By adamg on Tue., 9/25/2012 - 4:40 pm
Blue Mass. Group posted this video of Scott Brown staffers doing oh-no-not-at-all-racist war cries and tomahawk chops outside the Eire Pub in Dorchester the other day. And, of course, this being Boston, well, no rally is complete without a "Yankees suck!" chant.
Topics:
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
WTF are you talking about
By anon
Wed, 09/26/2012 - 11:28am
Why do you HATE 'straight white males'?
Why do you hate white people who're insufficiently 'ethnic'?
Why do you hate WASP?
Why can't you answer this WITHOUT resorting to silly mocking posts about 'Kennewick Man' [sorry, like 99% of people, I had to look that up; an insider joke? Does it make you feel special and superior?]? BECAUSE YOU CAN'T rationally answer by sane and reasoned posts regarding discrimination, bigotry.
Bottom line arguments
By CraigInDaVille
Wed, 09/26/2012 - 10:34am
From what I've heard, the Brown campaign feels that the real issue here is that she is untrustworthy because she apparently claimed a minority status to gain an edge in higher education faculty hiring.
From another bottom line perspective, a white, upper-middle class, straight male is telling people that a female in academia claimed an unfair advantage. You know, because there have never been any institutionalized forms of gender discrimination in higher ed faculty hires. Oh, except for that very public report done in his home state a few years ago that proved otherwise: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/21/us/21mit.html?pa...
It is a nonissue to most voters (polls have made that clear), so the only reason to continue to beat this dead horse is that he has nothing else to offer. At least, that's my takeaway, and apparently a lot of others opinions it seems.
Scott Brown comes from a privileged background?
By anon
Wed, 09/26/2012 - 11:21am
SERIOUSLY? No, he doesn't. Far from it. NEITHER CANDIDATE DOES.
Why do you and others have a bug up your arse about 'straight white males'? Why do you hate and then whine about others 'hating'?
Females [even those from high socioeconomic backgrounds and those with 'connections'] have benefited from legalized discrimination, i.e. so-called affirmative action and quotas [formal and informal] for a half century.
My take on discrimination, bigotry and un-fair advantages in our society is it's almost entirely SOCIOECONOMIC, NOT gender based, racial based or certainly not ethnically based. A male of female of any so-called race [we're all part of the human race, aren't we?] or ethnicity is at a distinct disadvantage, especially working class and 'poor' white males, who receive zero special considerations, unlike both 'poor' and advantaged black folks and other 'minorities' [including socioeconomically privileged white females] through affirmative action and quota programs. This has been going on for 40 plus years now, so it's nothing new.The vast majority of people alive today were born under this system where some are legally treated as deserving special privileges above others. White, black, Hispanic, Asian, straight, gay,bisexual, male/female people of a certain socioeconomic class or those who attended the ruling class schools are VERY PRIVILEGED compared to everyone else, regardless of gender, 'race', ethnicity or sexual orientation. Yet many of these privileged people are treated like they were oppressed and deserving of being more equal than others!
As for people not caring about Liz Warren LYING about her Indian/Native status [she LIED to get special advantages] is probably true. Our society has become immune to these ENDLESS scandals and hypocrisy among both our 'elite' and average people. And, likewise most people don't care about the 'whooping' scandal,either.
Hmmm...
By CraigInDaVille
Wed, 09/26/2012 - 1:55pm
Where did I say that Brown came from a privileged background?
I think the fact that you have made that assumption and then based your whole argument against that strawman kinda proves a point. Either way, I can't intelligently respond to your post for reasons that aren't worth listing because you wouldn't care anyway. You have an opinion, and no amount of information or facts will dissuade you from it, it seems.
really?
By anon
Wed, 09/26/2012 - 2:02pm
'From another bottom line perspective, a white, upper-middle class, straight male is telling people that a female in academia claimed an unfair advantage.'
You imply it here,Craig. And you take a gratuitous snark at 'white, upper class STRAIGHT male[s]'.
Great counter-argument
By CraigInDaVille
Wed, 09/26/2012 - 3:12pm
Please make sure to share those with the rest of the Brown campaign staff for the next debate prep.
The PERCEPTION that a white, upper-middle class straight male is calling foul on an issue of discrimination is the problem, and is probably a good part of the reason why the "issue" only motivates people like you who would vehemently oppose pretty much any Dem who ran for the office anyway. Seriously. No one outside of Howie Carr listeners and Herald readers really cares much about this issue, regardless of the facts involved (such as she might very well BE of Native American descent, or that she didn't actually "gain" any advantage anyway). Check the polls. I'm right. Science.
Oh, and since this is the internet and you can't see me, allow me to clarify that I am a white, middle class, straight male. Just to save you time in responding that I must be some man-hating feminist or something (although that would be entertaining!).
You assume incorrectly I wouldn't vote for a Democrat
By anon
Wed, 09/26/2012 - 3:40pm
I have and would again. I'm not a Republican, Craig, I'm independent - un-enrolled.
The fact you're a 'straight' white male is meaningless,also. There are plenty of brainwashed [IMHO] 'straight' white males who'll gladly hate on other 'straight' white males, and they do this for a variety of reasons. Black people can hate or discriminate against other black people, same with Asians, Hispanics, gays, whatever. It's common, actually. I believe most 'hate' is rooted in socioeconomics and a dislike or scorn for those perceived to be lower on the scale than you. I believe people of all 'races', ethnicities, genders, religions, sexual orientation are capable of this, and often directed at their 'own kind'.
I believe Liz Warren is a blatant hypocrite [as are Harvard] for LYING about her fake minority status. Is it the worse thing in the world? No, of course not. I'd overlook it if it was the only thing I dislike about her, but it's not. And when a goofy incident like this occurs, and her supporters respond like uber sensitive teen girls [I think much of the 'outrage' is of course feigned] it just confirms some of my other concerns.
"My take on discrimination,
By bibliotequetress
Wed, 09/26/2012 - 4:13pm
"My take on discrimination, bigotry and un-fair advantages in our society is it's almost entirely SOCIOECONOMIC, NOT gender based, racial based or certainly not ethnically based."
Wow, okay, so wealthy blacks aren't called n____r and are never, oh, say, pulled over for DWB. No one said that the current president of the United States got into Harvard because he's, you may have noticed, black. No one ever claims a woman slept her way into her job if she's rich. When the border patrol detained the former governor of Arizona and US Ambasador to Bolivia, it had nothing to do with his being hispanic.
There certainly is socioeconomic discrimination. That does not mean that there isn't other bigotry as well.
From boston.com The
By anon
Wed, 09/26/2012 - 12:23pm
From boston.com
I think it's time for Brown to apologize to Native Americans on behalf of those who work for him. My friends' kids in kindergarten aren't allowed to behave like this and are taught to respect those from different backgrounds. It's a little surprising that these Brown supporters who are grown men haven't already learned that lesson.
It's in the best interest of the citizens of Mass. for Brown and his supporters to get over the fact that Warren does not have documented proof of her Native American heritage so we can all move on to more important issues: such as the economy!
Bigger problem for Brown...and all of us
By Kaz
Wed, 09/26/2012 - 11:48pm
He needs to do more than he has so far on this issue. This isn't just some sort of bullshit campaign stunt that can be forgotten in a week. This is the paid staff of OUR Senator, already duly elected two years ago to represent ALL OF US, who has insulted the head of Cherokee Nation now. This went from campaign faux pas to embarrassment to the Commonwealth now.
I, for one, apologize that my national representative, Scott Brown, represented us so poorly as to upset members of Cherokee Nation.
Yeah! And what's more, I demand an apology from Deval!
By Bluto
Thu, 09/27/2012 - 7:33am
On behalf of Wampanoag nation I demand an apology, if not reparations. I'm not a member yet, by the way. But I'm working up to claiming it.
I mean, look at the official state seal of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. It includes an Indian, with a sword held menacingly over his head. THIS IS OUTGADEOUS, AND AN EMBARRASSMENT TO MASSACHUSETTS!
Since we're wallowing in a a river of self-righteous, convenient apologia, I just thought that I would throw that out there
Throw that out there
By Sock_Puppet
Thu, 09/27/2012 - 8:27am
Bluto deals with garbage just like my wife does - leaves the bag on the floor instead of taking it down to the can.
Next time you want to throw out some garbage, please throw it all the way out.
It's fun watching you go crazy
By Kaz
Thu, 09/27/2012 - 1:27pm
Of course, the state seal has nothing to do with hostilities towards Indians and all Mashpee Wampanoag complaints about it have always started with "to someone who doesn't know better..." (congrats on being that someone). Secondly, I don't exactly remember arguing that the state seal is perfect and should be left the way it is. So, you can put that straw man away until the Haunted Trail next month. Thirdly, Deval didn't create the seal or encourage its use as a means of ridiculing the regional Indian tribes for political sport. That's quite a different light than what Senator Brown's staff did which you're trying to make into a false equivalency.
So, I think the only thing you got right is that the state seal has an Indian on it. Congratulations.
It was satirical, Kaz
By Bluto
Thu, 09/27/2012 - 3:55pm
Let me help you work it out, since it's clearly over your head. But work with me here for a minute.
"Thirdly, Deval didn't create the seal or encourage its use...."
See, by making an outrageous claim that a 300 year old seal is the sitting governor's fault, I'm trying to point out the silliness of maintaining it's Brown's direct fault that two of his staffers chopped. And whooped.
And to help you a little further, Jonathan Swift wasn't really proposing that the starving Irish sell their children as food, either.
Huh?
By Kaz
Thu, 09/27/2012 - 5:37pm
Who is making the claim that Brown is directly at fault? Not I. I simply find him to be responsible for his staff as they are his representatives. If the cashier at McDonalds spits in your food, it's the cashier's fault, but it's McDonalds' responsibility to correct the situation.
This isn't a football game and your side didn't fumble. Scott Brown is a Senator first and candidate second. He has a responsibility to correct a situation that his subordinates created by their intentionally bigoted actions. By distracting from that point, you belittle the seriousness of the offense in an attempt to defuse the situation and turn it back into a political football that can be scored for one side or the other. That is wholly inappropriate.
Furthermore, you were first and foremost attempting to deflect attention from Brown by using a tu quoque logical fallacy ("oh yeah, but Deval..."). To reshape it into some sort of high-minded attempt at satire and hyperbole is naked and unappealing.
Must have been practicing
By SwirlyGrrl
Wed, 09/26/2012 - 1:39pm
Yep - this was a rehearsal for the Boston Tea Party Reinactment!
Nothing to see here ... move along.
This article's title is more racist than the subject itself
By anon
Thu, 09/27/2012 - 1:19am
Tomahawks and war cries actually reference Genuine aspects of Native American culture, they're stereotypes not because they don't have any basis in reality but because of their generalized use and over-simplified representation of varied cultures/practices.
The watermelon stereotype/symbol was BORN of racist assumptions and mockery, with no basis.
Perhaps you need to check your own assumptions.
Wait what?
By eeka
Thu, 09/27/2012 - 1:54pm
Yes, the stereotypes have different origins, but they're both racist and offensive. Would you be happier if he said "cotton" instead? Does it really MATTER?
http://abagond.wordpress.com/2011/03/10/the-waterm...
No, no, he's saying
By Sock_Puppet
Fri, 09/28/2012 - 11:49am
It would be more accurate to suggest that Brown's people would have shown up in sombreros and talked like Speedy Gonzalez if Warren claimed she was part Hispanic. Or shown up in pajamas talking like Charlie Chan if she'd claimed she were part Asian.
That makes it better, right?
Pages