I'm enjoying how all the racists have decided to pinpoint their rage on a witness because she's fat and black. Who cares?
I'm enjoying how all the racists have decided to pinpoint their rage on a witness because she's fat and black. Who cares?
beached whale wrote:
Why did you write "cracker" and "n-word"? You are assigning different levels of offensiveness to them. The two words are equally offensive. Should have written "c-word" and "n-word".
Right.
Because the history of white people and black people and how they came to America and how they have been treated is identical.
Use the N-word on some black guys and you will find out what the difference is
Let Us Run wrote:
I'm enjoying how all the racists have decided to pinpoint their rage on a witness because she's fat and black. Who cares?
You are right. I don't give a cr*p about her appearance. What I DO care about is how she is lying now or has lied in the past. One or the other since her stories aren't consistent.
Hollaback wrote:
Let Us Run wrote:I'm enjoying how all the racists have decided to pinpoint their rage on a witness because she's fat and black. Who cares?
You are right. I don't give a cr*p about her appearance. What I DO care about is how she is lying now or has lied in the past. One or the other since her stories aren't consistent.
Unlike the never told a lie Zimmerman?
Hollaback wrote:
You are right. I don't give a cr*p about her appearance. What I DO care about is how she is lying now or has lied in the past. One or the other since her stories aren't consistent.
I watched her cross examination live in a window on my laptop. It was jaw dropping and a painful to listen to. A lot of her testimony was unintelligible. It clearly confused the defense attorney. She was caught in making multiple lies. She admitted to lying under oath. Her demeanour when caught lying was... so what? (You kind of had to see it to believe it.)
She seemed to think that lying under oath was perfectly acceptable. Add to that that some of her responses seemed evasive and seemingly conflicting with earlier testimony.
(Lest someone think I'm making too big a deal of this, it's either 2nd or 3rd degree perjury. Under FL law, 2nd degree perjury is up to 15 years in prison or $10,000 in fines... 3rd degree is 5 years or $5,000.)
In the end, even if one were to ignore all this, she did not provide any evidence that GZ started the fight. Unless the prosecution can bring up something far more substantial, there's nothing so far to defeat GZ's self-defense claim.
fisky wrote:
In the end, even if one were to ignore all this, she did not provide any evidence that GZ started the fight. Unless the prosecution can bring up something far more substantial, there's nothing so far to defeat GZ's self-defense claim.
Other than the fact that it is established fact that it was Zimm who stalked TM, not vice versa, that it was Zimm who was armed with a gun, not TM, that it was Zimm who was the adult and outweighed TM by more than 100 pounds, and that it was Zimm who shot and killed TM
non racist white person wrote:
What annoys me is all the politically-correct-bleed-heart liberals who say things like "White people cannot be the victims of racism." or "Only black people can be the victims of racism."
Fu#*ing bullshit.
This is Liberal Logic. Equality at it's best.
True that anyone can be the victim of a racist act. But it's also true that the minorities in this world almost always get the worst of it. That's why the bill of rights exist, to keep the majority in check. It's not "liberal" to speak the truth that African-American people have had the worst of it. If they've given a little back to Caucasians, well that's only natural and people reap what they sow, right? Blacks were forced to band together due to their marginalization by Caucasians. When this happens, new culture is always formed. New language, new art forms. Calling out African-Americans for the use of the word "cracker" is specious. If you're "white", Do you really feel offended by the word? Do you really feel marginalized? Do you really feel like you're being treated like an inferior being? Be honest with yourself. Doesn't bother me one iota. The N-word on the other hand, when used by Caucasians, is heavily charged and used to marginalize and remind them of their supposed inferiority. So, let's just stop this specious argument and be honest about the N-word, and just stop using it (if African-Americans want to use it, let them. It helps take the charge out of it for them). Caucasians have to assume responsibility for the world they're experiencing. They caused the marginalization and the resulting cultural revolution that we call the "African-American community" and the language that includes the word "cracker." You reap what you sow.
The white folk that are reaping it are not necessarily those that sowed it, are they?
You are correct about the name calling. I couldn't care if anyone calls me a cracker or any other name. When you have self respect, name calling has no influence on you. I think I passed through the name calling stage when I was about 10 years old.
The two terms have different levels of impact and symbolism. I didn't even know the term "cracker" was used as a derogatory term against whites. I've never heard it used in that fashion until the media picked up Rachel's usage. If someone had called me a cracker, I wouldn't have known what it meant - I'd probably think they were calling me eccentric. N- has a much longer and meaningful past associated with hate, harm, resentment etc.
Ask any linguist which term carries more weight - I bet they all give you the same answer.
zxcga wrote:
The two terms have different levels of impact and symbolism. I didn't even know the term "cracker" was used as a derogatory term against whites. I've never heard it used in that fashion until the media picked up Rachel's usage. If someone had called me a cracker, I wouldn't have known what it meant - I'd probably think they were calling me eccentric. N- has a much longer and meaningful past associated with hate, harm, resentment etc.
Ask any linguist which term carries more weight - I bet they all give you the same answer.
How old are you? Seriously, you must be extremely young to not know the term "cracker" is derogatory. Face it blacks and liberals can use only slur they want and nothing happens. Look at Alec Baldwin and his notorious rants - just one this week using slurs against gays. Doesn't matter, nothing happens because liberals know as one writer said "what is in his heart".
OP is right. As a rich, white male, the term "cracker" brings back painful memories of subjugation and discrimination. Used to be us white folk couldn't walk down the street without some black person saying, "hey, CRACKER, why don't you and your other whitey friends go back to iceland with the rest of your polar bear buddies?", or, "hey, CRACKER, you're not allowed to ride this bus because you already own an Audi A6", or, "hey, CRACKER, get back to whipping us black folk while we pick cotton for your wealthy plantation".
How is "cracker" derogatory? Were you aware that in 1947, when FSU voted on which nickname to adopt for their sports teams, there were 54 votes for the name "The Florida State University Crackers"?
Look into the history of the term; "cracker" is simply a nickname for a resident of Florida or Georgia. The only insult is your manufactured outrage.
The answer is just that is simply how the majority of people react.
I'm 43 years old. I've lived in six different states including NJ, RI, CO, OR, CA, and MI, including both low-income and medium-income neighborhoods. I've heard the terms "whitey", "white trash", and "redneck", but not cracker. (I'm in academics and don't watch TV, so I could have minimal exposure to a subcultural vernacular - my point is the two terms are not on par - they do not carry the same weight.)
unbelievably awful wrote:
zxcga wrote:The two terms have different levels of impact and symbolism. I didn't even know the term "cracker" was used as a derogatory term against whites. I've never heard it used in that fashion until the media picked up Rachel's usage. If someone had called me a cracker, I wouldn't have known what it meant - I'd probably think they were calling me eccentric. N- has a much longer and meaningful past associated with hate, harm, resentment etc.
Ask any linguist which term carries more weight - I bet they all give you the same answer.
How old are you? Seriously, you must be extremely young to not know the term "cracker" is derogatory. Face it blacks and liberals can use only slur they want and nothing happens. Look at Alec Baldwin and his notorious rants - just one this week using slurs against gays. Doesn't matter, nothing happens because liberals know as one writer said "what is in his heart".
Kracker wrote:
Hollaback wrote:You are right. I don't give a cr*p about her appearance. What I DO care about is how she is lying now or has lied in the past. One or the other since her stories aren't consistent.
Unlike the never told a lie Zimmerman?
What, that makes it OK for her to lie?? You are seriously messed up.
GenericID wrote:
How is "cracker" derogatory? Were you aware that in 1947, when FSU voted on which nickname to adopt for their sports teams, there were 54 votes for the name "The Florida State University Crackers"?
Look into the history of the term; "cracker" is simply a nickname for a resident of Florida or Georgia. The only insult is your manufactured outrage.
"The history of the term" doesn't matter. It's today's intent that matters. The intent is a derogatory racist term against whites. Clear enough?
And why izzit that you libtards give Alec Baldwin a pass? He wants to beat up photographers every day and call them "homos". Yet Deen is crucified for something she said 20-30 years ago and Baldwin gets away with shit every day. WTF
The first race that truly adopts "sticks and stones may break my bone, but names will never hurt me" wins. Let's grow up, people. This is piddly poo. Instead of all this reaction to reaction to reaction, ad infinitum, let's raise our consciousness into a creative state and get moving and creating! If this were a run, we're not running anymore, we're by the side of the trail arguing piddly poo, while the ones dedicated to self-improvement and creativity pass us by. You get what you focus on.