Tuesday, October 25, 2005

The Party Of Political Correctness

An interesting thing happened to me tonight.

I was invited by a commentor on another blog to visit his site because he wanted my perspective on his post about whether or not Condoleeza Rice was electable as a Republican.
(I will not identify him here.)

He seemed to be of the opinion that she is not electable on a Republican ticket, because she is black, and a woman. (Because republicans are racists and sexists, dont'cha know...)

In his post, he used the word "Crackers", referred to the Republican base as "Redneck Neocons", and basically asserted that a black woman would have absolutely no chance of winning any kind of election on a Republican ticket, because of our rampant racism.

He then concluded that Condi SHOULD run, because it would open the door for the Democrats to sweep the election, because WE are all racists.

I personally think that he is wrong about that. I think that Condi would have an excellent chance at winning a national office, no matter what color she is. I would have no problem whatsoever with the idea of voting for her, even if she was purple.
(I take that back. I HATE purple people!!)

But this is not what bothered me about his post.

What bothered me is his presumption that all Conservatives are basically racist, sexist, biggotted, knuckle-dragging, redneck crackers.

In the same breath, he called ME a racist, and then referred to me as a "redneck cracker".

This same person has disparaged Christians before, and could not understand why I got upset and called him on that prejudiced attitude as well.

Now, I assume that this is a white guy. (I don't know for sure...)
But even if he is, I find these terms, when used in this context, to be extremely offensive.

These are the terms of racists, and biggotts. These are the opinions of prejudiced people.

There is no excuse for it.

And he wants to sit over there on the left, and believe that HIS party is the party of political correctness, and tollerance.

Well they are not. They have become so self righteous (some of them) that they do not even recognize their own biggotry.

I will never say that I do not hate anybody.

I do.

I hate all idiots equally, regardless of race, color, creed, or political affilliation.


American Novelist said...

I think the biggest problem Condi would have in a run for the Republican ticket is her pro-choice position on abortion.

I too tire of being painted as a knuckle dragging, racist [insert insult here].

Keep up the good work.

tugboatcapn said...

Thanks, Novelist.

Personally, the "Pro-Choice, Pro-Life" issue would not sway me either way. (But I may be in the minority.)

I do not agree with Abortion, but I am by no means an activist on this one.

It should be, and should have been, a "States Rights" issue.

Besides, If I don't want to vote for her because she is Pro-Choice, then that is an Idealogical disagreement, not a Racial one.

Glad you like the site. Hope to see you back again.

Mike's America said...

That's interesting... So all the Democrats who voted AGAINST Clarence Thomas to be on the US Supreme Court were racists?

P.S. I SUPPORT THE MIERS NOMINATION! Just in case you didn't already hear me say that five hundred times.

pecheur said...

I think she should run. And I think Republicans would vote for her. I would.

BTW you racist sun of gun, I saw you are a team member on nuther blog about the South. =) Don't that automatically make you a racist red neck cracker? teehee.

tugboatcapn said...

Well, Pecheur, it's all about context.

Some might call me a Redneck without offending me, but in this context, I don't like it.

I am by no means a racist.

The actually definition of "Cracker" is "Native Floridian", so I don't qualify there, although the wife does.

She only lived in NC long enough to meet me.

tugboatcapn said...

Some days, I'm sure she wishes she had stayed in Florida!

tugboatcapn said...

Mike, that's basically it.

You got it.

Think about what the Dem's reaction would have been, had the President nominated Alberto Gonzales...

Les Publica said...

Condi would be the Al Smith of the 21st century. It would be a crazy election. Blacks would vote for her, just to prove that a black could be president. The racist vote (yes, it's there) would desert the Republicans and find some mealy-mouthed reason for doing so. Pretty soon race would become the only issue, no matter how often and how hard she kept shouting "Let's look at the record."

Could she win? Only one way to find out. It would sure be interesting.

My problem with her is that she is an expert on a country that doesn't exist. There is no more USSR. Could we please have someone in the administration who knows diddly about Islamic civilization?

Toad734 said...

Fact remains that we don't drag black people behind trucks in the north nor do we have openly racist political candidates up here and guess who always votes Republican; the south! Do I see "NASCAR dads" in South Carolina and rural Tennessee voting for a black woman? No, not in a million years, especially if she is running against someone like Wesley Clark. If the choice came down to Hillary Clinton that may be a different story.

The fact remains she would be the first female, first black, and I believe the first unmarried President. I don't think America is ready for all of that at once.

Daffy76 said...

I think Condi could win. I really kind of like her, except for the Pro-Choice thing.

I'm amazed at the presumptions that are made about conservatives by liberals. In the infamous, "Is Jesus liberal?" discussion over at ER's place, I was appalled to find so many liberals who equated being conservative with being hard-hearted and unwilling to help people.

Just because I'm conservative doesn't mean I'm evil, racist, sexist or any other "ist" someone may want to name me. The odd thing about this is I have never considered liberals to have a prejudice backing the way they think. I usually just believe them to be good people who are really confused. Why then do they assume such things about me? This is just further evidence of how little we understand each other.

I hate "us and them" mentality, but unfortunately it's part of the world we live in.

Son of Lilith said...

Maybe, Tug, you can sympathize with us liberals who tire of being stereotyped as well.

Mark said...

If that offends you, don't link to that flash movie over at ER's place entitled "Be A Republican"..I found it very insulting, and I'm not even a Republican ....yet. I am tempted to register as one tho, just for spite.

Erudite Redneck said...

Thanks for the plug, Mark. If you hadn't spent most of your blog time lashing out at those on the left, I might have some patience with your feeling insulted at the Become a Repub thing's lashing out at those on the right. But you have, and so I don't.


rich bachelor said...

Since you're commenting on a relative's post, I suppose I gotta say something here...
I fully agree that Rice's race and ethnicity could be seen beyond by the Republican rank and file, and would easily win in a run against Ms. Clinton.
The reason Condoleeza would be okay though, I feel, is that she has always been willing to stick up for the party line, which doesn't recommend her at all in my own view, but would play pretty well with many others.
Toad, as far as the unmarried issue goes, you're ignoring another (distant) relative of mine, James Buchanan. Mind you, he is at least second on most historian's lists of Worst President Ever. Not that this had anything to do with his marital status.
The GOP might indeed find some sort of reason to back off of Rice's candidacy, but I maintain that it won't be race. I suspect it might be the pro-choice thing, which would endear her to a majority of the female electorate, actually.
I'll say it again: if the Dems run Hilary, it will be their own fault. Kerry was bad enough. Look now as she tries that whole "Abortion is bad, but it's legal," thing...Just like Kerry. This strategy always loses.

tugboatcapn said...

Toad, I can't even remember the last time I drug a black man behind my pickup.

Those were the days...

Look at the Red/Blue map again, Toad. If the whole Republican base drug black people behind their pickup trucks, there wouldn't be any black people left.


Bachelor, I really appreciate your comment.
You get it.
There may very well be a few hard core racists who vote Republican, but they are by no means the majority of Republicans, and I do not believe that there are enough of them to sway an election, no matter what they do.

The point of my post was not the electability of Condi Rice, but rather the tendency of some on the left (I did not say all...) to assume that Republicans, Conservatives, Southerners, Christians, White people, Rich people, anyone who is not Liberal...are Racists, and themselves using hateful, stereotyping, biggoted terms when referring to these people.

It's wrong, and I am going to call them on it.

Racism is racism, and prejudice is prejudice, no matter which way it is headed.

Erudite Redneck said...

Toad has a real knack for alienating people who otherwise would agree with him once in awhile.

He has a hate on -- I just learned that phrase! -- for all Christians all the time. So I'm done with him.

And here, I see he's made the same stupid kind of assumptions about Southerners that we've been puttin' up with forever.

Screw you, Yank.

Tug, you and I have our differences, and both of us can get real "out there" at times, in our own ways.

But when it's Christians versus anti-Christians, you should know where I stand.

And when it comes to Southerners, redneck or otherwise, well, you should know where I stand there, too. (Speakin' of: Come admire my stupid, expensive race-lovin' Rebel cat.)

On the topic: I'd vote against Condi, of course, because she's a Repub. :-) Other reasons, too, but that's the main one.


Erudite Redneck said...

You know, I think I'da had to vote for Douglas in 1860. He was the closest thing to a state's rights man. Liberal on slavery, but a popular-sovereignty type.

The Confederacy started, politcally, out as an oxymoron:

Arguin' for state's rights but wantin' a federal government to protect the slaveowners' interest.

Not that the rank-and-file men who fought, includin' great-grandpa ER, weren't fightin' for their homes and states.


tugboatcapn said...

Yes, ER, But you wouldn't vote against her because she's BLACK.

I can live with that.

You have every right to your ideaology.

For that matter, the commentor that I referred to has every right to his prejudice and biggotry.

And I have every right to be offended by it.

And Toad has every right to be stupid, and I have every right to make fun of him because of it.

tugboatcapn said...

Bruiser, You are wasting your time over here.

Go away.

carrier said...

I wouldn't vote for Rice not because she is black or because she is a woman. I wouldn't vote for her because she doesn't seem to have any problem remaining in league with the criminals that currently have control of the executive branch of our government.

I would however consider voting for Colin Powell if he were to run for president. I believe it was because of his sound moral character that he sought to distance himself from these crooks.

Extremists, conservative as well as liberal, believe that their viewpoint is right and everyone else is wrong and that there is no room for negotiation. This extremism is why it was a no brainer for the president to lie in order to convince the American people we had to go to war in Iraq. (I know Tug that you don't think he knowingly lied...I believe he did). This extremism was why the phenomena of political correctness rose to such sickening heights during the last decade.

Extremism allows for no debate and is intolerant of opposing viewpoint. Partisan politics embraces extremism and in the end may prove to be the downfall of this country.

Are conservatives wrong? Not always. Are liberals right? Not always. But in my opinion the biggest difference between the two is that conservatives insist that everyone behave as they themselves do, and liberals believe that anyone can behave as they choose to. I'm ready and willing to admit that I'm partially right and that I'm partially wrong.

Lone Ranger said...

What goes around comes around. The Republican party was founded EXPRESSLY to fight the Democrats to end the evil of slavery. The Republican party is now fighting the Democrats to end the evil of abortion. Just as with slavery, the Democrats don't think they're doing anything wrong by ripping an unborn baby from a womb. Just as with slavery, the Democrats are calling Republicans who want to end abortion "radicals." The Democrats never learn and the Republicans never stop fighting.

carrier said...

If fighting to outlaw a womans constitutional right to an abortion was all this republican party was up to I suppose I could live with that. A political party attempting to survive on such a narrow base would wither and die in no time.

Abortion is a lose lose proposition unless it can be used as a carot to bait a small but vocal segment of the population. The leaders of this republican party recognize this and have used it effectively to strengthen the voter base.

But it's only a tool for them, they couldn't care less whether women have the right to abortions or not. Their only concern is power and how much of it they can grab. Power is money, and that's what matters most to these creeps.

At least in my opinion.

cats dig me said...


I am the commentor of whom Tug speaks in this post. I did not call the entire conservative base knuckle dragging racists. It was Tug, in fact, who used the term "Knuckle-dragging". What I said was that the "redneck neocon crackers" would not be able to prevent Rice from becoming vice-president if Cheney resigns as it would be an appointment, rather than an election. I did not intend this comment to include every single conservative in America.

Once again, Tug has taken my words, and some of his own and others, and twisted them to suit his own needs. I never personally called him anything; some other poster did call him a turd and infer that he may be a fascist. That was bait to get Tug to comment on why he is NOT a fascist.

I invite you all to visit at www.hollanderspace.blogspot.com to view for yourselves exactly what my comments were. Also check out the post "God is a spice..." if you would like to see where my anti-radical Christian attitude stems from. And before you accuse me of hating ALL Christians, please remember that I am talking only about those whom I believe to be false Christians. Real Christians, who truly follow the teachings of Jesus, and don't use His Holy Name for political and material gain, I have no problem with at all.

And Tug, you might've informed me that you had an anti-"the space" tirade over here so that I could come over and defend myself. I do consider that to be a typical neo-con, unethical, power play. Kinda like the Bush administartion does all the time.

cats dig me said...

Tug, you also refered to my supposed hateful language. Once again you have taken my words completely out of context. Yes, I used those words to demonstrate that they are more prevalent than most polite people care to admit. But did you use my words from the very end of my comment, my summation, if you will? No, you did not.

"Maybe we can all get together and end that kind of hateful bullshit forever. I hope."