Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 (edited) You just exposed yourself. You're predisposed to seeing everything through the prism of racism and as such will always see it whether it's there or not. I'm not so naive to assume there aren't people who don't like Cam Newton because he's a back QB. But that's not really the point. The race baiters who want to push that narrative will claim that as long as they can find one person in a country of 300+ million that racism (specifically anti-black racism) is prevalent. Overcompensating for past injustices isn't noble or even pragmatic. It's destructive. If there's real injustice being perpetrated due to race (or any other reason, for that matter) then by all means, call attention to it. But let's not just pull ridiculous accusations out of our asses because they fit our biased narrative of the ever-racist US of KKKA. Open your eyes, Man. Do you really think if there were one person in 300+ million who is racist, racism would be an issue? Look at the comments below the web features on Shady, or Cam, or almost any news story on a black person for that matter. Many of them are despicable, hateful, bigoted. Racism is alive and well in the US of A, right next door to color-blindness and outreach. I heard an interview once with Nelson Mandela's daughter. This was back when he was still in jail. She was asked if she felt racism was harder to deal with in the USA or in South Africa. From the tone of voice it was obvious that the interviewer expected to hear SA. Her answer was that it was much harder to deal with in the USA because it was still there, but it was more covert thus much harder to address. . That's an interesting take. So you think that's why she brought this up now? I wasn't aware that the woman in question had brought up the story. I thought King brought it up, possibly in reaction to the UT lawsuit. Edited February 16, 2016 by Hopeful
Rob's House Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 Open your eyes, Man. Do you really think if there were one person in 300+ million who is racist, racism would be an issue? Look at the comments below the web features on Shady, or Cam, or almost any news story on a black person for that matter. Many of them are despicable, hateful, bigoted. Racism is alive and well in the US of A, right next door to color-blindness and outreach. I heard an interview once with Nelson Mandela's daughter. This was back when he was still in jail. She was asked if she felt racism was harder to deal with in the USA or in South Africa. From the tone of voice it was obvious that the interviewer expected to hear SA. Her answer was that it was much harder to deal with in the USA because it was still there, but it was more covert thus much harder to address. . Jesus !@#$ing Christ. Do you honestly believe I was suggesting that only one person in the goddamn country is racist? Seriously, is that what you read? This is why we can't have a "dialogue" on the subject. Because the vast majority of people are either too dense to have more than a surface level discussion about it or are too full of **** to be real about it. The (rather obvious) point is that there will always be anecdotal examples of racism so that even if we one day find ourselves in a world where 99% of Americans are as free of racism as they are of introspection, that 1% would still consist 3 million people who are racist.* And as long as we can find an anecdotal example of someone making a racist comment somewhere we can continue to perpetuate this narrative. Because until no one is racist it's an epidemic that calls for constant hand wringing and strong presumptions that racism exists anywhere and everywhere it could exist. *Since only white people can be racist it would really only be 1.5-2 million racists.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 (edited) Jesus !@#$ing Christ. Do you honestly believe I was suggesting that only one person in the goddamn country is racist? Seriously, is that what you read? This is why we can't have a "dialogue" on the subject. Because the vast majority of people are either too dense to have more than a surface level discussion about it or are too full of **** to be real about it. The (rather obvious) point is that there will always be anecdotal examples of racism so that even if we one day find ourselves in a world where 99% of Americans are as free of racism as they are of introspection, that 1% would still consist 3 million people who are racist.* And as long as we can find an anecdotal example of someone making a racist comment somewhere we can continue to perpetuate this narrative. Because until no one is racist it's an epidemic that calls for constant hand wringing and strong presumptions that racism exists anywhere and everywhere it could exist. *Since only white people can be racist it would really only be 1.5-2 million racists. Rob's House: "The race baiters who want to push that narrative will claim that as long as they can find one person in a country of 300+ million that racism (specifically anti-black racism) is prevalent." Hopeful's question: "Do you really think if there were only one person in 300+ million who is racist, racism would be an issue?" Rob's specific answer to Hopeful's question: *crickets*, but from the rest of your response, it does indeed appear that you feel racism is a narrative that will be perpetuated even if it becomes a minor or rare issue. I didn't coin the absurdity, Rob's House, you did. There is no reason to believe that people you call "race baiters" would push a narrative of racism if it indeed became an anecdotal issue in a country that was 99% racism free. In fact I'm sure they would be happy to do the experiment, if someone could set it up for them. We aren't there yet. And I would respectfully suggest that the reason we can't have a discussion is because instead of being real about it, you respond with some kind of generalized or personalized insults, such as "the vast majority of people are either too dense to have more than a surface level discussion about it or are too full of **** to be real about it" or perhaps one of your repetitive comments about things being inserted or removed from asses, which appears to be a particular fixation of yours. Edited February 16, 2016 by Hopeful
Billsmovinup Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 (edited) Lots of anger on this thread lately. Everybody take a bong hit and chill out. Edited February 16, 2016 by Billsmovinup
xsoldier54 Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 I know this has been stated here before, but I don't think people are getting it as the discussion goes on and on. This incident with Peyton Manning happened 20 years ago. He was 19. That doesn't excuse it for sure, but his behavior 20 years ago has nothing to do with Cam Newton's behavior after the SB. The article was racially motivated and it has done it's job because people are still talking about it as if it were relevant. It's not.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 I know this has been stated here before, but I don't think people are getting it as the discussion goes on and on. This incident with Peyton Manning happened 20 years ago. He was 19. That doesn't excuse it for sure, but his behavior 20 years ago has nothing to do with Cam Newton's behavior after the SB. The article was racially motivated and it has done it's job because people are still talking about it as if it were relevant. It's not. The article certainly doesn't make it relevant to support a claim of racism. The more relevant comparator would be between Cam Newton's shenanigans in college (possession of stolen laptop, allegations of cheating) and anyone else's shenanigans in college in a comparable age of media. JFF would be my choice and he's certainly been heavily critiqued. The thing that will keep the Manning incident in the news (and bring some relevance into the present day) is him being named in the recently filed UT lawsuit, which IMO is publicity-motivated. If a poor environment existed 20 years ago that neither proves nor disproves whether such an environment exists today.
Mr. WEO Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 The article certainly doesn't make it relevant to support a claim of racism. The more relevant comparator would be between Cam Newton's shenanigans in college (possession of stolen laptop, allegations of cheating) and anyone else's shenanigans in college in a comparable age of media. JFF would be my choice and he's certainly been heavily critiqued. The thing that will keep the Manning incident in the news (and bring some relevance into the present day) is him being named in the recently filed UT lawsuit, which IMO is publicity-motivated. If a poor environment existed 20 years ago that neither proves nor disproves whether such an environment exists today. You wouldn't make a good plaintiff's attorney. You don't think any lawyer would look to claim a pattern of behavior on the part of the Athletic Department and the University itself? Really? No?
MarkAF43 Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 I won't argue the race thing, I don't even want to touch that. From what I read this sounds like a man and a family with a sense of entitlement to do what they want and act how they want, and to me it's quite disturbing. Whether or not it's 20 years ago or 2 days ago, the actions of Manning and the family is disgusting and changes my view of who he portrays himself to be.
Rob's House Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 Rob's House: "The race baiters who want to push that narrative will claim that as long as they can find one person in a country of 300+ million that racism (specifically anti-black racism) is prevalent." Hopeful's question: "Do you really think if there were only one person in 300+ million who is racist, racism would be an issue?" Rob's specific answer to Hopeful's question: *crickets*, but from the rest of your response, it does indeed appear that you feel racism is a narrative that will be perpetuated even if it becomes a minor or rare issue. I didn't coin the absurdity, Rob's House, you did. There is no reason to believe that people you call "race baiters" would push a narrative of racism if it indeed became an anecdotal issue in a country that was 99% racism free. In fact I'm sure they would be happy to do the experiment, if someone could set it up for them. We aren't there yet. And I would respectfully suggest that the reason we can't have a discussion is because instead of being real about it, you respond with some kind of generalized or personalized insults, such as "the vast majority of people are either too dense to have more than a surface level discussion about it or are too full of **** to be real about it" or perhaps one of your repetitive comments about things being inserted or removed from asses, which appears to be a particular fixation of yours. Yet you and others consistently support the "we're not there yet" narrative with anecdotal evidence. The point being that even if we were "there" these arguments would still be just as easy to make. Therefore, these anecdotal stories are close to meaningless when trying to quantify the situation. Yet this is what is being used to do just that. So how will we know when we are "there"? The article certainly doesn't make it relevant to support a claim of racism. The more relevant comparator would be between Cam Newton's shenanigans in college (possession of stolen laptop, allegations of cheating) and anyone else's shenanigans in college in a comparable age of media. JFF would be my choice and he's certainly been heavily critiqued. The thing that will keep the Manning incident in the news (and bring some relevance into the present day) is him being named in the recently filed UT lawsuit, which IMO is publicity-motivated. If a poor environment existed 20 years ago that neither proves nor disproves whether such an environment exists today. Which is my point.
Beerball Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 I wasn't aware that the woman in question had brought up the story. I thought King brought it up, possibly in reaction to the UT lawsuit.I believe that it is time for you to put new batteries in your sarcasm detector. Jesus !@#$ing Christ. Do you honestly believe I was suggesting that only one person in the goddamn country is racist? Seriously, is that what you read? This is why we can't have a "dialogue" on the subject. Because the vast majority of people are either too dense to have more than a surface level discussion about it or are too full of **** to be real about it. The (rather obvious) point is that there will always be anecdotal examples of racism so that even if we one day find ourselves in a world where 99% of Americans are as free of racism as they are of introspection, that 1% would still consist 3 million people who are racist.* And as long as we can find an anecdotal example of someone making a racist comment somewhere we can continue to perpetuate this narrative. Because until no one is racist it's an epidemic that calls for constant hand wringing and strong presumptions that racism exists anywhere and everywhere it could exist. *Since only white people can be racist it would really only be 1.5-2 million racists. either find a way to rationally carry on a conversation or find another place to carry it out.
xsoldier54 Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 I won't argue the race thing, I don't even want to touch that. From what I read this sounds like a man and a family with a sense of entitlement to do what they want and act how they want, and to me it's quite disturbing. Whether or not it's 20 years ago or 2 days ago, the actions of Manning and the family is disgusting and changes my view of who he portrays himself to be. To not look at the race issue regarding this article takes it completely out of the context in which it was written. It was a race baiting article. Nobody disagrees that if the allegations are true then what the Mannings did was despicable. Most people would agree with that. The point of the article though was that Manning gets a pass because he's white and people are criticizing Cam Newton because he's black. The fact is that Manning's behavior 20 years ago has nothing to do with Cam Newton's behavior after the Super Bowl. It has nothing to do with race either.
Malazan Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 Can someone explain to me what race has to do with the Manning allegations?
Beerball Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 Can someone explain to me what race has to do with the Manning allegations?The author of the article made it an issue. Aside from that...
MarkAF43 Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 To not look at the race issue regarding this article takes it completely out of the context in which it was written. It was a race baiting article. Nobody disagrees that if the allegations are true then what the Mannings did was despicable. Most people would agree with that. The point of the article though was that Manning gets a pass because he's white and people are criticizing Cam Newton because he's black. The fact is that Manning's behavior 20 years ago has nothing to do with Cam Newton's behavior after the Super Bowl. It has nothing to do with race either. I don't believe it does, I didn't read the stuff in the article in regards to race. I was completely unaware of the allegations against Manning. I focused my reading of the article on what Manning allegedly did and the family actions and such. Until I started reading this thread and seeing the comparison to Cam and the race thing I was pretty oblivious to it.
Beerball Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 I don't believe it does, I didn't read the stuff in the article in regards to race. I was completely unaware of the allegations against Manning. I focused my reading of the article on what Manning allegedly did and the family actions and such. Until I started reading this thread and seeing the comparison to Cam and the race thing I was pretty oblivious to it. I'm with you. Race plays an insignificant and unnecessary part in the much larger Manning story. Unfortunately that unnecessary part is all that some are able to focus on.
FireChan Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 (edited) Clay Travis on the warpath. Clay Travis @ClayTravis 2m2 minutes ago Here is Manning accuser's signed affidavit from 1996 with no mention of physical contact. Kind of a big deal. Clay Travis @ClayTravis 50s51 seconds ago Here's a more expansive version of that statement. No physical contact mentioned. Story changed seven years later! http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/any-given-sunday-0?page=0 … 0 retweets 0 likes Edited February 16, 2016 by FireChan
BuffaloMatt Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 Agenda - a plan or goal that guides someone's behavior and that is often kept secret.
xsoldier54 Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 I don't believe it does, I didn't read the stuff in the article in regards to race. I was completely unaware of the allegations against Manning. I focused my reading of the article on what Manning allegedly did and the family actions and such. Until I started reading this thread and seeing the comparison to Cam and the race thing I was pretty oblivious to it. Well that's what the article was about. It was about the fact that people aren't criticizing Manning for what he did 20 years ago because he is white and they are criticizing Cam Newton for what he did after the SB because he's black. Race baiting was the motivation for the article. I'm with you. Race plays an insignificant and unnecessary part in the much larger Manning story. Unfortunately that unnecessary part is all that some are able to focus on. The article that prompted this whole discussion was about race. It contended that Manning gets a pass because he's white and Newton gets criticized because he's black.
KD in CA Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 Clay Travis @ClayTravis 2m2 minutes ago Here is Manning accuser's signed affidavit from 1996 with no mention of physical contact. Kind of a big deal. But...but...but....he rubbed his genitals all over her face!!! This thread is hysterical. Who knew there was so much pent up hate for Manning on this board. Rico could have used some company all these years! (btw, has anyone checked on Rico since the Super Bowl? Is he ok?)
Beerball Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 Well that's what the article was about. It was about the fact that people aren't criticizing Manning for what he did 20 years ago because he is white and they are criticizing Cam Newton for what he did after the SB because he's black. Race baiting was the motivation for the article. The article that prompted this whole discussion was about race. It contended that Manning gets a pass because he's white and Newton gets criticized because he's black. No, really it wasn't. The author wanted that & I suppose you're giving him what he hoped for but I choose to focus on what I feel is the more compelling story.
Recommended Posts