The Juan Williams moment, prompted by Bill O'Reilly, who just a few days earlier, had this immensely more dramatic-looking moment on "The View":
I got to the Juan Williams video via Donald Sensing (via Instapundit). Sensing has old quotes from Jesse Jackson and Susan Estrich, who both conceded that black men make them anxious in some situations. Jackson's painful admission was that he feels "relieved" when he's walking down the street, hears someone behind him, and looks back and sees that they're white. Estrich said:
Every woman I know, black, white, green or yellow, gets a little bit nervous, if she’s being honest, when she sees an 18-25 year-old black guy dressed in gang attire, walking behind her on the street. I’m not afraid of old black men. I’m not afraid of old white men.She purports to speak for all women, but limits the nervousness to encounters with "an 18-25 year-old black guy dressed in gang attire, walking behind her on the street." It's funny to see those 2 quotes together. Jackson describes the realistic situation of hearing someone behind you and looking back to see who it is. Estrich too has the person walking behind her, but somehow the nervousness is restricted to the young black man in gang clothes. Her political correctness made her layer in extra details, but if the guy is behind you, you don't see him yet. Were you not nervous just to have someone following you? The supposed revelation of feelings doesn't really add up, which makes the phrase "if she’s being honest" particularly telling.
Now, if Jackson and Estrich could say that, how was Williams different? Actually, there are a lot of differences. I won't try to list them all. But I don't assume that Jackson and Estrich got a free pass for saying what they said. And Williams has gotten a ton of support. It's not all about treating Muslims with more delicacy than black people receive. One thing about Williams is that he made himself available to Bill O'Reilly and gave him support and comfort. I think many people wanted to use that "View" fracas to demonize O'Reilly for good. And then Williams sat down on camera to shine a glow of humanity on the man the good people would have us see as monstrous. And so it became necessary to demonize Williams too.
पोस्ट्स
११९ टिप्पण्या:
"But I don't assume that Jackson and Estrich got a free pass for saying what they said."
Really...trying to think, you know I can't remember, trying harder now, nope... can you????
I thought the part was interesting where Williams said when he noticed people dressed in Arab garb, whatever that is, he abruptly cancels his ticket and books another flight. And if he then notices people wearing Arab garb and speaking in Arabic or wear t-shirts with squiggly writing on it, the he reschedules that later flight too. Unless he's stuck on that flight, in which case he makes sure to change his seat to be as far away as possible, and if he can't do that then he watches them like a hawk throughout the whole flight. And if they speak using a lot of throaty sounds during the flight he goes Hey you Arabs over there, stop talking that Arab talk on this airplane! Or possibly I just thought that part. Oh shit. Now I'm in trouble.
I know if I am on a flight and I see a bunch of people dressed in Arab garb....I always check my seat...just to be sure...because....well...they usually smell pretty bad.
Just keeping it real.
I don't see what's different about the three statements. The show or the newspaper they are contained in? Context, maybe. But all three indicate negative emotional reactions to people they see.
I saw the whole segment, and Williams argued with O'Reilly vigorously, and to me didn't give support at all. This statement was his one statement of agreement with him.
But you got what you wanted. Fox has a liberal apologist for anti-Muslim discomfort and NPR lost a reporter. What fascinating insights and proud conceits do feel that continuing to whip this dead horse will bring you?
Why was gang attire added in a discussion of race?
Addressing just the gang attire:
No, it's best if we all go through life totally ignoring visual cues. A young man in gang attire makes you nervous? Stop being a bigot! If you didn't have your hateful assumptions in the way, you'd see that he's probably also headed out to watch Age of Innocence at the dinner theater. He could have been your BFF, but now your ignorance ruined that possibility.
And Williams referenced religious attire that actual terrorists have not worn while Estrich references gang attire that is not disputed as an association with gang activity.
So, in other words: FAIL.
Now, if Jackson and Estrich could say that, how was Williams different? Actually, there are a lot of differences. I won't try to list them all.
No shit.
Generally they stink worse than the Yankees did last night.
Congratulations to the American League Champion Texas Rangers.
I will be rooting for you in the World Series. Especially if you play the Giants. That would be a classic.
Red State vs. Blue State.
George W Bush vs. Nancy Pelosi.
Texas vs. San Francisco.
PLAY BALL!!!!!!!!!!
Ritmo, he was saying that he thought his nervousness was wrong. So, FAIL again.
PatCA said...
I don't see what's different about the three statements. The show or the newspaper they are contained in? Context, maybe. But all three indicate negative emotional reactions to people they see.
actually, the Juan statement was weaker and less objectional
Jesse and Susan said/meant pretty clearly that their rational fear was based on the general understanding that whites are committing fewer street robberies per 1000 population than are young black men. That was a rational threat analysis
Juan said something like, "I have a gut fear, it may not be rational, but after 9/11, instinctly I have concerns when I see Muslims in the context of air travel. "
Myself, I think that he need not have backed away from the fear comment, but he did and his statement was much less about rational profiling and all about instinctive fears.
Verry interesting Col.Hogan. Their target was O'Reilly's show. They mistakenly presumed Williams role on Fox was as a straight man and token ethnic like all NPR ever saw Williams to be qualified for...a stage prop. But Williams was seen as giving aid and comfort to O'Reilly at a crucial moment of a Slander and Destroy mission directed at Fox's key man. Once again a truth denier like Schiller gets reality all screwed up by believing her own myths. Juan Williams is an everyman, respected guest, and has been allowed to speak off message from Bill O for years. That is the Fair and balanced method in action. Juan being a "Black Man" is last decades issue. The Tea party ca see past a man's skin color, although the Liberals will never believe that attack is gone. The Liberals seem always behind in the Tea Party/Palin Ooda loop these days. When is the election after the one 9 days from now?
FAIL what, Freeman? Is Williams' admission of his nervousness (his own thoughts on how right or wrong it is notwithstanding) not the controversial issue?
She purports to speak for all women, but limits the nervousness to encounters with "an 18-25 year-old black guy dressed in gang attire, walking behind her on the street."
Hey, I'd also feel nervious if it were mexicans or white skin heads with the gang attire. So it's not about race, it's about the gang attire.
If I saw a black men walk by in a three piece suit I probably wouldn't bat an eye. Which doesn't eman that the guy in the three piece suit can't be a robber, only that my mind wouldn't go into panic mode because guys in three piece suits are generally not the guys that will accost you at night.
So maybe if gang members want to get away with more crimes they should ditch the gang clothes, hide the tats and bling, and dress up like business men. Another way for the gang attire to stop engendering so much fear from passersby is if people who are in gangs stop commiting so many crimes. maybe if Tupac didn't have the tattoo "thugs life" on his stomach, people wouldn't presume that he was a thug. Maybe if Flavor Flav didn't walk around with a huge clock on his chest people wouldn't presume that he knew what time it was.
To quote Dave Chappelle (talking about women who get offfended when dressing like whores that guys assume they're whores):
"The girl says "Oh uh-uh, wait a minute! Wait a minute! Just because I'm dressed this way does not make me a whore!" Which is true. Gentlemen, that is true. Just because they dress a certain way doesn't mean they are a certain way. Don't ever forget it. But ladies, you must understand that is fucking confusing. It just is. Now that would be like me, Dave Chappelle, the comedian, walking down the street in a cop uniform. Somebody might run up on me, saying, "Oh, thank God. Officer, help us! Come on. They're over here. Help us!" "Oh-hoh! Just because I'm dressed this way does not make me a police officer!" See what I mean?
All right, ladies, fine. You are not a whore. But you are wearing a whore's uniform.
Similarly. Ok fine, just because you dress like a thug doesn't mean you are a thug. But you are wearging a thugs uniform. Unless you can find a way to make thug mean something totally innocent and playful, people seeing people dressed like thugs will presume that they are in fact thugs. So if you don't want to be presumed that way, don't dress that way. But don't be shocked that, if in dressing that way, someone might get the wrong impression.
If I walked around with a KKK Uniform on all day in a black neighborhood, what would the assumption be? Should blacks not assume that perhaps they should be wary of the guy dressed in a kkk uniform?
Why is it that NPR has problems with their reporters appearing on FOX news, but you never hear FOX complaining about people appearing on NPR?
Because appearing on NPR is like entering the Witness Protection Program.
Now, if Jackson and Estrich could say that, how was Williams different? Actually, there are a lot of differences. I won't try to list them all.
I really think this sums up the blog's philosophy in a nutshell. Revealing only part of what you think, including a select detail here or there while excluding another, makes for a more provocative and contentious discussion.
What's wrong with just honestly airing an issue in its entirety? Do you really get off on fueling the energy driven by half-truths?
Half the crowd will spout off on how vindicated they feel that what they generally choose to overlook went righteously ignored by the author, the other half will moan about how silly it is to leave out pertinent facts.
That's not a very blogworthy (or "bloggy") approach, is it?
"... if Jackson and Estrich could say that, how was Williams different?"
Williams is conservative and appears on Fox News to criticize Democrats - therefore he's a house nigger and not a real minority. He's just a token ... so discriminating against him is OK for the Democrats who populate our government offices.
You see, Ann ... some pigs are more equal than other pigs.
Everything - and I mean everything - about the tactics liberals use and the tactics that the Democrat Party uses against people were learned from reading just one author: George Orwell.
We are all required to read Orwell in high school (I was required to read both 1984 and Animal Farm). Conservatives read those novels as a distopian warning.
Democrats use these novels as instruction manuals on how to yoke their fellow citizens and to destroy people who disagree with them.
Liberalism is evil and everything about the Democrat Party is evil up to and including Barack Hussein Obama. Only evil people vote will continue to vote for Democrats.
O'Reilly is a "bloviator," and freely admits it. I also think he is a bloviating donkey's rear end and a bully and living proof that Harvard is not a;ways as "elite" it is cracked up to be. Whatever. He certainly is delighting in this added notoriety attracting a yet wider audience for his show.
Juan Williams is a woolly headed liberal, but a totally nice guy, who wears his heart on his sleeve, and NPR should have been bright enough to realize that even their own audience would side with Williams in this brouhaha.
Ritmo...I agree that both O'Reilly and later Williams failed to tie the Allah Worshiper's dress up uniform to a likely suicide bomber. That was irrational. So can we get rid of the TSA guys for irrationality too? OK, it is a harmless airport game. But Identifying the enemy's various profiles is a necessary and proper use of intellectual discussion. Submitting to forbidden topics rules pushed by Allah Worshipers does not gain their respect. It only confirms to Allah Worshipers that Americans are properly despised as stupid infidels that need killing. They respect the Strong Horse that seems to be winning...ONLY!
Ritmo wrote:
And Williams referenced religious attire that actual terrorists have not worn while Estrich references gang attire that is not disputed as an association with gang activity.
So, in other words: FAIL.
But in fact religious attire is associated with terrorists. Every time you see Osama bin Laden he's always wearing tradition muslim garb.
The fact that al qaeda terrorists dress in american clothes before going on their suicide runs means that the Musilm is doubly to be feared. If he is dresssed traditionally he could be the Osama bin Laden type, but if he is dressed in a modern fashion that just could be his disguise.
So terrorists make it bad for moderate and traditional muslims. Maybe the key though is, when terrorists do wage one of their attacks the moderate response is so muted. Because they don't vocally disassociate themselves from the extremists they are lumped in with them
Also, being associated with a group that likes to blow up planes makes anyone wary when they have to fly somewhere and see someone who may be a muslim. Sometimes, Indians or hispanics or Greeks could even be looked at funny. They have similar complexions, are they here to blow up a plane.
All I know is, I bet someone on the flights that were hijacked had wished someone somewhere had been more vigilant about not letting these people on a plane.
Now, if Jackson and Estrich could say that, how was Williams different?
FOX isn't NPR? Jackson wasn't employed by any media outlet? Duh!
"actually, the Juan statement was weaker and less objectional"
Yeah, I agree, DrillSgt.
Liberals are more afraid of muslims than they are of blacks. Which makes them more tolerant of muslims. When they don't fear a group, say like ethnic Catholics, they just let the hate hang out.
Did you ever hear Susan Estrich talk. I confess I never could understand what she was saying becaus I can't get past the Carol Channing thing.
But in fact religious attire is associated with terrorists. Every time you see Osama bin Laden he's always wearing tradition muslim garb.
But strangely enough, though - not at an airport.
Which is the entire context for Williams' statement.
How much more context gets ignored? Can I have a heads-up? Something in advance? Maybe some ground rules for truth or whatever might be in order.
I'm just trying to understand how many and which types of facts need to ignored in order to formulate the version of "truth" promulgated here.
Thanks in advance.
Doctor Zero, in the Hot Air Green Room:
As described by Glenn Reynolds in a classic 2002 essay, a preference cascade occurs when people trapped inside a manufactured consensus suddenly realize that many other people share their doubts. Preference falsification works by making doubters feel isolated and alone. In a totalitarian society, the dissenter fears that if he speaks up, his will be a lone voice, easily squashed by the enforcers of the regime. When dissenters realize they are not alone, and the true strength of their numbers becomes apparent, “invincible” regimes vanish with astonishing speed.
The same effect can occur without brutal oppression, when fear of ostracism and ridicule cause people to suppress their own doubts. This kind of preference falsification requires strict discipline from the makers of opinion. Since a free society makes it very easy for individuals to change their opinions, they must be prevented from even considering such a change. Manufactured consensus is very fragile in a competitive arena of ideas, when there is no fearsome penalty for a “Fresh Air” listener who decides to switch over to Rush Limbaugh.
The manufactured liberal consensus about Islamic terrorism rolled off the assembly line a long time ago, complete with a serial number and a limited warranty… which will instantly expire on the date of the next successful terrorist attack on U.S. soil. Islam is held hostage by a tiny minority of extremists. Juan Williams is more likely to be struck by lightning in midair than share a plane with one of them. The War on Terror was largely the invention of a paranoid and divisive Bush Administration. We repaired much of our rift with the Muslim world by electing Barack Obama, and the rest will be filled in with billions of foreign aid dollars, since poverty is the primary cause of terrorism.
A credentialed, taxpayer-supported NPR liberal cannot be allowed to question this consensus. It will shatter too easily if the clients of liberalism begin connecting dots between underwear bombers and pistol-packing Army psychiatrists. They cannot be left to nod quietly in agreement with the earnest musings of Juan Williams… then look around the room and see all the other faithful liberals nodding at the same time. It’s especially threatening when you consider the enormous increase in audience Williams gains by appearing on Fox News. He wasn’t just an employee of NPR. He was well on his way to becoming the public face of the organization, and his prominence would only increase in the wake of a November wave that destroys the relevance of his peers. This would put him in a position to threaten even more leftist dogma with mild questions. Liberalism has no shortage of fragile beliefs.
jr565 said...
Hey, I'd also feel nervious if it were mexicans or white skin heads with the gang attire. So it's not about race, it's about the gang attire.
I made this point on an earlier posting in the context of my wife and downtown DC.
Say you're down by 8th and H in DC. Would you rather walk on the side of the street with the 8 white skinheads, or cross over with the 8 young black guys wearing red tee shirts?
The answer is obviously, the 8 guys in red teeshirts and high and tight haircuts are Marines out for a run. The skinheads? just targets....
It's not race so much as the uniform, but regardless, we all profile everything all day long. It's called rational fact based behavior.
For context, Estrich disclosed in her 1987 book Real Rape that she was raped by a black male stranger in the 1970s.
The title of her book Real Rape refers to the fact that, unlike rape by an acquaintance, her rape by a stranger was looked upon as “real rape.”
Williams got nailed because what he said and what BillO said on The View were what most Americans think, so trying to turn O'Reilly into the next Georgie Jessel wasn't going to fly. They went after Williams when he gave them an opening because the Left has to destroy anyone who goes against the orthodoxy. The irony is that the two have had some real screaming matches over the years, but they can get past it; they fight, but they can agree to disagree. It shows you can be civilized and be a gentleman who respects an honest difference of opinion. That's a no-no in PC-land (look at people like Alpha or Jeremy). I also think Williams has been moving slowly rightward the last couple of years.
NPR also probably wanted a sacrifice to show Soros his money was well spent. Supposedly, Mara Liasson is next on the chopping block; again for the sin of being on Fox.
PS If people were honest, a lot of them look askance when they see any group of 15-25 year old males - white/black/asian/Hispanic, especially if they're making noise, etc. The added onus on blacks comes from the gangsta culture fed by the media and cultivated in the Black Power movement by the Left over the past 40 years.
PPS The hypocrisy of Jesse Jackson, of course, is that if anybody white said what he said, they would be branded a racist and driven from public life unless they were an officer in a major corporation, said corporation being then shaken down for a big "donation" to the Rainbow Coalition. Same for Susan Estrich, minus the shakedown.
Ms. Althouse, I believe you owe Glenn Greenwald an apology:
http://www.althouse.blogspot.com/2010/10/npr-fires-juan-williams-because-of-what.html
You quote him condemning Juan Williams' remarks without mentioning the parts where he makes it clear he opposes his firing from NPR. You also omit the reasoning he gives for thinking that Williams' comments were bigoted. Instead of trying to honestly argue with him you just selectively quotated him to accuse leftists of being PC sissies.
...and besides, Greenwald is just being consistent. I bet the people here supported the firing of people like Eason Jordan and Octavia Nasr for their patriotically incorrect stances.
Teenagers are initially very closely scrutinized by staff when entering stores to ensure that they haven't come to shoplift. Attractive, single women may initially receive special scrutiny at dinner parties to see if they are the sort of women who flirt with married men. Any man will be intensely scrutinized whenever he approaches a woman he does not know.
We are rational beings, and part of being a rational being is making intuitive, visual snap judgments, and using them to determine what merits our attention for closer scrutiny. The basis for these snap judgments may, as Williams was saying in his own case, be inaccurate. (For example, a random Muslim on a plane is quite unlikely to be a terrorist.) The important thing is not to regard snap judgments as truth. The teenager is probably law-abiding, the woman is probably good, and the man is probably perfectly nice. The snap judgement just focuses one's attention to making sure, usually in the same instant as the judgement itself, that these things are so.
Demanding that people go through life with entirely unfiltered attention is asking them not to be human. But I think the real demand here is that Williams filter should conform to some arbitrary, probably non-existent, politically correct filter. By the NPR way of thinking, your intuitive nervousness should be limited to Tea Partiers, Christians, and rural people.
What is "gang attire?"
So terrorists make it bad for moderate and traditional muslims.
A traditional muslim by definition is gung-ho for terrorism by virtue of being gung-ho for jihad.
A moderate muslim is a mythical creature dreamed up in the wish fulfillment lobes of the western brain.
There are doubtless millions of muslims in name only, MINO's. They are muslims by the accident of birth but live secular lives. And so what. Any muslim who is a practicing muslim is obligated to support jihad.
"What is "gang attire?"
Suicide belts hidden under burkas ... aka "full body ski masks".
What is "gang attire?"
Ten years ago in Little Rock, it was sweatpants with one leg rolled up to the knee with the other all the way down and, sometimes, tears tattooed on the face.
We're all Islamaphobic. Right and Left.
I, a conservative, am afraid that Muslims are going to blow up the planes and trains that I am riding on.
The Left has repeatedly demonstrated that they fear Muslims as well. See: South Park, Non Sequitur, the Danish cartoons.
Do I have to start with saying that I don't like or watch O'Reilly?
I don't like or watch the View either. I'm not sure how much money I'd have to be paid to watch it, maybe if it was enough to cover my daughter's rent. I can be bought.
But even if I really try I can not see how to take the "ladies" getting up and walking out on a guest in a positive light. How does that work? I'm reminded of that MIT lady becoming "ill" and feeling like she was going to faint when listening to Larry Summers. I'm either embarrassed, appalled at my gender, or viciously amused. Are their sensibilities too delicate? We've got MoDo saying that Angle makes her feel "unsafe" and WisCon dis-inviting Moon because their guests may feel "unsafe".
We've got editors pulling a cartoon because they feel unsafe, and no one who cares to stand up to the forces that provide an actual physical threat sufficient to drive a citizen of this country into hiding at the recommendation of the FBI.
But the ladies want us to walk on eggshells or they'll faint or become so overwhelmed that they make a huffy little exit scene.
Brilliant.
Also, your intuitive nervousness will have a lot to do with where you live and your own experience. In overwhelmingly white, rural states, the guy that most people will scrutinize closely is the poor, over-lean white guy.
If most of the Muslims you've seen have been on television, wearing traditional dress and screaming "Death to America!", then that will probably affect your intuition when boarding a plane.
An absolutely hilariously ridiculous discussion.
So, after Muslims sneak a dirty bomb into Manhattan and detonate it, will Shithead Ritmo declare that the real problem is the potential Islamophobia the act might produce.
You bet he will. Ritmo, you are the stupidest cunt on the planet. Suicidally stupid. This Bigot-omania of yours if a hilariously stupid. You are one stupid fucking cunt.
I can't wait for the day that cunts like you are beaten in the street. It's going to happen. The tolerance for your stupidity will evaporate in the wake of a dirty bomb attack on Manhattan. I'll be cheering on the sidelines while the crowd beats you, if I'm still alive.
"What is gang attire?"
When I was 8 years old, my gang rode our bikes with baseball cards thwapping in the spokes.:)
edutcher said...
They went after Williams when he gave them an opening because the Left has to destroy anyone who goes against the orthodoxy.
and the doubleplusungood fact that he was black.
If a black harbors "racist" feeling towards Muslims, it's harder to call white Americans racist.
Freeman said...We are rational beings, and part of being a rational being is making intuitive, visual snap judgments, and using them to determine what merits our attention for closer scrutiny.
That rational behavior has a PC name, which is profiling
I have not used the word "Islamophobia" once on this thread. And probably not even in other threads.
"shoutingthomas" is the Carl Paladino of Althouse. Probably thinks he's about as tough, too.
I'll be cheering on the sidelines while the crowd beats you, if I'm still alive.
Thankfully, it looks increasingly unlikely that you will be.
Depression, Heart Disease Combo May Up Odds of Death
Keep up the thug talk, though. You're about as likely to command the respect of a gang as the rest of these Vanilla Ices. Despite the fact that your psychotic talk puts you in danger of the type of behavior that should land you squarely in an eight-by-eight foot cell.
What a douchebag.
I don't say that very often.
I call bullshit on everybody:
I don't wear "gang attire" and (some) people still cross the street when they see me coming.
Still, it's nothing like France, where I got chased away from an ATM by those waiting in line.
What I find fascinating about American culture is the absolute refusal to let race die as topic - I include Ann and Glenn in this - it's the churning of the waters, the friction, that Americans get off on. There's no commitment to ending it, by putting it in it's place, but a thrill every time a new aspect of it appears to discuss - when it's a bogus topic to begin with.
Today, to me, there's no difference between racists of the past and the liberal impulse today:
Both are determined to play the game - at my expense - no matter what.
No matter how hard liberals try, and they've been trying for 50 years, they can't eliminate the SANE reaction to a group of young black males, which is one of watchful wariness. People have been equipped with a survival instinct. It can be dulled, in which case some people die. But it can't be eliminated by the insane.
Crack, I think that it won't die until simply being called a racist isn't similar to being called a child molester and loses you your job.
No matter how hard liberals try, and they've been trying for 50 years, they can't eliminate the SANE reaction to a group of young black males, which is one of watchful wariness.
I don't believe people have that reaction to young black males dressed in authentic African garb or whose presentation identifies them as African.
Ritmo spews the Commie orthodoxy to all the Vanilla Ices, "You're evil because you're white and American and free and wealthy and happy (and, if it fits, male). Only by becoming a Leftist and swallowing the Marxist-Leninist drivel that has been the death of over 100 million people can you achieve redemption in the eyes of all us cool, smart followers of Che and Mao and Fidel"
Andrew,
Eason Jordan went to a foreign conference populated with other journalists both pro-American and anti-American and stated that the US military made it a practice to attack journalists. You don't think he should be fired for that? Amazing.
It was muslims that killed 3000+ of my countrymen nine years ago. Purely muslims. I refuse to feel guilty for looking askance at those who publicly display themselves to be muslims, even though rationally I know that the ones who are the greatest threat are the ones who will hide it. I do not feel that by denying my instincts, I am somehow demonstrating some nobility. So, I will watch them. To do something preemptively would be wrong, but I will watch them. If I am right, my heightened awareness will be rewarded. If not, I've lost nothing. It gains me nothing to deny my instincts, but I may lose much. It may gain me much to respect them. Anyone who feels differently may behave as he sees fit, but is not entitled to deprecate me. Survival of the fittest will decide who is right.
Ricpic,
No matter how hard liberals try, and they've been trying for 50 years, they can't eliminate the SANE reaction to a group of young black males, which is one of watchful wariness.
Bullshit. I've told this story before here:
I get on a bus and there's no place to sit but in the back with some obnoxious black kids in "gang attire".
A white lady gets on and, since there's no seats together for her and her kids, she starts seating them wherever she can. One child reaches the rear and looks at his mother, wondering if he should sit down, and she says, "Go ahead, it's O.K., they're nice boys." and, like magic, the thugs became what they are: a bunch of nice boys. Courteous, looking out for the kids, and chatting with the mother like old friends.
My point is you're all infected with race, but won't acknowledge it, preferring to play holy-than-thou with the issue - which doesn't end it, but just keeps it going.
They're nice boys.
BTW - one of my favorite cult leaders, Keith Raneire of NXIVM, has admitted he's killed people - just as I've always said.
Maybe if the rest of you could learn to focus on what's real and important - and race, as a concept, ain't - such horrors wouldn't be allowed to continue right under your (upturned) noses.
That was brilliant, Ed. Are you trying to win some type of competition when it comes to the number of catchy words and phrases you can come up with to cover-up the fact that you lost an argument before even participating in it?
Is the water too cold for your freezing toes? Brrrrrr!!!! Come on! If you want to form that pretend-mob that skeezythomas invents for his cowardly cheering pleasure, you're going to have to do better.
"Vanilla Icicle" is more like it. But this is the wrong thread for that.
Synova,
I hear you - you know I do - but it still rankles that the focus you propose focuses on whites, still wallowing in race, and not blacks who want to be free of it. I - me - am also the point of the civil rights movement, not just whites who want people to stop calling them names. And I say "shut the fuck up about it" and the white/black name calling will stop, too.
None of it should carry any weight.
Shorter Cheering Thomas:
"I'd come out and beat you myself if that pretend flash-mob and catastrophic terrorism incident that I fantasize and dream about actually existed!"
It's about as convincing as this.
Yawn.
Ok. I'm off Douchebag Patrol. Either skeezy thomas retreated to wallow in his depression alone, found some other activity, or realized what a twit he was.
Early reports had CAIR involved in the Williams firing.
What isn't discussed much in the wake of the firing is the senior VP that actually fired Williams, Emily Weiss, is married to Rabbi David Saperstein, an uber-connected man in DC with links to many Muslim groups and heading some NGO that aims to stamp out "Religious tolerance and Islamophobia".
Uber-connected Rabbi Saperstein gave the invocation at the 2008 Democratic Convention, along with a Christian and a Mullah. He heads or is on the Boards of several other Leftist groups that also have ties to Muslims.
His links include CAIR and he has often has appeared on panels with Muslim activists aimed at "educating the public" that CAIR is wonderful, and religious diversity is "to be cherished".
So while the spotlight is on Soros and the hapless Vivian Schiller....you have to ask, if Williams said it Monday night, who did CAIR have the juice with to get into high-level meetings at NPR the next morning and demand progressive Jewish ladies Emily Weiss and Vivian Schiller fire the black guy who strayed off the Plantation?
If Williams sues, and I hope he does, over the Schiller psychiatric smear if nothing else - I think even liberals are interested in how much George Soros, Rabbi Saperstein, and CAIR contributed to the purge of the "not listening to Massa's wishes" black man.
This may be another episode in the long war between blacks and the progressive Jews that seek to control them. It started in the 60s, when blacks wrested control of many black organizations like the NAACP from the Jews and achieved "self-rule" in majority black districts away from progressive Jews that before had held the elected positions, ran the school boards, stores, courts blacks had to interact with.
When blacks stray off the Plantation and must be demonized, no group is more aggressive in demonizing and smearing them than progressive Jews in Media, academia, the Democrat Party.
One day blacks will wake up and demand the same freedom to express differing views that the other constituents of the Dem Party enjoy. To get there, the black community has to start by seriously questioning their blind loyalty to the Democrat Party and the demonization of any black that does not hew to Leftist Party line. And know who takes their votes for granted..
It does always surprise me what people who don't interact with black people assume about them. Especially kids. Any group of young teens will be ball busters and fool around but the story Crack tells rings true. Most people are just people and if you treat them with respect and kindness they will give it right back to you.
But you do have to watch out when you sit next to them.
Because they kind of smell of that musk colonge and the hair pomade that they use.
Still a lot better than those Arabs though. They usually smell like they have a three day old dead falafel in their shoes. Just sayn'
They're nice boys.
When I was a prosecutor, young black males, a miniscule portion of the population in our county (11% black, total), accounted for about 20% of the reported violent crime. Most of that crime was reported by black victims. Not an unusual scenario.
How does that fit in with your point, Crack?
If you don't like the smell of the dead falafels you're going to hate the smell of the live falafels.
Just saying.
But I think the real demand here is that Williams filter should conform to some arbitrary, probably non-existent, politically correct filter.
Yes, to somedegree and from time to time, we all have bigoted thoughts. The filter, that I think is important, is how we react to these thoughts. IMHO, this is where he errored. He's a journalist that could of acted more profesionally at that moment with O'Reilly. The goal in NPR's standards is to stay above the fray. Williams pushed that envelope (according to NPR).
For the record, I don't have a dog in this fight and see errors on both sides.
By the NPR way of thinking, your intuitive nervousness should be limited to Tea Partiers, Christians, and rural people.
Again, it's not his intuitive nervouseness that angered NPR, it was the forum and, given his professional credentials, his inability to convey that nervouseness into larger context, that sunk him. As for inferring NPR's slant on "Tea Partiers, Christians, and rural people", I've not experienced that, given that my personal and professional lives qualifies me for 2 of those.
Nobody can smell as bad as the Yankees.
Just sayin
NPR had wanted to get rid of him for a long time and were just waiting for the perfect excuse.
This is common knowledge in the reality based community. It's also incredibly f*&^#n' obvious.
Hombre,
When I was a prosecutor, young black males, a miniscule portion of the population in our county (11% black, total), accounted for about 20% of the reported violent crime. Most of that crime was reported by black victims. Not an unusual scenario.
How does that fit in with your point, Crack?
It fits into my point in that we refuse to realistically untangle the knot we've made of ourselves.
Trooper,
Dude, you're doing it again - I'm dying here! - and I love you, dearly, for it.
Hey I already did my Yankee posts on a real blog garage if you want to make any comments. Feel free to get some good shots in. I can take as can my team (the greatest sports franchise in the history of the world).
Congratulations to Texas once again. They won fair and square. They had great pitching and we are going to enjoy them when they pitch for the Yankees next year.
I hope they play those hippies from Frisco and kick their California asses. Just sayn'
I am becoming Juan obsessed.
How does everyone feel about Tilapia?
If I saw a black man 18-25 in gang attire walking behind me my thoughts would turn to...is he on the dl?
I have done the dl with many black thugs in the past and I find it both rewarding and very hot.
Thanks.
When doing the dl with a black thug I imagine I am a prison inmate and the act is being consummated because I have just been sold for a pack of smokes.
Thank you and good day.
You can always count on Ritmo to take the side of Islamic terrorhoids.
Ritmo hopes that Al Queda will recruit him.
Ritmo,
NPR had wanted to get rid of him for a long time and were just waiting for the perfect excuse.
This is common knowledge in the reality based community. It's also incredibly f*&^#n' obvious.
But - like me saying, to the sound of crickets, cults are killing people - we don't deal with obvious stuff, but insist on this speculative dance of bullshit. (Would we have Obama if it was otherwise?) Glenn Reynolds has this new thing he's pushing - credentialed but not educated - which describes too many Americans today, including himself and Ann. I don't need to see/hear/read this bullshit - especially because it revolves around ignoring the obvious for whereever they (the spokesmen for the credentialed) decide to steer the conversation, which will never be away from their own point of view.
It will always, always, always, go back to race. To prove they're not racist/racial. Or to say how horrible race is. Or to call someone else a racist. or to applaud racial pride. or to acknowledge "how far we've come" on race.
I'm sick of it. It's not part of life, usually, except when others start in. Did someone see me and cross the street? Their problem, not mine. They may have been crying and didn't want anyone to see. They may have had to cross the street to get to their destination. They may not have wanted to make eye contact for a multitude of reasons. Or they could be racists - in which case I don't want them near me anyway.
My point:
Get over yourselves - the civil rights era is over - and, as much as I hate to bust your bubble, you ain't on the freedom train.
I'm done with this controversy.
What NPR did was stupid, but Williams has now landed a better job on a better and more popular news network. So who cares?
Crack has a right to call what I said bullshit and I have a right to survive. Yes, those black kids can be nice guys. They can also be preparing to go wilding. Myth? No. It has happened and will happen again and if I'm the whitey anywhere in their vicinity I'm going to be damned sure to be wary and watchful in a way that I'm not going to be wary and watchful around a group of asian kids and fuck PC.
When you get on the subway you always have to look up and down the car to see who is on it. I mean you need to be prepared.
So if there a bunch of boisterous black kids coming home from school. Or a bunch drunken white kids coming from the hockey game.
The one thing you know is if the train is crowded but one car seems empty you should never get on.
Because there will always be a really smelly homeless guy with a bunch of bags picking at his skin while he is sitting in a puddle of urine.
I took a self-defense class around 18, and the school had guest speakers giving us little talks since I was 11 telling us 1 in 3 of us would be raped some time in our lifetimes and how to best avoid that.
So I'm going to give Estrich a break and assume she was way more aware of someone in her vicinity earlier on than Jackson who is, after all, a guy. She has been raped in her life after all. Even if she weren't, the defense is bred into you. And if you are attacked, people will go over your behavior with a fine tooth comb to see if you are partially to blame. This leads to paranoia.
I once had a dream in which someone was following me with ill intent. I had it before. At some point I realized this time it was a woman, and the (imaginary) relief that came over me was intense because now I knew I had a chance even if I had to fight her.
My brother, who is a gentle soul, notices that women clutch their bags and cross the street and do all that when he's behind him especially at night. It's just the way it is. Better clumsily overcoming the "be nice" conditioning than being dead.
Now when you are at the East Broadway stop of the F train, all of these Chinese people get on. Especially late at night when they are leaving Chinatown and their restaurant jobs.
They come piling on and push you out of the way to get a seat. Or they squat on the floor with their plastic shopping bags and their string bags full of oranges.
They usually smell pretty ripe. Like won-ton soup that has turned. Or a bad shrimp roll left out on the counter way too long. When they seat on a heated seat and the odor starts to permeate the car you really have to watch out.
When I fly the first thing I do is look for non-Muslim garbed potential Muslim guys and keep an eye on them in case they are a shoe bomber.
I see this as more than forgivable bigotry, I see it as my duty. I do feel for the guys and say "sorry about that" in my head after we've landed. I have a friend who won't grow his beard because it looks too Al- Qaeda.
But there have been two guys who have been brought down and two plane loads of people who have been saved because passengers were being paranoid - shoe bomber and some other guy.
Should they get psychiatric help? Come on. How about Fort Hood? The people who need psychiatric care are the ppl who let that pass. It's like that guy who was all shrooms and lollipops friends with the Grizzly Bears until one of them ate him on video.
- shoe bomber and some other guy.
The underpants bomber
Vs the underpants gnomes. Hey, if they're comin' for my panties, they're gonna have a fight.
Troop, what about the sneaky old Chinese woman that run through the car as soon as the doors open and immediately scarf an empty seat. It's like they are running through a Paddy Field.
Those bitches are fast, usually bent over and shifty. You can't trust them things. There was one we would always see-we called her Shanghai.
I am watching the Travel Channel right now and there is some guy that goes through Haunted Houses. He has really big guns and I am getting a little hard. I love big guns. He wears tight tshirts that accentuate his arm hotness.
I took karate class a long time ago. And one of the things they taught was how to not get into a fight. Namely be wary of your surroundings and avoid troublesome situations so that you don't NEED to fight. So if you see some suspicious characters ahead you can try to walk in a different direction OR deliberately walk in their direction with your head up so that you don't appear afraid. Situations like that, but ways to not have to fight. THen if you did have to fight you could fall back on your kicks to the groin and punches to the kneck.
However, isn't this profiling? I suppose Ritmo has a problem with that. Isn't that common sense though? What is the suspicious character. The guy standing over in the shadows with his buddy. Do I know for certainty that he is a bad guy out to kill me? No, but I make snap judgements by eyeing the situation and weighing the potential threat.
The libs of the group are apparently so unwilling to make snap judgements that they will get themselves killed or others killed for listening to them. Lack of judgement is not morally sound it's stupid. Assessing threats is using your judgement.
And what do criminals look for? People who aren't aware of their surroundings. People who don't seem to know the neighborhood or are talking on the phone and in their own world or are looking everywhere worried. THose are the marks who get robbed.
So, if you don't want to potentially get knifed one day, don't worry so much about whether it's racist to view a guy in gang colors as a threat, pay attention!
The fact that this has to even be explained only shows that liberals have rocks in their heads.
Muslims flew airplanes into the twin towers. We keep hearing about how they are planning to do so again. we hear stories about the shoe bomber or the guy with the bomb in his short, only caught because someone was paying attention to suspicious activity. That saved peoples lives.
When people say "if they were being honest" what I've found that means in this kind of situation is not "this is the way I think", but rather "My friends and family talk about this amongst ourselves, but censor ourselves in public when necessary."
Did Bill O'Reilly talk in that patronizing way on the view because he's sexist, or does he patronize everyone equally?
Did you ever hear Susan Estrich talk. I confess I never could understand what she was saying becaus I can't get past the Carol Channing thing.
Trooper should hear California Assemblyman Tom Ammiano speak.
Ha! Someone else made the same connection I did. "Nancy Hopkins, a biologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, walked out on Summers’s talk and later said that if she had not, she would have “blacked out or thrown up.”"
"...the key to understanding these non-explanations is to grasp that they should be self evident. They implicitly assume that if you “don’t get it” then there must be something wrong with you. If you require elucidation then some critical sensitivity is lacking from your make-up, just as it was absent from Larry Summers, Ginny Thomas or Juan Williams. An inability to recoil instinctively, or worse a desire for reasons signifies a reptilian stain in your bosom, which if it doesn’t make you want to rip it out, means you are the equivalent of a dead soul, lacking in some basic quality."
Richard Fernandez on the Belmont Club explaining the need for an instinctive recoil, a sensitivity, that proves you've got the moral high ground.
Faint, my lady. Faint. The roughness of the world abuses your soul.
Now I have the oppisite problems from all these poor Muslim people.
When people see me on the subway they always think;"cop."
You see a big fat Irish guy with a red face covered in donut crumbs just spells p-o-l-i-c-e.
I can't tell you the number of times I get on the subway car and one young kid in gang colors will turn to other and go 5-0h.
And I think to myself, jeeez I don't look Hawaiian.
But looking like a big fat Irish cop means all the little old ladys will crowd around you because they think it is safer.
So all you smell is mildew and Vic's Vapor Rub.
Shouting Thomas has focused on gang attire for us. He wrote, "I can't wait for the day that cunts like you are beaten in the streets...I'll be cheering on the side while the crowd beats you..." That tells us that whatever Shouting Thomas wears is "gang attire".Not that S T would risk doing any beating himself. Ritmo might have some friends who are meaner fighters than Ritmo. Not that I would harm a fly, as long as respect for other's opinions is being practiced.
Now when you get on the F Train stop at West 4th St you get all the hippie chicks. At least you did back in the day. You had to be scared of them.
I mean they smelled of patchouli oil and cunnilingus. But that wasn't the scary part.
You see they never shaved and if they rubbed some of those razor wired hairy legs against you...well that's all she wrote man. You would be bleeding all over the place.
"We're all Islamaphobic."
That's because terror works. If Muslims drive enough aircraft into lots of buildings, lo and behold, people begin to be afraid.
If Muslim suicide bombers murder enough innocent children ... then the rest of the us will fear for our childrens' sakes.
Instilling fear is the whole point of Muslim terror tactics. How else could a bunch of illiterate Imams control a billion people - except for blind fear?
Democrats are smart. They went to Harvard. They went to Yale. They want to make sure the fear works in their favor. They want to be on the "winning side." They don't want to waste a good emergency.
That's why - increasingly - they side with the killers. Democrats have strategically decided it's in their interests to be on the side of the killers because they think the terrorists are going to win.
They look forward to working with our new Muslim overlords.
"So all you smell is mildew and Vic's Vapor Rub."
And what do they smell?
Crack is correct in that you cannot correlate dress and behavior with young African Americans. I live in an area that is predominately African
American and I can tell you that getting all weak kneed when you see "gang attire" is stupid and a waste of energy. 99.9 percent of the young people I speak with who have pants on the ground are perfectly nice. We don't share the same taste in music but other than that no problem. There are, of course, areas that I avoid, both white and black, because I am not stupid. Attire is not a good data point for anything other than economic status and even then you can be way, way off.
Hagar:
"Juan Williams is a woolly headed liberal, but a totally nice guy, who wears his heart on his sleeve, and NPR should have been bright enough to realize that even their own audience would side with Williams in this brouhaha."
Preee-cisely. He's a sweetheart. He was on Fox the night Obama won, his eyes were full of tears, and he spoke quite emotionally, bless him.
"I don't wear "gang attire" and (some) people still cross the street when they see me coming."
That's the John Shaft effect, Emcee. It's not racism.
Everybody crosses the street when John Shaft walk down it. You got that John Shaft look goin' on brother.
You a bad mutherf ... shut 'cho mouth.
Crack is correct in that you cannot correlate dress and behavior with young African Americans. I live in an area that is predominately African
American and I can tell you that getting all weak kneed when you see "gang attire" is stupid and a waste of energy. 99.9 percent of the young people I speak with who have pants on the ground are perfectly nice. We don't share the same taste in music but other than that no problem. There are, of course, areas that I avoid, both white and black, because I am not stupid. Attire is not a good data point for anything other than economic status and even then you can be way, way off.
"And what do they smell?"
Dewars.
Nowadays it's mainly 6 ft. tall Russian models at West 4th St.
Those are trannies ricpic. Be careful.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
lol...Troop was supposed to say that. But he said the other day he's not a scotch drinker...
Just to remind everybody - if C-fudd says something, it is most likely a lie. He just makes shit up. For instance, in a previous thread he talked about how the Japanese have manfully owned up to their WWII crimes without being "guilt-ridden like the Germans". Bullshit. The Japanese have never owned up to the Rape of Nanking or what they did to the Koreans, instead they portray themselves as victims because we had to nuke them to defeat them. Of course his real purpose in saying this is to whine about how the Germans actually feel guilty about murdering millions of innocent Jews - he'd have been proud of it if he had the nuts to do it.
Fudd makes up shit about how he's served in the military or traveled overseas but the reality is he rarely gets out of his sweaty flophouse room. He lies about his age a lot, too, like a used-up streetwalker. He claims to be a Gen-Xer but he's really an aging boomer.
Sometimes you have to destroy a village (good-hearted liberal journalist, Williams) to win the war (On Fox and O'Reilly)
Of course Williams will be fine, all NPR has done is make itself look stupid.
This is common knowledge in the reality based community.
I hate that phrase. The essence of condescension.
99.9 percent of the young people I speak with who have pants on the ground are perfectly nice.
Which one might expect since low pants are not gang attire.
I thought tight pants are gang attire?
Or at least leotards?
"Now, if Jackson and Estrich could say that, how was Williams different?"
Williams was different because he had a financial and contractual arrangement with NPR requiring that he stick with analysis based on objective facts. If NPR is to be believed, he had been previously warned of either going over the line or getting too close to it, so I have a hard time believing that he totally forgot that while giving O'Reilly "solace".
As for the lefties going after O'Reilly? I feel certain he was patting his own back for a job well done. He successfully goaded the emotionally laden ladies of the View to perfection!
I have a great deal of respect for O'Reilly. He's a smart entertainer. He's an entertainer that no more needed emotional support from Williams than Rush Limbaugh needs in the course of his entertainment.
When you choose to play in the swamp that is political entertainment, you had best be sure you have alligators regularly trying to bite your ass.
What's the legal phrasing of it? Something like "factuality is an absolute defense against slander charges," something like that?
O'Reilly was entirely and undoubtedly condescending to that Behar woman when he said "listen to me, because you'll learn."
But, of course, it was entirely factual. She's a bit dim and emotional and has the only the most distant nodding acquaintance with critical thinking. If she'd stopped interrupting, she'd have heard a fully-formed and coherent thought, and that couldn't have been anything but good for her.
I don't know if that's an absolute defense. And it's a bit sad for O'Reilly to be saying it: The man's a blowhard and sometimes isn't, y'know, orders of magnitude more rational than Behar herself. He himself could do well to listen a bit more and bloviate less freely.
But compared to Behar, O'Reilly is an oracular font of wisdom. So there it is.
But compared to Behar, Titus's loaf is an oracular font of wisdom. So there it is.
Fixed.
That isn't Vic's, it's Noxzema.
On the subject of menthol, will blacks turn against the Democratic party over the banning of menthol cigarettes?
As I understood it, young blacks in the eighties and nineties weren't dressing like thugs to frighten whites but to intimidate each other. There was a kind of prison yard ethos. The trick was to look like the kind of semi-psycho motherfucker that you messed with at your peril--otherwise some semi-psycho motherfucker would mess with you. There was a kind of arms race in scowling and giving off menacing vibes. These scowls could have tragic consequences. Young men were shot, not for the proximate cause of a scuffed sneaker, but because the injured party with the scuffed sneaker might pull out a gun to redress the disrespect. In which case, the prudent course of action was to bust a cap in his ass before anything further went down. Things like this really happened.....The stop and frisk policy was initiated during the Giuliani years. Guns stopped being a fashion accessory, and everyone, particularly young black men, breathed a sigh of relief. Blacks now complain that stop and frisk tactics are discriminatory, but they saved a lot of black lives. Moreover, they reversed the polarities. You don't see anywhere near as many thug life wannabes as in former times.
He's a sweetheart. He was on Fox the night Obama won, his eyes were full of tears, and he spoke quite emotionally, bless him.
And then NPR's "news analyst" sagely said Obama was going to be a disaster, based on the fact Juan did his homework, and discovered Obama is a racist who has never done a damned thing in his life, right?
Rubes, rubes, everywhere.
Uhhh, Crack, you lost me. Did he really say O would be a disaster?
I don't know how anyone can learn anything from The View, anyway. Shrieking harpies yelling back and forth, interrupting each other with louder and lamer arguments, with a stupid audience applauding, what? That two women who are dumber than hair can't discuss ideas on a "discussion" show?
The View makes me ashamed to be a woman.
Penny,
What makes you think the ladies on The View did not have this whole thing planned to throw suspicion on O'Reilly instead. Why would they come back so soon if they were really that upset. They came back as if they expected Baba Walters to have cooled the situation down and they could declare victory. They apparently misread the public on that one. I have not seen much support for them and a whole lot of support for O'Reilly.
Did Bill O'Reilly talk in that patronizing way on the view because he's sexist, or does he patronize everyone equally?
He's an ass to everyone, so far as I've seen.
Ill side with Morgan Freeman here. Want race to not be an issue? Then stop talking about it.
Williams got hosed and that is NPR's prerogative. Its our prerogative to cut all federal funding for them and we should exercise that ASAP.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा