Why not? That same mentality worked on the O.J. jury, didn’t it?

They’re down to exactly one reason: Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden, campaigning in North Carolina where black votes could help swing the state to the Democrats, said today that electing a black person to the White House would be……

voting for a white person because he is white is DIFFERENT than voting for a black person because he is black.

If you believe that its only the results that count, and not the manner in which they are achieved, then you are unprincipled.

If your goal is for the social body to retain its cohesiveness, then I don’t see how you could support a Jim-Crow-like, separate-but-equal, one-set-of-expectations-for-whites-and-another-for-blacks kind of attitude.

For the record, I don’t find anything offensive about voting either for or against a person based in part on race. I believe that there are certain circumstances in which race can legitimately be viewed as a sort of short hand or proxy for a variety of issues that assume tacit knowledge of social values and mores. For example, as Miwok, I’m more likely to vote for another indian of any tribe for practically any office because I’m pretty sure I know what their position on gaming policy and a host of other issues important to me and my family will be.

Obviously, you also believe that it is acceptable to discriminate on the basis of race, as long as the beneficiary is non-white. That is unprincipled.

You apparently hold whites to a higher standard than non-whites, as though only whites are capable of recognizing shared interests other than those that are based on race.

Why do you have such contempt for non-whites?

One is an attempt to maintain power inequalities while the other is an attempt to create more equality.

So if given the choice between Condi Rice and Joe Biden for president…

I do not consider the latter to be racist.

I’m at pains to see why not.

Perhaps you might provide us with a non-contradictory definition of racism?

Is a person sexist if they vote for Palin because she’s a woman?

Yup.

There are many swing voters, including many former Hill-dog supporters, who will cast their vote for Palin based on one very superficial characteristic, just as much of the progressive base will cast their vote for obama based on some other superficial characteristic. The relevent question is, are there more of the former or the latter?

Don’t fret. There will be many voters who will vote against Palin because she’s a woman. But then, there will also be a couple of people who vote against obama because he’s black. Again, the relevent question is, are there more of the former or the latter?

Politcs is an ugly business.

#106 bluesoc said:

For this reason, voting for a white person because he is white is DIFFERENT than voting for a black person because he is black. One is an attempt to maintain power inequalities while the other is an attempt to create more equality. I do not consider the latter to be racist.

So you are advocating affirmative action for elections? The totally arrogant assumption that you are floating here is that whoever is in power ABUSES that power according to their skin color, (so you think we need more blacks in office to abuse things the other way for ‘balance’ … what a wonderful ~idea~ /sarc). Such is generally not true at all, (unless you count liberal welfare which has enslaved urban blacks to always vote democrat to keep getting their handouts).

I NEVER think of myself as a ‘white American’ and the sooner black democrats REJECT the liberal lie and stop thinking of themselves as victimized ‘black/Afro Americans’ and start thinking of themselves proudly as Americans, (and hopefully also then become conservatives once they see the truth in it as many conservative blacks have already managed to do despite the extra high piles of liberal crap they have to endure – such as Clarence Thomas for example), – the better off we’ll all be for it.

On September 15th, 2008 at 6:35 pm, bluesoc said:

Quick question to anyone who wants to respond: Is a person sexist if [he or she] vote[s] for Palin because she’s a woman?

I think so, yes. If is a tie-breaker factor, and it’s one of a number of factors, then it might be legitimate. It is analogous to what Fineous Reece said above about race, “just because” (regardless of any other factor), is racist; voting for a woman just because she is a woman is sexist.