Washington rids itself of sexist language

[Pakuni]

Much of the media and folks like Eric Holder are indeed loons. But, they're not on the fringes and a large chunk of this nation garbles their nonsense up.

So, much of the media and Eric Holder called for George Zimmerman to be charged with a hate crime?
Hmmm. Must of missed that.

Though I'm a huge fan of the "liberal media" meme. Especially when the nation's largest news network (by far) is Fox, its largest newspaper (by far) is the Wall Street Journal and its most listened to radio show is (by far) Rush Limbaugh.
Yes, there is a liberal media. But there's a just as large conservative media.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I'm happy for you.  Have some suffered for it?  Of course.  How many US Presidents have we had that are Catholic?  One...and likely blatant cheating in Texas and Illinois for that to happen.  Why has only one Catholic become a US President?  Tons of history on this.

Now, are Catholics or Christians out getting murdered these days in this country because of it?  No.  Have there been assaults, property crimes, etc because of beliefs...you bet.  Both in the way past with the Klan and as recently as this past year.  Some are major incidents, some are minor.  Some of our dearest friends are African American Catholics.  Our two families have gone to Hawaii, Orlando, etc in three of the last four Spring Breaks.  The grief they took by going to the Catholic schools growing up in Compton..you should hear the stories.  The assaults, the condemnations, etc....all because they were wearing a Catholic school uniform.

But look at your answer, just like Holder's answer...you believe this stuff is dependent upon HISTORICAL persecution.  This is where we fundamentally differ.  No one is disputing that some groups have suffered.  To the point some suffer so much white guilt that policies going the extreme opposite are now in place and are discriminatory in their own way (nothing like fighting discrimination with more discrimination...always a really good idea    ).   This isn't about me, so when you say is the deck stacked against me I don't even know where you are going with this, but that's the mindset many people have. "You're white, you've had it easy".  "You're a male, the world has been handed to you".  "You're a heterosexual, etc, etc". 

I believe in equality.  Period.  Laws should be applied to people EQUALLY.  If one group commits a crime and the media gets all ginned up, demands hate crime status, etc, then when the shoe is on the other foot, I expect equal treatment.  I expect the hypocrisy to end.  Somehow this is where equality goes out the door and the typical response is "well, such and such group has suffered atrocities in the past so "it's different"".    As long as we have that viewpoint, the racial divide will continue I'm afraid to say.  People see the double standard and that is why so many are upset with the media and certain folks that stand to make money, etc from the exploitation. 

#1 I don't think having a member of my religion/group be elected/not elected President is really an accurate way of evaluating potential discrimination.

#2 I don't suffer from "white guilt" at all. I'm using my PERSONAL experience to evaluate my position on a topic. I've never felt like I have been at a disadvantage because I'm white and Catholic. I could create a lot of scenarios and hypotheticals (as you have illustrated), but the honest to God answer is that I've never experienced it. Ever. Never. Not once. I'm not saying it NEVER happens, but I don't know if it's happening enough for me to RAGE about.

#3 You are technically correct with your belief that all laws should be blind and equal. However, the world is FULL of these types of situations. We've talked about this before. Augusta National received protests, Curves Gym received praise. Is that fair? Technically, no. Should I be OUTRAGED? No. Equality is a process. Look at the big picture.

#4 Racial/cultural/gender equality is a long, hard, process. It's going to be messy. It's going to take time. I'm not saying I agree 100% with every law that is on the books, but you seem to be VERY CONCERNED about the persecution of white Christians. I'm Irish-Catholic. I can promise you that I have never felt persecuted. 50 years ago, that wouldn't have been true at all.

#5 I don't believe that the regulations/laws that have been put in place are apart of some huge liberal/white guilt/conspiracy. I believe they were put in place to provide some additional protection for groups that have been treated poorly in the past. Now, the next logical discussion is if/when some of that protection needs to be repealed. I'll say from my PERSONAL experience, I don't think we are there yet. Probably need another generation or 2, as behaviors/beliefs take a long time to change.

[forgetful]

You can't necessarily stand on the corner and yell "I hate gays" at a gay dude. There are laws that may* be against "that". (i.e, discon, etc.)

Personally I mostly hate hate crimes. Punish the crimes. If hating someone and having an awful opinion of a person or group of people is completely OK in this country, then why add on to punishment for it?

But.. once you start going after that.. I wonder where you stop. DUI... you can do zero direct harm to anyone, yet be punished. Hit/injure/kill someone and things get a lot worse for you. Even though the same "crime" was committed - driving under the influence.

a) You're driving, someone runs a red, hits you and they die. If you're sober, no problemo criminally.
b) You're driving, are at a .09, someone runs a red, hits you and they die. Might be up for manslaughter or worse. Enhanced punishment, yes?

You can also get into the fact that specific BAC levels affect different people in much different ways. So maybe it's good to punish partly based on what harm is actually done. But maybe it's not fair to punish based on an arbitrary figure that everyone is equally subjected to, even though their actions "driving impaired" may be different.

Then again... there are lesser crimes charged for those who fail to carry out their intent. Attempted murder. You shoot someone with the idea of killing them.. you miss and or they don't die. In many cases, you're far better off than if the person died. Maybe you should be treated as a bad murderer vs. a non-murderer.

What are we really prosecuting? Crimes or the outcome or the reason for them? Answer is all of the above and "depends", right or wrong.

I tend to say look at the crime. Aggravating factors like having a kid in the car while driving hammered or pulling a drive by seem reasonable... but aggravating factors for what might* amount to exercising freedom
of speech and opinion? Ehhh..

The drive is indeed 100% white, the sheriff even had to come out and confirm it because of mis-reporting in the media.  The initial stories reported that they were all black, and included a picture (for the driver) of a completely unrelated black individual to maintain the story lines. 

Only later were the correct pictures reported and indication that the driver was White.  Later additional stories indicated that the shooter actually had a white mother and was thus of mixed race (still reported as being black).  This led the right wing conspiracy theorists to report that the "white driver" was actually mixed race (talking about the wrong individual), and brought up all the talk about, how come Obama is black and this kid is white. 

Essentially this whole story has been spun by the right to look as much as possible to be a racial story.  Fact of the matter is, much of it is false reporting and forcing a story to fit an agenda.

The important part is that kids are going out and killing people because they are bored and want to see a person die.  The better question to be asking ourselves is, what has gone wrong with our culture that such thought processes and behavior is even possible.  Moreover, what is wrong with society when instead of focusing on these important issues are individuals trying to spin this into a political story about Obama and hypocrisy.

Thats what got my involved in this debate, the needless politicizing of important events.  We apparently can't separate our analysis of events from our own political ideals/emotions.

For instance.  GZ case.

Important cultural aspect of the case regardless of ones stance on guilty/not guilty is that a kid walking home from a gas station in the rain is immediately condemned as a criminal because of his appearance and is stalked because of it.   Culturally, why is that the case...it led to a loss of life.  The rest is tragic, but this is the important cultural detail. By default in that case it brings in racial overtones as the victims clothing/demeanor demonstrated an Urban culture appearance.

In this case.  Kids are so morally bankrupt that they thrill kill just to see someone die.  What is wrong in these local conditions to allow such behavior.  In this case race should never have been an issue, (three perpetrators are 1-black, 1-white, and 1-mixed race).  The key is figuring out where society went wrong and what we can do as a society to fix this.  Sadly, this case was made into a political weapon and the key issues will never be examined and we will not learn from this tragedy. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

First of all, I'm extremely familiar with Chicos arguing himself into an unwinnable (sic) position and I'm not known as one who gives him an easy out. That said, don't hold your breath waiting for him to admit he's mistaken.

Regarding hate crimes, you may be technically correct that the statute drives sentencing but motive absolutely does and always has had a lot to do with convictions - as it should.

My point is this:if an 18 year old Asian man bludgeons my 91 year old Grandmother to death because he hates women, old people, white people or Catholics I want that or those facts exposed to help convict him and put him away for life, but I'm not impressed with a DA cementing his status with aggrieved groups by grandstanding for a greater sentence than befits the crime.

Oh I've admitted mistakes here quite often, a simple search reveals that.

In this case, it's a matter of opinion on these issues and I don't feel I'm mistaken.  If the shoe was on the other foot, there would be massive cries to label those as hate crimes.  I'm simply showing the double standard.  I have enough friends running news departments at tv stations, or reporters who will be back me up.  Some will flat out tell you in private what they believe vs what they are actually allowed to do because of various pressures.  It is what it is, I have zero doubt in my mind if a white kid put those tweets out there that would be a massive cry to label it a hate crime.  If a gay person was attacked as a traditional marriage rally, there would be a massive cry to label it a hate crime.  Not one shred of doubt.

[ChicosBailBonds]

#3 You are technically correct with your belief that all laws should be blind and equal. However, the world is FULL of these types of situations. We've talked about this before. Augusta National received protests, Curves Gym received praise. Is that fair? Technically, no. Should I be OUTRAGED? No. Equality is a process. Look at the big picture.

I am looking at the big picture, as long as you have racial hustlers, racial baiters, and unequal policies and application of laws, you will continue to be a racially divided nation.  That should drive outrage.  It's impossible to get there until you approach from an equality standpoint.  Going about it with more divide, more racial policies, is only going to continue to poison the well for many Americans.  You want racial divide to end, start treating people based on the content of their character.  Start using meritocracy.  Until then, things will continue.

When you have African Americans called Uncle Tom's for having differing view, that will move us forward how?  When you have people labeled as racist because they don't like policies (nothing to do with race) of our POTUS, that moves us forward how?  And on and on.  It doesn't...it only plants new seeds of resentment.  When you see the media editing 911 calls and doing everything in their power to make someone appear racist when they aren't, how does this help?  When you see the media apply one standard to one group and a different standard to other groups (unprotected classes), how does this help move the process forward?

This isn't hard. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

Posting pictures of a murdered 88-year-old man and suggesting we hold a moment of silence in his memory is totes logical and not in the least bit an appeal to emotion.

Definitely an appeal to emotion, but also to logic.  I'm trying to see if a member of the Tuskegee Airmen was murdered as an 88 year old while on his way to the pool hall by two white teens, how would the media play it?  How would Rev Al, Rev Jesse, MSNBC, etc?

I simply apply logic and ask why they aren't treated the same, why the double standard.  Sure there is emotion, but there is the logic, common sense question that no one wants to answers.  You guys can deny and say they would be treated the same by the media, etc...if you truly believe that, I honestly don't know what planet you live on based on the endless examples we see. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

Look at how many blacks end up on death row. You will see it is not being applied equally. And its definitely not in a way that is unfavorable to whites.


There has never been an easier existence in the history of the world than being a white, heterosexual Christian male in the United States of America at this very moment. I don't think your sob stories are going to convince anyone else otherwise. Arguing to the contrary is not brave or prophetic. Its whiny. Get over it. We've all got it good.

Again, you are applying historical standards...not EQUAL standards.  That's a classic white guilt argument.  I believe in equality, there is a difference. 

And please, don't say "we've all got it good", that is simply inaccurate.  There are poor whites, poor blacks, poor Asians, poor Hispanics, rich whites, rich Asians, rich Hispanics, rich Blacks....some have it good, some don't.  Part of the problem is you are using blanket statements to justify your guilt.  To each their own.

For me, I'll go with equality.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Says one conservative supporting another conservative's point of view..l AM SHOCKED.  LOL

Do you run around all day with your fingers in your ears?

Do you run around all day with your hands over your eyes?

[ChicosBailBonds]

The inability to laugh.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/08/26/missouri_rodeo_clown_a_lot_of_people_have_lost_their_ability_to_laugh.html

[forgetful]

Definitely an appeal to emotion, but also to logic.  I'm trying to see if a member of the Tuskegee Airmen was murdered as an 88 year old while on his way to the pool hall by two white teens, how would the media play it?  How would Rev Al, Rev Jesse, MSNBC, etc?

I simply apply logic and ask why they aren't treated the same, why the double standard.  Sure there is emotion, but there is the logic, common sense question that no one wants to answers.  You guys can deny and say they would be treated the same by the media, etc...if you truly believe that, I honestly don't know what planet you live on based on the endless examples we see. 

Except it isn't logic.  It is pure emotion and assumptions.  If the reverse happened by two poor white teens that robbed (motive for the attacks that don't involve race) and beat a black airmen, it would not have been considered a hate crime and provided they were charged with the appropriate crimes, Al, Jesse and others wouldn't have treated it any different than this case.  I provided a case in Mississippi where the appropriate punishments/arrests were made that did not get this fanfare you claim would occur.  But you ignore that instead of indicating your were wrong.

You also, do not admit your were wrong about who the shooter was, or the race of the people involved in the crime. 

Also, for someone so concerned about media treatment of the events, you seem to have no problem with the media presenting all three as black (including a photo of some other random guy in place of the white individual).  Why, because it fit your agenda. 

For someone so concerned about equality, you seem to have no issue with the two black (one being mixed race) individuals being charged with murder as adults, while the only white defendant is being charged differently as a juvenile defender. 

Rather you have twisted and contorted this case to fit some racial story line that doesn't exist...incidentally completely in step with the right wing media. 

The strange thing is, there are areas near your concerns which I do think merit discussion.  Namely unequal treatment due to some policies.  However, your treatment of this case is so outlandish that it actually hurts your cause in any areas that you may actually have a point.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I am looking at the big picture, as long as you have racial hustlers, racial baiters, and unequal policies and application of laws, you will continue to be a racially divided nation.  That should drive outrage.  It's impossible to get there until you approach from an equality standpoint.  Going about it with more divide, more racial policies, is only going to continue to poison the well for many Americans.  You want racial divide to end, start treating people based on the content of their character.  Start using meritocracy.  Until then, things will continue.

When you have African Americans called Uncle Tom's for having differing view, that will move us forward how?  When you have people labeled as racist because they don't like policies (nothing to do with race) of our POTUS, that moves us forward how?  And on and on.  It doesn't...it only plants new seeds of resentment.  When you see the media editing 911 calls and doing everything in their power to make someone appear racist when they aren't, how does this help?  When you see the media apply one standard to one group and a different standard to other groups (unprotected classes), how does this help move the process forward?

This isn't hard. 

You're missing the key element that a lot of people DON'T think everybody is equal. The rules and policies were put in place to force those people to make systemic changes. I'm not saying everything needs to be a law for the next 200 years. But, we are only 50 years removed from the civil rights movement. Equality is a process that is going to take a couple of generations. I've said this several times. Same for women in the workplace. It's a process. It's not going to be perfect. It's going to take time.

[Jay Bee]

The drive is indeed 100% white, the sheriff even had to come out and confirm it because of mis-reporting in the media.  The initial stories reported that they were all black, and included a picture (for the driver) of a completely unrelated black individual to maintain the story lines. 

I understand there was a picture of someone else attributed to the driver initially, but as for the 'true' driver... he still doesn't look white. I would question why you'd claim that he's "indeed 100% white".

I'd bet money against that in fact. Unless you're wanting to see him as white or just afraid to say honestly what you see, I don't understand how you'd think he looks 100% white.

3 alleged attackers, zero of them white. One victim, white.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Let me ask a rather simple question.

If you have it drummed into your head for years by certain people, by the media, etc, of the "systemic white racism" that exists and "you don't have a chance" without us (be it gov't, whatever), what do you think that does to that person's psyche?  What do you think that does to a young man who has that drummed into them every day...do you think that bodes well for race relations? How do you think that person views other races if he is taught this from day one?  If that explanation is used all the time, do you think it could ultimately become an excuse for not even trying, just hating on everything? 

I'm asking and I'm happy to tell the story of how one of my African American friends handles this with his son and daughter and why he is so against that kind of thinking, that kind of preaching from the media and "his leaders" (his words).  He feels that this daily mantra does nothing but further fracture race relations and gives people an excuse to blame all their problems.  Again, his words, not mine (though I agree entirely).  As he likes to describe it, they are poisoning the well and profiting from it in dollars and power. 

I'd be curious to hear some thoughts on that.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Let me ask a rather simple question.

If you have it drummed into your head for years by certain people, by the media, etc, of the "systemic white racism" that exists and "you don't have a chance" without us (be it gov't, whatever), what do you think that does to that person's psyche?  What do you think that does to a young man who has that drummed into them every day...do you think that bodes well for race relations? How do you think that person views other races if he is taught this from day one?  If that explanation is used all the time, do you think it could ultimately become an excuse for not even trying, just hating on everything?  

I'm asking and I'm happy to tell the story of how one of my African American friends handles this with his son and daughter and why he is so against that kind of thinking, that kind of preaching from the media and "his leaders" (his words).  He feels that this daily mantra does nothing but further fracture race relations and gives people an excuse to blame all their problems.  Again, his words, not mine (though I agree entirely).  As he likes to describe it, they are poisoning the well and profiting from it in dollars and power.  

I'd be curious to hear some thoughts on that.

It's an absolutely valid point.

Your friend is African-American, so he has a different perspective (from you or me). You seem to keep harping on this from an angle that it's somehow "unfair" to whites... and I'll tell you as a white guy, I haven't experienced anything unfair about it (which is my unique perspective).

Now, do we want to discuss the psychological impacts of these types of rules, regulations and programs? Yea, I think there is something there. If we wave a magic wand tomorrow and just declare everybody equal, I bet it would help with some of the stuff you mentioned. It sends a more consistent message to everybody. Work hard, get an education, provide for yourself and your family. You can be anything you want. etc. etc. I get it. Totally.

However, the downside is there is still a lot of subtle racism in this country, and without some rules and regulations, the cultural divide might be even bigger. That's my primary concern.

A Personal Example: I have an extended relative whom I'm embarrassed to admit is a racist (although he doesn't even know it). He's a nice guy. He loves watching football. He loves watching basketball. But, he ain't letting his daughter date a non-white guy. He also owns a small business, and I he'd prefer that his staff continue to be all-white. He's made passive racist comments that other people just write off as "old school', but deep down he's racist and he doesn't even know it.

My point? There is still a lot of subtle and institutionalized racism out there. Some of it's not even "on purpose". It's just been handed down from one guy to the next.

So, while I personally understand that there some possible side effects to "protected class" rules/laws/regs (that I cannot understand completely because I'm a white Catholic guy), I'm also concerned by some of the actions I've seen by my fellow white dudes. And for the record, this ain't "white guilt". This is stuff I have personally seen and heard.

Eventually, race is going to matter less and less in this country. Same with sexual orientation.

[brandx]

First things first - actually first 2 things first and AMMO correctly posted on each.
1. Liberal media. Every time I hear this, I think of exactly what AMMO said. Remember, the people claiming 'liberal media' are the same people demanding we need laws against Sharia law. Plain old stupidity.

2. Whites are discriminated against. I am 62 years old, and like AMMO, have NEVER faced discrimination over being white even one time in my life. It must really be rough on the people with the power and money. And there is never an effort to prevent whites from voting as there has been in the last several months towards blacks.

I've never had a problem with Republicans tho' I am definitely liberal. We need ideas from both sides and compromise, but with the emergence of the tea Party, that has ended. The Dems couldn't ever ask for more than Ted Cruz, Palin, Bachman, Santorum, etc. to make the Dems look good, but while it helps the Dems, it is not good for the country.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Except it isn't logic.  It is pure emotion and assumptions.  If the reverse happened by two poor white teens that robbed (motive for the attacks that don't involve race) and beat a black airmen, it would not have been considered a hate crime and provided they were charged with the appropriate crimes, Al, Jesse and others wouldn't have treated it any different than this case.  I provided a case in Mississippi where the appropriate punishments/arrests were made that did not get this fanfare you claim would occur.  But you ignore that instead of indicating your were wrong.

Again, I don't know what world you live in....I really don't.  If that happened (your example), it absolutely would be considered a hate crime by those people (law enforcement maybe or maybe not) and they would pound the racist drum into submission with certain media helping them at every turn.  I can give you case after case after case where they have done this, all the way back to the Tawana Brawley nonsense.  There are people that live to make every case like this a "race case" regardless of the circumstances.  It is what they do.  I just can't believe you actually believe they would just say "oh, just a random shooting" and not apply a racial element to it to get folks fired up.  They absolutely would, their history is your guide.  There is no way they wouldn't.

In terms of who the shooter was....sure, happy to admit I made a mistake.  Early reports said it was Edwards who pulled the trigger.  Happy?  Edwards was also charged with murder, so was Luna.  If it makes you feel better that one murder charge is somehow different than the other one, whatever.  It's Oklahoma, and I'm hoping both of them are going on the fast track to the death chamber, regardless of who pulled the trigger as they are both charged with the same crime.  If you want to identify them in a matter that is all of a sudden different than how the media and this country has identified the President, both are considered black...than that's fine, too, though interesting to say the least.  It reminds me of "white became white Hispanic", but whatever. 

I'm not aware of any photo presenting them all black...sounds like an innocent mistake in the fog of reporting in the early hours.  I find that VASTLY different than editing a 911 call so perversely as to change the entire meaning of the call to make someone look racist.  So over the top there is a lawsuit now that GZ is going to win against said news outlets.

[ChicosBailBonds]

You're missing the key element that a lot of people DON'T think everybody is equal. The rules and policies were put in place to force those people to make systemic changes. I'm not saying everything needs to be a law for the next 200 years. But, we are only 50 years removed from the civil rights movement. Equality is a process that is going to take a couple of generations. I've said this several times. Same for women in the workplace. It's a process. It's not going to be perfect. It's going to take time.

How much time?  Who decides?  Oh, and all the while we keep teaching one race of the evils of the other at every turn, that's sure to make things rosy in the future. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

However, the downside is there is still a lot of subtle racism in this country, and without some rules and regulations, the cultural divide might be even bigger. That's my primary concern.
 

Yup, by all groups of people, yet there are some people that believe that is impossible.  Just as you mentioned, there are some that don't believe everyone is equal.  No one will disagree with you on that.  There are also racists among all groups of people, but there are actually people out there that are unable to process this reality.

[forgetful]

I understand there was a picture of someone else attributed to the driver initially, but as for the 'true' driver... he still doesn't look white. I would question why you'd claim that he's "indeed 100% white".

I'd bet money against that in fact. Unless you're wanting to see him as white or just afraid to say honestly what you see, I don't understand how you'd think he looks 100% white.

3 alleged attackers, zero of them white. One victim, white.

I'm not wanting to see him as white, or think he looks 100% white.  I am reporting what the police and his friends (in articles) have said, that he is white (police report indicating 100% whatever that means).  His friends specified that he is white, Luna has a white mother (thereby separating mixed from black) and Edwards has a white girlfriend.

I'll go from reports of people that know him instead of a picture on the internet "looking" different.  

Here is an article with comments from a friend.

http://houston.cbslocal.com/2013/08/24/murder-suspects-friend-it-has-nothing-to-do-with-chris-being-white/

"One of Edwards’ friends, Serenity Jackson, told The Associated Press she didn’t believe race was a factor in the shooting. She noted that Luna’s mother, Edwards’ girlfriend and Jones are white."

I don't care if they are white, black, hispanic or native american.  I only pointed out that Chico's statements about the accused were factually incorrect according to reports.

[forgetful]

Again, I don't know what world you live in....I really don't.  If that happened (your example), it absolutely would be considered a hate crime by those people (law enforcement maybe or maybe not) and they would pound the racist drum into submission with certain media helping them at every turn.  I can give you case after case after case where they have done this, all the way back to the Tawana Brawley nonsense.  There are people that live to make every case like this a "race case" regardless of the circumstances.  It is what they do.  I just can't believe you actually believe they would just say "oh, just a random shooting" and not apply a racial element to it to get folks fired up.  They absolutely would, their history is your guide.  There is no way they wouldn't.

In terms of who the shooter was....sure, happy to admit I made a mistake.  Early reports said it was Edwards who pulled the trigger.  Happy?  Edwards was also charged with murder, so was Luna.  If it makes you feel better that one murder charge is somehow different than the other one, whatever.  It's Oklahoma, and I'm hoping both of them are going on the fast track to the death chamber, regardless of who pulled the trigger as they are both charged with the same crime.  If you want to identify them in a matter that is all of a sudden different than how the media and this country has identified the President, both are considered black...than that's fine, too, though interesting to say the least.  It reminds me of "white became white Hispanic", but whatever.  

I'm not aware of any photo presenting them all black...sounds like an innocent mistake in the fog of reporting in the early hours.  I find that VASTLY different than editing a 911 call so perversely as to change the entire meaning of the call to make someone look racist.  So over the top there is a lawsuit now that GZ is going to win against said news outlets.

If your whole argument is that there are some nutjobs out there who will turn everything in to a race crime, than I wholeheartedly agree.  If the legal system and the media and every person with a ounce of reason sees things the correct way, then frankly I don't care what some nutjobs think.  

If I got upset every time a fringe lunatic said something that bothered me, I'd be a stressed out angry old man.

This is the only link I can find that still has the original photos of the accused.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/fox-and-friends-daily-caller-falsely-report-3-black-teens-arrested-in-chris-lane-murder/

[Jay Bee]

I don't care if they are white, black, hispanic or native american.  I only pointed out that Chico's statements about the accused were factually incorrect according to reports.

And I'm pointing out that reports you rely on appear to be factually incorrect.

[ChicosBailBonds]

First things first - actually first 2 things first and AMMO correctly posted on each.
1. Liberal media. Every time I hear this, I think of exactly what AMMO said. Remember, the people claiming 'liberal media' are the same people demanding we need laws against Sharia law. Plain old stupidity.

2. Whites are discriminated against. I am 62 years old, and like AMMO, have NEVER faced discrimination over being white even one time in my life. It must really be rough on the people with the power and money. And there is never an effort to prevent whites from voting as there has been in the last several months towards blacks.

I've never had a problem with Republicans tho' I am definitely liberal. We need ideas from both sides and compromise, but with the emergence of the tea Party, that has ended. The Dems couldn't ever ask for more than Ted Cruz, Palin, Bachman, Santorum, etc. to make the Dems look good, but while it helps the Dems, it is not good for the country.

Notice the only people saying there isn't a liberal media are liberals.

"Of course the media are liberal"
-Walter Cronkite

I'm glad as a 62 year old white person you have never been discriminated against, some have.  College entrance admissions is an example, jobs (look at the lawsuits for police and fire, etc), being in the wrong place at the wrong time can get you killed for having the wrong skin color (that applies to blacks, whites, Hispanics, Asians), etc, etc.  Just because you have not been discriminated against doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Just as one of my good African American friends will tell you he is lucky to be African American in his job because he has benefited from it.  My brother-in-law, 1/4 Choctaw Indian...he has benefited from it and so have all three of my nieces and nephews on their college admissions by being able to "CHECK A BOX".  He laughs about it, he knows almost nothing of his Native American ancestry but he uses it where he can because the gov't says he can.  Why not, he's a fool not to.  

So like everything in life, it all depends.  Would he want to be living on a poor reservation....nope.  Do those people suffer?  Yup.  Does Toney (my bro-in-law) benefit from his race...yup.  Different circumstances for everyone.

[ChicosBailBonds]

If your whole argument is that there are some nutjobs out there who will turn everything in to a race crime, than I wholeheartedly agree.  If the legal system and the media and every person with a ounce of reason sees things the correct way, then frankly I don't care what some nutjobs think.  

If I got upset every time a fringe lunatic said something that bothered me, I'd be a stressed out angry old man.

This is the only link I can find that still has the original photos of the accused.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/fox-and-friends-daily-caller-falsely-report-3-black-teens-arrested-in-chris-lane-murder/

The "some nutjobs" in these cases are often leaders of some of these communities and given a voice by the media that legitimizes these claims.  These are not just "some nutjobs" that are ignored.  These are "some nutjobs given a microphone, hours of coverage, columns of inches" etc.  You aren't comparing apples to apples.  We're talking the evening news, the daily paper, not some talk show...we're talking MAINSTREAM media.  Huge difference.

[brandx]

Notice the only people saying there isn't a liberal media are liberals.  LOL.

Study after study, poll after poll...you can ignore it as you wish.

"Of course the media are liberal"
-Walter Cronkite

I'm glad as a 62 year old white person you have never been discriminated against, some have.  College entrance admissions is an example, jobs (look at the lawsuits for police and fire, etc), being in the wrong place at the wrong time can get you killed for having the wrong skin color (that applies to blacks, whites, Hispanics, Asians), etc, etc.  Just because you have not been discriminated against doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Just as one of my good African American friends will tell you he is lucky to be African American in his job because he has benefited from it.  My brother-in-law, 1/4 Choctaw Indian...he has benefited from it and so have all three of my nieces and nephews on their college admissions by being able to "CHECK A BOX".  He laughs about it, he knows almost nothing of his Native American ancestry but he uses it where he can because the gov't says he can.  Why not, he's a fool not to.  

So like everything in life, it all depends.  Would he want to be living on a poor reservation....nope.  Do those people suffer?  Yup.  Does Toney (my bro-in-law) benefit from his race...yup.  Different circumstances for everyone.

I've noticed that Police/Fire Dept. are always mentioned when talking discrimination. But I am amazed how it is used to show how whites are discriminated against. I guess we need to forget the 200 years blacks were discriminated against when it came to Police and Fire (cuz only the last 30 years matter).

Are the current hiring practices discriminatory? Probably - but also necessary to make up for the past.

As far as liberal media - we will continue to disagree. Even on "liberal" networks like NBC, CBS, etc., all you need to do is look at the guest breakdown on their weekend news programs. I'm amazed how these "liberals are constantly putting more Republicans than Democrats on their shows. And a quote from over 50 years ago is hardly relevant.

But as I said, it is never the whites who have their voting rights threatened.

[forgetful]

The "some nutjobs" in these cases are often leaders of some of these communities and given a voice by the media that legitimizes these claims.  These are not just "some nutjobs" that are ignored.  These are "some nutjobs given a microphone, hours of coverage, columns of inches" etc.  You aren't comparing apples to apples.  We're talking the evening news, the daily paper, not some talk show...we're talking MAINSTREAM media.  Huge difference.

Maybe you can help your argument out, by pointing out cases where the mainstream media and MLK III/Sharpton called for hate crimes in situations where there were not hate crimes. 

Don't use GZ as an example, it is a bad example and a very unique case.  If you can point out some cases that actually are legitimate (as opposed to the present cases), maybe we can understand your case better.