ungrateful Condi vents at USA: you've got a "birth defect"

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Irvine511

Blue Crack Supplier
Joined
Dec 4, 2003
Messages
34,498
Location
the West Coast
[q]Rice hits U.S. 'birth defect'

March 28, 2008

By Nicholas Kralev - 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.

Race has become an issue in this year's presidential campaign, which prompted a much-discussed speech last week by Sen. Barack Obama, one of the two remaining contenders for the Democratic nomination.

Miss Rice declined to comment on the campaign, saying only that it was "important" that Mr. Obama "gave it for a whole host of reasons."

But she spoke forcefully on the subject, citing personal and family experience to illustrate "a paradox and contradiction in this country," which "we still haven't resolved."

On the one hand, she said, race in the U.S. "continues to have effects" on public discussions and "the deepest thoughts that people hold." On the other, "enormous progress" has been made, which allowed her to become the nation's chief diplomat.

"America doesn't have an easy time dealing with race," Miss Rice said, adding that members of her family have "endured terrible humiliations."

"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," she said.

Miss Rice also said that what "attracted" her to candidate George W. Bush during the 2000 presidential campaign was not foreign policy, but his "no child left behind" initiative, which she said gave equal opportunities to black and white students. [/q]




what an ungrateful, America-hating, black separatist leftist! the woman gets her education paid for, becomes a full professor at freaking Stanford, then is a National Security Adviser, and then she becomes Secretary of State, and she has the NERVE to complain about slavery? does Condi know that she was born after 1865!?!?! how can she continue to blame slavery for the black kids who play such loud music when they drive by and wear their pants too low and frighten me!?!?!?! Condi is living proof that there's no racism in America, and her continuous harping on the issue, her refusal to put the blame squarely on the shoulders of African-Americans who talk loud is evidence of her secret, deep-rooted socialism and desire to redistribute wealth in the form of just another hand out. you'd think she'd have learned something about people working hard and getting ahead with nothing more than the gumption to pull themselves up by the bootstraps (like the Bushes have done).

but i guess not. we the *real* birth defect in this country are people who want to blame everything on history and not take personal responsibility. history is just an excuse for people who don't want to work hard.

right?
 
Condi is pro Affirmative Action


she does not want the "content of her character" to be all that is taken into consideration
 
deep said:

she does not want the "content of her character" to be all that is taken into consideration



clearly, she doesn't trust white Americans to judge her on the basis of her character only.

what a racist. she hates America.
 
40 years after the Civil Rights Act was passed, no less.
 
No, no, no, guys. If a Republican African American speaks, then he or she automatically speaks the truth. It's only the Democrats who hate America, silly. Ann Coulter says so, so it must be true.
 
"Miss Rice also said that what "attracted" her to candidate George W. Bush during the 2000 presidential campaign was not foreign policy, but his "no child left behind" initiative, which she said gave equal opportunities to black and white students."


Clearly, that was a wise choice. It's worked out oh so well.:rolleyes:
 
"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," she said.
Regardless of who wrote it, that's a great observation.
 
They also happened to be at the core of the Civil Rights Movement.
 
Is this thread comparing Rice's comments to Senator Obama's mentor Rev. Wright?

I hope not.
 
diamond said:
we call those core conservative principles.

dbs

:eyebrow: I want you to think really hard about this and explain this, because I can't think of one conservative principle that falls under that quote. In fact conservative principles have almost always been centered around status quo which is the opposite of having the country losing faith in that group.
 
Bluer White said:
Is this thread comparing Rice's comments to Senator Obama's mentor Rev. Wright?

I hope not.



it's putting a spin on Rice's comments comparable to that which was put on Michelle Obama's comments, and demonstrating that, yes, Condi's comments and Obama's comments and, yes, Wright's comments all come from a historical place, and that the idea that history doesn't matter, that affirmative action doesn't matter, that there isn't an inherently racist power structure to the foundation of the US, is all a bunch of bunk.

the Wright thing has been blown way, way out of proportion, and Wright's comments have been taken far out of context. some of them remain indefensible, almost as indefensible as the ecstatically righteous denunciation by the right wing of these few youtube moments.
 
I think there is a tendency (and not just among Americans either, because I think you encounter it in Canada with respect to First Nations Peoples) of those who aren't racists by any means to still feel that maybe enough time has passed by and well why can't they just get over it already? This is not an insidious type of racism, but it's an example of a certain lack of empathy with a group and certainly a lack of understanding of where they come from and what they've seen and experienced while growing up.
 
I think there is a difference between constructive criticism and hate. As a white person, who would you like to have a dialogue with?

Dr. Rice? Constructive criticism I believe.

Senator Obama's mentor Dr. Wright? I think the independent voters will decide if his views are worth engaging.
 
Bluer White said:
Senator Obama's mentor Dr. Wright? I think the independent voters will decide if his views are worth engaging.

But are they voting for a candidate, or a candidate's mentor? I would sure hope that if an independent isn't going to vote for Obama, it's because they honestly feel someone else is better for the job, rather than because someone Obama knows said something they disagree with.

(But I suppose that's a whole 'nother topic in a whole 'nother thread.)
 
Bluer White said:
I think the independent voters will decide if his views are worth engaging.

I would think independent voters would be smart enough to realize they aren't voting for someone's "mentor".

But that's just me. :shrug:
 
I am disappointed in this thread. To lump what she has said with the comments by the Reverend is disappointing.

I read the comments today, and hoped to come in and start a thread about her comments.

Maybe this election will end and we can get back to dialogue.
 
Dreadsox said:
I am disappointed in this thread. To lump what she has said with the comments by the Reverend is disappointing.

I read the comments today, and hoped to come in and start a thread about her comments.

Maybe this election will end and we can get back to dialogue.

This is a debating forum....we have different opinions.

'Dialogue' can be too easily indistinguishable from a bland and meaningless chorus of consensus, I for one prefer debate and argument.
 
Dreadsox said:
I am disappointed in this thread. To lump what she has said with the comments by the Reverend is disappointing.

I don't think anyone is lumping...

Just showing the anger is real and still exists...

You are always going to find someone that deals with anger differently. I could give examples of this on almost every existing issue, and show you how many of those are still considered relevant.
 
financeguy said:
This is a debating forum....we have different opinions.

'Dialogue' can be too easily indistinguishable from a bland and meaningless chorus of consensus, I for one prefer debate and argument.

This is not a "debating" forum

topics do not always fit the "in favor" or "against" the proposition format

some may approach it that way

it is a "discussion" forum

This is an off-topic forum. Discuss politics, spirituality, religion, world events.

It seems in a "debate" there are two sides
and one is trying to score points
and win



there does seem to be more substance in some posts and less in others

just my thoughts
 
I think there is a distinct difference between Condi's presentation and the Rev.

He unfortunately in my opinion has a view of history not founded in fact or reality. And that makes him lose credibility with me. In his case, I would say yes, he is UNGRATEFUL. America has not nor will she ever be perfect. Yet, America is responsible for many of the things the good Rev. has been afforded.

I think in looking at Condi's approach, she is dead on. It does not appear to me that she has taken an approach that sugar coats the history, nor does she present it in a mannet that I would call her UNGRATEFUL. She presents a fact, that America has been dealing with the after effects of Slavery to this day. It was a birthdefect that the founding fathers were not capable of dealing with.

Not sure with the tone of the original post, or why this has to be a republican/democrat debate.

You may not like the messenger - but that does not negate the message.

In the reverands case - I am not sure I like the messanger because of the message.
 
Irvine, I love you. :love:


I think the main comparison Irvine makes is between Condi and Michelle Obama, not with Wright. There's an email forward circulating around (that I started a thread a while back to comment on) that essentially says everything that Irvine's OP says, but says it in relation to Michelle Obama---her "proud of America" comment, despite being a lawyer who went to an Ivy League school.

Good job, Irvy! :applaud:
 
Last edited:
Dreadsox said:

You may not like the messenger - but that does not negate the message.



this is how i feel about Wright.



In the reverands case - I am not sure I like the messanger because of the message.



what he's saying is, in content, no different than what Dr. Rice or, as been noted before, what Dr. King had to say.

in fact, King had words every bit as harsh when he turned his focus on Vietnam. no, Hillary ain't never been called a n*gger. but you know what, no Viet Cong ever called a black soldier a n*gger either.

i think this is an interesting topic, race continues to fascinate.

but anyone who thinks that this is appropriate criteria upon which to judge a candidate, especially with other issues like, i dunno, the coming recession and the civil war in Iraq, is just as nuts as some claim the pastor to be.

but hey, something actually stuck to Obama. and that's what really matters, right?

if this election is about issues, McCain is toast. Iraq is on fire, and the economy is in the shitter (and the man himself says he really doesn't know too much about it anyway).

if it's about crap buzz words like "honor" or "duty" or "patriotism," then McCain might have a chance.
 
Back
Top Bottom