And this is why the GOP will lose in 2012Once upon a time, this shit would have worked. And, of course, it will work with Fischer’s base supporters.
And noone else.

Racist fuckerAnd that’s all I wanted to say.

All of those black leaders who align themselves with the religious right need to pay attentionAll of those African-American pastors and churches who are aligning themselves with the religious right need to take note. Will your “friends” will condemn Fischer’s comments or will they pretend not to notice? You need to face facts. These folks do not care about you or African-American issues. And as quick as they play you against the lgbt community, they will turn their backs on you.
One wonders how many of them think of you in the same manner that Fischer thinks of Obama.

Thing is, this isn’t even the most offensive statementthat Fischer has said.
IMHO, this was

The Lewis and Clark journals record the constant warfare between the nomadic Indian tribes on the frontier, and the implacable hostility of the Sioux Indians in particular.
The journals record the morally abhorrent practice of many native American chiefs, who offered their own wives to the Corps of Discovery for their twisted sexual pleasure. (Regrettably, many members of the Corps, Lewis and Clark excepted, took advantage of these offers and contracted numerous and debilitating sexually transmitted diseases as a result.)
The native American tribes ultimately resisted the appeal of Christian Europeans to leave behind their superstition and occult practices for the light of Christianity and civilization. They in the end resisted every attempt to “Christianize the Savages of the Wilderness,” to use George Washington’s phrase.
They rejected Washington’s direct counsel to the Delaware chiefs in 1779, “You do well to wish to learn our arts and ways of life, and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ.”
Thomas Jefferson three times signed legislation appropriating federal tax dollars for the evangelizing of the Native American tribes. It all came to nought, as one tribe after another rejected the offer of spiritual light and advanced civilization.
…
God explained to the nation of Israel that because of the “abomination(s)” of the indigenous Canaanite tribes, the land had become unclean and “vomited out its inhabitants (Lev. 18:25).”
Is this to say the same holds true for native American tribes today? In many respects, the answer is of course no. But in some senses, the answer is yes. Many of the tribal reservations today remain mired in poverty and alcoholism because many native Americans continue to cling to the darkness of indigenous superstition instead of coming into the light of Christianity and assimilating into Christian culture.

Even the AFA disavowed that statement and it’s no longer on their website.

Makes no conceivable sense.There are plenty of reasons to be unhappy with the Obama presidency.  (Is there anyone left who still thinks he deserved the Nobel Peace Prize?)  I honestly don’t understand why his right-wing opponents keep falling back on crap like this–and the birth certificate rubbish, and the “He’s a Muslim!” rubbish, and so on.  They keep denying that they’re racists, but ignoring all the perfectly legitimate reasons to criticize him and preferring instead just to call him “boy” has no other explanation.  The scary thing is that this kind of rot is likely to generate sympathy for him and thus insure that we’ll get four more years of Republican policies masquerading (not very successfully) as progressive ones.  
If I were conspiracy-minded I’d suspect that Fischer, Coulter Farah and the rest are all Obamabot plants, secretly working to help his reelection.  If nothing else, a second Obama erm will certainly give them lots more opportunities for fundraising from their fellow bigots.

He guy’s a jerkbut to be honest – at my first read I took it as calling Obama a child trying to do grown-up things.

We knew that he’s a racist all along.Fischer is cut from the same fabric as the Phelps Klan.

OMG!IIRC, Clinton was younger than Obama when he won the presidency and while the Religious White said many, many, MANY things about Bill Clinton, they never called him a “boy.”
(and Bill Clinton is from the South, so if they had wanted to infantilize Bill Clinton in that way, it actually would have been consistent with Southern speak).
You don’t have any white man calling a black man a boy! Period. Especially not coming from the portion of the culture that Fischer comes from…

Opps forgot to mentionIn general the trouble with quick written text as in Twitter, Facebook, blog posting, game chat, or general texting – there is such a quickness to it that sometimes people “say” something that on further thought might sound rude.  The receiving party sometimes takes it wrong.  True, some people want to be rude, as in this case.
There is no inflection in texting to aid in knowing what the author wants to say.  A sibling could be softly chuckling to himself when he texts his brother “boy you’re in trouble” in regard to biting into mom’s just baked pie.  Image the wrong signals that sentence could invoke on its own.  Just say it with different inflections and pauses [cool hand luke style].  Just sayin’

I am not defending this manI can see him using the word “boy” to slip in a wink to his followers. But, I also understand the term ‘boy’ having other meanings.
If a women talks to her friends and says “I can’t go out with that boy” Maybe, just maybe, she is talking about his maturity level and not the color of his skin.
I think we should be calling him out and asking his organization to clarify just what he was trying to get at.  That way, we will hear more stumbling and bumbling from this (cough) great group.  Inflection my friend.

I understand other meanings and uses of the word “boy,” toowhich is why I brought up Bill Clinton’s name, Clinton being the good ol’ southern boy that he is.
When it concerns Southern white men then, yes, you do have to read and listen for context. And, in fact, I have heard a few Southern white man refer to Clinton in that way but it was always a term of endearment
I think that in the 3-4 references that I heard it used by Southern-born white men it was used as a term of endearment and it was always about Clinton’s sexual appetite (“Hillary is gonna hurt that boy, now” being one specific statement that I remember)

yup, a slipI think you are right, it was a slip, he left his true feelings coming out.
Shit like this doesn’t happens by chance.
Luciano

actually

IIRC, Clinton was younger than Obama when he won the presidency and while the Religious White said many, many, MANY things about Bill Clinton, they never called him a “boy.”

I totally agree with you that Fischer’s comment and usage are racist. However, at least some members of the Religious White (great term, BTW) actually did call Clinton “boy.” There’s even a book from that era called Boy Clinton written by R. Emmett Tyrell of the American Spectator, and a quick Google search found that magazine still calling him that as late as 2009.
These facts actually don’t take away from your point, in my view. They were in fact trying to infantilize him, as you mention. But calling a black man a “boy” has a whole additional layer of meaning and is undeniably racist.

Good catchI stand corrected.
I never knew that people used the “boy” at Clinton as an insult: I’d only heard it used as a term of endearment.
IIRC, there is a very long history going back to classical antiquity as far as infantilizing men on the basis of (presumed or actual) sexual prowness.

Not to put to fine a point on this Alvin…But your assumption seems to be that the LGBT community has any more of an interest in issues of importance to black Americans.
The LGBT “community” can be just as hostile to the interest of black Americans as any of those folks on the religious right.

Provide me with some examples of that, SciFiGeekI mean seriously…other than some LGBT folk talking a good game about it but not backing it up with actions? Who in the LGBT community deliberately takes a stand against which black American issues?
What Alvin is saying (and how I took it) is that some who claim to represent “African American interests” don’t do so at all.

And soon the MSM will have Fischer as a talking head just like always.

It’s not even comparable… Calling President Clinton a ‘boy’ and calling President Obama a ‘boy’ are two whole different worlds on the disrespect scale.

You interpretation doesn’t make it betterit’s rather the point. It’s a diminishing rhetorical tactic, frequently used by the white male patriarchy. It seeks to dismiss “the other” by diminishing them by reinforcing indefensible stereotypes. women are hysterical and “too emotional” gays are having “hissy fits” and black men have always been “boys.” Because as you say, they are just boys trying to do the jobs of “real men.” (aka as rich straight white men.)

TrueBut they still kept the bastard on the payroll, Kev…  

Well, Monica…Bill Clinton was the first black president, lol.
(Seriously, I understand why Toni Morrison said that at the time that she said it. Chances are, she couldn’t have envisioned actually having a black president in the balance of her lifetime. But still…)

Have to say……that I agree with some others that this might not read in a racist way.  It certainly can be read that way, but I read the context of this as a comment on Obama’s maturity on the world diplomatic stage.  Especially since it’s followed by the comment about him running out of friends, i.e. the “liberal” WaPo even questioning him now.
I understand how “boy” is used as a racist invective (we’ve all seen it in movies and/or read it in books and other media), but I’m not sure that’s the intent behind the use here.
Not that anyone should expect anything better of Fischer either way.

But which First-term presidentsin recent memory have been mature on the world diplomatic stage?
That would only apply to Bush #41 and, before him, Richard Nixon.

None of them of courseBut I don’t think that matters to Fischer.  If it was a Republican President his immaturity wouldn’t matter because Fischer would be happy with him.

I agreeI agree with you, and I hope that I didn’t come across any other way. As I said, calling Obama “boy” has whole other layers of meaning and disrespect. I was just pointing out a small error in Kevin’s post, as he said that he thought that no one in the Religious White had ever called Clinton “boy.”