Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

Oh yeah?

twandx's picture

Michelle Bernard, one of MSNBC's new "political analysts," said recently:

"There is no way the super-delegates can take this away from Barack Obama. There will be race riots in the street."

On the other hand, Michelle, "Hell has no fury like a whole bunch of women scorned."

0
No votes yet

Comments

corinne's picture
Submitted by corinne on

There's more to Michelle than meets the eye here.

Michelle is CEO of the Independent Women's Forum

The Independent Women’s Forum (IWF) is an anti-feminist organization housing various "experts" who weigh in on a wide array of issues ranging from feminism and family issues to economics, environmental policy, and international affairs. IWF bills itself as the "home to the next wave of the nation’s most influential scholars – women who are committed to promoting and defending economic opportunity and political freedom."

IWF has an interesting list of Directors Emeritae: Lynne V. Cheney; Midge Decter; Kimberly O. Dennis; Wendy Lee Gramm; Elizabeth Lurie; Kate O’Beirne; and Louise V. Oliver.

(H/T Tennessee Guerilla Women)

Submitted by lambert on

Let's not make things any more volatile than they need to be. Seeing only the headline in the sidebar could give a really misleading impression. It did me.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

corinne's picture
Submitted by corinne on

"Let’s not make things any more volatile than they need to be."

Excuse me? If you think I'm going to let that comment pass without note you are sadly mistaken.

I read a post and posted a reply. My subject line fit that post. Any misinterpretations originate with you, and not me.

I am a Clinton supporter by attrition. I do not care to engage bloggy games with misleading or posts. I am well over the age of 40 and have worked and lived in DC for 25 years so I have a ringside seat to this circus.

I am not some kid in need of a gentle lecture or a kind pat on the head.

Submitted by lambert on

It was not my intention to pat you on the head.

To a casual reader, the subject line was misleading; readers don't always come at a comment from the post; they can come at it from the sidebar or from Google or from a link, so the context of the post is lost. I was misled in just that way. Generally, "Michelle" == "Michelle Obama" just as "Hillary" == "Hillary Clinton." I wouldn't want to see a subject line that read "Hillary eats babies" even if the post was about a story about "Hillary Smith" who did exactly that.

And having just invested several hours I didn't have the other day on a thread about "Michelle" that was, in fact, volatile, I don't want to invest the time again here when it's a side issue to the thread.

Your contributions are valued here. This is purely a copy editing matter.

That's all.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

Aeryl's picture
Submitted by Aeryl on

IMO, to imply that African Americans will riot. Personally, the last few riots I have seen, have been among college frat boys, because their team won or lost the championship. So it might be accurate to claim that his creative class supporters are more likely to riot, than AA's.

Bill Clinton for First Dude!!!

myiq2xu's picture
Submitted by myiq2xu on

Is there a schedule? When and where are the white people rioting? Do we have to register or buy tickets or anything? Will we get to loot any stores?

It sounds like fun, I've never rioted before.

------------------------------------------------
“I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat.” - Will Rogers

corinne's picture
Submitted by corinne on

I've got my eye on the Burberry store down the street.

blogtopus's picture
Submitted by blogtopus on

I agree. Why would Obama's supporters run wild in the streets? Why should they? He's only gotten half the voters to support him, it's a coin toss at this point.

The only thing I can think of is if the speaker somehow believes that all AA are so wild and disorderly as to take out their frustration (however unwarranted) in the most destructive way possible.

I can imagine something like the Rodney King riots, maybe, where many of the rioters were white and taking advantage of the situation. Televisions, anyone?

I shouldn't worry my pretty little head about it.

Submitted by lambert on

Cite to a source! Evidence!

Also, let's not start throwing the word "racist" around lightly, shall we? It's an analytical construct that deserves serious treatment, not, as with the OFB and the Obama campaign, an epithet used to dismiss the views of others.

If you want to use the word, prove it. Reasoning!

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

Aeryl's picture
Submitted by Aeryl on

So I'll respond anyways.

I feel it is racist to imply that AA's will riot, whether the anger that would drive it is justified or not, because the implication follows that AA's are just so damned unruly, they can't make their opposition to something with a reasoned response, and need to "act out"(like some are implying Clinton is doing).

Especially when, anyone who has paid attention*, can recall that the most recent "riots", have been a bunch of white frat boys, tipping cars and breaking windows because "They Won!". Here is an editorial from 2002, where the editor laments that they've never been able to riot. Here's another where people recount the riots in Columbus OH. And another.

Recent history shows, AA's don't riot, even if justified, like in Jena. But the "creative class" does, which makes perfect sense, since they are implying that people will riot, while at the same time pawning it off on their black "friends". People who state that there will be race riots, are, if not racist themselves, at least buying into a racist stereotype, to further their own agenda.

And we need to call it, when we see it.

*I used to be a news monitor, so its possible I paid more attention than most.
Bill Clinton for First Dude!!!

Submitted by lambert on

No, generic call for care in word choice, especially when using sharp tools like "racism." Gawd knows it cuts when directed at me!

I think we're talking at cross purposes... (Oh, and it may have been unclear on "volatile." I didn't mean "volatile" as in riots, I meant volatile as on posting and commenting on the blog. Maybe wrong wrong choice.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.