Michelle Obama plays the reverse race card archived

As soon as those words parted her mouth, I knew she would be in trouble. Take her comment and spin it for ill gain if you wish. Everyone knows with a thinking brain that is NOT what she meant. I told my children the evening of the election, "I never thought in my lifetime I'd see a President of color. I'm so proud of this country and so happy that you guys are here to see this." Would I be thrown under the bus for my comment? Being proud of my country for finally being able to listen to and decipher rhetoric from fact was prideful. I was proud of the fact that people in my country were not afraid of the Left Wing Boogey Man coming into their homes via tv and radio, talking about the Scary Obamas using their Koran, snake oils, African beads and voodoo in order to put a spell on all of us. It would be laughable if it weren't so sad.

The Obama's are indeed the American Dream. Aren't they what Right Wing Conservatives want from all of us? Hard work? Families/parents who guide and uplift? Great grades leading to stellar college educations? A vision of the future and a determination to get out there, work hard and grab the gold?

You can detest his policies, but really, you must be fair. He did everything the RIGHT way. If you cut off his head and replaced it with blond hair, blue eyed man, that individual would be the shining example of wonder in our country. That's the thing that upsets me the most. Some in this country still think that even when Blacks have "made it", somehow, we've either received special treatment, cheated or stole a spot from someone else.

elspeth said:

Source; MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell, Monday, January 16. Also, I guess you won't take my word for it, but I heard Bill O'Reilly say that.

"Angry woman," or "Angry Black woman?"

rastro said:

elspeth said:

Source; MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell, Monday, January 16. Also, I guess you won't take my word for it, but I heard Bill O'Reilly say that.

"Angry woman," or "Angry Black woman?"

"Angry woman."

O'Reilly's Defense Of His "Angry Woman" Comment About Michelle Obama Falls Flat
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201201130001

Here’s a good read on the topic.

Michelle Obama Was Right to Call Out Angry Black Woman Stereotyping

While some members of the public take issue with the first lady playing the so-called race card, I have little doubt that the certain attacks she's faced have racial overtones. Consider the 2008 New Yorker cover illustration that featured Mrs. Obama with her hair styled in Afro, wearing army fatigues with a gun slung over her chest as she fist bumped her husband. Barack Obama is depicted in Muslim dress but unlike his wife is not depicted as a militant. Her Afro, gun and clothing on the New Yorker cover link to the black radical movement of the late 1960s and '70s.

The New Yorker cover isn't the only time Michelle Obama has been depicted as an angry black woman. In 2008 as well, radio shock jock Rush Limbaugh circulated a rumor that Mrs. Obama had been videotaped using the word "whitey" at church. No such videotape existed but the point was clearly to portray her as a black woman resentful of whites. Limbaugh was also likely trying to add fuel to the fire of the Jeremiah Wright controversy, which Jodi Kantor helped keep aflame via her reports in the New York Times.

http://racerelations.about.com/b/2012/01/13/michelle-obama-was-right-to-call-out-angry-black-woman-stereotyping.htm

Thanks Phenixrising.

And of course, the New Yorker cover was an illustration satirizing all the various Obamas as militant-muslim-feminist-terrorist memes that were in circulation already.

No, it was a leftists fantasy of the mindset of its opponents. Says more about that mindset than anything else.

Have you noticed that it's only white people who claim racism doesn't exist and that racist attacks don't happen? And it's only white people who claim color-blindness (Every black person I know rolls their eyes at such claims, for good reason).

That's a (reverse) race card statement. So there you go again.

Zoinks said:

That's a (reverse) race card statement. So there you go again.

And I'm happy with the statement as it stands, no matter what idiotic label you try to put on it. My statement is true. Sorry if it hurts.

Look, Zoinks, we've already logically destroyed your position on the existence/nonexistence of racism. You never even tried to refute the argument -- you just walked away from the discussion for a few days, then came back spouting the same fantasyland nonsense.

You have done no such thing.

That's a long way from a refutation. And you forgot to add "nyah nyah nyah nyah" to the end, too.

It starts here. There is racist intent, it is meant to be harmful, there are people understand it that way, and it reinforces their bias.

Nothing you have produced is anything more than fringe elements and/or talking heads talking about possibilities, with a dash of mis-heard statements thrown in.

We've got Rush Limbaugh calling her "uppity." He's not fringe, is he?

Is "uppity" a race? Sorry, never heard of that one.

We've been over all these citations, too. You're just pretending we've forgotten.

Zoinks said:

Is "uppity" a race? Sorry, never heard of that one.

Do we really have to unpack this for you? Either you're new to this country and language, or you're playing dumb. Either way, you're not proving anything, and you're only trashing whatever credibility you have.

Zoinks said:

Is "uppity" a race? Sorry, never heard of that one.

You've got to be kidding me.

Zoinks types remember the Constitution but they never remember history.

Zoinks said:

Is "uppity" a race? Sorry, never heard of that one.

Of course you're just fcuking with people here and that shows a real lack of respect for others' ideas. I don't think I've ever heard the word "uppity" without its being followed by "ni$$er." I'm surprised you didn't ask for a citation.

GL2 said:

Zoinks types remember the Constitution but they never remember history.

GL2 said:

Zoinks said:

Is "uppity" a race? Sorry, never heard of that one.

Of course you're just fcuking with people here and that shows a real lack of respect for others' ideas. I don't think I've ever heard the word "uppity" without its being followed by "ni$$er." I'm surprised you didn't ask for a citation.

According to tom it was used alone. So I guess you are incorrect.

People, we're beating a dead horse here.

Truly, he's not worth arguing with anymore.

Let's all agree that, just like "uppity" has no meaning, none of the words he uses have any meaning either.

tom said:

Let's all agree that, just like "uppity" has no meaning, none of the words he uses have any meaning either.

Count me in.

Zoinks said:

GL2 said:

Zoinks said:

Is "uppity" a race? Sorry, never heard of that one.

Of course you're just fcuking with people here and that shows a real lack of respect for others' ideas. I don't think I've ever heard the word "uppity" without its being followed by "ni$$er." I'm surprised you didn't ask for a citation.

According to tom it was used alone. So I guess you are incorrect.

You don't need the noun. It's understood.

gibberellin said:

People, we're beating a dead horse here.

Satirizing his point of view, what do you mean we're beating a dead horse? I don't see any horse at all here, let alone a dead one. I'm guessing it's some kind of metaphor, but unless it has a connection on the receiving end it doesn't mean anything! And since it might not mean anything, obviously you didn't mean to say anything, either.

As I said, I never heard the word except as it's meant by racists. The fact that you don't need the noun attests to the "code" aspect of the word. Ever hear of "connotation." Your defense, as always, is based on denotation, which avoids cultural baggage; i.e. history.

tom, you might ask gibberlin for a citation explaining the death of the horse.

ala Zoinks