Aug 28th 2013, 19:50:35
[quote poster=Supertodd; 26130; 482955]
But.. there are undoubtedly people in America who make their entire living by fostering racism against whites. The Martin/Zimmerman example cited by the article is quite a good one. Al Sharpton (in my opinion one of the worst "race-baiters" in the US) was there inciting hatred quicker than you can say "hypocrite"...
How did he spew hatred? By drawing attention to the case? Making note of the justice system's unfair treatment of minorities (you can ask Ron Paul some of the ways this has happened -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0ys0F0xdYI)?
That's not what I would call hatred.
Some of our major "news" organizations intentionally and egregiously edited the tapes of 911 calls in order to fraudulently paint Zimmerman as a racist... Without any knowledge of the details of the case, without any supposition of innocence until his guilt was shown, Zimmerman was demonized and made the subject of violent threats by those "race-baiters" referenced by this article.
That wasn't a good thing ABC(?) did. But that doesn't just happen to white people:
http://race.iheartsociology.com/...loads/2012/10/looting.jpg
I'd say that to deny the existence of race-baiters who remain relevant only by prolonging and exacerbating racism, is what really ingores the "current contextual arguments about race relations in the US"
Not at all.
For starters, I haven't denied or seen anyone deny the existence of race baiters. Second, there isn't a comparable level of fear mongering from say an Al Sharpton speech that highlights some of the points Ron Paul makes in the above video and the above article that informs me there is a race war against white people…as if whites have been minorities all of this time.
His Justice Department refused to pursue charges in a clear-cut case of voter intimidation by the New Black Panther Party in Philadelphia, but threatens to charge Zimmerman with a violation of Federal Civil Rights laws, when there is not any - and can never be any - evidence that his story of self defense is false.
The DOJ/Holder's record is not a clear reflection of Obama himself. Obama does not have his hand on EVERY single case/incident handled by the DOJ.
Remember, Obama himself said "the jury has spoken" wrt the trials outcome. In both cases the DOJ is the main player not Obama himself.
Can never be any evidence? That's why one takes the issue to trial.
The President should be looking out for the interests of everyone in the US, regardless of whether their ancestors were mistreated 200, or 100, or 50 years ago.
The point I am making is that the original article made unreasonable expectations i.e. Why would he say such a thing in defense of a white american when that has never been a problem on the scale that we have seen (and do see) in this country?
All of us have different needs, so it is expected his support would manifest differently.
Originally posted by MauricXe:
But.. there are undoubtedly people in America who make their entire living by fostering racism against whites. The Martin/Zimmerman example cited by the article is quite a good one. Al Sharpton (in my opinion one of the worst "race-baiters" in the US) was there inciting hatred quicker than you can say "hypocrite"...
How did he spew hatred? By drawing attention to the case? Making note of the justice system's unfair treatment of minorities (you can ask Ron Paul some of the ways this has happened -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0ys0F0xdYI)?
That's not what I would call hatred.
Some of our major "news" organizations intentionally and egregiously edited the tapes of 911 calls in order to fraudulently paint Zimmerman as a racist... Without any knowledge of the details of the case, without any supposition of innocence until his guilt was shown, Zimmerman was demonized and made the subject of violent threats by those "race-baiters" referenced by this article.
That wasn't a good thing ABC(?) did. But that doesn't just happen to white people:
http://race.iheartsociology.com/...loads/2012/10/looting.jpg
I'd say that to deny the existence of race-baiters who remain relevant only by prolonging and exacerbating racism, is what really ingores the "current contextual arguments about race relations in the US"
Not at all.
For starters, I haven't denied or seen anyone deny the existence of race baiters. Second, there isn't a comparable level of fear mongering from say an Al Sharpton speech that highlights some of the points Ron Paul makes in the above video and the above article that informs me there is a race war against white people…as if whites have been minorities all of this time.
His Justice Department refused to pursue charges in a clear-cut case of voter intimidation by the New Black Panther Party in Philadelphia, but threatens to charge Zimmerman with a violation of Federal Civil Rights laws, when there is not any - and can never be any - evidence that his story of self defense is false.
The DOJ/Holder's record is not a clear reflection of Obama himself. Obama does not have his hand on EVERY single case/incident handled by the DOJ.
Remember, Obama himself said "the jury has spoken" wrt the trials outcome. In both cases the DOJ is the main player not Obama himself.
Can never be any evidence? That's why one takes the issue to trial.
The President should be looking out for the interests of everyone in the US, regardless of whether their ancestors were mistreated 200, or 100, or 50 years ago.
The point I am making is that the original article made unreasonable expectations i.e. Why would he say such a thing in defense of a white american when that has never been a problem on the scale that we have seen (and do see) in this country?
All of us have different needs, so it is expected his support would manifest differently.