Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
18 Comments
charliemsays...What the hell is a reverse racist ?
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=define%3A+reverse+racist&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
Yeah.....exactly, its a bullshit made up word.
If it had come from someone other than the hate-spewing fear monger limbaugh, id of thought it had some positive connotation.
A racist is bad...so a reverse racist must be good, right ?
Shit dont make sense. Its just gibberish.
JiggaJonsonsays...^lol
But I think reverse racism would be more accurately described as hating your own race (regardless Limbaugh is using it wrong)
see: http://www.videosift.com/video/Chappelle-Black-white-supremacist
*lies *controversy *jackassery
siftbotsays...Adding video to channels (Controversy, Lies) - requested by JiggaJonson.
gwiz665says...Can I call him a reverse smart guy?
videosiftbannedmesays...I've been calling him an asshole for years, and all he's heard is "You're great!" No wonder he won't shut up.
Pprtsays...It implies racism against Whites (which exists), but by adding the word "reverse" it validates the theory taught in schools that only White people can be racist, which is absolutely false.
Yeah.. "reverse racist" doesn't fly well at all with me. It's racism no matter what direction it takes.
dirtythirtyixsays...It's kinda like Satanism....you can't be Satanic without being Judeo-Christian.
deedub81says...There's no context included here. ...at all.
Psychologicsays...Reverse Racism:
Yes, it is a made-up word, but it was made up to describe something specific.
Affirmative action is a good example. It is based on the discrimination from others. It tries to achieve racial equality by counteracting perceived racism, requiring the inclusion of a certain proportion of minorities.
So you have a policy that tries to use a form of racism to counterbalance a different form of racism. That is what I understand as "reverse racism"... forcing the consideration of race to prevent discrimination based on race.
Limbaugh, on the other hand, sees it as "racism against white people". Maybe that is the definition many people use, but that just seems like normal racism to me.
I'm sure Obama's choice was partially based on race/gender, but as long as he chooses qualified people then I really don't care what color/gender they are.
bamdrewsays...Should have nominated Rush,... that would have put him in quite the pickle... has to disagree with Obama, but would like to be in charge of shaping the future of American law... quite the pickle indeed...
volumptuoussays...Reverse Racism = hating members of your own race.
There's nothing more to it. And no amount of comments by Pprt/QM/WP can ever change that fact.
The only reason why Limbaugh used the term is because he's a fucking idiot that doesn't understand the meaning of words.
----
Psychologic said:
"I'm sure Obama's choice was partially based on race/gender, but as long as he chooses qualified people then I really don't care what color/gender they are."
You're sure of that? How are you sure of that? Did you ask Obama? Do you have some sort of telepathic connection to his psyche? What if it were all white males he picked? What if it were two white males, two white women, and two black males?
What combination of races and gender does it take to bring people to believe Obama only chose those who he deemed most qualified?
Psychologicsays...>> ^volumptuous:
Psychologic said:
"I'm sure Obama's choice was partially based on race/gender, but as long as he chooses qualified people then I really don't care what color/gender they are."
You're sure of that? How are you sure of that? Did you ask Obama? Do you have some sort of telepathic connection to his psyche? What if it were all white males he picked? What if it were two white males, two white women, and two black males?
What combination of races and gender does it take to bring people to believe Obama only chose those who he deemed most qualified?
Well, I said "partially based". I don't think it was his primary concern, but I have a hard time believing that he wouldn't even consider the effect race and gender would have on the public discussion.
Obama knows that Republicans are looking for any little thing they can find to fight him on, so he chooses a highly qualified person who most Republicans are afraid to challenge (and the ones who have looked pretty silly from their reasoning).
I have no reason to think that Obama favors any race over another, but it would be very short-sighted of him to completely ignore the perceived importance of race in this particular situation. So yes, I'm fairly sure that Obama did consider her race when making his choice (if nothing else, for political implications).
volumptuoussays...>> ^Psychologic:
but I have a had time believing that he wouldn't even consider the effect race and gender would have on the public discussion.
So, when Obama was prez of Harvard Law Review, why didn't he practice this same type of thinking? I mean, out of 60+ members, he only appointed 4 other African-Americans.
So at what point in Barack's life did he start thinking about race and gender?
I understand you may feel that this was part of his thinking, but gut-instinct ≠ fact.
[edit] Considering the "effect race may have on public discussion", is a lot different than using race or gender as a precursor for who Obama selected. I didn't vote for Obama because he was the black dude, I voted for him because he was most qualified, knowing what effect his race "may have on public discussion".
rottenseedsays...>> ^dirtythirtyix:
It's kinda like Satanism....you can't be Satanic without being Judeo-Christian.
WRONG! LaVeyan Satanism. No belief in a god.
dirtythirtyixsays...>> ^rottenseed:
>> ^dirtythirtyix:
It's kinda like Satanism....you can't be Satanic without being Judeo-Christian.
WRONG! LaVeyan Satanism. No belief in a god.
Reading LaVey is what lead me to that conclusion. If your philosophy is just the antithesis of another, than it doesn't exist outside the context of the other. 2 sides of the same coin, etc...
campionidelmondosays...*dead
siftbotsays...This video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by campionidelmondo.
siftbotsays...rasch187 has fixed this video's dead embed code - no Power Points awarded because rasch187's points are already fully charged.
Discuss...
Enable JavaScript to submit a comment.