Is Racism Rising Because of Black President?

[Cindy]

Originally Posted by tstew

LOL...my reputation precedes me. I don't have tons of time now, so I'll just answer the question directly for now.

No, I don't think racism is rising because of a black President (the terrible incident in Akron notwithstanding). I have not heard of a great epidemic of such events since the election.

I personally think that in matters of race, having a black President will have the effect of positively affecting racism in ways that will pay great dividends particularly in the younger and future generations.


Was that good enough for now?

I agree.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by tstew

LOL...my reputation precedes me. I don't have tons of time now, so I'll just answer the question directly for now.

No, I don't think racism is rising because of a black President (the terrible incident in Akron notwithstanding). I have not heard of a great epidemic of such events since the election.

I personally think that in matters of race, having a black President will have the effect of positively affecting racism in ways that will pay great dividends particularly in the younger and future generations.


Was that good enough for now?

I would have to agree with the bold, though I am torn because I think Obama's policies are causing and will cause a lasting scar on America - including those of his own race.

Short term perhaps, racial tension is increased but there are positive long term aspects based on skin color I suppose.

IMO opinion skin color alone is not a good reason to support or oppose a president.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

[I]
...
The article states the case is not being treated as a hate crime... isn't that weird?

http://www.ohio.com/news/50172282.html

No, it is not weird that it is not being treated as a hate crime. It is only a hate crime if it is perpetuated against certain designated groups. A crime against a white male (unless he is gay) would not be designated as a hate crime.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Sam

No, it is not weird that it is not being treated as a hate crime. It is only a hate crime if it is perpetuated against certain designated groups. A crime against a white male (unless he is gay) would not be designated as a hate crime.

How could that possibly be? I don't know which is worse in this case then... The racism of the gang or the racism of the police!

[Adino]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

"Out of nowhere, the six were attacked by dozens of teenage boys, who shouted ''This is our world'' and ''This is a black world'' as they confronted Marshall and his family.

The Marshalls, who are white, say the crowd of teens who attacked them and two friends June 27 on Girard Street numbered close to 50. The teens were all black."

"Marshall was the most seriously injured. He suffered a concussion and multiple bruises to his head and eye. He said he spent five nights in the critical care unit at Akron General Medical Center.

The construction worker said he now fears for his family's safety, and the thousands of dollars in medical bills he faces without insurance."


This family was just watching a Fourth of July fireworks display when attacked.

The article states the case is not being treated as a hate crime... isn't that weird?

http://www.ohio.com/news/50172282.html

Reminds me of events in my family.

A second cousin of mine was hung in his backyard by a group of fellow students from his high school. My uncle showed up just in time to save his life. He found him dangling from a pole with a clothesline wrapped around his neck about to lose consciousness. After surviving this encounter, the same family member was again assaulted by another group on another day on the way home from school. This time the young attackers threw him in a garage, doused him with gasoline and lit him on fire. Miraculously, he did survive, but bears horrible scars of the incident to this day.

The school was in Detroit. The incidents were of complete racial motivation. My family member was white, his assaulters black.

While these events took place many years ago, it certainly gives evidence racism 'of that sort' has been around for some time. I don't think any objective thinker can look at the recent election and say it did not fuel existing feelings of racial tension.

Aside from the Black Panther voting intimidation incident and the subsequent dropping of related charges by the new administration, the voting demographics are unavoidably eye opening. With an astounding 95% of the black vote going to Obama vs a much more balanced 43% of the white vote it seems blatantly apparent many allowed the issue of skin color to be their determining factor and not the content of character.

A globalist of any color who looks to ensure global 'equality' must, of necessity, tear down a global super power. The question remains, why would the people of a super power put a globalist at the helm when to do so would be an act of national suicide? 95% just because his skin matches? I admit I have a difficult time understanding how this isn't a slap in the face to the man who once said, "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character".

It is said that the first question recorded in Scripture by man is "Am I my brother's keeper?"

It is said that the rest of the bible goes on to answer this question with an emphatic YES. We are the keepers of our brethren.

Lord, help us to be the keepers of all our brethren regardless of color and, Lord, let us not throw away what so many have given their lives to ensure.

[rgcraig]

I live in Memphis - it's hard to comment on things of this topic.

[n david]

Switch the color for the group and family involved and it would have been classified as a hate crime.

I've been against "hate crime" status from the beginning because it's really reverse racism. Anytime a white attacks an african american, hispanic, etc it's automatically considered a hate crime ... flip it around and it's generally not classified as a "hate" crime.

They need to just do away with the hate crime status and punish the guilty to the fullest extent of the law already in the books.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by n david

Switch the color for the group and family involved and it would have been classified as a hate crime.

I've been against "hate crime" status from the beginning because it's really reverse racism. Anytime a white attacks an african american, hispanic, etc it's automatically considered a hate crime ... flip it around and it's generally not classified as a "hate" crime.

They need to just do away with the hate crime status and punish the guilty to the fullest extent of the law already in the books.

I agree.

Why is it more wrong to assault an African American (or other certain "protected minorities")than to assault a Caucasian? Isn't legislation like this sending the message that persons of color are of more worth than white people? Or that gays are of more worth than straight people?

And why is it that only white people can be considered "racist"?

[missourimary]

I think amongst certain low mentalities of all colors, racism increased prior to and until shortly after the election. I'm not sure having a black president has actually intensified racism, however. I saw first hand how racism against whites was affecting some during the election. One woman campaigned for Obama at work, sending me (and everyone else she could) e-mails referring to "us" (blacks) and "them" (whoever doesn't like Obama). Several black friends were electioneered at the polls by comments about "vote for one of our own". From contacts I have, there is a strong possibility that some racist activity against whites is being brushed under the rug by the media. Racist speech increased at my church dramatically.

But racism was already there. I live in an area where there is a lot of racism. Whites are cussed, called "crackers" in classrooms, informed that more teachers should be black and hispanic. People of all colors are labeled in demeaning ways. I was informed when someone filed an EEO complaint against me the first time, "well, you're white, you must be guilty". Racism has been part of the poor attitude of a few for way too long.

I have marked those that cause division and stepped away from certain groups where this attitude runs rampant. I know it is still quite rampant in some circles at work and in church. One thing is certain, the events of the last year brought the racism that was in people's hearts to light in their actions.

[Truthseeker]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

I live in Memphis - it's hard to comment on things of this topic.

Why?