Is Obama our savior, our Messiah? Or is it just an Obama cult?

[quote name='Heavy Hitter']That's all I get? One sentence? No 7-paragraph manifesto overloaded with fifty-buck words? Wow, I'm disappointed.

Anyway, I wouldn't expect FoC to do anything to try to support my claims. Him trying to find something to distort and blur the issue at hand that Obama is a lying S.O.S. - now that I would expect.[/quote]

OK. Let's fake some civility.

How about this?

Are the quotes in post #142 the overall text that is causing the uproar?

... The government gives them [African Americans] ... blah blah blah ...
 
I apologize if you feel I have not been civil.

It's pretty simple, really. Obama said as late as last Friday he never heard any of these questionable comments. Now he said in his speech yesterday that he did. Of course, he didn't get specific as that would have buried him right then and there - but it was certainly implied.

Then after that he was classy enough to throw his Grandma under the bus to attempt to justify Wright's statements.

Obama is a great speechmaker. His speech yesterday was masterful, intentionally vague, and for people that want a sip of his Flavor-Aid, it'll do.
 
Well, to no great surprise, this thread is a huge waste of electrons. (The exceptions know who they are.) And kudos to you, FoC, for really getting into the facts of the story and maintaining a rational, objective position.
 
[quote name='Ruined']See videos in my sig. All the proof any rational person would need.[/QUOTE]

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qNi7tPanUA[/media]

I found a video, too.
 
21_19_60---Road-Closed-and-Diversion-Signs_web.jpg
 
[quote name='Heavy Hitter']I apologize if you feel I have not been civil.[/QUOTE]

Your apology is acce...

[quote name='Heavy Hitter']Then after that he was classy enough to throw his Grandma under the bus to attempt to justify Wright's statements.[/QUOTE]

Heavy Hitter is like a fire hose of fail.
 
Guess it's not a problem for the BPP to endorse him on his own webpage, especially since he's under fire already for being associated with racist and anti-American views.
 
[quote name='Heavy Hitter']I apologize if you feel I have not been civil.

It's pretty simple, really. Obama said as late as last Friday he never heard any of these questionable comments. Now he said in his speech yesterday that he did. Of course, he didn't get specific as that would have buried him right then and there - but it was certainly implied.

Then after that he was classy enough to throw his Grandma under the bus to attempt to justify Wright's statements.

Obama is a great speechmaker. His speech yesterday was masterful, intentionally vague, and for people that want a sip of his Flavor-Aid, it'll do.[/quote]

I just don't want the discussion to completely degrade into a shouting match. Let's keep it just snarky.

We went over this already. Statement A, B and such. Obama won't elaborate on what comments he heard from Wright because you're right. Every press conference afterwards would be, "Senator Obama, on XX/XX/XXXX, Wright said ... What is your opinion of that statement?"

I only read through Obama's speech once and I didn't watch it.

Is the Grandma/bus comment stemming from: "I can no more disown [Jeremiah Wright] than I can my white grandmother – a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe."

The Obama Kool-Aid doesn't have a clear label yet. The McCain Kool-Aid label states more war if possible and no understanding of economics. The Clinton Kool-Aid label states anything goes to further Clinton's best interests.
 
[quote name='Heavy Hitter']Guess it's not a problem for the BPP to endorse him on his own webpage, especially since he's under fire already for being associated with racist and anti-American views.[/quote]

Is the new BPP like the old BPP, but edgier and more extreme to the max? You know, like New Coke.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']We've gone over this, thrustbucket. It requires an alternative history/universe. Let's keep it simple.[/quote]

This attitude is so holier-then-thou.

You're holding one group up to a higher standard then the other - what you're essentially saying is that one group needs to play by a very civil and PC playbook while the other group has a broad lattitude of permissability for hateful remarks.

Why does this other group get to say whatever comes to mind? Because they are still oppressed victims.

:bs:

Equal treatment, no exceptions, enough with the excuses! The media does a disservice to the preacher and his congregation when they do not hold him to the same level of accountability concerning his hateful, bigoted speeches. And let's not lie - the media loves this playing this backhanded insult game as much as they love ratings.
 
[quote name='camoor']This attitude is so holier-then-thou.

You're holding one group up to a higher standard then the other - what you're essentially saying is that one group needs to play by a very civil and PC playbook while the other group has a broad lattitude of permissability for hateful remarks.

Why does this other group get to say whatever comes to mind? Because they are still oppressed victims.

:bs:

Equal treatment, no exceptions, enough with the excuses! The media does a disservice to the preacher and his congregation when they do not hold him to the same level of accountability concerning his hateful, bigoted speeches. And let's not lie - the media loves this playing this backhanded insult game as much as they love ratings.[/quote]

Actually, BigT had raised the same question as thrustbucket.

So, I nuetralized the statement by pointing out the dominance of white people during the formation and, arguably, up to present day.

In our collective reality/universe ...

If a white preacher screams how black people are making it tough out there for the white man since the inception of the nation until now, it is absurdly false.

If a black preacher screams how white people are making it tough out there for the black man since the inception of the nation until now, it has to be clarified.

For the most part, the lot of the average black person has steadily improved since 1775 but it is hard to say that it is equal to the lot of the average white person under every circumstance.

So...

The alternate history/universe statement allows historical fact to be ignored.

...

I think I'm starting to enjoy the "scandal". It'll be good to see if he cracks under a little stress.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Actually, BigT had raised the same question as thrustbucket.

So, I nuetralized the statement by pointing out the dominance of white people during the formation and, arguably, up to present day.

In our collective reality/universe ...

If a white preacher screams how black people are making it tough out there for the white man since the inception of the nation until now, it is absurdly false.

If a black preacher screams how white people are making it tough out there for the black man since the inception of the nation until now, it has to be clarified.

For the most part, the lot of the average black person has steadily improved since 1775 but it is hard to say that it is equal to the lot of the average white person under every circumstance.

So...

The alternate history/universe statement allows historical fact to be ignored.[/quote]

First off, I hear plenty of absurd things from political candidates all the time, only a few topics have such a polarizing "third rail" aspect and only one allows for a lopsided playing field born out of either misguided good intentions or something more subtlely sinister.

I have been to lectures that factually point out the facts of the African-American experience throughout American history. I have even seen eye-opening historical reenactments (controversial but educational, bookended by short lectures)

This was no history lesson.

This was not simply screaming about "how white people are making it tough out there for the black man since the inception of the nation until now"

This was pure vile bigotry and hatred, no clarification could suffice, no context could justify - nothing short of an out-and-out apology from the preacher. Is the nation really so two-faced that a dopey wanna-be cowboy doing the morning zoo is held to a higher standard then a supposed man of the Christian God?

I sympathize with Obama and I felt he handled the situation well, my concern is not with him. But the preacher will continue to be a symbol of what's wrong with the media's double standard towards bigotry until he apologizes for his hate-filled and divisive speeches.
 
[quote name='camoor']First off, I hear plenty of absurd things from political candidates all the time, only a few topics have such a polarizing "third rail" aspect and only one allows for a lopsided playing field born out of either misguided good intentions or something more subtlely sinister.

I have been to lectures that factually point out the facts of the African-American experience throughout American history. I have even seen eye-opening historical reenactments (controversial but educational, bookended by short lectures)

This was no history lesson.

This was not simply screaming about "how white people are making it tough out there for the black man since the inception of the nation until now"

This was pure vile bigotry and hatred, no clarification could suffice, no context could justify - nothing short of an out-and-out apology from the preacher. Is the nation really so two-faced that a dopey wanna-be cowboy doing the morning zoo is held to a higher standard then a supposed man of the Christian God?

I sympathize with Obama and I felt he handled the situation well, my concern is not with him. But the preacher will continue to be a symbol of what's wrong with the media's double standard towards bigotry until he apologizes for his hate-filled and divisive speeches.[/QUOTE]

I couldn't have said it much better. Thank you.

You guys can make all the excuses you want for Obama's preacher, but it doesn't change the fact that he's wrong. It doesn't matter what happened in the past, the stuff he says has to be held to the same standard as everyone else, or why have standards?

The bottom line that fatherofcaitlyn and others still aren't getting is if anyone else of any other race/religion said similar things about other races/religions it would be vilified by everyone. The fact that Trinity Church or Wright might have any ounce of credibility to anyone is the real concern here.

History doesn't/shouldn't justify double standards in free speech.
 
[quote name='Heavy Hitter']Obama's site has been scrubbed of the Black Panther Party endorsement. Now why do we suppose that is?[/QUOTE]

Because what you were referring to was just a meaningless "profile" that could have been put up by virtually anyone, on account of all candidates trying to be hip and allowing for "MySpace-esque" elements on their websites.

Perhaps I can make a "Pro-life evangelical racist christians" profile on Obama's website and you'll think that means something too?

[quote name='thrustbucket']I couldn't have said it much better. Thank you.

You guys can make all the excuses you want for Obama's preacher, but it doesn't change the fact that he's wrong. It doesn't matter what happened in the past, the stuff he says has to be held to the same standard as everyone else, or why have standards?

The bottom line that fatherofcaitlyn and others still aren't getting is if anyone else of any other race/religion said similar things about other races/religions it would be vilified by everyone. The fact that Trinity Church or Wright might have any ounce of credibility to anyone is the real concern here.[/QUOTE]

Likewise, what I think that what you don't get is that Wright's comments, while not in good form, aren't necessarily untrue. The fact that 11% of our population makes up 44% of our prisons, that 1 in 3 black males aged 20-35 are likely to go to prison at least once, are more likely to reside in poor inner-city areas that are poorly funded academically due to proportional property taxation funding large parts of public education, that these areas are largely populated by underemployed workers - then you'll only begin to see a *fraction* of the daily lived-in experience of what it's like to be black in America.

Where you start by thinking it's the same thing as being white is where you make a fundamental misstep right from the beginning and overlook the idea that the mere facade of "treating everyone equally" is a red herring argument.

Wright's comments about the state of the prison system are dead on - and something commonly felt by a far larger share of blacks in the US than whites. That's also something that Michael Tonry reiterated in his 2007 Presidential Address at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminologists. There is *very* little, if any, belief amongst criminologists that racism is not embedded in the social structure.

So, at the end of the day, you can do nothing to actually criticize the crux of Wright's argument, but instead focus on the tasteless and tactless way in which he said it in order to create some semblance of you being right on the issue.

EDIT: See if you can't hunt down a copy of Devah Pager's research article "The Mark of a Criminal Record" to see more on what I mean. I promise it's short and readable.
 
Thing is, no matter how much fluff anyone throws at it, Obama has had this guy for his spiritual advisor for 20 + years. Wright is a racist hate monger - can anyone really deny that?

When the association came to light, Obama pooh-poohed away concerns and denied he'd ever heard anything. Days later he reverses himself and distances himself from Wright when the heat gets turned up.
 
[quote name='camoor']
This was pure vile bigotry and hatred, no clarification could suffice, no context could justify - nothing short of an out-and-out apology from the preacher. Is the nation really so two-faced that a dopey wanna-be cowboy doing the morning zoo is held to a higher standard then a supposed man of the Christian God?

I sympathize with Obama and I felt he handled the situation well, my concern is not with him. But the preacher will continue to be a symbol of what's wrong with the media's double standard towards bigotry until he apologizes for his hate-filled and divisive speeches.[/quote]

Are we referring to this quote? If not, please insert the quote causing the reaction so it can be dissected.

"The government gives them [African Americans] the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme."
 
[quote name='Heavy Hitter']Thing is, no matter how much fluff anyone throws at it, Obama has had this guy for his spiritual advisor for 20 + years. Wright is a racist hate monger - can anyone really deny that?

When the association came to light, Obama pooh-poohed away concerns and denied he'd ever heard anything. Days later he reverses himself and distances himself from Wright when the heat gets turned up.[/QUOTE]

I suppose that your "distances himself from Wright" is equally empty "fluff," given that Obama said "I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother." He distanced himself from things that Wright has said, but not Wright himself.

But let's not fool ourselves: you're the kind of person who is so certain in their political opinion that no matter what Obama does, it wouldn't have changed your opinion of him in the first place.
 
Yeah, right. Let's see how many times those two are photographed together from here on out. I'd be very surprised to see that happen. Wright is political poison to Obama right now, and unless both men are wildly deluded, they both know it.

As far as your second paragraph goes, you're blowing some pretty heavy smoke out of your ass. I do understand your motivation, though. You like to pick fights with people on here - that's your thing. I get it.

I would love for Obama to do something to change my opinion of him - that he's an shrewd opportunist who is selling some serious snake oil with his "hope" and "change" platform full of nebulous feelgoodedness.

Since he's still got a chance at the Dem nod and there is a chance he could get the nation's top job, I'd like to see him move toward the center and be a good President for this country if he'd get elected. I don't see that happening, but it's nice to dream, eh?
 
[quote name='Heavy Hitter']I would love for Obama to do something to change my opinion of him - that he's an shrewd opportunist who is selling some serious snake oil with his "hope" and "change" platform full of nebulous feelgoodedness.[/QUOTE]

Going after campaign rhetoric is what folks do when they want to have an opinion, but not actually take the time to look into a candidate's actual platform.

Between your dislike of "hope" and "change" and your fervent outrage over two video clips of one preacher, it's quite clear that you rely on a superficial understanding, and nothing more, before formulating an opinion - and moreover, that you have no desire or interest in looking beyond that just enough you believe helps lead you to your conclusion.

So let me set you up: which policies of Obama's, specifically, do you disagree with?
 
And what about Don Imus? He made a joke and was vilified, lost his job, and crucified by the media. And.... it was a joke. A joke in bad taste, but a joke.

What wright says is not a joke. It's far more dangerous than a joke, because thousands eat it up like candy and form their world views based on it. Yet he gets, mostly, a free pass.

Mykevermin: I appreciate what you are trying to say. I don't deny the state of blacks with prisons and slums and poverty. But I do deny there is a conspiracy to keep blacks in this "state".

I guess I just see things differently....

Paraphrasing a great man - "You can't take a man out of the slums until you find a way to take the slums out of the man". That pretty much sums up how I feel we should deal with all the so-called "issues" the so-called "Reverend" Wright not-so eloquently drones on about.

The black community will benefit far more from the words of Bill Cosby, about their "plight" than someone like Wright.
 
Quite frankly thrust the current conservative world view (for example the hard on for deregulation or warmongering) has done about a brazilian times more damage to this country than anything Wright has ever said.
 
There doesn't need to be a conspiracy for racism to endure.
http://books.google.com/books?id=xa...oi=print&ct=title&cad=one-book-with-thumbnail

I highly highly recommend that book. Bonilla-Silva is a fantastic scholar, a very nice guy, and paints a very good picture of how racism has remained in post civil-rights society - not only that, but taken a stronger root by nature of how hidden and unintentional much of it is.

I think that's a major problem point for many folks: racism doesn't have to be a cognitive awareness of disliking another group and acting on it. It can take very benign and unintentional forms.

As for Cosby, he's a difficult person to deal with among blacks, based on what I know. In short, many feel that his comedy and sitcoms did an immense amount to help "normalize" blacks in modern American society. At the same time, many blacks greatly resent that his programs *NEVER EVER EVER* dealt with the realities of race and racism in modern American society. They feel that he presented an unrealistic and glossed over view of what it was like to be black in America during that time. By itself, that's not such a big deal. Where it becomes a cardinal sin, however, is when Cosby began publicly berating some of the 'street' elements (using Elijah Anderson's meaning of "street") of modern black culture.

Basically, it was bad that he never dealt with race at all, but forgivable because of what his show helped do. But when Cosby's only public acknowledgment of race at all comes in the form of blame, shame, and finger pointing at blacks themselves, it leads to nothing but resentment. Which is another layer of problems, since very few genuinely disagree with what Cosby's points are - they just think that he's pandering by ignoring race until he can appease nonblack society by blaming blacks for what some do, wear, or say.

I liken it to having a father who is always critical, and never offers up praise or help. You realize that he means well, but that doesn't mean you don't resent his tactics or think he can be a royal fucker from time to time.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']And what about Don Imus? He made a joke and was vilified, lost his job, and crucified by the media. And.... it was a joke. A joke in bad taste, but a joke.

What wright says is not a joke. It's far more dangerous than a joke, because thousands eat it up like candy and form their world views based on it. Yet he gets, mostly, a free pass.[/quote]

Very true. Imus's public humiliation and subsequent reinstatement was great for TV news program ratings. I suppose the media is too afraid of a backlash to go after Wright with half as much venom and animosity, what with pundits (and even ppl on this board!) saying that his remarks have to be put in context and can be justified by virtue of wrongs visited on his ancestors. Heck, even O'Reilly wants to cut him some slack, if that doesn't wake the so-called progressives up to what is really going on here I don't know what will!

[quote name='thrustbucket']Mykevermin: I appreciate what you are trying to say. I don't deny the state of blacks with prisons and slums and poverty. But I do deny there is a conspiracy to keep blacks in this "state".[/quote]

Exactly. I think Myke has this mindset because he focuses on prison populations all day - he has this myopic view of America as some strictly racially segregated place. But prisons are an extreme in American society - I was watching a program the other night where an African American prisoner was describing how on his first day in prison he sat with the wrong racial group and was beaten - he just didn't know the unwritten prison rules because he had never been in such a racially divisive environment before. It's 2008 and the real world isn't like that anymore.

BTW Myke I read a few pages of that book, to be honest I don't have time to waste on someone who spells America with three k's
 
[quote name='camoor']BTW Myke I read a few pages of that book, to be honest I don't have time to waste on someone who spells America with three k's[/quote]

Did you look at a different book? I didn't see "Amerikkka" (unless there is another way to spell American with three K's) in the preview at all, but I did search it and it said it came on on 2 pages out of 277, but also 22 pages with "America" and 29 with "United States" and I'm sure there are other references to the country with different words, so I don't see your point.

I couldn't preview those 2 pages, though, so maybe you could explain what you read.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Are we referring to this quote? If not, please insert the quote causing the reaction so it can be dissected.

"The government gives them [African Americans] the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme."[/QUOTE]

I'd like to see this, too. Specific quotes to go along with specific charges. "Racist" and "the stuff he said" doesn't cut the mustard.

[quote name='thrustbucket']And what about Don Imus? He made a joke and was vilified, lost his job, and crucified by the media. And.... it was a joke. A joke in bad taste, but a joke.[/QUOTE]

A valid concern ... but you're treating "black folks" like some monolithic entity. What Imus said isn't really relevant. It would be relevant if Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson -- the people so in arms over the Imus thing -- had been the ones giving the sermon. Absolutely. But anyone who's fine with both Wright and Imus (like myself) or who disavows both is outside the range of the contradiction you're alleging.

[quote name='camoor']Heck, even O'Reilly wants to cut him some slack, if that doesn't wake the so-called progressives up to what is really going on here I don't know what will![/QUOTE]

You mean that O'Reilly really doesn't want this to sink the campaign of the guy who's probably going to beat a Clinton? Yeah, I think I've got it.

[quote name='camoor'][quote name='thrustbucket']Mykevermin: I appreciate what you are trying to say. I don't deny the state of blacks with prisons and slums and poverty. But I do deny there is a conspiracy to keep blacks in this "state".[/QUOTE]
Exactly. I think Myke has this mindset because he focuses on prison populations all day - he has this myopic view of America as some strictly racially segregated place.[/QUOTE]

Perhaps you missed this?

[quote name='mykevermin']There doesn't need to be a conspiracy for racism to endure.[/QUOTE]
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Because what you were referring to was just a meaningless "profile" that could have been put up by virtually anyone, on account of all candidates trying to be hip and allowing for "MySpace-esque" elements on their websites.
[/QUOTE]

The NBBP has said that they put the profile up, and they had 396 campaign points - which if I understand this correctly are points given to users who raise funds, sign up other supporters or score high user ratings.

And now the NBBP's own website is gone. Someone must have given them a talking to.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Going after campaign rhetoric is what folks do when they want to have an opinion, but not actually take the time to look into a candidate's actual platform.

Between your dislike of "hope" and "change" and your fervent outrage over two video clips of one preacher, it's quite clear that you rely on a superficial understanding, and nothing more, before formulating an opinion - and moreover, that you have no desire or interest in looking beyond that just enough you believe helps lead you to your conclusion.

So let me set you up: which policies of Obama's, specifically, do you disagree with?[/QUOTE]

"Hope" and "Change" sound really nice, until you go on his website and spend some time in the "Issues" section. I see a ton of nanny-state, take-care-of-me Daddy Obama stuff. Who's going to pay for all of that? Oh yeah - us. I'd like to see a heading called "Grand Total" where it details how much all of these wonderful programs are going to cost.

"Set me up"? Fitting choice of words there. Which policies do I disagree with? Damn near all of them.
 
Well, then, pick two at random. You continue to hold many opinions and simultaneously divulge as much detail and substance as a cup of fruit-on-the-bottom yogurt.
 
[quote name='Heavy Hitter']"Hope" and "Change" sound really nice, until you go on his website and spend some time in the "Issues" section. I see a ton of nanny-state, take-care-of-me Daddy Obama stuff. Who's going to pay for all of that? Oh yeah - us. I'd like to see a heading called "Grand Total" where it details how much all of these wonderful programs are going to cost.

"Set me up"? Fitting choice of words there. Which policies do I disagree with? Damn near all of them.[/QUOTE]

So ... not really voting for anyone this time out, eh? That war ain't funding itself either, you know.
 
You want to knock yourself silly researching something? How much will Daddy Obama's programs cost? Feel free to round down - I figure the number will be large enough as it is.
 
I ask one simple task of you, and while you can find the time in your day to post incessantly here, you have shown that you are unwilling to demonstrate even the most rudimentary knowledge of Obama's platform, instead opting for meaningless drivel and rhetoric.

Christ - we've now entered a territory where someone has shown themselves to be too lazy to do a cursory google search, yet they have enough vigor to have an opinion on those things that they are not informed of.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Are we referring to this quote? If not, please insert the quote causing the reaction so it can be dissected.

"The government gives them [African Americans] the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people. God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme."[/quote]

There's too many to count. But yeah, that's a fine place to start...
 
Post incessantly? Like yourself?

And I have ample knowledge of Daddy O's platform - from his own site, no less. And it's enough knowledge to give me a gutache.

And I know you don't have a high opinion of me - and I really don't care.

Finally, I thought your "job" was done here? And the Rocky theme played while you made your triumphant exit? Or not?
 
[quote name='trq']Perhaps you missed this?[/quote]

Conspiracy? Have you read Myke's posts? It's all framed from a prison perspective.

Many times it's literal (such as when he takes stats from prisons and extrapolates to main society) other times it's metaphorical.

In the end he's guilty of creating his own reality, which is essentially a extension of the social microcosm he studies (and I will admit is fairly knowledgable on).
 
[quote name='Heavy Hitter']Post incessantly? Like yourself?

And I have ample knowledge of Daddy O's platform - from his own site, no less. And it's enough knowledge to give me a gutache.

And I know you don't have a high opinion of me - and I really don't care.

Finally, I thought your "job" was done here? And the Rocky theme played while you made your triumphant exit? Or not?[/QUOTE]

Tell me what you think of his policies on college tuition, his immigration policies, and civil rights, then.

Or would you rather continue to prattle on while giving no indication at all that you've read his platform?

[quote name='camoor']Conspiracy? Have you read Myke's posts? It's all framed from a prison perspective.

Many times it's literal (such as when he takes stats from prisons and extrapolates to main society) other times it's metaphorical.

In the end he's guilty of creating his own reality, which is essentially a extension of the social microcosm he studies (and I will admit is fairly knowledgable on).[/QUOTE]

The mean income for a black family in the United States is 60% of the mean income for a white family.

My expertise is undoubtedly the prison experience, but don't overlook my understanding of issues of stratification.

Moreover, you've already shown a bit of laziness yourself via your unwillingness to engage Bonilla-Silva's theory on colorblind racism, and your flippant disregard with massive, deep, and longlasting differences in treatment of blacks and whites in the modern US.

I bet you didn't read those few pages from the Pager article either. Her research, simply, is this:
1) there is a "social penalty" for being black and looking for work, because no matter how hard we try, discrimination exists.
2) there is a "social penalty" for having a criminal history and looking for work, because those with criminal background have shown themselves to be unreliable and untrustworthy.

What her research shows, however, is that the social penalty of discrimination in the modern era is *SO* strong that it is even greater and more harmful than the penalty for being a convicted felon/drug user. In her field research, white males with *felony histories* were offered more jobs than otherwise equal black males with *no criminal history at all*.

Discrimination is powerful, and it's still around - no matter how much you wish to will it away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top