Corporate Insurance Whore Harry Reid also racist.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Washington (CNN) -- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid apologized Saturday for making racially insensitive remarks about Barack Obama during the presidential campaign.

Journalists Mark Halperin and John Heilemann reported the remarks in their new book "Game Change," which is scheduled to be in bookstores Tuesday.

The authors quote Reid as saying privately that Obama, as a black candidate, could be successful thanks, in part, to his "light-skinned" appearance and speaking patterns "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one."

"He [Reid] was wowed by Obama's oratorical gifts and believed that the country was ready to embrace a black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama -- a 'light-skinned' African American 'with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one,' " Halperin and Heilemann say.

"Reid was convinced, in fact, that Obama's race would help him more than hurt him in a bid for the Democratic nomination," they write.

In a statement to CNN, Reid said, "I deeply regret using such a poor choice of words."

"I sincerely apologize for offending any and all Americans, especially African Americans for my improper comments.

"I was a proud and enthusiastic supporter of Barack Obama during the campaign and have worked as hard as I can to advance President Obama's legislative agenda," the senator from Nevada said.

Reid pointed to his efforts to integrate the Las Vegas Strip and the gaming industry, among other legislation favored by African-American voters.

"I have worked hard to advance issues important to the African American community."

The senator called Obama Saturday afternoon to apologize for the racially insensitive remarks.

"Harry Reid called me today and apologized for an unfortunate comment reported today," Obama said in a statement.

"I accepted Harry's apology without question because I've known him for years, I've seen the passionate leadership he's shown on issues of social justice and I know what's in his heart. As far as I am concerned, the book is closed."

Reid, who waited to formally endorse Obama until after the tough presidential primary battle ended in 2008, is facing an uphill re-election fight this year in his home state.

Good riddance to bad trash, and all that. He is a closet racist, if one of those patronizing "Oh, I want to look out for the poor darkies" type, and of course his record in the Senate with refusing to implement a liberal agenda is very well established, here and elsewhere. But this shows you what is, a racist old arrogant white man, just like the members of the party he nominally opposes.

[The Romulan Republic]

I honestly don't see how these remarks make him a racist. Politically incorrect perhaps, but that Obama being, in Reid's words, a fairly "light-skinned African American" and so on may have helped him seems perfectly plausible to me. Unfortunate, but plausible. I'm interpreting it as "a darker guy would have more trouble winning" as opposed to "a darker guy would be an inferior candidate/President/person." If anything, Reid is pointing out racism here, not endorsing it.

Of course, I look forward to the GOP trumpting this as proof of Reid's racism while continuing to shamelessly pander to the racists in their own base.

[The Romulan Republic]

Edit: deleted accidental double post.

[wolveraptor]

^I agree. It's absolutely true, especially within minority communities, that light skin is preferrable to dark skin. I don't know if it's due to some sort of inferiority complex or whatever, but it's undeniable.

He's also right about Obama's accent, though he's idiotic for referring to it as a "Negro accent". Having a thick accent, no matter what your race, isn't going to help you win any popularity contests, except in certain specific demographics.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I just don't see anything ethical in the way he approached it--the context of his comments might be mitigating, but the way he phrased them seems to address a background of casual racism.

[Anguirus]

Sounds more like a craven political animal than a racist. Hell, that exact phrase might have been dropped in my sociology class during a frank discussion of what it would take to get a black candidate elected to high office.

I don't see a value judgment in that phrase. Obama's light skin and ability to "sound white" almost undoubtedly helped him get elected. I don't like it anymore than you do.

[Axis Kast]

I don't see a value judgment in that phrase. Obama's light skin and ability to "sound white" almost undoubtedly helped him get elected. I don't like it anymore than you do.

I agree.

I agree. It's absolutely true, especially within minority communities, that light skin is preferrable to dark skin. I don't know if it's due to some sort of inferiority complex or whatever, but it's undeniable.

The "preference" for light skin is, in part, an outgrowth of the phenomenon of "passing" in societies which practice racial slavery and/or segregation, whereby light-skinned persons with African or Indian blood could pass themselves off as white by leaving the immediate communities of their birth (where they were often the illegitimate offspring of rape), and the influence of an aesthetic values system imposed by a dominant white culture over the course of hundreds of years.

[spaceviking]

Interestingly enough this has been seen in traditional American black colleges in the past where said colleges would exclude darker skinned blacks from attending, using the brown paper bag test.

[Patrick Degan]

The divisions between light skinned/dark skinned African-Americans goes right back to colonial times, particularly in French and Spanish domains in which mixed-blood children gained a measure of legal recognition unavailable to ordinary plantation slaves and often received manumission for themselves and their children as well as a small share of the estate as inheritance. Free persons of colour —gens de couleur— could own property, conduct business and trade, received a higher standard of education, and were able to go unmolested in colonial society. These distinctions did confer a higher status, socially and economically, than darker skinned blacks who were outright slaves or even those who managed to somehow purchase or win their manumission. On the plantation, the lighter-skinned blacks were most likely to be the trusted house servants rather than the darker-skinned field hands and would receive better treatment and more privileges.

Being light enough to pass for white was very important in the worst days of segregation, of course. But even for those who were not light enough to manage that, the distinction was still all-important simply because of the perception of a superior blood inheritance and because, even under Jim Crow, such lighter-skinned blacks were likely to enjoy a higher socioeconomic status than darker-skinned blacks, who were more likely to be lower class day labourers, and would face exclusion even within the structure of segregated society. To give an example: in New Orleans in the old days, an African-American who couldn't pass "the bag-test" —i.e. having skin at least as light as a Schwegmann's paper grocery sack— would have zero chance of admittance to exclusive clubs, fraternities, church congregations, carnival societies and mutual-aid organisations run by lighter nonwhite creoles.

[Ritterin Sophia]

It may not be meant to be malicious, but he's still making a judgement based on skin tone and racial stereotypes, it's still racism. So, whilst he might not be Imperial Wizard of the Imperial Klans of America, he's still a racist.

[Lord of the Abyss]

It may not be meant to be malicious, but he's still making a judgement based on skin tone and racial stereotypes, it's still racism. So, whilst he might not be Imperial Wizard of the Imperial Klans of America, he's still a racist.

He's making a judgement about other people's reaction to skin tone and stereotypes, which isn't the same thing. Admitting racism exists isn't racist. Would saying "the Klan won't like him because he's black" be a racist statement, or an accurate one?

[SirNitram]

It's a damn stupid thing to say, but we've known for years now Reid is not the sharpest killing instrument in the armory.

Then again, to prove some people are intellectually bankrupt, the GOP is now comparing a dumb comment about appearances to a lifelong proponent of segregation. Link

Top Republicans called for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to step aside Sunday — and accused the Democrats and the media of holding the GOP to a double standard on matters of race.

In an interview with POLITICO, National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn (R-Texas) said it would be "entirely appropriate" for the Nevada Democrat to relinquish his leadership post over comments about Barack Obama's skin color and lack of a "Negro dialect."

And like Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele and Senate GOP Whip Jon Kyl — both of whom also called for Reid's resignation Sunday — Cornyn suggested that any Republican who said what Reid said would be under attack from Democrats, leading African-Americans and the media.

“There’s a big double standard here,” Steele said during an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

“What’s interesting here, is when Democrats get caught saying racist things, an apology is enough. If that had been [Senate Minority Leader] Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) saying that about an African-American candidate for president of the president of the United States, trust me, this chairman and the [Democratic National Committee] would be screaming for his head, very much as they were with Trent Lott.”

Lott lost his leadership post in 2002 after saying that the country would have been better off if Sen. Strom Thurmond — a segregationist — had been elected president in 1948.

The comments — or at least the interpretations of them — were obviously different: While Lott words could be interpreted as a call for the continuation of racial segregation, Reid's were not an argument for race-based policies but rather a characterization of racial attitudes among voters today.

Still, Steele said: “There has to be a consequence here if the standard is the one set in 2002 with Trent Lott.”

Kyl (Ariz.), the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, echoed Steele’s complaints about a “double standard” for Democrats.

“I agree with Michael Steele's comments that there is a double standard,” Kyl said on Fox News Sunday.”

“If [Lott] should resign, then Harry Reid should. If they apologize and you know what is in their heart, my feeling is they shouldn't. But in this case, [Reid] should.”

Nevada Republican Sen. John Ensign relinquished his leadership post last year after admitting that he had an affair with a staffer, but neither Kyl nor Cornyn has called on him to give up his Senate seat.

In the day since Reid's comments were first reported, the majority leader has reached out to black leaders for support — and gotten it.

Reid called Obama on Saturday to apologize to the president directly for his statement, made during an interview for the new book, “Game Change.”

The book quotes Reid, who backed Obama’s candidacy, as saying that Obama is "light skinned" and "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one."

"Harry Reid called me today and apologized for an unfortunate comment reported today,” Obama said in a statement released on Saturday. “I accepted Harry's apology without question because I've known him for years, I've seen the passionate leadership he's shown on issues of social justice and I know what's in his heart. As far as I am concerned, the book is closed."

House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.), the highest-ranking African-American in Congress, came out in support of Reid, as did Nevada Senate Majority Leader Steven Horsford, the top black pol in Reid’s home state.



Al Sharpton, the vocal civil rights leader who has inserted himself in the middle of many of the biggest racial fights over the past 25 years, said that while Reid “did not select the best word choice in this instance,” the Nevada Democrat should not be forced to step aide.

And D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, a Democrat and an African-American, is warning Republicans against trying to make hay out of Reid’s comments.

The nonvoting member of Congress said Reid's opponents “will not find a welcome mat in the black community” if they try to seize on the Nevada Democrat’s remarks.

Reid has also reached out to Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus and other influential African-Americans, including Donna Brazile, Julian Bond and Wade Henderson.

With top African Americans supporting Reid or saying nothing, he has been able to avoid — up until this point — having the furor become a full-fledged media firestorm.

“The difference between Lott and Reid is that Democratic members of Congress are not calling on Reid to step down, especially CBC members,” said a GOP insider involved in the Lott scandal. “That’s what drives the media. Is he safe or not safe? But if members are not calling on [Reid] to step down, that won’t drive the media.”

Reid’s office quietly circulated talking points over the weekend on the majority leader’s record on racial issues and social justice.

Reid’s aides said the majority leader “has always been a friend to Nevada's African-American community, and as Nevada families struggle in these difficult times, his leadership is needed now more than ever.” They highlighted Reid’s support for the $787 billion economic stimulus bill, health care reform, expanded college loans and HIV/AIDS funding, all of which were key issues to minority groups, as well as his high career ratings from the NAACP.

In addition, Reid backers pointed out that Reid has run an internship program for the past five years with Howard University, a leading black college in Washington, D.C., designed to provide more diversity in Senate staffing.

Lott came under fire in December 2002 after saying, at a birthday celebration for Thurmond that his home state of Mississippi had supported him in1948 and was "proud of it."

"And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either," Lott said.

Unlike Reid, Lott initially refused to apologize for his comments, which were seized on by the blogosphere and by Democratic critics, including the then-chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Terry McAuliffe.

While Obama quickly put out a statement backing Reid, the top African-Americans in the Bush administration, Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, did not publicly back Lott, despite private pleas from the Mississippi Republican for help. Then Education Secretary Roderick Paige, an African-American, also refused to support Lott.

Although Lott went on Black Entertainment Television to try to quell the furor, his appearance was unsuccessful in stanching the outrage. President George W. Bush and other top White House officials, as well as his Senate GOP rivals, including former Sen. Bill Frist of Tennessee, seeing an opportunity to bring Lott down, did not publicly back him either, and Lott ultimately resigned his leadership post. Frist then took over as majority leader.

Lott was reelected to the top ranks of Senate Republicans four years later, before he resigned in 2007 to become a lobbyist.

Ah, hypocrisy.

[Darth Wong]

The authors quote Reid as saying privately that Obama, as a black candidate, could be successful thanks, in part, to his "light-skinned" appearance and speaking patterns "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one."

"He [Reid] was wowed by Obama's oratorical gifts and believed that the country was ready to embrace a black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama -- a 'light-skinned' African American 'with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one,' " Halperin and Heilemann say.

Oh for fuck's sake, this is just a matter of semantics. You could express the exact same sentiment with more carefully chosen words and no one would accuse you of being racist.

For example: "I believe Barack Obama is uniquely positioned to be successful in this campaign because he is so articulate and well-spoken, thus exploding racist stereotypes about black people, and his skin colour is relatively light, which makes him more telegenic in a world which unfortunately, as we all know, tends to favour that sort of thing."

Same exact idea, different choice of words. Sometimes, racists hide behind "choice of words" as a flimsy defense for a statement which is racist no matter how you look at it, but in this case, I would argue that it could be a valid defense. The fact is that like it or not, there is a characteristic "black person" way of talking in the US, and millions of black people eagerly (perhaps even deliberately) make sure to use it. Barack Obama is a good reminder that they don't have to, but let's not bury our heads in the sand and pretend that this cultural phenomenon doesn't exist. A lot of people, for whatever reason, actually seem to try to fit their own stereotypes. And no one is allowed to even mention it unless he's a black comedian, in which case it will constitute most of his routine.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I'll concede the point readily. It's true that I was suspicious immediately of his "poor choice of words" defence being so much like a racist dog whistle cover-up, so I knee-jerk reacted to that.

[Stargate Nerd]

Top Republicans called for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to step aside Sunday — and accused the Democrats and the media of holding the GOP to a double standard on matters of race.

In an interview with POLITICO, National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn (R-Texas) said it would be "entirely appropriate" for the Nevada Democrat to relinquish his leadership post over comments about Barack Obama's skin color and lack of a "Negro dialect.".

Perhaps that wouldn't be such a bad thing, seeing how Harry Reid is either completely corporate owned or completely inept.

[Broomstick]

Put me in the camp of "he could have phrased that a lot better", but it's not inherently racist to recognize and discuss racism.

I saw a video clip on the news where Obama mentions that Reid is actually, in a very clumsy manner, describing him as a good candidate (that's very paraphrased). Is it forbidden to note that the current PotUS is of notably darker skin than his predecessors? Is it forbidden to note that he speaks like the well-educated man that he is, in contrast to all too many people of similar ethnicity in this country who don't? (And, yes, some people of other ethnicities also speak in an unrefined manner).

It is a fact, much as it shames me to admit it, that among some of my fellow citizens a lighter skinned black man is more acceptable than a darker skinned one. That is a deplorable attitude and one I hope is on the way out, but it does exist. We need to drag that monster out into the light of day and expose it to the ridicule and derision it deserves, that it may die a pitiful and long-overdue death. We can't do that if we beat out of the public realm anyone who dares to speak of it, even when they do so clumsily.

Mr. Obama is a black man who defies many of the negative stereotypes about African-Americans. I hope he continues to do so, so that one day we will reach a point in this nation where school children, on first learning of past racism based on skin color, will be frankly disbelieving in such things until their elders provide proof that yes, so many once acted that shamefully towards their fellow citizens.

[Glocksman]

I just don't see anything ethical in the way he approached it--the context of his comments might be mitigating, but the way he phrased them seems to address a background of casual racism.

He's also 70 or so years old and most probably grew up using 'negro' as a polite way to refer to blacks.
I'm no fan of Harry Reid and personally think he's a spineless leader chosen by the Democrats solely because of his spinelessness.

That said, I don't see racism so much as I see 'old man using archaic terminology' and wingnut Republicans eager to avenge the furor over Trent Lott's comments about how much we'd have been better off if Strom Thurmond beat Truman back in 1948.
In fact, Thurmond's candidacy was based almost solely on opposition to desegregation.

Frankly if some Republican that didn't have a sordid history of ties to racist groups in his home state had said the same thing, I'd give them the benefit of the doubt that they were merely being polite to the old man.

Lott? That bastard knew exactly what Thurmond stood for and was expressing his approval.

NOTE: Edited to remove references to the 1952 election, as I had a brainfart and thought he ran then as well.

[mr friendly guy]

It is a fact, much as it shames me to admit it, that among some of my fellow citizens a lighter skinned black man is more acceptable than a darker skinned one. That is a deplorable attitude and one I hope is on the way out, but it does exist. We need to drag that monster out into the light of day and expose it to the ridicule and derision it deserves, that it may die a pitiful and long-overdue death. We can't do that if we beat out of the public realm anyone who dares to speak of it, even when they do so clumsily.

.

This was shown on Australian news outlets followed by surveys which found that Americans responded better to African Americans who were lighter skin. If the survey is true Reid is indeed correct from a tactical point of view to point this out, albeit he could have done it in a more prudent manner.