Weekdays at 12noon on 770 AM: The Truth
 Michael Medved

Is the Pope Hispanic?

March 19, 2013 @ 2:01 pm (Updated: 2:03 pm - 3/19/13 )

Since the new pope was born in Argentina, should he count as Hispanic, and does that make him a member of a different race from the former pope, who was German? In America, Pope Francis would indeed count as racially distinct from Pope Benedict, since the government — ridiculously — counts people of Hispanic heritage as "non white."

This mislabeling occurs despite the fact that a majority of Hispanics — 53 percent — identified themselves as white in the recent census. This matters, because the claim that America is supposedly becoming a "minority majority nation" depends on labeling Hispanics a distinct racial group — an absurdity given obvious differences between Cubans, Mexicans, and people from Argentina, like Pope Francis. Those who come from Spanish-speaking cultures shouldn't be considered a separate race, any more than those who come from Italian or Polish or French speaking societies.

More Michael Medved

MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (32)


  • Add A Comment

  • It's me! Ha ha! wrote...
    I don't care his nationality nor the color of his shell.
    March 19, 2013 2:00 pm
    He is the Pope and Catholic!

    Scared, hate filled Leftist rants in 5...4...3...2...ONE!

    Ch, that is your Que!

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • roomtemp wrote...
    "Is the Pope Hispanic?"
    March 19, 2013 3:53 pm
    Does it matter?

    I'm not Catholic and I have some issues with their doctrine. But he seems like a pretty cool guy from what I've seen so far. I couldn't care less what race he is.

    Human DNA is 99.9+% the same worldwide and yet we choose to assign labels designed to divide us for the .1% difference. Seems silly, unless your goal is to divide and conquer (control).

    "minority majority nation" That sounds like a non sequitur to me. I suppose I'd better grab a few other blonde hair blue eyed folks and organize a minority rights protest then eh? Those brown hair brown eyed types are 'the man' and I'm feeling all oppressed now.

    "_identified themselves as white in the recent census."

    I was offended that they even asked, it should only be a head count, so I went with -Other, pale blue... XD

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • gaymarriedchristianfromhollywood wrote...
    It's not silly at all.
    March 19, 2013 5:57 pm
    Over time, census data allows us to assess racial progress or lack of it. I will never understand how white middle aged men can feel oppressed when they make up like 85% of congress.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • sportsguru wrote...
    Who cares Medved
    March 19, 2013 4:39 pm

    What race he is, you are so bent trying to make the hispanics white, man what is wrong with you people,lol.

    The next elections are not until 2016, can't you wait until then to start trying to recruit the same people that you were just trying to deport.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • FormerMarineSgt wrote...
    medved loves minor issues that he can falsely twist into major events
    March 20, 2013 9:47 am
    He's at his personal best when he can take a relatively non-event, falsely connect it to other issues that he twists out of context and then make a proclamation that liberals are bad, Obama is evil and anything any part of government does is part of the liberal conspiracy to destroy this country by whatever contrived falsehood he can come up with. This column about 'hispanic race' is more of the same tired old drivel from him.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Once again, Michael, I am left wondering what IS your point ?
    March 19, 2013 5:03 pm
    The US census notes that 'Hispanic' can be of 'any race', and I know of few who think of Hispanics as a 'none white race', your whole post looses me.

    .

    By the way, Sports, I do suspect that when the GOP returns to a bigger tent - and family orientated, hard working Hispanics - of whatever shade - joint that tent - there will still be a few out there on the right who just don't get it.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • sportsguru wrote...
    ron prevost
    March 19, 2013 7:27 pm

    I like you Ron and I took a beating saying that I thought you were the only righty on this site that was at least fair and I will not mention the poster's name on here that tried to give that opinion a black eye (I don't know what you did to the guy, but it sure seems personal,lol).

    Given the current state of the Republican party, I am pessimistic that the big tent theory will ever see the light of day again. Who on the right or left has an all inclusive ideology? I can't think of one guy, I actually was close to giving Ron Paul serious consideration because as long as I have known him, his policy has always stayed the same, I knew he wouldn't get any traction so I had to move him to the back because our media has come to the conclusion that they need to tell us who the candidates are and not just give us information and let us choose on our own, every other politicians and/or party typically change with how the wind blows (hence the Republicans now wanting to include hispanic's and classify them as white).

    I personally don't want to be looked at as a COLOR, I want to be viewed as a person and judged by my own character, not by what somebody who looks like me and/or someones opinion on who they think I am.

    Every day, I am starting to become a isolationist, I am tired of fighting other peoples wars, giving foreign aid to everybody and there momma, selling MOST of our own resources to the global market and speculating on it, I am tired of helping people who are not doing ANYTHING to help themselves (And I am a very giving person), I am tired of representation of both parties not working for the will of the people, but for the will of themselves and special interest groups, man, I am just tired.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • gaymarriedchristianfromhollywood wrote...
    knock me over with a feather...
    March 19, 2013 8:06 pm
    Ron Paul? Seriously!? But he is so freaking insane. For every good idea he has two bat shiate crazy ones. I don't think the media had anything against him. I think they just saw him for what he is...a guy with a couple of good ideas and a lot of nutty ones. He is honest to a fault so I do appreciate that, but he's way to loco.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • sportsguru wrote...
    lol, gaymarried
    March 19, 2013 8:42 pm

    Here is kooky Ron Pauls ideals:

    •

    eliminate five cabinet-level agencies (Education, Interior, Commerce, Energy, and Housing and Urban Development)

    •

    privatize the FAA and the TSA

    •

    cut the federal workforce by 10%

    •

    cut funding (down from 2006 levels) for the Food and Drug Administration by 40% Centers for Disease Control by 20% Department of Homeland Security by 20% National Institutes of Health by 20% Environmental Protection Agency by 30% Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration by 20%

    •

    cut the Department of Defense budget by total 15%; eliminate all foreign war funding

    •

    freeze funding for most other federal agencies at 2006 levels

    •

    eliminate all foreign aid

    •

    eliminate international drug programs

    •

    substantially reduce federal travel

    •

    eliminate international organizations and commissions

    •

    administer Medicaid and other joint federal-state social welfare programs (SCHIP, food stamps, etc.) through block-grant funding mechanisms to the states

    Revenue changes:

    •

    cut the top corporate tax rate to 15% (down from 35%)

    •

    allow companies to repatriate capital without additional taxation

    •

    permanently extend the Bush administration tax cuts

    •

    eliminate capital gains and dividends taxes

    •

    eliminate estate and gift taxes

    •

    end taxes on personal savings

    •

    sell federal lands and other federal assets

    Other economic and regulatory measures:

    •

    repeal the new healthcare law ("Obamacare") as well as the Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley financial services and banking regulations

    •

    cancel certain "onerous" regulations instituted under executive order by previous presidents

    •

    conduct a full audit of the Federal Reserve

    • s

    eek competing currency legislation "to strengthen the dollar and stabilize inflation"

    The ones I don't like is the elimination of the five fed agency, too late in the game for that (although I would get rid of the DEA), getting rid of obamacare, I want people to have health care, I believe it should be a right, extending bush tax cuts NOT, I would double the federal cutting to the military to 30%.

    I believe in fiscal responsibility and living within my means, just to continue to spend money that we have to borrow don't work in your household and doesn't work in mine either, so why would it work in our federal government. I don't buy into what the media say about anybody, I research what the individual really believes and if that person stays consistent and Mr. Paul has stayed consistent, I understand his views are not popular but me personally, I tend to believe in solutions.

    Riddle me this gaymarried, do you feel that our size of government is too big or just right and do you feel that our government is well managed with no excessive waist or is it just right?

    I am not AJ nor Bill the butcher, I feel that you actually have some common sense and would appreciate your answer without any insults to your answer.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • sportsguru wrote...
    well that didn't present itself
    March 19, 2013 8:43 pm
    The way I wanted,lol.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • gaymarriedchristianfromhollywood wrote...
    Well...I'll tell you what I believe.
    March 19, 2013 10:18 pm
    I believe in a strong federal government. I believe that a strong federal government is essential for a society to function. Otherwise, you just become Iraq where every freaking village gets to pick their owns laws. I think the government is too big in certain areas, like the army. We don't need to spend more than the next 13 countries do combined. But no, I don't know if the government is too big. He wants to cut the FDA 40%, that sounds great, but you're still going to have a process for ensuring the public health when it comes to new drugs, and our food supply. Maybe you think they can do it with 40% less, but do you? I don't know that. I think all departments could be more efficient, but in any industry there is abuse and waste and I don't believe that the people running the government are any smarter or dumber than people running other corporations. In fact, I think people working in the public industry tend to be better educated then the private industry. People who work in the public industry are us. They are part of our community. They're nothing special. If they didn't do that they'd do something else. And most governments agencies are run like corporations. The same with the other agencies. I like the EPA. I like the DOT. I like it all, because yes, about a quarter of my family's income goes to federal taxes, but for the money, I get fairly decent roads to drive on practically anywhere in the country, I get clean lakes,parks and rivers to visit, and somebody is keeping an eye on the food supply, and making sure that drugs are safe and my kid can get an education if I don't want him to private school or can't afford it, and if I ever medicare or social security, if I'm ever unemployed for reasons which are not my fault, or bad things happen and I need help I can get it, and I'm contributing to new technologies and new sciences and research and the future and if someone attacks our country an army will defend my home. I get to help starving kids all over the world, and here at home and I get to help people afford college and...man, it's never ending. So for me that's a bargain. Life seems extremely good to me when I compare it to the rest of the world. I have it sweet. I cannot imagine that if I made so much more money that I would care if I paid the top tax rate which is 33% because I almost pay that now! And rich people never pay that anyways and they're still biatching. Taxes should be progressive, because 67% of a million and 75% of 120,000, is still a heck of a lot better than 100% of 20,000. No way should tax cuts be extended. It is utter bologna that if rich people got more money back they would hire more people. They're making bank now. No, I'm not a big fan of anybody who wants to permanently extend the Bush tax cuts. I think I'm way more optimistic about the government than a lot of people, but Ron Paul is whack...you gotta give that some more thought. Or google crazy Ron Paul ideas. You'll be surprised...
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • sportsguru wrote...
    gaymarriedchristianfromhollywood
    March 20, 2013 7:47 am

    If you read my last couple of paragraphs of my badly written post,lol. I said I didn't agree with Paul on eliminating 5 agencies, I didn't want to eliminate obama care, I don't want to extend the bush tax cuts and I would double the cutting of the military budget, so believe it or not, we are not that far off from each other, it's just when I mention Ron Paul that gives you pause on what I have to say and that's the problem with politics and political ideology, people can have similar ideas but because of I have respect for someones ideas makes everything that we agree on a deal breaker.

    One thing that I will have to respectfully disagree with you on is that the public sector versus the private sector being smarter?

    In the private sector, if you don't do your job and/or if your are not flexible to constant changes and/or you don't have the necessary skills for the job, you don't get the job and/or they can get rid of you IMMEDIATELY, public sector jobs don't have any accountability and you can throw away tax payer money without any consequences to your job, we read about it all the time. The legislators might be educated, but the rank and file government workers don't have to have all the skills necessary that you have to have in the private sector.

    I don't agree that most agencies are run like corporations, if a department head in a corporation loses $1 billion dollars they don't have a job at the end of the year, they get rewarded for saving money and adding to the bottom line and streamlining production so that they get the most bang for there buck. It's been a long standing procedure for every agency to spend every dollar allocated to them for fear that there next years funding for there departments will receive decreased funding if that money is not spent, that doesn't happen in private sector jobs, that alone is a HUGE problem. Every agency wants to keep there funding levels rather they need it or not.

    So why I agree with a lot of what you said, there are some basic differences on how we view how government should work.

    You see me GayMarried, I am not afraid to agree with someone that have different ideas, I am not a libertarian, but there are some things that libertarians believe that I agree with, same with republicans and democrats, If we could just find someone with a balanced approach, I would be all in.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • gaymarriedchristianfromhollywood wrote...
    I don't know who you've worked for, but I've worked for
    March 20, 2013 12:15 pm
    mostly large corporations in the private sector and King County Community Services Division in the public sector and they ran fairly similar. Yes, as a department you definitely try to use up the funding, but we did that in the private corporations too. I'm not talking about the smaller corporations, but the large ones definitely. And I disagree with you on the CEOs, a lot of the times whether they suck or are good they make boat loads of money. There was a report by the GAO a while back that sort of laid out where government could be more efficient and I would be open to those types of cuts and consolidations to cut expenses. I'm sure there are a lot of government programs that could be done away with all together or consolidate for efficiency. But the right (which includes the libertarian wing) always wants across the board cuts (except the libertarians don't mind cutting military spending). Now I will give you this, any ideology sounds crazy when taken to the extreme. But I do believe libertarians live in the extreme.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • roomtemp wrote...
    @sportsguru...
    March 20, 2013 1:26 pm
    Nice posts there fella! I think it's sportsguru for-the-win on this thread. ;-)

    "I personally don't want to be looked at as a COLOR, I want to be viewed as a person and judged by my own character"

    Thank you! It always makes my blood boil when the media talking heads talk about the 'black vote', 'hispanic vote', etc, like they're some sort of unthinking drones in a hive mind and not individuals. I can only imagine how it makes you feel.

    One thing that seems to get lost in the discussions of what government should or shouldn't do is that we're a republic by design not a pure democracy. There are really good reasons for that. Government should be kept at the state level to keep maximum accountability to the people it serves. We aren't supposed to be some amorphous blob of sameness. We're supposed to be fifty experiments running concurrently. If you don't like the experiment you're in, you can vote with your feet and move to another. If the feds control everything there is nowhere to go and an important dynamic is lost.

    P.S. If you're gonna be swinging Paul's name around, prepare to be mercilessly trashed, belittled, and marginalized by 'party men' from both sides. If there's one thing that hardcore democrats and republicans can agree on it's that liberty is a CRAZY idea. lol

    All the best to you and yours...

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • gaymarriedchristianfromhollywood wrote...
    To be fair, I didn't know you were scoring.
    March 20, 2013 3:07 pm
    Can't we ever just have a discussion without being athholes? I don't like libertarians because libertarianism is at best naive and at worst the thoughts of survivalistic sociopaths. Societies need structure. I'm not saying they should be up your ath every second of every day, but the idea that government should be kept at the state level is retardiculous. It's been tried and it failed. Under the Articles of Confederation, states often argued amongst themselves. They refused to financially support the national government. The national government was powerless to enforce any acts it did pass. Some states began making agreements with foreign governments. Most had their own military. Each state printed its own money. There was no stable economy. No one is making the argument that the government should control everything. And yes, Ron Paul is crazy. How can you defend his newsletters or some of the stuff that comes out of his mouth? Yes, Ron Paul is marginalized, but it's greatly of his own making.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • roomtemp wrote...
    @gmch...
    March 22, 2013 1:41 am
    "Can't we ever just have a discussion without being_"

    Apparently not. I was actually directing that at sportsguru and not you. (sports, scoring, for-the-win, get it?) The @sportsguru tag offers a small clue as to the intended recipient. (I'll give you the second place thread trophy if it makes you feel better. It's smaller and lacks the SG monogram though.)

    I guess I forgot to add what I thought was obvious to my sentence. Let me fix it for you. "Government should be kept at the state level -as much as possible- to keep maximum accountability to the people it serves."

    You've never read any of Paul's newsletters. Admit it, you've seen 3 pull quotes taken from 30 year old ones that he didn't write. Turns out he was a little busy with congress and neglected the newsletter. He apologized for it and fired the guy that wrote them. His mistake was lack of editorial oversight, not racism. He sure was insane when he told you to buy gold at $200 an oz, or predicted the housing bubble, or wars in the M.E., or currency deflation though huh. Crazy like a fox. As a supporter of the party of Robert -KKK Grand Poobah- Byrd, your attack is pretty laughable and just makes you look well programmed.

    My apologies, but you can't expect too much from a 'naive survivalistic sociopath' that you've never met and don't like. Can you? Definitely kind of you to say though.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • gaymarriedchristianfromhollywood wrote...
    Aha! So now you're calling me names?! A thousand injuries
    March 23, 2013 12:00 pm
    I've endured, but when you ventured upon insult I vowed revenge...just kidding. I'm sorry I called you a naive survivalistic sociopath, although I really didn't. I really wasn't sure what your political leanings were except that from the way you talk you sound like a libertarians and that's a problem because I usually don't have very nice things to say about libertarians. I don't have nice things to say about conservatives either. But that's really only because I'm a mayhem loving troll. In real life my boss who is a major Repo keeps telling me that I'm really conservative at heart. I don't think people are all one thing. I am a die hard liberal, but libertarians and conservatives do believe some things I believe. My problem with libertarians is their laisse faire attitude towards EVERYTHING. I don't give a flying fling what people think about me. I like the government. I think they do a good job for the most part. I think we have a pretty good society. I think anybody who likes to biatch and moan all the time about how bad things are here should visit the world more. I think if the pendelum swings to far one way, we can bring it back. We've had our history, but I just don't hold the same "the sky is falling" attitude about America. I think the best is yet to come.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • gaymarriedchristianfromhollywood wrote...
    Whatever Medved. You are such an idiot.
    March 19, 2013 5:40 pm
    The census attempts to gain statistics regarding the population of the United States. Being merely counted doesn't contribute much to the understanding of our population. More importantly, I helped a lot of Hispanics fill out the census and if I'm not mistaken one of the of the questions was "is the person of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin" and then it broke it down by Mexican, Puerto Rican, etc. I know why you're so obsessed with making Hispanics white. Because if they're white there are no disparities. Hispanic unemployment is not higher than white unemployment, Hispanics don't have a higher rate of poverty, nothing to see here folks, we're all equal. Nice try, but only the dumbos fail to see through your bigotry.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • gaymarriedchristianfromhollywood wrote...
    If the Pope filled out the census he would most likely pick
    March 19, 2013 5:41 pm
    white not of Hispanic origin, but like with everybody else, it would be his choice.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • SeattleD wrote...
    The reason Medved is so insistent that Hispanics and Latinos are really just white people
    March 19, 2013 6:30 pm
    is that Marco Rubio will never be nominated by the Republicons in 2016 unless he is officially a "white man" in the eyes of the Republicon primary voters.

    And we know how racist they are. In 2012 not a single vote went to a non-white Republicon presidential candidate during their primaries. Zero. Zilch. Nada. None!

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Gee, D, I didn't know Herman Cain was white.
    March 19, 2013 6:48 pm
    But, Oh, that's right. The LEFT doesn't consider and black who votes republican black. Nor any republican woman a woman.

    D, and the rest of the left, had double trouble with that 'white man' Condoleezza Rice.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • gaymarriedchristianfromhollywood wrote...
    Herman Cain was never a serious candidate.
    March 19, 2013 7:27 pm
    He was a joke. Anyways, I thought he dropped out before the primaries.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    didn't drop out until some time after the South Carolina primary.
    March 20, 2013 4:34 am
    Anyway, it's "D" who sees the world through weird colored glasses. ....... AND who thinks politics mist all be a matter of color.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • gaymarriedchristianfromhollywood wrote...
    No, I'm pretty sure he dropped out before the primaries. he was
    March 20, 2013 7:00 am
    Already on the ballot so he did get some votes. Look, it's not right to say that all Republicans are racists, but it's fair to say that the Republicans have an issue with race. Granted, most of it has to do with their extreme elements, but you can see it right on this blog. The most disgusting, repugnant, ugly, racists things get said on this very blog by people on the right. When I first started blogging people thought I was a black man...still not sure why, well, I used to have a different name, maybe it sounded black. But people were horrible to me. So...yeah, the Republicans have an issue with race and it is not imagined.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Google it - Herman Cain primaries /
    March 20, 2013 7:32 am
    considering the 2012 primary season STARTED December, 2011, how could he NOT have been active in at least a few ?

    .

    Yes, SOME on the right have a race problem (including a few in media) BUT so do more than a few on the left. ... Neither is imagined, but those on the left usually get a pass, just BECAUSE they are on the left.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • gaymarriedchristianfromhollywood wrote...
    I googled it, but it was hard to tell. It says the first primary was
    March 20, 2013 1:52 pm
    New Hampshire on January 3rd and he dropped out December 11th. Anyways, I guess it doesn't matter. I don't know what you mean about the left having a race problem. Do you mean a white race problem because a majority of white voters voted for Republicans? I guess that is true. But seriously, you don't think that the right alienates minorities? They call them moochers and say the only reason they vote for Democrats is because they Democrats give them stuff and that's not alienating them? An at CPAC some people clapped when some idiot said (basically) that slave owners should not apologize for feeding and clothing black people and that's not alienating them? And all the racist stuff that gets said about the president is beyon the pale, like the whole birtherism thing and Palin saying he chucks and jives and Conressman Doug Lamborn referring to Obama as a tar baby or the emails with the watermelons on the white house lawn sent by a Republican mayor? And Ginrich saying he wants black people to demand paychecks not foodstamps (WHAT!?)? And Santorum saying he doesn't want to give black people other people's money? These aren't just nobodies. It started with the Southern strategy in the 70s and it became a snake that bit itself because while a lot of whites did stop voting Democrat but the demographics of the country are changing. You don't need the South to win anymore. Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, they're bonuses. Now, let me say this, I think there is racism in both parties and neither one is immune. But that doesn't mean that the parties don't deal with it differently. The Republican party seems way more willing to tolerate it at a higher level in their party.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Like 'chains you can believe in' Biden ?
    March 20, 2013 5:20 pm
    Funny - or not so funny - we can always easier find fault with out opponents than with ourselves ..... Trust me, racism (and sexism) are as rampant on the left as on the right.

    Just 2 things - Newt probably should have said it better, but his intent was to get more black people back to work - not 'racism'. ...... And There may be a million mayors of various sized towns in America.. Look hard enough and you'll find a lot more than one - on all sides - who's an idiot. Just look at Pacific, for example.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • gaymarriedchristianfromhollywood wrote...
    Ron,
    March 20, 2013 5:57 pm
    Can you please just tell me in what way was that statement racist? I'm not trying to be glib. I never understood how that statement was racist. At all. The right kept talking about unshackling the private sector and in the statement biden says Romney wants to unchain wall street. Being white I'm not particularly sensitive to racist remarks, but this one escapes me all together. If anything it's implying that the right is racist, but I don't know that it's racist towards black people. Am I missing something? I don't trust you. You don't make a particularly good case for racism or sexism being as rampant on the left as on the right. How can you defend Ginrich? That was a ridiculously stupid statement. It was patronizing.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    no more patronizing...........than the chains
    March 20, 2013 8:34 pm
    It's all in the way you hear it.

    YOU hear racism from the right and others hear racism from the left. But neither will hear what the other hears.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • gaymarriedchristianfromhollywood wrote...
    Soooo...you don't know either?
    March 20, 2013 9:25 pm
    At least we don't have to decipher watermelons on the white house lawn or tar baby or chuck and jive or Rush Limbaugh talking about Obama's "negro dialect". Whatever Ron. Denial is not just a river in Egypt you know?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    LOOK - I do not have time to dig up any and every obscure slur uttered by a minor elected (or appointed?) office holder who hallens to call him or herself a democrat.
    March 21, 2013 5:36 am
    SOOOOOOO ... Just WHO and WHEN were these 'watermelons on the white house lawn' ? .. Last I heard of 'watermelons' was some leftwing school test a couple of years ago linking a 'Condellezza' to watermelons in a math problem.

    Now, I never listen to Limbaugh, but it's one thing for the president to affect an accent he neither grew up with nor even normally uses, for effect (like my Irish on St. Pat's Day). It is, however, another thing entirely when a Joe Biden tries to affect the same dialect. THEN THAT is called pandering - and racist.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • gaymarriedchristianfromhollywood wrote...
    Geez relax...
    March 21, 2013 6:34 am
    I'll give you one thing, I have WAY too much time on my hands right now. I am dying to go back to work...I'm dying to get off this couch. :( But just so we're clear, if you are still using the word Negro and it is 2013 and you weren't born in the 30s you just might be a racist. Biden pandering...okay. Racist, still not sure. :)
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }