Reply With Quote
Oh my god she's saying all white people have a birth defect!!!
ooops, I meant right.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said yesterday that the United States still has trouble dealing with race because of a national "birth defect" that denied black Americans the opportunities given to whites at the country's very founding.
"Black Americans were a founding population," she said. "Africans and Europeans came here and founded this country together — Europeans by choice and Africans in chains. That's not a very pretty reality of our founding."
As a result, Miss Rice told editors and reporters at The Washington Times, "descendants of slaves did not get much of a head start, and I think you continue to see some of the effects of that."
"That particular birth defect makes it hard for us to confront it, hard for us to talk about it, and hard for us to realize that it has continuing relevance for who we are today," she said..........
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/...746301768/1001
Oh my god she's saying all white people have a birth defect!!!
they lack pigment
ing idiot.
...scratch her off the McCain VP list....
Will you run with him if drafted?
No, she's saying this nation has a birth defect, and I agree.
I don't think you understand how this is supposed to work.
Hmmm. This article is pretty sparse. I would like to read the entire thing before passing judgement on it, or her.
Given her character, however (i.e., she is obviously not a racist), I doubt that she said anything like what some imagine her to have said.
So America's national birth was defective due to slavery pretty much everywhere? And after many generations, America's cutural DNA is still defective?
She has an academic's habit of spouting impenetrable, generic bull .
What a weird metaphor.
Is she trying "medicalize" American racism, which removes responsibility?
Certainly white supremacists, and their secret, silent sympathizers, would agree to the metaphor, with ethnic cleansing of the defects.
"Black Americans were a founding population"
No, the Black American population was present at the founding, but they played almost no part, if any.
White European male slaveholders conceived and gave birth to America.
Hmmmm, sounds a bit uppi y to me..........
Here is the transcript:
Interview With The Washington Times Editorial Board
Secretary Condoleezza Rice
Washington, DC
March 27, 2008
Now like all good papers, they change the order around, add a few words, leave a few out, etc. I am not quoting the entire transcript, but here are the entire questions and answers in transcript order that the article cites. The order of the quote in the article are numberd by me like (1), (2), etc. The article quotes are in bold letters:
QUESTION 13: Did you ever -- those are two monumental decisions. Did you ever have any doubts about the impact on foreign policy that an invasion of Iraq -- even if they had WMD, did you ever have a doubt in the back of your mind that, well, this is going to be a tough one for me coming down the road?
SECRETARY RICE: I thought it would be tough. I (14) didn't think it would be this tough.
QUESTION 14: Really? (Laughter.)
SECRETARY RICE: I didn't. But I thought it would be tough. I think (14) what we didn't know was how truly broken that society was -- underneath. And not just because of the years and years of tyranny. That was -- that was about 90 percent of it. But frankly, you know, the Oil-for-Food program and the UN sanctions, (16) as necessary as they might have been to try to put pressure on the regime, they also did a lot of damage . I look at agriculture-- which Iraq used to be a kind of breadbasket. (15) Agriculture is virtually dead in Iraq because with the food basket and no internal market, it collapsed.
And I just think that when I listen to people say, well, he was -- Saddam was contained (inaudible) could have gone on and could have gone on, and I think, at what price to the Iraqi people was this going to go on? Because the international community couldn't deal with Saddam Hussein. At what price for the Iraqi people and the region (inaudible) continue to deal with this?
So it's a society that's now just beginning to emerge and, of course, has had to do so against the backdrop of brutal terrorists in al-Qaida, which, nonetheless, in showing their brutality, have united the Iraqi people against them.
QUESTION 25: Or at least the Opening Ceremony.
SECRETARY RICE: Yeah. Well, my view of this is that we all knew that when the Olympics was awarded to Beijing, that there were any number of issues that needed to be dealt with because of the nature of the regime in Beijing. The Chinese at the time said that they -- they almost took a pledge that they were going to be open to discussions about these issues. I think we ought to take them up on it. I think that we should engage them on Tibet. We should engage them on Taiwan. We should engage them on all of these issues that are critical -- human rights. But frankly, it’s a sporting event. And (13) if you go there, I do think you have an obligation before, during, and after to continue to engage the regime about (10a/13) troublesome policies. But (12b) I don’t see the benefit of boycotting. I do not --
QUESTION 26: Well --
SECRETARY RICE: (12c) I do not think the boycott of the ’80 Olympics was very effective. In fact, I think it looked (10b/12c) feckless. I’ll tell you that. I really do. You know, (11) they invade Afghanistan, and the best you can think of is to boycott the Olympics and keep athletes who have been training for their entire lives from going and competing? (12a) Who were we kidding?
So I don’t see -- I see this, first of all, as keeping faith with holding the Chinese to the pledge that they understand that there are political issues. I see it as keeping faith with athletes who have trained their entire lives for this opportunity and shouldn’t be denied it. And also, there is a broader audience than the regime in Beijing. It’s called the Chinese people. And (13) this is a moment of international recognition for the Chinese people, too. And I would hate to do anything that was, in effect, (13) insulting to them -- the people. Not the regime, the people.
QUESTION 40: Madame Secretary, I wanted to ask a question that has absolutely nothing to do with any other country. (Laughter.) We're pulling up on the 40th anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King. And regardless of what race we were or what class we belonged to, it was a devastating time for America, without a doubt. And there's so much talk about race in the race for the White House. What, if any, lessons do you think Americans, as a whole, have learned since then?
SECRETARY RICE: Well, you know, it's – (7a) America doesn't have an easy time dealing with race. I sit in my office and the portrait immediately over my shoulder is Thomas Jefferson, because he was my first predecessor. He was the first Secretary of State. And sometimes I think to myself, what would he think -- (laughter) -- a black woman Secretary of State as his predecessor 65 times removed -- successor, 65 times removed? What would he think that the last two successors have been black Americans? And so, obviously, when this country was founded, the words that were enshrined in all of our great do ents and that have been such an inspiration to people around the world, for the likes of Vaclav Havel, associate themselves with those do ents. They didn't have meaning for an overwhelming element of our founding population. And (1a) black Americans were a founding population. (1b) Africans and Europeans came here and founded this country together; Europeans by choice, and Africans in chains.
And that's not a very pretty reality of our founding, and I think (3) that particular birth defect makes it hard for us to confront it, hard for us to talk about it, and hard for us to realize that it has continuing relevance for who we are today. But that relevance comes in two strains. On the one hand, there's the relevance that (2) descendents of slaves, therefore, did not get much of a head start. And I think you continue to see some of the effects of that. On the other hand, the tremendous efforts of many, many, many people, some of whom, whose names we will never know and some individuals’ names who we do know, to be impatient with this country for not fulfilling its own principles, has led us down a path that has put African Americans in positions and places that, I think, nobody would have even thought at the time that Dr. King was assassinated. And so we deal daily with this contradiction, this paradox about America, that on the one hand, the birth defect (6a) continues to have effects on our country, and indeed, on the discourse and effects on perhaps (6b) the deepest thoughts that people hold ; and on the other hand, the (6c) enormous progress that has been made by the efforts of blacks and whites together, to finally fulfill those principles.
QUESTION 45: Darn, that messed up my attempt. (Laughter.) And I wasn’t even going to ask about the presidency, but the vice presidency. (Laughter.)
QUESTION 45: (Inaudible) Barack (inaudible) speech about race -- did you listen to it?
SECRETARY RICE: I did and, you know, I think it was (4a) important that he (4b) gave it for a whole host of reasons. But look, I'm not going to talk about the politics. What I'm talking about is how -- you asked me about Dr. King and race in America. And I'm telling you that there is (5a) a paradox for this country (5b) and a contradiction of this country and (5c) we still haven't resolved it. But (8) what I would like understood as a black American is that black Americans loved and had faith in this country even when this country didn't love and have faith in them, and that's our legacy.
My grandmother and my great-grandmother, and my father, who (7b) endured terrible humiliations growing up -- and my father in Baton Rouge, Louisiana; and my mother's family in Birmingham, Alabama-- still loved this country. And I've often spoken of the Civil Rights Movement as the second founding of America, because finally we started to overcome this birth defect. But if anybody believes that black Americans love this country any less than white Americans do, they ought to go and talk to people who live under very tough cir stances, sometimes doing menial labor and doing tough jobs, and really all they want is the American dream. All they're focused on is is their kid going to be well educated enough to go to college and have a better life than they had. And one of the things that (9a) attracted me to George W. Bush, one of the primary things, it was not actually foreign policy, it was (9b) No Child Left Behind. Because when he talked about the soft bigotry of low expectations, I know what that feels like.
And so to my mind, where our understanding of and conversation of race has got to go. And I mean now, race. Black Americans aren't immigrants. We may call ourselves African Americans, but we're not immigrants. We don't mimic the immigrant story. Where this conversation has got to go is that black Americans and white Americans founded this country together and I think we've always wanted the same thing. And it's been now a very hard and long struggle to begin to get to the place that we can all pursue the same thing.
I would like to claim that in my discussions today about Dr. Rice's interview people were willing to consider her words in light of her reputation. Instead, this is what I got:
"Get over it, b****!"
"Why did W ever hire that **** in the first place?"
"It just goes to show, they're all n****** after all."
Yeah, alot of ad hominem attacks and not much substance. You'd be amazed at the flak one gets by daring to break with liberal orthodoxy:
"GW is not an idiot. Maybe wrong, maybe not a genius, but not an idiot. Or sinister."
"Condy is not a race-baiter, incompetent, a Tom."
"Fox News, while conservatively oriented, is still a basically reliable news source."
"Government subsidized health care is not a good thing."
Etc.
When it comes to the really important news, like Anna-Nicole Smith's death or whatever the Britney Spears is doing right now, there is no more reliable and exhaustive source than Fox News.
rice playing the race card hahahhahaahahaha
color ppl should give us white/yellow folks a break, seriously.
in todays day and age, we have laws that protect like this that gives nearly everyone (biding citizen) protection, whether its descrimination or equal opportunities
instead of playing the blame game, why dont this so called whingers get of there ass, get a job or stay in school and further themselves from the rest. There is always someone making the ppl who do it right look bad and pulls down society's views on a particular ethnic race.
It's more disappointing when non-liberals do it.
Here is a take on Obama, from a Black man. I find Dr. Sowell's
column very informative. Joe I hope you read this. And see just
who you are supporting.
Jewish World Review March 26, 2008 / 19 Adar II 5768
The Audacity of Rhetoric
By Thomas Sowell
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | It is painful to watch defenders of Barack Obama tying themselves into knots trying to evade the obvious.
Some are saying that Senator Obama cannot be held responsible for what his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, said. In their version of events, Barack Obama just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time — and a bunch of mean-spirited people are trying to make something out of it.
It makes a good story, but it won't stand up under scrutiny.
Barack Obama's own account of his life shows that he consciously sought out people on the far left fringe. In college, "I chose my friends carefully," he said in his first book, "Dreams From My Father."
These friends included "Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk rock performance poets" — in Obama's own words — as well as the "more politically active black students." He later visited a former member of the terrorist Weatherman underground, who endorsed him when he ran for state senator.
Obama didn't just happen to encounter Jeremiah Wright, who just happened to say some way out things. Jeremiah Wright is in the same mold as the kinds of people Barack Obama began seeking out in college — members of the left, anti-American counter-culture.
In Shelby Steele's brilliantly insightful book about Barack Obama — "A Bound Man" — it is painfully clear that Obama was one of those people seeking a racial iden y that he had never really experienced in growing up in a white world. He was trying to become a convert to blackness, as it were — and, like many converts, he went overboard.
Nor has Obama changed in recent years. His voting record in the U.S. Senate is the furthest left of any Senator. There is a remarkable consistency in what Barack Obama has done over the years, despite inconsistencies in what he says.
The irony is that Obama's sudden rise politically to the level of being the leading contender for his party's presidential nomination has required him to project an entirely different persona, that of a post-racial leader who can heal divisiveness and bring us all together.
The ease with which he has accomplished this chameleon-like change, and entranced both white and black Democrats, is a tribute to the man's talent and a warning about his reliability.
There is no evidence that Obama ever sought to educate himself on the views of people on the other end of the political spectrum, much less reach out to them. He reached out from the left to the far left. That's bringing us all together?
Is "divisiveness" defined as disagreeing with the agenda of the left? Who on the left was ever called divisive by Obama before that became politically necessary in order to respond to revelations about Jeremiah Wright?
One sign of Obama's verbal virtuosity was his equating a passing comment by his grandmother — "a typical white person," he says — with an organized campaign of public vilification of America in general and white America in particular, by Jeremiah Wright.
Since all things are the same, except for the differences, and different except for the similarities, it is always possible to make things look similar verbally, however different they are in the real world.
Among the many desperate gambits by defenders of Senator Obama and Jeremiah Wright is to say that Wright's words have a "resonance" in the black community.
There was a time when the Ku Klux Klan's words had a resonance among whites, not only in the South but in other states. Some people joined the KKK in order to advance their political careers. Did that make it OK? Is it all just a matter of whose ox is gored?
While many whites may be annoyed by Jeremiah Wright's words, a year from now most of them will probably have forgotten about him. But many blacks who absorb his toxic message can still be paying for it, big-time, for decades to come.
Why should young blacks be expected to work to meet educational standards, or even behavioral standards, if they believe the message that all their problems are caused by whites, that the deck is stacked against them? That is ultimately a message of hopelessness, however much audacity it may have.
And let us look at Obama from Dr. Walter Williams point of view.
Jewish World Review March 26, 2008 / 19 Adar II 5768
Is Obama ready for America?
By Walter Williams
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Some pundits ask whether America is ready for Obama. The much more important question is whether Obama is ready for America and even more important is whether black people can afford Obama. Let's look at it in the context of a historical tidbit.
In 1947, Jackie Robinson, signing a contract with the Brooklyn Dodgers, broke the color barrier in major league baseball. He encountered open racist taunts and slurs from fans, opposing team players and even some players on his own team. Despite that, his first year batting average was .297. He led the National League in stolen bases and won the first-ever Rookie of the Year Award. Without question, Jackie Robinson was an exceptional player. There's no sense of justice that should require that a player be as good as Jackie Robinson in order to be a rookie in the major leagues but the hard fact of the matter, as a first black player, he had to be.
In 1947, black people could not afford a stubble bum baseball player. By contrast, today black people can afford stubble bum black baseball players. The simple reason is that as a result of the excellence of Jackie Robinson, as well those who immediately followed him such as Satchel Paige, Don Newcombe, Larry Doby and Roy Campanella, there's no one in his right mind, who might watch the incompetence of a particular black player, who can say, "Those blacks can't play baseball." Whether we like it or not, whether for good reason or bad reason, people make stereotypes and stereotypes can have effects.
For the nation and for black people, the first black president should be the caliber of a Jackie Robinson and Barack Obama is not. Barack Obama has charisma and charm but in terms of character, values and understanding, he is no Jackie Robinson. By now, many Americans have heard the racist and anti-American tirades of Obama's minister and spiritual counselor. There's no way that Obama could have been a 20-year member of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's church and not been aware of his statements.
Wright's racist and anti-American ideas are by no means unique. They are the ideas of many leftist professors and taught to our young people. The basic difference between Sen. Obama, Wright and leftist professors is simply a matter of style and language. His Philadelphia speech demonstrated his clever style where he merely changed the subject. The controversy was not about race. It was about his longtime association with such a hatemonger and whether he shared the Reverend's vision.
Obama's success is truly a remarkable commentary on the goodness of Americans and how far we've come in resolving matters of race. I'm 72 years old. For almost all of my life, a black having a real chance at becoming the president of the United States was at best a pipe dream. Obama has convincingly won primaries in states with insignificant black populations. As such, it further confirms what I've often said: The civil rights struggle in America is over and it's won. At one time black Americans did not have the cons utional guarantees enjoyed by white Americans; now we do. The fact that the civil rights struggle is over and won does not mean that there are not major problems confronting many members of the black community but they are not civil rights problems and have little or nothing to do with racial discrimination.
While not every single vestige of racial discrimination has disappeared, Obama and the Rev. Wright are absolutely wrong in suggesting that racial discrimination is anywhere near the major problem confronting a large segment of the black community. The major problems are: family breakdown, illegitimacy, fraudulent education and a high rate of criminality. To confront these problems, that are not the fault of the larger society, requires political courage and that's an attribute that Obama and most other politicians lack.
Yeah! Bill Cosby got his own TV show back in the 80's; race problem over!
Last edited by PixelPusher; 03-29-2008 at 12:11 PM.
You must know because you must be speaking of yourself?
So, Oh Gee...
Did you read the entire transcript, or at least the parts I posted in context?
Makes you the race baiter, doesn't it...
So ... Jeremiah Wright and Al Sharpton can say the things they say about race -- not all the time, but often enough for us to get an idea about who they are and what they believe, and they're misunderstood.
But Sec. Rice says reflective, intelligent things about race, and she's race-baiting?
I'm glad to see Oh Gee's irony wasn't wasted on either or you.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
