Skip to main content

The Iowa Republican Party mocks racism

With the Republican Party having such a bad week when it comes to their rebranding efforts in trying to appeal to more female voters, it seems only fitting that they slip up at least once with regard to minority voters.

On Friday, the Iowa Republican Party decided to post a flowchart on their Facebook page, mocking racism and how the GOP likes to claim liberals pull out the race card more than a 21-year-old with the face of a 16-year-old pulls out his or her ID when going to a bar called Gettin' Messed Up.

Up top on the flowchart are the words, "Is someone a racist?"

Directly underneath that question is another question - "Are they white?"

If the person answers no, then it says, "They are not racist."

If someone answers yes, the question below that reads, "Do you like them?"

With regard to whether or not you like the person, underneath no is, "They are racist," while if you answer yes, then it says, "They are not racist."

At the very bottom of the flowchart is this message: "Note: If you think this flowchart isn't funny, then this flowchart is racist."

Not too long ago, the GOP tweeted that racism was over. This feeds into the notion that many of them actually believe such a thing. This flowchart insinuates that liberals don't actually believe racism to be determined by a person's words, actions, and beliefs with regard to one or more races, but by whether or not that person is white and whether or not we like the person. This is, of course, a ridiculous assertion of the situation and to poke fun at it like the Iowa Republican Party has, only worsens the matter.

The Iowa Republican Party, and the GOP in general, need to attend a few lectures with regard to rebranding, and in particular, with regard to the sensitivities of women, minorities, homosexuals, and non-Christians (especially Muslims). There are racists among each and every race of people. However, the Iowa GOP may want to answer a few questions:

1) What race makes up the majority of the U.S. population?

2) What race was subject to slavery in this country's history?

3) Has racism affected certain groups of people more so than others in this country's history? If so, who? If not, what are you smoking?

4) Does racism still exist in contemporary society or did electing the first African-American president (out of 44 presidents) negate that possibility? If you agree with the latter, then once again, what are you smoking? I seriously want to know, so I know to stay away from it.

5) If you answered any of these questions in a facepalm-inducing manner, my question to you is, what is racism? Define it for me.

After reading this article, I suppose I have one final question for the GOP - how is that whole "rebranding" thing going for you?

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/01/25/3205601/iowa-gop-racism/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"