response at all.
the response is balanced… we’re calling something racist what it is… racist.
and considering the party at faults line of work
she should lose her job
period
thanks for playing
June 17th, 2009 at 5:56 pmOh, and if I’m wrong backup, feel free to bring it back to me.
I’m right here. Always am. Whether I’m commenting or not.
Feel free to put up this same red herring you’ve tried so many times now, and that I’ve laid to rest so many times now for you.
Proving that you really are a racist, trying to pretend to be less than one for obvious reasons.
I know what you are backup. And you know what you are.
The others in here are figuring that out too, if they haven’t already.
June 17th, 2009 at 6:04 pmI always thought Ron Christie was a “Stepford Wife” and by that I mean factory made whore.
June 17th, 2009 at 6:37 pmnow when THIS cock-eyed, tool of a Tom says this…. it gives a moment of pause…
just long enough to remember what a compete “word that rhymes with glass-bowl” he is.
June 17th, 2009 at 6:46 pmJust dropped in to see which hateful a**holes would defend racism.
Hi backup.
June 17th, 2009 at 6:46 pmElBruce. No. I’m arguing for balance. The closest example I have at hand is you from yesterday:
What consequence do you suffer for your racism?
nanlichi. do you defend ElBruce’s right to comment how he feels or do you condemn it as racism?
June 17th, 2009 at 7:03 pmChristie is Cheney’s tool. He’s accussed Obama several times of playing the race card and now he wants to acknowledge someone acting racistly towards him? Too little, too late oh cross eyed one.
June 17th, 2009 at 7:15 pmI see you avoided me Backup, and wisely so.
And your question is moot, because El Bruce is in a free speech public arena, not working for TP and not engaged in any official capacity. Thus, he can’t be “fired” for saying what he wants. Although even in this format, speech is restricted to the “rules”, thus his comments are subject to being censored, as are yours and mine.
This isn’t about “free speech”. It’s about racism being used by a public official while at WORK.
Deal with that, and stow your free speech red herrings.
June 17th, 2009 at 7:15 pmWaynebro. you’ve got a point about the fact that she works in a public office. She has the right to say (or pass along) anything she wants, but she could suffer the consequence of being fired for it. Agreed.
It doesn’t, however change the argument much. Although a double standard can be justified based on a racial power imbalance (although that argument is thin if you consider Obama is arguably the most powerful person on the planet and the offender is a staffer for a state senator); there are limits being placed on speech, informally.
I doubt many people worried about being fired for making offensive caricatures of past presidents. They used the medium to communicate dissent.
I concede this example doesn’t fit adequately. It’s racist, inappropriate and could cause the staffer her job.
But, where do you draw the line? If someone wants to do a caricature of Obama and exaggerates the size of his nose or lips to do it; is that regular ordinary use of the freedom of speech or is it racial slur?
That is a dilemma others haven’t had to contend with.
You can argue that it’s not a free speech issue, but if someone ponders whether their characterization or caricature or portrayal of the President could likely get them fired; they will probably avoid it.
In that way, the racial issue can be used to limit speech. To limit those that might dissent or disagree.
You will say that this racist email has nothing to do with that, but some have conflated this email with using the ‘N’ word.
Where does it stop? Do we create a circumstance where people avoid traditional forms of caricature, or even avoid dissention in general, out of a fear of charges of racism or fear of termination due to the high consequence of the implication?
June 17th, 2009 at 7:24 pm….
b-cup
ask not for whom the bell tolls…
:::
because it’s not for you.
:)
June 17th, 2009 at 7:27 pmI’m letting this go. The email is racist and because of the nature of her job (public office that requires impartiality) it is understandable if she is asked to resign of is fired.
I do believe in the potential for Obama’s race to be used to restrain otherwise appropriate dissent or disagreement.
But, this ain’t that.
How’s it going, joe?
I am out.
June 17th, 2009 at 7:41 pmor is fired.
June 17th, 2009 at 7:42 pmWhat’s especially ridiculous about this “joke” is that Obama isn’t dark. The “joke” was calling him a n*gger. It’s not funny—it’s desperate.
June 17th, 2009 at 8:56 pmYesterday, Tennessee state senator Diane Black (R) continued to resist calls to fire a staffer who sent out a racist image of President Obama. “This is, believe me, not at all anything having to do with being derogatory toward someone in a minority,” said Black, adding that the e-mail by aide Sherri Goforth “does not reflect any of my beliefs.” As proof, Black said that she spent time as a nurse in Haiti working with “people with black skin.”
********************************************************
Personally, I don’t think the fact Ms. Black spent some time in Haiti working as a nurse automatically means that there’s no way she could possibly be a racist. In fact, for some reason, there’s something about her particular choice of words (”people with black skin”) that I find somehow eerily reminiscent of the manner in which some people who express prejudicial attitudes towards certain groups speak positively of people they know who belong to that group — “I have friends who are ______, which proves that I’m not a bigot.” This reasoning, however, is faulty since the person in question usually regards his/her friend as an exception to the rule that “all ______s are _____” instead of as living proof that the rule itself is flawed. We saw a similar kind of thinly-veiled prejudice more than once during the campaign in the comments which some people made about Obama — comments which on the surface seemed to compliment him personally but which disparaged African-Americans in general, such as the person (I cannot recall the name at present) who praised Obama for being articulate in a way which suggested that this was something astonishing and not possible for most African-Americans.
June 17th, 2009 at 10:06 pmwell, Ghost walker, you make a compelling argument…
oh, wait — no you don’t. See, imagining what others do and then criticizing them for your own fantasies doesn’t really work among thinking people.
June 17th, 2009 at 10:47 pmBluestocking.
I believe the ‘articulate’ comment was Joe Biden:
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/people/news/article_1254171.php/Senator_Joseph_Biden_Obama_clean_and_articulate
June 17th, 2009 at 11:04 pmI believe the ‘articulate’ comment was Joe Biden:
Biden had comments about Barack Hussein Obama. “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” he said. “I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”
*********************************************************
As it happens — although I don’t expect that you’ll believe me — that’s not the comment I was thinking of. In any case, I think that no matter who’s making those sorts of comments — Democrat or Republican — they’re unacceptable and the person who makes them should be held accountable. If memory serves, I do seem to recall Biden receiving flak over that comment — as was only right and proper. Did I find it odd that Obama nevertheless chose him as his running mate and/or think he could have chosen better? Yes, I did and still do — for that as well as other reasons — but then again, the choice was not mine to make. Of one thing I have no doubt — he had what he considered to be valid reasons for making that decision, at least some of which he may have kept to himself.
However, the remark which was in my mind was actually the one by Glenn Beck in which he referred to Obama as “colorless”:
“I was driving in today, and I was seeing — because I saw this piece with him on 60 Minutes — and I thought to myself, he is — he’s very white in many ways….He is colorless…[F]or whites, I think he’s colorless. You don’t notice that he is black. So he might as well be white, you know what I mean?”
Granted, this may have been interpretation on my part — but as I commented right here on TP at the time, it struck me that perhaps the reason why Obama seemed “colorless” to Beck was the fact that Obama has a very polished way of presenting himself and that this is something which Beck (whether consciously or unconsciously) views as being more or less exclusive to white people. In all honesty, I find it hard to see what else Beck might have meant by that.
June 18th, 2009 at 12:47 amWe agree on nothing here. It is not that its a public office. It’s that an employer has the right to fire someone for racist remarks and there’s no gray area there. It has nothing to do with “free speech”.
If I as an employee send out an email that is offensive in nature from my work computer then I am damaging the image of whatever firm, agency or organization that I work for. Which is why most agencies, organizations and companies screen corporate email for violations including harassment, threats, profanity, obscenity and RACIAL SLURS.
They have a right to protect themselves and to terminate any employee violating those ethics.
No doubt this staffer signed a computer access policy of some sort which prohibited such communications, and even if they didn’t, they have not only the right but given the fact this is a government agency, the obligation to fire her.
June 18th, 2009 at 2:08 amThis was not an “offensive caricature” of a President.
This was an ugly, prejudiced racial slur against Black Americans everywhere.
It didn’t mock the President. It mocked black people everywhere for the color of their skin.
June 18th, 2009 at 2:13 amAnd you can’t argue that it is, because free speech is a public right, not one that is associated with ones employment in a private firm or organization.
And after a few hundred years of forced slavery, abuse, persecution, sanctioned murder, and oppression, I’d say the least we owe the black Americans of this country is the inconvenience of having to “ponder” what we say about them prior to saying it.
June 18th, 2009 at 2:17 amThank you..
Sesli Chat
June 22nd, 2009 at 3:29 amSesli Sohbet
Sesli Chat
Sesli Sohbet
Seslikent
SesliChat
SesliSohbet