Someone say Macacacatinated three times fast. How about Macacinated?

Oops, I think I threw in a little extra caca there. It should be Macacatinate.

I first read it as "macacinate," which is easier for my brain to say inside my head (if I said it outside my head I'd get in trouble). Sort of like "marinate in caca."

There will be no marinating in uncles.

$25.01? Blogospheric marking.

great post. gret verbage.
dumb senators just don't get it, do they?

don't mess with the brown.
ups ought to change it's slogan.

what can brown do for you?
macacanate you.

kapish?

There are too many ignorant people in politics in the US. The injustice in that comment is particularly tragic, people driving cabs working hard to earn a living and to provide a future for their children and support their families have nothing to do with terrorism. I do not know what he was thinking by saying something like that. People like Burns have completely lost it and instead of trying to make things better are making new enemies.

I don't know if y'all posted on this already, but most people probably have read that India now provides the fourth largest number of undocumented immigrants to the United States. And our community overall has shown unprecedented growth in the past five years... we beat Filipinos now, making us the second largest Asian group in the country after the redoubtable Chinese.

White racism from on high has stopped surprising me.

I'm loving the political activism stories. In Britain we recently had a columnist, Julie Burchill, use the term 'tea-towels on their heads' for an article. God that was infuriating. She's lucky she isn't a politician.

Sen. Burns was named "Worst Person of the World" for today by the lately maligned -- just ;)'ing, Taz -- Keith Olbermann (official transcript not yet available; unofficial transcript by me):

[O]ur winner, Senator Conrad Burns of Montana -- already joked about his house painter being an undocumented immigrant, already criticized Virginia firefighters who travelled 2000 miles to help out in Montana, now he's claimed there are terrorists who live among us and, "drive taxi cabs in the daytime and kill at night." The question, to Mr. Burns: do you still have the stamina to offend everybody in the 68 days until the elections? Senator Conrad Burns of Montana. Today's Worst Person, IN THE WORLD!!!"

But Amardeep, looks like your 8:16 ET post beat Keith's 8:50 ET decision to the punch!

Amardeep - Label me a pain in the behind, If you will.Or, just forgive me for the following query.

- Did you or Sepia Mutiny devote the same amount of attention [ not that you are obliged to do so] to Biden's [Lingua 7/11] and Hillary's [Gandhi's Gaseteria] racist/xenophobic remarks?

Btw - I am a card carrying and dubya lovin Republican, who couldn't be happier If Allen loses his senate seat and takes Burns with him.

Yeti:

I'd be interested in knowing the breakdown of Indian illegals by region of origin in India...do you (or does anyone reading this) have that info? Is it (as I suspect) mostly Punjabi and Gujarati?

Kritic, SM went after Joseph Biden pretty hard. See Anna's post and Abhi's post.

And a former SM blogger named Apul made fun of Hilary here.

Is the senator trying to insinuate that taxi cabs don't run at night? it must be causing a problem for his late-night hooker runs....

Btw - I am a card carrying and dubya lovin Republican, who couldn't be happier If Allen loses his senate seat and takes Burns with him.

If race baiting bothers you then you must be one unhappy Republican.From Goldwater to Nixon Reagan to Bush Sr to Bush Jr.....maybe you need, umm, a different party.

I always wonder about whether I would be a House Republican or a field Republican ;)
....if I was a republican.

In terms of the word, I definitely agree with Nina P. that macacinate rolls of the tongue much more easily than macacatinate. I think we can get rid of that "ati" in the middle. Or make is macacanate. Slight difference.

Btw - I am a card carrying and dubya lovin Republican,

Yes, one thing I credit Dubya with is of never engaging in race baiting.

i vote macacanate.
easier.
simplicity good.
complexity to complicated for me at this time right now ;)

My bet is on the Republicans replaying their white hands ad with a brown hands/face ad = terrorism this October.

Kritic -- in addition to the links noted by amardeep, please also read this one by siddhartha.

Tamasha -- as between "macacinate" and "macacanate," i'm willing to bet that it will be easier to get through security lines &c with the latter than with the former..... ;)

I second the call to Macacinate him.

- Did you or Sepia Mutiny devote the same amount of attention [ not that you are obliged to do so] to Biden's [Lingua 7/11] and Hillary's [Gandhi's Gaseteria] racist/xenophobic remarks?

See here.

can we try and not turn this into a partisan flamewar?

(speaking as a field republican)

Hm, I think I might go give my $25 to Jon Tester for Senate. Apparently it’s a close race; I vote we Macacatinate** him.

I concur! Lets bury this idiot. The numbers are real tight though. Donate here.

can we try and not turn this into a partisan flamewar?

(speaking as a field republican)

Oh please! You are hardly a republican yourself ;)
You have a long long way to go before you become a wingnut like me :)

White racism from on high has stopped surprising me.

Let's not forget about good ole desi racism either.

I always wonder about whether I would be a House Republican or a field Republican ;)

Or maybe even a Log Cabin Republican...

#27: Very well said.

none of you dicks will ever see in the inside of a jail cell, not in your wildest dreams.

Does this mean you are convinced enough of this to offer bail for anyone whose "dick" does land in jail, i.e., are you putting your mouth where other "dicks" might be?

mouth = money

mouth = money

priceless!

Un eff'in believable. Here we go again!

I don't know that I have any more t-shirt designs in me...

incidentally, Osman, I wore my "Macacas with attitude" tshirt to teach, the other day, and it was a big hit!

On a sort of related note....i hope you have seen that disgusting review of Sacred Games by the reviewer of the Scotsman on Sunday

Amardeep - I have as of yet not been able to find a breakdown of ethnicity. I would assume it's composed of Gujjus and Punjus too but I don't know. I also wonder what the religious breakdown is of that, and the economic breakdown. I make a lot of assumptions about what kind of class dynamics exist in various desi communities but the truth is that I really don't know. Maybe razib can look up some demographics for us.

You know one can't really walk into a 7-11 without speaking with a Macaca-ish accent and you can't drive into a gas station without having the last name gandhi. These propa-macaca-gandhis drive seemingly normal taxi cabs by day, but transform into supervillans at night and shoot lasers out of their turbans.

Desis who vote Republican? I am confused now. Are you guys in it for the tax cuts, the overturning of Roe vs. Wade or do you simply hate homosexuals?

Desis who vote Republican? I am confused now. Are you guys in it for the tax cuts, the overturning of Roe vs. Wade or do you simply hate homosexuals?

Don't be silly m'dear Meena, we vote Republican because they're the only ones who share our fear of black people.

(Speaking as field Republican)

You sure you GOP-voting desis ain't workin' for Exxon Mobil or the logging industry? "Trees? We ain't needin' no trees!"

Desis who vote Republican? I am confused now. Are you guys in it for the tax cuts, the overturning of Roe vs. Wade or do you simply hate homosexuals?

I think it's because they want "smaller government" and "less governmental spending" *cough cough* (see middle of page; free reg. req'd).

In 1964, the federal government spent 18.5 cents of the American economic dollar. In 2005, it spent 20.5 cents. This is not what small-government conservatives would call progress.

Surely a 'smaller government' and 'less governmental spending' can't weigh up to the consequences of an outright ban on abortion and gay marriage?

Meena, while I agree with your sentiments, this,

an outright ban on abortion and gay marriage?

won't happen- its not politically viable or feasible. Nevermind the legal hurdles.

But that is what the neocons - pardon, the Republican party - has been pushing for hasn't it?

Desis who vote Republican? I am confused now. Are you guys in it for the tax cuts, the overturning of Roe vs. Wade or do you simply hate homosexuals?

There's the Allen-Burns-RalphReed-Lott, etc wing of the GOP and then there's the GeorgeSchultz-GregMankiw-ElliotAbrams wing which desis are more keen too. It's a different sort of nuttiness. It's also perceptive because I'd bet the latter will be the dominant wing of the GOP and the GOP will be the dominant party for the next 10-15 years.

osman:
wearing the shirt again this wkend at macaca filled event, will see how many people recognize the shirt.. rather than being told last week, 'oh i thought it was curious george on your shirt'..

um. no.

i'm going to be doing a non-scienfitic study for 3 days...gathering data in the field..age range, education, geographic location to political affiliation...to see who/what/where recognizes the word/comment..

as i'm off to do my work on location in macacadom...
just wanted to with everyone a great wkend, from the SF meetup to events going around the USA (yeah, lucky us with the 3 day wkend, but we don't get bank holidays ;))..

will be back with a full report.
cheers.

But that is what the neocons - pardon, the Republican party - has been pushing for hasn't it?

To rally the troops come election time I would argue. Although, the GOP has been quite efficient in recognizing that they can't have the whole enchilada and have instead opted to chip away- partial-birth abortion ban comes to mind.

I think they have come around to the fact that even chipping away at abortion and gay marriage provides only marginal returns. Immigration and anti-immigration rhetoric is the mobilizing issue of the future mixed with stop-gap "solutions" from the business wing to appease the raging xenophobes.

I should say that my assertions could be totally wrong because the backwardness of middle and southern America always amazes me. To think xenophobes are sufficiently mobilized and organized to put political pressure on Washington to put more surveillance cameras and equip border police with night vision goggles is indicative that, while backwards, they have power. Further, the fact that right-wing radio has been advocating, nay, vehemently pounding their fists for the use of the term Islamo-facism, with success, is remarkable.

Desis who vote Republican? I am confused now. Are you guys in it for the tax cuts, the overturning of Roe vs. Wade or do you simply hate homosexuals?

You sound like you are really nuts...

Desis who vote Democrat ? I am confused now. Are you guys in it for the welfare checks, the overturning of the 2nd amendment, or do you simply hate families.

... see how dumb that sounds.

do you simply hate families

is there a such thing as a desi female who hates families? Not to get OT, but I've yet to ever meet one who doesn't want a family aka kids.

Let's not forget about good ole desi racism either.

And how many "desis" are senators"? I said racism from on high? A relatavizing something or the other in every crowd. Sheesh.

I am confused now. Are you guys in it for the welfare checks, the overturning of the 2nd amendment, or do you simply hate families.

Are you guys in it for the welfare checks

If I was so poor that I qualified for a welfare check, then HELL YEAH! Wont you be? Why wont any poor person be in favor of welfare checks?

the overturning of the 2nd amendment

Hell yeah! Then we can get sane gun control laws though unfortunately the problem right now is the gun lobby and not the second amendment. But repealing the second amnedment will help in looking at the second amendment at a policy level and not as a freedom v freedom haters level. Here is a great book book you might on the second amendment.

And BTW folks,~ 70% of desis seem to vote democrat. So the reality is partisan.

and then there's the GeorgeSchultz-GregMankiw-ElliotAbrams wing which desis are more keen too.

I am wondering about whats common between the above three people? I would imagine that Schultz could be characterized as a realist in foreign policy while Elliot Abrams is a neo-con and a criminal. Mankiw is an economist. I am not sure what wing would that be?

And how many "desis" are senators"? I said racism from on high?

My apologies. I didn't realize that on high = senators. I was thinking of desis who are also "high up" in both society and government (not specific to the U.S. alone).

is there a such thing as a desi female who hates families? Not to get OT, but I've yet to ever meet one who doesn't want a family aka kids.

You sound like you are really nuts...

Desis who vote Democrat ? I am confused now. Are you guys in it for the welfare checks, the overturning of the 2nd amendment, or do you simply hate families.

... see how dumb that sounds.
Much less dumb than those neocons you're supporting. Welfare is nothing to be ashamed of - but then I'd see how you'd think otherwise hailing from a country where folks work 3 jobs and still live below the poverty line, a country where health insurance is privatized...lovely state it is in. And the 2nd amendment - isn't that the one that concerns gun control(or should I say lack of control)? I'm not even wasting words on that one. I can't believe there are desis that would support the ownership of guns. Where did I say btw that I supported those gutless, spinless Democrats? The Reps HAVE actually been pushing for the abolishment of gay marriage, abortion and have supported tax cuts for the ultra rich, so my statement was not all that ridiculous.

I hate to say this, but it looks like y'all are just posed for 'nuther Handmaid's Tale/1984.

is there a such thing as a desi female who hates families? Not to get OT, but I've yet to ever meet one who doesn't want a family aka kids.

Oops, I think I threw in a little extra caca there. It should be Macacatinate.

Was that a kaka joke? Or am I the only one seeing that?

I can't believe there are desis that would support the ownership of guns.

This is what one desi once wrote about being deprived of the right to own firearms:

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." -- Mahatma Gandhi (An Autobiography OR The story of my experiments with truth, by M.K. Gandhi, p.238)

This is what one desi once wrote about being deprived of the right to own firearms:

I know LOTS of desis who bought firearms right after 9-11, for self-prtoection. From what I'm told, the unclejis weren't too good on the firing ranges ;-)

Meena,

I can't believe there are desis that would support the ownership of guns.

Owning firearms and other weaponry has traditionally been common amongst certain quarters of the population back in the subcontinent, and it therefore stands to reason that people from those backgrounds in particular would perhaps be more amenable to the idea of possessing guns in the US under certain circumstances.

Ryan Sager said it best on RealClearPolitics (one of those terrible righty sites): "What is going on with Republicans these days?"

Notice how the rebuttal to a politician's insult from some in this thread is to insult more people......all class, some of you! I hardly know where to begin.

Meena, as much as I love your dutch desitude, you are being sold a bill of goods about the differences between right and left in this country. I guess you must watch a lot of BBCi, huh? I love how neocon is thrown around in a completely loose fashion, without any knowledge of the roots of the term. Neoconservatives, as the term is traditionally and historically defined, were leftists who left the left due to the lack of a robust response to communism. We are talking about people from years ago and the defining idea certainly wasn't welfare or any domestic policies. It had to do with foreign policy. The original neocons were even former marxists, as I understand it.

Condoleeza Rice's father was part of a group of blacks who defended her neighborhood from anti-white violence after the bombings in Birmingham by patrolling neighborhoods with guns. They should have not defended themselves, right?

Are any of you up on the tenth anniversary of welfare reform, a thoroughly righty idea passed (to his credit and agains gnashing of teeth from many democrats) by Clinton? The same welfare to work reform that is being hailed by both right and left as one of the most successful policies ever?

I remember when this used to be one of the most intelligent boards on the net: all points of view, right, left, up, down, detailed and with reason and logic as the basis for commenting. Burns is a fool. He's not the only one.

I find the othering of my distinctly right of center views on this board oppressive!

The thing that worries me about this senator's ignorant comments, is that when there is a media outcry about such ignorance, there isn't an adequate explanation/correction - just an outrage about how un-PC the comments are. It seems like the only reply is "there are alot of hard-working taxi drivers" almost gives more power to Sen. Burns comments; almost equivalent to saying "there are SOME cab drivers that are terrorists - but don't worry, these are few and far between." That's simply not enough (btw, I'm not talking about here at SM, but in the popular media) because people will latch on to the ridiculous fear that there may be some terrorist cab drivers. Once that misguided perception is "out there" it's really hard to refute. There has to be somewhat of an education process so that innocent people are not hurt, as after 9/11. False perceptions, such as the belief that sikh turbans = arabs, or brown skin=arab, or arab=terrorist or muslim=terrorist, led to alot of attacks (and even about 9 reported deaths) of innocent people of both arab-descent as well as other browns who are not of arab-descent and/or muslim. I hate to call them retaliation murders because they DIDN'T DO ANYTHING to warrant any kind of retaliation.

SO, I believe that, after such idiotic statements, we, as a community, have to reach the media asap and attempt to educate the masses before some idiot goes out and murders another innocent victim. Something along the lines of acknowledging Sen. Burns error, a "brief" explanation of the diverse make-up of the brown community, and a clarification that there have been no terrorists from the cab-driving community.

Valerie Kaur's film, Divided We Fall: http://www.dwf-film.com/

http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/002190.html

http://www.saja.org/roundupsept11.html

The best rebuttal to Burn's is the Kos rebuttal to Allen: you know, the one linked on the news section. DEtailing prominent Indian Americans. We have cash Indian Americans. Why not take out an ad (where is best I'm not sure) based on that as a sort of non-partisan informational campaign? Yeah, you heard that right. I'm recommending Kos.

in #61 anti-white should be anti-black, of course. Apologies to the uptight types how don't like it when you correct your mistakes.

If I was so poor that I qualified for a welfare check, then HELL YEAH! Wont you be?

Why wouldn't any 'terrorist looking' store owners, and cab drivers keep a gun for protection ? Particularly in light of comments like these.

MD,

Yeah, you heard that right. I'm recommending Kos.

was that a pig i just saw breezing past my third-floor window?

no othering from this other, just disagreement. you are absolutely right that the neo-cons are ex-leftists, but the "response to communism" question wasn't the only thing that made them leave, and there were many views on the response to communism, not just appease or fight back. there continued to be many views within the american left (such as it is), and many disagreements on many matters, as anyone who ever went to one of those endless activist-group meetings in college can attest.

and, meena:

i feel you, sister, but i have to agree with MD that you're getting, or have formed in your mind, a very reductionist view of the situation over here. i know that the majority of public opinion in many countries is quite aghast at US foreign policy, or aspects of it, right now, and that many people around the world feel that the US isn't doing a very good job as a superpower, either internationally or for its own people. and i agree with that. HOWEVER, politics here has many shades of gray, many ambiguities, and a huge amount of local variation. republicans do not equal neo-cons, democrats are not all spineless (though i do wonder sometimes), and the oil industry isn't all about destroying trees. in fact, the oil industry in louisiana is united with environmentalists in wanting to restore the wetlands whose erosion over the years contributed to the katrina disaster. you might reply that the oil industry had something to do with getting to that situation in the first place, and you'd be right, but to assume that those interests were the same that prevail today would be a mistake. in politics as everything else, things change, unintended consequences prove more significant than intended ones, and so forth. here in the US even a lot of republicans are upset at the bush administration for one reason or another. we're working on it, sister, we're working on it, but we're going to do it our own way and it may appear surprising to others.

that's it for now. peace & respects to you both, and everyone else.

I love how neocon is thrown around in a completely loose fashion, without any knowledge of the roots of the term.

A little pretentious, arnt we!

Nina: thanks for the link!

Long time SM observer here. I felt obliged to post after I started noticing a trend here.

It appears overly hypersensitive to criticize Burns' remarks (or even Allen's, for that matter). There was no mention of us browns (or even Arabs) in his comments. Are those who "drive cabs" or "kill at night" exclusively brown? Does anyone know even, for sure, the origin and meaning of a "macaca"? Outside of a few obscure references, I don't believe anyone can present a relevent citation to the word in the American press/lexicon.

As someone mentioned previously, as far as we know, none of the 911 hijackers were cabbies.
If anything, accuse the senator (and Allen) of being stupid, not racist.

AMFD - Why the nasty condescension? Aren't the Democrats racist?

If all Indian - Amreekans started voting left, irrespective of their concerns and goals, not only would that lead terribly boring parties, it could also lead to the "being taken for granted syndrome", which I notice is already prevalent amongst some desis.

Hey, the Republicans can do better, but given what is out there, they work for me just fine ...for now.

Okay, apologies all around (she says shame-facedly). First, to call out name callers and then to name call someone as fool is wrong. I apologize.

Second, to call out mistakes when I made a whopper is the height of dumbness and I personified it in my comments. Neocons were often former trotskyites, not marxists. Duh. I don't know why I wrote that when I know better.

Finally, I think I need to take one of my periodic SM breaks. Hey, you can wait till I leave before you all start clapping, okay :)

This racism is coming from both sides, in varying degrees. I think we should call them out regardless of affiliations. To become apaologists for either side because their political positions resonate with our own positions is just foolishness, imo, and we'd deserve to be trammeled upon. Lets settle this racism shit first, make it like they can't mess with us, and then worry about affiliations.

"If anything, accuse the senator (and Allen) of being stupid, not racist."

Whatevs. The implications are dangerous, as I pointed out in my prev post (#62). And because a large number of cabbies are brown, just by association alone, it is enough to imply that "browns are terrorists". It would be naive to assume he just pulled the occupation out of a hat, randomly.

Btw, Below are a few of the "angry" Sepia reactions to Biden's racist/xenophobic remarks.

AK - "as for stupid comments like biden's, i think that as a community we tend to overreact to them way too much "

brown fury -" if you watch the video- he was clearly joking. it's the kind of joke if one of your buddies made (brown or non-brown), it would be funny, because they know you. and basically, "

Abhi - "Yeah, I tend to agree (especially with the latter part of brown fury's comment). It seems like Biden may have tried to be cute and came off sounding ignorant. For the record I still consider him a top 5 Dem. 1-3 are just a lot better."

Janeofalltrades - "And I sincerely believe there is no malice or negativity involved with it. They seriously are ignorant. Joe Biden unfortunately falls into that category."

Grow some cojones, ladies and Gents...

kritic, give it a rest. there were plenty of other people who said other things, too. and some of them vote democrat or are your dreaded leftists, like me. just as there are different views on the allen thing. if more people here seem up in arms about the allen thing than the biden thing, so what? we report (you notice we actually report on these things no matter the perpetrator) and you decide. your selective quoting tricks are silly, and insulting a whole group of people ("grow some cojones") is a jack move.

AMFD - Why the nasty condescension? Aren't the Democrats racist?

In short, NO, though I am sure there are some individual democrats who are racists.
The Democrats of course have racists among their ranks (byrd and a whole generation of ex-democrats in the south)
However the Democrats do not engage in racial demagoguery to win elections precisely because of the fact that the democratic base is not racist in general.
The Republicans engage in race baiting in elections precisely because of the fact that race baiting helps them gain votes in some quarters of the republican party.
Can you cite me one example of democrats using racial demagoguery in an election as a ploy to rally their base?

I was one of the people who were on the side of "not feeling hurt" by Biden's comments. I feel that he really wanted to be cute and that remark slipped. In anycase I had commented that "Indians running Dough nut shops" isnt offensive at all. Infact I take that as a compliment to the enterpenarial spirit of Desis.

Compare that against the xenophobic (welcome to America, WTF??) racist (macaca) remark and singling out of a young Desi boy infront of a large non-desi crowd. I mean c'mon... for god sake there is no comparison with what Biden said and what Allen did.

And yeah WTF is this genus monkey thing that every media person quotes. What about the French Tunisian connection of this A-hole Senetor?? Its like me calling a racist remark to some non-Desi person in real street Hindi and media explaining the "word" completely discounting the fact that in certain part of India that word means a certain specific thing. Ridiculous !!!!!

Siddartha - You seemed to have missed this much more "Jacker" comment by AMFD #16 -

" I always wonder about whether I would be a House Republican or a field Republican ;)
....if I was a republican."

And, Yes, I did use the quotes selectively to make a point about double standards.
IMHO, Racism is Racism is Racism...........

p.s. I sincerely apologize for the cojones remark. Esp, to the ladies.

Why did Dubya operatives accuse McCain of having a black child? Because that is perceived as a negative by some of the South Carolina Republican primary voters. Why do you think that Reagan started his election campaign from Neshoba County Fair in Philadelphia, Mississippi?
Look not all Republicans are racist and I am well aware of the fact. But we know the *wink* *wink* references and codes which appeal to the base racism of some white votes, especially in the South. To pretend otherwise would be naive.
The Republican base consitutes a group (not the majority) which is not at ease with the minorities. They have to be pandered to and at the same time done in a way which wont alienate the suburban moms. Thats a fact of political life in America.

Kritic, your balls are more than our balls. One day, we will grow them (our balls, not your balls) to a sufficient size. And when that day comes, they (the senators, not our balls) better all beware, both Democrat and Republican! But especially Democrats, who've had a free pass for too long.

Down with racist Democrats! We want double balls, not double standards!

Unfortunately, as a house republican, I also found the clinton and biden comments totally unoffensive. I mean, without stereotyping, sociology would be impossible.

Allen wasn't stereotyping, rather he was using a racial slur of which in all likelyhood, given his french background, he knew the meaning.

Burns was steroptyping, but not in the complimentary way of biden and clinton (who stereotyped indians as successful franchise owners---and btw, i think gandhi would have loved the clinton comment, given the way he was down with the lower classes. it's mostly the elitism in us that took offense.)

But can we accept positive stereotypes while rejecting negative ones? stereotypes have a basis in reality. most islamic fascists are brown, thus burns chose a brown profession to make his point that islamic terrorists live amongst us. he didn't say all browns or cabbies are terrorists, though the masses may take it that way; ergo the sensitivity.

Another day, another demagogue pandering to his brain-dead "CON-stituent's" fears of the Big Bad Brown Bomb-carrying Boogie-man. Yes, taxi-drivers, who routinely pull 12 hour shifts 6 days a week, barely see their families, have an abundance of free time to hatch ingenius acts of sabotage against AMRIKA. And then they wonder how a naive slack- jawed yokel could be so confused as to attack some innocent sardarji cabbie.

Sid & MD,

thanks for the lengthy explanations. And yes, I do as a matter of fact happen to watch a lot of BBC(1, 2 & World Service) as well as read The Guardian(and like-minded Dutch newspaper NRC Handelsblad). Not only that, but I have to point out that my father, who has spent many years in the USA, has also partly contributed to my pre-conceived notions, as well as conversations with various Americans. I know that a long while back the Republican party used to be an entirely different beast. But I actually still can't get over how anyone can vote for party which promotes Christianity, Creationism, anti-abortion, anti-homosexual(forget even the marriage part) and anti-enviromentalism on the whole. Probably there are some fringe Reps who feel rather differently but the point is that these people I have described above are the ones in power, and frankly I find that very worrying. By the way, I'm not so ignorant to think that loose gun laws are the only factor contributing to America's high crime rates. I've heard a saying that "a black person who supports the Republican party is like a chicken that supports Colonel Sanders", and frankly I think that applies to Indians as well. Although I don't think the GOP is racist at the outset, and though I don't feel that this current administration is hostile towards minorities either, it seems that all this Bible-thumping anyway amounts to the same thing. But that's just my perception.
]

(I can't count the amount of times my dad has stated that desis who vote for the GOP are just complete nutjobs. Often he jokingly expands this profound analysis to ALL Indian-Americans, which is quite unfair of course. Although admittedly the prejudice is still lurking even for me.)

I'll have to point out what I did earlier, that namely Welfare might not be such a bad thing after all. How positive is it that folks(read: single mothers) who have had no control over their situation have to work 3 jobs to support their families?

Vikram, it doesn't matter what Gandhi ultimately said, because the USA is not lawless, oppressed India of the turn of the century. The last thing anyone needs in a country like that is some sort of street gang or militia.

Although admittedly my dad lived in the US of A during the Reagan years, which might've biased him more against Republicans. Sorry dudes 'n dudettes, but there is no excuse for supporting Reagan, especially not for a desi.

Sid & MD

Oooh, snap! She called Siddhartha "Sid."

*places down teacup*

" I always wonder about whether I would be a House Republican or a field Republican ;)

Kritic, I was kidding with that comment.

Can you cite me one example of democrats using racial demagoguery in an election as a ploy to rally their base?

Kritic --

It's very clever of you to rip a few comments out of context to manufacture a point -- especially useful when you don't have much of one. Cleverness, at the end of the day, doesn't substitute for substance -- not only is Siddhartha correct that other people were critical in the Biden thread, but I think that each and every person you quote also said things that were critical of Biden.

But let me take your bait: As for stupid comments like Burns's, I tend to think that we overreact to them as well, without keeping our eyes on the ball. The comment count on this site for "comment news" is infinitely higher than for news on actual substantive issues, like the government's efforts to deprive US citizens of their fundamental right to enter their own country.

Which is not to say that we shouldn't react to and criticize these kinds of comments. But we should always pay attention to context -- the context of the statements themselves but also the context of their policy positions on substantive issues. Go back and read all of what I and others said about Biden, rather than pulling out a few quotes here and there that suit you.

So, what was your point again?

p.s. -- clinton's sistah souljah episode was more an effort to distance himself from his base and play for the center, not rally it.

AMfD:

Can you cite me one example of democrats using racial demagoguery in an election as a ploy to rally their base?

I may or may not belive the folllowing examples are racial demagoguery, but by dem standards they would qualify. off the top of my head:

1. Kerry destroyed Howard Dean by running an ad showing dean and Osama bin Laden, and charging dean w/ a lack of foreign policy experience. dems charged the republicans with mccarthyism and racism when they used obl in ads.

2. the guy running against sen allen used an anti-semetic ad, ironically.

3. the whole outsourcing issue plays into Xenophobia and racism against indians in particular, by dem standards.

4. robert byrd

5. the ad against bush, showing a a black man being dragged to his death, was racially inflamitory and not good for race relations in the US.

6. in the electoral year of 1996, clinton took up the hoax of black bhurch burnings, again not good for race relations.

7. the crown heights riot and anti-semitism

8. cynthia mckinney

MD --

Finally, I think I need to take one of my periodic SM breaks.

Why? Don't stay away too long....

Manju: You are right about cynthia mckinney. I dont believe Byrd has done race baiting in the last couple of decades. Actually there are some examples of democrats engaging in race baiting (especially black democrats) in local elections. I dont think the Democrats have done that in a presidential election.

Vikram, it doesn't matter what Gandhi ultimately said, because the USA is not lawless, oppressed India of the turn of the century. The last thing anyone needs in a country like that is some sort of street gang or militia.

Thanks for simplifying the matter for the rest of us. You obviously have a better handle on these issues to be able to dismiss Gandhi so easily. I find it ironic that for people who lament about the government abrogating more and more rights of the citizens, that depriving constitutionally legal gun ownership by that same intrusive government is encouraged wholeheartedly. You seem to forget that adage that "laws are followed only by the law abiding".

Believe it or not, concern for millions of Indians living in endemic poverty, takes precedence over Gay rights for some Indian - Amreekans.

And the party, which does the most to help bring India and America closer gets my vote.

clinton took up the hoax of black bhurch burnings, again not good for race relations.

Thank you! I've been saying this for years. The only thing I hate more than stupid white folks burning churches is stupid black folks complaining about it. Yes we all know racism is bad, but talking about it is hoaxy, and that's what's really killing race relations.

These black people need some balls on the double.

Although, really I have to point out that on this side of the Altantic we don't have anything to be proud of either, as the Cabinet fell for the 3rd time in the space of around 4-5 years(first Sebrenica, the second time some other severe bungling but I don't remember what, and now because one of the ruling parties decided to call crisis). Now I can actively vote in my first national election. That said, quite a lot of people were cheering on the fall of the past Cabinet. The joys of a multi party system!

I find it ironic that for people who lament about the government abrogating more and more rights of the citizens, that depriving constitutionally legal gun ownership by that same intrusive government is encouraged wholeheartedly

Some of us dont believe that the consitution does in fact allow for unrestricted ownership of guns in the hands of all citizens.

I find it ironic that for people who lament about the government abrogating more and more rights of the citizens, that depriving constitutionally legal gun ownership by that same intrusive government is encouraged wholeheartedly. You seem to forget that adage that "laws are followed only by the law abiding".

Some of us dont believe that the consitution does in fact allow for unrestricted ownership of guns in the hands of all citizens.

Some of us don't believe that 'gun control' ought to be a euphemisim for an outright ban on the ownership of firearms by anyone beside the state police. No group in America is calling for 'unrestricted ownership of guns in the hands of all citizens'.

Some of us don't believe that 'gun control' ought to be a euphemisim for an outright ban on the ownership of firearms by anyone beside the state police. No group in America is calling for 'unrestricted ownership of guns in the hands of all citizens'.

I dont believe the constitution gives right to any private citizen to have even restricted ownership of guns.

Some of us dont believe that the consitution does in fact allow for unrestricted ownership of guns in the hands of all citizens

Aren't felons legally barred from owning guns ? So I wouldn't say all citizens are free to own guns.

The Office of Legal Counsel for the the Attorney General issued a memorandum that states in part:

we conclude that the Second Amendment secures a personal right of individuals, not a collective right that may only be invoked by a State or a quasi-collective right restricted to those persons who serve in organized militia units. link

I don't see anyone calling for the revoking of the First Amendment even though it is used by Neo-nazis and other hate groups to spread their propaganda. And legal organizations bend over backwards to offer such groups legal assistance to allow their unrestricted access to that right against any government/public opposition. So why should the Second Amendment be revoked if it is misused by a criminal group ?

Parroting ACLU's position on 2nd amendment is not enough.

I don't see anyone calling for the revoking of the First Amendment even though it is used by Neo-nazis and other hate groups to spread their propaganda. And legal organizations bend over backwards to offer such groups legal assistance to allow their unrestricted access to that right against any government/public opposition. So why should the Second Amendment be revoked if it is misused by a criminal group ?

Vikram: I dont believe that the 2nd amendment ever intended to give rights to private citizens to own guns. That has nothing to do with the fact that criminals now use guns and so they need to be controlled. I never made that argument.

P.S.: As far as the first amendment goes, the congress itself repeatedly passed laws curtailing freedom of speech till that liberal activist Judge Holmes ruled on it for the first time in 1919.

Parroting ACLU's position on 2nd amendment is not enough.

I agree. When they do it, it's parroting. When we do it, it's original thought. If I love one thing, it is original thought. And guns. Two. Two things. I love two things. Original thought and guns. And balls.

Parroting ACLU's position on 2nd amendment is not enough.

I am not regurgitating the ACLU position on guns. I have advocated for private ownership of guns here before on SM. I am however questioning the constitutional basis of this right.

Vikram: I dont believe that the 2nd amendment ever intended to give rights to private citizens to own guns. That has nothing to do with the fact that criminals now use guns and so they need to be controlled. I never made that argument

Considering that the rest of the U.S. Constitution is geared towards protecting the individual citizen, where do you draw your interpretation that this amendment is not an individual/private citizen's right ? It would seem odd that people interpret the rest of the Constitution in terms of protecting an individuals right to free speech, vote, practice religion etc, but yet somehow the Second Amendment is not interpreted in that fashion. Seems logically inconsistent.

Considering that the rest of the U.S. Constitution is geared towards protecting the individual citizen, where do you draw your interpretation that this amendment is not an individual/private citizen's right ? It would seem odd that people interpret the rest of the Constitution in terms of protecting an individuals right to free speech, vote, practice religion etc, but yet somehow the Second Amendment is not interpreted in that fashion. Seems logically inconsistent.

Vikram: Thats not entirely true. A lot in the constitution is also about protecting the rights of the state vis-a-vis the federal government. I believe the second amendment akin to the tenth amendment was a check on the powers of the federal government. We have regulated militias today and they are called National Guard. Though I would suggest that the right of the states to take on the US with a well regulated militia were kind of taken care of in the Civil War ;)
In a nutshell, the second amendment IMO was intended as a tool for federalism and a check on federal power in the hands of the states. I dont believe that it was ever intended as an individual right in the hands of private citizens. Reasonable minds can of course disagree and thats fine :)

if you see something say something - you is too funny, man. reeelly phunee.
p.s. i do not have anything original to say on the 2nd amendment, because i am a federalist.

Al Mujahid, you are right about the original intentions of the 2nd amendment, but the idea that the government would prevent people from owning guns was probably seen as ridiculous in then highly rural America. This wouldn't be the first time a law is used to defend a liberty it originally wasn't written to protect.

DesiDancer,

I'm glad to hear that your students like the shirts. Brings a smile to my face.

Speaking of smiling, when I posted the Teletubby Bhangra dance video on my blog I specifically thought of you as the audience.

This wouldn't be the first time a law is used to defend a liberty it originally wasn't written to protect.

Well said! I couldnt agree more.

This wouldn't be the first time a law is used to defend a liberty it originally wasn't written to protect

I doubt Constitution writers intended the First Amendment to be the legal defense of the thriving multi-billion dollar US porn industry either... ;)

I doubt Constitution writers intended the First Amendment to be the legal defense of the thriving multi-billion dollar US porn industry either... ;)

Some historians have made the case that the first amendment was more of a slogan than anything else.

AMfD:

I am wondering about whats common between the above three people? I would imagine that Schultz could be characterized as a realist in foreign policy while Elliot Abrams is a neo-con and a criminal. Mankiw is an economist. I am not sure what wing would that be?

I guess my claim here was to show the viable and intelligible nexus that desi Republicans (probably) admire which forms a frame of orientation sans the Bible-thumping, immigration-bashing camp: the statesman (Shultz), neoclassical economist and libertarian but not completely off the deep end like Milton Friedman (Mankiw), and the hawkishness of Abrams and his judicial philosophy.

Point being, I rarely see desi Republicans identify with the Bible Belt wingnuts and more with the leftover Reaganites.

Biden or Hilary's comments were not as demeaning as Allen's or Burns', were they?