Originally Posted By fkurucz calls the opponents of a bill that would provide DL's to illegals "crackers": <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/08/04/BAG7IKB9651.DTL&type=politics" target="_blank">http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/ article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/08/04/BAG7IKB9651.DTL&type=politics</a> Aztlanfornia here I come, right back where I started from.....
Originally Posted By fkurucz And of course, he issued a standard non apology apology: "Next time I come to Sacramento in August, I'll be sure to run the air conditioner," the statement said. "While I am concerned about the coarse and divisive tone used by a small minority in the driver's license debate, I believe that the vast majority on both sides are people of goodwill." But no apology for his racist remarks. Get used to it folks.
Originally Posted By gadzuux "racist remarks"? I suppose cracker could be construed as racist, but it's more a reference to uneducated rubes who are generally white - and perata's white too. The insult intended is not about race, it's about ignorance.
Originally Posted By DAR I was called a cracker once because I had the audacity to bust this particular gentleman for shoplifiting at the store I was working at.
Originally Posted By Mrs Nurmi My understanding of the term 'crackers' could also mean 'crazy'. I hadn't even heard the term 'cracker' used in a racist way until I heard it on South Park, lol. Someone had to explain why it was funny for Chef to refer to Kyle's 'little cracker friends'. I'd only heard of it used in a way that is interchangeable with 'nuts'. Perhaps this is how it was intended?
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Likely, but let's run with it and accuse Perata of racism anyway.
Originally Posted By cmpaley >>Aztlanfornia here I come, right back where I started from....<< And this isn't racist?
Originally Posted By nancyan crackers are white folks my black neighbers called us crackers to make us laugh and we did i am a cracker
Originally Posted By fkurucz From dictionary.com Offensive. Used as a disparaging term for a poor white person of the rural, especially southeast United States. Used as a disparaging term for a white person. >>and perata's white too.<< Regardless, its still a racist remark. Also,
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>And this isn't racist?<< My point was that now even California politicians are making racist remarks against whites, and not apologizing. And while Perata is "white", the term cracker is typically not used to describe people of Italian ancestry (there are other choice words for that). And yes, California is turning into Aztlan. Its only a question of time.
Originally Posted By Mrs Nurmi Also from dictionary.com - crackers adj, chiefly british slang insane, mad. I still say it is extremely possible that it was not meant as 'racist'.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "Also from dictionary.com - crackers adj, chiefly british slang insane, mad. I still say it is extremely possible that it was not meant as 'racist'." And I still say you're likely right.
Originally Posted By nancyan my word dearies did that man really call others crackers? someone best slap his face to show him maners. we need peace not fighting words from our leaders.
Originally Posted By cmpaley nancy, what needs to be pointed out is that fcuruz talking about California becoming Aztlan (whatever that is) because the population trends show latinos becoming a majority (if not a plurality) of the population while he's calling foul on a Senator calling people who oppose his opinion "crackers." It's called a double standard. The Right hates it when the double standard (i.e., making racist statements while pointing fingers at those who disagree with them for making statements that can be interpreted as racist) they imposeis pointed out
Originally Posted By vbdad55 I keep forgetting the Dems make no comments that are self -serving - making a note of that though for future reference.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder vbdad, knowing Perata, he likely meant it as in referring to them as crazies, loons, whatever, even moonbats, if you will. It is very doubtful he meant it in a racial context at all.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 ^^^^^^^^^ I see it pointed out that it has to do with the hispanic poplation growth in California and the negative connotation implied by whatever Aztlan is ( I have heard other negative terms but that one is new ) and the crackers term as it would be in it's racial form...not the terms you quoted. Of course Neo cons is a perfectly acceptable term..or coomparing Scwartzenegger as a candidate in another thread as worse than Satan. ?
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder When it comes to cmpaley and Schwarzenegger, there's no rationality involved. cm has more than a tendency to go over the top on certain things, i.e. immigration, the church and Schwarzenegger. Comparing Schwarzenegger to Satan is wrong, but that's cm for you.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 ^^^^^^^^^^ pointed out by others not Perata...I will defer to you on that one as I really have limited knowledge of the man...but in a public forum he should at least have been aware the term could have been taken as a recial eptitath also...agreed ? I can't believe he has gone through life in the public eye and not heard the term - especialy after the last 2 elections...so even if it was just a poor choice of words - he should explain that...
Originally Posted By vbdad55 ^^^^^^^ the second part of 17 should have been kept inthe other thread ....a problem when you read a few in a row , sometimes it carries over...strike it from here...
