Playing To Race In Politics And In The Workplace
Hillary Clinton is a desperate housewife.
She felt entitled to the presidency and thought she was just going to waltz back into the White House without breaking a sweat. But, life and reality got in the way and she saw that she might not get her way. Sen. Clinton tried to tout experience to the masses, miscalculating that this was the theme for the ’08 elections. She lost Iowa.
Then, she tried to steal Obama’s theme of change saying that she had experience that could lead to change. She barely won New Hampshire—Clinton country. So, she panicked. She called together big-wigs in the Democratic Party, so they could figure out what was going wrong and how she could slow down or stop Sen. Obama’s campaign. In doing so, she showed her true colors. That’s why I’ve come up with a list of 5 top-of-mind ways that Sen. Clinton’s actions are similar to tactics companies use against complaining Black employees:
1. She devised a “scorched earth” plan similar to the way corporate execs or HR staff develop a “scorched earth” plan to use against an employee complaining of race discrimination, harassment, and/or retaliation. “Scorched earth” is used to silence, destroy, and seek the termination of a complaining employee. “Scorched earth” is an onslaught designed to be so unbearable that almost any reasonable employee would shut up or resign, rather than continue to be subjected to its wrath. (See www.hillaryis44.com for what is alleged to be a possible “backdoor” to Hillary Clinton’s war room)
2. She and her surrogates are using racially-based slander and innuendo to sully Sen. Obama’s reputation and to reinforce stereotypes. There have been at least 3 instances of Sen. Obama being accused of being a drug dealer by Clinton’s surrogates/supporters, including Robert Johnson (formerly of BET). Each time the remark has been subtle, but very clear…Sen. Obama used drugs and may have sold drugs. The repeated mentioning of drugs and drug dealing could only be done with the sanctioning of Sen. Clinton. It is her campaign. Clinton and her surrogates are engaging in race-based shenanigans that are similar to workplace campaigns that are designed to destroy the reputation of Black workers, to turn them into pariahs, and to cut them off from any potential support groups. Unsubstantiated claims are often made and are possibly retracted, but the damage is done.
3. She’s accusing Sen. Obama of being racially divisive and of causing the fuss that is permeating the airwaves. Just as is often the case in the workplace, she is making the Black person the troublemaker and the “race-baiter.” A friend of mine was accused by an HR manager of being a “segregationist” and a “race-baiter” because she tried to stand up against false attacks by her White supervisor and a White coworker. She was told she was playing for race because she was probably planning a lawsuit. That’s the trick…Whites play up the Black person as the one with racial issues and pretend to be innocent of any racial biases or motivations.
4. She is trying to get Sen. Obama off message. Just as in the workplace, complaining employees are often forced off the issues due to the workplace bait and switch. For instance, you start a meeting trying to explain that someone called you a monkey and end up discussing whether or not you are sensitive. Before you know it, you are never discussing that you were called a monkey and are only defending yourself against being sensitive, hypersensitive or of misunderstanding the events that transpired. This is the switch Clinton is trying to pull on Obama, trying to get him talking about Black vs. White, instead of about America as a whole.
5. She’s playing on the African-American habit of hating on other Blacks—to the benefit of Whites. She can count on attacking Sen. Obama, even racially, and STILL feel confident that some prominent African-Americans will publicly defend her. They may criticize her or warn her behind the scenes about her tactics, but the public face of these Blacks will show support for the White establishment. For instance, Robert Johnson (will discuss him tomorrow) called Sen. Obama a drug user and drug dealer through innuendo. This is similar to the workplace. Black employees are often coerced (through bribes, fear, etc.) or will volunteer to isolate/ignore or assist in targeting a Black coworker for the benefit of the Whites. Blacks are must decide if they will participate in the campaign against a targeted Black worker or if they will “sit it out” and stay on the sidelines—pretending not to hear, see or know anything about anything.
Some have asked if Hillary Clinton made the MLK remarks to lead to this point of racial debate. Who knows? But, she has played this at every turn to escalate the racial overtones. Clearly, she sees this discussion as a benefit to her long-term goal of winning the Democratic nomination. Wall Street Journal Writer, Peggy Noonan, says that Hillary Clinton is willing to do anything to win (read: destroy Barack Obama) and will deal with the fallout [with Blacks], when she gets to that point.
Yet, for some reason Blacks are willing to overlook all of these race-based tactics. We are still salivating at the chance to vote for her!! This is not about Blacks being sensitive. If Sen. Clinton misspoke, with the Lyndon Johnson vs. MLK comment, she should have said so. Instead, she chose to accuse Sen. Obama of planting thoughts and words in the ether, like he and his campaign staff have some sort of mass Black-people mind control apparatus at their fingertips.
Hillary Clinton has played the race-card to perfection. Sen. Obama has been running as an American candidate. Focusing on race has never been his intent because (as anyone with common sense can tell you) focusing on race virtually guarantees he won’t get into the White House. America will never vote for a Black man, who they feel is “racially polarizing.” You know what I mean…like Rev. Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al Sharpton, who both ran for president and failed to get the nomination. White Independents and Republicans, like the sort who’ve voted for Sen. Obama in Iowa and New Hampshire, will now feel much more comfortable considering him as “unelectable” because they will now focus on his race and not his message of “change.” Sen. Obama talked about doing things differently and now he is being entrapped into a race-based discussion that will get people thinking…see it’s just more of the same…he’s full of sht*t!
Black people…WAKE UP!
Sen. Obama has a reason for trying to keep things out of a racial focus. He has nothing to gain and everything to lose. He will NEVER be president, if he runs a campaign that seems to make everything a Black this vs. a White that.
This days-long debate, started by Hillary Clinton, benefits her in the long-term. She can rally Whites to her side because it’s her side they will pick, when it comes to a race-based issue. Whites, who’ve shown they are open to voting for Sen. Obama, will now think even harder about supporting him because he now looks like another run-of-the-mill, chip on his shoulder, angry, drug dealing Black man, who is militant and sees racial issues in the clouds!
Some of us have been so focused on labels (wondering why Obama doesn’t talk about being Black and why he doesn’t bring up Black issues every 2 seconds). Well, you wanted labels…
Go ahead and thank your “girl” Hillary for coming hard with them. In one fell swoop, she’s taken Sen. Obama from a viable candidate to a street-corner, drug slinging ni**er. How about that label?
Did your “girl” do you proud?
As I mentioned earlier, there’s a web site, which is alleged to be a “back door to her [Clinton’s] war room.” The link is www.hillaryis44.com. This site includes a post that is asking if Federal Prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, is going to “destroy” Sen. Obama for some connection to an “indicted slumlord” and because of “shady [land] deals.” The more you look at the site, the more it reads less like some regular blogger and more like a politician or political aide fronting as a blogger. It’s way too strategic and the negative information is really out there as far as character destruction. Check it out and then feel real proud about your candidate.
Have a great time pulling the lever for her in the primaries and general election.
I for one will NEVER vote for Sen. Clinton now. Her race-based politics hit way too close to home for my taste and I don't believe any of it is an accident. I don’t care who the Republican nominee is…Hillary Clinton ceases to exist in my book. She can't count on this Black person!
Tomorrow, I want to deal with Robert Johnson having the audacity to go to the drug issue, when he gave us all the stereotypes and former-drug dealing rappers on BET! Talk about timely…this fits right into my Blacks Hating on Blacks post from a few days ago!
She felt entitled to the presidency and thought she was just going to waltz back into the White House without breaking a sweat. But, life and reality got in the way and she saw that she might not get her way. Sen. Clinton tried to tout experience to the masses, miscalculating that this was the theme for the ’08 elections. She lost Iowa.
Then, she tried to steal Obama’s theme of change saying that she had experience that could lead to change. She barely won New Hampshire—Clinton country. So, she panicked. She called together big-wigs in the Democratic Party, so they could figure out what was going wrong and how she could slow down or stop Sen. Obama’s campaign. In doing so, she showed her true colors. That’s why I’ve come up with a list of 5 top-of-mind ways that Sen. Clinton’s actions are similar to tactics companies use against complaining Black employees:
1. She devised a “scorched earth” plan similar to the way corporate execs or HR staff develop a “scorched earth” plan to use against an employee complaining of race discrimination, harassment, and/or retaliation. “Scorched earth” is used to silence, destroy, and seek the termination of a complaining employee. “Scorched earth” is an onslaught designed to be so unbearable that almost any reasonable employee would shut up or resign, rather than continue to be subjected to its wrath. (See www.hillaryis44.com for what is alleged to be a possible “backdoor” to Hillary Clinton’s war room)
2. She and her surrogates are using racially-based slander and innuendo to sully Sen. Obama’s reputation and to reinforce stereotypes. There have been at least 3 instances of Sen. Obama being accused of being a drug dealer by Clinton’s surrogates/supporters, including Robert Johnson (formerly of BET). Each time the remark has been subtle, but very clear…Sen. Obama used drugs and may have sold drugs. The repeated mentioning of drugs and drug dealing could only be done with the sanctioning of Sen. Clinton. It is her campaign. Clinton and her surrogates are engaging in race-based shenanigans that are similar to workplace campaigns that are designed to destroy the reputation of Black workers, to turn them into pariahs, and to cut them off from any potential support groups. Unsubstantiated claims are often made and are possibly retracted, but the damage is done.
3. She’s accusing Sen. Obama of being racially divisive and of causing the fuss that is permeating the airwaves. Just as is often the case in the workplace, she is making the Black person the troublemaker and the “race-baiter.” A friend of mine was accused by an HR manager of being a “segregationist” and a “race-baiter” because she tried to stand up against false attacks by her White supervisor and a White coworker. She was told she was playing for race because she was probably planning a lawsuit. That’s the trick…Whites play up the Black person as the one with racial issues and pretend to be innocent of any racial biases or motivations.
4. She is trying to get Sen. Obama off message. Just as in the workplace, complaining employees are often forced off the issues due to the workplace bait and switch. For instance, you start a meeting trying to explain that someone called you a monkey and end up discussing whether or not you are sensitive. Before you know it, you are never discussing that you were called a monkey and are only defending yourself against being sensitive, hypersensitive or of misunderstanding the events that transpired. This is the switch Clinton is trying to pull on Obama, trying to get him talking about Black vs. White, instead of about America as a whole.
5. She’s playing on the African-American habit of hating on other Blacks—to the benefit of Whites. She can count on attacking Sen. Obama, even racially, and STILL feel confident that some prominent African-Americans will publicly defend her. They may criticize her or warn her behind the scenes about her tactics, but the public face of these Blacks will show support for the White establishment. For instance, Robert Johnson (will discuss him tomorrow) called Sen. Obama a drug user and drug dealer through innuendo. This is similar to the workplace. Black employees are often coerced (through bribes, fear, etc.) or will volunteer to isolate/ignore or assist in targeting a Black coworker for the benefit of the Whites. Blacks are must decide if they will participate in the campaign against a targeted Black worker or if they will “sit it out” and stay on the sidelines—pretending not to hear, see or know anything about anything.
Some have asked if Hillary Clinton made the MLK remarks to lead to this point of racial debate. Who knows? But, she has played this at every turn to escalate the racial overtones. Clearly, she sees this discussion as a benefit to her long-term goal of winning the Democratic nomination. Wall Street Journal Writer, Peggy Noonan, says that Hillary Clinton is willing to do anything to win (read: destroy Barack Obama) and will deal with the fallout [with Blacks], when she gets to that point.
Yet, for some reason Blacks are willing to overlook all of these race-based tactics. We are still salivating at the chance to vote for her!! This is not about Blacks being sensitive. If Sen. Clinton misspoke, with the Lyndon Johnson vs. MLK comment, she should have said so. Instead, she chose to accuse Sen. Obama of planting thoughts and words in the ether, like he and his campaign staff have some sort of mass Black-people mind control apparatus at their fingertips.
Hillary Clinton has played the race-card to perfection. Sen. Obama has been running as an American candidate. Focusing on race has never been his intent because (as anyone with common sense can tell you) focusing on race virtually guarantees he won’t get into the White House. America will never vote for a Black man, who they feel is “racially polarizing.” You know what I mean…like Rev. Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al Sharpton, who both ran for president and failed to get the nomination. White Independents and Republicans, like the sort who’ve voted for Sen. Obama in Iowa and New Hampshire, will now feel much more comfortable considering him as “unelectable” because they will now focus on his race and not his message of “change.” Sen. Obama talked about doing things differently and now he is being entrapped into a race-based discussion that will get people thinking…see it’s just more of the same…he’s full of sht*t!
Black people…WAKE UP!
Sen. Obama has a reason for trying to keep things out of a racial focus. He has nothing to gain and everything to lose. He will NEVER be president, if he runs a campaign that seems to make everything a Black this vs. a White that.
This days-long debate, started by Hillary Clinton, benefits her in the long-term. She can rally Whites to her side because it’s her side they will pick, when it comes to a race-based issue. Whites, who’ve shown they are open to voting for Sen. Obama, will now think even harder about supporting him because he now looks like another run-of-the-mill, chip on his shoulder, angry, drug dealing Black man, who is militant and sees racial issues in the clouds!
Some of us have been so focused on labels (wondering why Obama doesn’t talk about being Black and why he doesn’t bring up Black issues every 2 seconds). Well, you wanted labels…
Go ahead and thank your “girl” Hillary for coming hard with them. In one fell swoop, she’s taken Sen. Obama from a viable candidate to a street-corner, drug slinging ni**er. How about that label?
Did your “girl” do you proud?
As I mentioned earlier, there’s a web site, which is alleged to be a “back door to her [Clinton’s] war room.” The link is www.hillaryis44.com. This site includes a post that is asking if Federal Prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, is going to “destroy” Sen. Obama for some connection to an “indicted slumlord” and because of “shady [land] deals.” The more you look at the site, the more it reads less like some regular blogger and more like a politician or political aide fronting as a blogger. It’s way too strategic and the negative information is really out there as far as character destruction. Check it out and then feel real proud about your candidate.
Have a great time pulling the lever for her in the primaries and general election.
I for one will NEVER vote for Sen. Clinton now. Her race-based politics hit way too close to home for my taste and I don't believe any of it is an accident. I don’t care who the Republican nominee is…Hillary Clinton ceases to exist in my book. She can't count on this Black person!
Tomorrow, I want to deal with Robert Johnson having the audacity to go to the drug issue, when he gave us all the stereotypes and former-drug dealing rappers on BET! Talk about timely…this fits right into my Blacks Hating on Blacks post from a few days ago!
Labels: in the news, racial profiling, racist perceptions, stereotypes
1 Comments:
Greetings, and great post!
I just read an interesting reply to the issue of "diversity" programs at work:
A Male Engineer's Perspective on Women in Male-Dominated Fields
Although the response contains "women" in the title, the content references "women and minorities." The comment comes across as quite balanced and fair, unlike much of the other bitter "reverse discrimination" blather. I'll admit, some notions may barely reach fair (such as who truly qualifies or performs the best) based on the subjective nature - and can't always be trusted when/if hate is an underlying motive.'
I'd love to hear your thoughts on this white-male perspective regarding "diversity programs" and his assertion that these programs morph into "discrimination programs" (against whites) when it comes time to downsize...
Post a Comment
<< Home