Chris Matthews: A Racist?

[xshady121]

wkEBtpcIVE4
It starts at 1:20, but the real jab is at 2:25

In every area that was touched on, they had to get an outside guy, they had to outsource, the republican party

Wow. Just wow. Talking about outsourcing when referring to the nations only Indian Governor? This is an incredibly racist statement. He tries to fix his faux pas by saying he was refering to somebody not affiliated with the mess the repubs created in Washington during the Bush administration, but that is moot considering Jindal was a rep from 05-08.

[WarpSpeedChewy]

At the worst, it's maybe a poor choice of words. But makes complete sense within the context of what he was talking about. It seemed pretty clear to me that the word "outsourced" to me was in reference to that fact the GOP had to find someone outside who was new or at lease not connected in timeline with republicans of the last few years. This is a really poor argument for deeming someone racist.

[ActionActionFan]

And people say the media isn't liberal. Rachel Maddow is also the most pathetic excuse for a reporter that I have ever seen.

[xshady121]

At the worst, it's maybe a poor choice of words. But makes complete sense within the context of what he was talking about. It seemed pretty clear to me that the word "outsourced" to me was in reference to that fact the GOP had to find someone outside who was new or at lease not connected in timeline with republicans of the last few years. This is a really poor argument for deeming someone racist.

The timeframe he was referring to, Jindal was a "Washington Insider". So that explanation doesn't apply to Jindal.

[wesgemm08]

http://www.jossip.com/wp/docs/2009/02/jack26.jpg

It was a poor choice of words, and isn't really even a topic worth discussion. Also, Rachel Maddow is a political commentator, not a reporter.

[GiggsOho]

Nice to see the GOP retards are still alive and well in these parts.

[xshady121]

Nice to see the GOP retards are still alive and well in these parts.

I know your not talking about me, I'm a registered libertarian :shrug:

[J.C.]

tehehehehe feigned outage

[xshady121]

tehehehehe feigned outage

Nope, not in the slightest.

[x togepi x]

And people say the media isn't liberal. Rachel Maddow is also the most pathetic excuse for a reporter that I have ever seen.

when you reach your 20s you'll realize how dumb statements like these are.


maddow is a commentator not a reporter.

[samsara]

"they" are black people im guessing?

[x togepi x]

Also, Rachel Maddow is a political commentator, not a reporter.

haha beat me to it

[Simulcast]

Nice to see the GOP retards are still alive and well in these parts.


They have to bring some sort of balance to the overwhelming population of Liberal idiots in these forums.

[J.C.]

Nope, not in the slightest.

In the very mostest. You understood his point fine and are throwing a shitfit about it to distract from the point. I know you didn't believe it was Matthews's intention to make a racial comment there.

[x togepi x]

i think chris matthews is terrible and has made questionable, if not obviously racist (and sexist) statements in the past. i can also see how this was misspeaking.

either way, the conservatives here probably wouldn't care if rush or o'rielly said it.

[GiggsOho]

They have to bring some sort of balance to the overwhelming population of Liberal idiots in these forums.

Liberal America, #1, Always and Forever. DON'T YOU FUCKING FORGET THAT.

[Simulcast]

Liberal America, #1, Always and Forever. DON'T YOU FUCKING FORGET THAT.


Ugh, that's the best you got?

[x togepi x]

meh, conservatives can complain about liberals all they want on this issue because liberals are the only ones who actually do anything for race relations these days. conservatives just push the same tired old policies that promote inequality, at best, a lot of them actually race bait to get into office (ie: "immigration reform")

[WarpSpeedChewy]

The timeframe he was referring to, Jindal was a "Washington Insider". So that explanation doesn't apply to Jindal.
Still, he was trying to make the point he was outside of all of that history. The reference and wording still makes sense to the context.

[saysmydoctor]

And people say the media isn't liberal. Rachel Maddow is also the most pathetic excuse for a reporter that I have ever seen.
She is an editorial commentator. She isn't an anchor. If I'm forced to acknowledge this about O'Reilly, the least you could do is state the obvious concerning Maddow, dumb ass.

Also, I want to thank the thread starter for making an issue out of a non-issue. Next up: gay marriage and flag burning!

[Siren Silently]

They have to bring some sort of balance to the overwhelming population of Liberal idiots in these forums.

umad?

[Duexy]

"they" are black people im guessing?



wrong

[Simulcast]

umad?


No, just amused.

[boykosaurus]

Liberal America, #1, Always and Forever. DON'T YOU FUCKING FORGET THAT.

Ugh, that's the best you got?

Shut it.

http://content.pyzam.com/graphics/showyourpride/BCbrave0626.gif

[Simulcast]

Lol.

[x togepi x]

She is an editorial commentator. She isn't an anchor. If I'm forced to acknowledge this about O'Reilly, the least you could do is state the obvious concerning Maddow, dumb ass.

Also, I want to thank the thread starter for making an issue out of a non-issue. Next up: gay marriage and flag burning!

gay marriage is very much an issue.

[chronomic]

meh, conservatives can complain about liberals all they want on this issue because liberals are the only ones who actually do anything for race relations these days. conservatives just push the same tired old policies that promote inequality, at best, a lot of them actually race bait to get into office (ie: "immigration reform")

and he's pretty much disowned his Indian heritage too. More and more I cannot stand any sort of movement that promotes inequality.

[xshady121]

In the very mostest. You understood his point fine and are throwing a shitfit about it to distract from the point. I know you didn't believe it was Matthews's intention to make a racial comment there.
Nope. He went out of his way to use the term "outsource" in a derogatory manner referencing the outsourcing of jobs to India. His explanation of it doesn't fly. I'm actually more worried that Chris Matthews might be so blind to his mistake that he doesn't how racist it was. After all, it is his self-proclaimed duty to help the President and his party succeed.

I thought the liberals were supposed to be beyond racism. I mean, it was clear that sexism was still alive and well during this past election cycle, but with the whole monkey incident last week the Liberals have just proved they are no better then the conservatives.

I won't hold my breathe for an apology, but I feel it is deserved.
i think chris matthews is terrible and has made questionable, if not obviously racist (and sexist) statements in the past. i can also see how this was misspeaking.

either way, the conservatives here probably wouldn't care if rush or o'rielly said it.
Yes. He is almost has "foot in mouth" syndrome as bad as Joe Biden.

However, while their may be a few that wouldn't think anything of it if rush and bill had said it, you can't generalize an entire movement over a few dozen out on the fringe. I would also like to think the same of you guys as well.

[J.C.]

Nope. He went out of his way to use the term "outsource" in a derogatory manner referencing the outsourcing of jobs to India. His explanation of it doesn't fly.

I've misjudged you a bit. I've thought a lot of the opinions you've shared on this board have been wrong(hilariously in some instances), but I didn't consider you an r-tard. I don't think you have any idea how nutty you're being right now.

[xshady121]

I've misjudged you a bit. I've thought a lot of the opinions you've shared on this board have been wrong(hilariously in some instances), but I didn't consider you an r-tard. I don't think you have any idea how nutty you're being right now.

I can't believe how blind you are being to the plight of the Indian people, specifically as immigrants and minorities in the 20th century. For the nations first Indian governor to be singled out like this and for people like you to turn a blind eye to the hatred and racist being spewed at him and being accepted by the public is a great travesty, and only helps prove that not only is racisim not dead, but it will never die.

[J.C.]

I know this is all a facade for some deeper point. Get to it already. You're wasting everyone's time.

[Praetor]

At the worst, it's maybe a poor choice of words. But makes complete sense within the context of what he was talking about. It seemed pretty clear to me that the word "outsourced" to me was in reference to that fact the GOP had to find someone outside who was new or at lease not connected in timeline with republicans of the last few years. This is a really poor argument for deeming someone racist.
Agreed.

[xshady121]

I know this is all a facade for some deeper point. Get to it already. You're wasting everyone's time.
Nope. As a firm believer in the fact that every citizen is entitled to their inalienable rights, this situation offends me. Especially when it's from a group who pretends to be so high and mighty when it comes to race. Wasn't it implied before, I have to find the quote, that the democrats stand for the promotion of racial equality?

EDIT: this is the post I was thinking of.
meh, conservatives can complain about liberals all they want on this issue because liberals are the only ones who actually do anything for race relations these days. conservatives just push the same tired old policies that promote inequality, at best, a lot of them actually race bait to get into office (ie: "immigration reform")
Agreed.
But he ISNT fresh, and he IS involved with the mess. He was a rep for 4 years, all during the Repub controlled house and senate years. Had he said he is a fresh new face to the game, someone would hve called him out and said "woah bobby jindal, you WERE on washington, you have as much blame to bear as everyone else". He's in a no win situation.

[Praetor]

Nope. As a firm believer in the fact that every citizen is entitled to their inalienable rights, this situation offends me. Especially when it's from a group who pretends to be so high and mighty when it comes to race. Wasn't it implied before, I have to find the quote, that the democrats stand for the promotion of racial equality?

EDIT: this is the post I was thinking of.


But he ISNT fresh, and he IS involved with the mess. He was a rep for 4 years, all during the Repub controlled house and senate years. Had he said he is a fresh new face to the game, someone would hve called him out and said "woah bobby jindal, you WERE on washington, you have as much blame to bear as everyone else". He's in a no win situation.
Yeah but unless I'm wrong (and I might be, I didn't pay attention to politics until the 2008 primaries) but Jindal was basically a no-name until recent events, wasn't he? Even though he was THERE, he wasn't part of the gang, you know? He wasn't a big name. And that's what I see an insider as; a new fresh face, not Romney/Huckabee/Gingrich et al.

[samsara]

wrong

then who is "they" or are you just being sarcastic?

[xshady121]

Yeah but unless I'm wrong (and I might be, I didn't pay attention to politics until the 2008 primaries) but Jindal was basically a no-name until recent events, wasn't he? Even though he was THERE, he wasn't part of the gang, you know? He wasn't a big name. And that's what I see an insider as; a new fresh face, not Romney/Huckabee/Gingrich et al.

While he may not be an insider in the traditional sense of the word, he certainly isn't new. He couldn't run on the ticket of "bringing change and cleaning up the mess in Washington", if he himself helped CREATE the mess! He would get called out on it, like Hillary did when she ran as against the war and was orignally for it.

While he may have been a minor charecter, he was STILL a charecter for the Repubs during 04-08.

That's why Matthews' explanation didn't apply, because his rationale was wrong.

[Praetor]

While he may not be an insider in the traditional sense of the word, he certainly isn't new. He couldn't run on the ticket of "bringing change and cleaning up the mess in Washington", if he himself helped CREATE the mess! He would get called out on it, like Hillary did when she ran as against the war and was orignally for it.

While he may have been a minor charecter, he was STILL a charecter for the Repubs during 04-08.

That's why Matthews' explanation didn't apply, because his rationale was wrong.
I'm just saying it would be easier for Jindal to run on a campaign of outsider-ness than an older face, and it would be understandable for Matthews to make a slip-up like that. I'll be honest, until this thread I didn't even know that Jindal was in Washington before he was a governor. Obviously being a political commentator I'd expect Matthews to know more than me but I can see how he could make that slip-up, you know?

[anamericangod]

This thread is laughable. The fact that GOP supporters have to attack the usage of a very commonly used word is a perfect example of the disrepair that party is in right now. Good job of grasping at straws.

[xshady121]

This thread is laughable. The fact that GOP supporters have to attack the usage of a very commonly used word is a perfect example of the disrepair that party is in right now. Good job of grasping at straws.

Good job labeling me a GOP supporter. That in itself is laughable

[saysmydoctor]

gay marriage is very much an issue.
Obviously, I mean in the sense of how it is used as a distraction to severe plights--like Bush used it to distract from the war.
Good job labeling me a GOP supporter. That in itself is laughable
O'Reilly tries the same thing. "I'm a registered independent."

He still spews ridiculous talking points and nonissues.

[Duexy]

then who is "they" or are you just being sarcastic?



they meant the people of Louisiana.

if you really want to misconstrue what was said then "they" could be Indian people since Bobby Jindal is the one being accused of outsourcing. you'd have to be trying REALLY hard to see this ass racism towards blacks.

[anamericangod]

Good job labeling me a GOP supporter. That in itself is laughable

I don't care what you identify yourself as or what you're registered under, this thread and the point you are attempting to make are ridiculous. The sad thing is there are actually people like you who can say shit like this and millions of others will listen to them. Instead of focusing on issues, we hear about dumb shit like this.

Go watch the clip ofJon Stewart ripping apart the clowns on Crossfire. You might as well be one of them.

[samsara]

they meant the people of Louisiana.

if you really want to misconstrue what was said then "they" could be Indian people since Bobby Jindal is the one being accused of outsourcing. you'd have to be trying REALLY hard to see this ass racism towards blacks.

well the title of this thread is if he was racist. I dont think someone can be racist to a state.

[xshady121]

well the title of this thread is if he was racist. I dont think someone can be racist to a state.

He was being racist to Indians by saying the repubs had to "outsource" the rebuttle speech to jindal, an Indian.

[xshady121]

Obviously, I mean in the sense of how it is used as a distraction to severe plights--like Bush used it to distract from the war.

O'Reilly tries the same thing. "I'm a registered independent."

He still spews ridiculous talking points and nonissues.



Oh right right. Regardless of the fact i'm a registered libertarian and believe in a lot the repubs don't (isolationist foreign policy, gold standard, civil liberties,pro stem cells, decreased siZe of military,anti patriot act, and decriminilaztaion). But as long as I hate what the democrats stand for as well that makes me a republican? It doeznt matter i hate rush and oreilly as long as i hate olbermann and maddow Im a repub? George bush tried this as well by saying "you're either with us or against us".

[Adeniz19]

i can't stand chris mathews, but i saw nothing "racist" about what he said in that clip

[Adeniz19]

He was being racist to Indians by saying the repubs had to "outsource" the rebuttle speech to jindal, an Indian.he was referring to how it had to be someone outside of congress to make that speech so they didnt look completely hypocritical. i didn't realizing "outsourcing" has become a derogatory comment.

[xshady121]

he was referring to how it had to be someone outside of congress to make that speech so they didnt look completely hypocritical. i didn't realizing "outsourcing" has become a derogatory comment.

It is when the person is an indian. And he wasn't "outside of congress" considering he served there for 4 years. That makes the "outsourcing" comment moot. So either he was wrong when he said they were "outsourcing" to someone disconnected with Washington, or he was just flat out racist.

[zion the lion]

I can't believe how blind you are being to the plight of the Indian people, specifically as immigrants and minorities in the 20th century. For the nations first Indian governor to be singled out like this and for people like you to turn a blind eye to the hatred and racist being spewed at him and being accepted by the public is a great travesty, and only helps prove that not only is racisim not dead, but it will never die.


As oblivious as I am to racism (even when it is blatant and expressed towards me) I really think youre making mountains out of molehills.

[Adeniz19]

It is when the person is an indian. And he wasn't "outside of congress" considering he served there for 4 years. That makes the "outsourcing" comment moot. So either he was wrong when he said they were "outsourcing" to someone disconnected with Washington, or he was just flat out racist.
I don't know how long you have been unbanned, but I just want to say I'm glad you are posting again. haha

[Machu505]

This is about as racist as that New York Post cartoon.

[xshady121]

This is about as racist as that New York Times cartoon.

Don't you mean New York Post?

[Machu505]

Don't you mean New York Post?

Ah yes. My mistake.

[xshady121]

Ah yes. My mistake.

Yes. This is EXACTLY like it. I find it scary how the same people who complained last week don't see it. They're blinded by their partisanship.

[saysmydoctor]

I think he was being sarcastic but if not, no it isn't racist.

[J.C.]

Yes. This is EXACTLY like it. I find it scary how the same people who complained last week don't see it. They're blinded by their partisanship.

I had the same opinion.

I have a hard time believing the artist actually intended the monkey to be a racial symbol. Nobody can be braindead enough to think that would go unnoticed. The artist was completely tone-deaf though in not recognizing how his dumb cartoon could be taken another way.

I wouldn't lump them as moral equivalents though, as cartoons are deliberate and thought out while the Matthews quote was spontaneous/off the cuff.

[Adeniz19]

This is about as racist as that New York Post cartoon.agreed.

Yes. This is EXACTLY like it. I find it scary how the same people who complained last week don't see it. They're blinded by their partisanship.if you look in the thread discussing the cartoon, most people said it isn't racist. you even admit yourself in that thread that the cartoonist isn't trying to be racist. who is blinded by their partisanship now?

While anyone should be able to grasp the connection between the stimulus bill and the "crazy" monkey, (monkeys often are associated with crazy, things being "bananas", etc...) it's something an editor should have caught.

You know he wasn't trying to be racist, because not even Fox News, certainly not a cartoonist, would have the balls to be that openly racist.

[xshady121]

agreed.

if you look in the thread discussing the cartoon, most people said it isn't racist. you even admit yourself in that thread that the cartoonist isn't trying to be racist. who is blinded by their partisanship now?

Nope not true. I said I didn't think he had the intent to be racist. I didn't mention if it was or not racist (it is).

Do I think Matthews had the intent to be racist? I don't know. Do I think that regardless of intent, the finished product was racist? Absolutly.

[J.C.]

Do I think Matthews had the intent to be racist? I don't know.

rly?

Nope. He went out of his way to use the term "outsource" in a derogatory manner referencing the outsourcing of jobs to India. His explanation of it doesn't fly.

[saysmydoctor]

rly?
Factcheck'd.

[Adeniz19]

Nope not true. I said I didn't think he had the intent to be racist. I didn't mention if it was or not racist (it is).

Do I think Matthews had the intent to be racist? I don't know. Do I think that regardless of intent, the finished product was racist? Absolutly.
In that thread you were explaining how a conservative paper wasn't intending to be racist while in this thread, you are looking for every opportunity to call out a liberal commentator for being a racist without looking at the context of why he said what he said. I'd say that is being partisan on a subject where you think both circumstances are EXACTLY the same. You are defending one case and prosecuting the other.

However, everyone else doesn't seem to be offended by either circumstance.

[Big_Guy]

gay marriage is very much an issue.

yeah, but it shouldn't be

[nothingclever]

Yes, he is a racist.

Wait...What? I wasnt paying attention. I didnt even watch the clip. Thought I would ruffle some feathers. HA!

[saysmydoctor]

:wallbash:

[nothingclever]

I knew I could get you here! Sweet! Nice play Dr.

[igetmikey]

That's Racist!