Skip to main content

View Diary: McCain's Racist, Sexist, Hypocritical Bafflegab Attacks Against Susan Rice and President Obama (85 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  please ... (0+ / 0-)

    explain to me why it is racism(as opposed to political opportunism)  to criticize a political opponent?

    •  It is racism to pander to racists (0+ / 0-)

      Surely, we can accept that the pandering is being done knowingly?

      •  Please explain (0+ / 0-)

        What in their criticism constitutes racism (the original charge) or now the lesser charge of pandering to racists? Criticism isn't racism. I have raised this issue several times in this and other threads and the only response calling the ambassador unqualified is racist because she's a woman and black and has a Doctorate. That is a patently silly defense of the charge.  

        •  I must find it easier to connect the dots (0+ / 0-)

          It's not about calling someone unqualified. It's about why one is calling someone unqualified. The criticisms on Benghazi are unfounded. The criticisms are still proffered, even after being shown to be baseless. Those doing the criticizing are overwhelmingly from traditionally racist states. Their electorate is susceptible to approving attacks on people of color.

          Is it that you don't see where the attacks originate?

          Or is it that you don't see the South as full of narrow-minded bigots?

          •  You must see dots (0+ / 0-)

            written in invisible ink.

            I'll contend that there are questions still unanswered regarding the embassy attack, the Ambassador's original story and the changing narrative for months. Now I don't think it rises to the level of conspiracy or scandal, but politicians, even bad ones are entitled to act like jerks. That does constitute racism however.

            What is a "racist state"?

            I'm guessing you are stereotyping the entire South with that comment but perhaps you should refer to a map.  Arizona and New Hampshire are not Southern states.

            I see who is doing the attacking. I do not see that the South is "full of narrow-minded bigots?".  How do you so easily engage in odious stereotypes of an entire region of the country?

            I mean Harry Reid is a norman, they used to practice polygamy, therefore he is a polygamist and panders to polygamists. Sheesh.

            Dana Milbank has also criticized Rice, as has Maureen Dowd. Are they racist bigots as well?

            And I still have no evidence of racism. If there were merits to defend or present I think they should/would have been made rather than accusing the critics of racism.

            •  What do unanswered questions have to do with Rice? (0+ / 0-)

              It is Rice (the messenger) who is being attacked. Surely, no sane person thinks that she owes anyone answers. The CIA chose to give a cover story, for whatever reason. Ambassador Rice parroted said story. The investigation is ongoing. Any questions should be asked of SoS Clinton (or at least the State Department) or the POTUS.

              I can think of several legitimate reasons why the right (and Sen. McCain in particular) might be attacking Rice. When they fess up as to their true motivations then I will agree to cease engaging in stereotypes. Until then, no.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site