Interestingly enough, the city manager of this town where it happened, a Mr. Bonaparte (sp?) did go on national T.V. with such pronoucements; calling the kid’s death a ‘murder’.
Not wrong legally speaking but stupid and potentiallyinsensitive. He should at least be diplomatic in a situation where we don’t know all the facts.
There was no need to interject race of any description and frankly no need to bring himself into it directly by suggesting if he had a son etc.
I’d consider his statements to be diplomatic.
Why do you and ralph124c not consider them to be diplomatic?
And he was there and he knows all the facts?
It might well have been murder but we don’t know. It’s still only at a grand jury stage. Let’s all hold off, the President included, until more facts come to light.
I’ve pointed it out several times above. Feel free to read and disagree but have the good taste to at least read my posts.
[Edited after my previous response]
What is the argument about if not race?
No, in fact, you have said that Obama should not have mentioned race. Do you really feel that mentioning race is undiplomatic? If so, Obama is hardly the first person you need to criticize.
I didn’t say he was correct, I was saying he did say what the pres didn’t. And he was much closer to and involved in the situation.
He was the only person mentioned in the OP. As President, I feel that he did not need to bring up either his own non-existent son or even a hint of race.
We don’t know all the facts, nor does the President. As such, he shouldn’t have interjected any racial element (so what if the victim may or may not have looked like his pretend son). It suggests that he has accepted one side of the story. It wasnt very diplomatic in the big picture and it was self absorbed from a personal perspective.
So the question in this thread is, should the president be too timid to offer a judgment on a situation, even if it’s obviously correct, because illiterate people who can’t understand how paragraphs work like the OP will condemn him either way?
I don’t think the president is worried about the opinions of people like you, Ralph. The illiterate vote is already locked for the other party anyway.
If only conservatives had been this concerned about gathering all the facts before we invaded Iraq.
Once again, I’m ignoring your attempt to bring an argument about whether the homicide was justified into this thread–there is a thread here in IMHO to argue that, and another in GD. The President also ignored the argument about whether the homicide was justified. You may wish to email the President a link to either of those threads if that is what you wish him to argue.
You’re not responding to my arguments in re the Presidents comments regarding race; no matter what I say, every post you make is identical. I shall no longer bother to respond to you.
Why is it “unstatesman like” to not pretend that this isn’t a racial issue? I mean, the shooter’s own history hints at his attitudes.
I don’t want my “statesmen” feeling that they are obligated to play a game of pretend to make sure everybody feels comfortable. I don’t see what’s statesmanly about playing games instead of handling matters of state.
Yes, conservatives voted to authorize the President to invade Iraq.
Liberals stood bravely steadfast, refusing to follow suit. I have to admit that you’ve got me there… That was an excellent example of jumping to conclusions with insufficient facts.
Yeah. If only there had been more true blue conservatives to stand up to the liberal president who called for an invasion of a foreign country.
Thank you, I’ve been waiting so long for one of you to admit that your policies in Iraq were the greatest mistake in the history of American foreign policy. It means a lot to me.
Now, if you guys will just admit you don’t like brown skinned people that much, we can have a more honest debate.
The President doesn’t know all the facts because no one knows all of the facts (other than the people involved). He decided to rather oddly to discuss both his pretend son and said pretend son’s likely race. This wasn’t necessary as we don’t know if this was a racially motivated act and nor does the President. As such, why interject with that sort of comment? He should not even be seen to take a side, even implicitly until we know more about what happened.
Taking any controversy our of it entirely why even bring up a pretend son? Why not just note that He is also a parent and he knows their pain. It was a bizarre comment.
Apparently Zimmerman is Latino (his mother is Peruvian so just as Obama is black he must be Latino). As such, I’m confused as to how I should feel a out him. Care to walk me through it?
Huh? If he had a son, I don’t think there’s anything “likely” about the race, given that his parents would both be black. Also, he didn’t actually mention his hypothetical son’s race.
Nor did the President say it was.
Why interject with a comment that doesn’t mention young Mr. Martin’s race? Are you saying the president explicitly should have mentioned race?
So the president can’t take a stance against the killing of unarmed teenagers? He’s got to be neutral on that point? “As a nation, I think we’re okay with a certain number of killings of unarmed youths.” Like that?
I’ve seen a photo of his parents. They’re both “black” in the sense that we use the term here in the U.S.
I don’t understand your obsession with racial categorization in this thread. But it’s obviously something you spend a lot of time thinking about.
ETA: I found the photo again, and in the process learned that her name is “Sabrina Fulton”, which is not exactly a typical Peruvian name. Not sure if you just made that up as part of your manifest fascination with racial categorization or if she is actually Peruvian. There are black Peruvians, of course, but most of them have more typically Hispanic-sounding names.