- Dave Brockington
- Paul Campos
- Erik Loomis
- Robert Farley
- SEK
- Scott Lemieux
- Website
- CV
- Blog Posts
- Blogroll
- Whiskey Fire
- Unqualified Offerings
- Well Timed Period
- The Talking Dog
- The Sideshow
- The Mahablog
- The Comics Curmudgeon
- SCOTUSblog
- Sadly No
- Rob Neyer
- Puck Prospectus
- No More Mr. Nice Blog
- Making Light
- Julian Sanchez
- Hit and Run
- Hendrik Hertzberg
- Glenn Kenny
- Faux Real Tho
- Charles Pierce
- Carrie Brownstein
- Balkinization
- Alicublog
- ACSBlog
- 11D
- My Other Blogs
- Dave Noon
- DJW
-
-
Recent Comments
- BillWAF on County Results in 1884
- MikeJake on Husky Onesies
- James E. Powell on Eisenhower
- DJK on Eisenhower
- A Children’s Treasury of Asshole Centrist Reactions to Cory Booker’s Asshole Centrist Comments « Look At This Fucking Centrist on Cory Booker Has an Ally!
- R Johnston on Cory Booker Has an Ally!
- Walt on Eisenhower
- Chris Marcil on Eisenhower
- L2P on The Contraception Lawsuit
- orygunian on Husky Onesies
-
Recent Posts
-
Tags
2008 campaign 2008 democratic primary 2012 Republican Primary afghanistan barack obama baseball bloggingheads books cats china civil liberties constitutional interpretation constitutional law environment food football foreign policy free dahlia lithwick gay and lesbian rights hacktacular health care hillary clinton human rights iran i see dead people kentucky labor libya military procurement movies music NCAA football nonsense nukes Obama administration reproductive freedom russia Sarah Palin soccer Straight-Talkin' Maverick John McCain Supreme Court the arbitrary executive The War On (Some Classes of People Who Use Some) Drugs wingnuttery Yuck the Fankees-
Meta
-
Awards
Paul Campos, Above the Law 2011 Lawyer of the Year
Erik Loomis, HNN Cliopatria 2011 Best Series of Posts
-
Friends of LGM
Get free advice on Law
Enter an top online casino where gaming is taken to the next level. Experience over 130 titles for pure casino action and fantastic site promotions.
Spin the Reels and enjoy the cash-filled at these top no deposit casinos.
Contact
For administrative, advertising, or other inquiries, please e-mail here.-
Advertisement
Try your luck at the best online casino with games like slots, video poker, or play blackjack online with all the fun of a real casino.
LGM Store
Advertisement
Archives
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- November 2004
- October 2004
- June 2004
-
blogroll
I really hate it when Obama critics say racist things. I can’t only imagine what black people think and feel.
I agree that this would be racist if Moore (or Bill Maher) were making it as a statement of fact. But they aren’t. Do you really think that they actually voted for Obama expecting him to act like a black stereotype?
The statement is a criticism of Obama wrapped in a joke about racial stereotypes. I don’t think its a particularly funny joke but YMMV as they say.
This same analysis applies to TNC’s Jewish accountant example. As a Jew, I would only consider that example racist if the person making the statement really thought he was in good hands because the accountant was Jewish. If he is saying it in a way that makes it clear he didn’t actually believe it, then it becomes a moderately amusing joke (again YMMV).
On a related point, I really think we would drastically improve race relations in our society if we were a little more forgiving of people who make statements that can be construed as racially offensive. Such people (whether they be Michael Moore or a member of the Tea Party) are never given the benefit of the doubt or even an opportunity to explain, clarify or apologize.
Do you really think that they actually voted for Obama expecting him to act like a black stereotype?
When I used to not mind killing an hour watching Bill Maher, he would regularly say things about how “Chocolate Jesus” needs to go “full black” on everyone.
.
This. There has to be a difference between being aware of the differences that are sometimes characterized (incorrectly of course) as “racial”, such as color of skin and cultural background, and speaking of those differences, versus being “racist”. At some point a line is crossed. This incident does not cross the line. Calling it a racist comment devalues the term. It’s like making the idea of rape equivalent to the act of rape.
Although I had no high hopes for Obama, based on his support of FISA, I did hope he would have an attitude more in line with his life experience, which includes being half black. Like Moore, I am disappointed that he has behaved too much like Bush/Bernanke/etc. One way to express this is with a joke, and jokes rely on stereotypes. And, since it’s a joke, you are meant to know that stereotypes are being used. You’d have to believe that Moore was not joking to believe the comment is racist.
This.
He’s saying Obama is behaving in “white” way. Do you think it’s racist to call him an Uncle Tom?
It’s also saying a biracial person has a black half and a white half — a disgusting proposition.
I do agree that context matters: if this had been a comedy routine, it would have played differently. There would have been a way this joke could have been used to riff on stereotypes and perhaps make fun of stupid disappointed liberals who looked at his race as opposed to all the other available evidence and conclude he was a liberal. but that wasn’t the case here.
What’s your point?
You’re the one who is disgusted and, BTW, you’re the one characterizing this as “biracial”. It’s no different than calling the child of one parent without Tay-Sachs genes and one with Tay-Sachs genes “biracial”. Skin color is not a scientific marker for race – in fact, I’d like to hear a good definition of race. Haven’t yet. We’re all one race.
And, this is a perfect example of somebody stating a pertinent fact and having it called ‘racist’.
What “fact” did he state?
Race is socially constructed. That doesn’t mean it’s not real.
The value of the dollar is socially constructed, too. You can pretend that isn’t real, too, if you’d like. The people without enough dollars, like the people who you think don’t actually belong to the black race, can assure you that those things are very, very real in their lives.
yep. abl’s hissy fit and attention-starved antics have more to do with moore’s perceived lack of support for obama than his obvious, white-sheet deep-seated racism. i mean, it’s obvious that moore is the worst person who ever lived and thank the gods we have a vibrant, original thinker like abl to illuminate us to this universal truth.
coates and the others justifying her nonsense should know better.
You know, just a thought:
If you’re not black, and you frequently find yourself responding to black people’s statements that they find something racially offensive or uncomfortable by insisting that no, they really don’t feel that way, they’re just making it up – YOU’RE PROBABLY WRONG.
Oh good lord. ABL is black. Therefore, she is the voice of all black people?
I remember reading at the Black Agenda Report something about Dennis Kucinich being the “true brother” rather than Obama. But then again, her defenders, who fall over themselves demonstrate that they are not racists would probably label those bloggers “Uncle Toms”.
And, what to make of Toni Morrison’s famous assertion the Clinton was the first black president?
Perhaps you should make more of an effort to expose yourself to the voices of black people, because your impression that this reaction is unique to ABL could not be more wrong.
You’ve clearly never read her, or her comment threads, in your life.
Just a heads up: she goes into fits of rage over people using the term “Uncle Tom” every couple of months.
um..no. Never heard her get mad when Cornel West was labelled an Uncle Tom.
I’ve read her enough to see that only the personal is political with her.
I cannot take her seriously.
I read her posts. She has her loyal defenders and her detractors. Her defenders seem to have a strong authoritarian streak.
I really don’t know anyone (and by “anyone” I don’t simply mean “black”)like her. It is difficult to take her critique seriously because I just cannot separate it from her constant kneejerk defenses of Obama.
Yes, well Moore did go all out for Obama in 2008, so there is that.
On the other hand he is assuming that a black man will act in a way that is more like Martin Luther King because he is black, rather than say like Barry Goldwater.
So assuming that a person will act more like a racial stereotype, even though that stereotype is kind of a compliment, if you think in stereotypes is racist. But it is a long way from Sepin Fetchit.
Now this is a better critique of Moore’s statement.
It only becomes a moderately amusing joke if you know the person who is the subject is cool with you making that joke.
Otherwise, it boils down to using his race as a way of insulting him – of dragging the issue of his race into an insult.
do you know what an insult is? race or being butt-ugly or dumb as a rock are often used to insult people. it’s usually not nice, but cheap comedy is the rosetta stone of human civilization.
As a matter of fact, I do know what an insult is.
An insult is an ugly thing mean to wound and demean.
And you think it’s just peachy to bring race into such territory?
We get it; you agree with Moore’s insult of the President! You think it’ wicked awesome to do that!
Fine. It’s still best to leave race out of it.
Except that’s not comedy…it’s racism. It might be funny to you, but it’s racism.
I watched the clip and while Moore was critiquing Obama’s presidency in a decidedly non-racial manner Joy Behar asked him if Obama’s race affected his presidency (specifically, was Obama concerned about being perceived as an angry black man), Moore’s answer to this included a quote of Maher’s glib line. So the way I see it someone else brought race into a discussion that had nothing to do with race, and Moore deflected the question by quoting someone else, and now he’s a racist because context never matters anymore. He’s fat tho, and thus a fair target I guess.
I’m not really sure why you think that context puts Moore in a more favorable light. How does his offering up the offensive and racist comment in response to an inoffensive if shallow question somehow make it OK? Or, to put it another way, do you really think “someone else bringing up race” somehow renders him immune from criticism for racist nonsense?
you can’t really prove your point by using conclusory adjectives. I could just as easily call the question “offensive and racist,” and the answer “inoffensive if shallow.”
Well, sure, that’s the neat thing about language–you can say just about anything! That doesn’t mean it makes sense.
I’m pretty sure you’re not actually as clueless as you’re pretending to be, but to spell it out just in case: the Maher/Moore line traffics in racial stereotypes that have a deep historical connection to some of the dominant racist narratives in our national history. The question “How has race impacted (Obama’s) presidency?” does not. In fact, I retract the “shallow” comment–it may have been a random pivot and thus poor interviewing technique on her part, but taken on its own, its a perfectly reasonable and serious question to ask, given the deep and ongoing significance of race in our society. Historians will be asking this question for decades to come. There’s no shame in deflecting it if it’s not something you’re interested in, or have a good answer for. Using it as an excuse to repeat a creepy racist joke is a pretty serious lapse in judgment.
He’s not a racist. He said a racist thing.
I resent the connotations about white people that Moore is expressing here.
Having actually watched the clip on the View, and not merely relied on Angry Black Lady’s synopsis, I really think to call out Moore as being “racist” is taking the least charitable interpretation of his remarks possible. OK, shame on Moore for having said something that lends itself to a racist interpretation at all, I guess. But what he says as his explanation of the statement is that he thought the election of our first African-American President was an historic event that would usher in historic change, and what we got was more of the same. If you’re inclined to take a charitable, non-racist view of that, then I think the idea that electing someone from a community historically excluded from the privileged class in this country would tend to produce significant changes is hardly a radical notion. And thus the disappointment that what we got instead was the “white guy” — i.e., policies that favor the traditionally privileged classes.
I mean, sure, you can believe, as ABL (and apparently Scott) does, that Moore was really hoping for the “gangsta” in Obama to prevail over the “white” part of his identity. There’s absolutely nothing in what Moore said that suggests this was his meaning, but I guess you’re free to read that into it. Just don’t pretend it’s so clear, please. I think Moore, for all his problems, has probably earned the benefit of just a little doubt.
But what he says as his explanation of the statement is that he thought the election of our first African-American President was an historic event that would usher in historic change, and what we got was more of the same.
Yeah, except it’s not 1968 and we didn’t select a black guy at random who it turns out kinda thinks the Panthers are on to something.
I saw that movie! And Mel Brooks had a cameo!
You could at least pretend to have read what she wrote.
She very clearly said that Moore made a racist statement, not that Moore’s a racist, and she very clearly drew a distinction between the two.
Sometimes smart people say dumb things with highly racist connotations. If they apologize for a careless choice of words and make a good faith effort to understand why what they said was racist and to not do it again, then maybe they’re just people who said some racist shit. You move on and let it go unless a significant pattern develops.
If, on the other hand, they get all defensive about it, keep repeating the same bullshit, and don’t even bother trying to understand the problem with what they said or to otherwise learn from their mistake, that’s when maybe they’re just racists.
This.
I’m sick of the George Bush “How dare you judge mah heart?!?” dodge dragged out every time someone who says something with an unintended, but unfortunate, racial connotation has the problem pointed out to him.
“Whoa, that was not what I meant. I phrased that badly. My bad.” It’s really not that hard. You don’t have to insist that there’s absolutely no way your joke about the tap-dancing watermelon could ever be construed in any way other than you intended, and that it’s the blackest of insults to your honor for anyone to point out the obvious.
The flip side of “Sometimes people say dumb things, but that doesn’t make them bigots,” is “Having it pointed out that you said something dumb isn’t an accusation that you ride with the Klan.”
Except it wasn’t a tap dancing watermelon. It was a comment that implied that he expects a lot more from a man who comes from a group that has a background of being treated badly to put it mildly. And he is disappointed that he is acting like a member of the ruling class.
…because black folks should never be so uppity to think they belong in the ruling class. Is that what you mean? Don’t want to go imputing racist tendencies where none are intended, y’know.
So that’s how it works.
You totally dodged the question.
Let’s cut to the chase: you, and Moore, are imputing a defined set of beliefs as the only ones black people are allowed to have.
And, by extension, white people as well.
Actually, that isn’t what I said at all, if you had bothered to read above as well as this comment.
Essentially it is a stereotype to think of a whole race as more noble than another whole race. Which is exactly what Moore was implying with the statement. Which is why it is a joke, although not a very good one.
But then Joe we know that those who criticize Obama are always wrong and according to ABL always racist. No matter how much they supported Obama in 2008.
Yeah, we get it. Nobody is confused about Moore’s point.
A little heads up for you: DON’T DO THAT.
That is as stupid a comment as any I have ever seen Joe.
The point is that people who come from oppressed backgrounds are assumed to identify more with the oppressed rather than the oppressor. It therefore, is disappointing when they get power and throw that power behind the oppressor. And that is what Obama has done. And every time someone points it out you have to rush to attack them.
Let me add something here. I worked and voted for the guy because I thought he would represent the interests of the poor and middle classes, not be a bag man for Wall Street. One of the reason I thought that was because the guy is black and comes from an oppressed class/race.
If that makes me a racist then so be it. I will not make that mistake again.
I remember the consternation when Hillary Clinton was in the process of crushing Obama in the West Virginia and Kentucky primaries. Nobody could possibly win the presidency if Appalachian hillbillies didn’t support him! As a result a lot of people who look the guys in the picture accompanying Erik’s Pittston post were interviewed on tv. One of them said he was voting for Hillary because this country treated the blacks so bad for so long he was afraid what they’d do if they got in power.
Knowing the candidate, was that a reasonable thing to worry about? How does that man’s line of thinking differ from yours?
never rely on what abl says. she’s very much like bill maher: much more interested in the attention than anything else.
this.
(i’ve always wanted to make a comment like this!)
“But what he says as his explanation of the statement is that he thought the election of our first African-American President was an historic event that would usher in historic change,”
If he thought that based solely on the fact that Obama was a black man…it’s racist! for exactly the reason Ta-nehisi articulated.
I suppose if Alan Keyes had been our First African-American President he would have ushered in even greater historic change, since he’s a lot darker than Obama.
Why? Because you like his ideology?
Do people not remember back, oh, about ten years ago when a British columnist reported that Moore “joked” that 9/11 happened because the airline passengers were all white, and thus scaredy cats? That if black people had been on the planes, they’d have fought back and beaten up the puny terrorists?
Matt Yglesias just today says we should elect more women, because women, especially college-educated women, are more progressive.
By the same logic, Moore and I, since blacks are among if not the most reliably progressive Democrats, at a 90% ration, honestly expected a progressive black President rather than an Eisenhower Republican in Democratic guise.
To add to Moore’s point, white males are the most conservative demographic. So I think Moore was being accurate and honest, and not racially stereotyping at all.
Now, bring up Keyes and Clarence Thomas and refute me
In my dreams Obama is an Eisenhower Republican.
Make that a Reagan Democrat.
I have about given up on the fluffers on this blog. Make Ezra Klein look like Emma Goldman.
By the same logic, Moore and I, since blacks are among if not the most reliably progressive Democrats, at a 90% ration, honestly expected a progressive black President rather than an Eisenhower Republican in Democratic guise.
If I recall your statements during the primaries and election correctly, you in fact had no expectations that Obama would be progressive whatsoever. If you thought he would be progressive, why were you a Clinton supporter?
I was an Edwards supporter, and voted for him in my primary.
After he was implausible, I kept vacillating between the lesser of evils.
i realize that i’m late to the discussion, but no one should have had any expectations that obama was anything but an updated eisenhower republican.
what demonstrated it to me beyond question was when he made a point in the spring of 2008 to return from campaigning to vote for fisa-violation immunity for the telecoms. some of his strategic and tactical choices have surprised me since them, but not his essentially moderate/conservative status-quo friendly nature.
I’ll just add: you don’t have to accept the description of “Eisenhower Republican” for this argument to make sense.
There is plenty of room between “progressive Democrat” and “Eisenhower Republican.”
I spent the 2008 general election describing Obama as a “squishy centrist,” and I haven’t been surprised by his ever-so-slightly-left-of-center governance at all, either.
By the same logic, Moore and I, since blacks are among if not the most reliably progressive Democrats, at a 90% ration, honestly expected a progressive black President rather than an Eisenhower Republican in Democratic guise.
Then your “logic” was based not on what Obama had said and done up to his election, but rather on the color of his skin. Because there was nothing remotely “progressive” about Obama’s record or rhetoric.
From the beginning I thought he pretty much oozed DLC-style third-way Clintonism out of every pore. Nothing that’s happened since has disabused me of that impression.
I figured he was sandbagging so he could put a bunch of old “Weathermen” into the cabinet.
No, not really. But I did think that there might have been some image-conscious self-censorship by Obama so as to be more palatable to the establishment. It doesn’t help Democrats to go hard-left in the primaries like it helps Republicans when they go hard-right. Democratic money doesn’t come from the extremes, it comes from the middle.
I don’t know that we’ll ever know where Obama stands, other than to the left of at least 41 Senators and 218 representitives, and that he doesn’t believe in reducing his own power while he’s president.
I was wondering what slot Bill Ayers would get, myself.
His professional background would seem to make him a natural for Secretary of Education.
But I understand he’s also done some work at the Pentagon.
Ba-boom! Nice one.
“Matt Yglesias just today says we should elect more women, because women, especially college-educated women, are more progressive.
By the same logic, Moore and I, since blacks are among if not the most reliably progressive Democrats, at a 90% ration, honestly expected a progressive black President rather than an Eisenhower Republican in Democratic guise.”
Um…no. Not at all. In part because that’s not what Yglesias said at all.
“In part because that’s not what Yglesias said at all.”
Liar
“And as it happens, most of the people with progressive ideology are women. This is particularly true among people with college degrees.” …MY
You mangled the argument. It was as follows:
P1. Political talent is presumably equally distributed among men and women.
P2. Women are disproportionately progressive.
C. Therefore, in any random collection of progressives, there will be more women with poltical talent than men.
You could, of course, apply this to blacks as well, although you would have to correct for the fact that women and men are approximately equally numerous and whites and blacks aren’t.
Right, but you have it backwards. Yglesias was saying that because women are objectively more likely to hold progressive views than men, progressives need to get them more involved in politics to deepen their potential pool of good candidates.
He wasn’t saying you could be forgiven for thinking Michele Bachmann would be the most progressive President ever because she’s a woman, or calling Bachmann a man because she isn’t a progressive.
Assuming individual people will be the median of their demographic is pretty much the definition of stereotyping.
Isn’t Michele Bachmann a college-”educated” woman?
If Moore were to apologize, I could believe he didn’t mean to be racist and just sort of garbled a one-liner. Of course, this comes in the wake of throwing his arms around Assange and defaming his accusers, so maybe there’s something of a pattern here.
No defending Maher though, he’s just a giant tool in every respect.
Moore makes great points most of the time, but he does have a tribal tendency towards allies. I wonder if this has anything to do with how much he gets shit on by his erstwhile political allies for “attitude” or “egotism” or any of the other right-wing talking points.
Maher is kind of like watching an air cannon filled with offensive objects going off: funny until you get hit with it.
No, in addition to being misogynistic et. al., Maher is also very much unfunny.
I’m not sure he averages as high as one laugh per monologue with his own audience.
maher and abl have lots in common.
you have to give maher credit though. he’s turned his brand of low-effort shallow political humor into a career.
And you’ve turned it into comments on a blog.
He and Norm MacDonald should go have a beer. With Adam Sandler.
Given the fact that Moore felt the need to peddle his book on such an embarrassing venue as The View (and even more disorienting, probably sat in Cheney’s warm spot), I believe his comedic discretion was rendered powerless by the unrelenting nature of Behar and BaBa WaWa and he was unable to resist the urge to banter in a shallow, simplistic manner. As powerless situations go, I think he conducted himself as well as he possibly could under very trying circumstances. It’s not as if his hosts wanted a serious discussion or were open to something more substantial. Put in its proper perspective, his comment was a harmless one and does nothing to detract from his record as our greatest left wing documentarian since Paul Strand.
It is not at all clear to me what separates The View from any of the myriad of other silly-ass talk shows that people peddle their projects on.
The joke is a pretty common one, but it does have racist connotations.
It reminds me of that episode of The Office when Michael starts a pick up game is shocked and disappointed with Stanley’s performance.
The Obama isn’t “acting black enough” seems to be a debassed version of the Obama isn’t using the bully pulpit argument. Personally, I like it when people in politics are able to remain calm and collected even under the most streneous circumstances. Its at least some evidence that the won’t panic and do something really disasterous in a moment of judgment under stress.
Just based on the excerpted statement, I thought that “the black guy” was Obama and “the white guy” was McCain.