343 replies to this topic

[Steve Heard]

Maybe we have different defintions of what National issues are? I'd like to think I try to stay informed about things, but this issue never really surfaced to me until after Obama's comments.

Another thing, ALL of us wordly people on this forum didn't begin talking about it until AFTER one week of Obama's comments. It it was such a national issue how did all of us miss it?

I've read after the fact where Sharpton was kinda making noise about Obama's lack of comments and I thought it was just a few days after that, Obama made his comments. I'll let everyone sort that out for themselves.

In looking back I saw where some of Obama's Aids, were consistent in saying this was a local issue anytime they were asked about it.

Despite all of the above, I really don't begrudge the President from making comments on any issue he feels is important. He probably could have avoided "looks like my son" and possibly allowed the situation to difuse itself sooner.

His comments did the complete opposite of bringing all of us together!

This story certainly was getting airplay before Obama's comments, and there are plenty of national issues which don't get brought up on the forum.

Funny thing to me is that my conservative friends who I discussed the matter with are unanimous in the opinion that Obama's remarks added fuel to the fire, and my liberal friends who I discussed it with, black and white, are unanimous in the belief that Obamas comments were sympathetic and not inflammatory at all.

I guess it's all about perception.

Looking back, I agree that if the only phrase which is causing controversy is the one about if he had a son, he'd look like Trayvon, then we are in agreement that he could have chosen different words. I don't think he or Romney or Santorum or anyone else was wrong to comment about it.

[Robert Giacometti]

This story certainly was getting airplay before Obama's comments, and there are plenty of national issues which don't get brought up on the forum.

Funny thing to me is that my conservative friends who I discussed the matter with are unanimous in the opinion that Obama's remarks added fuel to the fire, and my liberal friends who I discussed it with, black and white, are unanimous in the belief that Obamas comments were sympathetic and not inflammatory at all.

I guess it's all about perception.

Looking back, I agree that if the only phrase which is causing controversy is the one about if he had a son, he'd look like Trayvon, then we are in agreement that he could have chosen different words. I don't think he or Romney or Santorum or anyone else was wrong to comment about it.

So if all the whites make inflamatory remarks about a minority group and they all feel its OK, then is it OK, regardless of how the minority group feels about it?

It seesm to me that if someone feels wronged or hurt by a comment, then its up to person making the comment to either clarify their intent or make amends. Maybe Obama meant something completely different then the way its being taken by many?

I agree with your assessment in that the its his comments "looking like me" that probably should have been avoided and then there probably wouldn't be any issues. Well at least with the super majority.

[Steve Heard]

So if all the whites make inflamatory remarks about a minority group and they all feel its OK, then is it OK, regardless of how the minority group feels about it?

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that the line between those who were offended and those who were not was not necessarily drawn along racial lines, but political. My conservative friends were offended, my liberal friends were not, regardless of race.

Each of us has to decide what is offensive, and we do.

I recently had the opportunity to meet and talk with Kevin Hall, author of the book Aspire. He talked about the fact that words themselves are neither good nor bad, but how they are said and how they are heard is what makes them so.

As he is fond of saying, 'Used correctly, words are the first building blocks for success and inner peace. Used incorrectly, they are capable of undermining even the best of intentions'

Maybe Obama meant something completely different then the way its being taken by many?

Exactly! To some people, it appeared to be an off the cuff remark intended to show empathy and understanding. To some it was a carefully plotted and calculated remark, designed to divide people. Neither side is likely to convince the other of their position.

[The Average Joe]

I wasn't offended, and I think too big a deal is made out of what he said, but I do think he handled it poorly and was certainly not very Presidential or a "uniter" as he claims to be.
I have already stated what I believe would have been a more appropriate response.
It will be interesting to see how people behave as the facts of the case come out...

[supermom]

[/b]

Well, there's one thing for sure....white people won't riot in the streets and destroy businesses.

http://www.insidebay...ies/ci_19188593

Who's protesting? Who's life saving?

Can we please get some perspective on this? There does not have to be an argument about color/crime.
I think this thread has gone too far.

[folsom500]

http://www.insidebay...ies/ci_19188593

Who's protesting? Who's life saving?

Can we please get some perspective on this? There does not have to be an argument about color/crime.
I think this thread has gone too far.

I think is has as well- If no two (more than one ) minds I would like to close this topic as what has been said has been said more than enough times...

I will give it a few hours for responses....

Cheers
F500

[folsom500]

Oh please, those are just stupid white people on drugs.



Duuuuuuude, why does it have to be closed? Why can't people continue to discuss it?
Unless there are any TOS violations, it should be ok to continue.
Differing opinions are good, even when we dont agree with them some times.
Is it against the rules to discuss a subject too much? ... I know a dead horse can be beat too much sometimes but this place needs a lively thread once in a while to breath some life into it.

I have no NEED to close it - so based on your comments it will be left open --

[cw68]

I’ll surprise you and say that I think you are right!

The racial divide I had hoped to allow everyone to see has been very successful and proves that we still have very deep problems with race relations. It does seem that although whites are more willing to over look race and try to move on, blacks and some other races aren’t so comfortable doing so. Only my opinion of course.

I didn’t think there was any racial issue until the black leaders began to spout off about the Martin killing being racially motivated and how Zimmerman was a “White Hispanic”.
It seemed every black spokes person had to have a speech of hate.

On the lighter side, this thread has served to increase the forums failing number of posts and some have come out from under their rocks to “BE HONEST” about how they feel, instead of being phoney.

It’s been a learning experience at least, although I know it hasn’t changed anybodies mind about the issue.

Besides, we have Fried chicken and Macaroni and Cheese to talk about now!

Sure doesn't seem as if you are willing to overlook race.

Per your suggestion to "hold those who fan the flames accountable" stop fanning the flames. ENOUGH! You aren't one of those who are being honest about how you feel. You're being phony. Be racist all you want, just don't try to bully others into agreeing with you and believing what you believe. I'm white and you do not speak for me. Quit acting as if you do. You speak for yourself.

Some good points have been made on this thread, but overall I'm saddened and disappointed by the general attitude.

[awood]

A.) My 17 year old would not be on the streets at 2am.
B.) Whenever I saw anyone wandering my neighborhood at 2am, I am suspicious.
C.) If my neighborhood had enough instances and concerns to form a neighborhood watch group, I would have to believe that there was a reason and my responsibility as a neighbor would be an active part of protecting my friends and neighbors.

None of this applies to the case in question, but describes my bias in considering such a case. It is not based on race. It is based on my opinion and experiences as a parent, neighbor and citizen.

[Steve Heard]

A.) My 17 year old would not be on the streets at 2am.
B.) Whenever I saw anyone wandering my neighborhood at 2am, I am suspicious.
C.) If my neighborhood had enough instances and concerns to form a neighborhood watch group, I would have to believe that there was a reason and my responsibility as a neighbor would be an active part of protecting my friends and neighbors.

None of this applies to the case in question, but describes my bias in considering such a case. It is not based on race. It is based on my opinion and experiences as a parent, neighbor and citizen.

How about 7pm? Would your teenager be out at 7pm? Would you be suspicious of someone wandering your neighborhood at 7pm?

Phone records show that Zimmerman called the police at 7:09pm and Martin called his girlfriend and told her he was being followed at 7:12 pm.

As far as your responsibility to your neighborhood, would it be in the best interest of your neighbors (and your family) to chase after a suspicious character at 2am or at any hour, even though you'd already called the police? What if he was armed? Get in a Old West style shootout in front of your neighbor's house?

I've had suspicious characters in my neighborhood, and I called the police, fulfilling my duties as a parent, neighbor and citizen. I wouldn't go chasing after him. It might turn out that it was just a teenager on his way home from buying candy, and he might not like me following him, and he might confront me, and I might shoot him... or get shot myself.

[supermom]

On the other hand---When I was 17 my parents said....You will be 18 in a few months. You still have time to make a few mistakes and understand that we are much more forgiving than the public or the cops. You have a curfew of 2am. Be in the house by 2am. If you will not be in the house by 2 am for any reason, you better have called at least an hour prior to that or we lock the doors and you wont come in. Your choice. Do the right thing. If you are going to drink, do the right thing. If you are going to do drugs, do inside a friends house. If you find yourself in a situation that you can't handle; call us. We will help and lecture later.


When they gave me that lecture I was so mortified that they automatically assumed I would get drunk, do drugs, never get home on time for curfew and get into bad situations: that I never did. Not once. Period. To this day I think they saved me, them and society a whole lot of grief by giving me a lot of trust, a lot of rope, and a huge dose of humility.

Just because teens are out and about does not make them bad kids. We cruised sunrise until 2am on weekends and never drank. We just had fun. Girl talk and shouting at friends in cars in other lanes. We went to the greenback theatre and watched monty python until we could quote it in our sleep. We went horseback riding on the dam at dawn, dusk or full moon to keep out of the heat in the summer. I think the worst thing I ever did as a teen was tracking poachers and destroying their base camps while they stood in deer stands on my private property or on state property. We were good kids and so were the huge majority of other kids. I have yet to have heard that this kid did anything wrong other than ignore the fake security guard and keep on walking, mouth off, and for whatever reason he turned around and fought, then got shot.

Just as women are not responsible for getting raped because they wear short skirts; teens are not responsible for a full grown person's prejudgmental attitude toward teenagers. (and there are a lot of people out there who hate teens just because they are teens.)