Obama: "Trayvon Martin could have been me."
- Thread starter The Librarian
- Start date
- Status
So what do you want to do, pretend that racism doesn't exist? This needs to be talked about, and I'm glad Obama is speaking out about it.
TheChewyWaffles
Member
And damn, is it ever working wonders. It's sad how easy it is to play the masses.
Deified Data
Banned
I think Obama voicing his concern is important and laudable, especially knowing all the shit he's going to catch, but this post needs to be quoted for posterity. Shame is, Obama will likely never reverse his hardline stance on drugs. He's either a hardass or feels he needs to appear hardass.
The system we live in is far more insidious and despicable than pointing out how insidious and despicable the system is.
Then change it.
Chezzymann
Member
It could have been anyone. Why does that matter? Because Obama is black? Why the hell are idiots turning this into a race problem?
Yup, whether he is right or wrong he has too much influence to be taking a side.
Why?
Because this has become a conversation about race by people who I would not consider "idiots" because there is an argument that Zimmerman profiled Trayvon and that if Trayvon was a white male, this would have been completely different conversation.
Deified Data
Banned
He's not taking a side. He's empathizing with a dead child.
Baraka in the White House
2-Terms of Kombat
I find this logic puzzling. If he's right and has a lot of influence then how is this a bad thing?
Wow, that's rich. Is this like "too big to fail"?
"Too influential to express an opinion." Catchy.
What do you think will be the result of his influence now that he has "taken a side"?
Give me some hypotheticals if you have nothing else.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
So fucking dumb...
So, just because he's not part of the Judicial branch, he can't have an opinion about what goes on there?
This is just like people who whine about presidential candidates or politicians discussing their religious belief because of the separation of church and state, or people crying about freedom of speech when banned for writing or saying something in a private forum.
strikeselect
You like me, you really really like me!
First post nailed it.
Bams has been such a disappointment in his second term. Kinda regret my vote now.
Bams has been such a disappointment in his second term. Kinda regret my vote now.
He was followed and thought to be suspicious because he was black, something that happens to a lot of black people.
Why should he have stayed out of it?
We should just put up CCTV cameras everywhere so it won't be he said vs he said. Right, Obama.
Of course Obama is right that racial profiling happens, and that it's something all blacks in America have to deal with.
The thing is, to my knowledge, we have no evidence that Martin was profiled.
Of course Obama is right that racial profiling happens, and that it's something all blacks in America have to deal with.
The thing is, to my knowledge, we have no evidence that Martin was profiled.
I'm sure discussing slavery in the 19th century "kept racial tensions high," or civil rights in the 1960s as well. There are always people that would rather ignore and move on rather than discuss, learn, and progress. Some issues need to be discussed to a boiling point, need to evoke that tension for change to occur. The activists standing their ground against the police fire-hoses in the 20th century brought about a lot of tension and conflict. It was also the right thing to do.
I guess I'm in the minority here, but I'll stand by my comment. His re-entrance into the discussion isn't going to change minds, it's going to reaffirm those that have made their mind up about the issue.
Doesn't mean he's wrong in what he said, I just think he might not have been the right person to say it.
Doesn't mean he's wrong in what he said, I just think he might not have been the right person to say it.
What?
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Where do you get the confidence to state this as a fact?
Some floating bullshit about the office remaining "pure".
I love how you keep asking this, and you haven't even got one answer.
I agree with you. This doesn't really have anything to do with what I wrote though.
Where the hell did this come from?
Funny how that worked out, seeing as how the person who could have proven it was killed.
ComputerMKII
Banned
Not because he's not part of the judicial branch but because he's part of the executive branch. When you're the leader of the executive branch you're supposed to respect the independence of justice and not comment on court decisions.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Agreed. I'm so tired of the general idea that racism will go away if we stop talking about it - or that racism has gone away, and only is revived when we do talk about it.
Obama expressed thoughts that mirror the exact thoughts myself and other GAFers expressed mere days ago in the Questlove thread, and the thread about racist experiences. Nothing he said was false or shocking. As he tends to do, he explained how other people perceive things as a means of explaining an issue.
It's a shame that the country is so divided that anything he said was going to automatically stir outrage on the right and far right. He didn't condone violence, he didn't demand justice, he didn't cast doubt on the jury's verdict...he expressed what a whole lot of the country feels about this case in an honest fashion.
Finally, he's the president of the United States. He's going to be asked questions on this shit. Get over it.
What would have happened if Trayvon was a white kid? Would he have been followed? Would have even been profiled as being a potential danger? We have systematic issues like Driving While Black in this country that affirm that black people are considered potential lawbreakers instead of just any other citizen. That's the profiling problem that most people have.
because people refuse to see the fact he wasn't taking sides but speaking the truth about how people are profiled because of their race and primarily appearance.
Well, the jurors actually did have the option to convict him for manslaughter, but instead found him not guilty on all counts.
Of course politics shouldn't play a role in the case, but the widespread protests across the nation have made it impossible for it to be free of political influence.
We're mostly seeing this now with the DOJ investigating the possibility of a federal civil rights suit against Zimmerman.
soundahfekz
Member
Because it's better to keep racism deeply embedded within society than it is to face the complex task of purging it from the bowels of our justice system.
Anyone against this statement is flat out lazy or apathetic. Probably both
You know, the whole NSA spying thing. Heard of that?
Chezzymann
Member
I don't see any argument for Zimmerman profiling Treyvon besides the fact that he was black. And that isn't evidence, that is just his race. I think its even more racist to bring up the profile issue simply because he was black.
Half and half
Member
Black president is in a unique position to discuss something that affects black people daily. A statement is fine. He also said to respect the court's decision as well.
What? That's bullshit and not true.
I'd like to see some legislation done that forces neighborhood watch security type people to be actually competent at what they do. You know, training in unarmed self-defense and how to de-escalate situations without having to resort to lethal force. What kind of a neighbor watchman gets beaten to the point of "fearing for his life" that he has to use lethal force to protect himself from one unarmed teenager? I don't think the neighborhood is safe with someone so useless on patrol, and further senseless losses of life of both weak neighborhood watchmen and teenager unnecessarily gunned down would be prevented by actual competent watchmen.
Perhaps all watchmen should be forced to receive unarmed self-defense training from local martial arts schools... yes, that'd be excellent.
Perhaps all watchmen should be forced to receive unarmed self-defense training from local martial arts schools... yes, that'd be excellent.
Spot on.
Deified Data
Banned
Going by this logic, there's no way to anger his detractors any more than they already are, so he'd might as well speak his mind and reaffirm the faith of his supporters.
He's the President, it's an issue that's being followed nationally, it's fine to comment on it. Republicans are going to get angry no matter what he says or doesn't say, so fuck 'em.
He's not violating any rules or traditions. The people getting upset about what he's said are people who don't think there's a racial component to the Zimmerman/Martin affair. Frankly, anyone who believes that has removed themselves already from the category of people whose opinions should receive attention.
He's not violating any rules or traditions. The people getting upset about what he's said are people who don't think there's a racial component to the Zimmerman/Martin affair. Frankly, anyone who believes that has removed themselves already from the category of people whose opinions should receive attention.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Why? It's not like he's interfering or trying to overturn their decision. He's suggesting that maybe we should reexamine some of these laws that allowed this verdict. The president comments on legislative issues all the time. Does that mean he's not respecting the independence of congress?
The Lamonster
Member
Seriously? The reason the president should have stayed out of this is because of the lack of evidence surrounding the case.
It's perfectly plausible (and probable) that Martin attacked Zimmerman for following him. It's possible the murder was indeed self defense. However, we simply don't know. They both could have been at fault, acting like douche bags.
It's why I've avoided getting involved in discussions about it, because it seems to always boil down to which race people decide to root for. Pointless and borderline racist.
Wait, what?! O_O
The problem with this sort of thing is that it means people assume the interpretation of that amendment was the same back when it was written as it is now. You might be assuming that they actually meant an individual right to own a musket or whatever was around, and that's most definitely not the case. If they meant that they could have spelled that out very easily. Fact is that they rejected amendments like that. The 2nd amendment as it was written was because they feared a federal military. They didn't have a standing federal army back then, and so the only/best way to protect the country was through the militias. This amendment was there to protect the militias from having their guns taken away by the federal government.
But now we do have a standing military, and so the entire reason the amendment is there in the first place is gone, and it's been bastardized to hell and interpreted in a crazy way.
White people aren't normally stereotyped as thugs or criminals and stalked as such in the middle of the night. I'm sorry, but this just doesn't happen. The only time I'm ever pulled over or randomly stopped on the sidewalk at night by police is when I'm hanging out with my latino or black friends, it's clear who their after.
First, no one's to say that Obama wasn't when he was a teenager, especially considering the time period he grew up in. Second, we're essentially still engaged in character assassination of Martin when those circumstances in no way substantially contributed to why he was in that neighborhood that night (and arguably what happened at all).
This argument is just not going to fly.
- Status