Nader asks if Obama will be "Uncle Tom"

Yellow Ledbelly

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

I'm undecided on how racist the comment really is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncle_Tom

"Uncle Tom is a pejorative for a black person who is perceived by others as behaving in a subservient manner to White American authority figures, or as seeking ingratiation with them by way of unnecessary accommodation. The term Uncle Tom comes from the title character of Harriet Beecher Stowe's novel Uncle Tom's Cabin, although there is debate over whether the character himself is deserving of the pejorative attributed to him. Stowe never meant Uncle Tom to be a degrading character, but the term as a pejorative has developed based on how later versions of the character, stripped of his strength, were depicted on stage.[1]

It is commonly used to describe black people whose political views or allegiances are considered by their critics as detrimental to blacks as a group."

Basically what it means is: a black who kisses whitey's ass.
I really don't find any racism in Nader's remarks at all. I find his use of the term unnecessary (corporate whore, as someone else suggested seems more appropriate), but Uncle Tom is a term that I have never once heard a white person use in reference to a black. Blacks use it often though....and again that's around here

El_Kabong

MrBrian wrote:

The term first was used not to degrade blacks. Nader tried to speak from a more historical context. But again, in this day and age of political correctness it was not the best choice of words because it would only gain bad press and people would only focus on that phrase and not the question being asked which was infact very fair and correct.

Nevertheless, the Obama supporters who are so angry at this, if/when Obama shoots missiles or bombs a country, perhaps continues Americas digusting support of Israel...Will you be as angry at Obama for killing people as you are for Nader asking a question? Regardless of how he asked it or the words he used.

If Obama has Dennis Ross as a main advisor to him, will you be angry at Obama for having someone so backwards as that for an advisor? Or what if he's given secretary of state? Even worse.

maybe they'll dismiss it like they dismissed obama's remarks about why pennsylvania voted for Hillary in the primaries....or maybe not

and i doubt they even know who dennis ross is and they certainly didn't care when he picked the ceo from citibank (who called the sec of treasury asking to help cut some slack to enron) and a pro NAFTA/WTO lobbyist/lwayer as top advisors

Rhinocerous Surprise

decides2dream wrote:

sure.
i agree it's wordplay.
however, it's poorly chosen wordplay at best...he would not utilize such wordplay for a white president elect.
and when given the chance to reword, he did not. VERY poor choice imo.
it completely ruins the focus of his message and i would think he's overall message would be far more important to him than merely wordplay.

Absolutely. I won't deny that using the term was boneheaded, and the refusal to retract even moreso. But for people to say that he can't be taken seriously anymore is just knee-jerk reactionary nonsense - especially when it remains to be seen if he had a valid - though poorly-worded - point about Obama.

El_Kabong

Urban Hiker wrote:

Uncle Tom is a pejorative for a black person who is perceived by others as behaving in a subservient manner to White American authority figures, or as seeking ingratiation with them by way of unnecessary accommodation. The term Uncle Tom comes from the title character of Harriet Beecher Stowe's novel Uncle Tom's Cabin, although there is debate over whether the character himself is deserving of the pejorative attributed to him. Stowe never meant Uncle Tom to be a degrading character, but the term as a pejorative has developed based on how later versions of the character, stripped of his strength, were depicted on stage.[1]

It is commonly used to describe black people whose political views or allegiances are considered by their critics as detrimental to blacks as a group.


And


On November 4, 2008, in an interview with Fox News' Shepard Smith regarding an interview presidential candidate Ralph Nader did earlier in the day for Houston radio station KTRH, Nader challenged Barack Obama saying, "To put it very simply, he is our first African-American president. And we wish him well. But his choice, basically, is whether he is going to be Uncle Sam for this country, or Uncle Tom for the giant corporations". Smith asked Nader "I just wonder if in hindsight you wished you'd used a phrase other than Uncle Tom?" to which Nader replied, "Not at all.", continuing with a query posed to Smith "Do you know what the historic..." before Smith cut him off and closed the segment.[10]

Ralph Nader used the term Uncle Tom when he stated that President Obama would need to ask himself the question whether he is an Uncle Sam or Uncle Tom for the nation.

All from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncle_Tom - but you can see the original references under, yep, References

bah, don't let the facts get in the way of their spite!

decides2dream

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

Absolutely. I won't deny that using the term was boneheaded, and the refusal to retract even moreso. But for people to say that he can't be taken seriously anymore is just knee-jerk reactionary nonsense - especially when it remains to be seen if he had a valid - though poorly-worded - point about Obama.

i agree as well. however, people can say and think as they see fit. i think a LOT of people believed he was not to be taken seriously long before this comment. that's not my opinion, but really...it's neither here nor there. only real point is, especially when given the chance to rethink his words, he still said no. for me, that speaks volumes...so sure, i lose a bit of respect for the man b/c of it...ad i would say the same of anyone. we all make gaffes, but when offered the chance to acknowledge yours, have the good grace to do so. it ruins the power of your message otherwise along with tarnishing your image.

El_Kabong

Gonzo1977 wrote:

I have followed Ralph Nader for years. My wife and I were Nader's Raiders in University and took part in many volunteer efforts in our Communtiy to get Ralph on the ballot in 1996 and 2000. We knew full well what we were doing in 2000 by casting our vote to Ralph. I felt very strongly at the time that voting for Nader was the way to go, regardless of whether it would send a clown like Bush to The White House.

I've always believed that we need a strong 3rd party opposition in this country. But of course alot has changed since 2000, and I now believe strongly that we have to organize and build the party from the ground up rather than simply throw Nader on the ballot every 4 years without any other representation in government.

I do not recognise the man that I once held in such high regard. Despite pleas from his closest friends and workers in 2004, Ralph basically told us all to "Fuck Off"; shunning the very people that have supported him, and been with him since the very beginning.

I do not believe in this man any more because I strongly feel that his campaigns are no longer the agent of change that he proclaims, but nothing more than a selfish ego driven exercise in vannity.

These comments by Ralph comparing Obama to an "Uncle Tom" are further proof that Ralph has completly lost the plot.

His ideas regarding this country are still very strong, but it's tragically apparent that he has let his ego take control of the wheel. These actions have sadly lead him to a series of tragic mistakes and untasteful comments that do nothing more than tarnish his once great vision and legacy.

I'm positive that a younger Ralph Nader would shutter at these recent comments.

I hope that someday Ralph comes to his senses and works with us rather than continue to shut out those that share his vision, yet have different ideas on how to fully realize them.

sigh, does no one care about the truth? he didn't call obama an uncle tom, he said we will see if he will be an ucnle sam or an uncle tom. if you promise to pay me back $20 monday and i say 'we'll see if you are telling me the truth or lying to me' am i calling you a liar????

flywallyfly

El_Kabong wrote:

sigh, does no one care about the truth? he didn't call obama an uncle tom, he said we will see if he will be an ucnle sam or an uncle tom. if you promise to pay me back $20 monday and i say 'we'll see if you are telling me the truth or lying to me' am i calling you a liar????

Spin spin spin. Sigh.

decides2dream

El_Kabong wrote:

sigh, does no one care about the truth? he didn't call obama an uncle tom, he said we will see if he will be an ucnle sam or an uncle tom. if you promise to pay me back $20 monday and i say 'we'll see if you are telling me the truth or lying to me' am i calling you a liar????

nope.
but you are also not using racially loaded language in your comments. that is all. he could've gotten the exact same message across in numerous different ways, but he chose to utilize the words he did. he was offered the shance to reword, and he chose his witty wordplay to the detriment of his message. for good or for bad, his focus should be on getting his intended message to as many people as possible if he truly wants it to be effective....and he is obviously an intelligent enough man to realize many would get hung up on his language choice. and yet he still chose it and reaffirmed it. if obama weren't a black man...the analogy wouldn't work, so why even utilize it i think is the point.

El_Kabong

VictoryGin wrote:

yes. what i enjoy in my president and leader of this ginormous, diverse nation is a total lack of communication skills!

where would you place when you say you lost a primary b/c the voters cling to their guns and religion and are anti-immigrant??

VictoryGin wrote:

if nader can't even handle denigrating obama, a man he's be slamming for quite a while now so he supposedly knows a lot about him, how would he handle communication with the rest of us, with congress, with leaders of other nations?

i don't see how saying 'time will tell if obama is an uncle sam or uncle tom' is denigrating him

VictoryGin wrote:

sadly for nader, who after years of running for president, hasn't figured out that people will pay attention to the uncle tom part and will ignore or dismiss the rest. what's that they say about someone who keeps doing the same thing, expecting different results?

kinda like ppl who keep putting their support behind corporate candidates and expecting change, eh?

El_Kabong

flywallyfly wrote:

Spin spin spin. Sigh.

sorry, i just don't see saying 'we'll see if...' is the same thing as saying 'he IS....'

freindlyfired

Ralph knew exactly what he was saying... he asked a question of Obama as he has throughtout his campaign. How many times has Obama said the word poor?

I dont think phrasing the question is being racist, he said it to make a point. He made his point and challenged Obama, plain and simple.
As for the the moronic interviewer, if you read the transcript Nader was about to explain the term and his use of it but was cut off. This guy took jabs from the outset using spoiler and such.

decides2dream

freindlyfired wrote:

Ralph knew exactly what he was saying... he asked a question of Obama as he has throughtout his campaign. How many times has Obama said the word poor?

I dont think phrasing the question is being racist, he said it to make a point. He made his point and challenged Obama, plain and simple.
As for the the moronic interviewer, if you read the transcript Nader was about to explain the term and his use of it but was cut off. This guy took jabs from the outset using spoiler and such.

i honestly don't believe ralph is a racist or was behaving in a racist manner. the main point is.....WHY make that point? to what purpose? bottomline, if obama were not black...he'd not have made the comment, pure and simple. so WHy bring race into the equation at all? just call him on being a sell-out, a corporate whore...whatever. as i said earlier....he went for the witty wordplay to the detriment of his message. if you need to explain your message, than obviously you did a poor job of conveying your message in the first place.

Rhinocerous Surprise

decides2dream wrote:

i honestly don't believe ralph is a racist or was behaving in a racist manner. the main point is.....WHY make that point? to what purpose? bottomline, if obama were not black...he'd not have made the comment, pure and simple. so WHy bring race into the equation at all? just call him on being a sell-out, a corporate whore...whatever. as i said earlier....he went for the witty wordplay to the detriment of his message. if you need to explain your message, than obviously you did a poor job of conveying your message in the first place.

To be fair, the media have been bringing race into it for as long as Obama's been campaigning - the four hundred thousand shots of black families crying tears of joy after Obama's victory were fairly exploitative. And I seem to remember you yourself defending Eddie's "colour in the White House" comment - why did he have to bring race into it?

Trailer

I bet Eddie's wishing he didn't waste all that time and effort supporting this guy. The sad thing is that I'm sure there are some people here who worship Eddie and will do whatever he tells them to do. I have no problem if they agreed with Nader's policies and voted for him on their own research... but some of these fans are fanatical followers of whatever Eddie's current gospel is.

cincybearcat

I know some people here just love Nader...I just think he's an old douche bag.

To each their own, but I don't know why this old white douche bag is injecting race into Obama presidency, again and again.

MrBrian

cincybearcat wrote:

I know some people here just love Nader...I just think he's an old douche bag.

To each their own, but I don't know why this old white douche bag is injecting race into Obama presidency, again and again.

He's not white. Anyway, race is always a factor and I think its important to put what he said into context.

But i'm sure you must agree with many things Nader speaks about? Regardless of what you think about him.

cincybearcat

MrBrian wrote:

He's not white. Anyway, race is always a factor and I think its important to put what he said into context.

But i'm sure you must agree with many things Nader speaks about? Regardless of what you think about him.

Nader has certainly made some correct statements.

W.C. Carter

VictoryGin wrote:

yes. what i enjoy in my president and leader of this ginormous, diverse nation is a total lack of communication skills!

I, personally, am more interested in what a candidate has to say than how he says it. Nader hasn't always been the best about communicating his message in bite size words the average ignorant American can take without having to really think about.
I would like to reiterate the second definition that isn't race specific:
a member of a low-status group who is overly subservient to or cooperative with authority
I think a lot of people just hear Uncle Tom=named after black character=is possible to be construed as racially based=Obama is black=Ralph Nader is racist. If you really know the whole meaning of the term, you will see that its not implicitly racial.
I think Shep's opportunity to "correct himself" was trying to get Ralph agree that it was racist. Had Shep not interrupted Ralph before explaining the historical meaning, we would know exactly what Ralph meant, without question, from his own mouth, but Shep did interrupt him. I think that Shep Smith is an excellent actor with the whole ". . .what was that?" bit. He knew exactly what he was doing the whole time with his over dramatic "disbelief" and allowing him to recant his statement along with using the word "spoiler" and the "people complain about us not giving him enough time. . .time's up" bit.
I'm personally glad Ralph didn't correct himself or apologize. I seems to me that words are too cheap these days and had Ralph said "sorry" or changed his statement, it would have lessened everything the man says.

But, for the sake of argument, let's go ahead and say he meant it to be racially involved. Should we ignore the fact that had he said corporate whore or sellout, he would not have made it on FOX News for the world to see? Its possible that he knew that was the only way he would be able to get that statement to the people for them (along with Barack) to hear and to think about. Let's face it. Had he not said that, we wouldn't be talking about it right now.
(I realize that was long, but I don't like seeing my man Ralph being picked on;)

cincybearcat

MrBrian wrote:

He's not white. Anyway, race is always a factor and I think its important to put what he said into context.

He's not? See, this is why we need to even stop talking about race I guess as it doesn't matter. What peole say and do is what matters.

MrBrian

cincybearcat wrote:

He's not? See, this is why we need to even stop talking about race I guess as it doesn't matter. What peole say and do is what matters.

What people say and do should only matter, but it's just not the case much of the time. You know what I mean?

It also works the other way, for example, say Obama was white and his name was john, you think many people would be as excited by him? No, it's because he's black that adds to what he says. The feeling of seeing change.
Would so many of the people of color who have never voted before now, would they of gone out and voted for John the white guy? Probably not.

Race does matter in many cases. to just take it off the table would be to ignore the issue.