- cross-posted to:
- politics
- cross-posted to:
- politics
You must log in or register to comment.
deleted by creator
Okay, then why did you change your name from Nimarata to Nikki?
To be fair, Nimarata sounds like Nimrod which, thanks to Bugs Bunny, now means a stupid person. I’d probably have changed it, too.
Do you really think that’s why she changed it?
Of course not, but it’s why I’d change it
Nimrod was a mighty hunter. Bugs Bunny called Elmer fudd that because that was the opposite of what he was. Nimrod doesn’t mean stupid. Elmer fudd just was.
Such a good burn. Haley the randhawa punjabi. I wonder how many of her supporters even know she’s of Indian decent.
Sigh…as much as I really, really hate this dumbass, self-hating, pathetic excuse for a Asian, she didn’t change her name, Nikki is her given middle name.
She’s just a good ol’ fashioned white-passing minority that hates her own ethnicity and will sell out her heritage for a buck.
I don’t know what you’re implying. Also, you’re racist for asking the question. Over here in GOP-land, we don’t see color.
/s
Colbert made that joke for a decade and never once did conservatives realize it was pointed at them.
It’s actually racist to call someone racist
words are violence and this is just self defense
This is the best summary I could come up with:
In an interview on “Fox & Friends,” co-host Brian Kilmeade asked Haley whether she thinks the GOP is a “racist party.”
Drawing on her experience as “a brown girl that grew up in a small rural town in South Carolina,” Haley said she has experienced racism in the past but doesn’t want to raise her children to think they’re disadvantaged — a point she’s made before.
She added: “I don’t want my kids growing up where they’re sitting there thinking that they’re disadvantaged because of a color or a gender.
At a campaign event in recent weeks, Haley was asked about the cause of the Civil War, and she omitted any mention of slavery.
The discussion about racism came after Haley was asked to respond to a clip from an MSNBC host saying, “The elephant in the room, she’s still a brown lady that’s got to try to win in a party that is deeply anti-immigrant.
Haley responded by saying her credentials reveal the “American dream,” adding, “You can sit there and give me all the reasons why you think I can’t do this.
The original article contains 542 words, the summary contains 184 words. Saved 66%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
instead of teaching your kids that they’re disadvantaged by racism just let them suffer and think it’s their own fault if bad things happen to them :)
Haley: “The libs called it ‘slavery’, but I like to call it ‘job placement’.”
The prisoners with jobs…
Didn’t she say she was bullied for being** brown?
Yes according to the TLDR bot. Boy the mental gymnastics.
The constitution is quite racist. Has she never looked at the constitution? Oh right yeah, republican, she hasn’t. Hey Nimarata, they later famously had to add a whole amendment to add equal protection under the law regardless of race, after you know, that whole civil war thing.
It was hard to get dumber after her civil war comments, but she found a way. This is even more mental gymnastics than all that lost cause BS. Like holy crap, you can’t glance at any time period of American history without racism or its effects rearing its ugly head.
Race and color weren’t referred to in the constitution until the 15th amendment, which granted equal protection. You can argue parts talk about slavery in the abstract but could refer to any non-free person (prisoners for example).
Racism was institutionalized in many, many other ways but to say the constitution specifically is quite racist isn’t really correct, it’s more than race was left out.
Now the confederate constitution, that’s an example of won’t shut up about race.
I mean, Article 1 Section 2? The Three Fifths Compromise seems like it’s pretty race based to me. I suppose it probably doesn’t explicitly outline that it’s based on race, just enslavement status of the person, but that’s splitting hairs a bit, no?
Three fifths compromise was an attempt to determine how to count the population in terms of representation. Free men of any race were counted as a whole person.
Leads to the question, was it racist because a slave should be counted as whole person and thus give slave owning populations more power in government despite the fact that the slave would not have their representatives advocate for them? Or should they not be counted as a person at all and thus be reduced to property with no representatives accounting for their population? Is being in the middle any worse than the extremes?
There is no morally right answer on the subject (because slavery itself makes any decision on the matter inherently immoral), however it needed to be addressed in terms of how representatives are distributed to the states.
Do you really think they had white people in mind when they made the 3/5ths compromise?
deleted by creator
I’m aware it managed to avoid the specific word “race.” It still enshrined chattel slavery thanks to the fugitive slave clause, even though they deliberately avoided using the word slave. I’m also aware the 3/5ths clause is often misconstrued (was pushed for by the northern states not southern), but it’s a huge indication that it was generally understood that the rights enshrined by the constitution did not apply to people of other races and slaves and they were to be treated differently. Not until the 14th amendment were the benefits of the constitution and the law in general theoretically available to people of all races, though on a state by state basis sometimes people of other races got some rights prior to this. It ultimately is a compromise document between pro and anti slavery framers with varying levels of racist thoughts and opinions, as was common at the time.
Nikki Haley of course also ignoring the vast multitude of even more explicitly racist laws throughout all of the colonies. Heck even though Pennsylvania law didn’t mention race in regard to voting, black people there lost the right to vote in 1838 because of course when we say men in the state constitution we just meant white men not black (they didn’t get the right back until the 1870s). A document can still be racist without explicitly using the words race or slave, if that’s how everyone understands it.
And then there’s Jim Crow and that whole era, not to even get into more insidious manifestations where race isn’t explicitly mentioned but racist effects result (but that brings up critical race theory, the ultimate conservative boogeyman).
And yes the confederate constitution definitely dials it up to 11, agreed.
I know the constitution isn’t the perfect example, but I bring it up because it shows that racism was a part of the country from the beginning. Overall point is just that saying we’ve never been a racist country is a ridiculous statement no matter how you frame it.
What about the time we enslaved people who weren’t white for over a century and then almost split in half over it?
and then almost split in half over it?
She already said that wasn’t about slavery. She’s fucking nuts.
Nope, didn’t happen.
I will explain: Faux News never reported on it, thus it did not happen.
I only wish I could add a /s here, but instead all I can add is according to a certain POV. :-(
Then after that the segregation, lynching, shootings, fetishization, housing bans, zoning laws…
Really racist every step of the way.
I’d add the movement against reparations as well. So many studies have shown how various types of Jim Crow laws devastated black generational wealth in ways that won’t be fixed for a very long time. And still people think reparations are not owed since they weren’t recently enough a slave.
deleted by creator
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Really interesting when you look at the dates of those “it’s illegal to ride a horse on Sunday” laws…
Reagan could get away with using dog whistles. Trump said the quiet part out loud and now there’s no going back.
Cool, so I guess the Race Riots were incorrectly named, and segregation never happened. Phew!
That’s right. it was called Race Wars and was just a sweet car meet in the desert. Didn’t you see the documentary The Fast and The Furious?
As a counterpoint, have you seen gestures broadly?
'Merican here. The fuck we haven’t been.
She keeps trying to please everyone
While pleasing no-one
the title of my sex tape
That’s why I like Star Trek more than Star Wars
I don’t know, man… there’s a lot of racism in Star Trek. Think about how McCoy talks about Vulcans. Or how Riker has to learn that Klingons can laugh from being around actual Klingons.
Keep in mind that Republicans live in an entirely different universe. For them, sentences like that may actually make sense, how would people from good old earth know? And who knows, maybe their next big thing is “Unicorns are real”.
Slavery aside, you dropped a bomb on me.
