
Based on past experience, whomever posted it would also blame the incident on Obama. So, the debate would be over whether Obama was responsible or not. Since the article about the WI incident is on Glen Beck's website, there might be a tendency to question its accuracy. However, I cannot imagine anyone posting the video from the first post as a response. |
Yes there are. You can deny it, but you are lying. The point of your post is to show the relative depravity of the other side. Guess what, the sides are not white vs. black. The sides are decent people vs. perpetrators of hate crimes. |
I did not get the point of the original posting other than to have some fun race baiting. I posted the article about the WI state fair to point out hte sheer stupidity of the original post. |
OMG shut up. How was the original post "race baiting?" I seriously doubt that the owner of this forum posted that link just to have a little fun. You are the only PP who reacted defensively and, IMO, like a total douche bag. |
well then what was the point then? this is a political forum - was the act political, or just violence? do we have a crime forum? |
Statistically and historically, I think the violence done in this country by whites against blacks far exceeds that by blacks against whites. Being white, I don't mean to claim we are intrinsically more evil, but rather that we have had more power and therefore the capacity to do more damage.
More to the point of the present dispute, a gang of teens beating up on another gang of teens is a fairly common, if regrettable, phenomenon, usually stating with something minor and escalating. A person using his car to kill a stranger is a more unusual item, and therefore more of an eyecatcher. The second clip may not have been intended to excuse the first, but a bit more forethought by its poster would probably have indicated that many would take it that way. Given that we are all, I expect, opposed to violence of either kind, I think we should stop bickering and think of ways to understand and conquer racism, rather than fight among ourselves. Sorry to sound preachy, but the discussion calls for it. |
Maybe - JUST MAYBE - the point of the post is to bring attention to a racist act. In case you didn't notice, politics and racism are intertwined in American History. Once again, the topic is racism vs. decency, not which race is more racist. The fact that it didn't occur to you says a lot about your character. |
They shouldn't get life terms. They should get solitary confinement, with no visitors, an hour out in the yard with big, black prisoners who need a girlfriend while awaiting their death penalty sentence to be carried out. And it should be publicly broadcast to deter others. |
YOu are so right. Whites also eliminated the american indians and stole their land and whites bought the blacks from the English. They were the whites who had discovered blacks in Africa and descided to start selling them. And the man who dropped the Hiroshima bomb was white, as was the man who gave the command to drop it. |
Oh come on. This rant of yours just discredits the whole discussion. Do you have to be reminded that there were blacks selling those slaves to the whites in Africa? Do we need to start tallying incidents of genocide by continent? Is it useful to discuss the relative historical atrocities of the Japanese vs. the Europeans and Americans? If you think that the point is to prove the relative evil of the white race, you are as bad as the guy who posted the Wisconsin video. You miss the point. This post is about confronting racism. It is not a contest to decide the new master race. |
I don't know what motivated 12:47 to post the Wisconsin video. But I'm not going to give him/her a virtual kick for doing so. S/he posted an article from a source. Based on the comments, this paper seems to have a conservative readership. so what? Why are some of you up in arms over the second event but still freely accepting of Jeff's post? The actions in both stories are unconscionable, no doubt. But what if 12:47 posted the Wisconsin story first? Would you all be reacting in the same manner? Or. . . were these reactions to 12:47 stemming from white guilt? Somehow it's become more acceptable to practice reverse racism; it's more PC. The sad fact of the matter is that we're crippling ourselves by NOT addressing controversial topics. I can name quite a few colleagues who, in the presence of a minority, will say the right things, but behind closed doors true feelings are exposed. Sadly, however, most of us are hypocritical to some extent, wouldn't you agree? I count myself lucky for sharing space with an African American female who has the balls to tell it like it is. We talk about how dangerous language can be, for one, as we discuss the different connotations associated with word choice. For those in education, we throw around FARMs quite a bit. However, in the classroom, I'd prefer NOT to know who's on free and reduced meals, as it only brings to mind struggling minorities and students involved in gang activity - which is often NOT the case. Poverty provides a breeding ground for ignorance. You become your surroundings, right? But why is it somehow amusing to poke fun at poor whites (aka "white trash") or to dismiss their plight completely? I know of several people who travel to Appalachia yearly, delivering clothing, food items, and furniture. The living conditions are deplorable. I am not immune to racial issues, nor do I live in a "lily white" environment. I teach in my neighborhood school, fwiw, and am indeed in the minority. But I'll be damned if I succumb to white guilt -thus enabling my students by having a pity party for them. If an ugly issues presents itself, we talk about it. During a co-teaching session with an African American colleague, we discussed the N word with students as it related to our novel and to present day. The elephant's walking from room to room, people, and yet somehow we don't want to see it, do we? But if we ignore these issues, we'll never move forward. Personally, I'm happy 12:47 posted such an ugly article. |
I haven't participated in this thread, but I glanced at it. I think your question has been discussed, and that the critics of the Wisconsin video post were pretty clear. Had it been posted first, there might have been some question about the poster's point, but there wouldn't have been any obvious implication. By posting it in response to Jeff's post, the poster was clearly implying that the stories were related, that the second one somehow negated, balanced, or overrode the first. If I were to start a thread, "Native Americans weren't Christians," you might wonder about my point, but that's it. But if you started a thread, "The slaughter of Native Americans was a tragedy," and I responded, "but Native Americans weren't Christians," I think you'd take that a little differently. |