NY Times Welcomes Republican Tim Scott to Senate By Calling Him a “Token”

[bigrebnc1775]

I had almost forgot about the jamie fox comment. Just another reason to keep my guns.

Are you afraid that Jamie Foxx is going to come and try to kill you? What exactly do you mean by this?

Kill me? no but someone might take Foxx's word and do it too some innocent unarmed white liberal.
I remember a time when liberals were blaming Sarah Palin for the shooting of Giffords.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Are you afraid that Jamie Foxx is going to come and try to kill you? What exactly do you mean by this?

Kill me? no but someone might take Foxx's word and do it too some innocent unarmed white liberal.
I remember a time when liberals were blaming Sarah Palin for the shooting of Giffords.

Do you honestly think that Jamie Foxx wants to kill white people, or that he's going to "inspire" someone to kill white people?

Me? No But others maybe.
Do you think Sarah paling "target" map was intended to be used to shoot democrats?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Don't understand why more black Americans aren't disgusted by this.



Tim Scott is a good man.

Because for the most part, a great deal of us see this as nothing but a "Token" appointment.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/current-events/266293-sen-demint-r-sc-to-quit-in-january-3.html

Yes obama is a token.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Kill me? no but someone might take Foxx's word and do it too some innocent unarmed white liberal.
I remember a time when liberals were blaming Sarah Palin for the shooting of Giffords.

Do you honestly think that Jamie Foxx wants to kill white people, or that he's going to "inspire" someone to kill white people?

Me? No But others maybe.

Like who?

Do you think Sarah paling "target" map was intended to be used to shoot democrats?

Of course not.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I had almost forgot about the jamie fox comment. Just another reason to keep my guns.

Are you afraid that Jamie Foxx is going to come and try to kill you? What exactly do you mean by this?

I am sure he is refering to idiot Jacobins in general; why is that so hard for you too understand?

I understood it as soon as I read it, but you couldnt?

lol

 

[JimBowie1958]

Kill me? no but someone might take Foxx's word and do it too some innocent unarmed white liberal.
I remember a time when liberals were blaming Sarah Palin for the shooting of Giffords.

Do you honestly think that Jamie Foxx wants to kill white people, or that he's going to "inspire" someone to kill white people?

Me? No But others maybe.
Do you think Sarah paling "target" map was intended to be used to shoot democrats?

I disagree. I think Jamie Fox and those who applaud him *do* in fact want to kill *some* white people. Which ones? Southerners and Appalachians for starters and anyone who disagrees with their Jacobinism.

Why? For the same reasons the Jacobins killed people, along with the Stalinists, Bolsheviks, Maoists, Khmer Rogue, etc, all militant atheistic wannabe dictators.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Do you honestly think that Jamie Foxx wants to kill white people, or that he's going to "inspire" someone to kill white people?

Me? No But others maybe.

Like who?

How the fuck would you expect him to know?

Good greif, anothe ridiot libtard has floundered his way onto this thread.

God save us.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Do you honestly think that Jamie Foxx wants to kill white people, or that he's going to "inspire" someone to kill white people?

Me? No But others maybe.

Like who?

Do you think Sarah paling "target" map was intended to be used to shoot democrats?

Of course not.

If I knew who I wouldn't have said others.

 

[Stephanie]

Well I guess Obama is token, he did nothing special in his life to become President except be a community agitator

 

[Stephanie]

I just knew if either Gateway Plunderit or Jim Hoft were involved it would be yet another selective interpretation. And that it wouldn't include the original source, lest readers actually read it and check up on Hoft's usual bent. Here we have a Daily Double.

Sure enough, what the story actually says is:

But this “first black” rhetoric tends to interpret African-American political successes — including that of President Obama — as part of a morality play that dramatizes “how far we have come.” It obscures the fact that modern black Republicans have been more tokens than signs of progress.

That's a general statement about most "modern black Republicans" rather than specifically about Tim Scott. It includes him but it's not directed at him. And the rationale for that judgement is spelled out in the ensuing paragraphs, which is kind of the idea of making a point; you don't stop reading because you see the word tokens... you go on to see why it's there. Unless of course your real goal is to dumb-down the article into something it's not. The race hustling from Gateway Plunderit is shameless if not flameless.

Point 2, this article is an editorial, not "The New York Times". It's one person's opinion. You can kind of get a clue about that by his use of the first-person singular ("I"). It's a guest op-ed, written by a political science professor at Penn, not an editor at the Times (and he's black, if it matters).

But for point 3, let's go to Captain Obvious--
Ahem, thank you, at the risk of stating the obvious, to label Person X a "token" is a statement not about Person X, but about the action of the entity that put them there. In this case the acting entity would be the Republican Party. I can't believe you guys are so swimming in your own echo chamber of ideological swill that you can't see thi--Thank you Captain, that'll do for now.

I can see why Jim Hoft didn't go into law. He'd be laughed out of court every day. But nooooo, let's cancel the paper and call it the "Slimes" rather than read what it actually says. Let's take our cues from a hair-on-fire blog site that tells us about what the article said, rather than actually read it directly where we can judge for ourselves. Yeah there's a good plan. What could go wrong?

I'll never understand why some people want to outsource their political logic to the Blogs of the Bubble rather than DIY. Gateway Plunderit... a reliable source

oh that's right, the editors at the slimes don't have the discretion of what "opinions" they run in their rag..
I'd love to see the comments here if he had been a Democrat..maybe he would of been called a , TeaTard
and your long winded response doesn't make it any less of a disgusting article, but it's nice to know you AGREE with it too

 

[daveman]

Don't understand why more black Americans aren't disgusted by this.



Tim Scott is a good man.

Tim Scott is a teatard.

And the Times didn't quite call him a token, did they? They said it looked less like progress for blacks and MORE LIKE tokenism.

And if you're wondering why blacks run from the GOP, please, call our first black president the "food stamp" president again and say things like he doesn't think "like an American", and have your presidential candidates suck up to birfers.

The reality is that most blacks really are conservative. They're religious.... they could be GOP "values" voters, if the party didn't tolerate such a huge degree of racial insensitivity.

Well actually, yes they did. The last line of the article is as follows: "No number of Tim Scotts — or other cynical tokens — will change that." The entire article implies that the appointment of Tim Scott - and other black conservatives before him - were "deployed ......to undermine black interests." It goes on to say that Scott was elected in 2010 on a platform of "anti-tax, anti-union and anti-abortion," which according to the author are "utterly at odds with the preferences of most black Americans," as though being a shill for "black" interests or any other interests makes one a more legitimate candidate.


Is it true that all black Americans are pro-tax, pro-union and pro-abortion?

You're asking the right person. White liberals are qualified to speak for all black Americans.

 

[daveman]

As I just pointed out, the original editorial was written by a black American poli-sci professor. I think he's speaking on behalf of black Americans.

He's obviously not speaking for conservative black Americans, is he?

Or do they not count?

 

[daveman]

Who says that this lame-ass proffessor speaks for blacks in this country? Who elected him to that position?

White liberals. If a black person speaks the opinions that the left dictates, he's a spokesman.

If he speaks anything else, he's an Uncle Tom.

 

[JimBowie1958]

As I just pointed out, the original editorial was written by a black American poli-sci professor. I think he's speaking on behalf of black Americans.

He's obviously not speaking for conservative black Americans, is he?

Or do they not count?

Libtards dont think that blacks can be authentic blacks if they are not leftist ass holes like they are.

 

[Stephanie]

man people need to cancel the slimes rag...
links to article at site

SNIP:
NY Times Welcomes Republican Tim Scott to Senate By Calling Him a “Token”

Posted by Jim Hoft on Wednesday, December 19, 2012, 9:04 AM


The New York Times welcomed Republican Tim Scott to the US Senate by calling him a “token.”

snippet of the times peice at site


Republican Tim Scott is the only African American in the US Senate.
Mediaite reported, via Lucianne:


You have got to hand it to the New York Times’ editors – they’ve got moxy. A Times opinion piece on Tuesday introducing their readers to the newest Senator from the Palmetto State, former Rep. Tim Scott (R-SC), speaks about him – and those with who share his political affiliation and skin color – in the terms you would describe a curious science project. In “The Puzzle of Black Republicans,” the Times summons all the subtlety of the Kool-Aid Man as they smash through the perception that the “paper of record” maintains a single shred of neutrality as they advance the notion that non-Democratic African-Americans are a curiosity to be examined like some newly discovered species of fish.

Of course, it’s OK for liberals to call blacks “tokens” as long as they are Republicans.
Disgusting.

all of it here
NY Times Welcomes Republican Tim Scott to Senate By Calling Him a “Token” | The Gateway Pundit

Spare me the fake outrage, please it's unbecoming of you. I read the article completely and understood his reasons for calling Tim Scott a "Token" and concur with him on this. Now ONLY if you would've read the WHOLE article which was written very well and included some historical context and other examples he used I can't understand why your Republicans are whining so much.

I'm a Black Man and most Blacks that have discussed this if appointed would be nothing less than a "Token" appointment. Hell I said it here on this board myself:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/current-events/266293-sen-demint-r-sc-to-quit-in-january-3.html

So once again, spare us the drama...

News Flash it wasn't just some "Liberal" who called him a "Token", but another Black Man who happens to be:

Adolph L. Reed, Jr. is a professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania, specializing in race and American politics. He has taught at Yale, Northwestern and the New School for Social Research

I don't care if you're pink and I don't care what Adolph specializes in..
where is his wonderful thoughts on black Democrats?...I guess he doesn't see them as TOKENS huh..
but it doesn't surprise me to see you on left DEFENDING this article and calling a black Republican, TeaTard, then whine like a baby about the names Obama is called

 

[daveman]

As I just pointed out, the original editorial was written by a black American poli-sci professor. I think he's speaking on behalf of black Americans.

He's obviously not speaking for conservative black Americans, is he?

Or do they not count?

Libtards dont think that blacks can be authentic blacks if they are not leftist ass holes like they are.

On another board, I saw a white leftist say he was more in tune with the black experience than a black conservative woman.

 

[Stephanie]

Spare me the fake outrage, please it's unbecoming of you. I read the article completely and understood his reasons for calling Tim Scott a "Token" and concur with him on this. Now ONLY if you would've read the WHOLE article which was written very well and included some historical context and other examples he used I can't understand why your Republicans are whining so much.

I'm a Black Man and most Blacks that have discussed this if appointed would be nothing less than a "Token" appointment. Hell I said it here on this board myself:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/current-events/266293-sen-demint-r-sc-to-quit-in-january-3.html

So once again, spare us the drama...

News Flash it wasn't just some "Liberal" who called him a "Token", but another Black Man who happens to be:

Adolph L. Reed, Jr. is a professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania, specializing in race and American politics. He has taught at Yale, Northwestern and the New School for Social Research

I don't care if you're pink and I don't care what Adolph specializes in..
where is his wonderful thoughts on black Democrats?...I guess he doesn't see them as TOKENS huh..
but it doesn't surprise me to see you on left DEFENDING this article and calling a black Republican, TeaTard, then whine like a baby about the names Obama is called

So if you didn't care, why did you bother responding and on top of that, whining again?

That's your fooking problem right there, you dismiss my opinion and dismiss the Professor's opinion because both of us agree that this was nothing less than a token appointment because it differs from yours?

Get over your fooking self, we are entitled to have our own opinion just as much as you are, doesn't mean your opinion is better mines or mines better than yours, but we're coming from a Black perceptive that you have no clue of.

And if you listened to Black Talk radio weeks ago, it was thoroughly discussed and for the most part an majority of callers felt the same way about this.

Goes back to the Ann Coulter's remarks from where you're coming from:

"Our Blacks are better than yours"

well color me surprised most blacks like you feel the same way..you are as big racist as anyone of other color and spit on people who don't fit your stereotype..

 

[Stephanie]

He's obviously not speaking for conservative black Americans, is he?

Or do they not count?

Libtards dont think that blacks can be authentic blacks if they are not leftist ass holes like they are.

Not about being authentic as you claim (btw sounds so retarded), but we know that just because your my color doesn't mean your my brother.

Your words and deeds or non deeds tells US that you're not for US. Some whites need to recognize this and quit voting against your best wishes, by supporting the wealthiest's interests over your own best interests.

pfeesh, you telling others what their best are..and how is voting for all them WEALTHY Democrats working out for most blacks?
what is Unemployment for blacks, how about the murder rates?
Just because you've bought into the bullshit of the Democrat party doesn't mean you can tell others what their best interest are.
If anyone is a "token" maybe you should look in mirror

 

[daveman]

He's obviously not speaking for conservative black Americans, is he?

Or do they not count?

Libtards dont think that blacks can be authentic blacks if they are not leftist ass holes like they are.

Not about being authentic as you claim (btw sounds so retarded), but we know that just because your my color doesn't mean your my brother.

Your words and deeds or non deeds tells US that you're not for US. Some whites need to recognize this and quit voting against your best wishes, by supporting the wealthiest's interests over your own best interests.

And his politics is on most issues the opposite of mines, but your dumb ass is now trying to tell me to ignore that and support him because he's Black.

But then turn around and whine when Blacks supported President Obama and the Democrats who we share on a majority of issues reflects ours. But that doesn't mean that we don't differ on some issues either,

I'm for AMERICANS. Maybe if you stopped defining yourself solely by your skin color, you'd realize what I want for you might be the best thing for you:

The maximum amount of personal liberty conducive to civilized society.

 

[Stephanie]

So if you didn't care, why did you bother responding and on top of that, whining again?

That's your fooking problem right there, you dismiss my opinion and dismiss the Professor's opinion because both of us agree that this was nothing less than a token appointment because it differs from yours?

Get over your fooking self, we are entitled to have our own opinion just as much as you are, doesn't mean your opinion is better mines or mines better than yours, but we're coming from a Black perceptive that you have no clue of.

And if you listened to Black Talk radio weeks ago, it was thoroughly discussed and for the most part an majority of callers felt the same way about this.

Goes back to the Ann Coulter's remarks from where you're coming from:

"Our Blacks are better than yours"

well color me surprised most blacks like you feel the same way..you are as big racist as anyone of other color and spit on people who don't fit your stereotype..

Try the phrase, "color me stupid". Because you're stupid for thinking I would support him just because he's Black and our politics are on the opposite sides of the train tracks.

Dumb ass response trying to call me or others racists, because we won't support him or his brand of politics. He'll your already call us racists for supporting the President in big numbers.

News flash you can't have both sides of this argument.

ummmhumm..now you move the goal post...from agreeing with the article about Scott being a token, to you just don't support his policies..no problem, I'd move them too if I were you..