The GOPsters are racist, yes, but using that word too much weakens its meaning.
^^^^^ CB: Not using it enough weakens the fight against racism. The problem nowadays , including on the left, is that the word "racist" is not used enough , not at all that it is used too much. In fact, what we have too much on the left is concern that using the word "racist" too much will "weaken its meaning." There is no problem whatsoever of using the word "racist" too much on the left. We get formulations such as "Condeleeza Rice won't get the Republican nomination because of "you know what" ( the forbidden "r" word; don't want to use it because we might erode its meaning; give me a break)."
That's my point exactly.
^^^^^^
After all, the Demoncrats are also largely racist, no? at least many of the white ones?
^^^^ CB: Reason to be using the word "racist" even more !
^^^^^^^
also, it's good to highlight the structural/institutional elements of racism (something that liberals typically ignore, treating it as just a matter of subjectivity).
^^^^ CB: Of course, Republican and Democratic racism is one of the highlights of structural/institutional racism in U.S. politics.
^^^^^^
I've seen some critics of Bush suggest that _he_ isn't personally racist. That says something about the over-use of the term, doesn't it?
^^^^ CB: No it says something about the _underuse_ of the term. Those who defend Bush are typical of the problem of not using the term "racist" enough. Bush should be called out as racist, "structurally/institutionally" racist.