Affirmative action hits politics? The Washington Post editorializes that white male politicians, especially from the South, ought not question black politicians. [Washington Post]
Affirmative action hits politics? The Washington Post editorializes that white male politicians, especially from the South, ought not question black politicians. [Washington Post]
They didn’t mean to say ‘riceist’?
This type of name-calling defense seems to be the preferred option when they are caught. It is one of the more racist and sexist arguments I can think of. Do they really believe Ms. Rice is so delicate because she is a black female that she cannot withstand criticism? Do they really believe that because of her sex and race she cannot distinguish between truth and fiction and therefore cannot be held accountable for her actions? That defense seems pretty patriarchal and racist to me. It seems akin to the old stereotypes.
Idiocy in the so called high ranks. Just idiots.
The race card is the only defense they can muster. Not only did she lie, she continued the lie while knowing the truth from day one. Rice has no defense. I didn’t know she was Black until the racist trumpeting started. I also didn’t know Elizabeth Warren was a Native American.
Why don’t they just tattoo “God” on their foreheads and it will be easier to know who we can and cannot question. The score card currently is just too complicated–is the person of the same gender, race, sexual orientation, political party, socio-economic level? Maybe you can say something if all these match, but if you missed any one of the many criteria used, you’ll be labelled mean. The tattoo would solve a lot.
Beyond silly!!!
If they are a politician being paid on our dime, we have a right to question anything they say. To suggest that we can’t question a politician because of their color is moronic.