This is because, to your conservative sensibilities, anything that talks about race in any way is racist. There are other ways of looking at the world than through your narrow blinders.
It may be the case that the article was not as sensitive about race as it could have been, but it really is just come conservatives looking to get butthurt based on their misunderstanding so that they can say “You do it too!”
So, you have an article on CNN that is arguable racially insensitive, and when this was called to CNN’s attention, they made some changes to it to make it less so.
Is this in any way comparable to the articles on brietbart that are not just insensitive, but intentionally inflammatory, and when they create a negative reaction in the community that they are talking about, are not corrected, rescinded or updated in anyway to remove or even acknowledge the offensiveness.
The people that cannot tell the difference are simply not suited for debating politics, race or really anything more than their favorite voltron episode, due to their utter lack of critical thinking skills.
Then explain, in your own words, how that article was racist.
It did talk about race. And it did infer that criminal justice issues would effect black people more. Both of those are neutral and factual.
Tell me, where did you find inflammatory racism that is in any way similar to the brietbart articles that you were directed to?
If you think it is racist, you need to explain why., we have explain ed why the brietbart articles are racist, we have explained why this article, while talking about race in a way that may not be as sensitive as one would like, is not racist.
You have done nothing but repeat your own rhetoric.
No you haven’t, or if you have I missed it. I saw a CNN article with 10 headlines, 8 or 9 of which were decidedly NOT ‘racist’. Where have you or anyone else explained it like you want me to explain the CNN one?
Brietbart doesn’t just engage in racism. It also engages in homophobia, transphobia, and misogyny.
You would defend “The solution to online ‘harassment’ is simple: Women should log off” that headline? You don’t think that that is inflammatory at all towards women?
You don’t think that “Trannies whine about hilarious Bruce Jenner billboard” has anything objectionable at all n the headline?
Not only is the headline “Birth control makes women unattractive and crazy” rather indefensible to anyone who isn’t an ass, it also concludes with the Islamophobic line “We need the kids if we’re to breed enough to keep the Muslim invaders at bay.”
I could go on. If you need me to, I could, but I suspect you are just trying to waste my time.
If you really cannot see what is inflamatory about “Gay rights have made us dumber, it’s time to get back in the closet,” then you have absolutely no ability to consider anything, not anything at all.
Your CNN cite talks about how african americans are overly subjected to discrimination, and that the governor was trying to change that. The most racist line in the article, (to me), was " help African-Americans who were disproportionally affected by laws that put lifetime bans on felons."
Can you point to a more racist line in the article?
Keep in mind, just because you misunderstand a headline, does not mean an article is racist.
The original claim, that got us on this Breitbart racism discussion was made by madmonk28 back in posts #10 and #14. He said Steve Bannon is a “prominent white supremacist”. I asked for some evidence in post #15 and the responses I get were:
Ravenman saying “Breitbart News, under his leadership, published an array of racist trash.”
DrCube saying “He ran a racist website.”
Both of those were just unsupported assertions. The “evidence” that DrCube finally got around to offering on page 2 has almost nothing to do with “race”. And that’s the only evidence I’ve seen anyone offer here. You, kb9friender, said, “we have explain ed why the brietbart articles are racist” but you haven’t, and DrCube hasn’t, and Ravenman hasn’t, and neither has Czarcasm.
The disputed claim here is whether Steve Bannon is a “prominent white supremacist”. So far, the evidence to support that has been remarkably thin, to the point of being invisible.
Now you’re the one trying to move the goal posts. The initial claim was that Steve Bannon is a “prominent white supremacist”. Can misogynistic headlines on a website he used to run be fairly considered evidence to support that claim? (hint: the answer is no)
I know there are laws that prohibit “imprisonment” or something to that effect - for instance, if you lock up someone in your house, and confine them, and don’t allow them to leave, you have committed a crime. Is there an equivalent for obstruction of someone in a public space, who has a right to be going somewhere? AIUI, abortion protesters can’t physically obstruct a pregnant woman from entering an abortion clinic, so are the anti-Trump protesters who physically prevented spectators from getting to the inauguration, illegally obstructing their freedom of movement?
Yes. Do you actually know any of those people? Any of your many black friends tell you how much they just luv, luv, luv such things?
And did you look closely, check the origins? Is it your contention that black people, by and large, approve of such? Or what, exactly? Or did you just grab a google-vomit and gleefully assume you actually had something?
I personally know several black people that are not offended by the Confederate flag. I don’t know any of the ones on the Google Image page I sent you.
And then he somehow thought he won the argument by showing that brietbart isn’t just racist, but also is misogynist, homophobic, islamophobic, and transphobic.
You know, it’s funny. I wanted America to burn months ago, and the suggestion was that my idea was irrational. What a difference a new presidency makes, where now I’m saying that America needs peace, and some people deny the president and will make a statement equivalent to the revolution, rocks thrown on officers, distrust over law and more revolution-type things. Judging from how time works, my topic was radical then, but a few months later, it’ll be the norm in the US where everyone wants it to burn. Or at least, in the urban cities, anyways.
I really hope that for America, it doesn’t turn to urban cities vs rural cities, where if you’re from an urban city, you’re not going to be welcome, and vice-versa. Better yet, let’s just stop these destructive protests and partisanship, and join together to solve our problems, such as poverty, infrastructure, crime, and other issues.