It was certainly a race-based assessment on her part, since there is absolutely no evidence that her assessment that this student was not a citizen was correct.

Does that make it racist? That's pretty much in the eye of the beholder. You many like what you see. I don't.

Olive skin people, to which race do they belong?

Perhaps she was referring to nationality instead of race. Like I said, it was an ignorant comment, but I don't see racism in it. Most olive skin people are white...Greeks, Italians, middle eastern countries.

You think she is racist against white people?

You cannot judge nationality by the color of one's skin, but to try to make this into a racist comment is unjustified. Call it for what it is, stupid, ignorant and inappropriate, but don't try to make it into something it isn't. To do otherwise, is akin to crying wolf and we know what happens when people cry wolf one time too many.

It is not about sanitizing it, but accurately describing it. True cases of racism do not get the attention they deserve because the race card is played so often that people are skeptical and desensitized to it.

Sharpton lost much of his credibility when he held Tawana Brawley up as a victim of racism.

Throwing the race card at every issue is much like hurling curse words. Easy to do, but lacks real substance.

Call out O'Brien for her true transgressions is all I am saying.

"Sharpton lost much of his credibility when he held Tawana Brawley up as a victim of racism."

The problem there wasn't the racism charge, per se, but that the whole incident was fabricated.

I can agree that "racism" gets a bit overused, but that's primarily because the term "race" is rather ill-defined.

Does "olive-complected" define racial characteristics? Maybe. Maybe not. But I think in the way she used it here-- to indicate that the particular student "isn't one of us," and therefore not welcome, gets mighty close to what is commonly considered racist thinking.

"but in terms of nationality, not race."

As I said, race is not a particularly well-defined term, so bigotry with regard to race/nationality are often referred to with the term "racism." And really, the distinction between bigotry based on nationality, ethnicity, race, religion, whatever, is somewhat arbitrary. Hate is still hate.

Perhaps people who do not understand the difference, but racism is defined as being based on race. The meaning o fthe word is not changed just because people do not understand the proper use of the word .

rac·ism   /ˈreɪsɪzəm/ Show Spelled [rey-siz-uhm] Show IPA

–noun 1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others. 2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination. 3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

Fred, might I suggest that you take your dictionary research one step further and look up the definition of race? One definition, from the American Heritage Dictionary: a group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographical distribution: the German race.

To paraphrase you, the meaning of the word isn't changed just because one commenter on a newspaper website would like the word to have only one narrow meaning.

Could you define "uber-left"? Or, "uhinged left"?

You repeat the words "left" and "far-left" so often, and yet it's clear from all your posts that there is no real definition for "left" and "far-left" aside from "people who disagree with me."

Now you've added "unhinged left," which, like your other rhetorical ticks, has no objective meaning.

What on earth do you mean, in words a reasonable adult can understand?

I'll type slowly to make it easier for you to follow. Yes, racism is discrimination, but there are many types of discrimination. I am sure you've read the EEO statement about not discriminating based on race, national origin, religion and so on.

Racism is discrimination based on someone's race. O'Brien's comments were not prompted by the person's race, but her perception of the woman's nationality.

And since you raised the point, explain to me why a white person from Spain gets special protection/consideration as a Hispanic but a white person from Italy does not?

True, race can be used in the manner you described, but look up the definition of racism. It means discrimination based on race.

Also, generally racists base their hate based on the color of the person's skin.

This was not the case here. O'Brien, as I have pointed out, was basing her assertions on the person's percieved nationality.

It was a stupd, ignorant and inappropriate comment. We can all agree to that, but playing the race card does nothing but take away from the true transgression.

But if racism is discrimination on the basis of race and race can mean what I said, then this can be considered discrimination on the basis of race aka racism. Where does it say in the definition of racism that it only applies to one meaning of the word race?

As for your further points, call me crazy, but deciding the person was an illegal immigrant at least in part based on the person's complexion seems to be basing that decision on skin color.

It isn't "playing the race card" to call judging someone by the color of her skin racist.

Like I said, look up the meaning of racism.

People want to label O'Brien as a racist because it connotes a far higher level of evil than just wanting to deny someone from getting financial aid because they are not here legally.

Tea party people are racist, the GOP is racist, white people are racist..and on and on.

I get tired of false accusations of racism. jump on her for her stupidity, her ignorance, her inappropriate comment, but you're stretching it to call her a racist.

And, if you look at the post that started this, the person said if the person was white it would be different and I simply asked how do you know they weren't?

Reserve the word for true racist.

I'm done and you can be right. You win.

I am right and i do win because I'm not conveniently ignoring parts of dictionary definitions that hurt my point. The dictionary definition of racism requires one to understand the dictionary definition of race. Thus, it cannot be restricted in the narrow way you would insist on.

I get tired of people rerfusing to see legitimiate instances of racism. The representative made a judgment about someone at least in part based on the color of that person's skin. Stop being afraid to call a spade a spade.

Racial discrimination typically points out taxonomic differences between different groups of people, although anyone may be discriminated against on an ethnic or cultural basis, independently of their somatic differences. According to the United Nations conventions, there is NO DISTICTION between the term racial discrimination and ethnicity discrimination.

Please also ilustrate me on how Hispanics get special protection/consideration. and BTW, italians are not Hispanics they don't speak Spanish but they can be considered Latinos.

The disintegration of Yugoslavia involved groups of people who are nearly identical both linguistically and genetically. They just happened to have been separated by religion and politics over the last 500 or more years.

But the treatment they meted out to each other was as hateful, bigoted, and, yes, racist, as anything that's happened on this planet since WWII.