Get E-Mail Updates

What?! Racism Still in America?

Here we go again. Some people raise the issue of race (this time about the ways others are talking about or treating the first black U.S. president) and the media goes crazy. "What racism?" many of the pundits cry. "Didn't we just elect this black guy president?" (Implying "Doesn't that prove that racism is over in America?")

Related Reading

Take Action on This Issue

Tell the Senate: Don't Cut International Aid

Please join us in telling the Senate: Protect foreign aid programs that help the poor and the needy. 

So let's all just take a breath here, as we always need to do when talking about race in the U.S.

A few simple points:

First, on Nov. 4, 2008, the U.S. did what only one other country I know of ever has ever done -- elect a president from a minority race in a country with a different majority race. (Peru is the only other country I can think of to have done that, electing as their president Alberto Fujimori, who is of Asian descent, in a predominantly Hispanic country.) That a still majority white U.S. would elect a black man as head of state was stunning to many -- and, I must admit, to me. Frankly, it made me think that the country was better than I thought it was. That historic accomplishment is a sign of great progress and a hope of better things to come for racial equality and justice in the United States.

Second, the majority of Americans, and even of white Americans -- whether they voted for Obama or not -- seemed to feel proud and positive that the nation had finally reached this amazing milestone. Having elected Barack Obama made most Americans feel good about themselves and about their country on that Jan. 20 Inauguration Day. The new president's approval rating climbed up to 70% in the week after the inauguration, which obviously meant that even some of those who voted against him were impressed by how he was handling his job at the outset.

Third, there are many people, most of whom voted against Obama, who have basic disagreements with the president on substantive political issues. To disagree with a black president on policy questions does not mean that you are racist. The 20% fewer people who now approve of his job performance did not suddenly turn into racists. And my conservative friends who admire Obama personally but disagree with him politically can hardly be called racists.

But fourth -- and importantly -- there was, and is still, a hard core of racially-motivated white people in this nation who did vote against Obama because he is black, and who virulently oppose him as president because he is black. And that racist core of angry white Americans resides on the extreme political right of U.S. politics. The Far Right in America have never supported racial equality. Their political representatives voted against both the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts of 1964 and 1965, and most have never repented for it. And, let's be honest, the loudest voices of right-wing talk radio and cable television appeal directly to that core with subtle and not-so-subtle racial messages, as has the right wing of the Republican Party for many years.

If you were paying attention, you could see signs of that underlying racism at the most heated town meetings this summer. Of course, not everybody who attended, or even was mad about health care or the government at those meetings, is a racist -- most of those people weren't, but some of them clearly are. There were blatant signs of racism at some of the town meetings and, indeed, many signs that carried overtly racial messages.

I see those racial subtexts in the intensity of the attacks on Obama -- not in the disagreements per se, but in the viciousness of the rhetoric. Racism is often about disrespect, and many African-American citizens are now feeling that the black president in the White House is being disrespected. I also see it in supporters of the new "birthers" movement, who try to stir up doubts about Obama's citizenship. I see it in the furor over the president speaking to the nation's schoolchildren about studying and working hard. And, agree with me or not, I saw it in the disrespect shown toward a black president by a white Congressman from the South, whose less than enthusiastic apologies have now turned him into a fund-raising martyr, cheered on by a defiant rebel yell against the man (or is it "boy"?) in the White House.

We have all witnessed or experienced situations where someone has "played the race card" in inappropriate or unfair ways. And racism is not the cause or explanation of every social problem. Nor are legitimately different points of view obvious signs of racism. President Obama has not played the race card, expecting only to be treated as a man -- not a "black man"-- and to be judged as a president and not as an "African-American president."

But let's be honest. We all know racism still exists in the U.S. today. We know there is a hard core of our white fellow citizens who simply will not accept their black or brown brothers and sisters -- especially one in the White House. So while we should not call every disagreement an issue of racism, it is time to call out the racism that indeed does still exist -- that wounds our soul as a nation, and that obstructs the promise of the United States.

Sojourners relies on the support of readers like you to sustain our message and ministry.

by: photoglyph

03-03-2010 @ 5:12pm

well, he (Barack Obama) certainly came off more intelligent, calm and controlled than his opponent (or his disastrous choice for VP...) did in the election. I'd like to think blacks were as rational in their decision-making process as me.

by: Android Tablets

06-14-2011 @ 5:36pm

As a foreigner I like America except for this and all the fat people other than that good country.

Othello Tab

by: photoglyph

03-03-2010 @ 5:08pm

The ugliness exhibited by those with conservative/racist leanings that Blue Deacon is referring to is being exposed, but another part of the problem is the electorate or, more appropriately, the uninformed electorate; low-income, rural voters for instance.

In Missouri, 'white, rural' recipients constitute the largest percentage of welfare recipients, yet traditionally view blacks in metropolitan areas as being the highest proportion of recipients.

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 1:54pm

I actually see a proverbial silver lining in all this overt Obamaphobia. MLK Jr., quoting a historian whose name escapes me, said in a sermon that "Whom the gods would destroy they must first make mad with power." In other words, before God can truly deal with sin He needs to expose its ugliness -- and I think that's just what's happening now.

by: Lord_Voldemort

09-17-2009 @ 2:13pm

"And, agree with me or not, I saw it in the disrespect shown toward a black president by a white Congressman from the South, whose less than enthusiastic apologies have now turned him into a fund-raising martyr, cheered on by a defiant rebel yell against the man (or is it "boy"?) in the White House."

Jim, on the whole this was a thoughtful and balanced article, but I have to object strenuously to this part here. The simple fact is that grown men sometimes lie. You may think the President was right, that he was honestly mistaken, or that he was intentionally lying. The Congressman said "lie" He meant "lie". The word "boy" did not pass his lips.

You can condemn the Congressman's actions if you want, but if you are going to condemn him then condemn him for what he said, not what you guess he might have thought.

Judging is dangerous enough for a Christian -- "Judge not" and all that. Adding your own guesswork about what the Congressman might have been thinking only compounds things.

LV

by: SisterMarie

09-17-2009 @ 2:14pm

Your comments here remind me of a video that I recently checked out from the library. I don't remember the title, but the premise was that the South was victorious at Gettysburg and then immediately marched into Washington, DC and the union government collapsed. Then, the remainder of the video dealt with what our government would have been like. One stark difference was that we would never have entered WW2, since the views of our government would not have differed significantly from those of the Axis Powers.

You are certainly correct in pointing out the slowness of our nation in adopting civil rights reforms and the manner in which one particular section resisted those reforms. I am old enough to remember an era in which the Solid South could be counted on to vote for Democrats; then how quickly that entire section turned to the Republican Party when the Democrats began embracing civil rights. I'm also old enough to remember separate restrooms for black citizens. So I think that what we are now witnessing is a reaction to the last 50-60 years of progress. Despite their best efforts to hide their frustration of Black progress, you still see it emerge in the comments of Joe Wilson and Trent Lott saying that we should have elected Strom Thurmond in 1948. I can tell you one thing - if we had elected old Strom and then followed that up with a similar bent in subsequent elections, the election of a Black president would have been as remote as integrated restrooms in the 1950s.

So keep up the good work. With all of the hate that is being spread around the internet and talk radio, it's really refreshing to have an honest voice crying in the wilderness. With voices like yours and the remainder of your staff, perhaps one day 50 years from now we can finally look back on this interval with the same disdain that we regard those who resisted reform in the 60s and 70s.

by: Lord_Voldemort

09-17-2009 @ 2:14pm

The only question is -- to whom? I'm guessing we'll find out soon enough.

LV

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 2:22pm

You may think the President was right, that he was honestly mistaken, or that he was intentionally lying. The Congressman said "lie" He meant "lie". The word "boy" did not pass his lips.

Because that would have been obvious. For openers, when Wilson said "You lie" he was himself lying, and the reality is that he did that to curry political favor with people in his district who can't stand Obama. On top of that, Wilson belongs to the Sons of Confederate Veterans and led the charge to keep the "Stars and Bars" flying over the statehouse in Columbia, S.C. Furthermore, he -- and his upcoming opponent -- have raised a ton of money because of this dust-up.

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 2:24pm

To as many as will see it. That's what MLK Jr. did in the South.

by: jesse3

09-17-2009 @ 2:42pm

"I see those racial sub-texts in the intensity of the attacks on Obama - not in the disagreements per se, but in the viciousness of the rhetoric."
--And therein lies the problem...claiming that any and every sign of disrespect is motivated by "racism" is helpful to no one. Similar signs of disrespect were widespread and frequent throughout Bush's presidency. You had much harsher words for Cheney than Wilson (you called him a "liar" and said he represented "evil"). Please stop.

"I saw it in the disrespect shown toward a black president by a white Congressman from the South, whose less than enthusiastic apologies have now turned him into a fund-raising martyr, cheered on by a defiant rebel yell against the man (or is it "boy"?) in the White House."
--So you're taking cues from Maureen Dowd right now?

Sorry, Jim, you can acknowledge all sides of a debate all you want. But you're still coming down on the side whose claims of widespread covert racism is poisonous to national conversation. Carter's remarks reflect the fringe of American thinking (most people believe opposition to Obama's healthcare proposals is not motivated by racism). You're not helping.

by: prk

09-17-2009 @ 2:43pm

Let us speak about the south. I remember when my 4 grade year started that was the year that busing started here in Chattanooga. From then on I went to marjority black schools until college.

Ten years later I saw on the news riots in Boston over busing. I was shocked, I thought that these problems only exist in the south.

by: rsj2d

09-17-2009 @ 3:37pm

I think we are missing the point here. Of course racism still exists but Jimmy Carter had no reason to suspect Joe Wilson of racism. So why did he say it?

There is no evidence of racism. Please show me evidence of racsim

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 4:27pm

Jimmy Carter is a Southerner and has witnessed racism first-hand for most of his life. If he says that he believes that Joe Wilson is a racist -- and based on some of his associations and the political culture of South Carolina it's very likely -- I would take him seriously.

by: WaveTossed

09-17-2009 @ 5:40pm

"Because that would have been obvious. For openers, when Wilson said 'You lie' he was himself lying,"

To add to what you said: Joe Wilson was invoking another form of racism -- against Latinos, particularly against Mexicans. Much of the loud, angry rhetoric against "illegal immigrants" is directed at Mexican immigrants. I read stereotypical remarks about how these "illegals" are coming to this country to go on welfare and get food stamps, Medicaid, etc. Which are lies in themselves. These remarks that I read feed into the entire "lazy Mexican" stereotype.

The Cato Institute has some excellent articles that show that most immigrants -- from Mexico as well as from elsewhere -- come here to work and find jobs. They pay more in taxes than they take out in government services.

In the case of Joe Wilson, we have the spectacle of a congressman pandering to those who are more worried about whether or not "illegals" will or will not get health care benefits. For him (and his supporters), this issue seems far more important than whether or not people end up having to go through bankruptcy because of medical expenses and inadequate or no insurance. Or else people who literally end up dying because of no or inadequate insurance or access to medical care. According to people of this mind-set that Wilson panders to , it's more important to keep "illegals" (those lazy, welfare-grabbing Mexicans) from getting benefits than it is to help out people who desperately need help in this health care crisis.

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 1:54pm

I actually see a proverbial silver lining in all this overt Obamaphobia. MLK Jr., quoting a historian whose name escapes me, said in a sermon that "Whom the gods would destroy they must first make mad with power." In other words, before God can truly deal with sin He needs to expose its ugliness -- and I think that's just what's happening now.

by: WaveTossed

09-17-2009 @ 5:48pm

I am originally from Chicago. In 1965-66, I spent a year in Mississippi with the southern Civil Rights movement. While there I witnessed and experienced plenty of violence and hatred. After the James Meredith March in June, 1966, I returned to my home in Chicago. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. also came to Chicago to run an "open housing campaign" because of all of the blatent housing discrimination that was going on at the time.

I remember vividly, after a particularly violent display by white people in Chicago neighborhoods -- cherry bombs, rocks, bottles flew down on civil rights marchers and Dr. King was hit by a rock and wounded. Displays of Nazi and KKK signs were rampant. The white rioters ended up destroying about twenty cars owned by civil rights marchers. Through it all, the police didn't lift a finger to stop any of this. Dr. King addressed the marchers that night. He talked about the South and what he experienced there. He told us, "I have never experienced such hatred as I have here in Chicago." Having just returned home from the South, I could do nothing other than agree with him. Decades later, when I left Chicago to move to Maryland, it wasn't much better.

by: judithsihweil

09-17-2009 @ 5:49pm

This is the same Wilson who also disrespected Strom Thurmond's
illegimate daughter by a black lady !!!!!!!!!----
from an idiot so we should expect this...kind of behavior- but not put up with it.. JUST A BIG DISTRACTION ALSO
and Wilson got free publicity -which he doesn't deserve
.......being from Louisiana-northern part -over 35 years ago
I was very proud of our new president and very upset the way he is being treated. by all these ignorants and fraidy cats-Carter is absolutely Correct

by: seattle31

09-17-2009 @ 5:50pm

Jesse3, I believe you've missed the point entirely. It's helpful to have these debates to expose the very ugly truths about ourselves and our country. To dust it under the rug or simply not acknowledge that there are still people who hold these beliefs about others is what is NOT helpful to our nation.
Rev. Wallis never said in his article that "any and every sign of disrespect is motivated by "racism"". Quite the contrary, he made 3 points demonstrating the opposite opinion, so perhaps you should read the article before commenting.

by: Lord_Voldemort

09-17-2009 @ 2:13pm

"And, agree with me or not, I saw it in the disrespect shown toward a black president by a white Congressman from the South, whose less than enthusiastic apologies have now turned him into a fund-raising martyr, cheered on by a defiant rebel yell against the man (or is it "boy"?) in the White House."

Jim, on the whole this was a thoughtful and balanced article, but I have to object strenuously to this part here. The simple fact is that grown men sometimes lie. You may think the President was right, that he was honestly mistaken, or that he was intentionally lying. The Congressman said "lie" He meant "lie". The word "boy" did not pass his lips.

You can condemn the Congressman's actions if you want, but if you are going to condemn him then condemn him for what he said, not what you guess he might have thought.

Judging is dangerous enough for a Christian -- "Judge not" and all that. Adding your own guesswork about what the Congressman might have been thinking only compounds things.

LV

by: SisterMarie

09-17-2009 @ 2:14pm

Your comments here remind me of a video that I recently checked out from the library. I don't remember the title, but the premise was that the South was victorious at Gettysburg and then immediately marched into Washington, DC and the union government collapsed. Then, the remainder of the video dealt with what our government would have been like. One stark difference was that we would never have entered WW2, since the views of our government would not have differed significantly from those of the Axis Powers.

You are certainly correct in pointing out the slowness of our nation in adopting civil rights reforms and the manner in which one particular section resisted those reforms. I am old enough to remember an era in which the Solid South could be counted on to vote for Democrats; then how quickly that entire section turned to the Republican Party when the Democrats began embracing civil rights. I'm also old enough to remember separate restrooms for black citizens. So I think that what we are now witnessing is a reaction to the last 50-60 years of progress. Despite their best efforts to hide their frustration of Black progress, you still see it emerge in the comments of Joe Wilson and Trent Lott saying that we should have elected Strom Thurmond in 1948. I can tell you one thing - if we had elected old Strom and then followed that up with a similar bent in subsequent elections, the election of a Black president would have been as remote as integrated restrooms in the 1950s.

So keep up the good work. With all of the hate that is being spread around the internet and talk radio, it's really refreshing to have an honest voice crying in the wilderness. With voices like yours and the remainder of your staff, perhaps one day 50 years from now we can finally look back on this interval with the same disdain that we regard those who resisted reform in the 60s and 70s.

by: benvos

09-17-2009 @ 6:01pm

I don't think it takes much "guesswork" to know what Joe Wilson was thinking last Wednesday night. He's made it clear to everyone. He believes that "illegals" should not receive healthcare in the U.S. He believes that the President was "lying" about provisions in the healthcare plan to cover (or not cover) illegal immigrants.

This is a guy who attacked Strom Thurmond's African-American daughter for going public. This is a guy who belongs to "Sons of the Confederacy". This is a guy who wants to put up the Dixie Rebel flag outside a state capitol. This is a guy who sees no problem with shouting at a President in a session of Congress, but claims to love America.

If it was one moment out of context, that would be one thing. But to deny that Congressman Joe Wilson is prone to racism is not only naive, it's dangerous.

Because either he's extraordinarily uncivilized and inciting horrible behavior, or he's ignorant.

by: cohea

10-07-2009 @ 12:55pm

This article states that a small % of "whites" probably voted against our President because he is black and that racism is still alive and well in the USA but I rarely hear anyone talk about the possibility that a very large % of "black" voters voted for him purely BECAUSE they perceive him as black. Was their vote racist? And one other thing that clouds this discussion of racism; is our President a black man with a white mother or a white man with a black father? The answer to that question can reveal much about our perception of race and reveal our racial prejudices. (Gal.3:28)

by: Lord_Voldemort

09-17-2009 @ 2:14pm

The only question is -- to whom? I'm guessing we'll find out soon enough.

LV

by: photoglyph

03-03-2010 @ 3:12pm

well, he (Barack Obama) certainly came off more intelligent, calm and controlled than his opponent (or his disastrous choice for VP...) did in the election. I'd like to think blacks were as rational in their decision-making process as me.

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 6:01pm

I wasn't aware of the Cato Institute's findings, but you confirmed what I always suspected -- "illegals" come here from Mexico because, and only because, that's where the jobs are. You may remember that Sojo recently posted "Joe Legal vs. Jose Illegal."

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 2:22pm

You may think the President was right, that he was honestly mistaken, or that he was intentionally lying. The Congressman said "lie" He meant "lie". The word "boy" did not pass his lips.

Because that would have been obvious. For openers, when Wilson said "You lie" he was himself lying, and the reality is that he did that to curry political favor with people in his district who can't stand Obama. On top of that, Wilson belongs to the Sons of Confederate Veterans and led the charge to keep the "Stars and Bars" flying over the statehouse in Columbia, S.C. Furthermore, he -- and his upcoming opponent -- have raised a ton of money because of this dust-up.

by: photoglyph

03-03-2010 @ 3:08pm

The ugliness exhibited by those with conservative/racist leanings that Blue Deacon is referring to is being exposed, but another part of the problem is the electorate or, more appropriately, the uninformed electorate; low-income, rural voters for instance.

In Missouri, 'white, rural' recipients constitute the largest percentage of welfare recipients, yet traditionally view blacks in metropolitan areas as being the highest proportion of recipients.

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 2:24pm

To as many as will see it. That's what MLK Jr. did in the South.

by: Opinion_Honest

11-13-2009 @ 8:01pm

Well, your topic says "What?! Racism Still in America?" and the content solely talks about the US President Obama and eventually concludes "Yes, this is not racism and that is not, so, its so and so". If you want to have a look at racism, then politics is not the place - Politics is backed by Power, Power is backed by People, People are backed by more and more People. My point is, if you want to see how much racism goes on in the US then you have to look into these places - Restaurants (waiters/ waitresses), Super Markets (salesmen guys), Grocery Stores (salesmen guys), Shopping Malls 9again salesmen guys). I know one thing, that these guys at these places are either partially educated or uneducated and so the low thinking that gets into their minds.

Basically, there is someone or the other who is a racist, and they need to stop. When will they stop? No one knows that!

by: jesse3

09-17-2009 @ 2:42pm

"I see those racial sub-texts in the intensity of the attacks on Obama - not in the disagreements per se, but in the viciousness of the rhetoric."
--And therein lies the problem...claiming that any and every sign of disrespect is motivated by "racism" is helpful to no one. Similar signs of disrespect were widespread and frequent throughout Bush's presidency. You had much harsher words for Cheney than Wilson (you called him a "liar" and said he represented "evil"). Please stop.

"I saw it in the disrespect shown toward a black president by a white Congressman from the South, whose less than enthusiastic apologies have now turned him into a fund-raising martyr, cheered on by a defiant rebel yell against the man (or is it "boy"?) in the White House."
--So you're taking cues from Maureen Dowd right now?

Sorry, Jim, you can acknowledge all sides of a debate all you want. But you're still coming down on the side whose claims of widespread covert racism is poisonous to national conversation. Carter's remarks reflect the fringe of American thinking (most people believe opposition to Obama's healthcare proposals is not motivated by racism). You're not helping.

by: aaawwer

10-26-2009 @ 8:32pm

Racism in America is a serious problem. I as an Iranian American (real minority) can assure you that I have taken shit from whites and other so called minorities. I am not a muslim and not an arab, but I still have to put up with racism that's going on in this country. Obama's election was a step forward, sure, but we are light years away from having true equality in this country. If you manage to get inside the circles of ethnic groups (like whites), you'll get to learn the new names and newly released jokes about other ethnic groups (seriously disturbing stuff). This kind of thing is not just conducted by say red necks or uneducated people. Some of the people that I deal with seem to be really nice people with high values and proper education.

by: prk

09-17-2009 @ 2:43pm

Let us speak about the south. I remember when my 4 grade year started that was the year that busing started here in Chattanooga. From then on I went to marjority black schools until college.

Ten years later I saw on the news riots in Boston over busing. I was shocked, I thought that these problems only exist in the south.

by: Chris "Jesdisciple"

10-16-2009 @ 4:10pm

Earlier I read a comment that commended Obama for trying to "diffuse the situation" and simultaneously undid his efforts. Why don't we all adopt that strategy against racism?

Yes, there are still racists... I wager that the more intense ones are elderly, survivors of the 60s and 70s who shut up about racism because it's now uncool. One of my friends, for example, said his grandfather (probably about 70 years old) readily admits to being racist. He's quite a nice guy although I've never seen him around folks of other colors.

But there are younger racists too... mostly because of racist parents, but I'm sure class division perpetuates stereotypes. Poor people are more ready to steal things outright, so when an entire race is mostly poor we conflate our expectations.

And of course there's the core of racism in every race. These people antagonize both each other and the non-racists. In doing so they increase each other's membership because everyone "knows" the other race is full of racism (*puke*).

The first group is relatively easy to get rid of... Let 'em die. The second group needs to be educated, and philanthropy would help to break the cycle to make education easier. (I will not, however, stand for a welfare solution to this part of the problem - partly because I hate welfare itself and partly because the third group can use it as a rhetorical tool.) The third group needs to be starved of attention; if no one hears, no one joins. If no one joins, the movement dies.

To give an illustration of how I view the racist cores... Surely everyone here knows what an internet troll is? How are internet trolls defeated? Hint: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

by: markhayes

10-14-2009 @ 6:25pm

Having given thought to this for some time it occured to me that referring to the President as a black man may be one of the most racist comments to make.

I am something of a history buff and remember reading that in times past if a person had a "drop of negro blood" they were considered black. Using this formula, could make President Obama our sixth black President. I voted for the man because I thought he was the right man for the job period.

by: rsj2d

09-17-2009 @ 3:37pm

I think we are missing the point here. Of course racism still exists but Jimmy Carter had no reason to suspect Joe Wilson of racism. So why did he say it?

There is no evidence of racism. Please show me evidence of racsim

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 4:27pm

Jimmy Carter is a Southerner and has witnessed racism first-hand for most of his life. If he says that he believes that Joe Wilson is a racist -- and based on some of his associations and the political culture of South Carolina it's very likely -- I would take him seriously.

by: middmedstudent

09-17-2009 @ 8:09pm

Well, here we seem to have a problem with historical understandning. My friend, the "Stars and Bars" and belonging to the Sons of Confederate Veterns does not make this man a racest. The "Stars and Bars," is not a symbol of slavery, rather, it is a symbol of the rights that belong to states. The Civil War was not fought origionally because of slavery, it was an issue of federal vs. states rights. It turned into a war about slavery only during the war, recall that Lincoln issued the emancipation proclimation during the war, not prior to. And, so, you sir, you LIE. Or do you? Your understanding of the civil war is that it was about slavery. Is it wrong? One can argue either direction. But remember that any individual supporting any confederate aspect of the war is not a default racist, rather, a believer in his state before the federal government.

by: WaveTossed

09-17-2009 @ 5:40pm

"Because that would have been obvious. For openers, when Wilson said 'You lie' he was himself lying,"

To add to what you said: Joe Wilson was invoking another form of racism -- against Latinos, particularly against Mexicans. Much of the loud, angry rhetoric against "illegal immigrants" is directed at Mexican immigrants. I read stereotypical remarks about how these "illegals" are coming to this country to go on welfare and get food stamps, Medicaid, etc. Which are lies in themselves. These remarks that I read feed into the entire "lazy Mexican" stereotype.

The Cato Institute has some excellent articles that show that most immigrants -- from Mexico as well as from elsewhere -- come here to work and find jobs. They pay more in taxes than they take out in government services.

In the case of Joe Wilson, we have the spectacle of a congressman pandering to those who are more worried about whether or not "illegals" will or will not get health care benefits. For him (and his supporters), this issue seems far more important than whether or not people end up having to go through bankruptcy because of medical expenses and inadequate or no insurance. Or else people who literally end up dying because of no or inadequate insurance or access to medical care. According to people of this mind-set that Wilson panders to , it's more important to keep "illegals" (those lazy, welfare-grabbing Mexicans) from getting benefits than it is to help out people who desperately need help in this health care crisis.

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 9:00pm

Your accusation is false because I never actually said that the Civil War began over slavery. Indeed, I've been a student of Southern history over the past 30 years or so and know full well that the original issue was federalism.

That said, however, it is also clear that Southern states abused their legitimate claims about "states' rights" to deny African-Americans the franchise and the same opportunities that their white citizens enjoyed. And it became clear that Southern politicians of that day fully intended to preserve the system of slavery, if for no other reason that the planters were supporting their campaigns!

by: WaveTossed

09-17-2009 @ 5:48pm

I am originally from Chicago. In 1965-66, I spent a year in Mississippi with the southern Civil Rights movement. While there I witnessed and experienced plenty of violence and hatred. After the James Meredith March in June, 1966, I returned to my home in Chicago. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. also came to Chicago to run an "open housing campaign" because of all of the blatent housing discrimination that was going on at the time.

I remember vividly, after a particularly violent display by white people in Chicago neighborhoods -- cherry bombs, rocks, bottles flew down on civil rights marchers and Dr. King was hit by a rock and wounded. Displays of Nazi and KKK signs were rampant. The white rioters ended up destroying about twenty cars owned by civil rights marchers. Through it all, the police didn't lift a finger to stop any of this. Dr. King addressed the marchers that night. He talked about the South and what he experienced there. He told us, "I have never experienced such hatred as I have here in Chicago." Having just returned home from the South, I could do nothing other than agree with him. Decades later, when I left Chicago to move to Maryland, it wasn't much better.

by: judithsihweil

09-17-2009 @ 5:49pm

This is the same Wilson who also disrespected Strom Thurmond's
illegimate daughter by a black lady !!!!!!!!!----
from an idiot so we should expect this...kind of behavior- but not put up with it.. JUST A BIG DISTRACTION ALSO
and Wilson got free publicity -which he doesn't deserve
.......being from Louisiana-northern part -over 35 years ago
I was very proud of our new president and very upset the way he is being treated. by all these ignorants and fraidy cats-Carter is absolutely Correct

by: seattle31

09-17-2009 @ 5:50pm

Jesse3, I believe you've missed the point entirely. It's helpful to have these debates to expose the very ugly truths about ourselves and our country. To dust it under the rug or simply not acknowledge that there are still people who hold these beliefs about others is what is NOT helpful to our nation.
Rev. Wallis never said in his article that "any and every sign of disrespect is motivated by "racism"". Quite the contrary, he made 3 points demonstrating the opposite opinion, so perhaps you should read the article before commenting.

by: BlueDeacon

10-07-2009 @ 3:47pm

Because blacks are far more sophisticated and pragmatic politically than most
people give them credit for; I can assure you that only a small minority,
perhaps one or two percent, voted for Obama primarily because of his color.
If color really had been the issue they would have gone heavily for Jesse
Jackson in 1984 and '88; they didn't because they knew he had no chance of
winning and they don't do mere "symbolic voting." It's far more likely that
an evangelical Christian would vote for another evangelical Christian just on
that basis.

In fact, at the beginning of last year's primary season Hillary Clinton
actually had the black vote pretty much locked up and most black groups
actually didn't trust Barack Obama at first because they really didn't know
who he was. That began to change when Obama -- helped by young white
volunteers -- began running up caucus victories and Clinton, in her
desperation, began "pulling the race card" in Pennsylvania and South Carolina,
turning blacks against her and toward him. That said, had Clinton won the
nomination the Democrats would have closed ranks and supported her; blacks
vote 90 percent Democratic anyway and their hatred of GWB in particular
(consider Florida in 2000) and the political right in general would have
motivated them to turn out in record numbers.

by: cohea

10-07-2009 @ 12:55pm

This article states that a small % of "whites" probably voted against our President because he is black and that racism is still alive and well in the USA but I rarely hear anyone talk about the possibility that a very large % of "black" voters voted for him purely BECAUSE they perceive him as black. Was their vote racist? And one other thing that clouds this discussion of racism; is our President a black man with a white mother or a white man with a black father? The answer to that question can reveal much about our perception of race and reveal our racial prejudices. (Gal.3:28)

by: benvos

09-17-2009 @ 6:01pm

I don't think it takes much "guesswork" to know what Joe Wilson was thinking last Wednesday night. He's made it clear to everyone. He believes that "illegals" should not receive healthcare in the U.S. He believes that the President was "lying" about provisions in the healthcare plan to cover (or not cover) illegal immigrants.

This is a guy who attacked Strom Thurmond's African-American daughter for going public. This is a guy who belongs to "Sons of the Confederacy". This is a guy who wants to put up the Dixie Rebel flag outside a state capitol. This is a guy who sees no problem with shouting at a President in a session of Congress, but claims to love America.

If it was one moment out of context, that would be one thing. But to deny that Congressman Joe Wilson is prone to racism is not only naive, it's dangerous.

Because either he's extraordinarily uncivilized and inciting horrible behavior, or he's ignorant.

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 6:01pm

I wasn't aware of the Cato Institute's findings, but you confirmed what I always suspected -- "illegals" come here from Mexico because, and only because, that's where the jobs are. You may remember that Sojo recently posted "Joe Legal vs. Jose Illegal."

by: jim085

09-18-2009 @ 10:40am

racism is not just about skin heads it is about all of us and the way we have been shaped by a racist society. racism is about the disparity in employment, healthcare, environmental protection, housing, criminal justice...

by: wec33

06-16-2010 @ 5:31am

Who cares about racism, too many isms out there, but where in the constitution does it read that any person has to like any other person, much less provide anything for any other person? People are selfish as a whole, rich to poor. Turning away from God does this, not any isms. We are all in the same world, what we make of it is up to us individually.

by: wec33

06-16-2010 @ 5:31am

Who cares about racism, too many isms out there, but where in the constitution does it read that any person has to like any other person, much less provide anything for any other person? People are selfish as a whole, rich to poor. Turning away from God does this, not any isms. We are all in the same world, what we make of it is up to us individually.

by: thewhiplash

09-18-2009 @ 1:48pm

I believe that the single source of the cause of this discontent with our congress stems from the corruption in not just the corporate world, but in government, as well. Corruption does not recognize racism, sexism nor poverty. Its lense is so distorted by greed, power and influence that it cannot discern between these issues. There is no difference in the motives of our elected officials, save in the methods that they use. Unions, lobbiest, corporations all use their influence to manipulate policies. It does not matter if they are Republicans or Democrates, CEO's are labor union leaders, their motives are not altruistic; they simple want to protect what they have and increase their resources and influence. I wish that each person would take the spike out of their own eye before criticizing the speck in the eyes of others. We criticize the other party when we are doing the same thing. Examples of this are so many, and our memories are so short. The enemy is not your neighbor who is more conservative or more liberal than you are; the enemy is the source that promotes this discontent.

Comments sorted by highest rated. After voting you must refresh your page to see the sort order change.

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 1:54pm

I actually see a proverbial silver lining in all this overt Obamaphobia. MLK Jr., quoting a historian whose name escapes me, said in a sermon that "Whom the gods would destroy they must first make mad with power." In other words, before God can truly deal with sin He needs to expose its ugliness -- and I think that's just what's happening now.

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 1:54pm

I actually see a proverbial silver lining in all this overt Obamaphobia. MLK Jr., quoting a historian whose name escapes me, said in a sermon that "Whom the gods would destroy they must first make mad with power." In other words, before God can truly deal with sin He needs to expose its ugliness -- and I think that's just what's happening now.

by: Lord_Voldemort

09-17-2009 @ 2:13pm

"And, agree with me or not, I saw it in the disrespect shown toward a black president by a white Congressman from the South, whose less than enthusiastic apologies have now turned him into a fund-raising martyr, cheered on by a defiant rebel yell against the man (or is it "boy"?) in the White House."

Jim, on the whole this was a thoughtful and balanced article, but I have to object strenuously to this part here. The simple fact is that grown men sometimes lie. You may think the President was right, that he was honestly mistaken, or that he was intentionally lying. The Congressman said "lie" He meant "lie". The word "boy" did not pass his lips.

You can condemn the Congressman's actions if you want, but if you are going to condemn him then condemn him for what he said, not what you guess he might have thought.

Judging is dangerous enough for a Christian -- "Judge not" and all that. Adding your own guesswork about what the Congressman might have been thinking only compounds things.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

09-17-2009 @ 2:13pm

"And, agree with me or not, I saw it in the disrespect shown toward a black president by a white Congressman from the South, whose less than enthusiastic apologies have now turned him into a fund-raising martyr, cheered on by a defiant rebel yell against the man (or is it "boy"?) in the White House."

Jim, on the whole this was a thoughtful and balanced article, but I have to object strenuously to this part here. The simple fact is that grown men sometimes lie. You may think the President was right, that he was honestly mistaken, or that he was intentionally lying. The Congressman said "lie" He meant "lie". The word "boy" did not pass his lips.

You can condemn the Congressman's actions if you want, but if you are going to condemn him then condemn him for what he said, not what you guess he might have thought.

Judging is dangerous enough for a Christian -- "Judge not" and all that. Adding your own guesswork about what the Congressman might have been thinking only compounds things.

LV

by: SisterMarie

09-17-2009 @ 2:14pm

Your comments here remind me of a video that I recently checked out from the library. I don't remember the title, but the premise was that the South was victorious at Gettysburg and then immediately marched into Washington, DC and the union government collapsed. Then, the remainder of the video dealt with what our government would have been like. One stark difference was that we would never have entered WW2, since the views of our government would not have differed significantly from those of the Axis Powers.

You are certainly correct in pointing out the slowness of our nation in adopting civil rights reforms and the manner in which one particular section resisted those reforms. I am old enough to remember an era in which the Solid South could be counted on to vote for Democrats; then how quickly that entire section turned to the Republican Party when the Democrats began embracing civil rights. I'm also old enough to remember separate restrooms for black citizens. So I think that what we are now witnessing is a reaction to the last 50-60 years of progress. Despite their best efforts to hide their frustration of Black progress, you still see it emerge in the comments of Joe Wilson and Trent Lott saying that we should have elected Strom Thurmond in 1948. I can tell you one thing - if we had elected old Strom and then followed that up with a similar bent in subsequent elections, the election of a Black president would have been as remote as integrated restrooms in the 1950s.

So keep up the good work. With all of the hate that is being spread around the internet and talk radio, it's really refreshing to have an honest voice crying in the wilderness. With voices like yours and the remainder of your staff, perhaps one day 50 years from now we can finally look back on this interval with the same disdain that we regard those who resisted reform in the 60s and 70s.

by: SisterMarie

09-17-2009 @ 2:14pm

Your comments here remind me of a video that I recently checked out from the library. I don't remember the title, but the premise was that the South was victorious at Gettysburg and then immediately marched into Washington, DC and the union government collapsed. Then, the remainder of the video dealt with what our government would have been like. One stark difference was that we would never have entered WW2, since the views of our government would not have differed significantly from those of the Axis Powers.

You are certainly correct in pointing out the slowness of our nation in adopting civil rights reforms and the manner in which one particular section resisted those reforms. I am old enough to remember an era in which the Solid South could be counted on to vote for Democrats; then how quickly that entire section turned to the Republican Party when the Democrats began embracing civil rights. I'm also old enough to remember separate restrooms for black citizens. So I think that what we are now witnessing is a reaction to the last 50-60 years of progress. Despite their best efforts to hide their frustration of Black progress, you still see it emerge in the comments of Joe Wilson and Trent Lott saying that we should have elected Strom Thurmond in 1948. I can tell you one thing - if we had elected old Strom and then followed that up with a similar bent in subsequent elections, the election of a Black president would have been as remote as integrated restrooms in the 1950s.

So keep up the good work. With all of the hate that is being spread around the internet and talk radio, it's really refreshing to have an honest voice crying in the wilderness. With voices like yours and the remainder of your staff, perhaps one day 50 years from now we can finally look back on this interval with the same disdain that we regard those who resisted reform in the 60s and 70s.

by: Lord_Voldemort

09-17-2009 @ 2:14pm

The only question is -- to whom? I'm guessing we'll find out soon enough.

LV

by: Lord_Voldemort

09-17-2009 @ 2:14pm

The only question is -- to whom? I'm guessing we'll find out soon enough.

LV

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 2:22pm

You may think the President was right, that he was honestly mistaken, or that he was intentionally lying. The Congressman said "lie" He meant "lie". The word "boy" did not pass his lips.

Because that would have been obvious. For openers, when Wilson said "You lie" he was himself lying, and the reality is that he did that to curry political favor with people in his district who can't stand Obama. On top of that, Wilson belongs to the Sons of Confederate Veterans and led the charge to keep the "Stars and Bars" flying over the statehouse in Columbia, S.C. Furthermore, he -- and his upcoming opponent -- have raised a ton of money because of this dust-up.

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 2:22pm

You may think the President was right, that he was honestly mistaken, or that he was intentionally lying. The Congressman said "lie" He meant "lie". The word "boy" did not pass his lips.

Because that would have been obvious. For openers, when Wilson said "You lie" he was himself lying, and the reality is that he did that to curry political favor with people in his district who can't stand Obama. On top of that, Wilson belongs to the Sons of Confederate Veterans and led the charge to keep the "Stars and Bars" flying over the statehouse in Columbia, S.C. Furthermore, he -- and his upcoming opponent -- have raised a ton of money because of this dust-up.

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 2:24pm

To as many as will see it. That's what MLK Jr. did in the South.

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 2:24pm

To as many as will see it. That's what MLK Jr. did in the South.

by: jesse3

09-17-2009 @ 2:42pm

"I see those racial sub-texts in the intensity of the attacks on Obama - not in the disagreements per se, but in the viciousness of the rhetoric."
--And therein lies the problem...claiming that any and every sign of disrespect is motivated by "racism" is helpful to no one. Similar signs of disrespect were widespread and frequent throughout Bush's presidency. You had much harsher words for Cheney than Wilson (you called him a "liar" and said he represented "evil"). Please stop.

"I saw it in the disrespect shown toward a black president by a white Congressman from the South, whose less than enthusiastic apologies have now turned him into a fund-raising martyr, cheered on by a defiant rebel yell against the man (or is it "boy"?) in the White House."
--So you're taking cues from Maureen Dowd right now?

Sorry, Jim, you can acknowledge all sides of a debate all you want. But you're still coming down on the side whose claims of widespread covert racism is poisonous to national conversation. Carter's remarks reflect the fringe of American thinking (most people believe opposition to Obama's healthcare proposals is not motivated by racism). You're not helping.

by: jesse3

09-17-2009 @ 2:42pm

"I see those racial sub-texts in the intensity of the attacks on Obama - not in the disagreements per se, but in the viciousness of the rhetoric."
--And therein lies the problem...claiming that any and every sign of disrespect is motivated by "racism" is helpful to no one. Similar signs of disrespect were widespread and frequent throughout Bush's presidency. You had much harsher words for Cheney than Wilson (you called him a "liar" and said he represented "evil"). Please stop.

"I saw it in the disrespect shown toward a black president by a white Congressman from the South, whose less than enthusiastic apologies have now turned him into a fund-raising martyr, cheered on by a defiant rebel yell against the man (or is it "boy"?) in the White House."
--So you're taking cues from Maureen Dowd right now?

Sorry, Jim, you can acknowledge all sides of a debate all you want. But you're still coming down on the side whose claims of widespread covert racism is poisonous to national conversation. Carter's remarks reflect the fringe of American thinking (most people believe opposition to Obama's healthcare proposals is not motivated by racism). You're not helping.

by: prk

09-17-2009 @ 2:43pm

Let us speak about the south. I remember when my 4 grade year started that was the year that busing started here in Chattanooga. From then on I went to marjority black schools until college.

Ten years later I saw on the news riots in Boston over busing. I was shocked, I thought that these problems only exist in the south.

by: prk

09-17-2009 @ 2:43pm

Let us speak about the south. I remember when my 4 grade year started that was the year that busing started here in Chattanooga. From then on I went to marjority black schools until college.

Ten years later I saw on the news riots in Boston over busing. I was shocked, I thought that these problems only exist in the south.

by: rsj2d

09-17-2009 @ 3:37pm

I think we are missing the point here. Of course racism still exists but Jimmy Carter had no reason to suspect Joe Wilson of racism. So why did he say it?

There is no evidence of racism. Please show me evidence of racsim

by: rsj2d

09-17-2009 @ 3:37pm

I think we are missing the point here. Of course racism still exists but Jimmy Carter had no reason to suspect Joe Wilson of racism. So why did he say it?

There is no evidence of racism. Please show me evidence of racsim

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 4:27pm

Jimmy Carter is a Southerner and has witnessed racism first-hand for most of his life. If he says that he believes that Joe Wilson is a racist -- and based on some of his associations and the political culture of South Carolina it's very likely -- I would take him seriously.

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 4:27pm

Jimmy Carter is a Southerner and has witnessed racism first-hand for most of his life. If he says that he believes that Joe Wilson is a racist -- and based on some of his associations and the political culture of South Carolina it's very likely -- I would take him seriously.

by: WaveTossed

09-17-2009 @ 5:40pm

"Because that would have been obvious. For openers, when Wilson said 'You lie' he was himself lying,"

To add to what you said: Joe Wilson was invoking another form of racism -- against Latinos, particularly against Mexicans. Much of the loud, angry rhetoric against "illegal immigrants" is directed at Mexican immigrants. I read stereotypical remarks about how these "illegals" are coming to this country to go on welfare and get food stamps, Medicaid, etc. Which are lies in themselves. These remarks that I read feed into the entire "lazy Mexican" stereotype.

The Cato Institute has some excellent articles that show that most immigrants -- from Mexico as well as from elsewhere -- come here to work and find jobs. They pay more in taxes than they take out in government services.

In the case of Joe Wilson, we have the spectacle of a congressman pandering to those who are more worried about whether or not "illegals" will or will not get health care benefits. For him (and his supporters), this issue seems far more important than whether or not people end up having to go through bankruptcy because of medical expenses and inadequate or no insurance. Or else people who literally end up dying because of no or inadequate insurance or access to medical care. According to people of this mind-set that Wilson panders to , it's more important to keep "illegals" (those lazy, welfare-grabbing Mexicans) from getting benefits than it is to help out people who desperately need help in this health care crisis.

by: WaveTossed

09-17-2009 @ 5:40pm

"Because that would have been obvious. For openers, when Wilson said 'You lie' he was himself lying,"

To add to what you said: Joe Wilson was invoking another form of racism -- against Latinos, particularly against Mexicans. Much of the loud, angry rhetoric against "illegal immigrants" is directed at Mexican immigrants. I read stereotypical remarks about how these "illegals" are coming to this country to go on welfare and get food stamps, Medicaid, etc. Which are lies in themselves. These remarks that I read feed into the entire "lazy Mexican" stereotype.

The Cato Institute has some excellent articles that show that most immigrants -- from Mexico as well as from elsewhere -- come here to work and find jobs. They pay more in taxes than they take out in government services.

In the case of Joe Wilson, we have the spectacle of a congressman pandering to those who are more worried about whether or not "illegals" will or will not get health care benefits. For him (and his supporters), this issue seems far more important than whether or not people end up having to go through bankruptcy because of medical expenses and inadequate or no insurance. Or else people who literally end up dying because of no or inadequate insurance or access to medical care. According to people of this mind-set that Wilson panders to , it's more important to keep "illegals" (those lazy, welfare-grabbing Mexicans) from getting benefits than it is to help out people who desperately need help in this health care crisis.

by: WaveTossed

09-17-2009 @ 5:48pm

I am originally from Chicago. In 1965-66, I spent a year in Mississippi with the southern Civil Rights movement. While there I witnessed and experienced plenty of violence and hatred. After the James Meredith March in June, 1966, I returned to my home in Chicago. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. also came to Chicago to run an "open housing campaign" because of all of the blatent housing discrimination that was going on at the time.

I remember vividly, after a particularly violent display by white people in Chicago neighborhoods -- cherry bombs, rocks, bottles flew down on civil rights marchers and Dr. King was hit by a rock and wounded. Displays of Nazi and KKK signs were rampant. The white rioters ended up destroying about twenty cars owned by civil rights marchers. Through it all, the police didn't lift a finger to stop any of this. Dr. King addressed the marchers that night. He talked about the South and what he experienced there. He told us, "I have never experienced such hatred as I have here in Chicago." Having just returned home from the South, I could do nothing other than agree with him. Decades later, when I left Chicago to move to Maryland, it wasn't much better.

by: WaveTossed

09-17-2009 @ 5:48pm

I am originally from Chicago. In 1965-66, I spent a year in Mississippi with the southern Civil Rights movement. While there I witnessed and experienced plenty of violence and hatred. After the James Meredith March in June, 1966, I returned to my home in Chicago. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. also came to Chicago to run an "open housing campaign" because of all of the blatent housing discrimination that was going on at the time.

I remember vividly, after a particularly violent display by white people in Chicago neighborhoods -- cherry bombs, rocks, bottles flew down on civil rights marchers and Dr. King was hit by a rock and wounded. Displays of Nazi and KKK signs were rampant. The white rioters ended up destroying about twenty cars owned by civil rights marchers. Through it all, the police didn't lift a finger to stop any of this. Dr. King addressed the marchers that night. He talked about the South and what he experienced there. He told us, "I have never experienced such hatred as I have here in Chicago." Having just returned home from the South, I could do nothing other than agree with him. Decades later, when I left Chicago to move to Maryland, it wasn't much better.

by: judithsihweil

09-17-2009 @ 5:49pm

This is the same Wilson who also disrespected Strom Thurmond's
illegimate daughter by a black lady !!!!!!!!!----
from an idiot so we should expect this...kind of behavior- but not put up with it.. JUST A BIG DISTRACTION ALSO
and Wilson got free publicity -which he doesn't deserve
.......being from Louisiana-northern part -over 35 years ago
I was very proud of our new president and very upset the way he is being treated. by all these ignorants and fraidy cats-Carter is absolutely Correct

by: judithsihweil

09-17-2009 @ 5:49pm

This is the same Wilson who also disrespected Strom Thurmond's
illegimate daughter by a black lady !!!!!!!!!----
from an idiot so we should expect this...kind of behavior- but not put up with it.. JUST A BIG DISTRACTION ALSO
and Wilson got free publicity -which he doesn't deserve
.......being from Louisiana-northern part -over 35 years ago
I was very proud of our new president and very upset the way he is being treated. by all these ignorants and fraidy cats-Carter is absolutely Correct

by: seattle31

09-17-2009 @ 5:50pm

Jesse3, I believe you've missed the point entirely. It's helpful to have these debates to expose the very ugly truths about ourselves and our country. To dust it under the rug or simply not acknowledge that there are still people who hold these beliefs about others is what is NOT helpful to our nation.
Rev. Wallis never said in his article that "any and every sign of disrespect is motivated by "racism"". Quite the contrary, he made 3 points demonstrating the opposite opinion, so perhaps you should read the article before commenting.

by: seattle31

09-17-2009 @ 5:50pm

Jesse3, I believe you've missed the point entirely. It's helpful to have these debates to expose the very ugly truths about ourselves and our country. To dust it under the rug or simply not acknowledge that there are still people who hold these beliefs about others is what is NOT helpful to our nation.
Rev. Wallis never said in his article that "any and every sign of disrespect is motivated by "racism"". Quite the contrary, he made 3 points demonstrating the opposite opinion, so perhaps you should read the article before commenting.

by: benvos

09-17-2009 @ 6:01pm

I don't think it takes much "guesswork" to know what Joe Wilson was thinking last Wednesday night. He's made it clear to everyone. He believes that "illegals" should not receive healthcare in the U.S. He believes that the President was "lying" about provisions in the healthcare plan to cover (or not cover) illegal immigrants.

This is a guy who attacked Strom Thurmond's African-American daughter for going public. This is a guy who belongs to "Sons of the Confederacy". This is a guy who wants to put up the Dixie Rebel flag outside a state capitol. This is a guy who sees no problem with shouting at a President in a session of Congress, but claims to love America.

If it was one moment out of context, that would be one thing. But to deny that Congressman Joe Wilson is prone to racism is not only naive, it's dangerous.

Because either he's extraordinarily uncivilized and inciting horrible behavior, or he's ignorant.

by: benvos

09-17-2009 @ 6:01pm

I don't think it takes much "guesswork" to know what Joe Wilson was thinking last Wednesday night. He's made it clear to everyone. He believes that "illegals" should not receive healthcare in the U.S. He believes that the President was "lying" about provisions in the healthcare plan to cover (or not cover) illegal immigrants.

This is a guy who attacked Strom Thurmond's African-American daughter for going public. This is a guy who belongs to "Sons of the Confederacy". This is a guy who wants to put up the Dixie Rebel flag outside a state capitol. This is a guy who sees no problem with shouting at a President in a session of Congress, but claims to love America.

If it was one moment out of context, that would be one thing. But to deny that Congressman Joe Wilson is prone to racism is not only naive, it's dangerous.

Because either he's extraordinarily uncivilized and inciting horrible behavior, or he's ignorant.

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 6:01pm

I wasn't aware of the Cato Institute's findings, but you confirmed what I always suspected -- "illegals" come here from Mexico because, and only because, that's where the jobs are. You may remember that Sojo recently posted "Joe Legal vs. Jose Illegal."

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 6:01pm

I wasn't aware of the Cato Institute's findings, but you confirmed what I always suspected -- "illegals" come here from Mexico because, and only because, that's where the jobs are. You may remember that Sojo recently posted "Joe Legal vs. Jose Illegal."

by: middmedstudent

09-17-2009 @ 8:09pm

Well, here we seem to have a problem with historical understandning. My friend, the "Stars and Bars" and belonging to the Sons of Confederate Veterns does not make this man a racest. The "Stars and Bars," is not a symbol of slavery, rather, it is a symbol of the rights that belong to states. The Civil War was not fought origionally because of slavery, it was an issue of federal vs. states rights. It turned into a war about slavery only during the war, recall that Lincoln issued the emancipation proclimation during the war, not prior to. And, so, you sir, you LIE. Or do you? Your understanding of the civil war is that it was about slavery. Is it wrong? One can argue either direction. But remember that any individual supporting any confederate aspect of the war is not a default racist, rather, a believer in his state before the federal government.

by: middmedstudent

09-17-2009 @ 8:09pm

Well, here we seem to have a problem with historical understandning. My friend, the "Stars and Bars" and belonging to the Sons of Confederate Veterns does not make this man a racest. The "Stars and Bars," is not a symbol of slavery, rather, it is a symbol of the rights that belong to states. The Civil War was not fought origionally because of slavery, it was an issue of federal vs. states rights. It turned into a war about slavery only during the war, recall that Lincoln issued the emancipation proclimation during the war, not prior to. And, so, you sir, you LIE. Or do you? Your understanding of the civil war is that it was about slavery. Is it wrong? One can argue either direction. But remember that any individual supporting any confederate aspect of the war is not a default racist, rather, a believer in his state before the federal government.

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 9:00pm

Your accusation is false because I never actually said that the Civil War began over slavery. Indeed, I've been a student of Southern history over the past 30 years or so and know full well that the original issue was federalism.

That said, however, it is also clear that Southern states abused their legitimate claims about "states' rights" to deny African-Americans the franchise and the same opportunities that their white citizens enjoyed. And it became clear that Southern politicians of that day fully intended to preserve the system of slavery, if for no other reason that the planters were supporting their campaigns!

by: BlueDeacon

09-17-2009 @ 9:00pm

Your accusation is false because I never actually said that the Civil War began over slavery. Indeed, I've been a student of Southern history over the past 30 years or so and know full well that the original issue was federalism.

That said, however, it is also clear that Southern states abused their legitimate claims about "states' rights" to deny African-Americans the franchise and the same opportunities that their white citizens enjoyed. And it became clear that Southern politicians of that day fully intended to preserve the system of slavery, if for no other reason that the planters were supporting their campaigns!

by: jim085

09-18-2009 @ 10:40am

racism is not just about skin heads it is about all of us and the way we have been shaped by a racist society. racism is about the disparity in employment, healthcare, environmental protection, housing, criminal justice...

by: jim085

09-18-2009 @ 10:40am

racism is not just about skin heads it is about all of us and the way we have been shaped by a racist society. racism is about the disparity in employment, healthcare, environmental protection, housing, criminal justice...

by: thewhiplash

09-18-2009 @ 1:48pm

I believe that the single source of the cause of this discontent with our congress stems from the corruption in not just the corporate world, but in government, as well. Corruption does not recognize racism, sexism nor poverty. Its lense is so distorted by greed, power and influence that it cannot discern between these issues. There is no difference in the motives of our elected officials, save in the methods that they use. Unions, lobbiest, corporations all use their influence to manipulate policies. It does not matter if they are Republicans or Democrates, CEO's are labor union leaders, their motives are not altruistic; they simple want to protect what they have and increase their resources and influence. I wish that each person would take the spike out of their own eye before criticizing the speck in the eyes of others. We criticize the other party when we are doing the same thing. Examples of this are so many, and our memories are so short. The enemy is not your neighbor who is more conservative or more liberal than you are; the enemy is the source that promotes this discontent.

by: thewhiplash

09-18-2009 @ 1:48pm

I believe that the single source of the cause of this discontent with our congress stems from the corruption in not just the corporate world, but in government, as well. Corruption does not recognize racism, sexism nor poverty. Its lense is so distorted by greed, power and influence that it cannot discern between these issues. There is no difference in the motives of our elected officials, save in the methods that they use. Unions, lobbiest, corporations all use their influence to manipulate policies. It does not matter if they are Republicans or Democrates, CEO's are labor union leaders, their motives are not altruistic; they simple want to protect what they have and increase their resources and influence. I wish that each person would take the spike out of their own eye before criticizing the speck in the eyes of others. We criticize the other party when we are doing the same thing. Examples of this are so many, and our memories are so short. The enemy is not your neighbor who is more conservative or more liberal than you are; the enemy is the source that promotes this discontent.

by: BlueDeacon

09-18-2009 @ 2:08pm

IME, that kind of analysis is a tad naive -- it sounds like "the devil made me do it." Sure, there is an Eneny who is trying to wreck God's world; that said, it's also important to give specifics as to which people and institutions are involved so that things can be addressed.

by: BlueDeacon

09-18-2009 @ 2:08pm

IME, that kind of analysis is a tad naive -- it sounds like "the devil made me do it." Sure, there is an Eneny who is trying to wreck God's world; that said, it's also important to give specifics as to which people and institutions are involved so that things can be addressed.

by: thewhiplash

09-18-2009 @ 2:24pm

My point is simply, the people or institutions which give these specifics (i.e. the media, democrate, republican etc) have "only their agenda" that they are likely to support. I wish it were more like it is in the courtroom, when the judge says, " I want the truth, the "whole truth" and nothing but the truth". Unless you have a desire to find out the whole truth in any issue, you are often misled by the sources who give you only "one side of the issue".

by: thewhiplash

09-18-2009 @ 2:24pm

My point is simply, the people or institutions which give these specifics (i.e. the media, democrate, republican etc) have "only their agenda" that they are likely to support. I wish it were more like it is in the courtroom, when the judge says, " I want the truth, the "whole truth" and nothing but the truth". Unless you have a desire to find out the whole truth in any issue, you are often misled by the sources who give you only "one side of the issue".

by: BlueDeacon

09-18-2009 @ 3:03pm

Myself being in the media, I understand that we're also a business driven often by what people want to read. On top of that, there are some sources that are not always credible, so getting more than "one side of the issue" is not always possible or even desirable. (For example, quoting a Klansman at at KKK rally would basically be redundant.)

by: BlueDeacon

09-18-2009 @ 3:03pm

Myself being in the media, I understand that we're also a business driven often by what people want to read. On top of that, there are some sources that are not always credible, so getting more than "one side of the issue" is not always possible or even desirable. (For example, quoting a Klansman at at KKK rally would basically be redundant.)

by: pkinva

09-18-2009 @ 5:08pm

Man has not told you this, but our Father in Heaven. You are so right!!

PKINVA

by: pkinva

09-18-2009 @ 5:08pm

Man has not told you this, but our Father in Heaven. You are so right!!

PKINVA

by: curlygirl2004

09-18-2009 @ 9:44pm

I agree! Jim has good list of systemic racism going. I'd like to add to it the personal racism experienced by people of color on a day to day basis. Just because you don't go to KKK meetings in a white hood, doesn't mean you're not racist. You may have even voted for Obama and still be racist!!

by: curlygirl2004

09-18-2009 @ 9:44pm

I agree! Jim has good list of systemic racism going. I'd like to add to it the personal racism experienced by people of color on a day to day basis. Just because you don't go to KKK meetings in a white hood, doesn't mean you're not racist. You may have even voted for Obama and still be racist!!