Racist Morons

Tim F. offers the “Deep thought of the day” that “any honest discussion of race will inevitably reveal that some people are honestly racist morons.”

The corollary, of course, is that there will be widespread disagreement on whose these people are.

For every Glenn Greenwald reader who thinks the description aptly fits Glenn Reynolds, there will be a Glenn Reynolds reader who thinks it fits Glenn Greenwald. Both groups, incidentally, will be mistaken.

FILED UNDER: General, ,
James Joyner
About James Joyner
James Joyner is Professor and Department Head of Security Studies at Marine Corps University's Command and Staff College and a nonresident senior fellow at the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security at the Atlantic Council. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm vet. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter @DrJJoyner.

Comments

  1. Hal says:

    Hmmm. Glenn Greenwald never said Glenn Reynolds was a racist moron. Rather, it’s you that is making that assertion. Actually, the assertion you’re making is that there are as yet unnamed readers of Greenwald that are making that connection.

    Nice use of the passive voice to do a “things are balanced” kind of argument seemingly designed to obscure the fact that Reynolds, undoubtedly, approvingly linked to a racist moron’s screed.

    Whether that makes Reynolds a racist moron or not is up for debate. Certainly, he’s a moron for doing it, racist or not.

  2. Christopher says:

    Actually, any honest discussion of race will inevitably reveal that Obama himself is a racist hatemonger, and electing him president of the United States would be a huge mistake.

  3. James Joyner says:

    Actually, the assertion you’re making is that there are as yet unnamed readers of Greenwald that are making that connection.

    Read the comments.

    Reynolds, undoubtedly, approvingly linked to a racist moron’s screed.

    No, he didn’t. He linked an Easter poem from a blogger who, in a separate post, wrote some things which might be reasonably called a “racist screed.”

  4. Hal says:

    Ah, that makes it all better now.

  5. Bithead says:

    Two words, Hal….

    Robert Byrd.

    When you’re ready to denounce everything he says, based on something he said in his past, get back to us. Until then, your’e applying a rather grotesque double standard.

  6. JoeMorgan says:

    From article:
    “…some people are honestly racist morons…”

    Remember, when the politically correct use the term racist, they simply mean white Gentiles who discriminate.

    It is a racial slur only seriously given to white Gentiles. Racist = honky, or honky-ish.

    So, the translation of the quote would be: “…some people are honestly honky morons…”

    Ask yourself, have you ever seen a movie or TV drama that depicts someone Jewish or nonwhite as a racist? Yet, you have seen probably 1,000s of movies and TV dramas that depict white Gentiles as a racist.

  7. Hal says:

    When you’re ready to denounce everything he says, based on something he said in his past, get back to us.

    Um, yea. Considering that Byrd, himself, has already denounced his past.

    Geebus, Bithead. I did some research on your past postings – hey, the internet never forgets. Interesting. But it’s clear this kind of whacked argumentation and so-called debate tactics are pretty standard for you. 15 years haven’t changed you, so I’m certainly not going to try any longer.

  8. Hal says:

    Ask yourself, have you ever seen a movie or TV drama that depicts someone Jewish or nonwhite as a racist?

    ROFLMAO. Victimhood: The New Right Wing Cause.

    I’m sure this is going to sell well.

  9. sam says:

    Actually, any honest discussion of race will inevitably reveal that Obama himself is a racist hatemonger

    Moron

  10. Bithead says:

    When you’re ready to denounce everything he says, based on something he said in his past, get back to us.

    Um, yea. Considering that Byrd, himself, has already denounced his past.

    I wasn’t asking about that. I was asking about YOUR reaction… as in will YOU denouce him?

  11. Bithead says:

    Oh… and I forgot… to apply this denouncement evenly, you must then denouce everything he’s said and done since then.

  12. Hal says:

    I wasn’t asking about that. I was asking about YOUR reaction… as in will YOU denouce him?

    Again, with the obsession with time traveling. Are you somehow making the argument that instapunk’s racist screed was something that he, himself, disavowed and is strictly an incident of the past which he has apologized profusely for?

    Didn’t think so.

    Really, your whole bizarro world “debate” is really quite terrifying -that you actually think your commentary is anything other than some surrealist performance art, and you operate a motorized vehicle.

    Seriously, dude, give it up. These kind of arguments you’re pushing aren’t even arguments. Children learn to see through this stuff by the age of four. That you think they’re still something to push is psychologically baffling.

  13. Michael says:

    I wasn’t asking about that. I was asking about YOUR reaction… as in will YOU denouce him?

    to apply this denouncement evenly, you must then denouce everything he’s said and done since then.

    That’s about the stupidest requirement I’ve ever heard.

  14. Bithead says:

    Again, with the obsession with time traveling. Are you somehow making the argument that instapunk’s racist screed was something that he, himself, disavowed and is strictly an incident of the past which he has apologized profusely for?

    Nice try at dodging the question. Somehow I didn’t figure on a direct answer.

    That’s about the stupidest requirement I’ve ever heard.

    Oh, I tend to agree. But isn’t that what’s being reuqired of McCain as regards Hagee?

    Oops, huh?

  15. Michael says:

    Oh, I tend to agree. But isn’t that what’s being reuqired of McCain as regards Hagee?

    Has Hagee denounced his past comments? Is McCain being asked to denounce any and all actions done by Hagee at any point in time? Short answer: no, it isn’t what’s being required of McCain in regards to Hagee.

  16. Clovis says:

    No, he didn’t. He linked an Easter poem from a blogger who, in a separate post, wrote some things which might be reasonably called a “racist screed.”

    No he didn’t. He linked an Easter poem from a different blogger who posts on the same blog.

    Kind of like if you were to be called a racist for something Alex said.

    That is where Greenwald’s dishonesty comes to the fore.

  17. Christopher says:

    Hal,

    So if someone is a racist (and democrat) (excuse my redundancy), but renounces their racism, then all is forgiven?

    Wow! It’s so easy! No wonder Omamessiah gave that speech! I wonder what happened to forgiving Don Imus? Imus said he was sorry but Omamessiah condemned him anyway. Oh well, I’m sure forgiveness must be forthcoming.

  18. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says:

    Comparing McCain’s relationship to Hagee as somehow equal that of Obama’s relationship with Wright is something only those on the left are capable of doing. Facts are irrelevant. Most of Obama’s close associates seem to have low opinions of the United States. From the fact that he grabs his crotch during the nation anthem to his doing a real estate deal with someone under federal indictment, twenty years attending Rev. Wright’s hater church. His wife’s never having been proud of this nation. Who the hell are these people? Just what is it we are suppose to believe or hope for. What is it they intend to change. There was a great speaker who had a promised change to his people. He brought WWII. Watch the Omen series before voting for Obama

  19. Hal says:

    Christopher: Yea, I remember my first beer, too.

  20. Hal says:

    Watch the Omen series before voting for Obama

    Now that takes balls. Comparing Obama to the Anti Christ has got to be up there in the top ten.

    In any event, I do wonder who you people think you’re going to convince with this stuff. The people on the left? You’re obviously deluded anyway so it’s a distinct possibility. People on the right who are never going to vote for Obama anyway? The only prayer is to sway someone who’s on the fence and I think you’re missing your meds if you think that claiming Obama is the Anti Christ is going to sway them.

    But hey, keep plugging away. It is damn entertaining.

  21. Bithead says:

    Is McCain being asked to denounce any and all actions done by Hagee at any point in time? Short answer: no, it isn’t what’s being required of McCain in regards to Hagee.

    What you’re avoiding, here, is that we’re being asked… no, it’s being demanded… that we disassciate ourselves from McCain, and discount all the man says, because Hagee Likes him, and McCain won’t denounce him.

    Funny what hapens when the same standard is applied to the left, though… And Zaelsdorf nails it, here.

  22. Michael says:

    Now that takes balls. Comparing Obama to the Anti Christ has got to be up there in the top ten.

    I believe he also compared him to Hitler, so can we just invoke Godwin’s law and call this thread done?

    And Zaelsdorf nails it, here.

    Appeal to insanity? Is that a new logical fallacy I wasn’t aware of?

  23. Hal says:

    Is that a new logical fallacy I wasn’t aware of?

    It’s just SOP here in Bithead land.

  24. Hal says:

    I really love it when the honest the angry white guys start whining.

  25. Michael says:

    EDITOR’S NOTE: This comment and several that follow refer to comments by a drive-by yahoo which I have subsequently deleted as spam.

    why do you think that we are this way
    it because we are tired of the you owe us
    bullshit i dint owe black people nothing
    and I’m tired of hearing every time i go some
    where thats all i ever hear you owe me or it because I’m black not it not because you black its because your getting a shitty attitude thats why were SICK OF HEARING IT!!!!! if you Had a better attuned you would get Lot further in life so LOSE IT!!!!!

    Who writes like this? The only punctuation used is multiple exclamation points, the casing is all over the place, even the newline formatting is inconsistent.

  26. Hal says:

    Who writes like this?

    Someone rather angry.

  27. Michael says:

    Someone rather angry.

    Since when does anger making spelling and grammar impossible? I’m forced to believe that this person’s deficiencies run far deeper than his current emotional state.

  28. Hal says:

    Well, perhaps. But when one is spitting mad, one usually has a hard time typing. Most people really can’t type in the first place, so this really only compounds an already nasty problem. Personally, I tend not to read too much into the ASCII, given that computers still aren’t really something that adapts to them, rather requiring a lot of skills that most haven’t picked up during their youth, such as typing. As to grammar, well, that is the US school system at work – superbly funded and just aching for vouchers, of course.

  29. Hal says:

    Okay, so much for the benefit of the doubt. He’s got deep seated issues and deficiencies. And most likely mother issues.

  30. Hal says:

    Spoken like a true gentleman.

  31. Michael says:

    Okay, so much for the benefit of the doubt. He’s got deep seated issues and deficiencies. And most likely mother issues.

    It seems he’s got some spam-filter issues too. Interesting that emails are sent out, even if the messages themselves fall into the spam traps.

    They don’t. I manually deleted them rather than have them further divert the discussion. I was away at a meeting and was therefore behind in policing the thread. – jhj

  32. Bithead says:

    Is McCain being asked to denounce any and all actions done by Hagee at any point in time?

    Pretty much, yes, if you think on it. Think a little wider spectrum, here….

    What are we saying when we tell McCain he’s got to disassociate hismelf from Hagee? That All of Hagee’s judgements are in question, and if McCain doesn’t disconnect himself from Hagee, that all McCain’s jusgements are similary suspect.

    I find that interesting, because Obama tried publicly… and not very forcefully… disagreeing with Wright on specific issues, and the Democrats lapped it up, and suddenly Obama was valid again. He’s no longer to be considered a racist.

    Do you suppose McCain would get the same treatment if he tried playing the same game with Hagee?

    I don’t either.

  33. Hal says:

    Geebus, Bithead. Where’s this mythical world where people are crying for McCain to denounce and deny Hagee? On lefty blogs? in comments? Where in the mainstream press has there been anything? Betcha can’t find even one. Where’s the major speech that McCain was forced to do, betting his political life on it?

    You really are a loon.

  34. Michael says:

    Pretty much, yes, if you think on it. Think a little wider spectrum, here…

    If you have to “think a little wider spectrum”, then the answer is “No, but…”.

    What are we saying when we tell McCain he’s got to disassociate hismelf from Hagee? That All of Hagee’s judgements are in question, and if McCain doesn’t disconnect himself from Hagee, that all McCain’s jusgements are similary suspect.

    McCain had no association with Hagee before Hagee’s statements were know. That McCain chose to associate himself with the man after those statements were known, and without disassociating himself with the individual statements, leads some of us to believe that McCain chooses to associate himself with those statements as well.

    Obama, on the other hand, was associated with Wright long before the particular statements in question were made. Obama has disassociated himself with those specific statements, while giving a (rather forceful, in my opinion) explanation as to why he is not disassociating himself with Wright completely.

  35. Bithead says:

    Geebus, Bithead. Where’s this mythical world where people are crying for McCain to denounce and deny Hagee?

    Then why bring it up?

    Obama, on the other hand, was associated with Wright long before the particular statements in question were made. Obama has disassociated himself with those specific statements….

    …. only after the matter became an obsticle to his atatining political power. See, that’s the weak spot in your argument. mccain hasn’t been sitting in Hagee’s church for 20 years, and enabling him by pouring his time, his talent and his money into the place, as Obama was.

    Obama’s half-hearted objection this far after the fact, don’t cut it.

  36. Hal says:

    Then why bring it up?

    Um, you really are delusional. WTF makes you say that I brought it up?

    WRT your other half baked argument, it’s comforting to see that you’re quite alright with political pandering to a catholic bigot and someone who has repeatedly said that God has damned America.

    Luckily, the rest of America has measured the arguments you’re making and declared bullshit.

  37. Michael says:

    only after the matter became an obsticle to his atatining political power. See, that’s the weak spot in your argument. mccain hasn’t been sitting in Hagee’s church for 20 years, and enabling him by pouring his time, his talent and his money into the place, as Obama was.

    How long after Wright’s statements became publicly known did Obama publically denounce them? How long after Hagee’s statements were publicly known did McCain enthusiastically accept his endorsement?

    Obama’s half-hearted objection this far after the fact, don’t cut it.

    I suspect you’re not looking for something that will “cut it”, but instead just trying to convince yourself that he is a bad person because of this, so you can justify your own dislike of the man.

  38. Bithead says:

    How long after Wright’s statements became publicly known did Obama publically denounce them? How long after Hagee’s statements were publicly known did McCain enthusiastically accept his endorsement?

    Oh, please. I suspect Hagee wasn’t even on Mccain’s radar. He certainly wasn’t on mine… and he wouldn’t be on yours, now, except for he endorsement, and the resulting background search for something to hang on Mccain. I’m no fan of Mccain’s, mind you, but this attack of yours was a horse, I’d shoot it; it’s lame.

    I suspect you’re not looking for something that will “cut it”, but instead just trying to convince yourself that he is a bad person because of this, so you can justify your own dislike of the man

    To the contrary; I’m still looking for one good Democrat. Been looking for 35 years, and have not found one yet, that stayed a Democrat for long. I thought perhaps Obama had a chance at it, but no.

  39. Michael says:

    Oh, please. I suspect Hagee wasn’t even on Mccain’s radar.

    If he wasn’t checked out prior to McCain appearing with him to accept his endorsement, someone in the McCain camp needs to be fired.

    I’m no fan of Mccain’s, mind you, but this attack of yours was a horse, I’d shoot it; it’s lame.

    I’m not attacking McCain for it, I’m just saying that there is a difference between associating with someone after the fact, and having been associated with someone before the fact.

    To the contrary; I’m still looking for one good Democrat. Been looking for 35 years, and have not found one yet, that stayed a Democrat for long. I thought perhaps Obama had a chance at it, but no.

    Heh, when every relationship you have goes bad, perhaps the problem isn’t other people.

  40. Bithead says:

    If he wasn’t checked out prior to McCain appearing with him to accept his endorsement, someone in the McCain camp needs to be fired

    If I’m not much mistaken, that’s been tended to.

    I’m not attacking McCain for it, I’m just saying that there is a difference between associating with someone after the fact, and having been associated with someone before the fact.

    I agree, and I’m suggesting there are a number of those differences you’ve not considered.

    Heh, when every relationship you have goes bad, perhaps the problem isn’t other people.

    Oh, not all. Just somewhat less than half.

    (think about it)

  41. Bithead says:

    How long after Wright’s statements became publicly known did Obama publically denounce them?

    I missed this first time;

    Why on earth would they need to be ‘publicly known’, as in releated by the press? He was sitting in the Pews, pouring his money into the place for 20 years…. and now, apparently only stands up for what’s right when his failure to do so threatens his path to power.

    Which was the entire issue with him on this.
    Think anybody gives a poop about Wright?
    (Well, you and I perhaps, but beyond that, few.)
    Bottom line is that this issue is about Obama’s chocies, and his mindset. And enabling this guy for 20 years… for whatever reason… strickes me as a disqualifier.

  42. Michael says:

    Why on earth would they need to be ‘publicly known’, as in releated by the press?

    For the same reason you don’t run to the press whenever someone you know says or does something stupid. Because there’s no point in telling someone you’ve denounced a statement they didn’t even know was made.

    Bottom line is that this issue is about Obama’s chocies, and his mindset. And enabling this guy for 20 years… for whatever reason… strickes me as a disqualifier.

    There were more people at that church than Obama and Wright, and Obama’s time and money went to help many more people, it wasn’t just to cover Wright’s salary. Seriously, haven’t you ever gone to church?