Justice Dept silent as Holder charges critics with racism

The liberals/progressives/socialist best argument...

Attorney General Eric Holder accused his growing chorus of critics of racist motivations in a Sunday interview published in the New York Times. When reached by The Daily Caller Monday morning, the Department of Justice provided no evidence to support the attorney general’s claims.

Holder said some unspecified faction — what he refers to as the “more extreme segment” — is driven to criticize both him and President Barack Obama due to the color of their skin. Holder did not appear to elaborate on who he considered to make up the “more extreme segment.”

“This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him,” Holder said, according to the Times. “Both due to the nature of our relationship and, you know, the fact that we’re both African-American.”

The White House hasn’t returned requests for comment on whether President Barack Obama agrees with his top law enforcement officer’s allegations of racial motivations.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/12/19/justi ... z1h0FHNTGF

Racism is the lefts stock answer to any argument that they lack the intelligence to make. It can't be helped, it's out of their control, it's like a small child, when that child runs out of "it's mine... gimme gimme... because I said so... I'm going to cry.... and stomp my foot" tactics... then they revert to the one catch-all-ace-in-the-hole... race. Happens all the time.

This is something I would expect from a no talent scumbag like Sharpton but not the AG of the United States. He really is digging deep for distractions and excuses for his ineptness. Time to go pal.

Holder's African-American? You'd think we could get an American sans the "-" to head up the justice department. (I really hate that description unless it is used for someone who was born in Africa and immigrated here or vice versa.)

towermonkey wrote: Holder's African-American? You'd think we could get an American sans the "-" to head up the justice department. (I really hate that description unless it is used for someone who was born in Africa and immigrated here or vice versa.)

Hey... I think you have a point there... if holder had said "“This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him,” Holder said, according to the Times. “Both due to the nature of our relationship and, you know, the fact that we’re both Americans.”"

Yea... that works. No... it sound just stupid.

So... if you support the statement by Holder... "Holder said some unspecified faction — what he refers to as the “more extreme segment” — is driven to criticize both him and President Barack Obama due to the color of their skin." then could you explain to me how is is racist to oppose Mr. Holder. I would like to make sure I don't make the same racist mistake when dealing with someone else of color.

At least on the left it appears that it might be clear cut examples, unlike those on the right and the tea party it is very well hidden.... you have to search long and hard for even obscure examples such as this:

Facebook faux pas:

California libertarian and Tea Party darling Jules Manson is caught calling for the assassination of President Barack Obama and his children.

On Sunday, many Facebook users were greeted by the shocking spectacle of a California libertarian and Ron Paul supporter by the name of Jules Manson advocating for the assassination of President Barack Obama. Manson, a failed politician, recently ran for and lost a seat on the City of Carson’s City Council last March.

The following is the text of Manson’s racist, treasonous, deplorable post:


“Assassinate the f

---

n

---

and his monkey children”

Manson posted the disturbing and openly racist call to assassinate Obama and Obama’s children on his own Facebook wall, which was open to the public.

http://www.examiner.com/democrat-in-nat ... and-family


But your right, there is extreme racism on the left.... not on the right.

netdude wrote: At least on the left it appears that it might be clear cut examples, unlike those on the right and the tea party it is very well hidden.... you have to search long and hard for even obscure examples such as this:

Facebook faux pas:

California libertarian and Tea Party darling Jules Manson is caught calling for the assassination of President Barack Obama and his children.

On Sunday, many Facebook users were greeted by the shocking spectacle of a California libertarian and Ron Paul supporter by the name of Jules Manson advocating for the assassination of President Barack Obama. Manson, a failed politician, recently ran for and lost a seat on the City of Carson’s City Council last March.

The following is the text of Manson’s racist, treasonous, deplorable post:


“Assassinate the f

---

n

---

and his monkey children”

Manson posted the disturbing and openly racist call to assassinate Obama and Obama’s children on his own Facebook wall, which was open to the public.

http://www.examiner.com/democrat-in-nat ... and-family


But your right, there is extreme racism on the left.... not on the right.

Well... thank you for trying to answer a question I never proposed. Simple minds use simple debating techniques. Tu Quoque is so hoary and old. Would you like to point out where I suggested there is no racism on the right? Bet you can't. You see, the topic is Holder's claim that those who criticize him are racists. Instead of trying to approach the topic, you whined "they do it too... na... na... na..."

But your deflection is weak, worthless and should be ignored.

Does anyway really doubt that there are some extremists out there, such as white supremicists, who criticize AG Holder and President Obama primarily because of their skin color?

As the quoted article fails to point out, AG Holder did say that only a few of the extremists had an animus against he and President Obama because they were African-Americans but that most of his critics were due to idealogical differences. This is quite a bit different than the OP and right wing blog would have you believe. But then the right never lets actual facts get in the way of a good "outrage".


"Of that group of critics, Mr. Holder said he believed that a few — the “more extreme segment” — were motivated by animus against Mr. Obama and that he served as a stand-in for him. “This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him,” he said, “both due to the nature of our relationship and, you know, the fact that we’re both African-American.”

Mr. Holder, however, attributed most of the hostility to underlying ideological differences. “I think that people, despite my law enforcement background, view me as taking these consistently progressive stands, and I think that, philosophically, there is a desire to get at that person,” he said. “But I think the stands I have taken are totally consistent with a person who is looking at things realistically, factually.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/18/us/po ... der&st=cse

Something the Dog Said wrote: Does anyway really doubt that there are some extremists out there, such as white supremicists, who criticize AG Holder and President Obama primarily because of their skin color?

As the quoted article fails to point out, AG Holder did say that only a few of the extremists had an animus against he and President Obama because they were African-Americans but that most of his critics were due to idealogical differences. This is quite a bit different than the OP and right wing blog would have you believe. But then the right never lets actual facts get in the way of a good "outrage".


"Of that group of critics, Mr. Holder said he believed that a few — the “more extreme segment” — were motivated by animus against Mr. Obama and that he served as a stand-in for him. “This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him,” he said, “both due to the nature of our relationship and, you know, the fact that we’re both African-American.”

Mr. Holder, however, attributed most of the hostility to underlying ideological differences. “I think that people, despite my law enforcement background, view me as taking these consistently progressive stands, and I think that, philosophically, there is a desire to get at that person,” he said. “But I think the stands I have taken are totally consistent with a person who is looking at things realistically, factually.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/18/us/po ... der&st=cse

The "extremist" Mr. Holder is talking about is the members of the House who are looking into his possible mishandling of the Fast and Furious affair. Holder is not talking about some far right wing nutcase sitting out in the woods scratching his ass and trying to figure out a way to "get that n*****r." The article failed to point out what you are saying because HOLDER WAS TALKING ABOUT HIS POLITICAL RIVALS, not some nut cases out in the hinterland.

Boy... you'll make up all kinds of sh*t to cover for the administration. Show me where Holder is talking about "white supremacists"? You just made that up and pulled it out of your rear... didn't you?

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: Does anyway really doubt that there are some extremists out there, such as white supremicists, who criticize AG Holder and President Obama primarily because of their skin color?

As the quoted article fails to point out, AG Holder did say that only a few of the extremists had an animus against he and President Obama because they were African-Americans but that most of his critics were due to idealogical differences. This is quite a bit different than the OP and right wing blog would have you believe. But then the right never lets actual facts get in the way of a good "outrage".


"Of that group of critics, Mr. Holder said he believed that a few — the “more extreme segment” — were motivated by animus against Mr. Obama and that he served as a stand-in for him. “This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him,” he said, “both due to the nature of our relationship and, you know, the fact that we’re both African-American.”

Mr. Holder, however, attributed most of the hostility to underlying ideological differences. “I think that people, despite my law enforcement background, view me as taking these consistently progressive stands, and I think that, philosophically, there is a desire to get at that person,” he said. “But I think the stands I have taken are totally consistent with a person who is looking at things realistically, factually.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/18/us/po ... der&st=cse

The "extremist" Mr. Holder is talking about is the members of the House who are looking into his possible mishandling of the Fast and Furious affair. Holder is not talking about some far right wing nutcase sitting out in the woods scratching his ass and trying to figure out a way to "get that n*****r." The article failed to point out what you are saying because HOLDER WAS TALKING ABOUT HIS POLITICAL RIVALS, not some nut cases out in the hinterland.

Boy... you'll make up all kinds of sh*t to cover for the administration. Show me where Holder is talking about "white supremacists"? You just made that up and pulled it out of your rear... didn't you?

If you actually read the articles and if you had the ability to read and comprehend my post, I did not say that Holder was talking about white supremecists, that was my reference. The group of critics that AG Holder was referrring to were not just members of the House, but commentators, and right wing bloggers. Since you have been unable to actually read the article from which AG Holder is quoted, I have provided the relevant quote (in bold) for your benefit. Must suck to be you. Despite your pathetic attempts at misquoting and lying to justify your "outrage", the true facts do not support your slander.


But Mr. Holder contended that many of his other critics — not only elected Republicans but also a broader universe of conservative commentators and bloggers — were instead playing “Washington gotcha” games, portraying them as frequently “conflating things, conveniently leaving some stuff out, construing things to make it seem not quite what it was” to paint him and other department figures in the worst possible light.

Of that group of critics, Mr. Holder said he believed that a few — the “more extreme segment” — were motivated by animus against Mr. Obama and that he served as a stand-in for him. “This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him,” he said, “both due to the nature of our relationship and, you know, the fact that we’re both African-American.”

Mr. Holder, however, attributed most of the hostility to underlying ideological differences. “I think that people, despite my law enforcement background, view me as taking these consistently progressive stands, and I think that, philosophically, there is a desire to get at that person,” he said. “But I think the stands I have taken are totally consistent with a person who is looking at things realistically, factually.”