Another racist gaffe from Biden is buried by the controlled media

[Pogo]

Depends on what he was saying at the time, donut?

To your first line about Biden, once you navigate around the inoperative "can't walk in without an accent" and get to the gist of his point that the 7-11 is probably going to have an Indian clerk, nothing about that statement says anything about race or about Indians. If anything it says something about 7-11. But nowhere present is the suggestion that that clerk is there because of his race. And nowhere is the suggestion that the clerk's race requires or mandates that he work at 7-11. It isn't there. Doesn't exist.

Do you believe that a large proportion of Indians working at convenience stores or motels is a result of their race? I doubt it. That would make no sense either, and you didn't say that. But neither did Biden. So why plug in what isn't there?

Pogo, you know that if a right wing politician had said those same words, the liberals would be all over it like a cheap suit.

I know no such thing. I can't predict the future and I don't know who this monolith called "the liberals" is. What I do know is that those words, regardless who they come from, do not convey racism. If they did, it could be pointed out like a mathematical formula. It isn't there. Simply crowing "dat's wacist" doesn't make it racist; it has to actually be racist.

But I do know a speculation fallacy when I read one.

What the hell is "speculation fallacy"? You invent some ridiculous term and think you can bludgeon people with it because they don't have a clue what it is you're talking about?

There's no way I would presume to take credit for "inventing" this analysis. It was analyzed long before anyone we know got here, and it's been a fallacy since the first time it was trotted out by Og, who then redeemed himself by inventing the wheel.

>> Description: Offering a poorly supported claim about what might have happened in the past or future, if (the hypothetical part) circumstances or conditions were different. The fallacy also entails treating future hypothetical situations as if they are fact.

Logical Form:
If event X did happen, then event Y would have happened. (based only on speculation)

Example #1:
If you took that course on CD player repair right out of high school, you would be doing well and gainfully employed right now. <<​

Biden's comments ARE racist. You may not like admitting that...but that doesn't change the fact that he said things that people of color should find offensive. He stereotypes blacks and people from India in ways that nobody holding high political office should ever do. If he was Joe the Idiot from the neighborhood talking that stupid shit down at the corner bar it would be bad enough but he's THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!

First you say they're "racist" --- then you say they're "stereotypes". And the veneer peels away.

Having it both ways: priceless.

As I keep saying, it if was 'racism' you could demonstrate it from the elements we have. But that's impossible, which is why you're now trying to shift the argument to "stereotypes". And I knew from the beginning that this is where we would end up.

And the fact remains, neither "Indian" (of India) nor "Somali" is a race in the first place. And even if either of them were, you'd have to demonstrate where the speaker claims that their stereotyped occupation (convenience store, cab driver, whatever) is a function of what their race is.

As opposed to, say, what their culture is and who they knew that got them the job because of their personal acquaintances and connections.

And you can't do that. Nobody can, for the simple reason that it does not exist.

As for the all caps "Vice President of the United States", let me quote from a previous holder of that office, who put it this way:

"So?"

Do you not recognize that stereotyping is primary symptom of racism? When you don't know people you make judgements about them based on generalizations. Many people from the North think people from the South are stupid because they have a funny accent. They don't know any Southerners and it's a stupid conclusion but that's what stereotyping is all about.

Stereotyping is NOT racism. In any way. Racism may involve stereotyping but it does NOT go the other way. You yourself just gave a fine example in the north vs south stereotype -- nothing to do with anyone's race. It goes on in this forum constantly -- "Libtards can't think" -- "Conservatives are greedy" -- Muslims are violent" -- you literally can't get through a thread without it. It's the same Hasty Generalization involved in the statement "if a conservative said that the liberals would be raising hell". (it's a double fallacy; I concentrated on the speculation one, which is the first part).

When Biden infers you can't go work in a 7/11 unless you're someone from India then he's stereotyping. It a stupid thing to do if you AREN'T the Vice President of the United States...to do so when you ARE the VP borders on moronic...which is what Joe Biden is at this point.

First of all the speaker does't "infer" -- you infer. You mean the speaker "implies". I've been saying your inference is erroneous because it has no basis. And now you seem to be shifting to ad hominem because that basis is absent. Whatever -- there's STILL nothing in any of the statements that implies some characteristic to someone because of their race. If there were, someone could have demonstrated it by now. Declaring "it's stupid to say that" is simply not the same statement as "it's racist to say that".

An acutal racist statement would sound something like, "Indians all work in 7-11s because that's all they're intellectually capable of". But that's not anything like what we have here. You're making a leap to connect their occupation with their race -- rather than their culture. Joe Biden didn't make that connection -- you did.

I'm the first one to agree the statement is stupid, as I noted at the beginning -- you don't need any kind of accent to walk into a store. And accents have nothing to do with race either.