Lindsey Graham concludes that Sotomayor is not an ‘activist’ judge.
Lindsey Graham concludes that Sotomayor is not an ‘activist’ judge.
After Judge Sonia Sotomayor was nominated to replace Justice David Souter on the Supreme Court, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) joined with conservatives in declaring her an “activist” judge. “If I look at her philosophy, her legal philosophy, which I think is very activist in nature,” said Graham in May. But after three days of confirmation hearings, Graham appears to have changed his mind:
GRAHAM: And here’s what I will say about you. I don’t know how you’re going to come out on that case. Because I think fundamentally, judge, you’re able after all these years of being a judge to embrace a right that you may not want for yourself. To allow others to do things that are not comfortable to you, but for the group, they’re necessary. That is my hope for you. That’s what makes you, to me, more acceptable as a judge and not a activist. Because a activist would be a judge who would be chomping at the bit to use this wonderful opportunity to change America through the Supreme Court by taking their view of life and imposing it on the rest of us.
Watch it:
In his live-blog of the hearing, Ian Millhiser remarks that “Graham looks a whole lot like a ‘yes’ vote” following that exchange.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
How comforting. I don’t know how I would have carried on without the blessing of a man who looks and acts like a ventriloquist’s dummy …
July 16th, 2009 at 12:02 pmLindsey Graham concludes that Sotomayor is not an ‘activist’ judge.
– - Graham to Sotomayor: You Say Things That “Bug The Hell Out Of Me”
Lindsey’s having a bit of a meltdown.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:03 pmWell, that’s a relief!!!
What’s with the questions from all these repiggies?
They really have major problems with women in any sort of position of responsibility and authority.
Their idea of women in the workplace is confined to the under-40 attractive eye candy who are uncritical and compliant, and know how to defer to the supposed wisdom of aging white guys.
I really hope that women are watching and taking note.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:04 pmBecause a activist would be a judge who would be chomping at the bit to use this wonderful opportunity to change America through the Supreme Court by taking their view of life and imposing it on the rest of us.
In other words , a conservative …………..
July 16th, 2009 at 12:06 pm“Lindsey Graham concludes that Sotomayor is not an ‘activist’ judge.”
Well thank you Lindsey.
A Patriotic Anopheles Acting still adheres to his conclusion that Lindsey Graham is a Republiscum idjit
July 16th, 2009 at 12:07 pmGraham is the type that can laud and sing the praises of Sotomayor until the cows come home…and then still turn around and vote against her.
Cause he’s a member of the Republican Party, and that’s now they roll.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:07 pmI don’t know how Sonia and everybody else in the room kept their faces straight when Graham mentioned how impressed Ken Starr was with her.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:08 pmGraham prefaces his questions saying “I’m most likely going to vote for you”, then tears into her about her speeches. He finishes his little complain-fest saying the same thing.
What was the point of bringing up the speech quotes for the 38,938th time? Politics, pure and simple. It plays well back in his state. If Graham had such concerns about a nominee’s temperment, he should have quit helping John McCain run for president after Day 1.
Lastly, since he only talked about the negative of Sotomayor’s temperment, he forgot about what he said three years prior about NOT determining a nominee’s eligability on one topic during a SCOTUS confirmation.
At least Graham wasn’t as hung up on the race issue as Sessions or Kyl, so I won’t label him as a “Graham cracker”. Yet.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:08 pmMCMetal @ #4: Took the words right out of my mouth.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:09 pmI suspect Lil Lindsey just wanted to be sure Sotomayor was on the side of the Right of Privacy, just in case Out magazine ever does a story on the Senator.
PEACE
July 16th, 2009 at 12:13 pm“Because a activist would be a judge who would be chomping at the bit to use this wonderful opportunity to change America through the Supreme Court by taking their view of life and imposing it on the rest of us.”
Ergo, Justices Scalia, Thomas, Alito and Roberts are “activists” — right, Lindsey?
July 16th, 2009 at 12:14 pmGraham has been unbelievably disrespectful to Judge Sotomayor. First he called her a “bully” (while bullying her) and then he said “You say things that bug the hell out of me”. Graham really does have no idea how much damage he’s doing to his party while bullying and insulting Judge Sotomayor.
I’m thinking it’s time for someone to be disrespectful to Graham by outing him.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:15 pm.. .. .
let’s watch rush
go to work on lindsey.
***
July 16th, 2009 at 12:18 pmLindsey Graham is well-known in certain circles for being deeply closeted, as are several other high-ranking repiggies from South Carolina, including the lieutenant governor.
Theses closet cases are at the forefront in the campaign against full civil rights for gay men and women who live openly.
Sadly, there is a phalanx of well-heeled and influential Log Cabinettes who party with and cover for that closeted crowd.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:18 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
I know of 5 “activist” judges who made law from the bench in the fall of 2000.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:29 pmbackup says:
Isn’t this racially insensitive?
Would the sentiment/slur be condoned if it were directed at a black politician?
Actually a black politician would probably laugh at you if you called him a cracker.
But you are here to defend all the white politicians from some crazily percieved “reverse racism” any way. Hows that working out for you?
July 16th, 2009 at 12:30 pmGraham Smam, He already knows that Sotomayor will be confirmed.I Say congratulations Justice Sotomayor. Now raise your right hand.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:30 pmSomeone just can’t hide his racism.On any thread.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:31 pmI think he knows the answer to this,but wants to start one of his infamous circular arguments.
tony and lido
evangenital says:
Lindsey Graham is well-known in certain circles for being deeply closeted
You mean, like he’s the only one who doesn’t know he’s gay? Or, he still thinks his mother doesn’t know he’s gay?
Either way, the endless blustering and ill-conceived queries are nothing but a Rethug pi$$ing match. They will all crawl back to their constituents and say, “See. I tried.”
July 16th, 2009 at 12:32 pmWhile “yes” votes are nice to have for Supreme Court nominees the really important “yes” votes occur on things like meaningful health insurance legislation, where Graham is an obstructionist.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:34 pmbackup says:
Isn’t this racially insensitive?
Would the sentiment/slur be condoned if it were directed at a black politician?
July 16th, 2009 at 12:20 pm
______________
Why would you call a black politician “cracker?” It’s a derogatory term for ignorant Southern white people.
I mean, maybe if said black politician was a Usenet script kiddie in the mid-80s, then yeah, you could call him “cracker.” But other than that it’s simply nonsensical.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:34 pmAs to #15
Everytime Graham or the rest of the box of crackers says
“wise latino woman”
in that condescending tone, it’s racist.
It’s bigot-speak for “how dare you take pride in your non-wasp, non-male existence”. Control through shame and invalidation is an old school southern tradition to keep people in their place.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:35 pmThe words “judicial activism” are just code for not ruling in accordance with conservative beliefs. There is nothing in Sotomayor’s record to indicate she did not follow legal precedent. The people who claim she is a judicial activist are full of BS because their real complaint is that she is not a dyed in the wool conservative. Alito and Roberts are judicial activists because they are using every chance to overturn settled law as it relates to social issues and to whittle back the federal government powers that have been decided in previous cases.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:36 pmokie dokie says:
Everytime Graham or the rest of the box of crackers says
“wise latino woman”
in that condescending tone, it’s racist.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
_______________
And also woefully ignorant of the use of gendered suffixes in the Spanish language.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:36 pmGOP been a-read’n Hispanic leaders across the nation negative reactions to rediculous futile GOP pile on.
GOP blinks.
GOP convention floor every 4 years will continue to look un-like diverse American demographics.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:38 pmgraham has had his panties in a wad ever since his TMJ flared up and he started having back spasms just before valentines day. it totally ruined his favorite holiday.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:39 pm“Because a activist would be a judge who would be chomping at the bit to use this wonderful opportunity to change America through the Supreme Court by taking their view of life and imposing it on the rest of us.”
Like the judges your side wants that would do away with Roe Vs Wade? STFU.
RIP
July 16th, 2009 at 12:39 pmSGT Stephen R. Sherman
C CO 1-5 IN (STRYKER)
KIA 3 Feb 2005
Mosul, Iraq
This comment has been voted down. Click to read.
IndSteveAZ says:
GOP been a-read’n
July 16th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
_____________
Sorry, but I have to call shenanigans on this statement. Since when do Republicans read anything?
July 16th, 2009 at 12:40 pmGood point, toasterhead.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:40 pmSigh… does anyone think it would do any good at all to explain yet again to b-cup about the nature of demeaning remarks aimed at members of a minority as opposed to those aimed at members of a majority group, vis-á-vis the relevant power structure?
Yes, the “sentiment/slur” is disrespectful no matter that race of the target. But this particular one focuses on attitude, not some inherent quality that accompanies European ancestry. Beyond that, to pretend that the vulnerability of whites as a result of their skin color is in any way comparable to that of blacks is just absurd.
(And, no, the fact that Lindsay graham is a Republican doesn’t count as a member of a minority group in this instance. Although it does give me enormous pleasure to type that disclaimer.)
July 16th, 2009 at 12:41 pmRemember, on Republican World the failure to use racial slurs is racially insensitive!
July 16th, 2009 at 12:41 pmBut, Lindsey, that still doesn’t make you not a bigoted scum bag Republic Fascist Party POS….now does it.
Fcuk the Republic Fascist Party
July 16th, 2009 at 12:42 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
“…To allow others to do things that are not comfortable to you, but for the group, they’re necessary.”
Is he alluding to or hoping aloud about how he hopes she might rule in the event of possible future War Crimes prosecutions against Bushies? Because his logic here is exactly what GOPers use to justify the Bush War Crimes; unlawful but necessary, despite the fact that it’s a complete lie.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:43 pmbackup says:
A poster here can characterize Senator Graham as ‘Graham Cracker’ and not a peep from the enlightened progressive gallery.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
_____________
That’s right. Cause it’s funny. Call me racist against ignorant Southern white people if you like, but I stand by that assessment.
Contrary to your opinion, racial slurs are not all created equal. Some are indeed less offensive than others.
The slur developed by the historically oppressed group to refer to their oppessors carries far less weight than the slur developed by the historical oppressors to keep the oppressed group subjugated.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:45 pmShe needs to quit being so apologetic and stand up to these creepy thugs like Graham and Sessions.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:46 pmbackup says:
Pssst: Hey backup, know what? Funny thing is graham crackers are not white, they are kind of brownish in color… in case you didn’t know.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:47 pmAll I can tolerate of these hearings is blogged highlights, but I love some of the screen captures of Judge Sotomayor. Her facial expressions of earnest, attentive puzzlement just scream “WTF?” She’s done an amazing job of keeping her cool in the face of rabid, outlandish asininity from these fools.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:47 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
backup says:
more of the same.
That’s wrong.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
_______________
Meh. Still funny.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:48 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Toasterhead says: “I have to call shenanigans on this statement. Since when do Republicans read anything?”
July 16th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
LOL. busted.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:51 pmHey backup!
Here’s a plunger for you!
I’m white, I’m southern, and I can say cracker all day long
July 16th, 2009 at 12:55 pmbecause….
being “cracker” is a choice, and I choose not to be one!
All this signals is that Miss Lindsey may be the Puke member of the Sen. Judiciary Committee to take the nomination to the Floor for a full vote.
They always needed one of the 7 Pukes –Sayshuns, Gray-um, Coburn, Kyl, Hatch, Grassley, and Cornyn– to carry the nomination. Limpsey seems to be volunteering…
July 16th, 2009 at 12:56 pmI think it’s a foregone conclusion that b-cup will never absorb the concept of bigoted attacks within a group having disparate impacts depending on the relative vulnerabilities of the subgroup to which the target belongs. That’s been explained to him repeatedly, whenever he launches one of his “reverse racist” crusades, which are familiar to longtime regulars of this site.
But there is one critical point that b-cup may be able to grasp; the slur to which b-cup objects so strenuously, “cracker” is not a euphemism for white man (that would be more like “honky”, although it’s hopelessly dated). it is a euphemism for “ignorant, bigoted white man”.
The example to which b-cup alludes as an appropriate reverse comparison — rhymes with “Bigger” — is of a different class entirely. It not only refers to the color of one’s skin but has intimidating overtones that it’s more appropriate corunterpart, “honky” does not.
So b-cup has erected yet another of his incredibly life-like strawmen. The sunglasses really make the difference. (Or are those blinders?)
July 16th, 2009 at 12:56 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
B-cup:
Dissing whites for being racist pigs is not ‘ethnic’ slurring. In the USA, racism is an entirely “white” privilege.
July 16th, 2009 at 12:59 pmOK, backup, the nits are picked. You can crawl around and look for something else to be so concerned about.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:01 pmActually, some Florida long-time natives seem to take pride in the title cracker.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:02 pmtony and lido
Boy, it doesn’t take you long to go off the rails, does it? Where did I say that “some slurs are acceptable”? You must have missed where I said that Yes, the “sentiment/slur” is disrespectful no matter that race of the target, in the same post you quoted. how did you miss that?
What I said was, essentially, not all slurs are equivalent, as you seem to believe.
The continued ratings success of the steady stream of Faux News crazy talking heads would suggest otherwise.
… unless one recognizes that different groups face different realities in what should be a fair-minded society. To ignore that disparity is the REAL racism.
It certainly doesn’t benefit the dominant group to examine and try to redress inequities. So, if by “anyone” you mean “anyone in the dominant power group” I would agree.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:03 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
I’m amazed that people who claim to be so sensitive to racial issues fail to recognize that “cracker” refers to an attitude, not an ethnicity.
But I guess if you want to defend that attitude, you’re gonna see it as an ‘ethnic” slur worthy of a defense, not as a criticism of ignorance.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:05 pmThis was so right, had to post it twice:
July 16th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
ralph. It’s not that I see it as an ethnic slur. It is an ethnic slur:
What don’t you get about that?
Should I be able to justify the use of the N-word, by saying it’s not really an ethnic slur, but only a ‘criticism of ignorance’.
You are way wrong on this.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:10 pmI just have to post this column by Gail Collins today in the NYT. It is satire, but pretty spot on in it’s own way. Anyway, I think we could use all a laugh. Especially funny is the comment ascribed to Sen. Jeff Sessions, because it really illustrates not only his reality, but the unfortunate reality of so many of those on the Right.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/16/opinion/16collins.html?_r=1
July 16th, 2009 at 1:11 pmbackup says:
This was so right, had to post it twice:
How can we become one united group sharing the same values and ideas when separate rules are set up for different individuals?
July 16th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
_____________
Why would we ever want to live in a world in which everyone shared the same values and ideas?
July 16th, 2009 at 1:12 pmAny slur by anyone one on this blog pales in comparison to the racial slurring of Sonia Sotomayor in a very public forum by people who have put themselves out in front as supposed leaders in our country. What we say here has miniscule consequences while the words that Graham, Sessions, Coburn, and other Senators have said about Judge Sotomayor potentially have a great impact on our country functions in the future. If you want something to be concerned about, backup, then try focusing on that.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:13 pmb-cup, do you seriously not see the difference between a member of a sub-group calling another member a name that would be utterly insulting if issued by a member of a rival sub-group?
Can you not divorce intent from the text itself?
Jeezus, I knew right-wingers embraced the simplistic and the literal, but I didn’t realize they were THAT myopic.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:14 pmIt’s just so funny to watch how sensitive so-called Republican’s have all of the sudden become. Repuppetcans have been dishing out hatred for, well too damn long, not perceived hatred or racism, but real, actual racist comments, remarks, acts, etc. And now they get offended because someone calls Mr, Graham a “craker”!?.
In 1973, when I was five (5) years old I was visiting my relatives in Greenville, NC. Its something my parents did to get us out of the Bronx, NY every summer. Anyway my twin brother and I were standing outside with my Grandfather when all of a sudden the fire station alarm went off and the firemen slid down the pole and jumped in the trucks and drove off. You can imagine how excited two young boys were to see that. So we both said to our Grandfather that we wanted to be firemen. Our Grandfather said you boys can be what you want, well upon hearing this some “cracker” said to my Grandfather “what you doin telling these little light ni$ger$ that they can be anything but ni$ger$” and hit my Grandfather and were soon joined by three more men.
The sheriff, who knew my Grandfather along with some other locals came and broke it up. These men looked at us and told us that we will always be what we were and that is ni$ger$. Mind you I come from a VERY DIVERSE family, we range from the darkest hue to peach white, my favorite Aunt is my White Aunt Sandra, who I love to death, and to have these so-called men do that in front of us was/is something I have never forgotten. I could go on and on about what real racism is, as opposed to this perceived BS “reverse racism”, which is just some made up ish to rile up the dumbed downed manson/thurmond/helms/davis wing of the so-called Republican party.
Moral of the story, if your a racist, eff you, period.
To all of the sudden be offended because an intelligent, prideful, un-compromising, non-obseqious, minority is rising up at the expense of your so called “privilege” is dishonest at the least, and outright hateful at best. Backup spare me with the “I thought progressives BS” this is hate on display, stop being naive about the so-called Republican strategy of hate politics, this is how they do, so dont get upset because people are hitting back.
Sorry for the long post, but this is really starting to get on my nerves.
RIP
July 16th, 2009 at 1:17 pmSGT Stephen R. Sherman
C CO 1-5 IN (STRYKER)
KIA 3 Feb 2005
Mosul, Iraq
backup says:
Should I be able to justify the use of the N-word, by saying it’s not really an ethnic slur, but only a ‘criticism of ignorance’.
You are way wrong on this.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
______________
Sure, go for it.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:17 pmHere’s what i don’t get about that:
you’re willing to let the African American community decide the ethnic nature of a slur (while totally ignoring the crucial element of bigotry it implies) in order to slam the use of “cracker” yet you utterly dismiss the African American community’s casual use of the n-word to refer to each other, which is a clear attempt to defuse the power of a forceful insult when delievered by the wrong messenger.
in short, you buy the black community’s (or rather, wikipedia’s interpretation of teh black community’s) assessment of “cracker” yet you dismiss the same auhtority, which clearly accepts the use of the n word among its ranks.
Oh wait — I DO get it. You’re just shifting your ground again, as you always do.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:21 pmCrackers don’t want to become united with anyone unlike themselves. They choose to only associate with other crackers which is why they prefer to stay in their cracker box.
And one united group sharing the same “ideas” and values sounds pretty Orwellian, dude.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:23 pmtoasterhead. funny, but I’ll put it another way.
Would you sit idly by while someone (or some group of people) slurred a black politician by calling him the N-word and then justifying it by saying: “you know, it’s really not a racial slur, we’re only ‘criticizing the man’s ignorance’?
It would be funny, if it weren’t so sad.
It shouldn’t pass for progressive thought.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:24 pmOkay. I’m game.
b-cup seems to think white people can’t call other white people “cracker”, and that it is racist.
I’m not sure I follow the logic.
So, when Martin Lawrence or Chris Rock use the “N” during their stand up comedy act, they’re being racist?
Again, I’m not following.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:27 pmLindsey Graham secretly hopes to become a wise Latina woman someday.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:27 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
backedup is bending over backwards to try and defend the racism of graham cracker
he completely ignores the FACT that people CHOOSE to be a cracker (a term derived from ‘whip cracker’, as in the guy who whipped slaves)
cracker has nothing to do with a person’s skin tone, but everything to do with their ignorant, racist mindset
backedup knows this, he is just spinning, as usual, and being a troll
p.s. ralph, THIS is what I was talking about in a previous thread
July 16th, 2009 at 1:28 pmBecause a activist would be a judge who would be chomping at the bit to use this wonderful opportunity to change America through the Supreme Court by taking their view of life and imposing it on the rest of us.
Well, good to know that. Let me see you use that same exact phrase to your minions who are rabid for the court to overturn Roe vs. Wade.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:29 pmOkay, I’ll try one more time, and then I’ll just give i up as hopeless:
b-cup, do you recognize that the meaning and intent of vocabulary can shift depending on relationship and circumstance?
Say, for instance, one frat brother jokingly calls his best friend in the house “a$$hole”. He says, “get me a beer, A$$hole.”
Now imagine the frat brothers are on a pub crawl. A member of a rival frat spills a beer on them. The first frat brother says, “Watch it, a$$hole”.
Should those two instances be treated and taken the same way?
After all, it’s the same word, right? It seems that for you, intent and circumstance shouldn’t come into play at all.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:29 pmAs a white guy, I can tell you that “cracker” is a subculture, not an ethnicity and not a race.
The polite term is “redneck.” But “cracker” makes it clear that we’re talking about trash.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:29 pmDRxJ. This guy explains it better than me. Check it out:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rob-harper/the-n-word-is-never-accep_b_113501.html
July 16th, 2009 at 1:30 pmralph.
I believe you are earnest in what you believe. I don’t get it, but I appreciate you trying.
I’ll give it up for a while and think about what you’re saying.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:32 pmReferring to Senator Graham as ‘Graham Cracker’.
If the GOP wants to exploit cracker culture, we should be able to talk about it.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:33 pmput down the whip, backedup
July 16th, 2009 at 1:34 pmNo matter what any one says, whether they are black or white or even God himself (not that he would use the word), it is never, ever OK to use the ‘N’ word. In a joke, in a song, in private conversations, never, ever should the word be seen as acceptable to use. There are no exceptions.
That’s nice. Meanwhile, there are accepted uses of it in many walks of life and in the mass media, so Mr. Harper is just whining at the wall.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:34 pmI never liked Graham before the hearing – now I despise the condescending basturdddd!
I felt like I needed to take a bath after listening to these Republican scumbags ask their stupid rhetorical questions over and over again!
July 16th, 2009 at 1:39 pmWhy do I do that? Because your efforts to express your point generally use false equivalencies and sloppy reasoning, as I’ve pointed out.
I don’t have a problem with it at all.
One more time: “cracker” is not typically used as a general put-down of white people, the way so many derogatory terms are used to refer to all blacks. Or Hispanics. Or gays. Or any other sub-group that routinely faces discrimination. When it is used that way, it’s every bit as ignorant as the others.
“Cracker” refers, quite specifically in this instance, to ignorant, bigoted white men. hence the original comment that raised your ire:
Why did you need to pretend that the poster HAD called Lindsay Graham a “cracker” when he specifically stated that he would not?
And why did he say that he would not?
Because Graham wasn’t as hung up on the race issue.
Seriously, b-cup, how can you even muster the energy to keep arguing this shit?
July 16th, 2009 at 1:39 pmTommy, I know what you’re saying, and I appreciate it.
But the new system has chased away all the other trolls, and b-cup is the only one left worth arguing with.
What can I do?
July 16th, 2009 at 1:41 pmOK, backup, you win. Lindsey Graham is not and should not be referred to as a “cracker”. We progressives should instead accurately and civilly point out that Mr. Graham is a white man of questionable sexual proclivities who has taken it upon himself to proclaim that Judge Sotomayor is no longer an activist judge who will favor in her court those of her own ethnicity or race when, in truth, there has been no evidence to support Mr. Graham nor his gentlemanly colleagues on the Republican side of the political divide in their previous attempts to cast just such a label upon her.
Better? I hope so because I’ve got to go. My parrot is squawking for a cracker.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:41 pmIf I may for just a second.
Even though I actually can’t stand, and have hardly ever used the “N” word, I applaud the black community for adopting it and using it within their culture.
The “N” word, originally, was a word of degradation, a form of hatred.
It still is, but once “adopted”, became a word of endearment and brotherhood among it’s culture, thus desensitizing it’s true, vile meaning.
That being said, what is hilarious is this word still cannot (and should not) be used from white towards blacks.
And that, in my most humble opinion, drives the true racists nuts!
I hope b-cup isn’t one of these true racist.
July 16th, 2009 at 1:43 pmI agree with backup actually. A racial or cultural slur is a slur, no matter who it’s directed at. It is a denigration of the humanity of the person. Whether it comes from the mouth of an historically repressed race/culture or against such a member of that race. It’s hate-ful.
(The word, “Cracker” by the way has been used since the mid-1500’s and has a number of different meanings. At that time, a word used to describe someone who boasted.)
July 16th, 2009 at 1:48 pmb-cup, good response at post #78, but I disagree with the author’s argument.
Taking a word that was so vile, so hateful, and turning it into a term of endearment among it’s culture is brilliant. So brilliant, that using it outside of it’s culture is racist, pure and simple.
Again, it desensitizes the word.
I’ll use ralph’s above post as an example.
Compare and contrast the following sentences:
“You are an A$$HOLE!”
“Hey A$$HOLE, I scored some tickets for the big game. Wanna go?”
July 16th, 2009 at 1:58 pmWell said, DRxJ.
I realized as I was thinking it over that I should have structured my frat brother example differently.
It would have been more directly comparable had suggested that, instead of the frat brother calling a member of a rival frat an “a$$hole”, the dynamic should have been reversed. The rival should have been the one to use the word.
July 16th, 2009 at 2:06 pmI think I said pretty much that same thing, although I recognize the uneven power equation as a force that you don’t.
But b-cup was arguing that one black guy getting called the n-word by a friend who also happens to be black is the same thing as if that man was called the same word by, say, a white racist sheriff in rural Alabama.
I was saying it’s not the same thing at all.
July 16th, 2009 at 2:10 pmI hope that one of the effects of the new system is to not vote down sll trolls except good ole b-cup.
July 16th, 2009 at 2:17 pmAll the time you think you’re having an honest discussion, he’s chuckling like a circus clown at you.
tony and lido
So people here don’t like Lindsey Graham, so they make wild accusations about his sexuality. How “progressive”. He’s a Colonel in the Air Force Reserve. I guess if he was kicked out under DADT you guys woouldn’t have a problem since he’s a Republican.
July 16th, 2009 at 2:45 pmI think he has enough baggage without bringing up that subject.
July 16th, 2009 at 2:58 pmI don’t like Grahmn because he’s:
-arrogant
-dishonest
-major hypocrite
-a right-winger
tony and lido
How “progressive”. He’s a Colonel in the Air Force Reserve. I guess if he was kicked out under DADT you guys woouldn’t have a problem since he’s a Republican.
An unmarried senator invites such speculation. And I would be just as angry, no matter what his political affiliation. It’s conservatives who put party before country, and also party, before any other issue.
July 16th, 2009 at 3:01 pmbarfly says:
An unmarried senator invites such speculation.
BullSh!t! It’s nobody’s business but his own. Are you married? If your not you mut be gay. See how stupid that sounds.
July 16th, 2009 at 3:08 pmGreat threadjack, Backup!
And, to be fair, a round of applause for all those here who graciously gave him a huge helping hand.
July 16th, 2009 at 3:13 pmAccording to yahoo news:
New Haven, Conn., firefighter Frank Ricci is going to the Judiciary Committee, telling his story in the reverse discrimination case that has proved a leading cause for conservatives opposed to Sotomayor.
If the hearing is about judicial activity (and not a political show), I don’t see how this is germane. To choose one person she ruled against seems somewhat fishy before it is even started.
July 16th, 2009 at 3:47 pmBuck says:
——————————————————————————–
Great threadjack, Backup!
And, to be fair, a round of applause for all those here who graciously gave him a huge helping hand.
July 16th, 2009 at 3:13 pm Vote Up | Vote Down | (2) | Report Abuse
I totally agree. People who should know better by now continuously allow him to make everything about the great b-cup himself.
Notice when it happens not a lot of other people will even bother posting.
tony and lido
July 16th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
You’re Welcome, Buck!
July 16th, 2009 at 4:20 pmIt is so enjoyable to watch these reptiles, republican senators question Judge Sotomayer, and see the fear, their fear. Their questions are so redundant.
They are so afraid that the intellectual north east coast mentality, a PR from the Bronx and Princeton, who is cool calm and collected, a woman no less IS SMARTER AND BETTER than them.
Look, they still think the south won the war!
July 17th, 2009 at 12:35 am______
ralph the wonder locust says:
——————————————————————————–
Tommy, I know what you’re saying, and I appreciate it.
But the new system has chased away all the other trolls, and b-cup is “the only one left worth arguing with.”
What can I do?
July 16th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
______
Supposedly you all wanted the “trolls” gone because they were preventing you from having meaningful discussions of the issues. TP finally accepted the inability of posters to control their responses. It seemed that, at last, we might see the vast diversity of opinion that liberals claim separates them from the righties. And yet, we find you turning on each other and engaging “the only one (troll) left worth arguing with.”
July 17th, 2009 at 3:27 amRepublicans really do like activist judges despite what they may say. I can’t just let it go, the Supreme Court’s right wing activist judges picked George Bush to be President, when they stopped the recount in Florida. Nothing in the Constitution says anything about the Supreme Court picking the President, and that is exactly what they did. Republicans have been the greatest benefactors in history from the action of activist judges, and the United States has suffered the greatest harm.
July 17th, 2009 at 8:00 pm