Holder: US a nation of cowards on racial matters

[Dead...Again]

http://www.newsweek.com/id/185286

Stuff like this really bothers me. He complains that we're a bunch of cowards because we won't discuss racial matters. Doesn't he see that oversensitivity by minorities has made us this way? How can we openly discuss race if we get labeled a racist every time we say something that a black or other minority group doesn't like?

[Skud]

But from this quote here:

""If we're going to ever make progress, we're going to have to have the guts, we have to have the determination, to be honest with each other. It also means we have to be able to accept criticism where that is justified," Holder told reporters after the speech."

I think that his saying we have "to be able to accept criticism where that is justified" is saying that the groups that have been calling whites racist every time they say "excuse me, but" should be able see valid, factually based criticism as just that.

Some folks, whites and minorities, factor race into evey interaction with other races, on a daily, perpetual basis (sadly enough...can't see past their own noses)...see anything but kind words as having racial origins...even if the negative words result from an offensive/nihilistic act on the part of the "oppressed". This results in the unbalanced, unenlightened world that some live in, in which the victim can do no wrong and the victimizers can do no right. I believe that Holder is actually trying to address that side as well...which is a good thing, because if someone of another race were to say that everyone should be held accountable for their actions, they would be written off as being racist by many.

So, if I understand his speech correctly, the era of political correctness is finally over! Let it rip, boys!!!! :wink:

[Duke{CLR}]

I read that earlier and I was thinking that it's the PC crowd that has shut down any conversations like this and I doubt that will end any time soon. :roll:

[RyeWhiskey]

It pretty much is. When you have 'Race-only' or 'Gender' specific events, programs, that type of thing, that is a form of bigotry and a spade should be called a spade. I personnally never owned slaves, yet I'm subjected to reverse bigotry every other day. Where do programs and help come into play when you live in an area where you are the minority. They don't, you suck it up and live.

[Dead...Again]

But from this quote here:

""If we're going to ever make progress, we're going to have to have the guts, we have to have the determination, to be honest with each other. It also means we have to be able to accept criticism where that is justified," Holder told reporters after the speech."

I think that his saying we have "to be able to accept criticism where that is justified" is saying that the groups that have been calling whites racist every time they say "excuse me, but" should be able see valid, factually based criticism as just that.

Some folks, whites and minorities, factor race into evey interaction with other races, on a daily, perpetual basis (sadly enough...can't see past their own noses)...see anything but kind words as having racial origins...even if the negative words result from an offensive/nihilistic act on the part of the "oppressed". This results in the unbalanced, unenlightened world that some live in, in which the victim can do no wrong and the victimizers can do no right. I believe that Holder is actually trying to address that side as well...which is a good thing, because if someone of another race were to say that everyone should be held accountable for their actions, they would be written off as being racist by many.

So, if I understand his speech correctly, the era of political correctness is finally over! Let it rip, boys!!!! :wink:
I agree with you Skud, he does touch on it. However, I don't think he stresses enough what the problem is. If we are ever going to be able to discuss politically incorrect issues, people will have to quit playing the race card every time someones says something they don't agree with. Political Correctness has halted open discussion in this country.

He makes a bigger issue out of the fact that people don't hang out with members of other races. I do see that as an issue (mainly because the more you hang out with people of other races, the more you understand them), but I don't think that is what is stifling discussions of racial differences.

BTW I wish your last statement were true! :)

[Dead...Again]

NAACP head wants N.Y. Post editor, cartoonist axed (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-02-21-nypost-cartoon_N.htm)
Looks like nothing has changed...

[DougBob]

Sounds to me like some more of the associations with the racist comments stuck in some peoples heads. I looked at the cartoon and didn't think of racist related thoughts, I thought of the bill was written by an idiot aka a monkey could do it...

[Duke{CLR}]

Its funny how they didn't complain when similar cartoons were made about Condi Rice.

[mapes]

I looked at the cartoon. I don't think its overtly racist. However a couple of thoughts. One black folks might be a tad upset because there is a long history of calling blacks monkey's ... So maybe that touched a nerve. Personally I don't really get the cartoon at all. On some level though a political cartoonist is supposed to upset people. If he doesn't well he's not doing his job..

[linemanstud]

In order for this country to become comfortable with talking openly about race, people need to know that they won't be bludgeoned for drawing up a satirical cartoon. Also if they want people to be able to talk about race they should do away with organizations such as the NAACP whos very existence is pulling America in the wrong direction and is meant to intimidate people into being sensitive about it.

[Dead...Again]

Its funny how they didn't complain when similar cartoons were made about Condi Rice.
Not to mention the fact that I don't know how many times I saw GW caricatured as a monkey...

I didn't really get the joke either, although I think he may have meant what DougBob said (a monkey could have written the bill). Either way, groups like the NAACP will always stand in the way of open discussions of racial differences. Their whole purpose (currently) is to throw the race card when they think it is beneficial to them.

[Skud]

In order for this country to become comfortable with talking openly about race, people need to know that they won't be bludgeoned for drawing up a satirical cartoon. Also if they want people to be able to talk about race they should do away with organizations such as the NAACP whos very existence is pulling America in the wrong direction and is meant to intimidate people into being sensitive about it.

I remember the case of the "Jena Six", when Sharpton and thousands of others were marching in defence of the guys who mob beat the white kid. None of the protestors bothered to say that violence is wrong, or that beating a person six on one and kicking him while he is down is a cowardly, uncivilized act. They protested because the guys who participated were tried as adults: not even acknowledging the fact that if the race of the victims and perps were turned around it would probably have been called a hate crime, and given a much heftier sentence...

Sorry...your words struck a nerve. :(

[Tuck]

You know, it's really easy for a black man to say we're cowards for not discussing racial issues openly and honestly. Because a black man probably won't get fired if he says something that can be taken the wrong way.

But we live in a media saturated culture that warns white folks everyday that what you say can ruin your life, even if it's innocent. You guys have already discussed the NY Post cartoon, which, IMO, had nothing to do with race. But because the president is black and the cartoon depicted a chimp, many jumped on this as a racial incident. And at this very moment the so-called black leadership of this country is lobbying to get the cartoonist fired.

Another incident that comes to mind happened in Washington, DC a few years back. A white DC employee was speaking with two black colleagues about budget matters, and he said something to the effect of, "well, I don't want to be niggardly about this." If you don't know, "niggardly" has absolutely nothing to do with race. It means stingy or miserly, penny pinching.

Anyway, the two black colleagues were aghast at what they'd head. And even when it was explained to them what the word meant, they still insisted the white guy be fired. He was, although he was later offered a different job and a pay cut.

Which brings me to the next concept: we white people are expected not only to be able to predict black reactions to overt or subtle racial comments, but we're also held to a standard that says we should expect them to misinterpret some things as well. So using an innocent word that might remind someone of racial issues is forbidden, as is using imagery that can be construed as offensive in any possible way.

So, Mr. Holder, n this kind of environment, it is IMPOSSIBLE to have a frank and honest discussion of race. You should be smart enough to recognize that.

[Dead...Again]

Cartoonists treading lightly when drawing Obama (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D96FGCO02&show_article=1)

A couple of quotes from the story

"All my characters look simian," he said. "I don't make Obama look nearly as simian as our former governor Mike James, who I DID draw as a monkey, on more than one occasion. And he's a white guy ... I'm sorry, but when it comes to African-Americans, you just don't draw monkeys."


Perhaps race relations would improve, Lester said, if black people lightened up a bit: "They're not too good (at being) made fun of. We can all take a joke."

[Skud]

You know, it's really easy for a black man to say we're cowards for not discussing racial issues openly and honestly. Because a black man probably won't get fired if he says something that can be taken the wrong way.

But we live in a media saturated culture that warns white folks everyday that what you say can ruin your life, even if it's innocent. You guys have already discussed the NY Post cartoon, which, IMO, had nothing to do with race. But because the president is black and the cartoon depicted a chimp, many jumped on this as a racial incident. And at this very moment the so-called black leadership of this country is lobbying to get the cartoonist fired.

Another incident that comes to mind happened in Washington, DC a few years back. A white DC employee was speaking with two black colleagues about budget matters, and he said something to the effect of, "well, I don't want to be niggardly about this." If you don't know, "niggardly" has absolutely nothing to do with race. It means stingy or miserly, penny pinching.

Anyway, the two black colleagues were aghast at what they'd head. And even when it was explained to them what the word meant, they still insisted the white guy be fired. He was, although he was later offered a different job and a pay cut.

Which brings me to the next concept: we white people are expected not only to be able to predict black reactions to overt or subtle racial comments, but we're also held to a standard that says we should expect them to misinterpret some things as well. So using an innocent word that might remind someone of racial issues is forbidden, as is using imagery that can be construed as offensive in any possible way.

So, Mr. Holder, n this kind of environment, it is IMPOSSIBLE to have a frank and honest discussion of race. You should be smart enough to recognize that.

I remember last year an incident where three black youths accused a man of insulting them on the bus (I'm sure the poor kids were respectful and courteous beforehand). The driver had to have the passenger removed. The youths got off at the same stop, and assaulted the man. The police report the next day said that nobody was charged in the incident, because they had no witnesses! OMFG. Again, if the incident were turned around: hate crime...protests, uproar.

I could lay out a hundred more such cases, factual, and much worse, but won't because I would probably be the one who actually does get in trouble, or canned.

So, yes, a working relationship requires both sides to put forth effort and be honest...accept criticism and give praise/respect. I treat everyone the same, until they step on my toes. For that reason I have many friends from many cultures...and for that reason I feel that I should be able to tell someone when they are doing something that offends ME...as I would certainly be told when I am doing something that offends them. Disagreement is not the end of the world. Offensive words and deeds when discussed rationally and ernestly can be mended (and when used sparingly might even be of constructive/enlightening value)...but only if BOTH sides are willing to look at things from the point of view of the other. Ignorance and egocentrism on all sides is still fillibustering progress, I'm afraid. We'll see how much longer (if ever) it will take for everyone to move out of the past...start with a clean slate. :wave2:

[Hammy]

Martin Lawrence
Chris Rock
Eddie Murphy
DH Hugley

These three love to bash the white people and they are very vocal when white people give equal comedy in return about black people.

Since I dont care what politicians think about race relations, because they live in a bubble and POV that only says 'how does that swing my approval?', I look at people like these- they are tuned in to the real vibe on the street.

The world is upside down in the US, and when you step outside our border, people are perplexed that this arguement about slavery and opression is still existent today. Most cultures have experienced slavery, the American Indians used to take slaves for a matter of fact and point, and yet the perpetual restitution in the US for the African Americans is still prevalent today.

The Latin Americans have gotten the hint and are even claiming that they have a gripe, because they are the migrant workers who have been exploited. To that point I say "it's hard to exploit someone if they have done everything by the book, in compliance with the law, themselves. So not that two wrongs make a right, but by my scorecard, misery loves company."

What's next, the Arab Americans will be white hating in the US? Claiming that they deserve restitution because we went to war against terrorism?

It's all a bunch of crap- this entire thread is, which is why I have only followed it until today. These people have no valid issue, except to perpetuate the only advantage they have in an otherwise equal situation within modern America. There is a black president and the leader of the Republican Party is black. Any questions?

[Skud]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/24/wall.holder/index.html

with some decent points.

[Hammy]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/24/wall.holder/index.html

with some decent points.

yeah-

anyone with a brain and a contribution role to the US as a citizen is echoing the same sentiments that I have conveyed as well as what you present in this article.

Thats why I think its a non-issue. This Holder is the new Howard Dean.

[Dead...Again]

I liked the article. Did you read any of the comments? Priceless...