It cannot be an all-or-nothing proposition. He only has 24 hours a day so he has to pick. He picks his people. Hardly racist.

 

Now maybe he does or says things to make him a racist. However, not protesting that llist of murders isn't racist in and of itself.

 

Was Mother Theresa classist?

 

Never thought I would ever hear Mother Theresa and Al Sharpton compared in any way...Mother Theresa = selflessly doing things for others....Al Sharpton = selfishly exploiting other's pain for his self interest...

Al Sharpton has been in Chicago numerous times and was the host of a week-long city-wide conference on reducing violence just this summer.

 

Thanks for the information. I knew he has stopped there from time to time but did not know about the conference. I still cannot stand him for many reasons but I do like that he may be trying in Chicago.

Do you think Sharpton is doing more good or harm with the situation in Ferguson?

 

Of course I don't think Sharpton is the only one that should go, but he is the one in this thread that was said to be "standing up for blacks.". Blacks are being brutalized and murdered in Africa. He is not standing up for them. So I guess he further minimizes himself as standing up for those blacks that will bring attention to himself, and raise money for him and his causes.

 

So does he care about blacks or the ability to raise greenbacks? Which is of higher priority?

 

The people who live in Africa aren't "blacks" -- not in the way we're talking; those are Africans... people living in Africa. I don't know how much he could even do for them.

 

Don't have to go far to find a black community in trouble. Certainly don't have to go all the way to Africa.

 

I don't think Sharpton's methods are perfect. Far from it. But why do we feel the need to react to this man with such visceral hatred? It's not as if he's responsible for problems between the races here in America; it was like this before he was born... it seems it'll be like this after he's long dead.

I don't like him because he inflames situations, assumes race is the cause of just about every issue and tries (and succeeds) to benefit personally from others' pain. I will admit it Getslow, I think he is a despicable human being...

Incorrect.....................their focus is standing up for their pocket book.

 

I thought they preached equality.

 

No question he is profiting. However, choosing to do with via the helping of one race doesn't make him a racist.

Never thought I would ever hear Mother Theresa and Al Sharpton compared in any way...Mother Theresa = selflessly doing things for others....Al Sharpton = selfishly exploiting other's pain for his self interest...

 

I apologize then if the analogy didn't register.

 

The claim is that Rev Al is a racist because he ONLY comes to the aid of blacks even though whites are murdered as well.

 

Mother Theresa came to the aid of the very poor despite people in higher income ranges also needing help. Does NOT helping others who need help make her a classist? Should she be castigated and labeled ?

 

I'm not equating THEM (that should be obvious but....). I am showing the false logic of saying "bad if any other group is excluded."

So if one picks his own people he is not a racist?

 

Keep trying, keep trying. I could care a less that he is a racist-let's just call him what he is.

 

He could do better to help his people (your words) by going to Africa and seeing some of the disgusting, heinous things various leaders on that continent do to their young women.

 

 

Maybe I have a different definition of racism. My definition says one group feels superior over another group based on skin color.

 

Rev Al would argue that he's just trying to get blacks UP TO the level of justice that whites receive. That hardly seems like he is saying blacks are superior.

 

Could be he be a racist? Sure. The example cited in post 1 doesn't show that.

No question he is profiting. However, choosing to do with via the helping of one race doesn't make him a racist.

 

He is not helping anyone (other than himself), including his own race.

Sharpton and Jackson hardly have to go to Africa? How about Chicago? 100's of black kids are killed there every year. But they are killed almost exclusively by other blacks so Al and Jesse don't care...or at least not as much as they care about one black criminal that was killed by a police officer.

 

Again, terrible logic.

 

Is the justice system somehow choosing not to prosecute the blacks in Chicago who are killing blacks? If so, your analogy is spot on.

 

If not (and we know it's not) then... bad analogy.

Do you think Sharpton is doing more good or harm with the situation in Ferguson?

 

Of course I don't think Sharpton is the only one that should go, but he is the one in this thread that was said to be "standing up for blacks.". Blacks are being brutalized and murdered in Africa. He is not standing up for them. So I guess he further minimizes himself as standing up for those blacks that will bring attention to himself, and raise money for him and his causes.

 

So does he care about blacks or the ability to raise greenbacks? Which is of higher priority?

 

Come on. He can't be everywhere he deems there to be injustice. This Africa stuff is a red herring.

 

As to your last question: both.

I don't like him because he inflames situations, assumes race is the cause of just about every issue and tries (and succeeds) to benefit personally from others' pain. I will admit it Getslow, I think he is a despicable human being...

 

You're not alone.

He could do better to help his people (your words) by going to Africa and seeing some of the disgusting, heinous things various leaders on that continent do to their young women.

 

This is one of the more ignorant things I've ever read on BGP.

He is not helping anyone (other than himself), including his own race.

 

 

Fine. That's not the debate.

Again, terrible logic.

 

Is the justice system somehow choosing not to prosecute the blacks in Chicago who are killing blacks? If so, your analogy is spot on.

 

If not (and we know it's not) then... bad analogy.

 

If Sharpton really cared about helping black people, he could get a lot more done spending time trying to help in Chicago where 100's of blacks (many of them kids) die every year because of gangs than by spending time in Ferguson because one black criminal was killed by a police officer. I think Sharpton's motives are very selfish. Not a bad analogy at all. BTW, I really don't know what kind of job the Chicago justice system is doing in prosecuting blacks in that city for the murders. Could be doing great or terrible - I don't know.

 

Come on. He can't be everywhere he deems there to be injustice. This Africa stuff is a red herring.

 

As to your last question: both.

 

Only the ones with the most media attention? :lol2: