Who are the Racists Here?

About: billboard claiming martin luther king was republican angers black activists in houston - political news - foxnews.com

~A racist tempest in a teapot brewing the juices of some of the fading race industry leaders, IMHO.
Source: ...

King held great sway over black voters and carefully courted both Republicans and Democrats. He never officially endorsed a party or candidate.

But the founder of RagingRepublicans.org, the black conservative group that sponsored the sign, told FOXNews.com that the sign was designed to get blacks to rethink their political affiliation -- about 95 percent of blacks voted for Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential elections -- and that this is just the beginning. He said a radio campaign that focuses on "the destructive nature of liberalism" is forthcoming.

"We think it's imperative that [the GOP] try and attract more people from the communities of color to vote their values -- to vote conservative," said Claver Kamau-Imani, who heads the Corinthian Christian Empowerment Church, a small house church in Houston.

What's more, he said, the sign is accurate.


...loosening the ties that the Democrat Party has on one demographic. In recent years the Democrat Party has taken for granted some who have been loyal & have continued to get back nothing! 


Tags

  1. racism
  2. ragingrepublicans.org
  3. lumping
  4. item 714
  5. item 12248
  6. rush limbaugh
  7. bug

Comments


Seth says
Well i don't seen any racism going on here.  All i see is the Republican party trying to enlist more more Afro-Americans,  something that they sourly need to do.  This is should be obvious to anyone who looked at the faces of the delegates at their last convention ... pretty much a sea of white faces ... it was hard to find a black one ... quite a contrast to the Democratic convention.  What RagingRepublicans.org says about their intentions seems pretty straight forward to me.  Don't you believe them when they state "We think it's imperative that the GOP try and attract more people from the communities of color to vote their values -- to vote conservative" ? 

As far as them using King's name ... well that is a bit cheaky, me thinks.  Was he really a republican ... or do they really know.  The republican party was different back then.  It was probably more inclusive.  If King was alive today i will bet that he would be a democrat.

But, no, i dont' see any racism here whatsoever.  Though, of course, it certainly breaks 714 ... oh well ... just another example of how 714 does not in fact define racism.

Mark de LA says
It doesn't break 714 only people who violate the distinctions of 714 & use racism to their own benefit break themselves.

Mark de LA says
More Racism examples from Sen. B. Boxer. who is trying
get blacks to support her jobs stuff.


Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-17 08:40:23 12248
Ask about both of their motivations: (1) why did Sessions go out of his way to highlight the other Puerto Rican judge who disagreed with Sotomayor, and (2) why did Boxer go out of her way to pick other black groups who disagreed with Alford.  Behind both Sessions and Boxer's motivations for picking and hilighting race, was the assumption that everybody from one race will behave similarly.  When that doesn't happen, then it is surprinsing and a novelty.  Both of them were pointing out the novelty of the situation. 

Incidentally i've noticed that this is a frequent complaint from minority races.  They are very sensitive to the assumption that they usually behave like their race.  They don't like that assumption; and in fact, that assumption is false:  there is just as much variability of behavior in all races.  People who use that assumption are exhibiting racial steriotyping.  I would think that you would understand that, after all it follows exactly the text of 714.

If you don't focus on trying to insult me, and rather focus on the facts of the case, then perhaps we can come to a consensus of what happened here.   I really did not spend that very much time analyzing the particulars of the case.  Perhaps i'm worng, if so then, please show where according to the facts of the case themselves.
Why not put this on the Sotomayor item. It really is much different than this item.  The Ricci case & Sotomayor's comments have enough exposure during the hearings.  I'm not about to regurgitate it again here. All of the protagonists in this item have violated 714 in some degree; Sessions the least, Boxer the most, the billboard not at all (but the ones that brought it down did), Sotomayor in her Ricci decision, etc.  Do you cherry pick when you like 714 & when you don't based on some kind of racial distinction? If so then add yourself to the list.
 

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-16 17:51:20 12248
MR 2009-07-16 17:08:37 12248
seth 2009-07-16 15:17:31 12248
seth 2009-07-16 14:17:50 12248
source: MR says
get blacks to support her jobs stuff.
Wow talk about a tempest in a tea pot.  Well just framing my opinion by listening and not studying the issues, it sounds to me that it wasn't Boxer being racist, but rather Harry Alford having a hair trigger. 
Ok i studies it a bit more.  Alford's point is that he didn't like being lumped with other black organizations.  He wanted his opposition to stand on it's own merits.  People don't like to be lumped.   Sessions got into the same trap when he lumped Sotomeyer with the other "Puerto Rican" judge on the 2nd Circuit. In other words Sessions is saying, "Hey why don't all you spicks vote the same?"  So Sessions, a republican, is guilty of lumping, and Boxer, a democrat, is guilty of lumping.  Seems to me lumping is a non partisan  behavior ... complaing about it is, imho, being over sensitive.
This had nothing to do with Sessions. Surely you have a turd in your back pocket when you say we.
Both politicians were  lumping, i defined lumping and explained it clearly, your stubborn miscomprehension of anything i say notwithstanding.
I had to dig deep in your link to find any reference to Puerto Rican. You are disingenuous in your take.  They were discussing the Ricci case which was about race! Overall they had already beat up the "Wise Latina...." quote.  In that context Sessions said:
yours: ... And, in fact, your vote was the key vote. Had you voted with Judge Cabranes, himself of -- of -- of Puerto Rican ancestry -- had you voted with him, you -- you -- you could have changed that case.
...That is not the same thing as your schoolboy lumping distinction.  Boxer was trying to impeach Alford's testimony (not available in the short clip) - a black complaining about the lack of jobs in the stimulus? by bringing other documents from the NAACP etc. Boxer was entirely racially motivated. Sessions was otherwise discussing the Ricci case. Go back to school.
Your entire Sessions comment should be moved to your A Latina Judge's Voice item whose title is as racist as Session's comment & is a more appropriate item upon which to put your stuff.
your tit-for-tat doesn't prove anything, is more of the same old Seth



Seth says
source: MR above
IMHO, the Harvard professor has an axe to grind.
Credit The Swamp for reporting this picture taken by a neighbor, it matches the police report, which was a good find.  This does give us a more detailed understanding of what actually happened than has been available so far in broadcast media. 

Professor Gates obviously is hypersensitive about police handling of his race. He over reacted.  Perhaps he did "have an axe to grind". Having been arrested by the LA police in a situation where, I too was innocent, and  having also overreacted just like Gates, i have a visceral understanding of his reaction. 



That said, i think the decision to arrest the man in his own home was stupid.  The smart thing for the officers would have been to continue to walk away, Gates protestations not withstanding.  
source: last question in Obama's press conference

Obama: All right, I tried to make that short so that Lynn Sweet would get her last question in.

Q    Thank you, Mr. President.  Recently Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. was arrested at his home in Cambridge.  What does that incident say to you and what does it say about race relations in America?

Obama: Well, I should say at the outset that "Skip" Gates is a friend, so I may be a little biased here.  I don't know all the facts. ....

... [accurate account of what happened omitted, read the entire transcript] ...

...  Now, I don't know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that, but I think it's fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge Police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home; and number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there is a long history in this country of African Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately.  That's just a fact.
... Yep, right on Mr President.

Mark de LA says
MR 2009-07-23 10:19:51 12248
More racism? The Harvard professor arrest report is here. The Drudge headlines are here:
Some video of Obama is in this report.
~
IMHO, the Harvard professor has an axe to grind.
The Google news front is here.

Mark de LA says
     Yep, I too have been arrested in my own mall where I shopped regularly in Georgia trying to drop off my clothes at the Cleaner in the mall. A mixed-racial team of 2 female cops & one male told me I couldn't stop. They were all on bicycles & unidentifiable as cops until they moved forward to arrest me. It should be mentioned that a bicycle shop was right next door to my Cleaner. Anyway I was a little testy about not being able to stop & drop off my laundry on my way to a Saturday work session & in a hurry .  I used no swear words. The subsequent 8 hours in jail I will remember for the rest of my life - perhaps a story for another time.  I settled paying $640 (+ lawyer fees) nolo contendere so that I would not have to wake up every morning reliving the RWG of my innocence waiting for a trial.  I also had a drunk lawyer.  Non-stop playing of the series Cops was the only entertainment besides my own paranoia.
     The point here is both the Harvard Professor, you  & I were technically innocent - we were not drunk & violent.   Had the professor been polite & obeyed the officer's requests without comment there would be no news front.  Had you & I also done the same we probably would not have had our own experiences.  It's all good. I revised my theories of a walled city rather than incarceration for bad guys & you got whatever your karma offered.

Mark de LA says
Another blog presents more context for the encounter of the arrest of the Harvard professor. It is by Mary Katherine Ham - one of my favorites. She quotes:
Source: ...

The Cambridge cop prominent Harvard University professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. claims is a racist gave a dying Reggie Lewis mouth-to-mouth resuscitation in a desperate bid to save the Celtics [team stats] superstar’s life 16 years ago Monday.

“I wasn’t working on Reggie Lewis the basketball star. I wasn’t working on a black man. I was working on another human being,” Sgt. James Crowley, in an exclusive interview with the Herald, said of the forward’s fatal heart attack July 27, 1993, at age 27 during an off-season practice at Brandeis University, where Crowley was a campus police officer.

It’s a date Crowley still can recite by rote - and he still recalls the pain he suffered when people back then questioned whether he had done enough to save the black athlete.

“Some people were saying ‘There’s the guy who killed Reggie Lewis’ afterward. I was broken-hearted. I cried for many nights,” he said.


 
... much more read it all!The title of this item still ponders.

Seth says
Keeping up with the story, ABC has a video of Obama defending his remarks yesterday that has the Obama bashing blogisphere in such a tizzy.  The wording has now evolved from "acting stupidly" to "saner heads should have prevailed". 

So far we see these ripples flow ...

racism
begat --->
Professor Gates over reacting to police investigation
begat --->
Police arresting Gates
begat --->
Obama criticizing police for arresting Gates in his own
begat --->
Obama bashers over reaction to Obama's critizism of arrest

I agree with Obama, let saner heads prevail ... dampen the flow.

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-23 14:56:30 12248
Keeping up with the story, ABC has a video of Obama defending his remarks yesterday that has the Obama bashing blogisphere in such a tizzy.  The wording has now evolved from "acting stupidly" to "saner heads should have prevailed". 

So far we see these ripples flow ...

racism
begat --->
Professor Gates over reacting to police investigation
begat --->
Police arresting Gates
begat --->
Obama criticizing police for arresting Gates in his own
begat --->
Obama bashers over reaction to Obama's critizism of arrest

I agree with Obama, let saner heads prevail ... dampen the flow.
You left out the part where:
Professor Gates shouted & became disorderly while the police were doing him a favor investigating a possible break-in at his house.  
begat->
Professor Gates turned the situation into a racism issue instead of thanking the police
begat->
Obama shooting off his mouth bringing more racism into the news cloud
begat->
the blogosphere hyperventilating ignoring the deeper problem of the Democrats trying to ram though trillions more $$$ on health care.!!

Seth says
MR 2009-07-24 09:04:34 12248
seth 2009-07-24 08:25:48 12248
MR 2009-07-23 21:53:05 12248
MR 2009-07-23 21:47:10 12248
The answer to the titled question is the racists in this story are Obama & the professor. Also see this as the story still seems to twit around.

May it rest in peace
Unfortunately it is still growing, now 4429+ articles in the google newsfront.

Well i agree that professor Gates was hypersensitive about race.  But, there is absolutely no evidence that Obama is a racist in this story. All he said was that "the Cambridge Police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home," a sentiment that I too endorse.  If anything Obama's comments were directed against the police overacting, but not on racial grounds.   Obama went on to say "what I think we know, separate and apart from this incident is that there is a long history in this country of African Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately.  That's just a fact."  It is a fact.  If taking this oppurtunity to highlight that fact makes him a racist, then we are to make no progress in removing racism from all the police departments, because we are afraid to call a spade a spade.  No, calling Obama a ricist for his statements here is not warranted.  Though, i think he can be accused of being a might premature for rushing to judgement before reading the police report.

The question i would like answered is why it was necessary to arrest the professor in his own home.  Too bad no video or audio of the event has yet surfaced.
Perhaps the law prohibiting disorderly conduct should be revised to permit disorderly conduct in one's home when a police officer is inside! In my book the professor is a professor of racism - that's what he studies, that's who he is! He lives in that context. He lives the context.  Obama was a racist because he tag-lined his comments with racist facts trying to hint that they applied to the racist professor's situation. BTW, the cop who arrested the professor teaches about racial profiling to cops! 714 is really the only way to get rid of racism.  If the people who were former victims turn around & claim the right to racism themselves or behave like it is justified then you are right there will be no further progress.
Obama did not "try to hint that [racism applied]", rather he specifically said that racial profiling was "separate and apart from this incident".  What you say about the professor may or may not be true.  I don't know the whole context of his life.  All we do know, if we believe the police report and pictures, is that he is hypersensitive about race.  I'm just trying to keep the facts straight here and not twisted to rub an agenda.

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-24 08:25:48 12248
MR 2009-07-23 21:53:05 12248
MR 2009-07-23 21:47:10 12248
The answer to the titled question is the racists in this story are Obama & the professor. Also see this as the story still seems to twit around.

May it rest in peace
Unfortunately it is still growing, now 4429+ articles in the google newsfront.

Well i agree that professor Gates was hypersensitive about race.  But, there is absolutely no evidence that Obama is a racist in this story. All he said was that "the Cambridge Police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home," a sentiment that I too endorse.  If anything Obama's comments were directed against the police overacting, but not on racial grounds.   Obama went on to say "what I think we know, separate and apart from this incident is that there is a long history in this country of African Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately.  That's just a fact."  It is a fact.  If taking this oppurtunity to highlight that fact makes him a racist, then we are to make no progress in removing racism from all the police departments, because we are afraid to call a spade a spade.  No, calling Obama a ricist for his statements here is not warranted.  Though, i think he can be accused of being a might premature for rushing to judgement before reading the police report.

The question i would like answered is why it was necessary to arrest the professor in his own home.  Too bad no video or audio of the event has yet surfaced.
Perhaps the law prohibiting disorderly conduct should be revised to permit disorderly conduct in one's home when a police officer is inside! In my book the professor is a professor of racism - that's what he studies, that's who he is! He lives in that context. He lives the context.  Obama was a racist because he tag-lined his comments with racist facts trying to hint that they applied to the racist professor's situation. BTW, the cop who arrested the professor teaches about racial profiling to cops! 714 is really the only way to get rid of racism.  If the people who were former victims turn around & claim the right to racism themselves or behave like it is justified then you are right there will be no further progress.

Mark de LA says
Obama lied, there was no reason at all to bring it up if it didn't apply. Why bring race into the picture at all? Quite apart from this 12248 statistics prove that African-American studies professors tend to be racists, eh?

Mark de LA says
The only way to preserve the google newsfronts is to import the site url into Adobe Acrobat or something similar.  Here is the link today  which will change & become invalid. 5185 articles and counting.  More interesting than the Health Care boondoggle, eh?


Seth says
The president "offers his unique Obamapology"  to calm the media frenzy and extends an invitation for a beer to both the sergeant and the professor ... thanks youtube.
Kudos, Mr President





Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-24 10:54:47 12248
MR 2009-07-24 10:31:51 12248
seth 2009-07-24 10:14:59 12248
MR 2009-07-24 09:54:42 12248
Obama lied, there was no reason at all to bring it up if it didn't apply. Why bring race into the picture at all? Quite apart from this 12248 statistics prove that African-American studies professors tend to be racists, eh?
There is little doubt that the professor's reaction was from a context of being a victim of police racism. Obama, knowing his friend, did not ignore that context and rightly included it in his remarks.

I failed to see how this article statically "proves that African-American studies professors tend to be racists".  But it does pose the question: "is Tarzan a sexist and a racist who subjugates Jane and treats black men like children?" ... which certainly displays more hypersensitivity to victimology.  What i am concerned with here is hypersensitivity^2 ... being hypersensitive to somone else's hypersensitivity.  At some point we need to ask ourselves where to cut of the negative feedback.  This is a good example of exactly that.
It was an example of an irrelevant reference (by linking) in a similar sentence construct as Obama's.  Obama did intend that it apply (& you agreed) - half-life of truth for Obama's statement did not survive to the end of the sentence. WOW!  As far as negative feedback remind yourself of the Don Imus story about the women basketball players & see if he got enough feedback!  They fired his ass! The professor's context was that of a victim & racism. The police officer's context was that of arresting a disorderly person. The racism industry supported by the media tends to beat the horse to death until there is an apology or someone gets fired.  In this case I don't see much of a cause to fire the police officer. But, maybe riots & demonstrations somewhere could change the dynamic.

There is a grand difference between these forms: (Incident A separate and apart from this incident is context B) and your ( Assertion A describes context B); the latter is the semantics of hyperlinking.  Obama's usage of the first made a true statement, your usage of the hyperlink made a false statement.

But i agree, the Imus front was another example of hypersensitivity evolving into hypersensitivity^2  evolving into firing.  The only person who might get fired here would be the professor himself, though i doubt that will happen.  It might actually be interesting, if the DA reinstitutes the charges and the question of disorderly conduct gets adjudicated by a jury.  It came out in a press conference today that disorderly conduct is always a subjective finding, and it does require that other citizens were  affected by the behavior ... the latter point of law might be a real streatch to establish.
You missunderstood the analogy. I googled something like african studies are racist & found the Tarzan article amongst 217,000 others. They both relate (as does everything else in the World), but  like Obama mentioning race statistics relative to the arrest incident it would be disengenuous to say that the latter Tarzan article was important to mention amongst all the others. I did this with a link rather than extracting the data from the article.
The point stands!


Seth says
source: MR above
The only way to preserve the google newsfronts is to import the site url into Adobe Acrobat or something similar.  Here is the link today  which will change & become invalid. 5185 articles and counting.  More interesting than the Health Care boondoggle, eh?
Your snapshot does work fine to preserve the front at a moment in time.  Another idea that i think merits study is to record the sequence of articles which become the momentary title of the front.  We would need to capture the sequence number (A,B,C) and include the date, title and the hyperlink to the article.  That sequence grows but remains fixed and can be recorded in a database and literally shows the evolution of the front. 

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-24 10:14:59 12248
MR 2009-07-24 09:54:42 12248
Obama lied, there was no reason at all to bring it up if it didn't apply. Why bring race into the picture at all? Quite apart from this 12248 statistics prove that African-American studies professors tend to be racists, eh?
There is little doubt that the professor's reaction was from a context of being a victim of police racism. Obama, knowing his friend, did not ignore that context and rightly included it in his remarks.

I failed to see how this article statically "proves that African-American studies professors tend to be racists".  But it does pose the question: "is Tarzan a sexist and a racist who subjugates Jane and treats black men like children?" ... which certainly displays more hypersensitivity to victimology.  What i am concerned with here is hypersensitivity^2 ... being hypersensitive to somone else's hypersensitivity.  At some point we need to ask ourselves where to cut of the negative feedback.  This is a good example of exactly that.
It was an example of an irrelevant reference (by linking) in a similar sentence construct as Obama's.  Obama did intend that it apply (& you agreed) - half-life of truth for Obama's statement did not survive to the end of the sentence. WOW!  As far as negative feedback remind yourself of the Don Imus story about the women basketball players & see if he got enough feedback!  They fired his ass! The professor's context was that of a victim & racism. The police officer's context was that of arresting a disorderly person. The racism industry supported by the media tends to beat the horse to death until there is an apology or someone gets fired.  In this case I don't see much of a cause to fire the police officer. But, maybe riots & demonstrations somewhere could change the dynamic.


Mark de LA says
Apparently the calming of the waters did not achieve the effect one would expect - there are 7,104 articles now in the news front:


Mark de LA says
The News wave looks like this at 7992. It is to be noted that the chart covers the number of sources covering this story which decreases over time as people lose interest, & the total stories thus in google news aggregate increases as the horse continues to get beaten.


Seth says
MR 2009-07-25 07:32:38 12248
seth 2009-07-24 10:54:47 12248
MR 2009-07-24 10:31:51 12248
seth 2009-07-24 10:14:59 12248
MR 2009-07-24 09:54:42 12248
Obama lied, there was no reason at all to bring it up if it didn't apply. Why bring race into the picture at all? Quite apart from this 12248 statistics prove that African-American studies professors tend to be racists, eh?
There is little doubt that the professor's reaction was from a context of being a victim of police racism. Obama, knowing his friend, did not ignore that context and rightly included it in his remarks.

I failed to see how this article statically "proves that African-American studies professors tend to be racists".  But it does pose the question: "is Tarzan a sexist and a racist who subjugates Jane and treats black men like children?" ... which certainly displays more hypersensitivity to victimology.  What i am concerned with here is hypersensitivity^2 ... being hypersensitive to somone else's hypersensitivity.  At some point we need to ask ourselves where to cut of the negative feedback.  This is a good example of exactly that.
It was an example of an irrelevant reference (by linking) in a similar sentence construct as Obama's.  Obama did intend that it apply (& you agreed) - half-life of truth for Obama's statement did not survive to the end of the sentence. WOW!  As far as negative feedback remind yourself of the Don Imus story about the women basketball players & see if he got enough feedback!  They fired his ass! The professor's context was that of a victim & racism. The police officer's context was that of arresting a disorderly person. The racism industry supported by the media tends to beat the horse to death until there is an apology or someone gets fired.  In this case I don't see much of a cause to fire the police officer. But, maybe riots & demonstrations somewhere could change the dynamic.

There is a grand difference between these forms: (Incident A separate and apart from this incident is context B) and your ( Assertion A describes context B); the latter is the semantics of hyperlinking.  Obama's usage of the first made a true statement, your usage of the hyperlink made a false statement.

But i agree, the Imus front was another example of hypersensitivity evolving into hypersensitivity^2  evolving into firing.  The only person who might get fired here would be the professor himself, though i doubt that will happen.  It might actually be interesting, if the DA reinstitutes the charges and the question of disorderly conduct gets adjudicated by a jury.  It came out in a press conference today that disorderly conduct is always a subjective finding, and it does require that other citizens were  affected by the behavior ... the latter point of law might be a real streatch to establish.
You missunderstood the analogy. I googled something like african studies are racist & found the Tarzan article amongst 217,000 others. They both relate (as does everything else in the World), but  like Obama mentioning race statistics relative to the arrest incident it would be disengenuous to say that the latter Tarzan article was important to mention amongst all the others. I did this with a link rather than extracting the data from the article.
The point stands!

The problem with your "analogy" is that whereas the the Tarzan article has nothing to do with your made up premise about "African studies are racist", the presidents remarks were directly related to Gates racial hypersensitivity towards the police.  But, yes, i get that you are trying to imply that they were not - but it is really hard for me to to swallow that assumption when again and again we see that racial hypersensitivity against the police boiling to the surface.  The flip side is also there, white sensitivity to perceived advantages of minorities.

In my final analysis this was not about race, it was about respect for police authority.  That is why the officer decided to arrest Gates.  An officer should not have to turn his back and walk away from disrespect; even though in this case that would have been the smart thing to do.  On the other hand the black community is rightly sensitive to abuse from the police.  That abuse is a fact still festering in the community.  This incident and Obama's comments have served to improve our awareness of this situation.  Now, both sides need to deescalate the rhetoric, acknowledge the facts, and work to improve the situation.

Mark de LA says
It is not clear from the newswave whether Crowley accepted the beer at the whitehouse invitation, but he had a nice conversation with Obama. The details of when & what will take place are still shrouded in Obama.  It is interesting that WND did uncover a miscellaneous fact that Gates conducted a fundraiser for Obama & was a maximum legal private contributor to his presidential campaign. The depth of their friendship is not covered nor is it's basis.


Seth says
Regarding the news front:  new events like the president's surprise visit to the briefing room fuel the front.  We expect one more event on this front when we get coverage of the beer in the white house.  You then have a flurry of commentary following each event.  There is a lag between the event and the media and blog commentary.  With no more events all fronts tend to die down.  Maybe we need to chart events on the curve that way you could see this happening.

Mark de LA says
Seth(above): ... On the other hand the black community is rightly sensitive to abuse from the police.  That abuse is a fact still festering in the community.  This incident and Obama's comments have served to improve our awareness of this situation.  Now, both sides need to deescalate the rhetoric, acknowledge the facts, and work to improve the situation.

...
I think Crowley teaches that kind of thing to police officers via his profiling classes, but I don't have his curriculum posted anywhere, yet.  What are your suggestions on how to do that?  Charlene used to try to get me to hold encounter groups (back in the '70's) to which her doctor friend responded that I would get eaten for lunch.  My suggestion is of course for Obama to preach 714 from the bully pulpit. Perhaps Crowley could suggest that at the World famous beer bash. There is the outdated Blue-Eyes Brown-Eyes experiment of earlier days, but that is too much time in a seminar for any quick fix.  And yours? I believe that you actually understand & have the distinctions in 714 but for some known & unknown reasons have backtracked on it.  How would you restate it such that it would solve the Gate's problem?


Mark de LA says
Momentous details are emerging.

Seth says
MR 2009-07-26 09:55:22 12248
Seth(above): ... On the other hand the black community is rightly sensitive to abuse from the police.  That abuse is a fact still festering in the community.  This incident and Obama's comments have served to improve our awareness of this situation.  Now, both sides need to deescalate the rhetoric, acknowledge the facts, and work to improve the situation.

...
I think Crowley teaches that kind of thing to police officers via his profiling classes, but I don't have his curriculum posted anywhere, yet.  What are your suggestions on how to do that?  Charlene used to try to get me to hold encounter groups (back in the '70's) to which her doctor friend responded that I would get eaten for lunch.  My suggestion is of course for Obama to preach 714 from the bully pulpit. Perhaps Crowley could suggest that at the World famous beer bash. There is the outdated Blue-Eyes Brown-Eyes experiment of earlier days, but that is too much time in a seminar for any quick fix.  And yours? I believe that you actually understand & have the distinctions in 714 but for some known & unknown reasons have backtracked on it.  How would you restate it such that it would solve the Gate's problem?

I think the first steps towards improving the situation would be for both sides to acknowledge the reality of the other point of view.  Police departments need to acknowledge that the black community is sensitive to their treatment by the police.  I know in places that has been done.  The black community needs to acknowledge that police departments deserve respect and cooperation. 

I don't think that 714 has anything to do with this incident.  This was not a matter of a racial distinction being misused.   Now you could say that Gates erroneously assumed racial distinctions were being made against him.  But the problem was caused by his hypersensitivity erupting.   714 provides no lever to work against racial hypersensitivety.  Rather it does the opposite by providing a justification for white blacklash which just exasserbates hypersensitivty.  Obama preaching 714 would be counter productive.  My reasons for rejecting 714 are based, primarialy, on how it has been used.  They are clear and in no way unknown.  They may, however, be misunderstood.

I am looking forward to the World Famous Beer Bash, let us hope that it actually happens. The sad note, of course, is that there are people in this country who will use it as an excuse for a Obama bash no matter how productive it turns out to be. 

Mark de LA says
Hypersensitive erupting sounds a bit like stepping in dog shit or falling in love - all excuses that are socially accepted as having no cause like an accident; all of them pure pretty much bullshit. Gates did raise race first as a distinction in his that's how black men are treated in America statement - thus violating 714. Obama spreading 714 from the bully pulpit would wake people up to treating each other members of the human race as human beings first rather than members of certain races. Too bad you seem to be locked into the member of a race thingy. It does no such thing as provide for excuses for backlashes of any kind - shame on you for making that up; I have never used it that way. I doubt Obama will make any breakthroughs in the beer bash on race since he seems already to be going in the wrong direction in that matter.


Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-27 08:41:17 12248
MR 2009-07-26 18:51:17 12248
Hypersensitive erupting sounds a bit like stepping in dog shit or falling in love - all excuses that are socially accepted as having no cause like an accident; all of them pure pretty much bullshit. Gates did raise race first as a distinction in his that's how black men are treated in America statement - thus violating 714. Obama spreading 714 from the bully pulpit would wake people up to treating each other members of the human race as human beings first rather than members of certain races. Too bad you seem to be locked into the member of a race thingy. It does no such thing as provide for excuses for backlashes of any kind - shame on you for making that up; I have never used it that way. I doubt Obama will make any breakthroughs in the beer bash on race since he seems already to be going in the wrong direction in that matter.

Instances of you using 714 as an excuse for white backlash can be found all over in the  comments you made or repeated in racism room. Here are some ...
  • 714 Sotomayor belongs to La Raza, an interesting organization (which means "THE RACE")
  • 714 Well the so-called hate crimes are just ordinary crimes where someone notices that 2 different races are involved.
  • 2783 The Million Man March was Louis Farrakhan's stuff which is essentially black racism! 
  • 9601 [especially pertinant even though you did not mention 714] Why did he use the term "typical white (female?) person"?  Literally he might be saying a "typical white person" has a reaction to somebody they don't know from their (previous?) experience.  This is true for most of us without the racist identity "white" . For me appending the racist identifier white to it made it racist!
  • 9601 [talking about the cartoon of the item] My apologies for the on-target distinctions of the cartoon.
  • 10003 It was really a double jeopardy question proposed to Obama. If he answers other than he is the first multi-ethnic president ( or dodges the question slightly by saying he is the president for all human-Americans) then he is NOT racist by my definition & only a racist one drop theory will give him the title of the first black president.  Frankly, if he were to take such a non-racist stand & decline such a title as the first black president he would go a long way toward instantiating 714 & hence hammer the final nails in the coffin of racism.
  • 6460 the song in context of Rush's program made a lot of sense in that he was using it to point out your side's racism vis-a-vis the LA Times. If you remember there was a question from the main line of the race industry as to whether BHO was "black enough" & whether he was "down for the struggle".  Here is where the song writer elaborates on his song.  It is also fascinating to examine the appointee who was rejected previously by the electorate.  Apparently Blogo wants to appoint someone that the people rejected before in an election who also creates monuments for his so-called accomplishments.    You & the country will get over your racist sickness when you adopt [item 714]. [you trying to justify "The Magic Negro" label and calling upon 714]
  • 10838 It comes up vis-a-vis Sotomayor because she emphasizes it. Likewise in other situations. Politically it is part of the Democrat way because Democrats are just a mixture of demographics & groups based on identity politics; rarely having an ideal or overarching principle to drive them.   When you emphasize diversity meme as if it is something to be worshipped you invite a response in the nature of [item 714].
  • at this point i stoped looking ... there are probably several more.
You use of 714 against Sotomayor is probably the most clear cut case of using 714 to excuse your own whitelash.  Btw, i am not going to argue each point above ... i don't expect you to accept my judgement here. 

Well, you are very ignorant that reverse racism is racism.  None of this is backlash material. All of these are examples of some kind of racism or incidents that illustrate racism which on your side of the aisle & mentality is just OK. Did you invent the word whitelash to illustrate your own racism or are you just a racist idiot! IMHO, as long as there are people who think like you do on race there will be racism. 714 is the way out of Hell & you don't seem to want to go there. Muddle it out on your own, then.

Mark de LA says
MR 2009-07-27 09:20:55 12248
WND uncovered some video of professor Gates which may give more context to his hypersensitivity or perhaps just shows a member of the racism industry doing his work. The video only shows him using the n-word once, would be nice to find the whole speech. If Newt were to crack the same jokes he would be hounded out of his history classes.

&...
source: ... (on his application to Yale) 

"As always, whitey now sits in judgment of me, preparing to cast my fate. It is your decision either to let me blow with the wind as a nonentity or to encourage the development of self. Allow me to prove myself."


... apparently Gates got some respect:
ibid: ...

He was substantial enough to get into Yale anyway, politicized enough to protest racism and the Vietnam War, but never so disheartened by his country that he didn't consider himself a part of it.

As a scholar, he has advocated African American history as part of American history, distrusting "the rhetoric of crisis" and unwilling to enter the "sweepstakes of oppression." Change has been effected from the top. At Harvard, Gates is credited with turning the school's African American studies program into a "hub" for intellectual history, Appiah said, with fellows and faculty advisers including Guinier, William Julius Wilson and Nobel laureate Wole Soyinka.


...



Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-27 07:15:18 12248
MR 2009-07-26 19:58:38 12248
source: ...

Today, on Fox News Sunday, Juan Williams came up with a fine formulation, in the context of the Henry Louis Gates imbroglio:

"But in this situation, the president spoke without the facts. And so you can't have a teachable moment if it's based on a lie."

Amid all the blather about "teachable moments," I don't recall anyone else making this simple but profound observation: "You can't have a teachable moment if it's based on a lie." Another way of putting it might be to say that it's not a "moment" that's teachable, it's the truth that's teachable.

So a moment in which everyone colludes to obscure the truth (which seems characteristic of most "teachable moments" in contemporary America) is not a moment of teaching; it's a moment of deception, of misdirection, of obfuscation. Call it an obfuscatable moment.

...couldn't have said it better!
Where is the lie?  


Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-27 11:48:41 12248
source: MR above
I talked about affirmative action without using racism
Talking about the issue was not the challenge.  The challenge is to argue against affirmative action without using the definition of racism given in 714.

Try a simplified example:  you find a company hiring just white people for a position where there are plenty of black people who are qualified.  So you make a rule that says they must hire just as many black people as they do white people.  Now can you give an argument against that rule without using the definition of racism given in 714?
I gave you the solution to affirmative action above by looking at whatever the problem is in terms of poverty, jobs, hiring, etc. as individual cases. If you want to use racism as a tool you will find no arguments or support from me. You are using the wrong tools; your straw man doesn't generate any more interest in me because of specifics. In so far as there are laws which prevent specifics - enforce them.


Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-27 10:05:02 12248
source: MR abobe trying to justify his use of 714 as not being an excuse for whitelash
reverse racism is racism.
Bear in mind that the term "reverse racism" was coined by whites to talk about affirmative action.  So to get to the bottom of this we need to substitute:  Is affirmative action racism?   But it was not; rather it was a temporary way to even the playing field between the races.   However, according to the wording of 714, affirmative action is racism.  So you have used 714 as an excuse to fight affirmative action. 

Try to argue against affirmative action without using 714 at all. 
I don't accept your straw-man premise. To take the victims of racism & have them turn around and make the victimizers targets of racism is still racism. Furthermore, the eye for an eye biblical notion has been supplanted by the new one called the Golden Rule. Treat people as you want to be treated (love one another as you want to be loved).  In the case of an eye for an eye you end up with 2 blind people. If you look at people who are in poverty or impossibly hard situations to get out of, regardless of race, you have good solutions - case by case.  To make laws based on racial groups is just race politics
& race industry... just more of the same.  I don't mind my tax dollars going to helping those who really want to get out of the catch-22 of poverty & lack of opportunity. But, you must come from abundance rather than scarcity; abundance is a mental attitude that can help transform contexts with a little help from your friends. Context your work in this area on individuals at the personal level & 714 will help bust the mental roadblocks. That is one dimension, another is quit reliving the past.  The Jews relive the holocaust often & stay limited as such;  the descendants of slaves likewise.  A woman who is raped, however horrible the thought, does herself the most harm by reliving it over & over again from her memory. Some PTSD therapies can help the latter, however willingness to forgive & let it go as the Lord's Prayer says "forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us" is the best prescription. 

Seth says
MR 2009-07-27 08:03:18 12248
More lies?? M$M or ??
source: ...

BOSTON -- The 911 caller who reported a possible break-in at the home of black Harvard scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. did not mention race in the call, according to a statement issued by her attorney and backed up by Cambridge Police Commissioner Robert Haas.

Lucia Whalen placed the 911 call July 16, saying she saw two men on Gates' front porch who appeared to be trying to force open the front door. The call led to the arrest of Gates by Cambridge police on a disorderly conduct charge, and a resulting national debate about racial profiling.

In the statement issued Sunday by attorney Wendy Murphy, Whalen -- who has not spoken publicly -- said she only saw the backs of the two men and did not know their race when she made the call. Murphy said Whalen, who works nearby, called because she had been aware of recent break-ins in the area and wanted to correct "misinformation" suggesting that she placed the call because the men on the porch were black.

"Contrary to published reports that a 'white woman' called 911 and reported seeing 'two black men' trying to gain entry into Mr. Gates home, the woman, who has olive colored skin and is of Portuguese descent, told the 911 operator that she observed 'two men' at the home," Murphy's statement read.

...WTF,

Might be interesting to find out where the notion of "two black men" came from.

Seth says
source: MR above
I talked about affirmative action without using racism
Talking about the issue was not the challenge.  The challenge is to argue against affirmative action without using the definition of racism given in 714.

Try a simplified example:  you find a company hiring just white people for a position where there are plenty of black people who are qualified.  So you make a rule that says they must hire just as many black people as they do white people.  Now can you give an argument against that rule without using the definition of racism given in 714?

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-27 10:57:02 12248
MR 2009-07-27 10:33:01 12248
seth 2009-07-27 10:05:02 12248
source: MR abobe trying to justify his use of 714 as not being an excuse for whitelash
reverse racism is racism.
Bear in mind that the term "reverse racism" was coined by whites to talk about affirmative action.  So to get to the bottom of this we need to substitute:  Is affirmative action racism?   But it was not; rather it was a temporary way to even the playing field between the races.   However, according to the wording of 714, affirmative action is racism.  So you have used 714 as an excuse to fight affirmative action. 

Try to argue against affirmative action without using 714 at all. 
I don't accept your straw-man premise. To take the victims of racism & have them turn around and make the victimizers targets of racism is still racism. Furthermore, the eye for an eye biblical notion has been supplanted by the new one called the Golden Rule. Treat people as you want to be treated (love one another as you want to be loved).  In the case of an eye for an eye you end up with 2 blind people. If you look at people who are in poverty or impossibly hard situations to get out of, regardless of race, you have good solutions - case by case.  To make laws based on racial groups is just race politics
& race industry... just more of the same.  I don't mind my tax dollars going to helping those who really want to get out of the catch-22 of poverty & lack of opportunity. But, you must come from abundance rather than scarcity; abundance is a mental attitude that can help transform contexts with a little help from your friends. Context your work in this area on individuals at the personal level & 714 will help bust the mental roadblocks. That is one dimension, another is quit reliving the past.  The Jews relive the holocaust often & stay limited as such;  the descendants of slaves likewise.  A woman who is raped, however horrible the thought, does herself the most harm by reliving it over & over again from her memory. Some PTSD therapies can help the latter, however willingness to forgive & let it go as the Lord's Prayer says "forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us" is the best prescription. 
Sorry i missed the part where you argue against affirmative action without using the principal of 714.  Your argument against affirmative action seems to be typified by ...
source: MR above
To take the victims of racism & have them turn around and make the victimizers targets of racism is still racism.
In other words use 714 to deny advantaging a race which is severely disadvantaged to level the playing field. Your argument always hinges around  your notion of what racism is. 
I am sorry you missed my first line about how I don't accept your straw-man premise.  I talked about affirmative action without using racism (that's 714 in essence). You try it!
Try being a human for a change instead of being a member of a race & maybe the light will go on.


Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-27 12:43:55 12248
-snip- editor cliped only the offending bullshit to comment upon

Btw, VDH's use of "None of us gets a pass once we evoke racial identity" is an example of whitelash using 714.  In fact every time you see the term "racial identity" or "identify politics"  you will find that it is being used to whitelash against people working to level the playing field in some manner.  Apparently those whitelashers think things will just clear up on their own ... or maybe the are hoping that thing will just say the same as they are.
There is no such thing as whitelash you are making up! You are still trying to pick a fight - just like professor Gates. Your word has nothing to do with 714. Your side only respects groups of people instead of individuals & individualism. Such a shame. Join the whole human race you will find it much more enjoyable. Or stew in your own juices down there in the pits....
 

Mark de LA says
source(Seth above): ... Btw, VDH's use of "None of us gets a pass once we evoke racial identity" is an example of whitelash using 714.  In fact every time you see the term "racial identity" or "identify politics"  you will find that it is being used to whitelash against people working to level the playing field in some manner.  Apparently those whitelashers think things will just clear up on their own ... or maybe the are hoping that thing will just say the same as they are.

...
VDH is probably not aware of this blog nor 714. You are probably not aware of the word backlash vs blacklash & made up your own word out of the confusion. It is as racist as the n-word in my book. & ... oops you didn't even make it up. You seem to be going in the opposite direction from making race relations better & are deep in the RWG as most people who can't see beyond race are.  I will remind you again of MLK's dream:
source: ...

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.


...re-read the whole speech someday (or listen) & you will find more of 714 in it in spirit than your whole RWG about 714.!!!!


Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-27 17:07:15 12248
seth 2009-07-27 08:45:04 12248
MR 2009-07-27 08:03:18 12248
More lies?? M$M or ??
source: ...[snip]

"Contrary to published reports that a 'white woman' called 911 and reported seeing 'two black men' trying to gain entry into Mr. Gates home, the woman, who has olive colored skin and is of Portuguese descent, told the 911 operator that she observed 'two men' at the home," Murphy's statement read.

...WTF,

Might be interesting to find out where the notion of "two black men" came from.
Actually, according to the officer, she did report seeing two black men ....


The tapes seem to indicate that the police at the call center asked about race which the caller was uncertain about & speculated one was hispanic & the other she didn't see or know what he was.


Mark de LA says
... & then here is an article by Henry Louis Gates, Jr. entitled Blacklash ~ All prejudices are not equal. But that doesn't mean there's no comparison between the predicaments of gays and blacks.
He seems to want to put blacks above gays in the pecking order of civil rights attention or something like that.

Mark de LA says
Here are 2 images of the Comic Book hero Blacklash: - could almost work as a new image for the RWG.


Seth says
MR 2009-07-28 05:59:29 12248
source(Seth above): ... Btw, VDH's use of "None of us gets a pass once we evoke racial identity" is an example of whitelash using 714.  In fact every time you see the term "racial identity" or "identify politics"  you will find that it is being used to whitelash against people working to level the playing field in some manner.  Apparently those whitelashers think things will just clear up on their own ... or maybe the are hoping that thing will just say the same as they are.

...
VDH is probably not aware of this blog nor 714. You are probably not aware of the word backlash vs blacklash & made up your own word out of the confusion. It is as racist as the n-word in my book. & ... oops you didn't even make it up. You seem to be going in the opposite direction from making race relations better & are deep in the RWG as most people who can't see beyond race are.  I will remind you again of MLK's dream:
source: ...

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.


...re-read the whole speech someday (or listen) & you will find more of 714 in it in spirit than your whole RWG about 714.!!!!

Or rather whitelashers like you and Limbaugh who are saying lies about Obama like he has a chip on his shoulder and accusing judge Sotomayor of being a racist are going in the wrong direction.  I'm glad that you at least caught yourself and found out that i didn't make it up but instead have just observed it playing out on the scene.  It is 714 that is being used as the excuse for whitelash.  Suddenly minorities are supposed to become color blind.  If they even dare to talk about race, then they are to be accused of racism.  If the president even mentions race, then he is to be called out for a chip on his sholder. 

No that is not the way to go!   Don't become blind to the problem. Get it out in the open and talk it.  Acknowledge the progress that has been made and highlight that which is still left to be done.  The absence of racism is not color blindness.   Don't use your made up ideal of color blindness to attack minorities when they are dealing with real problems. 

Please open your mind.

Mark de LA says
~


Mark de LA says

Maybe, some enterprising soul can invent something like Billy Beer for Obama maybe with a picture of Blacklash on the label.

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-28 07:09:54 12248

-snip- racist name calling removed by the editor

No that is not the way to go!   Don't become blind to the problem. Get it out in the open and talk it.  Acknowledge the progress that has been made and highlight that which is still left to be done.  The absence of racism is not color blindness.   Don't use your made up ideal of color blindness to attack minorities when they are dealing with real problems. 

Please open your mind.
Focus on what is common amongst humans & you will get the point & then you will solve the problems.  Focus elsewhere & what you are in is the RWG. I guess your demographic is now trying to extract it's pound of flesh from Obama since he has been distracted by the economy & all those other things. Certainly he has a lot more experience as a Chicago street organizer & Alinskyite than as an economist!

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-28 07:33:13 12248
MR 2009-07-28 06:37:27 12248
... & then here is an article by Henry Louis Gates, Jr. entitled Blacklash ~ All prejudices are not equal. But that doesn't mean there's no comparison between the predicaments of gays and blacks.
He seems to want to put blacks above gays in the pecking order of civil rights attention or something like that.
Herrump ... well don't put me in the same camp with this Gates character.  Anyone who could coin a sentence like "This sentiment -- that gays are pretenders to the throne of disadvantage that properly belongs to black Americans, that their relation to the rhetoric of civil rights is one of unearned opportunism -- is surprisingly widespread" is not beating the same drum as am I. Apparently Ann Coulter was onto something when she introduced the idea of a hierarchy of victimology.  Gates needs some therapy.  Who knows, maybe Obama and Sargent Crowley will get a chance to double team him on Thursday.
This is just a window into the African Studies mind of HLG,jr. I ran into it googling around for blacklash.


Seth says
source: MR above
...MKH
Well, yes, it wold have been more politically correct for Obama to have recused himself and not made his "acted stupidly" comment, not withstanding that it would have been smarter had Crowley not arrested Gates.
  But then we wouldn't have this dramatic beer summit to watch!

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-28 08:43:31 12248
Whatever ... for my part i would be happy if i never again hear 714 mentioned in relation to tort on a minority.  Color blindness and acting according to the GR are laudable ideals.  But that is quite different than lashing out against people who are dealing with the nitty gritty reality of race relations in America today.
Nobody is lashing out - that's your hostility & combativeness surfacing again! I am quite willing to never mention it again, but by my doing so you will lose any authority or believability in my mind to ever discuss race on your blog or mine again.  I will brush off your treating so-called nitty gritty reality of race  (like whatever you really do about it anyway) with a giant WHATEVER & go my own way; your having wasted my time by distracting my glance with something you say about race - henceforth. 


Mark de LA says
from Politico via MKH : ... Good Tuesday morning. WHICH CABLE WILL BE THE FIRST WITH A COUNTDOWN CLOCK? The cop, the prof and the prez will meet for that beer at 6 p.m. Thursday, a sleepy White House official told us after it was first blogged by ABC’s industrious Jake Tapper. L.A.Times/Chicago Tribune’s Peter Nicholas: “The beer summit will be monitored closely. Many black leaders believe Obama was on target with his initial comments. They don't want the moment to pass without a fuller discussion of racial profiling. … Law enforcement agencies will be watching closely for any sign that the president will favor his friend Gates over Crowley. … ‘Whenever you get race and politics, it's like catnip,’ [Robert] Gibbs said, sitting behind his desk in his West Wing office. ‘All you need is a spark — and cable television is happy to do that.’
...MKH


Seth says
MR 2009-07-28 09:04:48 12248
seth 2009-07-28 08:43:31 12248
Whatever ... for my part i would be happy if i never again hear 714 mentioned in relation to tort on a minority.  Color blindness and acting according to the GR are laudable ideals.  But that is quite different than lashing out against people who are dealing with the nitty gritty reality of race relations in America today.
Nobody is lashing out - that's your hostility & combativeness surfacing again! I am quite willing to never mention it again, but by my doing so you will lose any authority or believability in my mind to ever discuss race on your blog or mine again.  I will brush off your treating so-called nitty gritty reality of race  (like whatever you really do about it anyway) with a giant WHATEVER & go my own way; your having wasted my time by distracting my glance with something you say about race - henceforth. 

Well your reaction is your own ... I take no responsibility for it ... don't put it on me.  My "whatever" was in response to yours of 2009-07-28 08:30:37 which i found almost impossible to follow.  That "whatever"  is not to be twisted to be about "treating so-called nitty gritty reality of race" ... that would be just another lie.

I could say this differently.  I would be happy if the next time you get ginned up by listening to Rush Limbaugh rag on minorities or Obama regarding race relations, that you carefully consider if behind his remarks lurks the assumption that Americans should adopt color blindness regardless of how much they are hurting.  Color blindness is an ideal.  It does not help us with the nitty gritty of race relations today.  It is a goal for the future.

Mark de LA says
I have not listened to Rush on this subject at all.  Again Rush speaks for himself & I speak for myself.  He probably would agree with you more than me on 714 which you are apparently unqualified to understand.  You are so fucked up you just can't read a simple paragraph & grok it's content without first reading the White House talking points on the subject to get it's meaning.  The WH hacks & the M$M are the ones ginning up the racism on this one because Obama ran off at the mouth assuming a stereotype illustrated in the cartoons above. Good luck in your racial cocoon.  Personally, I prefer not to think of race at all but you & the president apparently have to; all future teachable obfuscating moments notwithstanding.


Mark de LA says
All goals which were ever accomplished at one time resided as something to be accomplished in the future. Once you accept the goal then you can begin to work backwards toward figuring out all the previous steps which must happen in order to make the goal a reality! Some, like the president like to declare something & skip the details like how much it costs or whether it is really something that the people want. I find that some men a lot of women just like to throw tantrums & get all excited & angry hoping that someone, somewhere will fulfill their wants & needs with having to bother them with the details of how to get there. 
 

Mark de LA says

Seth: ...
Mark, the problem it is not that "restrict or abuse" can not be included in 714.  The problem it is that your wording of 714 extends out to more than just restricting or abusing.  It extends to arguing, allocating, educating or even studying.  It extends to even making a distinction.  What i am talking about here are the actual deeds of abuse and restriction ... not merely the making of distinctions. There is nothing wrong with "separating into identity groups for political gain".   I do believe that right was built into our constitution by our founding fathers.   What is your real reason for agitating against that right now?
...It does not say making distinctions is racist - perhaps that is you problem.  Using a distinction to separate humans based on race usually has a purpose which is racist.  It is the purpose of the distinction which I am getting at. Again, how many times do I have to tell you that once you leave the level of human in solving human problems and start by lowering yourself to the level of racial problems you leave behind emotionally those who are not of that race; disingenuous arguments to the contrary notwithstanding. Free assembly is fine. I presume that you think free assembly of the members of the KKK or Al Qaeda is just fine also because it is a Constitutional right. However nothing says you have to have them represented in equal numbers in government to their numbers in the population.  Identity politics has the nasty side effect of saying that a member of the homosexual community must represent homosexuals, a member of the transgender community trans-genders etc. it is anti-individuality.

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-28 11:32:40 12248
MR 2009-07-28 10:27:00 12248
All goals which were ever accomplished at one time resided as something to be accomplished in the future. Once you accept the goal then you can begin to work backwards toward figuring out all the previous steps which must happen in order to make the goal a reality! Some, like the president like to declare something & skip the details like how much it costs or whether it is really something that the people want. I find that some men a lot of women just like to throw tantrums & get all excited & angry hoping that someone, somewhere will fulfill their wants & needs with having to bother them with the details of how to get there. 
 
Well goals are great.  But I am not at all sure that moving towards a color blind society should be our goal.  I would prefer a goal that allowed for racial awareness and identity.  There is no reason to stamp that out.  In and of itself it does not hurt our society. The problem is where race becomes the reason to restrict or abuse another person.  Perhaps you could revise 714 to remove its ability to excuse whitelash ... and refocus it on a world where nobody ever uses race as a reason to restrict or abuse another person or group of people.  Why not allow people to promote their own proud identities be those identities based on race, or sex, or religion, or anything else?  Where does that, in itself, hurt our society?
Except for your red herring WH buzzword whitelash all of that is contained within 714 in the sentence
714: ... anyone who uses the distinctions of race to argue, judge, excuse, blame, criticize, politicize, incite, agitate, allocate, study, educate, etc. is a RACIST !

...certainly restrict, abuse & other politicizing acts fall within the generality quoted above. Celebrating one's cultural uniqueness is great; particularly if part of human variability (in the purest sense.) It's the politics of victim hood & the politicizing & separating into identity groups for political gain of particular parties that doesn't serve the human race. As I have said before when you shout out about a challenge for, say homosexuals, it's hard for me to hear & empathize with it until I hear the problem framed as a challenge for humans in general.  The law, the domain of equality, is often thought of as blind. Why not be color blind for the sake of brotherhood - the domain of economics & opportunity.
 


Seth says
MR 2009-07-28 11:53:16 12248
seth 2009-07-28 11:32:40 12248
MR 2009-07-28 10:27:00 12248
All goals which were ever accomplished at one time resided as something to be accomplished in the future. Once you accept the goal then you can begin to work backwards toward figuring out all the previous steps which must happen in order to make the goal a reality! Some, like the president like to declare something & skip the details like how much it costs or whether it is really something that the people want. I find that some men a lot of women just like to throw tantrums & get all excited & angry hoping that someone, somewhere will fulfill their wants & needs with having to bother them with the details of how to get there. 
 
Well goals are great.  But I am not at all sure that moving towards a color blind society should be our goal.  I would prefer a goal that allowed for racial awareness and identity.  There is no reason to stamp that out.  In and of itself it does not hurt our society. The problem is where race becomes the reason to restrict or abuse another person.  Perhaps you could revise 714 to remove its ability to excuse whitelash ... and refocus it on a world where nobody ever uses race as a reason to restrict or abuse another person or group of people.  Why not allow people to promote their own proud identities be those identities based on race, or sex, or religion, or anything else?  Where does that, in itself, hurt our society?
Except for your red herring WH buzzword whitelash all of that is contained within 714 in the sentence
714: ... anyone who uses the distinctions of race to argue, judge, excuse, blame, criticize, politicize, incite, agitate, allocate, study, educate, etc. is a RACIST !

...certainly restrict, abuse & other politicizing acts fall within the generality quoted above. Celebrating one's cultural uniqueness is great; particularly if part of human variability (in the purest sense.) It's the politics of victim hood & the politicizing & separating into identity groups for political gain of particular parties that doesn't serve the human race. As I have said before when you shout out about a challenge for, say homosexuals, it's hard for me to hear & empathize with it until I hear the problem framed as a challenge for humans in general.  The law, the domain of equality, is often thought of as blind. Why not be color blind for the sake of brotherhood - the domain of economics & opportunity.
 

Mark, the problem it is not that "restrict or abuse" can not be included in 714.  The problem it is that your wording of 714 extends out to more than just restricting or abusing.  It extends to arguing, allocating, educating or even studying.  It extends to even making a distinction.  What i am talking about here are the actual deeds of abuse and restriction ... not merely the making of distinctions.

There is nothing wrong with "separating into identity groups for political gain".   I do believe that right was built into our constitution by our founding fathers.   What is your real reason for agitating against that right now?

Seth says
MR 2009-07-29 15:22:44 12248
seth 2009-07-29 10:03:55 12248
Note how MR has used his famous 714 to call somebody a racist ...
source: MR in comment 2009-07-26 18:51:17 in this item above
Gates did raise race first as a distinction in his that's how black men are treated in America statement - thus violating 714.
Now it is obvious that Gates was erroneously overacting.  I am not defending his actions, which were misdirected, obnoxious, and disrespected an officer.  But suppose for a moment he had been singled out by a police officer and arrested in a situation where a white man would have been left alone.   Would then Gates have been racist by saying "that's how black men are treated in America"?   No he would not have been.  But according to the wording of 714 he would have been. 

This is a clear cut example of MR using 714 as an excuse to call a minority a racist for the wrong reason.
Gates used a racial distinction in the context of the RWG to make the Crowley wrong for whatever he was doing when Gates became disorderly - hence Gates was the racist.  Still nothing wrong with 714. The rest of your hypothetical is convoluted & does not apply. It would have little mattered whether Crowley was of the same race as Gates or some other race.
Pluck it out, scream & shout if you can see again!
Well i can accept your description of what happened.  However my complaint was not addressed to Gates behavior - which could well be considered racist,  but rather to your comment which i quoted above.  You said  "Gates did raise race first as a distinction in his that's how black men are treated in America statement - thus violating 714."  Then i asked you to suppose that the officer was in the wrong (see more detail description above).  Yet your 714 would still obtain.  You have affirmed it once and now you have affirmed it again.  Yet such a observation by Gates would not have been racist at all by my reckoning.  He would not have been abusing or restricting based upon race.  But, yes, he would have been drawing a racial distinction.  

It would be useful for our continued dialogue if you would carefully follow what i am saying above and at least ack that you understand it the way i mean it.  It goes to the heart of my complaint with 714.  Then, who knows, perhaps we could move on.

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-29 09:30:19 12248
MR 2009-07-29 08:36:57 12248
seth 2009-07-29 08:01:22 12248
source: MR above
...It does not say making distinctions is racist
Well actually it does, quite literally ...
source: text of 714
I say that anyone who uses the distinctions of race to argue, judge, excuse, blame, criticize, politicize, incite, agitate, allocate, study, educate, etc. is a RACIST !
...
Actually, you should take a refresher course on English.  To make a distinction & to use a distinction to are different & even use different English constructs. Also, for the sake of confusion you can read this as well from the Wikipedia.

No there is no substantial difference between saying "using a distinction" and saying "making a distinction".  Ask yourself what is done differently when you use a distinction as opposed to when you make a distinction.  Give an example.  The only difference i can see is drawing a distinction for the first time (making) can be distinguished from using one which has already been drawn.  But that slight difference is of no importance here. 

And for the record, use-mention  has nothing to do with this.  I am quite familiar with the semantics of use-mention and have even mentographed it in detail.  In the paragraph above i have mentioned "distinction" but have not used or made a distinction.  Its the difference between talking about the word "nigger" and calling someone a nigger.   My point above about 714 stands: "It extends to even making a distinction."  Note i did not say: It extends even to mentioning a distinction ... which, of course, it does not.
Go back to subject A & retake the course! They are different & I say they are different; your deframe being horseshit not withstanding.


Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-29 08:01:22 12248
source: MR above
...It does not say making distinctions is racist
Well actually it does, quite literally ...
source: text of 714
I say that anyone who uses the distinctions of race to argue, judge, excuse, blame, criticize, politicize, incite, agitate, allocate, study, educate, etc. is a RACIST !
...
Actually, you should take a refresher course on English.  To make a distinction & to use a distinction to are different & even use different English constructs. Also, for the sake of confusion you can read this as well from the Wikipedia.


Mark de LA says
IMHO, you are beating the horse to death yet not getting any smarter about dead horses. Your hypothetical is garbled - make it more useful. It's not the fact of finding the distinction or mentioning it first so much as the purpose you put it to. For example, if Gates were talking about sickle cell anemia & the proposed treatment of a black man for that disease he would be quite correct in his use of the distinction.
   If Crowley had somehow been cruel in his arrest & Gates were to have said "is this how policemen treat people in America?" there would be no fault race-wise or distinction-wise.  


Mark de LA says
Blacklash - Whitelash who knows?  Maybe it is time to give it a rest, before the long hot Summer gets any hotter, eh?


Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-29 10:03:55 12248
Note how MR has used his famous 714 to call somebody a racist ...
source: MR in comment 2009-07-26 18:51:17 in this item above
Gates did raise race first as a distinction in his that's how black men are treated in America statement - thus violating 714.
Now it is obvious that Gates was erroneously overacting.  I am not defending his actions, which were misdirected, obnoxious, and disrespected an officer.  But suppose for a moment he had been singled out by a police officer and arrested in a situation where a white man would have been left alone.   Would then Gates have been racist by saying "that's how black men are treated in America"?   No he would not have been.  But according to the wording of 714 he would have been. 

This is a clear cut example of MR using 714 as an excuse to call a minority a racist for the wrong reason.
Gates used a racial distinction in the context of the RWG to make the Crowley wrong for whatever he was doing when Gates became disorderly - hence Gates was the racist.  Still nothing wrong with 714. The rest of your hypothetical is convoluted & does not apply. It would have little mattered whether Crowley was of the same race as Gates or some other race.
Pluck it out, scream & shout if you can see again!

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-29 10:54:13 12248
  Here is a classical example of a use-mention error ...







pretty picture mostly content free for this discussion.

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-07-29 18:43:05 12248
MR 2009-07-29 17:32:33 12248
   If Crowley had somehow been cruel in his arrest & Gates were to have said "is this how policemen treat people in America?" there would be no fault race-wise or distinction-wise.  
Yes i agree.  However the technical wording of [item 714] still finds Gates a racist here because one could claim that he was "using the distinctions of race to argue or educate". 

I have problems including the purpose to "argue, judge, allocate, study, educate" in the definition, because when those are benign activities that may have no adverse effects and actually might even have positive effects.  One could argue that you just gave an example of that above.

But my biggest problem is with the definition's need to assign purpose (or intent) to actions.  Purpose is always subjective and can really only known by the actor himself.  There are no objective ways to assign purpose or intent to behavior. 

I'm thinking that both of us have about the same conceptions of racism ... my complain with your definition is mainly technical.  However it is real and many commentators are focusing their thoughts on color blindness rather than the real harm racist behavior causes. 

Try this one instead ...
Racism is any behavior where a person or persons is abused or restricted or otherwise harmed because of their race.
... Note it is simpler and focuses on behavior rather than the intellectual game of drawing distinctions. 
You missed the entire point.  I am not trying to define racism - almost anyone can do that. I am sufficiently expanding the definition so that it is clear what must happen at the individual level to get rid of it. You argue like a lawyer for something that is not lawyeresque, but personal. It is like you would argue about the Golden Rule (& have!). I am comfortable in my definition.  BTW, you probably support hate crimes as a concept, but many in the race industry would double the punishment for racial prejudice during a murder. Go figure. Nobody can demonstrate what is going through your mind beyond a reasonable doubt!

Seth says
MR 2009-07-29 20:29:05 12248
seth 2009-07-29 18:43:05 12248
MR 2009-07-29 17:32:33 12248
   If Crowley had somehow been cruel in his arrest & Gates were to have said "is this how policemen treat people in America?" there would be no fault race-wise or distinction-wise.  
Yes i agree.  However the technical wording of [item 714] still finds Gates a racist here because one could claim that he was "using the distinctions of race to argue or educate". 

I have problems including the purpose to "argue, judge, allocate, study, educate" in the definition, because when those are benign activities that may have no adverse effects and actually might even have positive effects.  One could argue that you just gave an example of that above.

But my biggest problem is with the definition's need to assign purpose (or intent) to actions.  Purpose is always subjective and can really only known by the actor himself.  There are no objective ways to assign purpose or intent to behavior. 

I'm thinking that both of us have about the same conceptions of racism ... my complain with your definition is mainly technical.  However it is real and many commentators are focusing their thoughts on color blindness rather than the real harm racist behavior causes. 

Try this one instead ...
Racism is any behavior where a person or persons is abused or restricted or otherwise harmed because of their race.
... Note it is simpler and focuses on behavior rather than the intellectual game of drawing distinctions. 
You missed the entire point.  I am not trying to define racism - almost anyone can do that. I am sufficiently expanding the definition so that it is clear what must happen at the individual level to get rid of it. You argue like a lawyer for something that is not lawyeresque, but personal. It is like you would argue about the Golden Rule (& have!). I am comfortable in my definition.  BTW, you probably support hate crimes as a concept, but many in the race industry would double the punishment for racial prejudice during a murder. Go figure. Nobody can demonstrate what is going through your mind beyond a reasonable doubt!
I don't get how your definition does anything to "make it clear what must happen at individual level to get rid of it".   I guess your saying "don't make distinctions about race to argue, judge, allocate, study, educate", etc.  But those distinctions are not the problems.  On the other hand, you oppose making laws against hate crimes and you ridicule people who gather together to do real work against prejudice.  But those are the things which  create consequences that help or force people at the individual level move away from racism.  They are not intellectual ideals. Like i have said before, your 714 is primarily designed to militate against minorities doing anything about racial inequity.  No i did not miss your point.  It has been clear all along what your agenda is.  We see that not in the flowery ideals expressed in 714, but rather in what you actually say about real events. 

I give up with you ... I'm out of here.

Mark de LA says
...none of what you said above is true about what I propose - they are all complete lies ! You apparently have intentionally missed the point & prefer to remain closed up in your racial cocoon. I guess you prefer to use force to make people fit in your unenlightened World. I prefer to speak to the highest in people so that they rise to the occasion & potentials planted within them long ago.  Your attitude is what will bring on more racial strife.  You have proposed nothing.  Glad you are gone!



Mark de LA says
Whitehouse spins a teachable moment where nobody got taught - 'twas the usual symbolism over substance.
WSJ: ...

The White House beer "trivializes what is a bigger issue," said Natane Singleton, 28 years old, a first-year law student at Yale University who is African-American. "It's not about personal relations, individuals not getting along; it's about abuses of power."

Others felt the meeting was helpful. "These things work because people start to view each other as another human and not a person of a different race," said Beverley Wright, chairwoman of the Dallas Dinner Table, a nonprofit that fosters discussions centering on race over a shared meal.

Reaction to the president's intervention broke down along racial lines, a blow to a president who wanted to transcend them. In a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll released Wednesday, 4% of African-Americans blamed Mr. Gates for the arrest, versus 30% who identified the officer as the cause. Among whites, 32% said Mr. Gates was more at fault while 7% blamed Mr. Crowley.

The sharpest divide, next to race, was political: 47% of Republicans polled blamed Mr. Gates for his arrest, compared with 11% of Democrats.

...What is interesting is following up on Beverly Wright's Dallas Dinner Table Program. Some of the accomplishments are detailed in this PDF.  There are probably some real teachable moments to be had with her.

Mark de LA says
Yep, Van Jones is a racist watch this one:
He's got some points, but he's headed in a racist direction IMHO. I don't agree with his premise. Bill Cosby had a better way of saying some of this about fathers & family.


Mark de LA says
BTW, he's blaming the Colombine high school massacre on one race and obsolved his own for any such doings.  Something messed up S's hearing.


Mark de LA says
seth 2009-09-04 21:20:05 12248
source: MR above
Yep, Van Jones is a racist watch this one
Well i'm not at all sure what the fuck he is talking about.  "Young white males are suffering, profoundly"  From what? " ... are ignored"  Oh really?  It doesn't make much sense to me ... makes me think it has been viciously chopped out of context.  Without knowing what the fuck he is talking about, i'm not going to judge what he is saying. 
Well, maybe you should follow what he said via twitter shitvanjonessays!


Mark de LA says
MKH uncovers more racism charges by the lefties"
source: ... 
 

I guess we've entered the Jim Crow era for cultural references? We must filter our literary allusions by race, and only whites are allowed. Got it? Good.

... Y'all be racial correct now, ya hear?.

Seth says
Limbaugh is the racist here. Well i remember being beat up by black kids in junior high and can say definitively that is was racism. But, hey let's be reasonable, Obama was not even born then. For Limbaugh to speculate that Obama would even consider "coming to the defense of the assailants" is just to stir up race hatred against Obama.  Even by tenants of 714 than is racism.  Let us see if MR will call a spade a spade.

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-09-16 09:50:31 12248
Limbaugh is the racist here. Well i remember being beat up by black kids in junior high and can say definitively that is was racism. But, hey let's be reasonable, Obama was not even born then. For Limbaugh to speculate that Obama would even consider "coming to the defense of the assailants" is just to stir up race hatred against Obama.  Even by tenants of 714 than is racism.  Let us see if MR will call a spade a spade.
IDK, your link is NG.

Mark de LA says
Jimmy Carter is definitely a racist - he is projecting - probably from the deep embarrassment of being a failed president & recognizing that he & Obama shared similar economic failure.


Seth says
MR 2009-09-16 11:08:18 12248
seth 2009-09-16 09:50:31 12248
Limbaugh is the racist here. Well i remember being beat up by black kids in junior high and can say definitively that is was racism. But, hey let's be reasonable, Obama was not even born then. For Limbaugh to speculate that Obama would even consider "coming to the defense of the assailants" is just to stir up race hatred against Obama.  Even by tenants of 714 than is racism.  Let us see if MR will call a spade a spade.
IDK, your link is NG.
Try it again, there is nothing wrong with it.   Or listen to it over at media matters here.

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-09-16 11:22:38 12248
MR 2009-09-16 11:08:18 12248
seth 2009-09-16 09:50:31 12248
Limbaugh is the racist here. Well i remember being beat up by black kids in junior high and can say definitively that is was racism. But, hey let's be reasonable, Obama was not even born then. For Limbaugh to speculate that Obama would even consider "coming to the defense of the assailants" is just to stir up race hatred against Obama.  Even by tenants of 714 than is racism.  Let us see if MR will call a spade a spade.
IDK, your link is NG.
Try it again, there is nothing wrong with it.   Or listen to it over at media matters here.
Yeah, by my definition it could be called racist. As I have said before Rush speaks for himself & I speak for myself.  He does not have 714 distinctions. Apparently, I am the only one that does.  The usual suspects in the left leaning blogs & news outlets would love to destroy Rush (So would the Obama administration). The original story in Drudge was here. Had the racial roles been reversed you would have Obama pontificating & the media all ablaze with huffington puffing. We'll see what develops. I don't think much of this was racist nor was getting slapped upside the head at school.  That was more a gang & bullying mentality; perhaps hard to separate in one's mind. Obama has created this aura & mystique of we won, now we're in charge & we're going to ram our programs through & spread the wealth around to our supporters.  That is also a gang & bullying mentality. Partisans of both sides will become more passionate & strident until Obama in deeds & speeches returns to govern from the center. LOL.

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-09-16 11:34:13 12248
MR 2009-09-16 11:11:18 12248
Jimmy Carter is definitely a racist - he is projecting - probably from the deep embarrassment of being a failed president & recognizing that he & Obama shared similar economic failure.

Well i think he is just saying what i have been saying.  Most of the vicious tearing down of Obama stems from underlying racial prejudice.  Some of the people doing it may not even know where their motives are coming from.  I'm not talking about the rational reasoned oppositon on sound political grounds.  I'm talking about the kind of opposition that carried these kind of signs to Glen Beck's march on Washington last Saturday.  If you carry and post those kind of signs, then perhaps you should consider why you are really doing it.
There is only one sign in that group of signs that could possibly be racist & it is more a play on words:
To be passionate about your position in opposing the president & his plans is not racist in any way.  There is no hate in those signs.  To pretend that people are racists & don't even know it is to participate in the theatre of the absurd. It's like saying that I know you are a racist subconsciously even though you don't know it & your opposition to my side is racist because I say so.  BS!  If that is your position then go join the national hemorrhoid, Jimmy Carter, scratch yourself, apply some Vaseline & then go fuck yourself.

Mark de LA says
Apparently I'm not the only one that thinks so: (see FreakingNews.com)

Mark de LA says
~ hate crime or not? I wonder if that question will be asked by the M$M.  If the roles were reversed I'm sure it would be asked.

 

Mark de LA says
A follow up on the bus beating is here indicating charges are filed.
Source: ... On the issue of a hate crime, Haida said: “No evidence is present to suggest that the motive for the conduct was the race of the victim. Illinois law requires such evidence in order to support that charge. Illinois law is clear that the fact that a defendant and a victim are of different races is insufficient without more evidence to support a hate crime.”

"The incident appears now to be more about a couple of bullies on a bus dictating where people sit,” said Capt. Don Sax.
...

Mark de LA says
The race card is played in the healthcare debate by Jesse Jackson :


Mark de LA says
~
source: ...
Harry Reid is developing a well-deserved reputation for playing the race card. Last month he accused opponents of his secret healthcare bill of being the same as those who opposed ending slavery. It was a highly objectionable historical analogy based on extremely flawed logic. Those who are fighting to stop ObamaCare are upholding the ideal of freedom -- from government intrusion, confiscatory taxation and oppressive debt.

Reid, liberal Democrat and Majority Leader of the U.S. Senate, has now admitted to a 2008 comment calling Obama "a light-skinned" African American "with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one." 
...

Meanwhile the M$$$M prefers to beat up on Palin & apologize for Dingy Harry.

Mark de LA says
M 2012-01-08 11:05:13 12248
M 2012-01-08 11:03:17 12248
seth 2012-01-08 11:00:22 12248
M 2012-01-08 09:31:57 12248
I am just wondering does the fact that an organization such as The United Negro College Fund legitimize the word "negro" as a distinction which is valid to apply to some members of our population?  How about the term "colored people" as exemplified in the name of another well known organization The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

Nope, it is just a fact of linguistic drift vs the reluctance of organizations to change their name.
Must be a slight-of-brain-married-to-a-linguistic-drift of mind problem!



Mark de LA says
we have a slight nesting problem in the basic software here. I had to switch userid to factor the nest a bit & it kept on doubling some of the comments & then landed in the wrong part of the nest. 

Seth says
M 2012-01-08 11:08:39 12248
we have a slight nesting problem in the basic software here. I had to switch userid to factor the nest a bit & it kept on doubling some of the comments & then landed in the wrong part of the nest. 
Another way to look at the bug is to realize that it only happens on certain deficient browsers with certain user behavior.  I notice that frequently your items and comments end up with unbalanced markup.  When i quote replay to one of those comments of yours, it is immediately obvious on the screen that something is seriously fucked up.   My solution, is to copy my message in the clipboard, delete the comment that i just made quoting your comment, and then start a entirely new comment thread.  For me that is a easy work around. 

Mark de LA says
source: ...

A chaotic scene unfolded outside Middle School 72 in Jamaica, Queens, on Wednesday night as several men who wanted to attend a tutorial workshop for the upcoming FDNY entrance exam were turned away.

These men said it was because they were white. The Workshop was being hosted by the Vulcan Society, a fraternal organization of black firefighters, which apparently only let in people who got a special e-mail.



Read more: http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/news/controversy-over-fdny-exam-workshop-20120301#ixzz1o9vKETIY
...  Hhmmmm.... I wounder what the M$M would do with a fraternal order of white firefighters.

Mark de LA says
Something more to add to the post-racism timeline - chicken stereotypes, NBC doctors tape to insert racism, & ...
Rush: ... I got a note from the Hutch up in Seattle. He said, "'Undercover Brother' was a funny movie, bro. The general was played by Billy Dee Williams. You tell Burger King to discriminate against me for a million dollars. I'll talk about something I love to eat. My wife's fried chicken is so good, if you put it on my head, my tongue would beat me to death trying to get to it."
...

Mark de LA says
source: ...

Members of the Congressional Black Caucus appear undecided so far on whether to support a call for a boycott of Florida over the Trayvon Martin case, with Maryland Rep. Donna Edwards saying Sunday such a move could be "devastating" to some communities in the state. 

Edwards, a Democrat, told “Fox News Sunday” that she has yet to fully examine the call to boycott, as proposed by civil rights leader the Rev. Jesse Jackson.

... Oh goodie! Now we have a racist segment of Congress calling for boycott an individual state because of a valid jury verdict in a court case in one of them.
Fuck Them ALL!
I wonder how they get away with a Congressional Black Caucus anyway.  If there were a Congressional White Caucus they would be politically corrected right the hell out of the Legislature by the M$M & blogosphere .



See Also

  1. Thought Socretes Cafe Tuesday April 25 2017 with 109 viewings related by tag "racism".
  2. Thought Means & Ends - the Good, Bad and the Ugly with 87 viewings related by tag "racism".
  3. Thought Lecture: ‘A Latina Judge’s Voice’ with 83 viewings related by tag "item 714".
  4. Thought Political Correctness & Racism with 45 viewings related by tag "racism".
  5. Thought Racism is Fluid Just Like Gender, eh? with 28 viewings related by tag "racism".
  6. Thought Racism with 28 viewings related by tag "item 714".
  7. Thought Copy of - Racism with 26 viewings related by tag "item 714".
  8. Thought The Racism Swamp with 26 viewings related by tag "racism".
  9. Thought Intersectionality with 22 viewings related by tag "racism".
  10. Thought We can enter unicode into fastblogit ! with 21 viewings related by tag "bug".
  11. Thought Why is this not racist? with 11 viewings related by tag "racism".
  12. Thought Grown Ass Woman with 8 viewings related by tag "racism".
  13. Thought 9 years left & counting .... with 8 viewings related by tag "rush limbaugh".
  14. Thought about: white people have no place in black liberation. - racebaitr with 8 viewings related by tag "racism".
  15. Thought Well with this new fluidity, what is the big deal ... with 7 viewings related by tag "racism".
  16. Thought Racism with 7 viewings related by tag "racism".
  17. Thought Two different directions out of racism with 5 viewings related by tag "item 714".
  18. Thought The CSS font-size statement does not work on the MacAir in Chrome with 4 viewings related by tag "bug".
  19. Thought It is all about the Juice with 3 viewings related by tag "racism".
  20. Thought I Demand An Apology with 3 viewings related by tag "racism".
  21. Thought It's Hard to get Americans to Riot over a Cartoon with 3 viewings related by tag "racism".
  22. Thought I Call Out Blatant Racism with 2 viewings related by tag "racism".
  23. Thought Obama versus the Wright with 2 viewings related by tag "racism".
  24. Thought FAIR ? with 2 viewings related by tag "rush limbaugh".
  25. Thought Brown Eyes - Blue Eyes Experiment with 2 viewings related by tag "racism".
  26. Thought The Race Card is Poison with 2 viewings related by tag "racism".
  27. Thought about: Agreement from the gecko - comment 57646 with 2 viewings related by tag "racism".
  28. Thought Local Fitnesse Wiki with 2 viewings related by tag "bug".
  29. Thought The Oprah Solution ? with 1 viewings related by tag "racism".
  30. Thought A chance for more divisions - Micro-agressionism - The Race card in disguise with 1 viewings related by tag "rush limbaugh".
  31. Thought test of tags with blank in front of word with 1 viewings related by tag "bug".
  32. Thought Statistical Governmentalism & Racism with 1 viewings related by tag "racism".
  33. Thought A Gremlin on your items ? with 1 viewings related by tag "bug".
  34. Thought Please report grammar problems with references on this link with 0 viewings related by tag "bug".
  35. Thought Reference validation has holes in it with 0 viewings related by tag "bug".
  36. Thought Chicago Style Thug Politics - NO CHANGE just Obama with 0 viewings related by tag "rush limbaugh".
  37. Thought Empathy for GZ with 0 viewings related by tag "racism".
  38. Thought Please FIx with 0 viewings related by tag "bug".
  39. Thought [title (785)] with 0 viewings related by tag "bug".
  40. Thought Obama - first black president ? with 0 viewings related by tag "racism".
  41. Thought pic says a hundred words with 0 viewings related by tag "item 714".
  42. Thought Is this a bug? with 0 viewings related by tag "bug".
  43. Thought first black president? with 0 viewings related by tag "racism".
  44. Thought Are all the tags in FastBlogIt in the taglist on the left of the display? with 0 viewings related by tag "bug".
  45. Thought collecting facts for feeds best practices manual with 0 viewings related by tag "bug".
  46. Thought Announcement: [google x] as a wiki reference with 0 viewings related by tag "bug".
  47. Thought White vs Black Manifesto by Dylann Roof with 0 viewings related by tag "racism".
  48. Thought dynamic cartoons with 0 viewings related by tag "bug".
  49. Thought WTF with 0 viewings related by tag "racism".
  50. Thought about: The Audacity of Hops with 0 viewings related by tag "item 12248".