How is something like this even remotely possible nowadays?

[Steve Petersen]

We are all just too stupid to figure these things out.

We need to have referees to in order to recognize racism.

 

[DesertSky]

We are all just too stupid to figure these things out.

We need to have referees to in order to recognize racism.

OK, even if that were true, my point is, so what? Racism exists. It's not illegal. It's illegal to act on it in certain situations (work, etc.), but as bad as anyone may think it is, it's still allowed. The OP sounds like "how can anyone even think like this?" I can not like anyone for any reason. I don't need anyone's permission. If I run a business and people know my prejudices and don't like it, they don't do business with me. Simple. If I run for public office, they don't vote for me. But to question how this can even be, like the OP does, is just plain silly.

 

[skip_wiley]

Rule 319 of political debate: "Everything people in my favourite party do is completely justified if I can find just one bad thing people in the other guy's favourite party have done"

No. I never tried to justify anything. It doesn't matter whether you're a Republican or a Democrat, racism is wrong. Period. And, just so you know, I'm neither a Republican, nor a Democrat, so your "other guy's favorite party" comment doesn't work.

All I did was to point out that there is a precedent for electing people with dubious racial beliefs, and that it isn't limited to one party.

 

[skip_wiley]

I don't get all the kerfuffle....the guy's entitled to his opinion. If he's a public figure and people don't agree with him, he doesn't get elected. I'm weary of everyone having to toe the line for fear of offending someone.

Same here. It's no different to me than all of the liberals who have been calling us "intolerant" for all of these years, but now are freaking out because Christine O'Donnell says she experimented with Wicca when she was in high school.

I don't get the double standard.

 

[AirPo]

What liberal is freaking out because Christine O'Donnell says she experimented with Wicca?

 

[skip_wiley]

What liberal is freaking out because Christine O'Donnell says she experimented with Wicca?

Every liberal commentator I've seen on TV in the last week. It's a huge story, for some reason.

 

[AirPo]

I think you're confusing freaking out with laughing. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, which commentator?

 

[AirForceTeacher]

OK, even if that were true, my point is, so what? Racism exists. It's not illegal. It's illegal to act on it in certain situations (work, etc.), but as bad as anyone may think it is, it's still allowed. The OP sounds like "how can anyone even think like this?" I can not like anyone for any reason. I don't need anyone's permission. If I run a business and people know my prejudices and don't like it, they don't do business with me. Simple. If I run for public office, they don't vote for me. But to question how this can even be, like the OP does, is just plain silly.

It was a metaphor. I am just shocked that anyone today is still uneducated and / or prejudiced enough to hold this value.

 

[Belk]

No, I don't disagree with your assessment.

This is a difficult thread to post in because all the comments seem to be borderline fanatic. And I realize that I can come across that way at times myself, often because folks here don't know me very well yet and can't tell my sarcasm from my humor from my serious comments.

There are points this guy makes I want to defend, and there are points at which I want to say "Um...you're over on the dark side here, is that where you really want to be?"

Fair enough. And I do agree that just because some of a persons ideas are out there does not mean all of their ideas are wrong.

 

[skip_wiley]

I think you're confusing freaking out with laughing. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, which commentator?

OK. If you don't understand "freaking out", then I'll just say "making a big deal out of".

The bottom line is that it's hypocritical that people who call us intolerant and would never let the issue go if we said that you shouldn't vote for somebody because they're a homosexual, are now trying to make O'Donnell's "dabbling" in Wicca a campaign issue.

I don't see what the problem is. I thought liberals believed that we should respect all beliefs and religions.

Just for the record, none of them laughed about it. They all took it quite seriously.

 

[Pommer]

OK. If you don't understand "freaking out", then I'll just say "making a big deal out of".

The bottom line is that it's hypocritical that people who call us intolerant and would never let the issue go if we said that you shouldn't vote for somebody because they're a homosexual, are now trying to make O'Donnell's "dabbling" in Wicca a campaign issue.

I don't see what the problem is. I thought liberals believed that we should respect all beliefs and religions.

Just for the record, none of them laughed about it. They all took it quite seriously.

The liberals were agog over it since they're thinking "gee, one wonders how the Christian base is going to react to O'Donnell's history?"

The liberals don't care who is a Wiccan or Catholic or Jew or Muslim.

 

[AirPo]

OK. If you don't understand "freaking out", then I'll just say "making a big deal out of".

The bottom line is that it's hypocritical that people who call us intolerant and would never let the issue go if we said that you shouldn't vote for somebody because they're a homosexual, are now trying to make O'Donnell's "dabbling" in Wicca a campaign issue.

I don't see what the problem is. I thought liberals believed that we should respect all beliefs and religions.

Just for the record, none of them laughed about it. They all took it quite seriously.

I understand "freaking out" quite well. Which is why I asked, since I didn't see anyone "freaking out."

As far as what they were actually saying, Pommer explained it quite nicely. Unless, of course, you can point out where a liberal said you shouldn't vote for somebody because dabbled in Wicca.

 

[skip_wiley]

The liberals were agog over it since they're thinking "gee, one wonders how the Christian base is going to react to O'Donnell's history?"

Except that that's not what they said.

The liberals don't care who is a Wiccan or Catholic or Jew or Muslim.

They seem to care very much who's pro-life, though.

But if they don't care that she tried Wicca and rejected it, just as many of us in out TEENAGE years tried things and rejected them, then why is it such an issue for them? It isn't the "Christian base" that's talking about it, but liberals.

But anyway, that isn't what this thread is about.

 

[Ar Cosc]

If they have an issue with her trying out Wicca, then by definition, they're not really liberals.

 

[Pommer]

Except that that's not what they said.

Okay, I'll bite: What did "they" say?
Hint:A source would be nice right about now.

They seem to care very much who's pro-life, though.

Everybody has concerns...that's how politics works.

But if they don't care that she tried Wicca and rejected it, just as many of us in out TEENAGE years tried things and rejected them, then why is it such an issue for them?

One more time: It's not "an issue" for them, it might be used by O'Donnell's opponents by drumming the fact into O'Donnell's usual supporters.

It isn't the "Christian base" that's talking about it, but liberals.

Because they don't know how it all will play out, it's exciting!

But anyway, that isn't what this thread is about.

Uh huh. You made your points and "won", so you're done talking off topic, I see.

 

[skip_wiley]

Uh huh. You made your points and "won", so you're done talking off topic, I see.

There you go. You have the last word.