I admit that I am still using the old, original, can’t-be-adjusted-to-fit-anyone-or anything-you-want-to-smear definition of “racism”: “the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.”
That’s one reason that I know that the attacks on President Trump as a racist comprise a Big Lie. No, criticizing a single Black individual, even nastily or unfairly, isn’t racism. Not favoring policies that confer advantages because of race isn’r racism. Even referring to third world countries with primarily black populations as “shit holes’—just to pick a hypothetical—isn’t racism. However, what Joe Biden said yesterday, during an interview with black and Latino journalists,
“Most people don’t know, unlike the African American community with notable exceptions, the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community, with incredibly different attitudes about different things.”
That’s racism, flat-out, no doubt about it, no spin possible. Not only that, it’s old school racism, like “them darkies just love their watermelon, and are happy pickin’ cotton in the fields!” In sexist terms, it is like saying that women are too emotional to hold leadership position. In a homophobia context, it is like saying that gay men are potential child molesters. The idea that blacks are monolithic and basically all alike was a Jim Crow staple, and like all racist tropes, is, or should be, nonsense on its face.
What Joe Biden said wasn’t a “gaffe.” His statement was clear and unequivocal; indeed it was one of the most coherent things he has uttered in public for a long time. It wasn’t a “gaffe,” except if you use the cynical Washington, D.C. definition of that word, which is “a politician saying in public what he really thinks.” Back in 1988, when Ross Perot was scaring both parties with his third party run for the President, the NAACP tarred him as a racist because at one point in his address to the group he referred to them as “you people.” Imagine if he had said, “you people are all the same.” Yet that is exactly what Joe Biden said yesterday.
The implication of what Biden said was so obvious that his campaign almost immediately began the clean-up on Aisle Dumb, with Joe, or his ventriloquist, writing on Twitter:
“Earlier today, I made some comments about diversity in the African American and Latino communities that I want to clarify. In no way did I mean to suggest the African American community is a monolith — not by identity, not on issues, not at all, Throughout my career I’ve witnessed the diversity of thought, background, and sentiment within the African American community. It’s this diversity that makes our workplaces, communities, and country a better place,.My commitment to you is this: I will always listen, I will never stop fighting for the African American community and I will never stop fighting for a more equitable future.”
Translation: I did not mean to suggest, when I said that African Americans were unlike Hispanic-Americans in that the latter have varying beliefs and opinions, that African Americans are unlike Hispanic-Americans in that the latter have varying beliefs and opinions.
Why did he say what he said then, if that’s not what he thinks? That’s the convenient thing about written denial that you said what you said: nobody can ask, “Huh?”
Joe Biden has There are dozens of photographs of Joe Biden sexually harassing or assaulting women of all ages while Vice President. He has a #MeToo accuser who is far more credible than than the high school accuser who prompted Democrats to call a judge with an impeccable personal and professional life a “rapist.” Yet even activists who insisted that accusations of sexual misconduct made by women must be presumed true have said they were still supporting Joe.
Now he has made a public statement that, unlike the comments by Donald Trump that were immediately assailed as proof of his racism, really is signature significance for a racist bigot. For example, I know Black Lives Matter is a racist organization because its leaders and spokespersons say that all whites are alike—you know, racists.
Yet if the pattern holds, Biden will be allowed to escape any consequences of letting the mask drop.
Ethics Alarms 
Just my opinion, but the clarifying email doesn’t “sound” like Biden. It hits “African American community” four times without ever stumbling over the individual African Americans who constitute the diversity. That’s an academic or bureaucrat talking from a lofty perch, not a politician who lives to press the flesh.
Agreed. Biden didn’t write that.
Of course he didn’t. He probably doesn’t even recall making those remarks in the first place.
It’s profoundly messed up that the Democrats are doing this to him. He is in no condition to be running for a school board, much less president of the United States.
My current theory is that, back in January and February, the Democrats realized that Trump was very likely to win, possibly bigger than in 2016. Rather than “waste” one of the younger primary candidates on this election, Biden was selected as the sacrifice. Then along comes a pandemic and economic disruption, and Trump isn’t looking as strong as he did in February, but now they’re stuck with this terrible candidate who is in rapid decline.
The fact that they’re willing to play such games with an unwell old man is reason enough for me to not vote Democrat.
I don’t think Joe Biden is a racist, or at least no more or less than any other 80 year old in the grips of cognitive decline that starts to say the quiet part out loud after a long life of keeping utterances like that locked up tight. Joe Biden isn’t well. We’re going to get more of this.
The racism of Joe Biden is not a recent thing to surface. He said this in 1977 in why he wanted to stop bussing:
He doubled down with the choice to use the word “jungle” when referring to black people coming to his kids’ school. The guy is a lifelong racist.
See, I’m old enough to remember when Donald Trump was telling brown, naturally born Americans, to “go back to their own country” if they didn’t like it here, and the commentariat on this very blog going balls to the wall to explain that the assumption that someone who is brown was born somewhere other than America was not at all racist. But now, merely mentioning jungle in the same context of black people is obviously indicative of a history of racism.
If you say so. I however, think that smacks of political bias, and don’t really care.
We are both members of the “commentariat” so you can point the finger back at yourself as much as you can point at me. I certainly didn’t defend Trump on the statement.
I’ll have the minor quibble with your statement – AOC and Talib are naturally born. Omar is not, she is a naturalized immigrant. I do believe the comment Trump made was in direct response to Omar so it isn’t factually incorrect to say “go back” to mean to return to Somalia.
“We are both members of the “commentariat” so you can point the finger back at yourself as much as you can point at me. I certainly didn’t defend Trump on the statement.”
I encourage you to go back to the post on that topic and browse the statements made, I was the person they were going balls to the wall against.
“I’ll have the minor quibble with your statement – AOC and Talib are naturally born. Omar is not, she is a naturalized immigrant. I do believe the comment Trump made was in direct response to Omar so it isn’t factually incorrect to say “go back” to mean to return to Somalia.”
It wasn’t. Trump was speaking off the cuff at the time, and referred to the “women in congress” plural, who “should go back to their countries” Again, plural. Of the squad, AOC, Tlaib and Pressley are naturally born citizens, and Omar is an immigrant. So which two, minimum, was he talking about? Even if you want to expand outside the squad, there aren’t many immigrants in congress, and none of them fit the qualifiers Trump laid out.
The best defense of this, I think, is that “Trump says shit”, and this wasn’t indicative of racism, just stupidity. Maybe… But way to damn with subtle praise.
Uncharacteristically, you repeat a false Left narrative here. (By the way, EA declared that tweet by Trump unethical and stupid.) However, he didn’t tell them to go back where they came from; he said to go back where they came from, use their theories of governing to fix their messed up countries, and then come back and teach us how to do it. That’s materially different. In other words, he was saying, “If you’re so smart, prove it,” and the little detail (to him) that Tlaib and AOC were native Americans didn’t get in teh way of the point he wanted to make, so he made it. It was offensive and stupid. It was not racist.
I wrote “This is gross incompetence and stupidity.” Link here:https://ethicsalarms.com/2019/07/14/from-the-ethics-alarms-presidential-flat-learning-curve-files/
Re-reading the tweet, by the way, I think a fair argument can be made that “where they originally came from” is just Trump-speak for “where your family came from.” I didn’t take it that way, but if someone said that about me, meaning Greece–a thoroughly messed up country–I’d get the point.
And again, as with the #MeToo hypocrisy, I expect the left to hold itself two the standards it throttles others with. But as we see here with our Blackface governor and out accused rapist (But black!) Lt. Governor, they don’t,
That’s barely “racist” at most.
It might even be true. Bussing kids in from out of district may well have created an overbubbling racial tension. Students selected by race and forced to attend and out of town school sure sounds like a recipe for racial tension. Advocating against bussing isn’t even racist – the mandatory practice turned out to be unconstitutional!
The only “racist” part of the remark is the word “jungle”. Even this is pushing it. I worked in a primarily white school district. Jungle is not an unfair description of rowdy students there. To say it is racist is to uncharitably assume Biden was delibrately calling black children apes, rather than the more obvious intent of calling a potentially chaotic situation a jungle.
This is racist primarily through the lens of today’s “gotcha” culture.
Can you explain why Biden specifically made sure that the omnibus crime bill of 1995 contained a provision barring Pell grants to inmates in state correctional institutions. Does not sound like someone who is worried about ensuring blacks have an opportunity to change their lot in life.
If you want to argue that Biden’s policies are bad, or that he’s inconsistent, or insincere when it comes to his support towards African Americans, then hoist that flag brother, and I’ll march beside you. I’m just really, really, REALLY fucking tired of people deciding that everything they don’t like politically is racist, and I don’t think we’re well served by trying to emulate that.
The correct path for someone trying to paint Biden is a racist would be to pointing out that he has a recent history of gaffes like this, most recently before this episode was when he went on the podcast of Charlemagne The God and said in a response to a question about black people who had questions about his policies said, “If you don’t vote for me, you ain’t black”.
The problem with that is that the same people saying that Biden is a racist for these events are also using them as examples of cognitive decline. It’s exceptionally common for elders in the grip of cognitive decline to start saying racist things, and that’s not an indication of racism. People with dementia say all kinds of things that aren’t indications of their real, unfiltered views… I remember the father of a friend who mistook another patient’s mobile oxygen bottle for a golf cart. It’s not like he *really* thought the oxygen bottle was a golf cart and his dementia removed the filter.
Joe Biden should not get within sniffing distance of the White House, but not because we think he’s racist, but because the people who love him should wheel him off to an acreage to spend the last few quasi-cognizant years he has left playing with his grandkids.
HT
Biden can’t have it both ways. I communicated with the Judiciary Committee back then on this issue. Our program was one of the national models to reduce recidivism among those incarcerated on drug crimes. He specifically and publically stated that denying Pell grants to state inmates would free them up for others ( read white kids) and allow increases for them. That was a bald faced lie. He perpetuated the myth that I spent 5 years fighting that those inmates were getting something white students rightfully deserved.
Pell was and is an entitlement based in income. There is no cap. Further no increases in student aid was ever made from the savings.
Keep in mind it was Biden who said poor kids are every bit as bright as white kids. I suppose they are just less deserving.
This transcends policy disputes. His public public persona is one that suggests he sees himself as a benevolent overseer as opposed to an equal. I am just one who has witnessed it up close and personally. The only difference now is that he has a more difficult time containing his true feelings toward those not in his group.
Addendum: policy affecting racial groups is an extension of attitudes toward those groups.
“Poor kids are just as smart as white kids” is another great, recent example.
Biden isn’t asking for it both ways, though. Even if Biden were in stage 7 cognitive decline, his campaign would never admit it. He’s asking to be taken seriously. I suppose that while I believe that Joe is basically gone, he *is* running for President of the United States of America, and I think he has a very good change of winning, and we should treat everything he says seriously, but I think opens us up to the risk of falling into the same trap the left falls into every other day with Trump: They take everything he says seriously and literally, when in reality he just says shit.
On the topic of Pell grants… I was 10 in 1995, so I wasn’t exactly tuned in. Was this actually seen as a racial problem? I see how it could be, more than half of all Pell Grants are given to people under the age of 25, and in that age group, black people were far more likely to have spent time in a correctional institution. But the argument could be made that there was nothing inherently racist about the rule in and of itself, because the differentiation was criminality, not race. That might not fly so far in the current political climate, but back in 1995?
Interesting that Susan Rice’s mother is considered the “mother” of Pell Grants.
I’m saying that his statement would be immediately used as proof of racism for anyone else. And the claim that blacks are monolithic IS racism. He laos said that Barack Obama was outstanding by being “clean.” He’s demented, sexist, AND racist by the standards of his own party.
Two things…
First, I think that we should probably be careful of declaring “monolithic” to be a racial slur, particularly when discussing a demographic where Trump’s ability to get 8% of their vote in 2016 was seen as a breakthrough, and Clinton’s ability to *only* get 88% of their vote was devastating. It was true though, because in 2012 Romney was only able to get 6% while Obama whistled away with 93%. That seems pretty monolithic, I’m just saying. I can’t think of many examples of demographics voting in lock-step to that extent outside of tin-pot dictatorships with rampant corruption. Hell, even Vladimir Putin was only able to fudge 77% in Russia’s last election, and Xi did even worse! He only managed to scrape together 72% support in 2018.
That is to say, while of course, saying that a person will vote a certain way because they’re a certain race, and there’s an assumption that all the people of a certain race will vote a certain way… Pretending that it’s not a good campaign strategy to treat one of America’s biggest voting blocs as a voting block because they happen to share a racial background rejects reality.
Second, to be clear, are you saying that this behavior is racist, and you would always condemn it, or are you saying that Biden would call a Republican that said what Biden said racist, and he should be hoisted on his own petard? Because those are two very different things.
Gah:
“That is to say, while of course, saying that a person will vote a certain way because they’re a certain race, and the assumption that all the people of a certain race will vote a certain way is a problem. Pretending that it’s not a good campaign strategy to treat one of America’s biggest voting blocs as a voting block because they happen to share a racial background rejects reality.”
He didn’t say that Blacks voted more predictably than Hispanics. He said “unlike the African American community with notable exceptions, the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community, with incredibly different attitudes about different things.” That’s not just voting, that’s saying “all blacks think alike.” And that’s racist.
Yes, I am saying that any time someones says, “this race is always like this, and is different from MY race, and the way my race is, is better” that’s racist. And stipulated ; being capable of diverse views is better than no being capable of them. No? Moreover, the black community has LONG protested that calling them monolithic is a slur.
Fair enough. I think I’ll still continue to refer to Black America, specifically on the topic of voting, as monolithic, at least until their out-group support consistently breaks double digits, or it becomes politically nonviable to do so…. It has the benefit of truth. But you’re right, that’s not what Biden said, and what Biden said was obviously worse.
That “cleanup on Aisle Dumb” (LOVE that!) is a type of #64, “It isn’t what it is:”
“I didn’t say what I said.”
We have a Republic – if we can keep it.
Joe Biden will have anarchy – if he can keep it.
Jack wrote, “I admit that I am still using the old, original, can’t-be-adjusted-to-fit-anyone-or anything-you-want-to-smear definition of “racism”: “the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.””
I use a similar classic definition of racism “a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race”. There are lots of concepts and definitions being bastardized in the 21st century!
The word racism and racist are actively being bastardized in the 21st century and there was a noticeable uptick in the bastardization of the words when President Obama took office. I had a conversations about this since that time and recently there was one over on Quora after I posted this question If you are one of the people that claims that systemic anti-black racism exists in the United States can you please provide evidence, other than superficial innuendo and accusations, to prove that systemic anti-black racism actually exists? Someone named Marko posted an answer that contained this “Racism = Prejudice + Power”, my specific reply to that was…
If a Conservative had said that “Most people don’t know, unlike the African American community with notable exceptions, the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community, with incredibly different attitudes about different things.” that Conservative would be endlessly tarred in the court of public opinion as a racist until he withdrew from the election.
If the Democratic Party isn’t really careful Kanye West might siphon off nearly every vote from the black community that would have normally voted for a Democrat making it impossible for Biden to be elected. This statement from Biden is perfect for West to exploit.
Question: Who is waiting in the wings ready to replace Biden and step into the election ready and willing to take on President Trump?
“Racism = Prejudice + Power” isn’t, and was never, actually functional. I think they used “prejudice” because of the alliteration. “Racism = Discrimination + Power” just doesn’t roll off the tongue the same way. Their point was, I believe, and if anyone holding that view wants to correct me, I’ll be willing to listen, that Racism without power isn’t damaging the same way racism with power is, and so it shouldn’t be treated the same way.
There’s perhaps some truth to that; While I don’t particularly like it when people say hurtful things to me based on my race, I don’t think mean words have the same teeth as a two-tiered justice system. I’m not saying that’s what America has. It isn’t (at least not racially, laws are for little people, as the political elite love to showcase, and that’s not a racial divide). But hypothetically, a law that reinforced slavery, as an example, would be a whole lot more damaging to a person than mean words.
I don’t like that description, because it excuses a whole lot of bad behavior. Even if following someone down the street calling them racial slurs is *less* hurtful than actually enslaving them, it’s still not good, reasonable, or acceptable. It’s still something, and whatever that thing is, it’s bad. If “Racism = Prejudice + Power” then what do we call unempowered prejudice?
That said, I’ve always liked it when someone uses “Racism = Prejudice + Power” because I think it’s an example of the mask slipping. Progressives don’t care about prejudice, or discrimination, or whatever the word bridging the = and + are, they care about the power.
Regardless, “Racism = Prejudice + Power” is unworkable now because they’ve further expanded the definition. Prejudice or discrimination is nolonger required… All that’s necessary is a disparate outcome. The power requirement hasn’t changed though; Hockey being comprised almost entirely of white players is racist, because it’s a disparate impact that disenfranchises a disenfranchised group, Basketball being very disproportionately black however, is not racism, because the dis-proportioned minority is disenfranchised.
At some point the mask will entirely slip, I think we’ve started to see this already to an extent, where progressives are going to stop looking for an excuse, and they’re just going to shorten the equation to what they really think, which is “Racism = Power”. The problem won’t be when a white person is doing something particularly bad, the problem will be that they’re white. The fact that this is deeply racist by conventional standards because it assumes power on behalf of every white person based on the color of their skin either won’t occur to them, or won’t matter, because again…. Progressives don’t have a problem with prejudice, they have a problem with power.
Actually… They don’t have a problem with power, even…. They have a problem with other people having power. Their entire ideology is anthropomorphized avarice.
Humble Talent wrote, “Racism = Prejudice + Power” isn’t, and was never, actually functional. I think they used “prejudice” because of the alliteration. “Racism = Discrimination + Power” just doesn’t roll off the tongue the same way. Their point was, I believe, and if anyone holding that view wants to correct me, I’ll be willing to listen, that Racism without power isn’t damaging the same way racism with power is, and so it shouldn’t be treated the same way.”
Here’s something that might help your thinking.
Racism does not actually require any kind of action, simply put, by definition it’s racist thought. Discrimination actually requires some kind of action based on racist or prejudice thoughts. Writing or speaking is an action that can inadvertently reveal the thoughts of the closet racist and this is what Biden did and these “actions” are signature significant Freudian slips, then there are the outright discriminatory actions of blatantly open racists that target the people the the racist thinks are inferior.
I think “Racism = Discrimination + Power” is false.
“Here’s something that might help your thinking.”
I have pretty well fleshed out ideas on the topic. The way I approach discussions like this is to try to understand where the other side is coming from. It’s useless to attempt to speak about details in right-ese when the progressive you’re talking to rejects your entire premise.I think, in this instance, that I understand the progressive argument, I don’t agree with it, but I understand it, and I can dismantle it from there. The problem is that progressive theories are like dust in the wind, floating around ephemerally and being notoriously hard to pin down. If someone who identified as a progressive took issue with my explanation of their beliefs, that line was an invitation to correct my understanding of their beliefs so I could shred what they actually believed, as opposed to the strawman I’d concocted for them.
You, not being a progressive, cannot answer that question.
“I think “Racism = Discrimination + Power” is false.”
You and basically everyone else who isn’t progressive. I think Power+ arguments go against the grain of a fundamental sense of fairness held by most of the population, and progressives are trying to lie loudly enough until our subjective expectations for fairness moves. The problem with that is that humanity is an inherently self-interested species, and despite being able to think and reason, we very often fail to suppress even some of the most damaging cave-brain thinking all the time, never mind things that are merely inconvenient to someone else’s politics.
Thanks HT, that adds clarity to what you wrote before.
I disagree with your definition of discrimination. Discrimination is the process of choosing, or separating things, one from the other. It is independent of the reason for the choice.
When preparing breakfast, you discriminate in choosing oatmeal over Frosted Flakes. When testing students, you design the test to discriminate between those who learned the material and those who did not. Red car or blue car? Baked or mashed? Etc. Discrimination happens constantly, done by all of us.
Like racism (the word), discrimination has become bastardized into a negative term.am
Another Mike wrote, “I disagree with your definition of discrimination.”
It’s not MY definition Mike and I don;t care if you disagree, it’s still the definition. I got it from here using a the google search “discrimination definition”.
No the definition of discrimination has not been “bastardized” in the manner in which you are claiming. The definition you chose “the process of choosing, or separating things, one from the other” is using a different context of the word; in effect you’re correct and you’re incorrect but in context of racism your really, really incorrect.
You might want to check point two in your own link.
I did check that and a lot more. Context makes all the difference.
Having been around nearly as long as Biden, I have seen a fair amount of evolution (or bastardization, as some would say) in English language usage. There was a time when ‘racial’ was regularly attached to ‘discrimination’ so the intent was clear. Now, after a number of years, ‘discrimination’ without any modifier implies racial discrimination for so many that number 1 definition spot in many dictionaries says it is racial, with the older and more pure meaning right behind in 2nd place. I have tried being a language purist, but usually it doesn’t go over well. Now, I have to force myself not to discriminate between those who know words and use them precisely and those who don’t.
Following up on Biden’s previous comment that “If you have a problem figuring out if you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black” the latest comment is of signature significance. Yes, this is strong evidence of benign racism of an old man with dementia.
Don’t make me defend Joe Biden’s sanity!
I’m honor-bound to point out that there’s an innocent (well, less racist) interpretation of what he phrased in an incompetently unambiguous manner: I suspect that he meant it as “African-Americans, with some exceptions, are among the few people who do know that the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community.”
The African-American community was being contrasted with people who don’t know the Latino community is diverse, not with the Latino community itself.
In essence, he was saying, “present company excepted,” with the intention of avoiding alienating the black journalists.
Arguably that interpretation still treats African-Americans as a monolith, by assuming the majority have some sort of bond or association with Latin cultures.
I’m rather puzzled that his handlers didn’t invoke that interpretation when trying to run damage control, though, regardless of whether it was true.
Also, minus five woke points to Joe for not using “Latinx”.
EC wrote, “African-Americans, with some exceptions, are among the few people who do know that the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community.”
If you want to dig down deep into it like that then you must take into account that there appears to be a double negative in the statement, “Most people don’t know, unlike…” Which would seem to change what you wrote to “African-Americans, with some exceptions, are among the few people who don’t know that the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community.”
Just sayin… 😉
Actually you already took that double negative into account, my bad.
EC,
I think your interpretation of applying the clause between the commas to the first clause instead of the third clause would have some credibility if Biden’s follow up tweet would have somehow explained something close to the same thing but in fact what Biden did was just try to deny one interpretation of what he wrote and then pander to the black community.
In my opinion; if you watch the video of Biden saying what he did, it’s very clear to me that the second clause is tied with the third clause not the first. Biden was intentionally pandering to the Latino community and had a signature significant Freudian slip revealing that he’s a closet racist.
Just watched the clip.
Wow… yeah, my alternate interpretation of the words seems much less likely now. He made a giant pause before, “Unlike the African-American community, with notable exceptions…,” and he led with, “what you all know but what most people don’t know…” (emphasis mine) which means there would be no reason for him to include such an awkward “present company excepted.” That indicates that he was actually being racially prejudiced.
No wonder they didn’t try the alternate interpretation angle. The best they’ve got is, “I didn’t mean what I said.” Of course, that always begets the question of why he’s in the habit of saying things he doesn’t mean.
EC wrote, “No wonder they didn’t try the alternate interpretation angle.”
I didn’t wonder about that at all, denials are completely acceptable for a Democrat, you know it was all just the Republicans misrepresenting what he said and the left leaning media will likely back him up 100%.
Did anyone catch the fact that in the denial they only said what they didn’t mean, they never said what they did mean. Interesting…
The idea that the black population is a monolithic voting block went out 40 years ago! It is not only racist but just untrue. Unbelievable that Biden made that statement: and I agree with other commenters that Biden’s “correction” could not possibly be written by him.
I still do not understand the anti-Trump psychosis, but really, I find it tantamount to treason (though I know not prosecutable) to set out to elect a mentally deficient as POTUS, still the most powerful office in the world — just to defeat Trump? And in re policy: add mental deficiency to an avowed socialism movement in the USA, where do we go?
I have talked this over with others: highly intelligent, highly educated people still will vote for Biden. Corona notwithstanding: this is a virus that takes usually rational people and turns them into ideological automatons, and IQs of 150 to 80 in one fell swoop. These individuals remind me much of Hollywood progressives: they have so much money that no new socialist policies will actually affect them, so they are free to espouse the most ridiculous ideas. They can just retire to their dachas and watch the show.
Hope they enjoy it. And when we all go to hell, I hope they go there, too.
Lunch break! Let’s put Democrat Party faux Christian theology into worship music:
Holy, Holy, Joe B. – Lord, God-Elect, he;
Early in the morning his gaffes are plain to see.
Holy, Holy, Holy – full of bull and flighty,
God in two persons –
Joe and his V.P.
After all, John R/ Lewis (God, who was in the flesh until recently) stated (and thus promised) that His Spirit would inhabit others after him. (Like Biden and his V.P.)
I think Ann Althouse got this one completely right:
As a political bloc, Hispanics really are much more diverse than blacks. Blacks vote about 5%-10% Republican, and that’s very consistent from state to state. Hispanics vote about 20%-40% Republican, and that varies greatly between native-born and foreign-born, according to nation of ancestry, and from state to state.
Boy, I don’t, at all. In fact, I was going to use this in the warm-up and ran out of space. Thanks for raising it. She’s assuming it’s inside baseball rather than racist, but 1) the inside baseball is based on stereotyping, and 2) the statement is still per se racist. If it doesn’t trigger an ethics alarm before it comes out of his mouth, Biden believes it: Blacks are monolithic.
She’s spinning, blaming Joe’s statement on campaign strategists and letting him off the hook. It pissed me off, frankly.
Biden’s comments demonstrate that Democrats believe that Blacks are a monolithic voting bloc.
Speaking virtually on Thursday to the National Association of Latino Elected Officials conference, Biden stated that if he won in November, his administration will reflect “the full diversity of this nation” as well as “the full diversity of the Latino communities.”
This is part of what he said:
“Now what I mean full diversity, unlike the African American community and many other communities, you’re from everywhere. You’re from Europe, from the tip of South America, all the way to our border in Mexico, and the Caribbean. And different backgrounds, different ethnicities, but all Latinos. We’re gonna get a chance to do that if we win in November.”
Biden went to talk about differences within the Latino communities on immigration, noting that Latinos (Cubans) in Florida have different ideas than Latinos (primarily Mexicans) in Arizona. That is particularly tone deaf with respect to Latinos and Blacks. He assumes Blacks are from the US, but refers to them as “African Americans” yet Latinos are from all over the place, assuming that Latinos are still not fully integrated into US culture.
jvb