So if your neighbor says something that someone might interpret as racist, that would make you a racist?
How did you get to calling Zimmerman racist? That link was to a CNN article with a neighbor noting that all of the burglaries were committed by young black males, despite the Reuters article only using the words "several". This was a thread regarding CNN's coverage.
What evidence do you have that he "selected Martin based on race?"
From his own call with a number of false perceptions, namely drug use and being one of "those aoles who always get away" that were based on behavior which is normal for someone without a car who has to walk. If we are to take that behavior as being suspicious, then countless white/black, young/old people are now suspicious in their daily life. Either that or race played a significant factor in his selection of Martin as suspicious, which is what is assumed to be the case given that "race should only play a factor in the event that enough prior incidents reflected that a majority of the crimes in a neighborhood were committed by a particular race".
Vector said:
"Let's talk about the elephant in the room. I'm black, OK?" the woman said, declining to be identified because she anticipated backlash due to her race. She leaned in to look a reporter directly in the eyes. "There were black boys robbing houses in this neighborhood," she said. "That's why George was suspicious of Trayvon Martin."
That quote only indicates that there were black boys robbing houses in that neighborhood. Nothing about how many of the total robberies were committed by them, unless the reader assumes that white/latino/etc were not also significantly represented among the thieves.
Regardless the Miami Herald reported that some of the calls Zimmerman made that they knew about did not relate to black males.
As to this incident, if he saw any young guy he did not recognize walking around townhouses back yards at night in the cold rain, he certainly sounds like the type of person who would report it, regardless of race.
The fact that not all calls were regarding black males doesn't preclude the selection of suspicious people on the basis of being black males.
ABC: Trayvon Martin Shooter Zimmerman’s Audio Tapes Show Calm
Since August 2011, Zimmerman has called in to a non-emergency police line seven times, according to documents released by the Sanford Police Department. Of those calls, five were made to report a “suspicious person.” In the audio released by Seminole County Sheriff’s Department, he describes the suspicious characters as black or African-American, though never mentioning race until after he was asked to describe the characters. These five calls all began similarly, with Zimmerman saying that he was calling as a result of past break-ins or robberies.
Wrong again. The non existent racial aspect was not relevant in either.
So I was pointing out the hypocrisy of the media in that if they were going to frame the Martin incident as racial, then they should be consistent and do the same for the Adkins incident. he fact that they didn't, and typically don't when minorities are the shooters just goes to further my point.
You're asking them to report on something that doesn't exist, as opposed to a case where it does exist and multiple sources corroborate it.
I said race should only play a factor in the event that enough prior incidents reflected that a majority of the crimes in a neighborhood were committed by a particular race(i.e. Little Havana example). The same would relate to gender in that I'd be much more suspicious of boys and men than girls and women. I guess that would make me a gender profiler in your mind, right?
If all other variables are the same. I'm not sure why you're picking a fight with a dictionary here. If you select boys as being suspicious primarily on the basis of them being a boy, you are profiling by definition.
Lastly, the racial animus I speak of is related to what the media and the race baiters created by turning it into a racial incident, which it clearly was not.
Except for the people in the that community who agree that it was, among the other available information.
I agree with that, but it is not enough. People think FOX is conservative because they are so use to left wing news sources. However if we had a channel that was as extreme right as most of the media is left, many would begin to see FOX as genuinely moderate or as they say "fair and balanced". I am of course talking about their actual news, not the talking head and commentary shows.
Their "fair and balanced news" quotes their commentary and talking head shows as sources.
If the new channel does happen, we'll finally know the answer to the question:
"Is a sufficiently right wing source indistinguishable from Colbert?"
