Bush is not a racist.

[mzmolly]

He is a classist!

George Bush nominated Condi Rice and Alberto Gonzales to two very notable positions. We can call him a racist all we like, but it's frankly ridiculous at this point.

Fact is they (Bush/Blackwell and others) supressed the POOR vote, not the Black vote perse'.

Blacks, Hispanics, Whites, Native Americans, Asians who don't have much money stood in longer lines to vote than their 'WEALTHY' counter parts.

We have to frame this issue as it is. We have to frame this in a way that "UNITES" people of all colors against the R's and their F-ed up agenda.

That's all I have to say folks.

Kick it and remember it's "Classism" stupid. ;)

[RPM]

1. only problem is that many people will ignore that accusation.

Many will:
1) falsely assume they are of a higher class than they really are (no one wants to be poor)
-or-
2) happily ignore the class distinction as they aspire to be of the higher class, someday.

It reminds me of the quote about law school grades: There are a lot more people in that class who say they got A's than there are people in that class who got A's. Class works the same way - 'everyone' wants to be upper-class, and if you don't you are a godless commie.

:eyes:

Show me wrong, but I think those are two high hurdles to clear; especially when most folks have a TV, couch, and enough to eat. Take those away, and class distictions become painfully pronounced.

[mzmolly]

2. I disagree, I think the people who stood in long lines might as well.

To call the man a racist at this point is not credible IMHO.

Bush's policies hurt the NON-RICH. That is something the average person can relate to. Most people don't consider themselves "WEALTHY."

It's a matter of educating the populous as to how they are effected by his classist policies.


:shrug:

[RPM]

12. Yes and no

I agree with you that the racist label, whether true or not, is inapplicable.

The problem as i see it is that it is awfully easy to feel "rich" by maxing out the plastic at the mall and making minimum payments. That's borne out, at some level, by the obscene proliferation of consumer debt in the last 20 years in order to maintain a growing standard of living that is impossible to have without a corresponding growth in real wages. As a result, many people feel as if they are rich - obviously not Bill Gates rich, but i would imagine that 50% of Americans believe they are in the top 25% as far as wealth goes.

Also, with those crazy "American Dream" and "each generation must do better than the last" mindsets, it becomes 'wrong' in the minds of some to hate the rich - they think (hope) that they will be rich someday, and you cant hate that which you aspire to...

Again I agree with you - it IS a matter of educating the people as to how they are effected by the classist policies. But I add that: in order to do that, you need to make many people realize something that they do not want to confront - that they are not as well off as they think, that they are essentially a wage slave, and that their dreams of top 5-10% wealth are unattainable. Only then will you get the $120k.yr mid-level manager (the worker in capitalist drag) to realize that his fate lies not with management, but with labor. Once that realization is complete, your point can be made and it will resonate.

Edited for spelling and missing words

[mzmolly]

14. Many poor people voted for * and they have no illusion of being wealthy.

Perhaps I travel in different circles? LOL

I think most people feel buried in debt and feel burdened in the Bush economy.

But it's good to have disagreement on this subject because we've perhaps found common ground.

We both agree Bush's policies are classist, the question is how do we educate people.

Dean started to discuss "voting in ones own best interest" and I think we need to demonstrate to people of all colors, HOW this is accomplished by supporting Democrats.

[RPM]

22. agreed

We may well travel in different circles, different observations will often lead to different results.

I think we are both dead on analyis-wise, but our analyses are targeted towards different groups.

I agree that many people feel swamped by debt and burdened by the current economic state - my town (Pittsburgh) has many people who are struggling to get by. Your analysis certainly addresses those people directly. They need to be made aware that Bush is waging a class war against them. They (particularly those in the "moral-values" voting block) need to be made acutely aware that by voting for bush they are sealing their own doom. Moreover, they need to be provided an out from the "moral high-ground". I am afaid that you may be setting yourself up for a fall by assuming that they are not "voting in their own best interest" - perhaps they have given up on their economic interest in this world (think "discouraged workers" who don't show up in unemployment statistics) and have decided that their only bet at comfort is pleasing God and getting into heaven. Perhaps that has become their (self-percieved) "best Interest" and best chance at comfort and freedom from burden. AS such, to win those people over, you must be able to provide them a dogmatic out (something like "vote for your life down here, live for your life up there").

My rationales are more suited towards the middle/upper-middle class manager who makes a tidy wage, but is still for all intents and purposes, labor. He thinks he is capital because he controls the use of it, but at the end of the day he doesn't own it. Nevertheless, he tends to vote red thinking he is an integral part of "big business". Ultimately he is not, he is still a wage worker, despite a tidy wage. He needs to be made to realize that he is more poor than he is rich. That may be hard to do with a cushy lifestyle, but that is the challenge with this red voter.

Turn both of these types of red voters blue, and the GOP is marginalized to the super-rich (top 10%) and the fundigelicals.

See - aint it great when we are both right! :-)

[mzmolly]

23. Indeed it is. For the record, I piss and moan about ceeding the

"moral high ground" as well. ;)

Now, how to address these folks we talk about ey? :hi:

[FreedomAngel82]

30. In many ways he is

And remember in 2000 and 2004 when they disinfranciesed voters in URBAN areas? :grr: In other ways he does appoint people of color and whatnot, but only because of their policies. He just gets whoever he wants to promote his agenda.

[NYC]

3. I think option 2 is the answer.

I've seen some of that with my own eyes.

2) happily ignore the class distinction as they aspire to be of the higher class, someday.

[mzmolly]

8. Than we must define "Class" as it pertains to this administration.

Give these fools the numbers.

[NYC]

9. Defining class to the deluded is a tough one.

Ever heard of genteel poverty?

[mzmolly]

11. It can be defined in a very clear manner via "tax cuts" and other policy.

;)

Calling a man a racist who has a record of appointing people of color is like chasing your own tail.

[NYC]

13. Do you know how many people think they got tax cuts when they didn't?

[mzmolly]

17. I sure do! That's one more failure on OUR part as Democrats.

This is part of the reason we have to call a fig a fig here and address the issue of classism head on.

If we continue to say we shouldn't address X because people are stupid, they will remain ... "stupid."

[NYC]

20. I never said don't address it.

I explain to people in careful detail what their tax "benefits" were.

[mzmolly]

21. But you did say it was "tough to explain to the deluded" I agree.

We have to simplify it if possible.

[NYC]

25. I don't think you can convince people that they are not of the class

they aspire to be.

People delude themselves intentionally. If you try to convince someone who is "above" the working class that they are working class, I think you will meet too much resistance.

Just convince them Bush & Co. are thieves, and they are the victims.

[mzmolly]

26. That's why we need to define what "classism" is.

WE can't toss about the word without defining EXACTLY that Bush represents a very SMALL percentage of the population.

I just think we need to expand well beyond the 'racism' argument is all. ;)

[NYC]

27. Racism was never the sole argument.

Bush is a thief.

[mzmolly]

28. Depends on who you ask.

If you think it's hard to convince people that Bush is classist, try convincing them of a stolen election.

However, my issue goes BEYOND this election. It's about his entire "mandate" ;)

[blondeatlast]

44. Start from the effect of a $500 car repair.

If it affects them for more than a month or two, those are the people Bush wanted disenfranchised.

It's easy to understand and gets to the heart of the matter.

[ncrainbowgrrl]

103. That's a really great way to think of it.

Thanks! :hi:

Mind if I use this line?

[KT2000]

6. Agree

I recall surveys that said - many more people assume they are part of the top 2% than there realy are.
The religious idea that "the special people" will be transported away also taps into that distorited thinking.
Maybe it is a package deal.

[blondeatlast]

43. "Working people" vs. "working class."

How hard are these people working for their TV, car, et?

And how devastated are they when they are faced with a $500 car repair? or medical bills?

[Fovea]

4. ** is a class warrior

He hates his sheep and he leads them to the slaughter any time he smells profit or power in it.

I am convinced he is the re-incarnation of Caligula.

[mzmolly]

10. One can only hope he meets a similar fate.

Note to homeland security, the previous statement was *of course* made in jest. ;)

[quiet.american]

5. You've got to be kidding!

Nominating those two identifies him only as an opportunist and a bigot.

[mzmolly]

7. Of course * I * agree, but the average American will NOT relate.

Alberto is a long time "friend" of George, Condeliza is also a long time friend of the entire family.

The Republican Party is doing everything they can to eliminate the perception of them being "racists" and I think they are doing a good job of it frankly. They have no issue with black 'wealthy' people, it's poor people of color they despise. And, poor people in general.

So as I said: "Classism" ... remember it and say it often. ;)

[quiet.american]

16. Try saying classism to "average folk" - see what kind of response you get

I understand your point -- however, if getting through to average, financially-challenged folk is the goal, respectfully, "classism" is not going to do it -- "welfare for the wealthy" is the "sexed-up" phrase I use to get the attention of folks around this concept. :)

[mzmolly]

18. This is why I'm mentioning this NOW. How can we properly frame this.

The word racism flies around her like water, and it won't hold much as it pertains to Bush.

So HOW do we educate the average bloak?

[quiet.american]

31. Still not sure "racism" doesn't stick to Bush --

However, I understand your idea of hitting more than one note --

Have you read "Don't Think of an Elephant"? It's worth taking more than one look at in terms of "framing."

[mzmolly]

34. I haven't read it but it sounds very interesting. I've read Lakoffs

positions and am impressed with his thoughts. Partly why I posted this thread.


Thanks for the recommendation. :hi:

[quiet.american]

35. You're welcome -- and the best part is, it's only ten bucks! :)

:hi:

[kaho]

40. bloke

[mzmolly]

58. Darn! I knew it!

Cloak ... bloke

Cloak ... Bloke

:freak:

Welcome to DU :toast:

[blondeatlast]

46. I still like the "war on work" or working people.

It's a start.

[mzmolly]

60. Excellent. "War on working people"

I love it!

[borg5575]

52. That's elitism.

You are intelligent enough to understand the nuances of all of this, but the average folk are not huh? That smacks of elitism to me.

Please give the average folk credit. They are as intelligent as you or I are and you shouldn't be talking down to them.

These average folk voted to elect both Gore and Kerry but we know what happened. It's not the fault of average people. They understand what's going on just as much as you do.

[mzmolly]

59. Interesting point.

:hi:

Welcome!

[jjtss]

15. I think G.Brish's hate for

the American voter goes well beyond the poor all the way through upper middle class. He has nothing but contempt for anyone and everyone outside of his narrow wealthy clique. He plays that race card like the great manipulator he is and sells those poor befuddled neocons the impossible dream while robbing us all.

[mzmolly]

19. Yes indeed Joan!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[blondeatlast]

47. Agreed. Reversing the "elite" meme would help address this.

Who are the real elites?

We can think of it this way--who is W willing to be physically close to?

It's the old, pre-election "Who would you rather have a beer with?" argument.

Just reverse it: "Who's willing to have a beer with YOU?"

[leesa]

24. He is a psychopath....many are equal opportunity murderers

[deadparrot]

29. What's wrong with both?

The man has scorn for anyone who isn't a white Christian m(b?)illionaire.

[mzmolly]

33. I think he is fine with colorful millionaires. How bout "Elitist" instead

of classist. ;)

[rumpel]

32. Yet, it is clear, the GOP as a whole, use ethnicity as "photo op", and

that to me is abuse of minorities.
On the other hand, their mind, it seems can not comprehend people regardless of race, who were not born with a silver spoon in their mouths.
Simply, they live in a world of their own.

[Bridget Burke]

36. He's never shown he cares for poor Whites....

Despite the fact they're the same race.

But the Republican party definitely uses racism to gain & keep power.

[MattG]

37. I don't think he's classist

I think he just don't give a damn and wants all the money for him and his rich friends.

[blondeatlast]

49. Well, um, how does that differ from classism?

Sounds to me like you defined classism.

[Kinkistyle]

38. Plantation owners had "House Slaves" too.

Just because they treated a few of them better than the others didn't make them any less racist did it?

[mzmolly]

61. Nope. But Condi gets a damn good salary for her work. I don't

consider that slavery.

[kaho]

39. ...road to nowhere...

...surely categorisation / stereotyping by "class" is doomed to failure.
Doomed because it is human nature to desire and attain opportunity and wealth. Hence the worldwide (perhaps excepting parts of Africa) phenomenon of increasing living standards.

Consider India, where the caste system still holds sway, caste there may well equal class, but who would doubt that over all, the people of India (and China) altogether totalling a quarter of the Earth's population, are benefitting from the modernisation and industrialisation of their country? and that caste and class differences are being eroded by a growing "middle class?"

Anybody using this site going hungry these days?

[Just Me]

48. It is spot on precisely due to human's desire to attain opportunity.

Moreover, classism is precisely what is happening.

With respect to your last question, there was a time when, but for the assistance of my family and friends, I would have gone hungry. We have well over 40 million citizens who are going hungry.

[mzmolly]

64. Indeed, 40 million ....

and growing.

[blondeatlast]

50. My husband's from India.

I can only say you are optimistically misinformed as to what's happening there.

[mzmolly]

62. Here here!

:toast:

[mzmolly]

63. So one has to be starving to understand classism? No I'm not going hungry

but I do feel the financial pinch * has put upon the working class. I also see the "will work for food" signs aplenty once again, just as I did in the Reagan/Bush years of the past.

These Republicans ARE classist. I haven't a bit of trepidation saying that.

[marcologico]

41. The GOP (and Bush) have used racist resentment for political gain ever

since Nixon rolled out his "Southern strategy" so I'd call them racists.

Incidently Rice and Gonzales are being exploited for their race just like Powell and Clarence Thomas were.

[blondeatlast]

42. Precisely. I've been saying this for some time now. nt

[Just Me]

45. Wow! My immediate reaction to your headline: "Bush is not a racist"

was precisely what you posted!!!

He is a "classist"!!! So are the neoCONspirators and most Republicans!!!

They are also pro-corporate republic rather than pro-democratic republic making them fundamentally ANTI-democracy.

[mzmolly]

72. Just trying to "frame" the debate in a more meaningful manner.

:hi:

Glad you got it. ;)

[marcologico]

51. Question: Why does the GOP disenfranchise black voters? Why did Bush file

an amicus brief AGAINST affirmative action in the 2002 U of Michigan case? Why has Bush refused to speak to the NAACP? Why has he been working since 1978 to take away the only pension most blacks will ever see? Why does he refuse to attend funerals of mostly black and latino Iraq war victims?

Because he gives a shit about blacks and latinos? I don't think so.

[mzmolly]

65. Bush hasn't attended any soldiers funerals to my knowlege.

And I agree his mentality is one of racism/classism. But, he makes exceptions for people in a certain "class."

Bush opresses POOR people, regardless of color.

[LibDemAlways]

53. When the chimp nominates

a couple of repuke tokens like Condi and Gonzales and then sends the troops out to tout their "rags to riches" stories at every opportunity and shout "racism" when Dems like Boxer question their policies, he is cynically playing the race card.

When I see repukes like George Allen, a card-carrying racist, heartily endorsing these nominations, I know it's all a smokescreen and that someone has assured him that Cheney is actually pulling the strings.

[mzmolly]

66. I agree, but the smoke screen is working so it's time to change the

terms of the debate.

[GetTheRightVote]

54. * does not care enough to be racist or classist, he only whats the money

though the end result is that the lower/middle classes get destoryed by his greed while the wealthier get more. This man is simply pure evil.

:kick;

[marcologico]

55. I'd call the "spreading democracy to the heathen Moslems" lie racist. n/t

[mzmolly]

67. So do I. But he's not bombing his rich friends in Saudi. He's bombing

the poor people of Iraq.

I agree the man is a racist, but he makes exceptions based upon class.

[robbedvoter]

56. BS! he's both. "I believe that people whose skin is different than ours

can self govern...
How many times does he have to repeat this patronizing BS for you to understand that not only does he think he's better than YOU , but he thinks he's a different species all together from people with different sking color? Does he have to congratulate them for walking upright, using opposable thumb or make love to trent Lott during the Coronation for you to accept it?

[mzmolly]

69. What?

You talkin' to me?

I don't defend Bush's "progressive" policies on this board.

I am making a point about changing the terms of the debate! It's apparently over the heads of many here?

I chose a "controversial" headline to open discussion ... that's all folks.

Classism will carry more weight, and will be far more difficult for Bush to weasel his way out of.

[robbedvoter]

74. But your "point" denies the fact that W IS RACIST.

Why do you have to frame your talking point in making light of his racism? It's there, it's despicable, try another pitch.
"Classism" doesn't even have any punch - although I do agree with your point.

[mzmolly]

77. I think W makes an exception for people of a certain financial stature.

Thus the point. If * was an all out racist, he'd not think Condi Rice or Alberto Gonzales "intelligent" enough to hold the positions that they do. He'd have appointed people of color to LOWER level cabinet positions.

We are not going to convince people that W is a racist when he has such a diverse cabinet.

That's why I prefer to frame the debate in the manner I have.

I see all the time "*" is racist. It's becoming laughable given his personal record of promoting P.O.C.

Here are the definitions according to dictionary.com:

Racism

The prejudice that members of one race are intrinsically superior to members of other races 2: discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of another race

classism

Bias based on social or economic class.

Bush has proven he's a classist, whether or not he's racist is "debatable" ... that's the point.

[Dr Fate]

76. Okay-so he screws over poor people of all colors...

...why are we congratulating him for that?

[mzmolly]

84. Good Gawd, I'm doing no such thing. I chose a thread title that would

grab attention so that discussion would take place. This isn't a Bush rah rah thread by any means.

It's a "frame this issue properly" or lose more elections type thread.

:hi:

[Dr Fate]

99. I know- I was framing the issue:

"Bush screws over the poor no matter what color they are-nothing to be proud of there."

Instead of "Bush is not as racist as the wacky left-wingers would have us believe."

[mzmolly]

100. Seems were on the same page.

My apology. :hi:

[mockingbich]

57. I totally agree - Bush has learned to play the RACE CARD

Look at the recent vote for Gonzalez

Bushco has figured out that they can put any non-white gestapo agent up for confirmation and have the Democrats roll over. Don't wanna be called a racist by the GOP do ya?! Especially in those 2006 election ads targetting the all important emerging hispanic vote

IN case you haven't noticed...The GOP is about to destroy the Democrat monopoly on minority vote.

[mzmolly]

70. Exactly my point! Thanks for "getting it" It's time to change the terms

of the debate.

:hi:

[robbedvoter]

75. Yeah, but "tokenism" doesn't negate racism. neither should we.

It's wrong and untrue.

[mzmolly]

79. Prove it's "tokenism"

That's the point.

Afterall, couldn't he appoint Condi Rice/Colin Powell to far lesser positions were they just tokens?

:shrug:

[marcologico]

68. How do you think the GOP has held the WH for the last 36 years,

Carter and Clinton (two Southerners) excepted? The Southern strategy, which also works in swing states by playing to white resentment of affirmative action.

[mzmolly]

71. Of course. And, he's managed to do that while promoting a black woman

to the highest diplomatic position in the world. Thus, calling him a racist is foolish. It requires much explaination and debate.

One doesn't NEED affirmative action if he/she has money. AA is no longer important.

Bush has tossed the racists a brand new "hate" bone. The "Towel head" bone, which of course trumps the American people of color bone of the past. The mideast is the new and improved racist love-affair.

It won't last, of course, but in the mean time, we have to change the terms of the debate.

[Zhade]

73. "George Bush nominated Condi Rice and Alberto Gonzales..."

Yes, as expendable scapegoats. What, you think he isn't cynical enough to scapegoat minorities when HIS ass is on the line?

He's a classist, but he's also a racist.

[mzmolly]

80. Couldn't he promote them to a lesser position if he were a racist?

Look, I think he's a racist, but I can't say for sure.

I do know for sure that he's a classist, and I think we need to frame the issue of his oppressive policies as such.

[marcologico]

82. Rice, Gonzales, Powell, and the rest are basically canon fodder.

The fact that they're minorities gives them extra teflon, but don't think they won't get tossed overboard if Bush runs into any heavy weather (like Powell and that black education secretary did).

[mzmolly]

86. See my post # 85.

:hi:

[marcologico]

88. See my post #87.

:toast:

[mzmolly]

90. See my post #89

:P

[Zhade]

104. Oh, agreed, it's better to go after him on the class issue.

But I do think appointing minorities to high positions of visibility where they will likely bring shame to the office could be a subtle form of racism on his part ("See, they just can't cut it, they're inferior.") as well as ass-covering.

[mzmolly]

106. Were he the type to admit error perhaps?

But since he's not, I don't think so.

As you know his cronies and all of his "followers" love his wars and all the ill that this administration has imposed. :(

[niblick]

78. classist?

That's a new one for me. The president is just surrounding himself with like-minded people, which is what we want him to do, right? He'll live or die (politically) with the bed he makes, as it is with every politician.

[mzmolly]

81. He has "classist" policies.

Welcome to DU!

classism defined:

Bias based on social or economic class.

[marcologico]

83. What's the point of "reframing" racism as classism? To let Shrub off the

hook? That's Rove's job, not ours. He's racist, he wins elections by exploiting racism, he's learned how to race bait by exploiting minorities, I say call him a racist.

[mzmolly]

85. Call him what you like. But we'll lose the argument unless we eliminate

their obvious "out."

Like it or not, Bush and his cronies CAN make a GOOD case against his being a racist. They can NOT make such a case when it comes to class.

Blacks/hispanics voted for Bush in larger numbers than before:

http://www.nola.com/national/t-p/index.ssf?/base/news-0/109981466277200.xml

In Ohio, according to exit polls conducted by the National Election Pool, Bush won 16 percent of the black vote, up from 9 percent in 2000.

David Bositis, an analyst of black politics at the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, calculates that if Kerry had won black votes at the same rate as Al Gore, he would have gained 55,000 that instead went to Bush, a net switch of 110,000.

Kerry was trailing Bush by 136,000 votes in Ohio when he conceded, having concluded that counting the more than 100,000 provisional ballots couldn't change the outcome. With those additional 110,000 black votes, Bositis said, the identity of the next president might still be in doubt.

Bush scored a similar gain with black voters in the battleground states of Florida, where the 13 percent contributed to his comfortable victory, and in Pennsylvania, where Democrats were able to absorb the 16 percent and still win.

We can keep on calling Bush/Neo-cons racist, and keep losing elections in the process.

After all were the ones who look condescending and perhaps "racist" if we continually perpetuate the "Rice and Gonzales are too DUMB to realize they're being used" meme.

[marcologico]

87. The way I see it, the only thing we'll lose is more minority voters.

"Reframing" reality into bland platitudes is their game, and they're winning it. I don't see the point of playing.

[mzmolly]

89. "The only thing"

Minority voters basically DECIDED the last election.
We can't afford to cede any voters.

They played and WON, and as for me ... I'm taking notes. ;)

[marcologico]

91. Nopity.

White women decided it. They were the only sector that increased their share of Republican votes from the '00 election.

But we ARE losing minority voters, no question.

[mzmolly]

92. Were losing "women/hispanics/blacks/ etc...

We need to bring ALL of them back into the fold, and add a few white dudes in the process.

"Classism" ged it? ;)

[marcologico]

93. "Classism" is a polite diversion. "Racism" is honest and has firepower.

I say use the big guns, we need them!

[mzmolly]

94. "Classim" covers all bases, and brings necessary issues to the forefront.

"Racsism" sounds tired and desperate. And, as I said it's a bit tough to make a case against W when it comes to "racism."

Classism can not only bring new people into the fold, but open up a dialogue that helps recover some of the voters we lost in 2004?

[marcologico]

95. "Classism" is how they WANT us to reframe their racism.

Why play their game? So they make it harder for us to call them out. Tough, we still have to do it if we want to win. If we call them "classist" we might as well call gutting SS a plan for "ownership."

[mzmolly]

96. I couldn't disagree more! They would FEAR us framing the issue as such.

Tell me they're not eliminating the perception of "racism" already.

You don't think Rove is prepared for the "racist" label?

They don't fear being called racist, trust me, they welcome it!

However, they can't make a good case against Bush's classist policies because they are crystal clear.

[marcologico]

97. "Classism" sounds about as fearsome as "classicism," which most people

probably think it is. "Racism" is a lot clearer. And they aren't any less racist than they were a generation ago. They're just better at it.

[mzmolly]

98. We'll have to agree to disagree.

:shrug:

I'll educate people as to what classism is if need be, and I guarantee you that 100 years ago we'd be hard pressed to find any party appointing black women to positions of power. :hi:

[kaho]

107. ..I totally agree...

..."class" labels, ie, classism, classist, class- consciousness even, is replaying by Marxist rules. It's a dead end street. Nothing would suit the opposition better.

[DemDogs]

101. Racism shows at the lower income levels

How does he treat a poor white vs. a poor black?

[mzmolly]

102. Basically the same.

Like doo doo.

[ComerPerro]

105. Hey, I agree

Of course, I have a whole different, more modern definition of racism, which I have built by noticing the views held by people around me.

I won't go into it here, but it involves "I hate black people, but only ones that don't act or think like I do". For example, I know people who are very polite and respectful to minorities, but will turn around and make generalized derogatory comments about "niggers" and Mexicans.

By that definition, I feel that Bush is a racist.

He also fits my definition because I think it really says something that he is trying to make a big deal out of his appointments. If he really didn't see skin color at all, why would we be hearing so much about how Bush is the "first to appoint a black SOS".

But you are right. Its more calssism than racism.

[Hippo_Tron]

108. Agree 100%, Bush isn't a Christian fundie either

It's all a vote getting act. The people in the administration are actually educated and don't give a shit about "family values" or "southern pride" or probably even affirmative action for that matter. It's all about getting the votes of bigots and fundies.