and here we go. . . . white on black 'knockout' feds step in on hate crime

[Svnla]

Sorry but your posts reminded me of this

http://www.guavaleaf.com/video/704/Dave-Chapelles-Show--Racial-Draft#sthash.jtdEYmfJ.dpbs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDfcbaSGzwA

Love Chapelles, especially his "when keep it real go wrong" skits. From your own links, so H. Berry and E. Jetter are whites now as D. Chappelles said. LOL

IIRC, you were the one that asked to see the so called horrible PM's list in full context as another poster accused me of and of course, there was no such thing. The ghetto moron made up the whole thing.

How sad and pathetic that some of the people that they could not debate with facts and logic but throw around groundless accusations.

 

[TerryMathews]

one of the kids was white

Only as much as Tiger Woods and Barry Obama are.

Shame about this white President that fooled everyone. When do you think we will elect our first black President?

 

[xj0hnx]

So you dont even know about instances of hate crimes towards whites, and yet you feel the need to act as an authority on the subject? Interesting that.

But lets talk about society favoring one race over another. Shall we discuss fire fighter hiring practices where minorities are given lower standards than whites when it comes to promotions and hiring? What about test scores that are set by race, allowing minorities to score lower and yet be rewarded at a higher rate? Do you REALLY want to go down this road, because once the facts hit you int eh fgace you may be a bit surprised to really understand where society is at today regarding favoring one race over another.

Either that or you will simply ignore the facts, which is pretty telling in its own right.

Eh ...you're talking to CanOWorms, the biggest self hating, white guilt wallowing fruitcake on the board.

 

[CanOWorms]

So you dont even know about instances of hate crimes towards whites, and yet you feel the need to act as an authority on the subject? Interesting that.

But lets talk about society favoring one race over another. Shall we discuss fire fighter hiring practices where minorities are given lower standards than whites when it comes to promotions and hiring? What about test scores that are set by race, allowing minorities to score lower and yet be rewarded at a higher rate? Do you REALLY want to go down this road, because once the facts hit you int eh fgace you may be a bit surprised to really understand where society is at today regarding favoring one race over another.

Either that or you will simply ignore the facts, which is pretty telling in its own right.

You live in some weird bubble. Some of those minorities may test lower because the tests are written in the realm of white privilege. Additionally, they may lack the resources to study because white students often have access to wealth that was accumulated through centuries in their families, and in particular through slavery and Jim Crow where others were economically depressed to benefit whites. With all the benefits, a middle class white male student should be scoring perfect scores. A disadvantaged student (e.g., a poor white or black student), with less resources, scoring slightly less than an advantaged student (e.g., white middle class male) is impressive to me and is someone who has more potential. Sometimes I wonder what's going on with white males who work in the private sector who don't generate at least $100 million in economic impact. Privilege is just being wasted! The country needs deep reform to redistribute resources so that they're more efficiently used.

I have no problem going down this road. Our entire country is established to perpetuate white privilege. Don't need to look beyond constitutional jurisprudence regarding the 2nd amendment, which has taken a strange evolution to cater to conservative white culture. America is supposed to be about egalitarianism, not white privilege.

 

[xj0hnx]

I have to disagree, folks don't go knocking out old people for a social experiment. They may use that as some form of excuse for their actions, but it takes a special kind of disregard for humans to do it.

he targeted him because he was black, he said so himself. by definition a hate crime, even if he didn't hate the guy.

Targeting because he was black, but not necessarily because he hated blacks. Maybe he did do it because he hates blacks, but if his reason holds true, there is a difference. It also exposes why the hate crimes modifier is bullshit, and a double standard.

I read this situation, and I think, I don't care what the motivation was. Anyone who does this should be removed from society. You don't knock someone out to impress your friends, and you certainly don't knock someone out to "test" a double-standard (which doesn't even make sense to do, sounds more like "I'm caught, let's think of something to tell the media"). Both situations deserve harsh punishment.

I totally agree, he has no place in society, no matter his reasons.

 

[xj0hnx]

You live in some weird bubble. Some of those minorities may test lower because the tests are written in the realm of white privilege. Additionally, they may lack the resources to study because white students often have access to wealth that was accumulated through centuries in their families, and in particular through slavery and Jim Crow where others were economically depressed to benefit whites. With all the benefits, a middle class white male student should be scoring perfect scores. A disadvantaged student (e.g., a poor white or black student), with less resources, scoring slightly less than an advantaged student (e.g., white middle class male) is impressive to me and is someone who has more potential. Sometimes I wonder what's going on with white males who work in the private sector who don't generate at least $100 million in economic impact. Privilege is just being wasted! The country needs deep reform to redistribute resources so that they're more efficiently used.

I have no problem going down this road. Our entire country is established to perpetuate white privilege. Don't need to look beyond constitutional jurisprudence regarding the 2nd amendment, which has taken a strange evolution to cater to conservative white culture. America is supposed to be about egalitarianism, not white privilege.

On top if being completely retarded, you seriously suffer from one of the worst cases of white guilt out there. There is no special place where whitey gets to go learn things that society (The Man) is keeping hidden from minority children, that's your white guilt, and imagination telling you fibs.

 

[Darwin333]

I realize the one on the right (Michael Jones) is light, but he isn't white. I wouldn't exactly call him black, either, but it wouldn't surprise me if he calls himself so.

Looks white, has a name like Michael Jones.... Dunno, until proven otherwise I am going to personally assume he is white. Just my .02

 

[Sunburn74]

Here's a challenge for you. Explain to me why white names would be picked over black names? There has to be a reason, and it isn't racism.

Hint: It's the same reason why Indians, Chinese, Russian names would be overlooked as well.

Um... I have no idea what you're driving at. The experiment picked reasonable names (nothing wild) that had ethnic connotations and evaluated for response from employers. Everything else was on the resume was exactly the same. The only variable was the employers response to their racial expectation of the name. If the employer receiving a resume, has the expectation of a black candidate, that candidate in the employment market is treated markedly differently than his identical caucasian counterpart BEFORE they even meet him. That was the experiment. The experiment didn't evaluate other races and this same phenomena may be true to various degrees there (even with favorable benefits shown in certain races as there are positive stereotypes that exist; ie indians and chinese often have positive stereotypes of being gifted in mathematics and science for example, and african americans in sports and etc), but that is besides the point. This is a discussion about african americans in relation to whites and so that is why the study is relevant because it evaluated just that.

And if the resume had a name like Cletus Appalachianbumpkin how many callbacks did it get?....

Well, you can't answer that because they never run the test with white names like that for some reason. I wonder why? :hmm:

This too is a moot point unless you're citing that the name Tyrone Jackson is as ridiculous a name as Cletus Appalachianbumpkin, at which point I'd call you a racist and ask you to go get counseling. No experiment/study evaluates everything. The study didn't aim to evaluate extremes in nomenclature. It simply aimed to see the effect size of reasonable but ethnic sounding african american names on their employability.

The results were clear. If you have a white name, you often are not even competing with the full employment market as potential and equally qualified but ethnic candidates get screened out so early.

 

[Geosurface]

Looks white, has a name like Michael Jones.... Dunno, until proven otherwise I am going to personally assume he is white. Just my .02

You honestly see a full blooded white person when you look at his mugshot? Look particularly at the nose and lip area.

I didn't make up the standard our society uses of the "one drop rule" I'm just working within that framework. He is not white by society's traditional definition of that.

 

[umbrella39]

Nice to see the anthropologists finally show up... from Stromtrooper U no less...

 

[TerryMathews]

Nice to see the anthropologists finally show up... from Stromtrooper U no less...

Who? The one who said "With a name like Michael Jones, he's gotta be white"?

Paging Colin Powell: sorry dude, you're white. Your name just isn't black enough.

 

[Geosurface]

Our entire country is established to perpetuate white privilege.

America is supposed to be about egalitarianism, not white privilege.

How do you reconcile these two statements? The entire country is established to perpetuate white privilege... but it's not "supposed to be about" white privilege? Doesn't being established to perpetuate it actually mean that's exactly what it's supposed to be about?

I guess perhaps we should look at some things those who founded and shaped this country said about it to see whether you're right about it being established that way...

"When freed, [the Negro] is to be removed from beyond the reach of mixture." - Thomas Jefferson

"The number of purely white people in the world is proportionately very small ... I could wish their numbers were increased." - Benjamin Franklin

“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.” - Abraham Lincoln

"This is a country for white men, and by God, as long as I am President it shall be a government for white men" - Andrew Johnson, Lincoln's successor

"I have a strong feeling of repugnance when I think of the negro being made our political equal." - James Garfield

"I have not been able to think out any solution to the terrible problem offered by the presence of the Negro on this continent." - Teddy Roosevelt

and the list goes on, and on, and on. Particularly the founding fathers were unabashedly in favor of this being an exclusively white country permanently. I am aware of no dissenting voice among them on that point.

I offer no endorsement of these statements and in fact they are rather hard to read for a modern citizen, I merely offer them as supporting evidence for your initial contention that the entire country was established to perpetuate white privilege. I think that's true. I'm just looking at this purely from the perspective of what was the stated purpose of the country, and how does your agenda line up with it?

So the question is, what did you mean when you said America is supposed to be about egalitarianism, not white privilege? When did that change in the purpose of the country happen? And if someone argued that dismantling white privilege or "crushing" it as you put it, was actually contrary to the purpose of this country, wouldn't they have some pretty strong evidence in their favor?

 

[Braznor]

I'm not usually a guy to get offended by racism. I just laugh over it most of the times since the racist perpetrators are dumbfucks anyway.

But since this guy did this thing to prove something outrageously, the state should similarly increase the outrage by frying him in an electric chair.

Stupid must meet another level of stupidity to cancel itself out.

Sometimes two wrongs can indeed cancel themselves out.

Note, I would have recommended the same thing even if the situation was racially reversed.

 

[Geosurface]

With regard to this idiot who punched the elderly black guy, I couldn't be more against what he did and hope he is punished severely. But not as a hate crime.

 

[Sunburn74]

Probably not a hate crime but I understand the charge. You also have to keep in mind that likely there'll be some plea bargain reached. Prosecutors will try and pin as much on this guy so when it comes to bargaining they'll have more leverage.

 

[CanOWorms]

How do you reconcile these two statements? The entire country is established to perpetuate white privilege... but it's not "supposed to be about" white privilege? Doesn't being established to perpetuate it actually mean that's exactly what it's supposed to be about?

It's quite easy. The country, when founded, was based on white supremacy, but the country as an entity isn't supposed to be. The country has evolved beyond white supremacy, yet many of our institutions and society still clutch at it.

 

[Incorruptible]

Gotta love the hypocrisy and double standards of obama and his cronies. There were multiple cases of black on white and these idiots said nothing.

This moron and all the other idiots should be locked up.

 

[Geosurface]

the country as an entity isn't supposed to be.

According to whom and based on what?

 

[lotus503]

According to whom and based on what?

culture and society based on the constitution.

 

[Geosurface]

culture and society based on the bill of rights.

The people who wrote the bill of rights didn't intend it to be applied to all of humanity.

 

[lotus503]

The people who wrote the bill of rights didn't intend it to be applied to all of humanity.

The bill of rights and its intent is only given meaning by culture and society that it represents. Its part of why we have amendments, because culture and society determine its application and can adjust accordingly.

 

[Geosurface]

The bill of rights and its intent is only given meaning by culture and society that it represents. Its part of why we have amendments, because culture and society determine its application and can adjust accordingly.

True.

 

[Sunburn74]

Gotta love the hypocrisy and double standards of obama and his cronies. There were multiple cases of black on white and these idiots said nothing.

This moron and all the other idiots should be locked up.

You don't seem to understand why hate crime laws were instituted in the first place. There is intrinsically a double standard which society accepted as existing a priori to passing these laws which made these laws necessary.