Aborting Black babies for the good of society

[Autocratic]

The fact is that he could have said that poor babies could be aborted, and the crime rate would lower. But he chose to say black. He is clearly true, based on black crime rates. But those rates tend to sync up with the crime rates of the impoverished anyway, so why bring race into it?

[mmbt0ne]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En réponse à:</font><hr />
The fact is that he could have said that poor babies could be aborted, and the crime rate would lower. But he chose to say black. He is clearly true, based on black crime rates. But those rates tend to sync up with the crime rates of the impoverished anyway, so why bring race into it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because his pay is directly proportional to the number of people who listen to the things he says.

[ptmusic]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, I had no idea this guy even existed until this story came out.

[/ QUOTE ]

He's a conservative (fool in my opinion) who is semi-famous for being an ineffective drug czar and a hypocritical big-stakes gambling addict.

-ptmusic

[[censored]]

I think one reason people are so upset is because strictly speaking his is correct.

[slamdunkpro]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm definitely on the liberal side of things, but I have no idea why the Democrats are getting their panties all rolled up into a bunch over this one.

[/ QUOTE ]

Slow news day.

Seriously, I mean this guy is a talking head, not an elected official, yet whole talk shows Friday were devoted to how wrong and “insensitive” this was. The leftists really don’t want to go down this road. Where was the outrage and condemnations of Louis Farrakhan over this racially charges statement "I heard from a very reliable source who saw a 25 foot deep crater under the levee breach," Farrakhan explained. "It may have been blown up to destroy the black part of town and keep the white part dry.". Glance through any of Sharpton’s, Rangel’s or Jesse Jackson’s speeches and you’ll find racial hate speech, not subtle, but right there out in the open. This is all OK, but Bennett’s use of an outrageous example to refute a point is not.

[jcx]

[ QUOTE ]
Bennett, a conservative radio commentator, stirred outrage for saying on his talk show on Wednesday: "But I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could, if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country and your crime rate would go down."



[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure of Bill Bennett's true feelings on the subject, but the beliefs of Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood are clear. Though abortion was not legal during her time period, she was a proponent of forced sterilization of "human waste" and wanted to use this tool to purify the race. Check out some of her zingers here:

http://www.gateway.org/content/pdf/quotes.pdf#search='margaret%20sanger%20racist%20qu otes'

Research the orgins of Planned Parenthood. It's an eye-opener. The Nazis would have been proud.

[lehighguy]

For all we know, he made it sound intentionally racist in order to make it more repugnant. Thus validating his rejection of it and keeping with the context of the conversation.

[TransientR]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually, I had no idea this guy even existed until this story came out.

[/ QUOTE ]

He's a conservative (fool in my opinion) who is semi-famous for being an ineffective drug czar and a hypocritical big-stakes gambling addict.

-ptmusic

[/ QUOTE ]

He was also Secretary of Education under Ronald Reagan in the 80s.

A classic blowhard, I remember him writing/talking about a list of the great books in the Western Canon (ah, the fondness of some folks for lists). I was surprised that I had read many more of these books than he had. But when I learned that he was a high stakes gambler who used a lot of his money from lectures and book sales at the casinos, I understood why he had little time to read.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't have anything against gambling, but when a person makes big bucks pointificating on virtue, and how the rest of us should behave, and doesn't use a lot of that money helping people in a virtous fashion, but instead blows it on casino gaming, they are a hypocrite of a high order.

Frank

[newfant]

[ QUOTE ]
Now don't get me wrong, I don't have anything against gambling, but when a person makes big bucks pointificating on virtue, and how the rest of us should behave, and doesn't use a lot of that money helping people in a virtous fashion, but instead blows it on casino gaming, they are a hypocrite of a high order.

[/ QUOTE ]

You cannot be a Republican and not be a hypocrite. After all, the Republicans are supposedly the party of "fiscal conservatism," but they have ballooned the deficit as high as it has ever been. The Republican party is also supposedly a "pro-life" party while favoring the death penalty. Their party motto seems to be: "do as I say, not as I do."

[PhatTBoll]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Now don't get me wrong, I don't have anything against gambling, but when a person makes big bucks pointificating on virtue, and how the rest of us should behave, and doesn't use a lot of that money helping people in a virtous fashion, but instead blows it on casino gaming, they are a hypocrite of a high order.

[/ QUOTE ]

You cannot be a Republican and not be a hypocrite. After all, the Republicans are supposedly the party of "fiscal conservatism," but they have ballooned the deficit as high as it has ever been. The Republican party is also supposedly a "pro-life" party while favoring the death penalty. Their party motto seems to be: "do as I say, not as I do."

[/ QUOTE ]

You'll get no argument from me on the first part, but I believe the argument for the second part goes something like this:

Killing convicted murderers = ok
Killing unborn babies = not ok

I hope this cleared something up.