Yesterday, I didn't agree that Jenteal was a total disaster. Today... yeah, she was. She has zero credibility after today. If she had simply stuck to one story, her rather unpleasant personality would have meant much less. Her demeanor and attitude and her status as a "friend" (I thought she was his girlfriend? Now she wasn't?) of Trayvon cast him in a more negative light. The likelihood of the jury thinking Trayvon was the physical aggressor who initiated the physical fight has to have gone up after being exposed to her and because of her testimony. I can't believe that the prosecution didn't at least try to lessen the blow of her quoting Trayvon with the "nigga followin' me" and "crazy-ass cracker." It undercuts the prosecution's argument that Trayvon was not hostile towards Zimmerman while Zimmerman was chomping at the bit to take Martin down.
And as Kaitlin said, the jury has to be wondering how she 'knows' what Trayvon would have done if he had intended to get into a fight with Zimmerman. The defense must be hugging themselves with glee, since the judge won't allow them to show Trayvon's texts and tweets involving weed, guns, and fights. She did their job for them.
It's been very disappointing to see some the racial arguments being advanced here. Racism is racism is racism. Whether or not racism has effected blacks more in the past or today is totally irrelevant. Saying that one person's racism or racist remarks aren't really racist or aren't as bad, because their group has been more effected by racism, is a race-bias divisive argument.
Even though the person who has been advancing it most strenuously (Magpie) undoubtedly believes in it for ideological, not racial, reasons, the effect is that people are divided by their race into categories and qualitative judgments are made based on those categories. The color of someone's skin is not a signpost as to their character and how their behavior should be judged.
On June 28 2013 13:09 Kaitlin wrote: I totally missed Rachel's testimony that had Trayvon been about to get in a fight, he would have told her he'd call her back, that he wouldn't keep her on the phone when he was about to get in a fight. I totally missed that, maybe you guys discussed it, but it totally leads one to believe she has knowledge of Trayvon fighting before, since she knows how he would prepare. Interesting.
It's a good point. Who knows if the jury picked up on that though.
Well, I'm sure the defense did, they drove it home a couple times, so it will come out at closing.
On June 28 2013 13:25 DeepElemBlues wrote: Yesterday, I didn't agree that Jenteal was a total disaster. Today... yeah, she was. She has zero credibility after today. If she had simply stuck to one story, her rather unpleasant personality would have meant much less. Her demeanor and attitude and her status as a "friend" (I thought she was his girlfriend? Now she wasn't?) of Trayvon cast him in a more negative light. The likelihood of the jury thinking Trayvon was the physical aggressor who initiated the physical fight has to have gone up after being exposed to her and because of her testimony. I can't believe that the prosecution didn't at least try to lessen the blow of her quoting Trayvon with the "nigga followin' me" and "crazy-ass cracker." It undercuts the prosecution's argument that Trayvon was not hostile towards Zimmerman while Zimmerman was chomping at the bit to take Martin down.
And as Kaitlin said, the jury has to be wondering how she 'knows' what Trayvon would have done if he had intended to get into a fight with Zimmerman. The defense must be hugging themselves with glee, since the judge won't allow them to show Trayvon's texts and tweets involving weed, guns, and fights. She did their job for them.
It's been very disappointing to see some the racial arguments being advanced here. Racism is racism is racism. Whether or not racism has effected blacks more in the past or today is totally irrelevant. Saying that one person's racism or racist remarks aren't really racist or aren't as bad, because their group has been more effected by racism, is a race-bias divisive argument.
Even though the person who has been advancing it most strenuously (Magpie) undoubtedly believes in it for ideological, not racial, reasons, the effect is that people are divided by their race into categories and qualitative judgments are made based on those categories. The color of someone's skin is not a signpost as to their character and how their behavior should be judged.
Would you say that about weight-class in boxing? Or would you blindly insist that weight-class difference between a feathweight versus a heavyweight is irrelevant. Boxing is boxing is boxing?
Being called a 'cracker' doesn't really hurt when you have more money than Black people on average. That's why you find that these neo-racists who claim 'reverse racism' are just the underbelly of the White communities, and certain figures trying to profit from them - ala Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin, Fox News.
On June 28 2013 13:25 DeepElemBlues wrote: Yesterday, I didn't agree that Jenteal was a total disaster. Today... yeah, she was. She has zero credibility after today. If she had simply stuck to one story, her rather unpleasant personality would have meant much less. Her demeanor and attitude and her status as a "friend" (I thought she was his girlfriend? Now she wasn't?) of Trayvon cast him in a more negative light. The likelihood of the jury thinking Trayvon was the physical aggressor who initiated the physical fight has to have gone up after being exposed to her and because of her testimony. I can't believe that the prosecution didn't at least try to lessen the blow of her quoting Trayvon with the "nigga followin' me" and "crazy-ass cracker." It undercuts the prosecution's argument that Trayvon was not hostile towards Zimmerman while Zimmerman was chomping at the bit to take Martin down.
And as Kaitlin said, the jury has to be wondering how she 'knows' what Trayvon would have done if he had intended to get into a fight with Zimmerman. The defense must be hugging themselves with glee, since the judge won't allow them to show Trayvon's texts and tweets involving weed, guns, and fights. She did their job for them.
It's been very disappointing to see some the racial arguments being advanced here. Racism is racism is racism. Whether or not racism has effected blacks more in the past or today is totally irrelevant. Saying that one person's racism or racist remarks aren't really racist or aren't as bad, because their group has been more effected by racism, is a race-bias divisive argument.
Even though the person who has been advancing it most strenuously (Magpie) undoubtedly believes in it for ideological, not racial, reasons, the effect is that people are divided by their race into categories and qualitative judgments are made based on those categories. The color of someone's skin is not a signpost as to their character and how their behavior should be judged.
Would you say that about weight-class in boxing? Or would you blindly insist that weight-class difference between a feathweight versus a heavyweight is irrelevant. Boxing is boxing is boxing?
Being called a 'cracker' doesn't really hurt when you have more money than Black people on average. That's why you find that these neo-racists who claim 'reverse racism' are just the underbelly of the White communities, and certain figures trying to profit from them - ala Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin, Fox News.
You could also look at it the other way. The only reason why people pay special attention to racial slurs against blacks is because the black population still is not doing so hot socially and economically when compared to other populations.
Regardless, claiming that black people "can't be racist" against white people is just stupid on every level imaginable.
EDIT: No more posts on this diversionary subject for me.
On June 28 2013 13:25 DeepElemBlues wrote: Yesterday, I didn't agree that Jenteal was a total disaster. Today... yeah, she was. She has zero credibility after today. If she had simply stuck to one story, her rather unpleasant personality would have meant much less. Her demeanor and attitude and her status as a "friend" (I thought she was his girlfriend? Now she wasn't?) of Trayvon cast him in a more negative light. The likelihood of the jury thinking Trayvon was the physical aggressor who initiated the physical fight has to have gone up after being exposed to her and because of her testimony. I can't believe that the prosecution didn't at least try to lessen the blow of her quoting Trayvon with the "nigga followin' me" and "crazy-ass cracker." It undercuts the prosecution's argument that Trayvon was not hostile towards Zimmerman while Zimmerman was chomping at the bit to take Martin down.
And as Kaitlin said, the jury has to be wondering how she 'knows' what Trayvon would have done if he had intended to get into a fight with Zimmerman. The defense must be hugging themselves with glee, since the judge won't allow them to show Trayvon's texts and tweets involving weed, guns, and fights. She did their job for them.
It's been very disappointing to see some the racial arguments being advanced here. Racism is racism is racism. Whether or not racism has effected blacks more in the past or today is totally irrelevant. Saying that one person's racism or racist remarks aren't really racist or aren't as bad, because their group has been more effected by racism, is a race-bias divisive argument.
Even though the person who has been advancing it most strenuously (Magpie) undoubtedly believes in it for ideological, not racial, reasons, the effect is that people are divided by their race into categories and qualitative judgments are made based on those categories. The color of someone's skin is not a signpost as to their character and how their behavior should be judged.
Would you say that about weight-class in boxing? Or would you blindly insist that weight-class difference between a feathweight versus a heavyweight is irrelevant. Boxing is boxing is boxing?
Being called a 'cracker' doesn't really hurt when you have more money than Black people on average. That's why you find that these neo-racists who claim 'reverse racism' are just the underbelly of the White communities, and certain figures trying to profit from them - ala Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin, Fox News.
are you honestly defending the use of pejorative terms based on race?
Would you say that about weight-class in boxing? Or would you blindly insist that weight-class difference between a feathweight versus a heavyweight is irrelevant. Boxing is boxing is boxing?
Horrible, awful analogy.
Being called a 'cracker' doesn't really hurt when you have more money than Black people on average. That's why you find that these neo-racists who claim 'reverse racism' are just the underbelly of the White communities, and certain figures trying to profit from them - ala Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin, Fox News.
That is simply ridiculous and a perfect example of the kind of ideological racial division that serves no purpose except as a "tails I win heads you lose" situation where the point is to show your superiority, not to achieve anything positive.
If Kobe Bryant is called a nigger, is that less bad than someone living in a trailer in the mountains of Tennessee being called a honkey, because Kobe Bryant is a hundred thousand times richer?
I have lived in a situation where I was the racial minority and was subjected to racist statements and negative behavior towards me because of the color of my skin, it was not "reverse racism" it was just plain racism, and the fact that I was "the rich white boy" did absolutely nothing to lessen the hurt I felt. You are ignorant, and ignorance breeds the kind of bigoted and intolerant remarks you just put on display.
I wonder how strongly is the police preparing for the "black culture events" after Zimmerman is declared not guilty. Generic wannabe-gangster/thug was removed; people should give him an award.
On June 28 2013 13:25 DeepElemBlues wrote: Yesterday, I didn't agree that Jenteal was a total disaster. Today... yeah, she was. She has zero credibility after today. If she had simply stuck to one story, her rather unpleasant personality would have meant much less. Her demeanor and attitude and her status as a "friend" (I thought she was his girlfriend? Now she wasn't?) of Trayvon cast him in a more negative light. The likelihood of the jury thinking Trayvon was the physical aggressor who initiated the physical fight has to have gone up after being exposed to her and because of her testimony. I can't believe that the prosecution didn't at least try to lessen the blow of her quoting Trayvon with the "nigga followin' me" and "crazy-ass cracker." It undercuts the prosecution's argument that Trayvon was not hostile towards Zimmerman while Zimmerman was chomping at the bit to take Martin down.
And as Kaitlin said, the jury has to be wondering how she 'knows' what Trayvon would have done if he had intended to get into a fight with Zimmerman. The defense must be hugging themselves with glee, since the judge won't allow them to show Trayvon's texts and tweets involving weed, guns, and fights. She did their job for them.
It's been very disappointing to see some the racial arguments being advanced here. Racism is racism is racism. Whether or not racism has effected blacks more in the past or today is totally irrelevant. Saying that one person's racism or racist remarks aren't really racist or aren't as bad, because their group has been more effected by racism, is a race-bias divisive argument.
Even though the person who has been advancing it most strenuously (Magpie) undoubtedly believes in it for ideological, not racial, reasons, the effect is that people are divided by their race into categories and qualitative judgments are made based on those categories. The color of someone's skin is not a signpost as to their character and how their behavior should be judged.
Would you say that about weight-class in boxing? Or would you blindly insist that weight-class difference between a feathweight versus a heavyweight is irrelevant. Boxing is boxing is boxing?
Being called a 'cracker' doesn't really hurt when you have more money than Black people on average. That's why you find that these neo-racists who claim 'reverse racism' are just the underbelly of the White communities, and certain figures trying to profit from them - ala Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin, Fox News.
Either racist language matters regardless of what race the speaker is, or it doesn't matter regardless of what race the speaker is. Anything else is a double standard.
On June 28 2013 13:25 DeepElemBlues wrote: Yesterday, I didn't agree that Jenteal was a total disaster. Today... yeah, she was. She has zero credibility after today. If she had simply stuck to one story, her rather unpleasant personality would have meant much less. Her demeanor and attitude and her status as a "friend" (I thought she was his girlfriend? Now she wasn't?) of Trayvon cast him in a more negative light. The likelihood of the jury thinking Trayvon was the physical aggressor who initiated the physical fight has to have gone up after being exposed to her and because of her testimony. I can't believe that the prosecution didn't at least try to lessen the blow of her quoting Trayvon with the "nigga followin' me" and "crazy-ass cracker." It undercuts the prosecution's argument that Trayvon was not hostile towards Zimmerman while Zimmerman was chomping at the bit to take Martin down.
And as Kaitlin said, the jury has to be wondering how she 'knows' what Trayvon would have done if he had intended to get into a fight with Zimmerman. The defense must be hugging themselves with glee, since the judge won't allow them to show Trayvon's texts and tweets involving weed, guns, and fights. She did their job for them.
It's been very disappointing to see some the racial arguments being advanced here. Racism is racism is racism. Whether or not racism has effected blacks more in the past or today is totally irrelevant. Saying that one person's racism or racist remarks aren't really racist or aren't as bad, because their group has been more effected by racism, is a race-bias divisive argument.
Even though the person who has been advancing it most strenuously (Magpie) undoubtedly believes in it for ideological, not racial, reasons, the effect is that people are divided by their race into categories and qualitative judgments are made based on those categories. The color of someone's skin is not a signpost as to their character and how their behavior should be judged.
Would you say that about weight-class in boxing? Or would you blindly insist that weight-class difference between a feathweight versus a heavyweight is irrelevant. Boxing is boxing is boxing?
Being called a 'cracker' doesn't really hurt when you have more money than Black people on average. That's why you find that these neo-racists who claim 'reverse racism' are just the underbelly of the White communities, and certain figures trying to profit from them - ala Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin, Fox News.
Either racist language matters regardless of what race the speaker is, or it doesn't matter regardless of what race the speaker is. Anything else is a double standard.
The difference is that one of these slurs is intimately associated with literal centuries of racial oppression and the other isn't
On June 28 2013 13:25 DeepElemBlues wrote: Yesterday, I didn't agree that Jenteal was a total disaster. Today... yeah, she was. She has zero credibility after today. If she had simply stuck to one story, her rather unpleasant personality would have meant much less. Her demeanor and attitude and her status as a "friend" (I thought she was his girlfriend? Now she wasn't?) of Trayvon cast him in a more negative light. The likelihood of the jury thinking Trayvon was the physical aggressor who initiated the physical fight has to have gone up after being exposed to her and because of her testimony. I can't believe that the prosecution didn't at least try to lessen the blow of her quoting Trayvon with the "nigga followin' me" and "crazy-ass cracker." It undercuts the prosecution's argument that Trayvon was not hostile towards Zimmerman while Zimmerman was chomping at the bit to take Martin down.
And as Kaitlin said, the jury has to be wondering how she 'knows' what Trayvon would have done if he had intended to get into a fight with Zimmerman. The defense must be hugging themselves with glee, since the judge won't allow them to show Trayvon's texts and tweets involving weed, guns, and fights. She did their job for them.
It's been very disappointing to see some the racial arguments being advanced here. Racism is racism is racism. Whether or not racism has effected blacks more in the past or today is totally irrelevant. Saying that one person's racism or racist remarks aren't really racist or aren't as bad, because their group has been more effected by racism, is a race-bias divisive argument.
Even though the person who has been advancing it most strenuously (Magpie) undoubtedly believes in it for ideological, not racial, reasons, the effect is that people are divided by their race into categories and qualitative judgments are made based on those categories. The color of someone's skin is not a signpost as to their character and how their behavior should be judged.
Would you say that about weight-class in boxing? Or would you blindly insist that weight-class difference between a feathweight versus a heavyweight is irrelevant. Boxing is boxing is boxing?
Being called a 'cracker' doesn't really hurt when you have more money than Black people on average. That's why you find that these neo-racists who claim 'reverse racism' are just the underbelly of the White communities, and certain figures trying to profit from them - ala Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin, Fox News.
You could also look at it the other way. The only reason why people pay special attention to racial slurs against blacks is because the black population still is not doing so hot socially and economically when compared to other populations.
Regardless, claiming that black people "can't be racist" against white people is just stupid on every level imaginable.
EDIT: No more posts on this diversionary subject for me.
People pay attention because the black (colored, african american?) interest group is the strongest minority entity in the United States and throws its weight around freely. The state originally decided not to charge Zimmerman only to go back and put on a show trial after pressure from primarily black and left/multicultural groups demanded a trial (and I say this a liberal and another minority).
Besides it's entirely relevant since it supports the possibility that Martins escalated.
On June 28 2013 13:25 DeepElemBlues wrote: Yesterday, I didn't agree that Jenteal was a total disaster. Today... yeah, she was. She has zero credibility after today. If she had simply stuck to one story, her rather unpleasant personality would have meant much less. Her demeanor and attitude and her status as a "friend" (I thought she was his girlfriend? Now she wasn't?) of Trayvon cast him in a more negative light. The likelihood of the jury thinking Trayvon was the physical aggressor who initiated the physical fight has to have gone up after being exposed to her and because of her testimony. I can't believe that the prosecution didn't at least try to lessen the blow of her quoting Trayvon with the "nigga followin' me" and "crazy-ass cracker." It undercuts the prosecution's argument that Trayvon was not hostile towards Zimmerman while Zimmerman was chomping at the bit to take Martin down.
And as Kaitlin said, the jury has to be wondering how she 'knows' what Trayvon would have done if he had intended to get into a fight with Zimmerman. The defense must be hugging themselves with glee, since the judge won't allow them to show Trayvon's texts and tweets involving weed, guns, and fights. She did their job for them.
It's been very disappointing to see some the racial arguments being advanced here. Racism is racism is racism. Whether or not racism has effected blacks more in the past or today is totally irrelevant. Saying that one person's racism or racist remarks aren't really racist or aren't as bad, because their group has been more effected by racism, is a race-bias divisive argument.
Even though the person who has been advancing it most strenuously (Magpie) undoubtedly believes in it for ideological, not racial, reasons, the effect is that people are divided by their race into categories and qualitative judgments are made based on those categories. The color of someone's skin is not a signpost as to their character and how their behavior should be judged.
Would you say that about weight-class in boxing? Or would you blindly insist that weight-class difference between a feathweight versus a heavyweight is irrelevant. Boxing is boxing is boxing?
Being called a 'cracker' doesn't really hurt when you have more money than Black people on average. That's why you find that these neo-racists who claim 'reverse racism' are just the underbelly of the White communities, and certain figures trying to profit from them - ala Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin, Fox News.
Either racist language matters regardless of what race the speaker is, or it doesn't matter regardless of what race the speaker is. Anything else is a double standard.
The difference is that one of these slurs is intimately associated with literal centuries of racial oppression and the other isn't
jap didnt become a pejorative for japanese until world war II when americans wanted to kill them with less remorse. so, we have successfully killed this strawman you have created. next.
On June 28 2013 13:25 DeepElemBlues wrote: Yesterday, I didn't agree that Jenteal was a total disaster. Today... yeah, she was. She has zero credibility after today. If she had simply stuck to one story, her rather unpleasant personality would have meant much less. Her demeanor and attitude and her status as a "friend" (I thought she was his girlfriend? Now she wasn't?) of Trayvon cast him in a more negative light. The likelihood of the jury thinking Trayvon was the physical aggressor who initiated the physical fight has to have gone up after being exposed to her and because of her testimony. I can't believe that the prosecution didn't at least try to lessen the blow of her quoting Trayvon with the "nigga followin' me" and "crazy-ass cracker." It undercuts the prosecution's argument that Trayvon was not hostile towards Zimmerman while Zimmerman was chomping at the bit to take Martin down.
And as Kaitlin said, the jury has to be wondering how she 'knows' what Trayvon would have done if he had intended to get into a fight with Zimmerman. The defense must be hugging themselves with glee, since the judge won't allow them to show Trayvon's texts and tweets involving weed, guns, and fights. She did their job for them.
It's been very disappointing to see some the racial arguments being advanced here. Racism is racism is racism. Whether or not racism has effected blacks more in the past or today is totally irrelevant. Saying that one person's racism or racist remarks aren't really racist or aren't as bad, because their group has been more effected by racism, is a race-bias divisive argument.
Even though the person who has been advancing it most strenuously (Magpie) undoubtedly believes in it for ideological, not racial, reasons, the effect is that people are divided by their race into categories and qualitative judgments are made based on those categories. The color of someone's skin is not a signpost as to their character and how their behavior should be judged.
Would you say that about weight-class in boxing? Or would you blindly insist that weight-class difference between a feathweight versus a heavyweight is irrelevant. Boxing is boxing is boxing?
Being called a 'cracker' doesn't really hurt when you have more money than Black people on average. That's why you find that these neo-racists who claim 'reverse racism' are just the underbelly of the White communities, and certain figures trying to profit from them - ala Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin, Fox News.
Either racist language matters regardless of what race the speaker is, or it doesn't matter regardless of what race the speaker is. Anything else is a double standard.
The difference is that one of these slurs is intimately associated with literal centuries of racial oppression and the other isn't
jap didnt become a pejorative for japanese until world war II when americans wanted to kill them with less remorse. so, we have successfully killed this strawman you have created. next.
What I meant to say is that "cracker" doesn't carry the connotation that you are a gibbering subhuman animal who should be subservient to others or be lynched. Are you unironically arguing that "cracker" is even as remotely offensive
Seriously, Bill Clinton went around calling Obama voters crackers, Trayvon's usage of the term doesn't imply that much racial hostility, whatever you may want to believe
On June 28 2013 13:25 DeepElemBlues wrote: Yesterday, I didn't agree that Jenteal was a total disaster. Today... yeah, she was. She has zero credibility after today. If she had simply stuck to one story, her rather unpleasant personality would have meant much less. Her demeanor and attitude and her status as a "friend" (I thought she was his girlfriend? Now she wasn't?) of Trayvon cast him in a more negative light. The likelihood of the jury thinking Trayvon was the physical aggressor who initiated the physical fight has to have gone up after being exposed to her and because of her testimony. I can't believe that the prosecution didn't at least try to lessen the blow of her quoting Trayvon with the "nigga followin' me" and "crazy-ass cracker." It undercuts the prosecution's argument that Trayvon was not hostile towards Zimmerman while Zimmerman was chomping at the bit to take Martin down.
And as Kaitlin said, the jury has to be wondering how she 'knows' what Trayvon would have done if he had intended to get into a fight with Zimmerman. The defense must be hugging themselves with glee, since the judge won't allow them to show Trayvon's texts and tweets involving weed, guns, and fights. She did their job for them.
It's been very disappointing to see some the racial arguments being advanced here. Racism is racism is racism. Whether or not racism has effected blacks more in the past or today is totally irrelevant. Saying that one person's racism or racist remarks aren't really racist or aren't as bad, because their group has been more effected by racism, is a race-bias divisive argument.
Even though the person who has been advancing it most strenuously (Magpie) undoubtedly believes in it for ideological, not racial, reasons, the effect is that people are divided by their race into categories and qualitative judgments are made based on those categories. The color of someone's skin is not a signpost as to their character and how their behavior should be judged.
Would you say that about weight-class in boxing? Or would you blindly insist that weight-class difference between a feathweight versus a heavyweight is irrelevant. Boxing is boxing is boxing?
Being called a 'cracker' doesn't really hurt when you have more money than Black people on average. That's why you find that these neo-racists who claim 'reverse racism' are just the underbelly of the White communities, and certain figures trying to profit from them - ala Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin, Fox News.
Either racist language matters regardless of what race the speaker is, or it doesn't matter regardless of what race the speaker is. Anything else is a double standard.
The difference is that one of these slurs is intimately associated with literal centuries of racial oppression and the other isn't
jap didnt become a pejorative for japanese until world war II when americans wanted to kill them with less remorse. so, we have successfully killed this strawman you have created. next.
What I meant to say is that "cracker" doesn't carry the connotation that you are a gibbering subhuman animal who should be subservient to others or be lynched. Are you unironically arguing that "cracker" is even as remotely offensive
i dont find any pejorative terms personally offensive because only retards would use them, and i certainly dont attempt to classify them as most and least offensive since that would be retarded as well.
On June 28 2013 13:25 DeepElemBlues wrote: Yesterday, I didn't agree that Jenteal was a total disaster. Today... yeah, she was. She has zero credibility after today. If she had simply stuck to one story, her rather unpleasant personality would have meant much less. Her demeanor and attitude and her status as a "friend" (I thought she was his girlfriend? Now she wasn't?) of Trayvon cast him in a more negative light. The likelihood of the jury thinking Trayvon was the physical aggressor who initiated the physical fight has to have gone up after being exposed to her and because of her testimony. I can't believe that the prosecution didn't at least try to lessen the blow of her quoting Trayvon with the "nigga followin' me" and "crazy-ass cracker." It undercuts the prosecution's argument that Trayvon was not hostile towards Zimmerman while Zimmerman was chomping at the bit to take Martin down.
And as Kaitlin said, the jury has to be wondering how she 'knows' what Trayvon would have done if he had intended to get into a fight with Zimmerman. The defense must be hugging themselves with glee, since the judge won't allow them to show Trayvon's texts and tweets involving weed, guns, and fights. She did their job for them.
It's been very disappointing to see some the racial arguments being advanced here. Racism is racism is racism. Whether or not racism has effected blacks more in the past or today is totally irrelevant. Saying that one person's racism or racist remarks aren't really racist or aren't as bad, because their group has been more effected by racism, is a race-bias divisive argument.
Even though the person who has been advancing it most strenuously (Magpie) undoubtedly believes in it for ideological, not racial, reasons, the effect is that people are divided by their race into categories and qualitative judgments are made based on those categories. The color of someone's skin is not a signpost as to their character and how their behavior should be judged.
Would you say that about weight-class in boxing? Or would you blindly insist that weight-class difference between a feathweight versus a heavyweight is irrelevant. Boxing is boxing is boxing?
Being called a 'cracker' doesn't really hurt when you have more money than Black people on average. That's why you find that these neo-racists who claim 'reverse racism' are just the underbelly of the White communities, and certain figures trying to profit from them - ala Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin, Fox News.
Either racist language matters regardless of what race the speaker is, or it doesn't matter regardless of what race the speaker is. Anything else is a double standard.
The difference is that one of these slurs is intimately associated with literal centuries of racial oppression and the other isn't
jap didnt become a pejorative for japanese until world war II when americans wanted to kill them with less remorse. so, we have successfully killed this strawman you have created. next.
What I meant to say is that "cracker" doesn't carry the connotation that you are a gibbering subhuman animal who should be subservient to others or be lynched. Are you unironically arguing that "cracker" is even as remotely offensive
Actually that is exactly what 'cracker' and 'honkey' mean to some of the more radical black supremacist groups like the New Black Panthers.
For most people, 'cracker' and 'honkey' are simply racial insults that have no fixed meaning other than being intended to be derogatory because of race.
Are you suggesting that race-based double standards are, "unironically," okay? The hipster bullshit is strong in that one... yes, 'cracker' is not as "remotely offensive," it just as offensive.
Unless racial double standards are okay to you, then minimizing anti-white racial slurs is just a symptom of a larger problem. Hint: it starts with an r and ends with an m.
Seriously, Bill Clinton went around calling Obama voters crackers, Trayvon's usage of the term doesn't imply nearly as much racial hostility as Zimmerman's use of the other does
Trayvon's use of the term implies just as much hostility as Zimmerman's use of the other would have... except Zimmerman didn't call Trayvon a nigger.
It'd be funny if it weren't so sad, using the color of people's skin to determine how 'bad' their racism is or if it is even 'bad' at all. I was taught that all racism is bad period when I was growing up, I guess the problem was I hadn't got to college yet to learn how non-whites can't be racist, or at least that their being racist isn't as bad as whites being racist, because bullshit.
On June 28 2013 13:25 DeepElemBlues wrote: Yesterday, I didn't agree that Jenteal was a total disaster. Today... yeah, she was. She has zero credibility after today. If she had simply stuck to one story, her rather unpleasant personality would have meant much less. Her demeanor and attitude and her status as a "friend" (I thought she was his girlfriend? Now she wasn't?) of Trayvon cast him in a more negative light. The likelihood of the jury thinking Trayvon was the physical aggressor who initiated the physical fight has to have gone up after being exposed to her and because of her testimony. I can't believe that the prosecution didn't at least try to lessen the blow of her quoting Trayvon with the "nigga followin' me" and "crazy-ass cracker." It undercuts the prosecution's argument that Trayvon was not hostile towards Zimmerman while Zimmerman was chomping at the bit to take Martin down.
And as Kaitlin said, the jury has to be wondering how she 'knows' what Trayvon would have done if he had intended to get into a fight with Zimmerman. The defense must be hugging themselves with glee, since the judge won't allow them to show Trayvon's texts and tweets involving weed, guns, and fights. She did their job for them.
It's been very disappointing to see some the racial arguments being advanced here. Racism is racism is racism. Whether or not racism has effected blacks more in the past or today is totally irrelevant. Saying that one person's racism or racist remarks aren't really racist or aren't as bad, because their group has been more effected by racism, is a race-bias divisive argument.
Even though the person who has been advancing it most strenuously (Magpie) undoubtedly believes in it for ideological, not racial, reasons, the effect is that people are divided by their race into categories and qualitative judgments are made based on those categories. The color of someone's skin is not a signpost as to their character and how their behavior should be judged.
Would you say that about weight-class in boxing? Or would you blindly insist that weight-class difference between a feathweight versus a heavyweight is irrelevant. Boxing is boxing is boxing?
Being called a 'cracker' doesn't really hurt when you have more money than Black people on average. That's why you find that these neo-racists who claim 'reverse racism' are just the underbelly of the White communities, and certain figures trying to profit from them - ala Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin, Fox News.
Either racist language matters regardless of what race the speaker is, or it doesn't matter regardless of what race the speaker is. Anything else is a double standard.
The difference is that one of these slurs is intimately associated with literal centuries of racial oppression and the other isn't
jap didnt become a pejorative for japanese until world war II when americans wanted to kill them with less remorse. so, we have successfully killed this strawman you have created. next.
What I meant to say is that "cracker" doesn't carry the connotation that you are a gibbering subhuman animal who should be subservient to others or be lynched. Are you unironically arguing that "cracker" is even as remotely offensive
Seriously, Bill Clinton went around calling Obama voters crackers, Trayvon's usage of the term doesn't imply that much racial hostility
A derogatory racial term is a derogatory racial term regardless of the connotation that the public, or you, place on the term.
Right around the 7:00 minute mark, pure gold. I've been trying to track down the alternative meaning of "get off", so hopefully I'll find it soon.
Am I the only one who wanted to blow my brains out and worship that lawyers patience with her? Rachael had such a shitty attitude throughout the court process, my blood was boiling.
On June 28 2013 13:25 DeepElemBlues wrote: Yesterday, I didn't agree that Jenteal was a total disaster. Today... yeah, she was. She has zero credibility after today. If she had simply stuck to one story, her rather unpleasant personality would have meant much less. Her demeanor and attitude and her status as a "friend" (I thought she was his girlfriend? Now she wasn't?) of Trayvon cast him in a more negative light. The likelihood of the jury thinking Trayvon was the physical aggressor who initiated the physical fight has to have gone up after being exposed to her and because of her testimony. I can't believe that the prosecution didn't at least try to lessen the blow of her quoting Trayvon with the "nigga followin' me" and "crazy-ass cracker." It undercuts the prosecution's argument that Trayvon was not hostile towards Zimmerman while Zimmerman was chomping at the bit to take Martin down.
And as Kaitlin said, the jury has to be wondering how she 'knows' what Trayvon would have done if he had intended to get into a fight with Zimmerman. The defense must be hugging themselves with glee, since the judge won't allow them to show Trayvon's texts and tweets involving weed, guns, and fights. She did their job for them.
It's been very disappointing to see some the racial arguments being advanced here. Racism is racism is racism. Whether or not racism has effected blacks more in the past or today is totally irrelevant. Saying that one person's racism or racist remarks aren't really racist or aren't as bad, because their group has been more effected by racism, is a race-bias divisive argument.
Even though the person who has been advancing it most strenuously (Magpie) undoubtedly believes in it for ideological, not racial, reasons, the effect is that people are divided by their race into categories and qualitative judgments are made based on those categories. The color of someone's skin is not a signpost as to their character and how their behavior should be judged.
Would you say that about weight-class in boxing? Or would you blindly insist that weight-class difference between a feathweight versus a heavyweight is irrelevant. Boxing is boxing is boxing?
Being called a 'cracker' doesn't really hurt when you have more money than Black people on average. That's why you find that these neo-racists who claim 'reverse racism' are just the underbelly of the White communities, and certain figures trying to profit from them - ala Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin, Fox News.
Either racist language matters regardless of what race the speaker is, or it doesn't matter regardless of what race the speaker is. Anything else is a double standard.
The difference is that one of these slurs is intimately associated with literal centuries of racial oppression and the other isn't
jap didnt become a pejorative for japanese until world war II when americans wanted to kill them with less remorse. so, we have successfully killed this strawman you have created. next.
What I meant to say is that "cracker" doesn't carry the connotation that you are a gibbering subhuman animal who should be subservient to others or be lynched. Are you unironically arguing that "cracker" is even as remotely offensive
Seriously, Bill Clinton went around calling Obama voters crackers, Trayvon's usage of the term doesn't imply that much racial hostility
A derogatory racial term is a derogatory racial term regardless of the connotation that the public, or you, place on the term.
That statement has little value. It's like you're saying "damn" and "fuck" are both swear words. One's a little more likely to get you fired or have several heads turn your way in a public place. The same is basically true of "cracker" and "nigger." Sure, there are situations where "cracker" could be just as jarring, but those generally require context, while "nigger" requires context not to be explosive.
EPT
