Well, then, you may have just gone a long way to prove Lance’s original point. If you thought you were referring to me, for example, you probably haven’t been reading my posts very carefully, and you fail.
But you’re certain!
That is what was in the OP’s linked article, but the one Andiethewestie posted later had “what.” That’s the one I checked to make sure I had it right, and I only noticed later there was a discrepancy. I’m not sure how much it matters, but interesting that there are different accounts of what was actually said.
I’m sorry, who, exactly, is defending racists here? Have you actually read this thread?
Nothing about my reply points to you as part of any of the groups I described unless you want to go ahead and join the group of people embracing the uncertainty of intent of the peanut throwers at the event. If thats you then you are a racist, stupid or blindly partisan, if not relax and chill out,
Granted, but to be fair we have a situation of two elderly white men taunting and assaulting. To taunt and assault anyone is boorish and bullying. To taunt and assault a woman is at the very least sexist, but because NO one else, all the people in the room including white men and women who COULD have been targets were not. You can draw only one conclusion. It’s the face of Racism, it’s callous and unambiguous and all the more horrific because these men didn’t seem to give a damn about how their actions would be perceived.
The peanut throwers were obviously racist. Racism is bad. Claiming that racist people are not bad (racist) is defending them.
I had never really realized that dog whistles work three ways instead of just two:
- Racist people hear the code words and know they are supported by the whistler
- Non-racist people hear the words and don’t pick up the racist context, whistler suffers no ill effects
- Non-Racist/Racist people (either) hear the words and argue that we can’t be absolutely, positively sure they are racist because the slimy dog whistler used weasel words and code words. Thus racists should always get away with their racism unless they are burning a cross in a front yard.
edit: Oh wait the cross burners are just celebrating their Southern Christian heritage! We can’t know FOR SURE they are racist.
I am not giving anyone a “bye” when the facts are presented here. I say anyone who calls another human being an animal is implying they are sub-human. When the person being bullied is black, that takes on a whole other layer of bullying. It’s racism, and I gave the historical biblical association upthread.
Maybe the cross had termites, ya never know, might have just been being conscientious.
Again, where does it say “elderly white men?” I read two articles in full, looking for this description. In both the perpetrators are described only as “attendees.”
I am not saying that they weren’t old white men, but considering that this is being reported as blatant racism, then why not identify the race (or gender or age) of the perpetrators? And how much difference would it make, if any, if they happened not to be old, white, and/or men? Would it be any less of a racist attack?
I see, you would prefer that it wasn’t old white men being racist this time. I know its hard sometimes being white.
So anyone who can see even the slightest bit of ambiguity here, is unambiguously a racist in the eyes of those who saw no ambiguity in the first place. The ‘racist defenders’ have all, I think, stated they believed it was a much better than even chance racism was the motivating factor for these bums. Because that wasn’t definite enough for some, they get tarred with the epithats racist, or partisan, or stupid.
I’m not into hypotheticals, my information came from what I posted, that I guess the news media revised to remove the description of the perps. However,
Here is the article that cites an eyewitness account
Yeah, seriously, I never realized that saying these asshat peanut-throwers were bullies and most likely racists, based on all available evidence, turned me into a cross-burning KKK member. Or, worse, a Republican! :eek:
I’d better turn in my East Coast liberal-elite Obama-supporter card.
Well, I will admit finding myself more or less agreeing with Magellan was weird…
So, we’ve gone from being annoyed that others are raising the concept of innocent until proven guilty in regards to this discussion, to tarring and feathering those who raise even the merest scintilla of doubt about the motivations of these morons.
People here are putting a lot more thought and emotion into this than even the two peanut throwing racists.
Ah, that’s more like it. Her response was terrific (“Are you out of your mind?” Indeed).
This expanded quote (“Here, want more peanuts? This is what we feed the animals in the zoo.”) somehow makes the whole incident a lot creepier.
According to the eyewitness there is absolutely no doubt as to what this was. I just find it rather sad that Roberta has to prove her victimization beyond a scintilla of doubt. Obviously this is why some who are victims of racism hate to talk about it. She didn’t want to grant other interviews. Not only is it humilitating to endure, but people would rather disbelieve it than to entertain the notion that racist bullies exist.
Who wants to be humilitated and be labelled a liar?
You can say what you like about the people at the convention, but you can’t insult people who are posting here by saying they are stupid or racist or with other personal commentary. At best you’re walking a fine line here, at worst you’re breaking the rules. Take a step back from that line.
Well, I don’t think we’re going to hear any more of substance about this story, the men will apparently not be identified (which surprises me, I must admit). No new news about this within the past 48 hrs I can see.
It is a shame it doesn’t go further as Roberta wanted to drop it, but the two older white men are deplorable and should be held to account.