Over the weekend the Twin Cities saw the GLBT community celebrate with a "Pride Festival". Last week the group was looking to bar Brian Johnson from being involved because of his views on homosexuality. After hearing of "Pride Festival" stance, I wrote the following to the Star Tribune (which was published in Saturday's paper): http://www.startribune.com/opinion/letters/97195119.html?elr=KArksc8P:Pc:Ug8P:Pc:UiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUr
The feud over Johnson smacks of hypocrisy. The Pride festival touts, on its website, that "nearly 400 vendors and exhibitors set up at the Pride Festival each year. From food and beverage to arts and crafts, employee groups and local nonprofit organizations, you can find just about anything you're looking for at the Pride Festival." But if the judge had not ruled, you would not have been able to find Brian Johnson.
Where did the tolerance, diversity and compassion go with Pride organizers? Jim Kelley, Pride festival manager, stated in the Star Tribune that "free speech and liberty belong to everyone. We are leasing this space, and if someone came into your home and started telling you what an awful family you have, [they] can have that opinion; [they] just can't have it in your house."
Again, where is the tolerance? What better place to discuss, openly, the topics concerning the community than at Pride? Or is tolerance of others only saved for the oppressed, downtrodden and castoffs of society?
When I opened the Sunday paper I was happy to hear that Johnson and his group were allowed to walk among the Pride Festival. From all accounts that I have read both yesterday and today, of the Pride Festival is that Johnson's group did not create the type of disruption that officials thought might take place.
You think Johnson was there to engage in a discussion of tolerance? I'm all for it, but that's not what he wanted. The purpose of the festival is a celebration, not to engage in heated debate. Wrong time, wrong place for the discussion you want.
ReplyDeleteToph
ReplyDeleteI agree that Johnson goal of going to Pride was not to engage in a discussion of tolerance as his message is that homosexuality is a sin. The point of my entry in the Star Tribune was the hypocrisy of Pride that touts tolerance not allowing an opposing view; i.e. Johnson.
Johnson wasn't the only anti-GLBT message, I forget the gentleman's name that was on a soap box preaching. According to Sunday's article in the Tribune the police had to step in a few times when members of the crowd ratcheted up the debate with heated rhetoric.
I do not agree with Pride being the wrong time or wrong place to have this type of discussion. With all the people coming down in support or dissent is the perfect storm. The tough part is removing the emotional attachment so rational conversation can ensue.
I do find it interesting that Johnsons message is homosexuality is a sin while Pride is one of the Seven Deadly Sins.
Chris, when you're throwing a birthday party for your children, do you want someone barging in and prosthelytizing about the "sin" of over-population? Or is the birthday party not the time or place for that discussion?
ReplyDeleteAnd if you're going to bring religion into the discussion Chris, what happened to "Judge not lest ye be judged?" Christians seem awfully happy to cast that first stone only to cry foul when the tables are turned.
Kevin – “you're throwing a birthday party for your children, do you want someone barging in and prosthelytizing about the "sin" of over-population? Or is the birthday party not the time or place for that discussion?”
ReplyDeleteWhat are you talking about? A) The birthday party is on private property B) Over-population is really a sin being touted by religious groups? As for the proper time or place, we have had some heated debates at kid’s birthday party over other issues.
Brian Johnson, based on what he said and appears to have taken place over the weekend, did not proactively seek people out; rather he walked around and discussed topics with those that started the conversation. Now, you do have a point on “Judge not lest ye be judged”.
First off, I've had birthday parties at parks before, so they are held on public lands. Second, leasing a public space for a private event subjects that event to the same trespassing laws as if it was private property. Third, there are some who feel that the catholic churches stance on birth control is tantamount to support for overpopulation and the resulting consequences thereof.
ReplyDeleteBut all that aside, since you didn't like that example, here's another.
You are attending a funeral for a soldier who was killed in Afganistan when Phelps and his ilk show up to protest at the funeral because they feel it's punishment for acceptance of homosexuality. Is that an appropriate time or place? It's on public land, and in the eyes of some it's pertinent to the occasion.
So would you defend that kind of intrusion? Where are the boundaries?
In other words, I'm trying to illicit your stance?
Being in a land that promotes equality and freedom we must accept the protest of others that run contrary to our own. While I do not see the correlation of a soldier killed in Afghanistan as retribution by God Almighty for the acceptance of homosexuality, I do recognize that Phelps and others have the right to assemble.
ReplyDeleteI’d hope that people in a civil society recognize that events, like funerals and birthday parties, are not proper places to protest the issue at hand. Nor do I think it is appropriate for people to gather busses of people and protest at the private home of a CEO. In the case of Pride Festival, I see that is an appropriate place to have this type of debate.
Is a KKK rally the proper place to discuss race issues?
ReplyDelete"I’d hope that people in a civil society recognize that events, like funerals and birthday parties, are not proper places to protest the issue at hand."
ReplyDeleteI get that you'd hope that but you understand you'd be wrong if your stance is one that promotes unfettered freedom of speech, right?
I still wonder how Christians feel they have a right and moreover an obligation to preach against any sin. The teachings of Christ would seem to preclude this from being part of their evangalization since it doesn't promote the type of discourse that will change the hearts and minds of potential converts.
Toph
ReplyDeleteKKK rally, black panther party or NOI meeting would be all great places to hold a discussion on race.
Hey Kevin, American voted for Hope and that works out well. As for unfettered freedom of speech is different then unfettered freedom of assembly. If we allow unfettered freedom of assembly, i.e. private birthday parties, then we lose the right of private property. It is the right of property that allows our society to prosper. If we had to worry about the security of property, it would be hard for us to go to work in the morning and expect that our property would still be their when we were done.
ReplyDeletePart of the Christian movement is to spread the Gospel. To show through the Word that one is not living in a civil society without a Christain influence. Christ himself said to teach others the Word as well.
"KKK rally, black panther party or NOI meeting would be all great places to hold a discussion on race."
ReplyDeleteSeriously? Do you really think this would be a rational discussion when you're talking with people violently against you solely for the color of your skin?
I don't think you've thought this through very well to be honest.
"Hey Kevin, American voted for Hope and that works out well."
Huh, is this an attempt to be all folk'sie like Sarah Palin?
"As for unfettered freedom of speech is different then unfettered freedom of assembly."
Yes, but leasing a public park or building for private use makes this no longer "unfettered freedom of assembly". And even if that wasn't the case, we don't have unfettered right to assembly since the city can require permits and shut down anyone who rallies without one. Case in point, the Republican convention actually pre-emptively raided counter ralliers houses to stop their planned rallies. They hadn't even rallied yet. By the way, what the St paul police did was very unconstitutional and they protesters will win their case in MN Supreme court, costing the state millions.
I'm not sure how the right to property has anything to do with Johnson's desire to "protest" at the Pride festival.
And I understand that evangalization is part of the gospel, but telling someone that their life whether chosen or biological will send them to hell seems like a counterproductive way to do it and also shows that the christians are themselves sinners by judging the others. I know you'll say we're all sinners but you're not supposed to go out of your way to be one.
And I know plenty of societies that are civil AND moral without Jesus. That would imply that I don't need Jesus to have either wouldn't it?
You can't honestly believe that. Maybe in your perfect world where you seem to place these hypotheticals it would be a good idea, but think about what happens in the real world. Do you honestly believe anything, the slightest tiniest thing constructive would come out of a discussion in such a place? It would turn into tossing of slurs, hate speech and violence in minutes with out substantial security and police.
ReplyDeleteAll of those things might be great reasons to have the discussion, but not at the event. Hold it at a neutral place where there is control and emotion can be minimized. Even then, groups like that that are so opposite and opposed to each other are not interested in having a discussion with each other. That's reality.
As far as Christianity, don't mistake the actions of a few for the beliefs of the rest of us.
I recognize that having a race relations conversation at a KKK, NOI or Black Panther event may result in more heated rhetoric than rational conversation it still is a good place to have one. Not every member of the three groups is as polarized as we’d like to think. There is always a percentage of any group that will be radical, moderate and liberal minded members. Will a neutral site really remove the emotional aspect? If people are going to debate based on emotional will participate in that manner no matter what the location is.
ReplyDeleteAnon’s final statement, “As far as Christianity, don’t mistake the actions of a few for the beliefs of the rest of us” is why I say the discussion on race relations can partake at a KKK, NOI or Black Panther event. I wonder though, is Anonymous using this same philosophy about Christianity with those in the Tea Party movement?
Chris, I'm curious how you would have a rational conversation with someone who hates your very existance? How exactly do you get past that little sticking point and get them to have a reasoned discourse? Especially when you can be assured that they consider their excrement to be have more right to be on this earth than you do.
ReplyDeleteThe conversation gains traction and develops rational discourse by exploring the extremes along with the exchange of view in between. To understand ones opposing view assist in strengthing ones. There will be points in the discussion that rational thought will have to "agree to disagree".
ReplyDeleteThe purpose of the conversation is to have open, honest dialogue and not so much to change the fringe ideals. As we have seen with politics, one cannot gain compromise with stoic ideologues.
The discourse will display the range of views that exist in our society. After the dust settles, it will be the greater society that moves the conversation forward. Do we accept seperate but equal communities? Is it okay for NAACP to continue to push the black agenda? Is it okay for the KKK to continue to push a white agenda? Society is okay with non-white groups coming together to espouse their agenda yet demonizes a similar white group in doing so. I recognize the history of the United States and oppression that existed.
"The conversation gains traction and develops rational discourse by exploring the extremes along with the exchange of view in between."
ReplyDeleteThis assumes that there would be enough respect between the parties to even begin the dialog. IMO, your position is incredibly naive.
And "agreeing to disagree" is not an option to most skinheads from what I can tell. I don't see them as "live and let live" people.
"Society is okay with non-white groups coming together to espouse their agenda yet demonizes a similar white group in doing so."
Correlating the NAACP agenda to the KKK agenda is like correlating the girl scouts agenda for cookies to the Nazi agenda for jews. They are not correlative in any manner and for you to think they are is absurd and shows at the very least willfull ignorance on your part.
The NAACP promotes black opportunities and equality. The KKK promotes hate, racism, demonization and furthermore has been party to the lynchings of hundreds of people. How are they in any way equivalent?
And moreover, how can you even think to assert that the KKK agenda should be given any level of respect or legitimacy?
The KKK doesn't give a crap about understanding the view of blacks nor do homophobic hate mongers care about the views of gays. Further, compromise isn't reached on the extremes, it's reached in the middle. Naive doesn't begin to cover it. There's no middle ground.
ReplyDeleteHere are the main websites of the three groups listed before
ReplyDeletehttp://www.kukluxklan.bz/about.html
http://www.naacp.org/about/mission/
http://www.noi.org/index.html
All of these organizations have their own agenda’s based on race. Any agenda, no matter how non-violent, that promotes one race over another is racist. Thus each of these organizations, to varying degrees, is being racist. I do not buy the comparison of NAACP:KKK is similar to Girl Scouts:Nazi Germany.
The KKK would agree with the NOI of a divided nation where blacks lived with blacks and whites lived with whites. The NAACP is more like a white-washed NOI in that they use other organizations like ACORN, Black Panthers, and the ACLU to do their dirtier work. All three groups have their own agenda’s based upon race as the central issue. Again, having a race discussion is most proper at events held by any one of these groups because their central tenet is race.
Just as the United States attempts to move forward from the legacy of slave owners and trading of human capital with African tribal leaders; so is the KKK, if one is to believe the website above, attempting to change their means to push the white agenda. The KKK, aside from its history, is no different than the NAACP or the NOI once we remove the color of the agenda away. Violence was used by all three groups in the past to varying degrees.
Toph
If the KKK, NAACP or NOI are not concerned about understanding the others point of view then so be it. The greater society will benefit from the debate by understanding that all three of these groups are really no different in their message. One just need to change the method, race and process used.
"he KKK, aside from its history, is no different than the NAACP or the NOI once we remove the color of the agenda away."
ReplyDeleteChris, I'm calling you out. Each time I think you can't go any further you go further. Last time you claimed that your comments about Pol Pot were only tongue in cheek and taken out of context, that you were playing devil's advocate. I smelled BS then but let it slide.
Now you claim that "ASIDE FROM ITS HISTORY" the KKK is just like the NAACP. What a completely ignorant statement. You couch it in such racist, revisionist history that it doesn't even deserve a response. Because if you can't see the difference, my trying to tell you won't matter anyhow.
And to be honest, this is so far beyond what a rational, logical or reasonable discussion is that it's simply not worth my time anymore.
I would however, like to thank you for reaffirming my thoughts about the Tea Party. You and others have shown it to be a party of intollerant, racist, bitter white men who feel impotent because of their diminishing power in this country. I wish for it to have a quick and painful demise, and luckily with Palin at the helm I'm assured as much.
I'd say it's been fun but shocking would be more appropriate to be honest. All the best man.
Just a few items Viper,
ReplyDelete1) Toph said that "the KKK doesn't give a crap about understanding" the views of blacks. Way to respond by taking that out of context and twisting Toph's words when you say "If the KKK, NAACP or NOI are not concerned about understanding the others point of view...".
2) Congratulations on being "published". Will this new career as a published pundit be followed by an E! True Hollywood expose in a few months? Published. Ha!!!
3) I'm glad to see that someone is looking out for the poor, disadvantaged, powerless, trampled under foot, victim filled race that is the middle aged white American male. You've had it pretty rough here in the US of A. I can't imagine your life and the struggles that you've faced. If only we could do something about all of those barriers that you face on a daily basis. People, especially those black people, just don't get how hard life can be for a white man in America.
Kevin
ReplyDeleteI acknowledge that methods used by KKK and NAACP were different in the past. The KKK did use lynchings, murder and other violent tactics to impose their will on those non-whites. The NAACP has used legislation and peaceful marches to advance the black agenda. Now, based on the KKK website, it appears that the KKK has recognized that violent tactics will no longer advance their cause. If they are true to a non-violent means to push a white agenda, tell me how they would be any different than the NAACP that pushes the black agenda?
We have institutionalized racism. It was that institutionalization that has created a sub-class of society even more so than the days of slavery. To assert that the Tea Party is just a group of white men is simply wrong.
Anonymous
ReplyDeleteI did not twist Toph’s words. I simply expanded upon them and voice my opinion. Not sure on how getting published in the Star Tribune will lead to an E! True Hollywood story, but the last opinion published in the Star Tribune is not the first nor will it be the last.
I do not disagree with you that being white has afforded me more leeway than other groups in America. That doesn’t translate though to a smooth, easy or powerless life. A lot of things can still take place to establish a barrier to advancement. Answer me this: Why can other groups (Asians, Latinos, or Arabs) can come to America and prosper yet blacks struggle?
Let's hear your theory Viper on why other groups (Asians, Latinos or Arabs) can come to America and prosper yet blacks struggle. I'm sure it's a doozy.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous
ReplyDeleteIn talking with business owners that are first generation immigrants I found a common thread to their success. The common thread was their drive to succeed and not look to the government for a handout. A number of the business owners I have spoken to came from areas where government was the oppressor so turning to the government for assistance is not an option. Many of these business owners do not understand why people already here in America do not fill the needs they are filling. Then again they are thankful for the unmet need. The other fact that I noticed is that nearly everyone of the first generation immigrant success involved the entire family.
While I recognize that single parent households are not just a black issue, it appears to effect the black youth greater than other races. Now, I ask again: Why can other groups can come to America and prosper yet blacks struggle?
I actually think your question is BS. You don't think other groups come here and struggle? You don't think you might have a small sample size? Looking at only those with businesses, not all of those who don't? Not all blacks struggle. Other groups haven't had the same history and struggles while in this country, which you seem to choose to ignore. There are plenty of black success stories.
ReplyDeleteAren't there whites that struggle, too? You phrase a question that there is no way to answer and supports what you want to conclude. The problem goes well beyond a single parent household, too.
Anonymous
ReplyDeleteI do not disagree that other groups struggle when they arrive here. I am sure my elders struggled when they took up roots in Iowa after making the trek from Germany and Sweden post Civil War. The Irish were considering scum after the Potato famine. Groups have seen tough times. Even the Native Americans have seen their land taken and put on reservations; many of the tribes are prospering now.
My question is not BS, perhaps it is to you because the answer brings guilt. My sample size may be small but since a large number of immigrants flock to the Twin Cities I venture to guess my sample is pretty representative. Look at the unemployment numbers and one will see that blacks are the most impacted. Why is this? Is it because of the hateful, bigot, white man that rules all of America? If that were the case then why not more Asians, Latinos, Native Americans and other non-white groups equally impacted?
And yes, white people struggle as well. I did not phrase my question to answer a pre-assumed conclusion. I disagree with you on the problem goes well beyond a single parent household. All of ills in society begin in the home.
What race was enslaved by white Americans until the Emancipation Proclamation?
ReplyDeleteWhat race led the fight for civil rights and was instrumental in the passage of the Civil Rights Act?
Let's see how similar the NAACP and the KKK really are.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the NAACP's website, their mission is: to ensure the political, educational, social, and economic equality of rights of all persons and to eliminate racial hatred and racial discrimination.
According to the (or a) KKK's website (http://www.kkk.bz/), their goal is: Become the leader of the White racialist movement; Strive to become the representative and driving force behind the White Community; and Organize and direct white people to a level of activism necessary to bring about a political victory.
How do you join either of these organizations?
Well, for the NAACP, they give 5 reasons to join and then have a short membership application. It actually doesn't even ask you to volunteer information about your race or ethnicity.
For the KKK (from the same website as above), it's presented as one simple rule, but it really isn't as simple as they make it seem (for some at least): We emphasize ONE requirement for every person who decides to associate with The Knights, and that is that they conduct themselves with Christian character. We want our Klansmen and Klanswomen to live their lives as honorable, decent, dignified white people.
They're indistinguishable according to the Viper.
Nope, no guilt. Reality. Your sample size of business owners only isn't small? Really? Did you go into North and ask around down there about how successful immigrants there are?
ReplyDeleteAnd this "I disagree with you on the problem goes well beyond a single parent household. All of ills in society begin in the home." I especially call bullshit on. You've never known of a kid who came from a good moral based two parent family who had problems with violence, drugs, and booze while their siblings didn't? I do. Or kids who grew up in a single parent family that were succesful? I do. Or people who changed in mid life, outside of the influence of their parents? I do.
To say that all the ills begin at home is ignorant. Do parents play a big role? Of course. But to think that drugs, violence, schools with mold that are falling apart, and other factors don't contribute is ignorant. All I ask is you really think about that response. Think about what it's like to grew up in the projects. Really think about it for a few days.
I find it especially surprising that you think a two parent family solves all the problems when you are all in favor of allowing a male ( I purposely don't use man) to just opt out of caring for a kid they conceive.
You seem to suffer from a serious case of terminal uniqueness. Everyone else seems to have the wrong take on race relations to you. Ever notice that everyone disagrees with you? If it sounds like a duck, looks like a duck, walks like a duck . . .
Toph
ReplyDeleteI am not saying that all nuclear family homes or all single family homes are the same way. Yes, people can be successful or unsuccessful no matter their family make up. An argument that is undeniable is that more kids perform poorly that come from single family or broken homes than those from two parent households. Ask any psychologist or profiler and they will tell you that neglect, abuse or family trauma is what triggers psychopaths and other mental disorders among the people.
I am not saying other aspects do not come into play but it is not ignorant to say that a household’s with uncaring or involved parents put their kids at risk. I know I didn’t tell my parents everything I did but I knew well enough not to cross certain lines because of the communication I had.
Of course those that disagree with my view will espouse more often on the blog site. People, in general, do not like confrontation or debate. So if their view is being represented they stay quiet. I have admittedly several times and even altered my stance based on the conversation. Also, I have played devil advocate – openly and discreetly.
I know I do not have all the answers and I know I do not look at the world in the same light that other people do. Neither case is not grounds for automatic dismissal of my ideas either as that would be ignorant. Just as I do not immediately discount yours or anyone elses.
What race was enslaved by white Americans until the Emancipation Proclamation? Blacks...one could through in Native Americans but I do not believe the Emancipation Proclamation covered them.
ReplyDeleteWhat race led the fight for civil rights and was instrumental in the passage of the Civil Rights Act? While Black leaders lead the fight it was a white Congress led by Conservative voices that passed the Civil Rights Act.
If the NAACP is for racial equality then why do they have Colored People in their title?
ReplyDeleteI said: " The problem goes well beyond a single parent household, too." You said " I disagree with you on the problem goes well beyond a single parent household. All of ills in society begin in the home." So no other factors do come in? So there is now more problems than single parent households? It seems like you've come around, after being called out on it.
ReplyDeletethis is a cop out too: "Of course those that disagree with my view will espouse more often on the blog site. People, in general, do not like confrontation or debate. So if their view is being represented they stay quiet."
One, if people don't like confrontation, then this blog would be filled with people who support you, not disagree with you. Second, just look at the comments section in the Star Tribune, people don't have problem speaking their mind on the internet when no one knows them and their view is represented.
Third, if people agreed and kept quiet at first, don't you think they would chime in after so many others post comments that disagree with you?
Let's do this. If anyone out there agrees with Chris, please chime in. I'm just curious if you're there. You don't even have to use your name or say why you agree. Although, I'd prefer to know so I can think about the argument.
You've changed when the facts glaringly prove you wrong. Have you changed an overall opinion though? Not that I've seen. I don't automatically discount your opinion, but like I asked, please actual rethink your opinion when so many seem to disagree with you. I asked you really think about it, you took like 6 minutes to respond.
And to the NAACP, I hope the that Anon responds, but really, that's your come back? You still didn't address the heart of the difference. It seems he showed that the connection between the NAACP and KKK is rather thin and you pick on the name. Look at what they do and stand for.
Toph
ReplyDeleteI am one that often agrees with what Viper states on his blog. I do not respond but when you laid down the gauntlet I felt I must. I follow the blog more for the Hamburg information.
So you think a KKK rally is a good place to discuss race issues and the KKK and NAACP are essentially the same?
ReplyDeletePretty weak Viper. Why does the NAACP have "colored people" in their title? Well, let's see. The name has been used since their founding in 1909. At that time, "colored people" was not such a derogatory label. You could even argue that for the majority of it's existence, the label was acceptable to use. Times have changed and there has been discussion of changing the name. If anyone should not be offended by the use of that label, it's you. A racist white male.
ReplyDeleteAlternatively, if you meant to suggest that it's disingenuous of an organization to say they're for racial equality but focus their efforts on one or just a few races, I would have to say you are blind and ignorant. The struggle for "political, educational, social, and economic equality of rights" is based upon the idea that inequality exists. I'll take a wild guess and say that you don't believe there's any inequality. I say this because your experiencse in the cultural Mecca that is Hamburg are, in your mind, a representative sample of the state, country and world.
One more thing, why doesn't 20th Century Fox
change it's name? They sure seem to be stuck in the past. Did they not realize it's the 21st century?
Anonyomous
ReplyDeleteDo I think the KKK rally is a good place to discuss race issues? It is not the best place to have a discussion but it is a start. A lot can be learned from talking to extreme minded people.
As for the KKK and NAACP being the same? They are in this sense. Both groups push an agenda for their representative race. The NAACP does say equality for all but let's not kid ourselves. The NAACP is a group that wants to promote the black agenda over any other agenda yet they recognize that in order to get there they need other races on board.
Toph
ReplyDeleteDefine so many? I am not a politician that changes their stripes based on poll’s or popular opinion. I do take what others say into consideration and not taking on their position doesn’t mean my opinion isn’t right. Just because more voices shout for one opinion doesn’t make it the right position either. If that were the case the United States would still have segregation and women wouldn’t be able to vote.
The KKK and the NAACP both push their agenda’s based on the race group they represent. The NAACP, which another Anonymous has accurately stated, acknowledges that in order to advance their agenda they need to, at least on the surface, attract other groups.
Anonymous
ReplyDeleteDo I think that inequalities exist in America? Yes, but not to the extent it had twenty or thirty years ago. To get past the next hurdle Americans need to talk about race issues openly and honestly. Part of that discussion needs to include the recognition of differences, stereotypes and similiarities among the races that make up America. To embrace those aspects will evolve our society to one that is more equal. Part of the evolution is to accept that part’s of our culture will want to live segregated. Now, segregation is not a black/white issue as it has been in the past. Segregation exists as other cultures, Hmong and Somali, wish to live with their own.
As for the 20th Century Fox analogy, that is weak because their core mission has not changed. The NAACP has to be perceived as pushing equality for all in order to push their original mission of the black agenda.
As for your assertion of me being a racist white male. That is patently unfounded and incorrect. The attempt to smear the messenger is a Progressive tactic when the conversation is being lost and it is laughable. Just because I believe in small government, low taxes and a life to make my own choices while recognizing that fringe elements of our society have the same rights to exists as you and I does not come close to the assertion you make.
It's not a tactic to call you a racist. It's my opinion. Maybe it doesn't move the conversation forward, but it's my opinion based upon your ramblings in numerous posts and comments. Like Kevin said the other day, you're scared. The white man is being threatened, his power is being reduced, his influence is nit what it once was and that scares you, especially because non whites are the cause.
ReplyDeleteIf inequalities exist, then doesn't the NAACP still have work to do? And even if we reach a point where inequalities don't exist, it would seem that they'd still have work to do ensuring that we don't regress as a society.
Why do you continue to assert that people aren't talking about race issues open and honestly? Is it because people disagree with your views? Is it the thought that "well, if they don't believe what I believe, then they're just not being honest with themselves"?
And to suggest that people want to live segregated is just perfect. Are you a member of the KKK? The skinheads (looks like it)? Should we put up fences around certain neighborhoods to make clear that these people wantro live with their own? What about schools? Grocery stores? Gas stations? Restaurants? Should we put up signs that say Hmong Only or Must Be Somali? If that's you're idea of where our society should go, then please, stay in Hamburg, don't have any more kids, and be happy with your white neighbors.
Oh please, don't try to claim that smear tactics only apply to "progressives," talk about a laughable claim. All sides use it. It comes off as another attempt to blame the left. And god forbid we try to progress as a country. Way to try to tarnish a label. I don't think myself or anon thinks a conversation is being lost. Quite the opposite.
ReplyDeleteAnd believing in small government has nothing to do with coming off as a racist nor has anyone disagreed that the fringe has the same rights.
And this comes of as smear and looks like a lost message: "The NAACP has to be perceived as pushing equality for all in order to push their original mission of the black agenda." Please provide some rational support for this. How is equality only a black agenda? Has to be perceived or has to to fit what you want? Why the conspiracy? Why is it hard to accept they push for equality for all?
Anonymous
ReplyDeleteI feel no threat or see my power or influence as a race diminishing in America. The policies of the current regime if allowed to go unchecked will bring America to her knees. European countries are starting to realize that debt racked up over the past three years is unsustainable for economic growth. Our regime feels that it is government that can do it best. Really? If that is the case then why does the unemployement figure hover around 10% and where are the 8 Million new jobs that the stimulus was to deliver?
The simple fact is that government is not the answer. Private sector increase is. To get the private sector to hire and invest more, we need to adopt a tax policy that encourages growth and remove mandates, i.e. health care, on businesses.
Race issues are not being talked about openly and honestly. Case in point, earlier this year Chris Matthews had a town hall meeting on race in America. One of the panelist was an Indian lady from an Ivy league school. She posed the question to her students: Why they voted for Obama? To a T she reported they voted for him because he was black. Now, people get labeled a racist or bigot for just voicing opposition to Obama’s regime. Why is it not equally racist to vote for someone because of his skin color? Matthews quickly moved away from the question she posed. Why? Because the cottage industry of race relations see racism and bigotry as a one way street; which it is not.
I am not nor have I ever been a member of the KKK or skinheads. Nor do I aspire to be one either. I am not suggesting that we put up fences around our neighborhoods but we do need to accept and recognize that some members of society want to leave among those that share their same values and beliefs; part of that may be based on race.
Progressives or the Left has labeled the Tea Party movement as racists because a core belief is smaller government. Viper is not saying that the NAACP is not pushing for equality for all; rather, at least how I see it, the point is that the NAACP's view of equality is from the black perspective. Even though they appear to be pushing for equality for all, they are really pushing the black agenda.
ReplyDeleteYou sure know how to research. You find one example that confirms your view and it's gospel.
ReplyDeleteWhy do blacks struggle while othe immigrants prosper? Viper talked to business owners that are first generation immigrants who were like minded. If they agree with me, then all other views are wrong.
What proves that race issues aren't being talked about openly and honestly? One town hall meeting hosted by Chris Matthews and Viper's own personal experience. Case closed!
And to the anonymous poster after the Viper, please explain the connection between a belief in smaller government and being a racist. You lost me there. There's plenty of rhetoric contained in tea party messaging that is racist. There really isn't a need to grasp at straws to explain why some view the tea partiers as racists.
Back to the NAACP, Viper said "the NAACP is more like a white washed NOI" and "the KKK, aside from it's history, is no different than the NAACP". Do you agree with that?
Could someone tell me who specifically of progressives said small government is racist? I'd really like to know.
ReplyDeleteI'm a progressive and I don't think that. Not at all.
I have a feeling of what they might be getting at. That those in favor of small government would reduce or eliminate entitlement programs which would disproportionately impact minorities. the impact is not the intended consequence. It's not as though those in favor of small government start off by saying how can we screw minorities, by reducing welfare, let's do that. The impact is an unintended consequence. Now, decisions in the past that have led to the need for entitlement programs may be racist. But that is a different conversation and a belief that can only be reached by accepting some pretty extreme beliefs.
Anonymous
ReplyDeleteI talked to more than just business owners that are first or second generation Americans. In a past life I worked in the Casino industry talked about this and other topics with a wide array of people. While my conclusion here is not scientific, it is a cross section of Minnesotans.
Toph - Any pundit on MSNBC or CNN has labeled the Tea Party supports as racist because of what they stand for - small government, lower taxes and more freedoms.
Don't you think the libel use of entitlement programs has created a society dependent on the Federal government thus stripping them of their dignity?
The NAACP is attempting to be seen as an all-inclusive group as it pushes for equality. When the NAACP places a Latino, Native American, Asian or Arab as their leader then I will believe they are really advancing the equality banner for all races. Could we see a white leader of the NAACP?
ReplyDeleteWow, don't go to heavy on the specifics there. Let me be more specific. Who said what, when, and about what? Why did it come up? Otherwise, you have a broad generalization with no support, which proves and shows nothing.
ReplyDeleteIt's a pretty serious accusation, a little support is nice. I'm not doubting you, just show me who said it and about what.
Or did every last pundit say it? Some republicans stand for small government, right, were they included in the racist group? If not, maybe there was something else that was going on?
My guess is it goes well beyond small government, but please show me I'm wrong since you make the accusation.
And no, I don't think the use of entitlement programs is directly to blame. And who's dignity is being striped? I know we won't agree on this. There is a lot of good in entitlement programs when used properly. Is there waste? Yes. Is there abuse? Yes. Is that the majority? I don't know, neither do you. The programs need to go back to what they were intended for, to help people get on their feet, not a way to live. Should anyone be given 2 years of unemployment? Hell no.
There are lots of people who use these programs for what they should be, to help them get by in bad times. Is that a bad thing? I know people who have used programs for just that. I know you do too. Why? Because you collected unemployment.
I'd say people lost their dignity long before they were on these programs. it comes with living in a run town part of town with crumbling infrastructure, no jobs, crappy schools and being looked down by the rest of society. Yeah, people have a choice of how the handle it, but I think society has failed many of these people by not addressing these situations.
I believe these programs are good and can help when tied in with work incentives, with education, with retooling, with providing life skills. If a recipient doesn't want to go through those, then they shouldn't get money. I'm fine with that.
Like I said, I know we won't agree on it but I think you use broad generalization to think people are stripped of their dignity because they use these programs. They were stripped of it long before that, often through no fault of their own and with no recourse.
Anyway, we're going around in circles and I'm moving on.
Anonymous
ReplyDeleteIt will take time to research exact quotes and names but next time a Tea Party rally is to take place just tune in and you will see. As for Republicans and racism, if they are tied to the Tea Party there is a tinge of accusation.
As for entitlement programs, I agree with you they should be available to those that require them. My cousin works for the county and witnesses the abuse first hand. Just as people have made politics their career so have people made entitlement programs theirs. I recognize that work is tough to come by and firms are not hiring because of the uncertain policy affects of the Obama administration. Jobs are out there but people rather take the handout then work at a job that pays less or at unemployment rates.
As for dignity, I talk about the welfare parent with 5 kids and another on the way. Instead of doing the right thing they teach their children that the government will take care of them. There is no shame. Then the first time the government says No, violence becomes the answer.
I've watched coverage, a lot, and haven't seen what you claim.
ReplyDeleteFirms aren't hiring because people are spending and demand for goods has gone down and imports are a bigger player. Don't dump it all on Obama. Christ. So people aren't hiring but there are jobs? Which is it?
It's been a few years since I looked at it, but you might want to do real research on welfare. The average recipient use to be a white single rural woman with just over 2 kids. The stereotype you have is just that. Welfare pays less than a full time job and most recipients would rather work from what I looked at before.
Talk to recipients, they don't typically like receiving it.
And please explain what this means: " Then the first time the government says No, violence becomes the answer." or does it just sound good to you?
And if we are talking about cheating the system, plenty goes on in business.
When I talk to people in my former industry, Premium Diversified Industrial market, I am told that orders are up. The trouble is that future mandates, i.e. health care, are barriers to more hiring so crews are working more OT. Plus, as the debt continues to mount many of these same companies are bracing themselves for increases in tax rates. Add to that the proposed VAT tax it has these companies wondering and leaving them in limbo.
ReplyDeleteGovernment needs to get out of the way and allow the private sector to work. Stablize the debt and start reducing it without the threat of increase taxes, repel the health care mandate and we will see private sector job growth.
Do you know why some people think you are racist, or a bigot, or an angry white male? Because you toss crap like this out, especially the last line: "I talk about the welfare parent with 5 kids and another on the way. Instead of doing the right thing they teach their children that the government will take care of them. There is no shame. Then the first time the government says No, violence becomes the answer."
ReplyDeleteWithout any factual support, without anything to back it up, without a connection to the debate. Look at that last line objectively, how does that show understanding or substance? How does it, to steal a favorite line, advance the conversation?
Finally, never has it been shown that we create growth by cutting taxes and cutting spending. Doesn't work. History shows it. Some taxes need to be cut. Some raised. Some spending increased, some cut. And only a combination of private and public spending will create growth.
Anon..how is my statement racist, bigotry or angry white man? You took it to mean that I was talking about a non-white person. I believe another Anonymous poster stated that the average welfare recipient is white.
ReplyDeleteBack in the 80's we saw a dramatic decrease in tax rates and saw incredible growth. Spending does not need to take place but we do need to reduce the type of spending we have going on right now in Congress. All the rest of the world undestands that spending spree by government right now is unsustainable. So cannot our community organizer not too?
Yeah, I pointed that out after your comment about 5 kids and violence after a conversation on race, specifically blacks and welfare. I'm comfortable assuming you were thinking minorities. Specifically, black. You can argue otherwise, but I don't buy.
ReplyDeleteSecond, I said some people might think. Pointing out to you what others have said and giving you an example of why. I don't think you are racist. Rather, I think you are somewhat uninformed and not nearly as understanding of race relations as you think. So smooth the fuck off.
Third, that glorious time you speak off came with record deficits due to massive spending. Specifically military. Like I said, no growth with tax cuts and SPENDING cuts. The 80s doesn't prove otherwise.
You want growth. Look to Clinton and a mix of tax cuts, increases, and, a balanced budget.
Apparently I'm a bit late to this party. Looks like I missed quite the "debate".
ReplyDeleteViper, what exactly is, in your opinion, the "black agenda" that you mention several times above?
Clark
ReplyDeleteI have asked this of many of my black facebook friends on Truth2Power group. Actually, Corey did respond on the blogsite a while back. In addition to equilty the black agenda is looking for reparations. I am all for equality.
I believe the Founders believed that to despite many owning slaves. Remember women didn't have the right to vote either and were treated as second class citizens for a long time as well. In my conversation with members of Truth2Power we have discussed race, probably, more candid then many like. We have concluded, for the most part, that people need to recognize the difference, similarities and complexities of different races.
Toph
ReplyDeleteI agree that we need to balance the budget. The CBO just reported that if spending continues as is we will see debt equal to 62% of our GDP. 62%!
Obama pledged that we needed to spend our way out of a recession. Even though it has never worked in the past. Obama has done a great job of laying the foundations to introduce the VAT and Cap and Trade taxes to help pay down the debt. The VAT tax is worthless, Europe is prime example, and it will only make things more expensive and lead to inflationary times. But that is how Democrats like to payoff debt is through inflated money. The trouble is the rest of us suffer for it.
I don't disagree that a good mix of lowering taxes and smart spending is required. Extending unemployment benefits does not stimulate the economy - but Obama, Pelosi, Biden and Reed still say it does. We have been at it for over a year and half.
Business are scared to hire people because they do not know how much more they will have to pay for each additional employee they hire. It is time for Congress to move to a flat tax. Tax all individuals the same and tax all corporate industries the same. Eliminate all tax credits at the same time. There is a reason why Warren Buffett, and others like him, laugh at our tax code. Sure they get taxed at 45% but after all the deductions and credits they pay less than 15%.
Last time I heard, 45% or 47% pay no taxes after all the tax credits are done. Why should this be? We all benefit from teachers, police, fire, roads, bridges, etc...so why not have everyone contribute to the kitty? Plus, by going to a flat tax we will reward those people that improve their and their families lots in life.
The road we are headed down is a revert back to serfdom.
So, in your own personal view Viper, the black agenda consists of two things:
ReplyDelete1) Equality
2) Reparations
Correct?
Clark
ReplyDeleteThe NAACP is pushing equalitiy and erasing racial discrmination, which I agree with, but they are also pushing a left leaning idealogy - health care mandate, clean every policy (cap and trade) and financial reform.
As for raparations, that is something the group from facebook is telling me is part of the agenda.
So, the black agenda consists of:
ReplyDelete1) Equality
2) "Left Leaning Ideology"
a) Health Care
b) Clean Energy
c) Financial Reform
3) Reparations
Clark...basically that would be correct. If NAACP is dead set on equality then remove the institutional racism that exists with Affirmative Action.
ReplyDeleteSo given the fact that you have now defined "the black agenda", would you like to retract the statement you made regarding the NAACP being the same as the KKK? I don't see any claims of superiority within the black agenda; I don't see any desire to live only among those that are like minded; I don't see any goal of making our society more pure. There's a lot that I don't see in the black agenda when I compare it to that of the KKK. Maybe you'd like to revise your irresponsible statement. Or should I wait for hell to freeze over first?
ReplyDeleteBy the way, have you tried that NAACP is the same as the KKK line with the Truth 2 Power group? Please do. And do tell how that goes over.
Clark
ReplyDeleteThe NAACP pushes the black agenda just as the KKK pushes a white agenda. I do not disagree that tactics to achieving their end goal is different. At the end of the day, the NAACP promotes the black agenda and the KKK promotes a white agenda. That is in where my comparison lies.
So the only difference is tactics? Are you absolutely sure about that? Is the KKK a champion of equality?
ReplyDeleteMaybe I'm missing something here, but I find it very surprising that you only see one difference between the NAACP and the KKK and that being their tactics.
Float this to Truth 2 Power. See how they respond. Please.
Clark
ReplyDeleteI will post the question on Truth2Power site on Faceback an report back what is said there. I will also ask those there to come here to post as well.
I have an angle for you guys. Why is it okay for all black colleges but not all white colleges?
ReplyDelete