pan6467

Ok so going by the sheer cultural aspect of it, it would be ok for whites to do it?

OOOPs nope, you state, it can't happen because.... What about the Jewish community? They are a very tight community, in many way the same as the black community? Would that be ok?

What about 50 years ago with an Italian judge addressing some guys from "little Italy".

Or 30 years ago a Cleveland Polish judge addressing a group from "Slavic Village"?

What about a Hispanic judge addressing some Mexicans?

What about a female judge addressing only females?

Or a Male judge addressing only males?

Is it only the "black" culture" that is allowed to do this?

And again a courthouse and judge should NO NOT NEVER be used in this way. It doesn't matter what the culture/ethnicity/religion/sex/whatever.... because in the courtrooms of America and by the judges IN those rooms (regardless of whether in session or not as long as they are wearing that robe, serving that duty and/or in that room), ALL MEN/WOMEN SHOULD BE SEEN SOLELY AS EQUALS.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

dc_dux

The Supreme Court has ruled that 10 Commandments in a courtroom is unconstitutional. A judge asking people to leave the courtroom, after the session had concluded, to engage in a private conversation with defendants is not.

To satisfy what IMO, is your unreasonable interpretation, perhaps the judge should have asked the defendants (and their families) to meet him in his private chambers...same public building, same court...but maybe it was too small to accommodate them all.

The concept of equal justice under the law (race, religion, sex, ethnic background) applies to judicial decisions, not informal conversations in a non-official capacity.

I am honestly not clear in my own mind if the OP is a display of sincere ignorance or conscientious stupidity.

but IMO, the more you post, the deeper the hole you dig for yourself.

In any case, as you correctly noted, we are each entitled to express our own opinion.

And opinions that reject your premise, harsh as they may sound to you, are not personal attacks.

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

ratbastid

Which is a mistake you've made at least twice in this thread alone, pan.

You know what would heal the racial divide in this country? Compassion. Understanding. People getting interested in why other people are behaving the way they're behaving.

You know what perpetuates it, widens it? Complaints about the "other side" and their "supporters". Saying they shouldn't do what they do. Insisting that they don't have the right to do what they do.

pan, I assert that your actions in all these racial threads over the last several weeks are widening the racial divide.

Baraka_Guru

But this rarely is the case. I think most know this. What does it mean to be treated as "equal" exactly? Do we all pretend we are equal even when it clearly isn't the case?

Did you happen to read post #53?

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

roachboy

to expand on 53 a little--which, modesty aside, seems to me important--african-american as a category is a creation of the particular history of american racism---you can look at it as a consequence not only an initial erasure of distinctions between ethnicities/groups/backgrounds/histories during the period of slavery, and so as a kind of residuum, an index of the crudeness of euro-american perceptions of Others, one which reduces them to the color of their skin---but also as a category that has not gone away, but rather has continued and is reinforced and perpetuated through the history of segregation---of separation geared around this same crude one-dimensional category--that has been in a sense taken over and made into a source of positive identification over time---and so can refer to the much of the cultural experience that has been separated and shaped through separation.

so the category functions in a way that "white" simply does not: think about it--you ask a group of white folk (myself included) about their ancestry, say, you'll probably get answers that refer to irish or french or italian or russian or ukranian or whatever backgrounds that then get the hyphenated american thing--so the histories have not been erased systematically, the grouping is not the same--this is a function of having power, of having had power, of having used that power--maintaining one's history in this case is an index.

you can figure it out from here: this is not difficult and if you think about it, it corresponds in a general sense to experience.

mlk and myriad others looked forward to a day when this history would no longer matter--BUT WE ARE NOT ANYWHERE NEAR THAT.

i mean, look the hell around you. jesus.

in conservativeland, there is this bizarre-o claim that we somehow have floated free of the history of racism, that it no longer matters--this claim seems geared around the core consituency of conservative populist politics, the Eternal Victim, the white petit bourgeois--who on this is set up as the Victim of attempts to address racism the Victim of the history of it. that these arguments recapitulate the same arguments made by elements of the same social class to justify the appalling period that we laughingly call "reconstruction" does not matter--history has been vaporized for the populist right and so there we are.

this is one of the central problems in the debate across political viewpoints on race and racism---conservatives make assertions from a position that is particular to their own politics about history and its relation to the present---outside that political viewpoint, these assertions make NO sense.

so one possible space to talk reasonably is about why these claims do not make sense (for the rest of us, say) or why they do (for conservatives)--but that would assume that conservative folk are both willing and--more to the point--able to defend this position and not just assert it.

second: since this claim resonates not with historical or social reality but with the sense of Being-Victim of the constituency of populist conservatism, it is hard not to see in pan's performance here a kind of repeat of the internal logic of the ideology itself. to justify the claims, he has to CREATE the sense that he is Victim--even if that means running, unmotivated otherwise, into this strange little rat's nest which seems to start each time "people have called me a racist, but i am not" which translates "poor me i am a Victim"

so there is a choice: we can talk about the validity of conservative-specific claims about racism in america--claims that sometimes (as here) utilize the kinda nasty little trick of quoting martin luther king for their own purposes, standing these quotes on their heads, using them to legitimate themselves and their politics rather than as claims which speak to aspirations that we, collectively, have not gotten anywhere near reaching and, if threads like this are any indication, do not know how to even start approaching---or we can assume that this is just another bizarre-o performance piece that is mostly about pan--who at least has the fortitude (intentional or not) to do the performance (no matter how irritating folk find it to be, there IS a way to see this that points to a problem bigger than narcissism)---by which i mean the appeal of these claims about racism in america for conservatives is NOT about their historical or social accuracy, but is rather about the sense of Being Victim they enable conservatives to derive from them.

personally, i see the argument in the op as so weak empirically and so naive historically, that the only plausible grounds for coming up with it seem to me to involve this persona of Eternal Victim, which is at the core of populist conservative politics---it is the way subjects are interpellated by that ideology (positioned as subjects)

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

dc_dux

RB.....thoughtful and on-point.

But (and a big but).. I just dont see a need to tiptoe around the OP for fear of offending sensibilities (not suggestng you are)

Pan's argument that the judge's actions were discriminatory or somehow infringed on the rights of others or an abuse of power.....is simply ignorant of the law.

His subsequent argument that the the judge is a`racist, based on a one-minute video....is simply ignorant.

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

roachboy

so there is another register of problem.

take your pick comrades: but try to defend the nonsense not only at the heart of this thread, but that informs it.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

mixedmedia

ah, like coming up for air...

Thanks, rb. You've nailed with words what I see spot on.

I wish I could do that.

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

Ustwo

I'd like to say I'm surprised by reactions to this but I'm not.

Based on the replies I've read, if I were an outsider, I'd conclude that we must need a separate groups of laws for blacks than other races, as blacks have issues which being unique to them need to be addressed specifically to them and thats ok.

Perhaps black courts with black judges? Maybe only black cops can arrest blacks and whites can arrest whites?

While I share none of Pan's outrage there is a valid point here. Either we are one people equally under the law or we are not. It is only the racism that about everyone exhibited in this thread that allows us to say its ok for a black judge to exclude non-blacks from his court for any reason because blacks are different with different issues.

TFP is an interesting place. On the one hand I've been told that races don't even exist, there are no real differences, and on the other I've been told its ok for those in power to be exclusionary due to race differences as long as they are of that race.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

pan6467

BUT, we have established by some on here IF a WHITE judge were to do this, they would find it wrong.

This argument goes completely down the toilet if you say, "It's ok the black judge did it, but the white/male/female/jew/hispanic judge that may do it would be wrong.

It's either wrong or right for ALL groups. To say it's ok for one group but not another, in and of itself is prejudicial. There is no in between here. To say there is, is in fact showing favoritism to one group over another.

That is not "my interpretation" either. In his chambers, he would still be effectively wearing the robe, esp. if giving the lecture he gave in the courtroom. Sorry, but I would still find that an abuse of power and wrong. The ONLY way I would find any public justification for this would be: if this judge (or any judge) were to give speeches of this type off the property and in the community he serves, without having race/sex/ethnicity/etc be a prerequisite of hearing that speech.

But this was not an informal conversation. This was a judge that threw out a specific people, so that he could address a select group that had no choice to be there. He did this in his official capacity as evidenced by throwing that specific group of people out.

A difference of opinion and sharing of differing views is not personal, nor do I take it personally.

This last quote however, is personal and again, makes this thread about something it is not about.

Why was this necessary? I don't need nor want an answer. I simply find it inappropriate because it has NOTHING to do with the OP and the subject.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

roachboy

you're avoiding the real problems, pan, and retreating to a "it's just my opinion man" position---but opinion is not based on nothing--and if at the most basic level, opinion is rooted in a whole series of misunderstandings and/or erasures, then it hardly seems rational even to just repeat "it's just my opinion man" unless the idea here is not debate at all, not even discussion, but just to put into motion some little piece of theater in which you get to star as the drama queen.

seriously, pan: there are real problems with every single element of the position you've laid out--you started this machinery, so the least you can do is engage when folk point out the problems--and don't confuse them with personal attacks--for what it's worth (to be explicit) i don't even see most of what you're doing here as being your invention--i think you're performing the consequences of a politics, and you're doing it point-for-point. so this isn't even psychological theater, there's no voyeurism--it's just what happens when a reasonable fellow latches on to identity politics in the populist conservative mode--and all the more if your views in this area are not of a piece with your views in other areas.

don't you see this?

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

pan6467

That is the whole crux right there. To me, whether people care to believe it or not, race doesn't matter, you are either a jerk or you aren't. But when you begin to make excuses for the behavior of one race/sex/group of people and say others cannot have that behavior, the action becomes prejudicial because you have made it so.

People on here (those brave enough to truly answer the OP question) have even stated flat out that a white judge could not do this and should not be allowed to do this. Yet, they find excuses to allow a different group to do it. That in and of itself is prejudicial and in this case racist thinking.

What are you saying, a white man raised in the same area and taught that blacks are equal and has believed all his life that race doesn't matter, doesn't need to hear what the judge had to say, simply because he is white?????

If the people who say yes to that, then turn around and would be vehemently opposed to a white/hispanic/male/female/etc judge doing what this one did.... that is by definition prejudicial, because you are excusing one group's behavior and giving them special privileges that you would withhold from another group.

That is my problem with all this.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

roachboy

another dodge.
and an irrational one, outside the assumptions of the politics you've adopted.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

pan6467

This is a personal attack has nothing to do with the thread does it? It is only done to publicly tell me off?

Nothing to do with the thread

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

host

Ustwo....aren't you saying that it is "the blacks" who are acting like the "drama queens", especially "that" Jesse Jackson?

pan6467

How is that a dodge?

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

roachboy

read no. 53.
read no. 85.
respond to them please.
i dont think you can do it.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Jinn

pan, have you ever studied sociology or race relations in a formal setting?

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

pan6467

Why not quote the WHOLE paragraph and not just the little fragment that suits your need?????

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

roachboy

read no. 53.
read no. 85.
respond to them please.
i dont think you can do it.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

pan6467

What does this have to do with the OP?

Ummmm telling me "I don't think you can do it" is not a personal attack?

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Jinn

You wrote it, and it would help to explain why you continue to defend it.

And Jesus, give it up with the "personal attack" mantra.

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

roachboy

you aren't willing to respond to critiques of the basis for your op.
you aren't willing to do it.
you prefer indulging some other game.
i think that is directly linked to the politics that you've adopted on this.


you complain about the lack of debate, but when you're challenged, you shuck and jive and in the end don't address what's directed at you.
people, myself included, get exasperated.
you then say "personal attack!"

read the posts i referenced please and maybe engage across that.
or, if you prefer, a blunter version:
put up or shut up.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

host

pan, you've created a platform for this:
roachboy has politely tried to tell you that the "regular" practitioners of the opinion you are communicating on this thread, have a much more refined way of communicating it via non-communication. They put it out, but they won't discuss it, as you can see in my example above. They also have an advantage in that it is integrated into their entire political identity, whereas you're only latched on to a disjointed part of it.

Take their cue, don't try to discuss it, just put it out there. Look at Seaver's <a href="http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpost.php?p=2427188&postcount=72">only post</a> in this thread. He does it right....just a quick jab.

By the way....I'm still not sure that you were aware that "my message" to you yesterday was only because of my reaction to your doing "this" on the 40th anniversary of the assassination of Dr. King. Any other day, IMO, would have been a fine day for you to post your reaction to the video about the black judge.

pan6467

The points you made may have been interesting to talk about.... until I got to here... then, to me it became nothing but accusations, false interpretations, a little personal attack.... well let me address it as I see it.

I have been extremely vocal about my views.... when given a true and valid point ON TOPIC I have responded to those I have seen with my opinion and views.

truly see no defense of what the judge's actions were in any of this.
But overall, it turns the focus off of the OP and the actions of the judge and turns the focus onto something else..... which if I point out, it becomes all about me..... if I ignore it gets worse, because then you say "I ignored it." So as I have done the past few posts, anything addressed to me or about me, will be quoted and given the reply... "off topic, what is you opinion on the OP." I truly see nothing wrong with that.

I do see a lot wrong when the defenses for the judge are weak and proven to be and then the personal attacks start and the focus, not from me, gets taken off the OP. Don't ask... I am pointing them out as they come and have been. I will no longer answer them in any other way.


I didn't reply, because to be quite honest, i don't like the style you type in, to me it's very degrading and pompous.


I have given reason upon reason why I defend my opinion and beliefs.

off topic, what is you opinion on the OP.


off topic, what is you opinion on the OP.

I have post after post after post shown and reiterated my views and beliefs on this topic. I have defended them and given examples and you still want to say I'm not addressing the issue?


posts 1, 12, 68, 73, 76, 79, 81, 90, 92 have all been on topic, once I got through the personal bullshit stuff I had to address.

You never replied to Post 99.

But yet again, I broke my own rule and this is the LAST time, I refuse to have to defend myself. If it has nothing to do with the OP, I just won't read it.


off topic, what is you opinion on the OP.

Have a nice day

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Ustwo

Does this invalidate my point somehow?

I do look forward to telling you to shut the fuck up in the near future, now that its obviously appropriate behavior for the politics board.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

roachboy

o for god's sake, pan...

this is the actual argument:

you skipped it.
this directly addresses the premise around which the op is built.
the second part of the post--which for some reason is where you started--was about linking the premise to the politics that lay behind the op claim.

it seems to me that if you accept the premise which i quote AGAIN here, you can't move to your argument in the op at all.
maybe that's why you skipped it.


===========
side note:

i don't write this way here to do anything beyond relay information that i think is relevant in the form of an argument.

i write other ways in other contexts.

so this:
i didn't know there was a writing workshop dimension to the forum.
i'll just ask you whether you're sure you want to go down this route with me.
i'm not sure you do, pan.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Seaver

Nice attempt. Actually my "quick jab" was because I see this as illegal... but I just don't care enough about this instance to write it out fully. Honestly, I just don't care about this instance.

I'm just constantly boggled at the double-standard people agree we need in order to get rid of double-standards. To me that's as logical as someone who wants to end our dependency on foreign oil by going out and buying everyone he knows a Hummer.

__________________
"Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas

dc_dux

You gotta love the drama of "As the Thread Turns"

pan...the central character with the victim complex who refuses to discuss the topic with rb because of writing style.

seaver...who believes the action of the judge in question is illegal..but of course doesnt care enough to explain that position...or perhaps because there is no legal justification.

and the ever present Ustwo....known for his "not enough hours in the day" defense to avoid responding to posts that present factual evidence that challenges his positions on numerous issues and occasions....you ready to discuss voter caging yet?

Stay tuned for more!

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Willravel

Can I be the handsome doctor with the bad spanish accent? Seniorrrr?

dc_dux

dr. will...I dont mean to make light of a serious topic....but you gotta laugh at the twists and turns...right turns only

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Willravel

The thread was doomed by the time Pan hit "post" on the OP. Some did what they could, but there never was any hope. Quite frankly it's devolved into a situation where people have their fingers in their ears and hairs on their triggers. It's dead as a debate.

pan6467

That's not what the OP asked. It asked, if you thought what this judge did was racist, wrong or ok and would you be as accepting if a judge from another group took the same action? It may not have been phrased that way, I did insert my 2 cents and beliefs on the subject which is my right. But the question was fundamentally there.

What you try to do in the above is change the focus thereby changing the argument to fit your needs, what you want it to be. Not what the OP was truly about.

To me, what this judge did is racist, wrong and I have discussed why.

Do not try and attempt to tell me what my OP was about.


I do not like the way you converse, I find it very degrading and pompous .... I am allowed to... but this is off topic and has nothing to do with the OP.

Yet another personal attack having nothing to do with the OP, with the last sentence IMHO being a threat from a MOD on this board.

How nice is that.

Let's stick solely to the question and debate that.... nothing else just this "if you thought what this judge did was racist, wrong or ok and would you be as accepting if a judge from another group took the same action?"

My name does not even have to be mentioned, I don't want to see anymore posts directed at me unless hey are to question something I have stated in regards to this question.

I can almost guarantee it won't happen and I will have to say: off topic, what is you opinion on the OP.

off topic, what is you opinion on the OP.


off topic, what is you opinion on the OP.


off topic, what is you opinion on the OP.


off topic, what is you opinion on the OP.

If it is dead why post?

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Ustwo

Unlike you its not my job, no one writes me a check based on my politics. There is nothing to defend here, its opinion only, its pretty straight forward, and the results were in fact predetermined to start with. The racist policy of your bosses in their attempts to buy votes has helped lead to this, where a black judge feels the only way he can get through to some young black criminal is to make it a black issue rather than an issue for the country at large.

Keep on promoting those double standards, I'm sure that SOME day they will pay off with equality, really

Edit: And since you want to bring up an issue for the sake of bringing it up, you call it voter caging, I call it an attempt to ferret out voter fraud (something living in Chicago with ties to the mayors office I am well acquainted with from your bosses party).

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Willravel

Why? The same reason people slow down when there's an accident. Or maybe it's just so absurd that it's funny. The judge wasn't racist at all, but calling a brave black community leader a racist and asking for him to get fired on the anniversary of MLK Jr's death? It's so horrible that it's actually kinda funny.

pan6467

You call that "brave"?????? I call it racist and abuse of power. Just as I would ANY other judge doing the same thing.

You and your side have stated if the judge were white it would have been wrong.... then when the arguments given cannot be applied to ALL and it is shown the double standard, racist beliefs being shown.... it's take the focus off, call it dead and let's have play time.

off topic, what is you opinion on the OP.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Willravel

REALLY?! YOU CALL IT RACIST?! Why didn't you say that before?!

We've all already tried to explain this to you, but you're not willing to listen. He was brave, and you're wrong. He's not a racist, he's a community leader trying desperately to fix what he sees is a systemic problem in his culture. But Pan the non-racist wants to berate him and have him lose his job.

pan6467

Personal attack. off topic, what is you opinion on the OP.

It IS racist. I have stated I have no problem in the message he gave.... it's where he gave it and how he abused his authority and position to give it.

You still do not deny had it been a white judge doing the exact same thing... you would call him racist and demand his job.

Sorry, that is hypocritical and a double standard I cannot nor will not accept and be silent about.

Yes this judge was


But this quote above obviously means NOTHING to "civil rights leaders" today.

This judge by throwing out anyone not of a particular color... judged a man by his skin color and not by the content of his character and THUS continues racism and those that defend this bullshit continue to keep racism alive and very negative, instead of finding ways to positively work through the problem.

It should be looked at the same no matter what color/sex/ethnicity/religion the judge was from and he people he kept in the courtroom were.

Double standards by virtue of their existence creates prejudice. Anyone who argues well it's ok or you just don't understand.... etc... only keeps feeding the beast.

By exposing the beast, showing what the double standards are and speaking out against them will positive solutions be built from.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Strange Famous

In terms of the legality of it - as far as I am aware a judge can do what he wants (within reason) in his or her courtroom, and can certainly ask certain individuals to approach the bench or have a private discussion.

I suppose it is fashionable for white people to claim nowadays that they are the victims of reverse racism. It must be a way of trying to wash away historical guilt.

Of course, I dont mean to be anti-American, the British profited awfully from the rape of Africa as well, and many of the worst villians of America were British colonialists.

There is a big point and a little point.

The little point is that the actions of the judge are probably inappropriate, certainly make him look a bit silly and are certainly not criminal.

The big point is that, quite simply the actions of white people and black people, in regards to race, DO have different meanings. I think that for someone to argue this was not the case, would be very difficult to connect to logic.

__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas

Seaver

It's illegal because it is an order based on race and nothing else. You also misunderstand me, it's not that I don't care about explaining it... I just see it as not worth fighting over. I really don't care what this judge did... does not mean it's not illegal. I see people speeding all the time, which is illegal, but it does not bother me much in the same way. Once again, my example of the double-standards are used to erase double-standards holds though.

Within reason means the judge can boot people out of a courtroom for creating a disturbance or somehow impeding justice. Judges can boot out protesters if they are creating a problem. They can boot the media if they feel it will hinder the right to a fair trial, or endanger key witnesses. They can boot a lot of people for a lot of reasons, however booting because of the color of skin is not legal.

__________________
"Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas