Leadership

[MMMMMM]

My post was not illogical; as I have explained, I said the race card was dead (as in meaning it has no good merit left to stand on); dead, that is, except for those with axes to grind or who remain mired in the past (as I believe I also wrote there).

So, my post DIDN'T descend into nonsense.

[ QUOTE ]
See? Like I said, I'm not very nice.

[/ QUOTE ]

And I had just said about you: [ QUOTE ]
You're definitely one of the nicer ones,

[/ QUOTE ]

So, I guess that means I was wrong, huh?

Well then here's a question for you: WHY aren't you nice, then? Not just to me, but to everyone, if that's the case: here, in life, anywhere, everywhere? What the hell is so hard about that anyway? It isn't hard to be nice, you know. Do you think it is hard? Something to think about, at least hopefully.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
Just admit it that when you responded by redefining the word DEAD you accepted that you likely wrote that or words to that effect. Which of course you did.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes I wrote "dead" but not the quote which was attributed to me and which I failed to realize that at the time; those words were put in my mouth, as I showed above. My initial remark had to do with the "race card" not "racism".

Anyway, why does nearly everyone on this board feel the need to "win" an argument at any cost? Seriously the maturity level here is no better than junior high school. It's literally unbelievable.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
The presentation of an example does not prove the existence of rampant racism (at least as you define and redefine DEAD) and the lack of a personal example does not prove the absence.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course it doesn't PROVE it one way or the other, but it DOES offer some indication as its prevalence or lack thereof. Thus far NOT ONE PERSON has chimed in with a personal example of serious racism they have personally witnessed in recent decades which had a deleterious effect (such as someone not getting hired, or getting fired, or getting beaten up, because of racism).

So you can't dismiss that. Just between you, me, and Cyrus we're personally covering at least 100 years of experience in recent decades. Yet not one of us has witnessed such an incident (I'm presuming for you and Cyrus because neither of you piped up with a personal report). Doesn't that at least suggest to you that the prevalence of such incidents is probably really not all that common after all? 100 years experience between and NO INCIDENTS PERSONALLY OBSERVED? Hel, how many Royal Flushes have we personally seen? But not one incident of serious racism with bad effects. I'm not saying it doesn't exist at all but I can't imagine it is ubiquitous either. And neither should you.

There are what, 300 million+ persons in this country? Known serious incidents of racism in the last 20 years are how many, who knows? But hundreds of millions of people interacting daily, and only a relative teaspoonful of serious incidents ever make the news. And neither you nor I nor Cyrus have ever seen any. Hell I've seen a couple of tornados, though. Maybe those are more common today than serious racism with significant deleterious effect.

[ACPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, why does nearly everyone on this board feel the need to "win" an argument at any cost?

[/ QUOTE ]

What is your reason?

[ACPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
So you can't dismiss that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually I can dismiss that.

The chances that I would be a victim of an overt racist insult/harm is extremely small. In the high tech circles the racism if any, is non-existent at the lower levels of management and dismissed at higher levels under the guise of qualifications.

In any event for you to draw any conclusion, one way or the other, based on inputs or non-inputs from three people shows that you are coming from a place where your mind is made up.

Regarding racism, I direct you to the comments of American Airlines from the past (who I believe was a programmer at IBM or something like that) - which I am certain you remember. In the small, relatively well educated, relatively more intelligent community of Poker players those attitudes, proudly stated reflect the FACT that racist attitudes are alive and well.

But, if you want to WIN this argument at any cost -- keep arguing.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway, why does nearly everyone on this board feel the need to "win" an argument at any cost? Seriously the maturity level here is no better than junior high school. It's literally unbelievable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Numerous posts trying to let everyone know you didn't say what you really said...and EVERYONE ELSE is consumed with winning...

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
My post was not illogical; as I have explained, I said the race card was dead (as in meaning it has no good merit left to stand on); dead, that is, except for those with axes to grind or who remain mired in the past (as I believe I also wrote there).

So, my post DIDN'T descend into nonsense.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) How can you say the 'race card' is dead? Did you not accuse leftists of trying to constantly playing the race card? Is not the implication, then, that the race card is alive?

2) You didn't merely say the race card; you said 'race issues' as well...then you went on to reference Affirmative Action, one of the preeminent political issues of the day - clearly race issues are alive, and you're wrong. Look around at the 10 or so posts here dealing with New Orleans and race; do you still stand by your claim that race issues are dead? It was an outlandish claim;

And you're never hesistant to point out when others are wrong; so grow up and take it when you give it.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Of course it doesn't PROVE it one way or the other, but it DOES offer some indication as its prevalence or lack thereof. Thus far NOT ONE PERSON has chimed in with a personal example of serious racism they have personally witnessed in recent decades which had a deleterious effect (such as someone not getting hired, or getting fired, or getting beaten up, because of racism).

So you can't dismiss that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Anecdotal evidence, by it's very nature, is so-called because 'anecdotal' constitutes a complete lack of rigorous analysis.

Goodness knows if someoen DID produce anecdotal evidence, it would merely be cast aside as an outlier - and rightfully so!

[SheetWise]

Most of the discussion to this point has led me to conclude that racism is alive and well -- but more in rhetoric than reality.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Most of the discussion to this point has led me to conclude that racism is alive and well -- but more in rhetoric than reality.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think your demand that black leaders (black leaders ESPECIALLY) should condemn looting is an example of how subtle racism permeates society; perhaps only in rhetoric, but it's powerful rhetoric nonetheless.

this isn't to say "Sheetwise you're a racist!"...but given just a little thought, I don't think it's hard to conclude how such a demand is racist.

Racist = natural differences among people in regards to character and ability due to skin pigmentation;

OF COURSE black leaders condemn looting; the only people who question this are people who already have ingrained, negative images of black people; asking black leaders to condemn looting is a subtle (or not-so-subtle) slap in the face; it's saying something along the lines of "society isn't so sure black people oppose looting (based merely on your skin pigment)...will you reassure us?”

There is no need for reassurance here; like you and Fishhooks said (although you backtracked on it) – we all KNOW Jesse Jackson doesn’t support looting (at least the violent, taking-non-necessary-items type looting we're referring to here). The request that he especially (or other black leaders) should come out and condemn looting is just requesting that black leaders come out and stage a dog-and-pony show to assuage the concerns of racists.