Did Don Imus Go Too Far (Again) With His Latest Comments?

Oh and with your slew of political links...Clinton's "sexism" is also largely media-generated with a side of dirty politics.

I couldn't vote for her because of her record and corruption. What parts are in her pants-suit don't matter to me and I'll bet it doesn't to the FAR majority of voters. There are plenty of women I could cast a vote for, but she's not one of them.

Same goes with Obama. I can vote for a black man, just not THAT black man. When I listen to him, I don't hear a person of color, I hear someone I don't agree with. But yeah, I'm a racist, sexist, bigotted homophobe because I oppose him and others in his party! I'm also a bitter Pennsylvanian who clings to my guns and Bible. :D

I do not believe that racism or sexism are still large problems in this nation. They would be pretty much non-existent if the media and politicians wouldn't manufacture these controversies for their own gain. Also, if we would finally shut up those who claim they're fighting racism like Jackson, Sharpton, the NAACP, the ACLU, plus stopped using laws that require us to examine and discriminate based on race (affirmative action, NFL coaching interviews, etc.), we'd find that most people are looked at for their own merits and actions, not by the color of their skin. Constantly emphasizing race, even if intentions are good, not only prolongs and puts racism on life support, but it creates more tension. If we'd stop doing things that put the issue in our minds, I bet the far majority of us would live our lives day-to-day looking at people without even thinking about their skin color. Unity parades and diversity events do not unify, they point out our differences and "celebrate" why our cultures are not the same. Rather than maintaining our own African, Hispanic, whatever cultures, we should all realize we're Americans together and that in itself is its own culture. Sure, it's OK to be proud of where your family came from, but why continue to use it to separate yourself from the rest of society? Instead of preaching diversity and creating racial and cultural divides, we should just live together.

I wish the numbers were on your side (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/21/AR2008062101825.html?hpid=topnews).


Overall, 51 percent call the current state of race relations "excellent" or "good," about the same as said so five years ago. That is a relative thaw from more negative ratings in the 1990s, but the gap between whites and blacks on the issue is now the widest it has been in polls dating to early 1992.

More than six in 10 African Americans now rate race relations as "not so good" or "poor," while 53 percent of whites hold more positive views. Opinions are also divided along racial lines, though less so, on whether blacks face discrimination. There is more similarity on feelings of personal racial prejudice: Thirty percent of whites and 34 percent of blacks admit such sentiments.

I wish the numbers were on your side (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/21/AR2008062101825.html?hpid=topnews).
Thats because all the people like Al Sharpton the national news etc... keep telling us that race relations are poor.

Thats because all the people like Al Sharpton the national news etc... keep telling us that race relations are poor.

How do you know that race relations are poor because of the media and people like Sharpton? That's pretty amazing that you are able to enter the minds of hundreds of millions, determine whether they are racist and if so why, and then reach some universal conclusion about the existence/cause of problematic race relations.

Anecdotally, I have seen a fair amount of racism from whites, blacks, asians, latinos, etc. My girlfriend's family is from the South and whenever I go to visit them, I am astounded by how bad the racism is (I have many interesting/sad stories to share). I currently live in Wisconsin and many people here hate immigrants and Native Americans quite openly. Part of my family is Korean and they openly bash Chinese and Japanese people. Another part of my family is from California, and the way they talk about latinos is disgusting.

Neighborhoods are highly segregated, interracial couples still encounter problems (I know from my own experiences), groups of friends are usually from one racial group, etc. In my experience, we've come an awfully long way since the 1950s, but we've still got a ways to go.

Thats because all the people like Al Sharpton the national news etc... keep telling us that race relations are poor.

Al Sharpton rubs a lot of people the wrong way including myself but to say that he is responsible for racial tension is a stretch. If people are taking their queues from people like him and the media to determine how they should feel with respect to race relations god help us.

Al Sharpton rubs a lot of people the wrong way including myself but to say that he is responsible for racial tension is a stretch. If people are taking their queues from people like him and the media to determine how they should feel with respect to race relations god help us.
No he and others are on the news allways preaching about how bad it is and such. If you hear something enough then people tend to believe it. I think if you asked people how they feel personaly abou race relations it would be better then if you asked how they think race relations are in the US in general. Its like everyone hates congress but when asked they like their congressman.

Slavery was put to an end by one side of this nation (The Union) on moral grounds (got to love Abe Lincoln) as well as tactical grounds. And of course who can forget the Jim Crow Years that only ended 40 years ago.and the Republican Party. :duel:

(just throwing a little zing out there, not trying to start another debate):)

and the Republican Party. :duel:

(just throwing a little zing out there, not trying to start another debate):)


Only by name, not ideology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_South). It's actually pretty fascinating how the transformation took place. The party of Lincoln is a nice marketing slogan though.

Oh and with your slew of political links...Clinton's "sexism" is also largely media-generated with a side of dirty politics.



As I recall your original argument was that minorities like Al Sharpton drum up controversy in the media around racial issues, and that similar woman's groups don't exist to protest the sexism of Howard Stern (who also gets away with indulging in a level of racism that dwarfs Imus's but whatever) or at least that the media doesn't take up these issues. I was pointing out that, at a time when sexism in America has been one of the dominant news stories for the last two months, drummed up and insisted upon by angry woman's groups, it's perhaps not so accurate to suggest that minorities are more actively charging discrimination in the media than woman. It's simply not true right now.

You can't have it both ways. You can't boycott the liberal media and then make sweeping arguments about this same media, because you run the risk of looking like you don't know what you are talking about.

Only by name, not ideology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_South). It's actually pretty fascinating how the transformation took place. The party of Lincoln is a nice marketing slogan though.

Race was certainly a major factor in the transformation of southern voting patterns, but abortion, the drug culture, sexual liberation, and the idea that the Democratic Party sort of looks down on religion were also important. It's tempting for Democrats to pretend that the switch was merely the result of the racism of white southerners, but these other issues are critical as well.

In addition, I think there has been an attempt to convince people that the Democrats have always been for racial justice. Not so. I beleive that of the 27 votes against the 1964 Civil Rights Act, 22 were Democrats. Every Senator from the old south (save Ralph Yarborough of Texas), plus Robert Byrd of West Virginia comprised that 22. The Democrats had a southern strategy and benefitted from it greatly long before the Republicans did.

From Wiki:

By party and region
Note : "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederate_States_of_America) in the American Civil War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War). "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.

The original House version:

Southern Democrats: 7-87 (7%-93%)
Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0%-100%)


Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%-6%)
Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%-15%)
The Senate version:

Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5%-95%) (only Senator Ralph Yarborough (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Yarborough) of Texas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas) voted in favor)
Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0%-100%) (this was Senator John Tower (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Tower) of Texas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas))
Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%-2%) (only Senator Robert Byrd (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd) of West Virginia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Virginia) opposed the measure)
Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%-16%) (Senators Bourke Hickenlooper (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourke_Hickenlooper) of Iowa (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa), Barry Goldwater (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Goldwater) of Arizona (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona), Edwin L. Mechem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_L._Mechem) of New Mexico (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Mexico), Milward L. Simpson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milward_L._Simpson) of Wyoming (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyoming), and Norris H. Cotton (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norris_H._Cotton) of New Hampshire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Hampshire) opposed the measure)
Ralph Yarborough had an interesting career. Democrats in Texas attempted to play the race card way back in the day. Again from Wiki:

Ralph Yarborough was urged to run again for state attorney general in 1952, and he planned to do so until he received a personal affront by Governor Allan Shivers who told him not to run. Out of spite, Ralph Yarborough then ran in the primaries for governor in 1952 and 1954 against the conservative Shivers, drawing support from labor unions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_union) and liberals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal). Yarborough denounced the corrupt "Shivercrats (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shivercrats)" for veterans' fraud in the General Land Office and for endorsing the Republican Eisenhower/Nixon ticket for President instead of Democrat Adlai Stevenson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adlai_Stevenson) in 1952. Shivers portrayed Yarborough as an integrationist supported by communists and labor unions. The 1954 election was particularly nasty in its race-baiting by Shivers as it was the year that Brown v. Board of Education (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Board_of_Education) was decided, and Shivers made the most of the court decision in order to play on voters' racism. In one particularly odious episode, a black man was hired to drive around East Texas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Texas) in a Cadillac full of Yarborough stickers and to be obnoxious and insult gas station attendants. The man would say he was busy and had to hurry "to work for Mr. Yarborough." Yarborough made it to the primary runoff and came surprisingly close to beating Shivers despite receiving almost no newspaper endorsements, being out-fundraised, and being the target of nasty attacks

Certainly race wasn't the only factor. It was definitely a culmination of many things but the civil rights issue was the straw that broke the camels back. LBJ really captured the sentiments many democrats felt at the time which was the loss of the southern vote. He said to an aid after signing the civil rights act "we have just lost the South for a generation." Give JFK some props, he was a democrat who had tremendous foresight.

AYuVKbEPgoc

vitqaJ7VKqQ