So you have no proof then? Put up of shut up. You are either intellectually lazy, or you are lacking integrity. Either way, you should defend something you say with evidence.
What bullshit. Leaders are responsible for the actions of the people they lead? I doubt you can honestly believe that.
Give me an example of when a protest he’s held got out of hand. You are arguing that he’s responsible for what people do after they leave his protests. I call that bullshit.
Well it depends how loose the connection and what degree of responsibility. Colin Powell advocated and lied before the UN to start the Iraq war. He probably could not have stopped the war, but he was certainly part of the machine of aggressive war. The others you mention are so attenuated that culture and responsibility are more connected than those groups directly.
What’s funny to me is that many of you argue that Sharpton perpetuates a “victim culture”. Central to that idea is the lack of personal responsibility for one’s actions, something we can all agree is wrong. Yet, I’ve yet to hear someone blame the people who killed Rosenbaum, or Roland Smith (Freddy’s arsonist) for what they did. Instead, you try to shift blame to Al Sharpton. Here I was thinking murderers were responsible for the people they kill, when in reality, any one who influenced them in anyway shared responsibility. It’s the same specious reasoning people employ when they blame McDonald’s for getting them fat. It’s really sad.
Quote me a couple of these posts that have said “I won’t listen to him at all”. I know I haven’t said that.
Cite for the “drunkenly” accusation?
Does Bush have responsibility for Abu Ghraib? I’ve heard a lot of anger about higher ups in the Armed Forces not getting their due, obviously many think they hold some responsibility.
Maybe it is bullshit, but he’s said some very inflammatory things, to groups of very angry people, and bad shit has happend afterwards. It doesn’t take a genius to figure that one could lead to the other.
Did he order attacks? No.
Did he help create/perpetuate the environment in which the attacks happened? I think he did.
Did he do anything to help defuse the situation, and prevent a riot or attack? Not that I know of.
That’s been my point the whole thread, people won’t listen at all and dismiss everything and tune him out after mocking, refusing to listen to the point. I know many people like that, this thread is filled with a lot of that.
So if he is advocating something, you won’t tune out the cause after the obligatory character bashing that goes on in our culture? Fine, for what it is worth, you get the Blah Blah Blah --er the Bob Loblaw, certificate of approval. (Yes, I know, you don’t want it, it means nothing to you.) You are not a racist vis-a-vis Al Sharpton because you won’t refuse to consider his cause because of him. That is all I ask.
I wouldn’t ignore an issue simply because Al Sharpton is its current most visible celebrity mouthpiece. Even a stopped clock…ehh, you know the drill.
Similarly, if David Duke says something I happen to agree with, I’ll acknowledge that he’s right even though he’s still David Duke. (Is he still around anyhow?)
Doesn’t make him a decent person.
You’re right. I won’t listen to what Mr. Sharpton has to say, as a rule. I have long made a habit of disregarding the opinions of bigots.
CJ
I think Al Sharpton is a racist. So by refusing to listen to a racist, I am a racist.
Wow, my head is spinning.
What this all boils down to is that whether Sharpton is a commentator or a preacher or a politician, it is up to us whether we want to listen to him or not. There are plenty of all of these things around, and if we choose to find some more credible, or trustworthy, or closer to our understanding of God, then the fault is with him, not with us.
Al Sharpton has zero credibility with me, and he has nobody to blame that on but himself.
Charles Manson didn’t actually commit the Tate/Lobianco murders, he influenced people to commit them. He’s serving a good bit of time for that.
So, what does it say about us as a society that Al Sharpton does have legitimate power over the political process? Democratic candidates had to seek his endorsement, once he himself stepped out of the race, and when he did endorse Kerry, Kerry had to welcome that endorsement
(cite: http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/03/16/sharpton.concession/
relevant quote:
"Sharpton described his meeting with Kerry as cordial.
In a statement, Kerry said he had “come to appreciate the warmth and candor [the] Rev. Al Sharpton exhibited in so many primary debates and forums across America. No one can argue with his ability to cut through the double-talk we see coming from this administration.”
Kerry said he welcomed Sharpton’s endorsement and shared many of his concerns."
I mean, Kerry couldn’t come out and say, “While I agree with many of his principles, Al Sharpton is a parasite, who feeds off his own people etc, etc” as has been said by all but a handful of people on this thread, without being labeled as a racist by quite a few people.
Slightly different Charlie instructed them and ordered the slayings.
I believe Al spoke inflammatory words but never called for a riot or killings.
If you can cite Al calling for riots or killings, I will apologize.
I thought he just said said to kill some pigs, not necessarily those people.
At any rate, bad analogy on my part. Al didn’t say to kill anyone, Charlie did.
Just pointing out that you don’t have to pull the trigger (or throw the Molotov) to be as guilty as the guy who did. And I used a bad example in an already bizzare thread. If any apologies are needed, it’s from me.
No problem, I can respect anyone that admits mistakes.
Jim
That’s one way of looking at it. But why stop there?
Through his border “patrols”, David Duke can be credited with raising our consciousness re the problem of illegal immigration. I guess we shouldn’t reject him out of hand as a sleazy bigot.
Three cheers for Timothy McVeigh, who dramatically highlighted opposition to government excesses i.e. at Ruby Ridge and Waco. Don’t get all caught up in McVeigh’s crime.
And there are plenty who choose to overlook Osama bin Laden’s crimes and focus on the attention he has brought to wrongs committed by the United States.
A much more compelling case can be made that all of these individuals, and many more who did wrong in the name of noble-sounding ideals actually damaged those causes far more than they helped them, leading many to dismiss their ideas out of disgust for the malignant personalities that promoted them.
I remember Al Sharpton’s performance in “debate” when he was running for mayor of New York. He conducted himself in a very poised and well-spoken fashion.
Which makes it even more reprehensible that he has behaved as he’s done and failed to make amends or apologize for his acts. He’s obviously intelligent, and knows better. He’s not someone who just lost control on a couple occasions because of outrage over injustice.
“Well, everybody in politics has baggage.” - Al Sharpton
Does anyone else recognize the absurdity of comparing Al Sharpton to McVeigh, or David Duke? It’s truly pathetic.
I think it was a bit of hyperbole??
Yep, I do. Now the over the top statements are going the other direction.
Does anyone really think Rev Al wanted a riot to break out and people to be killed?