I also said "Please explain" which is the meat of this discussion. I could care less about the poll because I knew many of the folks would be coy with it but I had to have a justification for having such a short OP-- the poll allowed that.
If you think race relations are a "game" that require you take "sides" based on which black person's sound bites you agree with; and "trap" all the other ******s with your e-laaa-bo-rate riddles about generic phrases, then you're an idiot who has no business wasting others' time with your simplistic views on race.
Why are you limiting respondents to black people? I didn't. EDIT: I should also add that the "side whose sound bites I prefer" (Cosby, Freeman, Sowell) have made immense careers for themselves and contributions to us in some arena besides race-baiting (Jackson and Sharpton). If you were "trapped," what can I say but... it worked predictably-- almost like a scientific experiment! Got the back-slapping cadre all ired up and calling names. You, yourself, have used an inordinate number of "*s" in your thoughtful responses. Maybe views on race should be simplistic? Don't attend to race. How novel !!
This has become one of my favorite threads ever on this bbs. It's hilarious that giddy would think that the reaction to this thread is just because of the three words he posted. I'm guessing the angry reaction is because it was a transparent ploy by the poster to get some kind of reaction, and he's a poster that has defended the use of the term wetback, and the use of racial profiling among other things. Then when people get annoyed that a poster with that history is trying so hard to get people to react a certain way in order to prove the point, he actually believes that his trap worked and that what upset the posters was the three word title. I think this thread is just brilliant. Keep it up.
the only thing on my mind is why did i respond to one of your threads hoping for logical conversation. your rants in this thread are especially hilarious ending each one questioning what is on our mind
You did what I expected with no provocation-- unless three little words is that provocative. If they are that provocative, you should ask yourself why. I know that you have no sense of playing fair or you wouldn't keep bringing up the "wetback" thing from 10 years ago or the "racial profiling" thing from, what, eight years ago. Those were very specific conversations and I made myself very clear on my positions there, but the way you represent that here is totally irresponsible and disingenuine on your part... and you've done it time and time again. I don't really expect you to stop because that is the way your talking points would instruct you to engage, but I will protest your method every time. Three little words...
My end of the conversation has been very logical. In fact, I daresay this whole thing was a good bit of social science. I got my expected outcome. I didn't question what was on your mind; I predicted what was on your mind... and I was accurate. Three little words.
As a man who happens to have white skin, I look at this original post and say to myself, everything a man (or woman) does has an agenda. Either good or bad. It's quite obvious the OP agenda isn't good here. I'm not going to make blanket statements that lump entire groups of people in the same category. I think a man should be judged on his soul and character and not the color of his skin. There are still WAY too many people that are white, black, brown or red that just don't get it. None of us got to choose how tall we wanted to be. None of us got to choose the color of our eyes. None of us got to choose our parents, or where we were born, whether we born into wealth or poverty, and NONE of us got to choose the color of our skin. Martin Luther King had a dream (and it was a beautiful dream). In my opinion that dream is getting further and further away because of hatred by all races. Life is TOO short to go around being mad all the time.
I'm not the one who uses it... except in this thread. Think about it. That is one of my points because there are those who would assign themselves as a voice of "the black community."
The agenda is a high-minded one, contrary to critics. You should have been around for the last year and a half for the Trayvon Martin thread. Go back and read the first 40-50 pages and see all the hateful propaganda that was disseminated about George Zimmerman that some of the same critics IN THIS THREAD bought hook, line and sinker. It was lies and distortions posed by the race-baiters and eaten up by the MSM because it sells. After reading about the TM case, at some point, I became astounded at how often I came across an expression like "the black community." My first thought was "there is no such thing." My second thought was that anyone that tried to articulate an analagous POV for "the white community" would immediately get denounced. In my case, I got the "stormfront" assignation from CometsWin along with other insults and denouncements. Small-minded stuff. Gee, that's why Cosby, Freeman and Sowell ask for. You're in good company. I think it is getting better-- under the surface. We have the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton whose livelihood depends on the tension so they stir it up but underneath and in the mainstream I think things are getting better. It takes time.
giddy, giddy, giddy. You spent days defending Don Young's use of "wetback" just 4 months ago. We get it. In your "white community" no one can be labeled a racist unless they're caught with a robe and hood on and carrying a rope. Maybe. However, if you're black, talking about your "community" makes you a race provocateur. You're right giddy. This thread is very revealing. Just not in the way you think.
I'd like to know what constitutes "defending" is? Even he didn't defend the remark in the news story that was posted. He made a beautiful apology. What I "defended" was the thought to not summarily dismiss and destroy him by some of you here.; There was an understandable context to that term creeping into an interview and the destructive nature that that word "can" imply was not part of his adult life.... yet you and others gleefully wanted to hang him by his mis-statement. He made a slip of the tongue. Trayvon and his girl joke about "crackers." Al Sharpton parlays his schtick into a low-performing cable talk show. See the difference? God, I hope so....
