Topic: Rick Perry & the "Niggerhead" stone

[John Florida]

I'm vavering on Perry as it is but if they keep playing the race card I might have to go back and support him just because.Cain should know better.

[trapeze]

I couldn't support McCain in the primaries because of his support for illegals. Loose borders and "pathways to citizenship" are a bridge too far for me with Perry. I'll vote for his ass if he wins the nomination just like I voted for Mr. Reach Across The Aisle but I won't like it.

[Alphabet Soup]

Should we not also realize that we (as observers) are also being played by the media?

Absolutely, and thank you for mentioning it.

People generally have a reason behind their actions, although sometimes guessing their motives can be quite the exercise. With lefties, not so much. They tend to run from reliably predictable to utterly inevitable. When a lefty posted this story on (another forum) I knew that he didn't GAS about what Cain thought about the story - he was only interested in it because he saw in it the potential to embarrass his enemies. Several folks have stopped and looked, only one has bothered to reply.

I fully expect the OP to postscript a whiny "The 'outrage' seems to be a bit selective." supposedly meaning that the only reason we don't care is because it involves pubbies and not dhimmi's (Liberal Projection at its finest).

If you ask me, the whole idea of "Knock down the other guy instead of propping up your own" is pretty childish. The left appears to have it down to a fine science.

[IronDioPriest]

On a tangential issue:

Why is it offensive to use the actual word "n i g g e r" while it is perfectly acceptable to (verbally) say, "the n-word" or to spell it with an asterisk when everyone knows exactly what word is being alluded to?

Obviously, it is patently offensive to use that word as an expletive or a descriptor when referring to someone of the negro race. But I just don't see why it is acceptable to use obvious substitutions for it when the discussion is merely academic rather than provocative. In an academic discussion, where no offense is intended, it seems stupid and pointless to to use these PC terms which everyone knows are meant as thinly veiled substitutions for the actual word.

In this context, is not the mere "thought" of the word every bit as offensive and outrageous as the actual word itself? When someone uses one of these substitutions does anyone not think of the actual word itself? I know I do. It's impossible not to. So, given that premise, using the "n-word" is equally offensive as the word itself.

Or...put things another way: Would it be any less offensive to use "n-word" when referring (especially directly) to someone of the negro race? I think not. So that definitely brings the offensive use of the word back to intent and context.

I am much more concerned with what is in a man's heart than what words are issued forth from his mouth, especially when the word itself is the subject of an academic discussion. This is the crux of the whole "politically incorrect speech" nonsense that the left has forced upon us.

That is a good point. The forum software censors that word because I copied the censored words lists over from IAF, where such censorship was a requirement. It's not a requirement here though, and we ought to be able to discuss words here without being burdened by the political correctness that we all loathe.

As long as we don't get some new asshat running off at the mouth with nigger-this and nigger-that, I'll remove the word from the censored words list so that we can have an adult discussion without the burden of other people's unrealistic speech codes.

[trapeze]

As long as we don't get some new asshat running off at the mouth with nigger-this and nigger-that, I'll remove the word from the censored words list so that we can have an adult discussion without the burden of other people's unrealistic speech codes.

I am sure that we can deal with any abuse through normal moderator duties. But I don't really expect any abuse.

[Janny]

Yes, I agree that Cain was probably just being thoughtless and reacting in a knee-jerk fashion, rather than playing the race card, and I will give him a pass for this if he fesses up.

I am also very leery of Perry on immigration, but of course I will vote for him if he is the nominee.

[Delnorin]

In regards to the gentlemen stating his frustration of it being forbidden to acutally type the word Nigger in a report about said word...

I think of it as this...

Double-Plus-Ungood.

It's thought control and public manipulation.
2+2=5 Winston.

[jpatrickham]

Lets face it, no matter what Conservatives say or do, they will be considered Racists, Radicals, and just about anything else Liberals can pin on them. The reason, they own the Media. They don't own the vote, not yet, and soon, Liberals will be 'NOTHING' but a great big minority!

[IronDioPriest]

"Double-Plus-Ungood" - I like that.  

Welcome Delnorin.

[trapeze]

Yes, I agree that Cain was probably just being thoughtless and reacting in a knee-jerk fashion, rather than playing the race card, and I will give him a pass for this if he fesses up.

I am also very leery of Perry on immigration, but of course I will vote for him if he is the nominee.

I think it would be better if he said nothing more about it. If, however, he is baited with it at the next debate he can, having had the intervening time to think it through carefully, use it as a Sister Soulja moment against the media. Time will tell if he is that savvy.

[trapeze]

Barone is ready to believe that Cain is not a joke...

Cain claims that he could get one-third of the black vote in a general election. There's no way to rigorously test that.

But it finds some support in Scott Rasmussen's polls, which have been regularly pitting 10 current or possible candidates against Obama. Rasmussen finds Romney ahead by 2 percent and Chris Christie trailing by 1 percent. The other candidate closest to Obama, trailing by 5 percent, is Cain.

Moreover, Cain holds Obama to the lowest share of the vote, 39 percent, of any of the 10 Republicans. That may be because some black voters desert Obama when Cain is the opponent.

Further support can be found in the Low Country of South Carolina, where Tim Scott won with 65 percent of the vote in 2010 in a district where John McCain won just 56 percent and where 20 percent of the population is black. No other Republican freshmen in the Old South ran so far ahead of McCain.

All this speculation may be getting far ahead of the facts. Cain still has significant liabilities as a candidate and could make a disqualifying mistake any time. But he's beginning to look like a contender.

Somehow I have a feeling that no one will use the term, "dark horse candidate" in reference to Cain, though.

[Janny]

Yes, I agree that Cain was probably just being thoughtless and reacting in a knee-jerk fashion, rather than playing the race card, and I will give him a pass for this if he fesses up.

I am also very leery of Perry on immigration, but of course I will vote for him if he is the nominee.

I think it would be better if he said nothing more about it. If, however, he is baited with it at the next debate he can, having had the intervening time to think it through carefully, use it as a Sister Soulja moment against the media. Time will tell if he is that savvy.

I don't know ifi would be satisfied with that. I would rather that he clarify his comment and then leave it alone. I guess we will see what happens, as you say....

[trapeze]

Yes, I agree that Cain was probably just being thoughtless and reacting in a knee-jerk fashion, rather than playing the race card, and I will give him a pass for this if he fesses up.

I am also very leery of Perry on immigration, but of course I will vote for him if he is the nominee.

I think it would be better if he said nothing more about it. If, however, he is baited with it at the next debate he can, having had the intervening time to think it through carefully, use it as a Sister Soulja moment against the media. Time will tell if he is that savvy.

I don't know ifi would be satisfied with that. I would rather that he clarify his comment and then leave it alone. I guess we will see what happens, as you say....

He took the bait and was caught. Further talk on the subject only serves to more firmly set the hook. Again, he should wait for the media to make the next move. They will. Take it to the bank...ring bell, dog drools...they are nothing if not utterly predictable. When they do he can easily turn it on them and come out of it in a far better position.

Sure, it's wishful thinking on my part that it goes down that way but you gotta think positive in these things.

[John Florida]

Yes, I agree that Cain was probably just being thoughtless and reacting in a knee-jerk fashion, rather than playing the race card, and I will give him a pass for this if he fesses up.

I am also very leery of Perry on immigration, but of course I will vote for him if he is the nominee.

 How the hell do we separate the damned race card form the race?It's always just under the surface to be played at will. Alll I'm saying is don't let them stop you from voicing your thoughts the accusation will come anyway.

[ttomm46]

The thing that is really maddening about this interminable primary campaign is the way the Republican candidates keep attacking each other, instead of focusing on Obama and his destructive socialist policies.

Except hopefully someone will hit Romney on the 5 times he's been pro life then pro abortion..A real dork of convictions when convenient.!!!

[trapeze]

These Tea Party people in Illinois are really racist. Here are the totals from their straw poll:

10. Johnson 0%

10. Hunstman 0%

8. Obama 0.2%

7. Santorum 1.4%

6. Paul 1.8%

5. Romney 2.6%

4. Perry 3%

3. Gingrich 3.8%

2. Bachmann 9.4%

1. Cain 77.5%

(For reasons that no one understands, Cain was the only candidate to show up at this event)

You will also notice that Sir Golfsalot beat out Huntsman and Johnson. Any chance this could ace them out of the next debate?

Naww!!!

[charlesoakwood]

Possibly Cain wasn't addressing Perry at all. He could easily have been addressing the words on the rock.  The punks that throw the word nigger around and the group of negros who are genuine respectful human beings, that group feels pain from that word, are two distinct cultures. I think he was addressing the words on the rock.  

Some of our best candidates are making assumptions that we understand the context from which they speak (where they are coming from) the result is that the both of us are left with that old saw of "you know what an assumption does?"

Could it be that Cain's "misspeaks" are not so much a misspeak but an honest plain comment of the moment. This fresh thing we are completely unaccustomed to from politicians, something rare; therefore difficult to process.  They ask him a question and he answers it, bam, and it is a shocking straightforward rough honesty.  We are getting to know him better than any of the formulated and choreographed politicians.  May he maintain his honesty while improving his presentation.

Another dose of honesty:

AP
Cain tells "Fox News Sunday" that many conservatives won't support Christie once they find out about his views on global warming, illegal immigrants and gun control.

Politico
Herman Cain won't be supporting Chris Christie any time soon.

Cain told Chris Wallace on "Fox News Sunday" that the New Jersey governor is too liberal to run as a Republican for president because of past policies on immigration, assault weapons, civil unions and global warming.

"I believe that a lot of conservatives, once they know his positions on those things you delineated, they will not be able to support him," Cain said. "I think that that is absolutely a liability to him, if he gets in the race."

"Most of the conservatives believe we should enforce our borders. They do not believe people should be here without documentation. They don't not believe global warming is a crisis or a threat," Cain added. "Yes it might be a little bit out there, but they don’t see it as a crisis or a threat. And as you go right down the line, he’s going to turn off a lot of conservatives with those positions."

This is the greatest election season we have ever witnessed, we have good men and women competing for the job at one of the most critical times in our history and we are here.  May we do whatever we do best to bolster and help bring forth a positive outcome for the nation, for our families and for our friends.


  

[Pandora]

The Washington Post reported on Cain's remarks and then instructed on reaction.  Until I hear Cain expound his views, I take what the WaPo reports with a grain of salt.

The media defines the narrative, reports according to the narrative and then proceeds to rebut their narrative.

Could be Cain said what WaPo said he said; could be he misspoke; could be his words were interpreted according to the WaPo's views of how such issues are viewed.  Charles is absolutely correct that possibly "Cain wasn't addressing Perry at all. He could easily have been addressing the words on the rock" or "Could it be that Cain's "misspeaks" are not so much a misspeak but an honest plain comment of the moment".  We keep allowing the opposition to set the parameters of what is permissible, i.e. politically correct therefore "electable" vs truth in advertising.

We keep getting stuck in the "yeah, right, but will this turn people off?" even when what is said is truthful.

[Janny]

Yes, I agree that Cain was probably just being thoughtless and reacting in a knee-jerk fashion, rather than playing the race card, and I will give him a pass for this if he fesses up.

I am also very leery of Perry on immigration, but of course I will vote for him if he is the nominee.

 How the hell do we separate the damned race card form the race?It's always just under the surface to be played at will. Alll I'm saying is don't let them stop you from voicing your thoughts the accusation will come anyway.

I certainly agree that we should speak our minds, because the mischaracterizations will be the same regardless.

I would have had no problem if Cain had merely stated that the name on the rock was offensive, but he didn't stop there. He suggested that Perry didn't remove it soon enough, and that wasn't factual. He spoke without knowing all the facts and he stuck his foot in his mouth. I am concerned that this foot in mouth problem is a trend with him. The last thing we need is to have a candidate that speaks his UNinformed opinions, off the cuff.

[Janny]

Cain made the remarks on FoxNews Sunday. You can read about it here.

LINK