Doesn’t the President have enough to do, keeping the Martians at bay?
And has Done The Right Thing besides.
Well, you gots to keep your pimp hand strong.
I’ve always wondered why people so regularly use the term “pimps” regarding when it comes to Civil Rights activists, I.E. “poverty pimps” “race pimps” etc. but it’s never used for other types of activist such as environmental activists or gun rights activists.
For that matter, I’ve heard it referencing the NAACP but never the ADL or other comparable organizations.
Edit: that’s not to imply racism but a really odd for lack of a better term, bias.
Whereas I’ve never wondered about it at all. However it got started, at some point it turned into ‘watch me use racially loaded language to show you I don’t give a fuck if you call me a racist.’ It’s pretty badass!
My guess is that the imagery being summoned up is someone who is pretending to be taking care of a weaker person but is really taking advantage of them. It’s more appropriate for the poverty pimps and race pimps (the first is a lot more common) than environmental activists or gun activists.
I don’t think it’s commonly used for the NAACP either. It’s commonly used for people like Jesse Jackson and Sharpton, who have made a lot of power, fame, and money off racial issues.
Google returns 5 million hits for NAACP + pimps.
Those things have a direct impact on the state of the nation. Aside from the media hype and its relationship to the issue of race and stand your ground laws Martin Zimmerman case was just one of the 40 or so homicides that happen every year.
The correct thing is to let the DOJ do their job, to determine whether there is any federal charges that can be brought, correctly determine that there aren’t and then let the thing drop. Obama getting involved inherently politicizes a decision that should be based on the facts of the case.
Not to hijack but
This was one of my main criticisms of the Bush administration was his exerting political influence over the decisions of the civil service.
http://seattletimes.com/html/politics/2010058489_climate14.html
Google returned even more hits for ADL + pimps.
I get 29 million for NAACP + race + pimps and 5 million when I subbed in ADL. But yes, hardly anyone calls the NAACP race pimps because people who say this kind of stuff are famously circumspect with their language.
For the same reason that the Supreme Court often doesn’t take a case even if the outcome wasn’t legally correct. The role is to set policy, not make sure the right decision is made in every individual case.
Of course, there’s also the cynical political agenda reason. He has nothing to win by doing so, quite the opposite of the OBL and econ examples.
I only see 769,000 for Marley pimps. You’d better work on that. 
If I understand you correctly, you’re rigging the searches. The NAACP is a race organization. The ADL is more of a religious/ethnic organization. So by putting race in, you’re automatically going to get more hits for the NAACP than for the ADL.
My general point generally was that you can’t prove a whole lot from the number of google hits. The NAACP is going to be mentioned in a lot of articles in which others are being accused of being pimps.
Or, because they are not profiteering from race in the pimp-like manner of Jackson and Sharpton.
The same would also be true of Eric Holder, and he is clearly going to be involved in this decision.
So criticizing Obama is just kind of automatic with you at this point?
Seriously, I can’t imagine anything Obama could do that his opponents wouldn’t then spin into somehow being the wrong thing.
Some people will see it as him politicizing it on gun control grounds, others will see it on racial grounds. No political benefit to him, and plenty of harm to him with both those groups, no matter how it turns out. Best to publicly and pointedly butt out.
Too bad for him, that’s what Presidential underlings are for. To take the political heat for their boss.
I don’t see that he really gets shielded from criticism by avoiding direct involvement in the issue (other than to the extent that people think a president shouldn’t be directly involved, which begs the question).
I think he is going to be saddled with whatever decision Holder makes, and people who would criticize the decision on gun control or racial grounds will criticize it just the same.
Ah, so it’s just a coincidence that it happens to evoke hackneyed racial stereotypes?
Without getting into the pimping discussion, I think that Obama is making the right call. The Zimmerman case, while publicly controversial, shouldn’t be legally controversial. I think that the President’s office only gets involved when they are setting some sort of new groundbreaking policy, which they wouldn’t be here. Getting the President involved would politicize the entire thing even more, and would cause people to think it was purely political.
I wouldn’t call it a coincidence. There are quite a few “hackneyed racial stereotypes” out there, and you’re inevitably going to get a lot of criticisms that happen to fit one or another of them, even if there’s no specific intention to do so.
Ok, but why did Obama inject himself into this in the first place? He saw some kind of political hay in this, so he should be judged by his actions.