Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

Racial Rhetoric Heats Up as Congress Prepares for Holder Contempt Vote

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2012/06/26...contempt-vote/


excerpt...
"

Civil rights leaders held a press conference in support of Eric Holder and accused Republicans of being politically motivated ahead of Thursday’s contempt of Congress vote against the attorney general. Leaders claimed that the House of Representatives is on a “witch hunt” and is demonstrating subtle racism, while Reverend Al Sharpton wrote in an op-ed article that Holder has been “in essence ‘stopped & frisked.’”
As the rhetoric in the gun-running operation ‘Fast and Furious’ investigation heats up, Sirius XM radio host David Webb said on America Live today, “This is the preemptive narrative change ahead of Thursday’s contempt vote … because it doesn’t seem like Holder’s going to comply with the subpoena and also the pending SCOTUS decision on Obamacare. They need a distraction.”
He continued, “I’m sick of the black race hustler mafia, which is what this is, drumming up something."



Of Course: Democrats to Portray Holder Contempt Vote as Racist

http://www.jammiewf.com/2012/of-cour...ote-as-racist/


excerpt...
"

"At the front of the push is a group of seven national civil rights leaders, including the Rev. Al Sharpton, that is scheduled to hold a press conference Tuesday about the effect that placing Holder in contempt of Congress would have on his ability to protect the rights of black and Hispanic voters, homeowners and immigrants.

Holder is the first black attorney general, and in an op-ed published last week, Sharpton used charged language to emphasize the racial overtones that might arise as the contempt measure comes to a head.
Sharpton wrote that Holder has been “stopped and frisked” by Republicans over the course of their investigation and has been “profiled” in his role as a prominent black federal official."

As Campaign Heats Up, Democrats Focus on Racism

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...cus-on-racism/


excerpt..
"

When House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi last week said that a Republican desire to keep minorities from voting was the reason lawmakers were dogging Attorney General Eric Holder over secret documents related to the murder of a Border Patrol agent with weapons lost in a botched gunrunning sting, it was a bit puzzling.
The former speaker of the House is sometimes guilty of excited utterance, and certainly accusing one’s colleagues in Congress of trumping up a contempt charge in order to allow states to disenfranchise minority votes was a charge so monstrous that Power Play expected to see it walked back in subsequent days.
But it has not been walked back, and today it will be run forward by a trio of prominent Democrats: Al Sharpton, Ben Jealous, the head of the NAACP, and Marc Morial, the head of the Urban League."

.................................................. .........................


Shocking!! The race card again. I agree that this to some extent is political but isn't everything these days. But racism? Give me a break!!
.
.
.

"Obviously, this is a tragedy," Obama said. "I can only imagine what these parents are going through, and when I think about this boy, I think about my own kids, and I think every parent in America should be able to understand why it is absolutely imperative that we investigate every aspect of this, and that everybody pulls together -- federal, state and local -- to figure out exactly how this tragedy happened."

See, guys... it's okay! Obama wants this to be fully investigated - to get to the bottom of this and find out exactly what happened.

Oh, wait... no, that quote is from the Martin case. In this case, Obama's explicitly blocking the release of documents pertaining to this case, documents needed to fully investigate the situation and to find out exactly what happened.

Yeah...Darrell Issa has absolutely NO agenda here.

Likely. Everyone has an agenda. What's your point?

Do you feel this entire situation should be swept under the rug because Issa has an agenda?

Originally Posted by UncleBob Likely. Everyone has an agenda. What's your point? Do you feel this entire situation should be swept under the rug because Issa has an agenda?

What is the situation? Explain it.

Lot's of programs fail and lot's of people are killed or died because of those failed programs. Shit, I'd say that military medical experiments in Thailand that injected people with HIV to test a new vaccine ranks up there with this one, but no one says shit.

Is it about concealing evidence? Because evidence is concealed as a matter of fact all the time and has been since we came up with the 5th Amendment.

Is it about execute privilege? It's been used by the previous president how many times and no one said shit?

So tell me. What is this really about beyond the typical Republican scorched earth policy?

Reagan was the racist that appointed him to a judge position somewhere...

Ah. I get what you're saying, by bringing up previous injustices and using them to justify the current situation.

You're saying that past wrongs make everything okay, right?

Originally Posted by UncleBob Ah. I get what you're saying, by bringing up previous injustices and using them to justify the current situation. You're saying that past wrongs make everything okay, right?

Shitty strawman and not even close to the argument I was making.

I didn't say that any of it was "ok." I specifically asked you to explain what the you or anyone else that cares to answer as to WHY this is such a huge issue.

I ing named 3 different possible issues that you could debate and you ing thought that strawmanning me was a better course of action? I know this is par for ing course, but COME ON...

I'm "strawmanning" you? You're bringing up completely unrelated events in Thailand. You're not interested in having a serious discussion about this. You simply want to excuse this entire chain of events because either A) Democrats did it or B) Republicans are coming out against it.

I'd care about what Issa has to say on the issue if it were part of a larger look into the disastrous drug war.

Originally Posted by UncleBob I'm "strawmanning" you? You're bringing up completely unrelated events in Thailand. You're not interested in having a serious discussion about this. You simply want to excuse this entire chain of events because either A) Democrats did it or B) Republicans are coming out against it.

And here you are with the double down...good job.

Again, what ing chain of events are you ing talking about? No shit Thailand has nothing to do with it because that isn't my ing argument. I named 4 big issues surrounding this debacle: the failure of the program, withholding evidence, executive privilege, and partisanship.

You made the strawman argument that I'm somehow pushing for sweeping the "situation" under the rug when you don't even explain what the situation actually IS. Back up your bullshit.

Originally Posted by Feeding the Abscess I'd care about what Issa has to say on the issue if it were part of a larger look into the disastrous drug war.

Exactly, but we all know that this isn't the case. The only reason why Issa would look into it is to further privatize it and expand it.

Originally Posted by dohdough No shit Thailand has nothing to do with it because that isn't my ing argument.

So... why the hell did you bring it up then?

"Oh, here's a bunny. It doesn't have anything to do with anything, but here it is anyway. And you're stupid because here's a bunny."

I named 4 big issues surrounding this debacle: the failure of the program, withholding evidence, executive privilege, and partisanship.

...then immediately dismissed each of those issues, the first three because "Oh, this happens all the time... in Thailand... which has nothing to do with my argument." and the fourth because "lol Republicans."

edit: nevermind you two can have it out on your own.

Originally Posted by UncleBob So... why the hell did you bring it up then? "Oh, here's a bunny. It doesn't have anything to do with anything, but here it is anyway. And you're stupid because here's a bunny."

Yeah, it's not as if the point was that there are lot's of "failed" programs. I didn't even preface the Thailand example with a sentence talking about failed programs! The fact that you decided to focus on one aspect of the example instead of the actual argument is the ing strawman, you obtuse hack.

...then immediately dismissed each of those issues, the first three because "Oh, this happens all the time... in Thailand... which has nothing to do with my argument." and the fourth because "lol Republicans."

You mean I preemptively shot down any stupid points you were going to make? I made my points. How about you make some of your own instead of harping on one tiny part of my example instead of the argument. But I know that you'll just resort to more strawmans while further derailing this thread because you don't have anything of substance to add.

I understand that you made your points. Your points are that this doesn't matter because A) "it" has happened before and B) lol republicans.

Anyone with "points" like that simply isn't worth attempting to actually have a real discussion with.

I mean, seriously... the idea of a failed program that cost lives and you "shot down that stupid point" with the idea that there have been other such programs - thus this one should get a free pass as well?

By that logic, our government - and the officials who work for us - should have free reign to start up any programs they want, regardless the consequences.

It's the same bulls*** logic that gives Obama a free pass for killing brown folks because Bush also killed brown folks.

http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.co...furious-truth/

Seriously, guys... Bush now gets a free pass for an unjust war based on half-truths and misinformation because, like, totally - Vietnam and Kosovo happened before Iraq and they were unjust and based on misinformation.

I believe the point that doh is trying to make is that you (or at least those like you) bob, are among the biggest hypocrites in the world when it comes to complaining about shit the Obama administration does. Yes, because it's been done before, that means there is precedent. It's not like "OMG!!!111 THIS HAS NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE, I CAN'T BELEIVE IT!!!!1111". Yet that's exactly what the cons (and apparently you) act like.

It's much ado about nothing in the grand scheme of things, and it's an election year stunt.

Originally Posted by Clak It's much ado about nothing in the grand scheme of things, and it's an election year stunt.

Originally Posted by Clak It's of course a bit of a election year stunt, I'm not going to criticize someone for doing what everyone in politics does though.

Speaking of hypocrisy.