JR,

If you lived below the Mason-Dixon line, think how guilty he would try to make you feel. I know, I have felt his wrath and it only had to do with WHERE I lived.

Mulk

Ronny, I have no guilt at all. I know exactly who I am and what I am. I also have no use for people who intimate that you a "racist" simply because you disagreed with them. As I said before, sadly, that's one of the oldest tricks in the world. Unfortunately, I've seen Jeff use it many times before. It's one of the most despicable thing a person could do imo. You really can't defend yourself and it's a waste of time trying. The best thing to do is simply avoid people that pull this crap. That's what I intend to do.

This makes sense. I readily admit that there's a lot I don't understand when it comes to racial relations. That said, with regard to this particular issue, I'm not sure I agree that "thug" is being used disproportionately towards thugs of color. I could be wrong, but I don't see it.
I'm not offended, by the way. I've been participating in political, racial, religious, and geographic discussions on line long enough to pretty much be oblivious to getting offended. And that doesn't even address the thick skin I've developed as a ref.

JR,

Neither should they imply that you are racist based upon where you live. Hope you didn't think that I was implying that you should feel guilty.

Mulk

I would not expect you to see it. No matter what the issue is, there are a lot of double standards out there. Maybe you do not see it because you are not personally affected by those double standards. Just as an official I see many double standards that are not openly spelled out. Just look at the OSCAR coverage and what the actors were saying about their opportunities. Hell there was people that got offended by what Chris Rock said about President Bush in his monologue. I guess those have the right to be offended by Rock's comments and anyone else cannot find things out of line about a characterization that seems to fall on every African-American when they make a mistake.

Oh well, I am not going to convince anyone here. I know who I am talking to. It was a great conversation and I think you for having it. I voiced my opinion and it still stands. I am done with it from this point on.

Peace

Ronny, the last time I checked they had black people in the South too. If you use the same stoopid logic, that would automatically make them racists too, wouldn't it? Iow, the whole premise was ridiculous from the git-go, and also not worth worrying about.

T'was the other poster that was implying that I should feel guilty. I don't. I never have.

I didn't know anyone had any respect for Jeff. You must have been the last one.

Did you really say this?

So you mean the many people that were lynched and not allowed to go to the same schools as a certain group of people separated by class are racists? Now if that is what you are saying that is very stoopid logic if you ask me.

There is an old saying called "up south and down south." Many of the very same things that happen in the south took place in the north. The main difference is that many people of color could not do many things in the south based on grandfather laws and segregation. The south gets a bad rap when some of the very same racist acts took place in the north all the time and many blacks were not legally segregated in the more industrial north.

So by calling a coach a thug, we are now relating it to slavery and lynching. Brilliant. This is the dumbest thread I've seen.

That was my point and Mulk's point. Just because someone lives in the South doesn't automatically make them a racist, contrary to what some other people might believe. If you're gonna use twisted logic, you'd better apply it to everybody.

Btw, if you want to debate this further, find someone else. You have my views.

I think you completely misread his intent. I believe he was saying racists can be anywhere and can be any color.

Now to your statement...the people that were lynched and otherwise treated horribly may or may not have been racists. The fact that they were treated horribly doesn't yield any information as to how they thought of others...just that they were the victims of racism.

Smitty, you're witnessing an unfortunate truth. There are people who all too frequently look to turn non-racial issues into racial issues.

This is simply the case of a man (who happens to be black) that was criticized an undisputably egregious act. He wasn't criticized because he was black no matter how much some would like others to believe it.

Absolutely. It's those same people who turn things like this into something racial that do the most harm to race relations. I find it absurd.

It sounds like we have some people that are more concerned with being called a racist than having a real discussion about the comments that were made and how they are perceived. I will not speak for rut but I do not care if you are or you are not a racist. That is something you have to deal with. What I do concern myself is your actions and the words you use. If you use words that are seen to be offensive, it does not matter what label someone attributes to the person that made them. All I care about is the fact the comments were made.

Rut was right on. The more things change the more they stay the same. It is just sad really.

I think you completely misread his intent. I believe he was saying racists can be anywhere and can be any color.

[/B][/QUOTE]That's exactly what I was saying, Camron.