You are so right.

 

I wonder if he ever saw those ornaments that were in the shape of a black person holding a watermelon. Maybe even the jockey lawn ornaments. That wouldn't be racist then would it?

 

If you are referring to me then I don't believe you are actually reading my posts.

Yes I thought that was offensive. And, yes, if Rather had added "fried chicken" then it would have been as well. My point was that in the context of his analogy "watermelons" didn't appear to be used in a racial manner, one would have to jump to the conclusion that he used watermelons instead of any other fruit solely because of the race of the president. It doesn't make sense as a racial stereotype. If he had added "fried chicken" I believe it would have removed that doubt.

 

I agree. It's likely a bad choice of words that did not have ill intent. Had it been coupled with something else, then that is a different story.

 

Twice in my life I've made comments that ended up having a racial connotations to them. I was sorry for my choice of words, but they were, indeed, just unfortunate, spur of the moment comments that did not have a racial meaning, though an outsider that did not know me might be shocked. I'm just glad that they weren't caught on camera to be analyzed.

 

Rather, to my knowledge, does not have other similar remarks and I will give him the benefit of the doubt as to it being an unfortunate choice of words. As to the original post, as much as I do not like her, I don't think that Palin has made any comments that have been taken racially. I'm not sure about Hannity, being a shock job (IMO) might have made comments with racial connotations, but Limbaugh certainly has, so yes, it might deemed something deeper if he had made the comment, instead of Rather.

If you are referring to me then I don't believe you are actually reading my posts.

I've read every post you've made concerning this topic. If you really think that the race of the President had nothing to do with the comment made by Dan Rather there's nothing more to say.

I agree. It's likely a bad choice of words that did not have ill intent. Had it been coupled with something else, then that is a different story.

 

Twice in my life I've made comments that ended up having a racial connotations to them. I was sorry for my choice of words, but they were, indeed, just unfortunate, spur of the moment comments that did not have a racial meaning, though an outsider that did not know me might be shocked. I'm just glad that they weren't caught on camera to be analyzed.

 

Rather, to my knowledge, does not have other similar remarks and I will give him the benefit of the doubt as to it being an unfortunate choice of words. As to the original post, as much as I do not like her, I don't think that Palin has made any comments that have been taken racially. I'm not sure about Hannity, being a shock job (IMO) might have made comments with racial connotations, but Limbaugh certainly has, so yes, it might deemed something deeper if he had made the comment, instead of Rather.

 

Why is that? What difference does it make if a person is a shock jock or not? A racial epithet is wrong no matter who says it.

Why is that? What difference does it make if a person is a shock jock or not? A racial epithet is wrong no matter who says it.

 

For Limbaugh, it's because he has used racially insensitive words before. Rather has no previous statements that I am aware of, nor does Palin. I am not aware of any from Hannity. Limbaugh has, so if he says something again, I personally will feel that it is deeper than a poor choice of words. The same holds true for Rather now, IMO.

 

Again, in my situation mentioned above, what I said sounded very bad, much worse than what Rather said, but was all about circumstances, not ill intent. In each case I felt awful about it afterwards, even after apologizing to those that I might have offended (which should have included everyone within earshot, had my words had meaning).

 

I'm not sure, in Rather's case, that this is an epithet, as intent (by definition) must be determined for that to be the case. Additionally, Rather's body of work does not speak to any such ill intent toward blacks, as far as I know. As stated above, if there is a next time, I would THEN question his intent.

 

I'm willing to share my examples of insensitive remarks, if we think it would be appropriate to do so.

I've read every post you've made concerning this topic. If you really think that the race of the President had nothing to do with the comment made by Dan Rather there's nothing more to say.

:thumb: :thumb: :thumb:

Oh ok, I see it now. It is not a racial slur as long as the intent is not there.

I've read every post you've made concerning this topic. If you really think that the race of the President had nothing to do with the comment made by Dan Rather there's nothing more to say.

 

I think I've put forth a cogent argument in this thread as respectfully as I can in what I consider to be a sensitive topic. Ignoring my arguments, you've concluded I don't recognize racial stereotypes or racially offensive remarks or otherwise find them acceptable. That's beyond ludicrous. There are a lot of posters I would have expected that juvenileness from, but not nwo.

I think I've put forth a cogent argument in this thread as respectfully as I can in what I consider to be a sensitive topic. Ignoring my arguments, you've concluded I don't recognize racial stereotypes or racially offensive remarks or otherwise find them acceptable. That's beyond ludicrous. There are a lot of posters I would have expected that juvenileness from, but not nwo.

Browbeating won't work on nWo, he's seen that garbage before.

I think I've put forth a cogent argument in this thread as respectfully as I can in what I consider to be a sensitive topic. Ignoring my arguments, you've concluded I don't recognize racial stereotypes or racially offensive remarks or otherwise find them acceptable. That's beyond ludicrous. There are a lot of posters I would have expected that juvenileness from, but not nwo.

Wow! I must have hit a nerve.

Wow! I must have hit a nerve.

:lol: You're not the first, trust me.

:lol: You're not the first, trust me.

I hear you.

Several years ago, my 30th birthday fell on a Monday. As most women are, I was dreading turning 30. On a basketball trip over the weekend, I turned to our head coach and said, "Well, this Monday is Black Monday for me." His eyes got really big and he said, "What did you say?" I repeated what I had said.

 

My birthday is January 19th, which just so happens to, on occasion, fall on MLK day, which that year it did. He originally took my comment as a slur (and told me how shocked he was that anything like that came out of my mouth) UNTIL I explained that it was my 30th birthday. My choice of words was completely an unfortunate coincidence...and it sure made me sound like a racist.

 

On the 2nd occasion, one of our football players came late to practice, needing to check out his practice gear for the day. I had JUST finished putting away the very stuff he needed, as I thought that he was just absent that day. I turned to him and playfully said, "Joe, I'm gonna have to string you up by your ears! I just put that equipment away!" He looked at me, cracked a smile, and said, "Is it because I am black? You want to lynch me because I am black?" He smiled because he KNEW that wasn't my intent and that I didn't even make the connection myself, but I apologized profusely and STILL feel bad about those unintentional words today.

 

So, I do think that in this case, Rather may have had a slip up like I did, in which he said something that had a racial connotation (slur, epitaph) to it, without intending it to. If he has nothing else in his background to point to anything else, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, as long as he doesn't say anything similar again. If he had used a combination, such as those mentioned in earlier threads, then I think the intent would point to a more nefarious meaning.

 

As a hispanic, I have been the subject of racial slurs. However, since my incidents, I have tried to make sure that any perceived slur didn't have an alternative meaning and intent from the user. On occasions, that has been the case. On others, it's not.

Several years ago, my 30th birthday fell on a Monday. As most women are, I was dreading turning 30. On a basketball trip over the weekend, I turned to our head coach and said, "Well, this Monday is Black Monday for me." His eyes got really big and he said, "What did you say?" I repeated what I had said.

 

My birthday is January 19th, which just so happens to, on occasion, fall on MLK day, which that year it did. He originally took my comment as a slur (and told me how shocked he was that anything like that came out of my mouth) UNTIL I explained that it was my 30th birthday. My choice of words was completely an unfortunate coincidence...and it sure made me sound like a racist.

 

On the 2nd occasion, one of our football players came late to practice, needing to check out his practice gear for the day. I had JUST finished putting away the very stuff he needed, as I thought that he was just absent that day. I turned to him and playfully said, "Joe, I'm gonna have to string you up by your ears! I just put that equipment away!" He looked at me, cracked a smile, and said, "Is it because I am black? You want to lynch me because I am black?" He smiled because he KNEW that wasn't my intent and that I didn't even make the connection myself, but I apologized profusely and STILL feel bad about those unintentional words today.

 

So, I do think that in this case, Rather may have had a slip up like I did, in which he said something that had a racial connotation (slur, epitaph) to it, without intending it to. If he has nothing else in his background to point to anything else, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, as long as he doesn't say anything similar again. If he had used a combination, such as those mentioned in earlier threads, then I think the intent would point to a more nefarious meaning.

 

As a hispanic, I have been the subject of racial slurs. However, since my incidents, I have tried to make sure that any perceived slur didn't have an alternative meaning and intent from the user. On occasions, that has been the case. On others, it's not.

 

You had absolutely no reason to apologize for either of your comments as I see it. It sounds to me like the individuals in your post have a huge chip on their shoulder. If those comments offend anyone, THEY are the ones with serious racial problems.

 

You didn't slip up, Rather may have, but you didn't. The problem is Rather may have slipped up and got pretty much a pass on it. I couldn't get away with the same "slip up" on BGP, that's what bothers me.

 

I would be willing to bet this months salary that if I had made the exact same comment Rather made on a BGP thread, I would have been berated by some of the BGP members that are defending him now...Guarantee it! Right up to the time my post was removed and I was placed on probation.

You had absolutely no reason to apologize for either of your comments as I see it. It sounds to me like the individuals in your post have a huge chip on their shoulder. If those comments offend anyone, THEY are the ones with serious racial problems.

 

You didn't slip up, Rather may have, but you didn't. The problem is Rather may have slipped up and got pretty much a pass on it. I couldn't get away with the same "slip up" on BGP, that's what bothers me.

 

I would be willing to bet this months salary that if I had made the exact same comment Rather made on a BGP thread, I would have been berated by some of the BGP members that are defending him now...Guarantee it! Right up to the time my post was removed and I was placed on probation.

 

Neither of the people that I mentioned in my post got mad. However, both would have had every right to be upset if my words had been intentionally chosen for racial connotations, which would then make them slurs. As it is, they were unfortunately chosen based on circumstances.

 

You are probably right as to what would have happened here on BGP, had someone used that phrase. The problem is that we can't read each other's tone and particularly here in the P/R forum, we seem to be (dem/rep, con/lib alike) a little higher strung, and thus, a bit more reactionary. However, I dare say that if I had made posts similar to what I said in my examples, about Black Monday or about the comment that I made to the football player that was black, without the additional details, then some might have taken offense.

 

The problem with Rather's comment is that we really DON'T know his intent. Is it a circumstantial coincidence? Or is it intentional? Since I know of no other similar offense and he has explained what he meant, I personally will give him the benefit of the doubt...this time. The same would hold true if Sarah Palin had made the same comment. There are plenty of other reasons not to like her.