Rep. Corrine Brown makes racist remarks regarding Haiti

Notice how this comes from Fox News. No white man left behind! Seriously though, Rep. Brown's remarks were totally inappropriate and she deserves every bit of criticism she gets, just as Trent Lott did for his racist comments. However, Rep. Brown is wrong that the Bush Administration is ignoring Haiti because Haitians are black. Haiti is being ignored because it represents no profit opportunity for the Halliburton Corporation. BIG DIFFERENCE!

MIAMI — U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown (search) apologized Thursday for remarks she made a day earlier when she said Hispanics and whites "all look alike to me."

Brown made the statement during a Wednesday briefing on Haiti with Assistant Secretary of State Roger Noriega (search), a Mexican-American, and the Florida congressional delegation. During the meeting, attended by about 30 people, Brown sat across the table from Noriega and launched an attack on President Bush's policy on Haiti (search).

She said Republican leaders were "racist" in their policies toward the Caribbean nation, which is almost entirely black, and called the president's representatives "a bunch of white men."

"I sincerely did not mean to offend Secretary Noriega or anyone in the room. Rather, my comments, as they relate to 'white men,' were aimed at the policies of the Bush administration as they pertain to Haiti, which I do consider to be racist," Brown said in a statement on Thursday.

Brown added that she was offended that the meeting on the crisis in Haiti, led by administration officials, "turned into a diatribe rebuking the Haitian government and the Haitian people. I was personally insulted by the anti-Haiti sentiment brought to the table by the State Department and by Republican members of Congress in attendance," she said.

Brown also wrote a letter to Noriega, in which she apologized again "if what I said was construed as a personal affront."

"The State Department delegation that came to meet with us did not include any females or people of color. Given the racial makeup of the people of Haiti, who are 95 percent of African descent, I felt the delegation and the delegation's position were callous and out of touch with the needs (cultural and otherwise) of the Haitian people," she wrote.

After the dressing down, which sent a hush over the hour-long meeting, Noriega responded that he would relay her comments to Secretary of State Colin Powell (search) and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice (search), both high-level African-American members of the Bush administration.

Participants in the meeting said Noriega later told Brown: "As a Mexican-American, I deeply resent being called a racist and branded a white man."

Noriega also pointed to Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart (search), a Republican member of the delegation who was born in Cuba, and asked whether he appeared to be a white man. Diaz-Balart's brother, Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (search), is also a congressional member from the state.

Brown's response, according to witnesses, was: "You all look alike to me."

U.S. Rep. Mark Foley (search), a Florida Republican who organized the meeting, called the comments "disappointing."

"To sit there and browbeat this man who is a Mexican-American and call him names, it was inappropriate," Foley said.

As Brown criticized the political response to Haiti, which she said amounted to the detention of Haitian migrants fleeing their country and the freezing of millions of dollars in aid over flawed 2000 legislative elections in the impoverished nation, others said Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide (search) had created the crisis on his own and should step down.

"Haitians need true, decent, democratic leadership elected fairly and freely by the people. Not surprisingly, they have finally said enough is enough," said House Intelligence Committee chairman Porter Goss, R-Fla.

In an apparent switch in the U.S. stance on Aristide, Powell said late Thursday that the Haitian president should "make a careful examination of how best to serve the Haitian people" and should consider "whether or not he'll continue this presidency."

Powell said that the United States has not yet decided what assistance it might provide to an international force that would support a "transitional government or a political settlement."

It is the first time the secretary has mentioned publicly any alternative to Aristide's settling the issue politically with his opposition.

In a statement Wednesday, Brown tried to draw a parallel between the administration's response and the 2000 election in Florida.

"It simply mystifies me how President Bush, a president who was selected by the Supreme Court under more than questionable circumstances — in my district alone 27,000 votes were thrown out — is telling another country that their elections were not fair and that they are therefore undeserving of aid or international recognition," Brown said.

Aside from the Florida delegation, several other members and officials attended Wednesday's meeting with Noriega. U.S. Reps. Christopher Cox, R-Calif., and Maxine Waters, D-Calif.; John Maisto, U.S. Ambassador to the Organization of American States (search), and Adolfo Franco, an assistant administrator with the U.S. Agency for International Development (search), all were in attendance.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,112651,00.html

She was somewhat right, I think... Latinos can certainly look white to this administration under certain circumstances...

Why the fuck will we accept political refugees from Cuba that arrive on a boat but not a single Haitian under any condition?? That does seem somewhat racist to me...

>She was somewhat right, I think...

I love when liberals admit that they're racists, but think that it's ok but because they're racist for the right reasons, towards the right people.

I love how BoN compared her comments to Trent Lott's. Anyone want to bet that these remarks won't get even a tiny fraction of the attention that his did, and that the Democrats won't feel the slightest bit pressured to take any action against her for her repugnant racism?

Gee, I wonder what could account for the difference in treatment? Any ideas?

Latinos can certainly

>look white to this administration under certain

>circumstances...

It must be really sad to go through life judging people by their skin color. Don't you get tired of it? Are you one of those people who think that Colin Powell isn't really black because he's light-skinned and speaks white? Sure sounds like it.

>Why the fuck will we accept political refugees from Cuba that

>arrive on a boat but not a single Haitian under any

>condition?? That does seem somewhat racist to me...

This is inane drivel. The majority of people from Cuba look about as brown as can be. You are sadly obsessed with skin color; it's really a disease for you if the only difference you can see between our policy towards political refugees from Cuba and Haiti is that the refugees from one country are (mildly) darker than those from the other.

>I love when liberals admit that they're racists,

>I love how BoN compared her comments to Trent Lott's.

Doug, you're such a loving guy today. :*

>Gee, I wonder what could account for the difference in

>treatment? Any ideas?

I won’t deny that the Democrat sharks are unlikely to start circling, but don’t you think it has as much to do with the fact that it is black-on-white or black-on-Latin racism? The fact that black racism is just beginning to be challenged can hardly be blamed on either Party. There is simply greater tolerance for it because of the history of racism towards blacks. That’s starting to change, but I still think it is very uncomfortable for white people to challenge black people on racism so they just avoid it.

>I won’t deny that the Democrat sharks are unlikely to start

>circling, . . .

Will you deny that their failure to do so is inexcusable in light of the fuss made over Trent Lott's statements?

>... but don’t you think it has as much to do with the

>fact that it is black-on-white or black-on-Latin racism?

Yes and no. I think it has first and foremost to do with the fact that when Democrats criticize Republicans for making racist remarks, they don't really care about the racism, but only the opportunity to make the GOP look bad. That's why they never shut up about Strom Thurmond's racist past while praising former KKK-member Sen. Robert "White Niggers" Byrd. This woman's racism won't be criticized by Democrats (or will only obligatorily be criticized but not vehemently criticized - i.e., "yeah it's wrong, but . . . ") primarily because she's a Democrat, and secondarily, because she's black, and therefore has an impenetrable immunity challenge in certain circles.

The

>fact that black racism is just beginning to be challenged can

>hardly be blamed on either Party. There is simply greater

>tolerance for it because of the history of racism towards

>blacks.

What you describe does exist, but I think there is only greater tolerance for black racism among racists - it's that patronizing, liberal racism masquerading as compassion - as in: "Oh, we can't hold black people to the same standards. After all, they were oppressed for a long time, so what you can expect from them?" It's the same noxious attitude that says that we have to lower the standards for college admission for black people because otherwise they can't get in.

Martin Luther King didn't talk about a dream where white people would be color-blind. He talked about a society where people wouldn't be judged by the color of their skin. The Rep. Brown's and the Jamesk8140's of the world never got that message. They still think it makes sense to judge people by - and have different standards based on - the color of their skin.

>That’s starting to change, but I still think it is

>very uncomfortable for white people to challenge black people

>on racism so they just avoid it.

Yes, you're right, but this attitude is cowardly and itself racist, for the reasons I explained above. Saying that Democrats will overlook these vile comments because they are afraid to confront racism when spewed by black people isn't much of a defense, if that's how you intended it.

>

The Diaz-Balarts ARE white. Just look at them! Hispanic (and even Mexican-American) isn't a racial designation, its an ETHNIC one. Duh? The pre-revolutionary Cuban elite (of whom the Diaz-Balarts are a leading family) are almost all of European descent and racially white. The same is true of the elite in Mexico and many other Latin-American countries where the majority of the population is of Indian or mixed-race descent. There has always been a strong element of racism in Latin-American society, where the whiter and more European your background is, the likelier you are to be a member of the elite.

And the U.S. policy towards Haiti IS racist, whether you agree with Rep. Brown or not. The policy pre-exists Bush. I'm willing to bet if the Haitians were all blond and blue-eyed, we'd be welcoming them to our shores with open arms. But they're black, and they're poor. So we want to keep them out of the U.S. and stuck in their hellish homeland, even when they're in grave peril. It's positively heartwarming! Oh, sorry, that's heartBURNING! ;(

We regard Cubans as refugees from political oppressions, since Cuba has a totalitarian Communist government. Haitians come here, not as refugees, but as immigrants seeking better economic conditions. Refugees get a priority status. Many blacks from the Caribbean come here as legal immigrants, and many more blacks come as refugees from persecution in certain African countries, notably the Sudan.

>Yes, you're right, but this attitude is cowardly and itself

>racist, for the reasons I explained above. Saying that

>Democrats will overlook these vile comments because they are

>afraid to confront racism when spewed by black people isn't

>much of a defense, if that's how you intended it.

No defense intended. Just a simple observation. I tend to agree with Democrats on most things and truly believe they are very much the lesser evil, but I’m not such a party loyalist that I feel any compunction to defend or excuse their behavior.

I accept the realities of an adversarial political system that pits two parties against one another and often curtails anything that comes close to real idealism. I don’t expect either party to go after their own. What will it get them in the long run? The moral high ground? We’ve just seen how much good that did Howard Dean.

I think it is entirely possible to be uncomfortable about confronting racism in people who have been the traditional victims of it without being racist yourself. People can sneer about ‘Liberal white guilt’ all they want, but I don’t think there is anything wrong in acknowledging that the accident of birth that placed you in a middle-class white family doesn’t exactly prepare you to judge someone from a completely different background. When is the last time you actually felt emotional pain from being called a “honkey” or a “cracker?” It’s just not the same thing when you come from the privileged group.

>>She was somewhat right, I think...

>

>I love when liberals admit that they're racists, but think

>that it's ok but because they're racist for the right reasons,

>towards the right people.

I don't know why I bother spelling things out for you, you just jump off on another tangent having nothing to do with what the adults are discussing...

My point was that we either accept political refugees or we don't. It should not be based on race at all, but it inherently is at the moment. Even worse though is when it's based on transparent political pandering, as is everything most politicians do regarding Cuba.

Sorry I don't have time to draw it out in crayon, gotta go...

Doug69: "I love....BoN...."

Can i quote you on that Dougie? How many points do i get for being a liberal Democrat and calling her out for her racist remarks? Do I get to be an honorary Republican?

IMHO, Doug69, once again makes a very VALID point, but ONCE AGAIN, attack the author and not the point!

Racist remarks is racism, regardless of the race, nationality or political party affiliation of the one making the racist remarks. Any public figure making such remarks should be subjugated to the same media attention/scrutiny/public castigation as others have been subjugated to, but oops that only applies to caucasians(white) people, right? In this country, imo, as long as you are not a WASP, you can make any outrageous anti-white, racist statement and practice white exclusion in clubs, organizations, business, ad nauseum without retribution or accountability.

But then again, perhaps her remarks were just an attempt at humor ala the "they all look the same to me" remarks historically attributed to whites' descriptions of blacks. But of course, there is absolutely no room for such humor in the self-rightous, absurdly pc society of modern America.

As far as Cuba and Haiti, there are certainly many, many Cubans of black, African descent who have obtained refuge in the U.S. Many Latin American/South American countries engaged in African slavery, just like the U.S., and as such, many Latinos are black, so Cuban vs Haitain refugees, in all likelyhood, has nothing to do with skin color.

IMO, it has more to do with the anti-Castro, anti-Communism stance of the U.S. government, and even refugees from Cuba on leaky rafts will be deported back to Cuba, unless they have set foot on U.S. soil. If the raft sinks off shore and the Coast Guard picks up the survivors, those survivors will be sent back to Cuba. Any survivors who can manage to swim to shore on Florida soil are granted asylum.

Haitians, on the other hand, are not fleeing a Communist, anti-American regime at odds with the U.S. and as such, are no more entitled to sanctuary than the thousands of El Salvadorans who fled a repressive political regime, and as such there is nothing racist about that policy.

The policy I don't like is the indefinite imprisonment of Haitian refugees vs immediate deportment of other refugees from repressive regimes. IMO, they are retained without legal counsel/trial/deportation for the SOLE reason that they come from a country that is rife with AIDS infestation. They have been illegally detained in concentration camps on US soil since the early 80's onset of AIDS, so what other explanation is there?