Full Version: Bigot? Who you calling a bigot?
I'll point out again you have yet to point out evidence of Sharpton saying or doing anything racist.
Except perhaps the yarmulke crack though Source Watch provides context:
Link
That makes him a bigot? You must have really been upset over Trent Lott or Newt Gingrich.
Except perhaps the yarmulke crack though Source Watch provides context:
QUOTE
In August 1991, an African-American boy, Gavin Cato, was killed in Crown Heights in New York city "when a car in a Hasidic rabbi's motorcade accidentally veered off the road and hit him." Subsequently, Slate reports, a "gang of black youths stabbed a rabbinical student to death, and black-Jewish tensions ran high." At Cato's funeral Sharpton said:
"The world will tell us he was killed by accident. Yes, it was a social accident. ... It's an accident to allow an apartheid ambulance service in the middle of Crown Heights. ... Talk about how Oppenheimer in South Africa sends diamonds straight to Tel Aviv and deals with the diamond merchants right here in Crown Heights. The issue is not anti-Semitism; the issue is apartheid. ... All we want to say is what Jesus said: If you offend one of these little ones, you got to pay for it. No compromise, no meetings, no kaffe klatsch, no skinnin' and grinnin'. Pay for your deeds." [3]
"If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house," he said.
"The world will tell us he was killed by accident. Yes, it was a social accident. ... It's an accident to allow an apartheid ambulance service in the middle of Crown Heights. ... Talk about how Oppenheimer in South Africa sends diamonds straight to Tel Aviv and deals with the diamond merchants right here in Crown Heights. The issue is not anti-Semitism; the issue is apartheid. ... All we want to say is what Jesus said: If you offend one of these little ones, you got to pay for it. No compromise, no meetings, no kaffe klatsch, no skinnin' and grinnin'. Pay for your deeds." [3]
"If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house," he said.
Link
That makes him a bigot? You must have really been upset over Trent Lott or Newt Gingrich.
QUOTE(turnea @ Sep 1 2007, 11:20 PM) 
I'll point out again you have yet to point out evidence of Sharpton saying or doing anything racist.
Except perhaps the yarmulke crack though Source Watch provides context:
Link
That makes him a bigot? You must have really been upset over Trent Lott or Newt Gingrich.
Except perhaps the yarmulke crack though Source Watch provides context:
QUOTE
In August 1991, an African-American boy, Gavin Cato, was killed in Crown Heights in New York city "when a car in a Hasidic rabbi's motorcade accidentally veered off the road and hit him." Subsequently, Slate reports, a "gang of black youths stabbed a rabbinical student to death, and black-Jewish tensions ran high." At Cato's funeral Sharpton said:
"The world will tell us he was killed by accident. Yes, it was a social accident. ... It's an accident to allow an apartheid ambulance service in the middle of Crown Heights. ... Talk about how Oppenheimer in South Africa sends diamonds straight to Tel Aviv and deals with the diamond merchants right here in Crown Heights. The issue is not anti-Semitism; the issue is apartheid. ... All we want to say is what Jesus said: If you offend one of these little ones, you got to pay for it. No compromise, no meetings, no kaffe klatsch, no skinnin' and grinnin'. Pay for your deeds." [3]
"If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house," he said.
"The world will tell us he was killed by accident. Yes, it was a social accident. ... It's an accident to allow an apartheid ambulance service in the middle of Crown Heights. ... Talk about how Oppenheimer in South Africa sends diamonds straight to Tel Aviv and deals with the diamond merchants right here in Crown Heights. The issue is not anti-Semitism; the issue is apartheid. ... All we want to say is what Jesus said: If you offend one of these little ones, you got to pay for it. No compromise, no meetings, no kaffe klatsch, no skinnin' and grinnin'. Pay for your deeds." [3]
"If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house," he said.
Link
That makes him a bigot? You must have really been upset over Trent Lott or Newt Gingrich.
Ok Turnea, just remember what you say the next time a white man encourages a mob with people holding up signs this time saying "kill the black man" and someone ends up dead as a result. If thats not the definition of hateful person, a racist, or a bigot then I'm afraid I don't know what is. Or the next time a white man says on the air waves that blacks can be racist while whites can't. Would that then be Racist?
If you do things like that, and you say things like that I don't care what color you are, including white or black, that means you obviously have a race issue. You still haven't given me the reasons why Sharpton isn't a bigot or racist however which is fine, but I just wonder how that sort of loyalty would play into the research you do when you create a forum on the race problem amongst conservatives.
with all due respect.
When did he ever encourage the mob?
He wasn't as disciplined as King or Shuttelsworth. In the "good old days" the march would be canceled for signs like that. But he never advocated violence and the people who killed that student had nothing to do with Sharpton.
I'll not argue that Sharpton was imprudent attempting direct action with people who were not committed to non-violence, clearly he hasn't been reading up on satyagraha, but again there was nothing racist about his actions.
Seeing as this is your accusation, you still haven't given me the reasons why Sharpton is a bigot.
Does this make sense?
You've listed a lot of his actions you take issue with, but none that actually show bigotry.
He wasn't as disciplined as King or Shuttelsworth. In the "good old days" the march would be canceled for signs like that. But he never advocated violence and the people who killed that student had nothing to do with Sharpton.
I'll not argue that Sharpton was imprudent attempting direct action with people who were not committed to non-violence, clearly he hasn't been reading up on satyagraha, but again there was nothing racist about his actions.
QUOTE(net2007)
If you do things like that, and you say things like that I don't care what color you are, including white or black, that means you obviously have a race issue. You still haven't given me the reasons why Sharpton isn't a bigot or racist however which is fine, but I just wonder how that sort of loyalty would play into the research you do when you create a forum on the race problem amongst conservatives.
Seeing as this is your accusation, you still haven't given me the reasons why Sharpton is a bigot.
Does this make sense?
You've listed a lot of his actions you take issue with, but none that actually show bigotry.
QUOTE(turnea @ Sep 3 2007, 01:23 PM)
When did he ever encourage the mob?
He wasn't as disciplined as King or Shuttelsworth. In the "good old days" the march would be canceled for signs like that. But he never advocated violence and the people who killed that student had nothing to do with Sharpton.
I'll not argue that Sharpton was imprudent attempting direct action with people who were not committed to non-violence, clearly he hasn't been reading up on satyagraha, but again there was nothing racist about his actions.
Seeing as this is your accusation, you still haven't given me the reasons why Sharpton is a bigot.
Does this make sense?
You've listed a lot of his actions you take issue with, but none that actually show bigotry.
He wasn't as disciplined as King or Shuttelsworth. In the "good old days" the march would be canceled for signs like that. But he never advocated violence and the people who killed that student had nothing to do with Sharpton.
I'll not argue that Sharpton was imprudent attempting direct action with people who were not committed to non-violence, clearly he hasn't been reading up on satyagraha, but again there was nothing racist about his actions.
QUOTE(net2007)
If you do things like that, and you say things like that I don't care what color you are, including white or black, that means you obviously have a race issue. You still haven't given me the reasons why Sharpton isn't a bigot or racist however which is fine, but I just wonder how that sort of loyalty would play into the research you do when you create a forum on the race problem amongst conservatives.
Seeing as this is your accusation, you still haven't given me the reasons why Sharpton is a bigot.
Does this make sense?
You've listed a lot of his actions you take issue with, but none that actually show bigotry.
Did you even read the article that Larry Elder wrote? When did he ever encourage a mob? Read the article, thats all I can say, I didn't pull that out of thin air. That by itself shows he is at the very least in part responsible for a murder, and all this over a traffic accident that lead to the death of a black girl. Thats something that is unfortunate, but he provoked a sensitive crowd to take offense to this as if it were done on purpose. Another act of rage against African Americans, just as he believes everything is, including someone saying something as non specific to blacks as "nappy headed hoes". That for example he claims was racist, while in reality it was more sexist than anything. If he wants to live out his life as if he is a constant victim of white racism thats his business, but he isn't fooling anybody, well not many anyway
and he deserves the constant stream of criticism he gets. I only wish it was enough to affect his personal life as he has done to so many others. To further address your initial question When did he ever encourage the mob? I'm not quite sure I know why your confused unless you didn't read the article. What was he supposed to be blind and deaf when he was leading those protesters? Did he not hear that his own protesters were screaming out things like "kill the Jew" While one guy held up a sign that said "The White Man Is the Devil"? Thats reminiscent of the behavior of the KKK, and there is no excuse for it. The truth is I didn't even know about the details of the Crown Heights riot until recently, but you know what? I am not surprised, not at all. I came to the conclusion he was a racist bigot before I even read about that in detail.
And if that, not to mention everything else I have mentioned on him means he is not a racist or bigot there is no way in heaven or hell that people should be coming to the conclusion that Imus is racist, yet that I hear frequently, ironically from Al Sharpton above anyone, so in light of that you can add Hypocrite to the list, and thats my conclusion. He is a racist Bigot, who is a hypocrite to boot. Now you can believe what you want, but did I give you logical reasons that explain my assertions on him? Sure did, you happen not to agree with those reasons which is your business, but Id still like to hear why none of this is evidence for the claim I am making.
If your assertion is perhaps people are just being too hard on old Al. Funny thing because from what Ive read on him, most of which I have shown, he has made a bad habit of overreacting on just about anyone so long as their skin color doesn't match his own, and for people like that I have no sympathy.
QUOTE(Bikerdad @ Aug 1 2007, 06:07 PM)
While getting lunch today, I was reading some of Bernard Goldberg's book Arrogance. In it, he spends a fair amount of time examining how the Main Stream Media (aka MSM) approaches the issue of race. One of his arguments is that the overwhelmingly liberal media takes extraordinary measures, both institutionally and also individually, to avoid being called racists or bigots.
And that is the springboard for this thread. Not to examine whether or not Goldberg's assertion is correct, but rather, to ask these questions:
1} Why would they work so hard to avoid the accusation?
2} How can a person respond to accusations of racism or bigotry, especially when the accused believes the accusation to be false?
And that is the springboard for this thread. Not to examine whether or not Goldberg's assertion is correct, but rather, to ask these questions:
1} Why would they work so hard to avoid the accusation?
2} How can a person respond to accusations of racism or bigotry, especially when the accused believes the accusation to be false?
The so-called Liberals want Afro-Americans and Hispanics to believe that they are rooting for them when in fact the opposite is true:
The Racist Roots of Gun Control
The historical record provides compelling evidence that racism underlies gun control laws -- and not in any subtle way. Throughout much of American history, gun control was openly stated as a method for keeping blacks and Hispanics "in their place," and to quiet the racial fears of whites. This paper is intended to provide a brief summary of this unholy alliance of gun control and racism, and to suggest that gun control laws should be regarded as "suspect ideas," analogous to the "suspect classifications" theory of discrimination already part of the American legal system.
QUOTE(Contumacious @ Sep 3 2007, 06:50 PM)
The so-called Liberals want Afro-Americans and Hispanics to believe that they are rooting for them when in fact the opposite is true:
Really, really credible or maybe incredible is the word. First, you make a blanket statement about liberals.
http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/cramer.racism.html
Then you link us to Clayton E. Cramer, a software engineer from Boise, Idaho, who claims to have a MA in history.
From the books he has published, click here, it seems Cramer is acting as an advocate for guns enthusuasts rather than an objective historian.
Despite, the proclaimed concern for Blacks and Hispanics, Cramer is a conservative white man, who does book reviews for the
National Review Online
Picture of Clayton E. Cramer
I’m sure his interest in Blacks and Hispanics is heat felt and utterly dwarfs his desire to promotion gun ownership.
QUOTE(BoF @ Sep 4 2007, 12:50 AM)
Really, really credible or maybe incredible is the word. First, you make a blanket statement about liberals.
BoF, I agree with you that the blanket statement is overly broad, but your response...
QUOTE
Then you link us to Clayton E. Cramer, a software engineer from Boise, Idaho, who claims to have a MA in history.
"Claims"? What possible reason do you have for doubting him? I'm a (former) software guy who has a Bachelor's in Liberal Studies. (See, now y'all know why I'm here, field work. 
)QUOTE
From the books he has published, click here, it seems Cramer is acting as an advocate for guns enthusuasts rather than an objective historian.
Actually, based upon the reputation of the publisher, "objective historian" seems to be far more likely. He's also been published in peer reviewed law journals.
QUOTE
Despite, the proclaimed concern for Blacks and Hispanics, Cramer is a conservative white man, who does book reviews for the
National Review Online
Picture of Clayton E. Cramer
omg, he's a "conservative white man", ignore everything he says!!!National Review Online
Picture of Clayton E. Cramer
BoF, that's probably the most glaring ad hominem I've seen on this board in a long time.
QUOTE(Bikerdad @ Sep 4 2007, 04:12 AM)
QUOTE
Despite, the proclaimed concern for Blacks and Hispanics, Cramer is a conservative white man, who does book reviews for the
National Review Online
Picture of Clayton E. Cramer
omg, he's a "conservative white man", ignore everything he says!!!National Review Online
Picture of Clayton E. Cramer
BoF, that's probably the most glaring ad hominem I've seen on this board in a long time.
This was not meant as an ad hominem, but a parallel. If "liberals" do not have empathy for Blacks and Hispanics, then maybe, just maybe, "conservatives" don't either.
At any rate, we had a blanket statement about "liberals" backed up by a totally disconnected-and-irrelevant-to-the-topic link to a gun article. I tried to counter both.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.