which do think may be racist, bush or clinton?

Question

try to think about it before you answer.

Answer 1

no politican (black or white) can afford to be openly racial now. This means that both Bush and Clinton will not say anything that could be construed as a racial remark. However, if you look at who appointed the most blacks and other minorities to position of power, Bush would win hands down. ,I guess from looking at who did what to whose, I would have to say that Clinton would most likely be a racist, not Bush. However, I do not believe that either Bush or Clinton is a bigot.

Answer 2

I don't know, but from life experience I have found that liberals are more racist than Conservatives.they hide their racism behind their liberalism, and when I say that when you foster a system of dependecy it is a form of racism. I will give you some examples take New Orleans It was run by democrats for over 60 years they had a black mayor a woman governor both liberals yet during that crisis I saw people(mostly black) behaving like they were refugees from some plantation yet who did these people blame Bush! An observation if you notice most of the black mayors congressman, and people of political power are out of the Conservative south, not out of the liberal mecca up north.

Answer 3

Clinton

Answer 4

That's obvious to me, Bill "keep them down and needing the government, make them think they can get no where on their own, therefore they need affimative action" Clinton. Bush has named more minorities (including women) to higher posts, home ownership for minorities is higher than it's ever been, he actually supports a form af amnesty (which I disagree with). No matter how the left wants to spin this...."America's first black president" is a racist where it matters most.

Answer 5

I suspect both have had a real problem with understanding what it is like to be brown or black. I think Clinton is a consumate politician and has been able to project an image of being all-inclusive. My problem with that is sort of like the buddy you have who kisses everyone's asss and gets away with it. Everyone knows he is full of crap, but that does not stop him from doing it.

Bush on the otherhand has appointed many blacks and hispanics to high level jobs and does not seem to treat them differently from whites. That would indicate a more refined sense of who he is and a lack of "white guilt". We often hear about his uncaring in the case of Katrina, but it is a leap to say that he would have been able to control who got flooded out or not. That painted a picture that is not backed up by action.

Answer 6

Well, let's consider the facts. Bush has appointed the first black secretary of state, the first black female secretary of state, the first Hispanic attorney general, along with countless other appointments of minorities. Under Clinton, the highest appointment for a minority was his secretary.

Abraham Lincoln was a Republican. Under him, Republicans fought a war against Democrats to prove that black people are neither property nor slaves.

I think that says enough.

Answer 7

Clinton, cause that is when the riots were on. That is why Rage Against The Machine, Kid Frost, NWA, ISP, Ice Cube, and so on were fighting against Clinton cause Clinton told the police to keep a close eye on colored skin people.

Answer 8

I have never seen any evidence that either of them are racists. I think Clinton is a lying, cheating, womanizing, failure of an excuse for a President who embarassed his own wife and his own daughter but I doubt he's racist.

Answer 9

When Clinton shakes the hand of a Black person, he doesn't turn to an aide for a Handi-wipe and a bacteria spray like Bush does.

Answer 10

Both of them had minorities appointed by them. Clinton had Powell and Bush has Rice, for example. So I'll have to go with the one who was on vacation while thousands of blacks were sitting on their roofs.