chain
The Fly
Yellokite,
As far as this comment "Have you ever noticed how all newspaper composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?" is concerned. It is racist simply because it assumes that all wanted criminals look like Jesse Jackson,i.e. black. And it assumes that all black people look similar to each other - being interchangable as criminals on a wanted poster sharing nothing more than a skin color.
You stated this very succinctly. It is so obvious to me. I thought if anyone evaluated it, they would arrive at your conclusion. That is the only way it sounds to me.
"Have you ever noticed how all newspaper composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?"
ALL pictures of CRIMINALS resemble JESSE JACKSON
Jesse Jackson (Black) All criminals (black)
Or maybe Rush meant Rev. Jesse Jackson (religious) all criminals (religious) therefore, all religious are criminal?
I think Rush was going for the first premise.
That someone denies this, is astounding to me. Perhaps they really don't see it. In this forum some people have a hard time changing their opinion. That is why I suggested presenting this premise to a few people for a reaction. I do this myself when I find myself in a minority opinion. I don't always change my mind, but it is the best tool I have to hear a different perspective, without the bias of defending an opinion already presented.
I don't believe you said America was responsible for 9/11. I believe you stated what pretty much occurred. Those events may have contributed to totally unacceptable actions.
Thank you for a thoughtful and serious contribution to this thread.
Chain.
80s,
By your postings you seem to be a devout, religious person. I respect your walk in your beliefs. If you don't understand how the remark is offensive, take my suggestion and present it to 5 or 6 random people. If the thought of repeating it, makes you uncomfortable maybe you understand more than you think.
Sincerely,
chain
[This message has been edited by chain (edited 03-25-2002).]
[This message has been edited by chain (edited 03-25-2002).]
As far as this comment "Have you ever noticed how all newspaper composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?" is concerned. It is racist simply because it assumes that all wanted criminals look like Jesse Jackson,i.e. black. And it assumes that all black people look similar to each other - being interchangable as criminals on a wanted poster sharing nothing more than a skin color.
You stated this very succinctly. It is so obvious to me. I thought if anyone evaluated it, they would arrive at your conclusion. That is the only way it sounds to me.
"Have you ever noticed how all newspaper composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?"
ALL pictures of CRIMINALS resemble JESSE JACKSON
Jesse Jackson (Black) All criminals (black)
Or maybe Rush meant Rev. Jesse Jackson (religious) all criminals (religious) therefore, all religious are criminal?
I think Rush was going for the first premise.
That someone denies this, is astounding to me. Perhaps they really don't see it. In this forum some people have a hard time changing their opinion. That is why I suggested presenting this premise to a few people for a reaction. I do this myself when I find myself in a minority opinion. I don't always change my mind, but it is the best tool I have to hear a different perspective, without the bias of defending an opinion already presented.
I don't believe you said America was responsible for 9/11. I believe you stated what pretty much occurred. Those events may have contributed to totally unacceptable actions.
Thank you for a thoughtful and serious contribution to this thread.
Chain.
80s,
By your postings you seem to be a devout, religious person. I respect your walk in your beliefs. If you don't understand how the remark is offensive, take my suggestion and present it to 5 or 6 random people. If the thought of repeating it, makes you uncomfortable maybe you understand more than you think.
Sincerely,
chain
[This message has been edited by chain (edited 03-25-2002).]
[This message has been edited by chain (edited 03-25-2002).]