Race relations/affirmative action

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

And how, exactly, would you distinguish what you have just described above from people who become newly alarmed when a black President is elected?

I was not alarmed that the Obama was elected.  I was thrilled.

I was alarmed that it didn't resulted in AA coming to an immediate end.  

[Spider-Dan]

But the big difference is Woods is not being called a racist black which he does not identify himself as. Zimmerman is being called a racist white and he does not even identify himself as white.

How is that a "big difference"?  Tiger Woods was frequently categorized as black man marrying white woman (even though he does not identify as black).  In Tiger's case, it's convenient for him to be a black man when talking about the inroads of blacks into golf, or when talking about the propensity of black men to date white women.  In Zimmerman's case, it's convenient for him to be a white man when talking about racial profiling.

Zimmerman does not claim himself as what he is portrayed and the people he is portrayed as being do not claim him either.

Not a particularly good argument to make, given a) the lack of an outpouring of Hispanic support for Zimmerman and b) the racial composition of the cohort of Zimmerman supporters.

[pondwater]

How is that a "big difference"?  Tiger Woods was frequently categorized as black man marrying white woman (even though he does not identify as black).  In Tiger's case, it's convenient for him to be a black man when talking about the inroads of blacks into golf, or when talking about the propensity of black men to date white women.  In Zimmerman's case, it's convenient for him to be a white man when talking about racial profiling.
Not a particularly good argument to make, given a) the lack of an outpouring of Hispanic support for Zimmerman and b) the racial composition of the cohort of Zimmerman supporters.

So I take it from this post that you still think Zimmerman is guilty? Would it also be safe to assume that most blacks also think he is guilty?

[Spider-Dan]

I think Zimmerman was found Not Guilty of murder, in exactly the same sense and to the extent that Casey Anthony and O.J. Simpson were found the same.

[pondwater]

I think Zimmerman was found Not Guilty of murder, in exactly the same sense and to the extent that Casey Anthony and O.J. Simpson were found the same.

Well since that's the case. If I remember correctly the black community celebrated the acquittal of OJ much more than the white community did with Zimmerman. Even though the prosecution could have done better in the OJ trial, there was enough evidence for a guilty verdict. It could have gone either way. Not so much in the Zimmerman trial, since there wasn't much evidence against him at all. So, a black person complaining about the Zimmerman verdict is kind of like the pot calling the kettle black, no pun intended. This is the hypocrisy of the black community, they don't want equal treatment, they want "payback"

 

[Spider-Dan]

Well since that's the case. If I remember correctly the black community celebrated the acquittal of OJ much more than the white community did with Zimmerman.

If you want to compare number of media personalities who openly defended OJ and celebrated his acquittal to those who did the same for Zimmerman, I'm happy to take that bet.

But even that comparison is flawed; OJ is a famous football star and TV celebrity, while Zimmerman is a random citizen.  If we are going to compare apples to apples, we would have to compare the insane media coverage of a random black man accused of murdering white(s) under very questionable circumstances who was then acquitted to that of Zimmerman.  Feel free to let me know when you find one.

Even though the prosecution could have done better in the OJ trial, there was enough evidence for a guilty verdict. It could have gone either way. Not so much in the Zimmerman trial, since there wasn't much evidence against him at all.

shorter: "OJ was actually guilty but Zimmerman totally wasn't"

How convenient that you get to ignore the verdicts you don't agree with.

[Phishfan]

How is that a "big difference"?  Tiger Woods was frequently categorized as black man marrying white woman (even though he does not identify as black).  In Tiger's case, it's convenient for him to be a black man when talking about the inroads of blacks into golf, or when talking about the propensity of black men to date white women.  In Zimmerman's case, it's convenient for him to be a white man when talking about racial profiling.
Not a particularly good argument to make, given a) the lack of an outpouring of Hispanic support for Zimmerman and b) the racial composition of the cohort of Zimmerman supporters.

The lack of support from the Hispanic community should not shock anyone. Zimmerman was labeled white from the first reports to push the racial angle of the story. As soon as photos came out and people could clearly see he was Hispanic they altered their reporting to use the term white Hispanic. Hispanic organizations have aligned with black organizations frequently in the past. They have both felt racism from the white community and Zimmerman is not the best spokesperson for an ethnicity. The best way for each group to push an agenda, refer to Zimmerman as white.

[pondwater]

If you want to compare number of media personalities who openly defended OJ and celebrated his acquittal to those who did the same for Zimmerman, I'm happy to take that bet.

No lets just stick to the black and white communities reaction to the OJ and Zimmerman verdicts.

shorter: "OJ was actually guilty but Zimmerman totally wasn't"

How convenient that you get to ignore the verdicts you don't agree with.

They were both declared not guilty, but lets just assume that they were both clearly guilty according to the evidence and that the jury got them both wrong. Since you keep bringing up whites defending Zimmerman even though he was guilty. How is it any different for the black community to defend a clearly guilty OJ?

[Spider-Dan]

The lack of support from the Hispanic community should not shock anyone. Zimmerman was labeled white from the first reports to push the racial angle of the story. As soon as photos came out and people could clearly see he was Hispanic they altered their reporting to use the term white Hispanic. Hispanic organizations have aligned with black organizations frequently in the past. They have both felt racism from the white community and Zimmerman is not the best spokesperson for an ethnicity. The best way for each group to push an agenda, refer to Zimmerman as white.

Your claim was that Zimmerman was being labeled as white, yet whites were not claiming him as such.  But Hispanics weren't claiming him either, and the overwhelming majority of his supporters were white.

So bringing up who claimed whom as what is not really useful to your point.

[Phishfan]

Your claim was that Zimmerman was being labeled as white, yet whites were not claiming him as such.  But Hispanics weren't claiming him either, and the overwhelming majority of his supporters were white.

So bringing up who claimed whom as what is not really useful to your point.

Actually, many of us are not Zimmerman supporters. We are supporters of the ruled of law as well as evidence and the proof or lack of proof of it. I have met Zimmerman and did not care for the guy (this was years before this incident). On the other hand, I can accept that the prosecution was not ale to show that Zimmerman committed murder. He killed someone, of that there is no doubt. That is a long way from proving it was a murder though.

That is the point people on your side of the argument miss. Your argument is simply that an unarmed black person was killed. Therefore it had to be murder. People on my side of the argument look at the rules of law in that the evidence must be beyond the shadow of doubt. I could clearly see where they did not have enough evidence to get to that level of certainty.

Speaking for myself, calling me a supporter is way off base.

As for who claimed who not being useful to my point, it really is. My original point being that Zimmerman is Hispanic but is being called white by the media and black community. Hispanics really are not denying his heritage. They just did not support his case. There is a difference.

[Spider-Dan]

No lets just stick to the black and white communities reaction to the OJ and Zimmerman verdicts.

What, exactly, is the "white community"?

I mean, I can give lots of examples of white people (in fact, almost entirely white people) supporting Zimmerman, just as you can presumably give examples of black people supporting OJ.

They were both declared not guilty, but lets just assume that they were both clearly guilty according to the evidence and that the jury got them both wrong.

You're free to assume that they are clearly guilty; I already stated that my opinion is that he was found Not Guilty in court, which is what matters.

I wasn't even the person who brought up Zimmerman, and you'll notice that I also mentioned Casey Anthony (a white woman accused of killing her white child) in the same sentence.

[Spider-Dan]

Actually, many of us are not Zimmerman supporters. We are supporters of the ruled of law as well as evidence and the proof or lack of proof of it.

When you can find me an OJ supporter that says, "I supported OJ only because of his race, and not because I think he didn't do it," I will be able to appreciate the value of the above statement.

Until then, saying "I only support justice and the rule of law" is so vague and malleable as to be useless.  Everyone thinks they are on the side of the rule of law.

Your argument is simply that an unarmed black person was killed. Therefore it had to be murder.

Given that Zimmerman does not deny the fact that he killed Martin, if that was the entirety of the argument against him, the trial (and the previous threads in this forum) would have been much shorter.  You're obviously oversimplifying.

Speaking for myself, calling me a supporter is way off base.

You supported his argument that his actions were justified under Florida law, which is why I called you a supporter.  (Unless I have misinterpreted your position and you actually believe that he is guilty, but that the prosecution did not do a good job of proving it?)

This is a rather silly application of semantics.  What sort of label should we invent to describe someone who thought Casey Anthony was not guilty and should go free, but is not a Casey Anthony supporter?

As for who claimed who not being useful to my point, it really is. My original point being that Zimmerman is Hispanic but is being called white by the media and black community. Hispanics really are not denying his heritage.

Are whites denying that the classification of "white Hispanic" exists, or that it applies to him?

Your point appears to be that both sides are trying to classify him in a way that frames the story to better suit their interests.  This is not really news.

[Phishfan]

When you can find me an OJ supporter that says, "I supported OJ only because of his race, and not because I think he didn't do it," I will be able to appreciate the value of the above statement.

I have no idea what this has to do with anything. White people are not supporting Zimmerman because of race. The reason, he isn't white. Have you even seen a picture of the guy?

As for OJ, here is one person (all you asked for) pointing out the community's views on this. It was rather simple to find.

There are a lot of black people in this town that have told me privately, "You know, I agree with you. I think he did it, but I'll never tell anybody that." Because there's this kind of like racial code or something, this camaraderie, there's a line: If you cross that line, somehow you're not in sync with the thought process in the black community. You're not loyal, or you're a sellout. …

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/oj/themes/blacksoj.html

Anyway, I'm not really here to discuss the OJ verdict. it was so long ago all I can really remember was the Furhman racist comments and the farce of the glove not fitting (over another glove on a stretched out hand). No other evidence really stands out so I can't comment.

Until then, saying "I only support justice and the rule of law" is so vague and malleable as to be useless.  Everyone thinks they are on the side of the rule of law.

Not the people evidenced above

Given that Zimmerman does not deny the fact that he killed Martin, if that was the entirety of the argument against him, the trial (and the previous threads in this forum) would have been much shorter.  You're obviously oversimplifying.
You supported his argument that his actions were justified under Florida law, which is why I called you a supporter.

I would say it is more accurate at this time to position my feelings as the prosecution was unable to prove it was unjustified. Different thing entirely.

This is a rather silly application of semantics.  What sort of label should we invent to describe someone who thought Casey Anthony was not guilty and should go free, but is not a Casey Anthony supporter?

Some people are supporters of Zimmerman. I am not. I don't even like the guy but I don't feel they could convict him based on that evidence. Having not met Anthony I can give the same basic description of how I feel. I told you guys she was going to get off while the trial was happening. I think she did it though.

Are whites denying that the classification of "white Hispanic" exists, or that it applies to him?

To be honest I had never heard "white Hispanic" before this. I won't deny it exists but it does not equate to white, especially when he does not appear white and does not consider himself white.

Your point appears to be that both sides are trying to classify him in a way that frames the story to better suit their interests.  This is not really news.

My point is more that the story was misrepresented from the start and has stayed that way in many circles.

[Spider-Dan]

I have no idea what this has to do with anything. White people are not supporting Zimmerman because of race.

Zimmerman killed a black teenager who allegedly attacked him.  I think everyone can agree that if Trayvon Martin was a blond-haired, blue-eyed teenager, the national perception of this story would have been radically different.

As for OJ, here is one person (all you asked for) pointing out the community's views on this. It was rather simple to find.

There are a lot of black people in this town that have told me privately, "You know, I agree with you. I think he did it, but I'll never tell anybody that." Because there's this kind of like racial code or something, this camaraderie, there's a line: If you cross that line, somehow you're not in sync with the thought process in the black community. You're not loyal, or you're a sellout. …

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/oj/themes/blacksoj.html

That example is of a person saying that someone else told me blahblahblah, which is not quite the same thing as saying "I personally supported OJ specifically because of his race."  (I'm sure you would regard secondhand testimony of "well, I know white people who said that Martin was obviously a criminal because blacks usually are" with equal skepticism.)  The particular person you are quoting says that he personally believed that OJ was guilty and that he was troubled that a guilty person got away with it.

Interestingly enough, from the same page:

"… It's not that we couldn't conceive that O.J. would be guilty; the question is, one, can you legally prove that the man did what was claimed that he did?; two, did the prosecution make a compelling case to substantiate their claim that Mr. Simpson was guilty?; and three, there's a difference between being innocent and not guilty.

So black people are not naive enough to think that the proof or the lack of proof of guilt suggests that somebody is innocent. It means that the prosecution didn't meet its burden of proof -- to prove the guilt of Mr. Simpson."

Sounds pretty similar to your position on Zimmerman.

To be honest I had never heard "white Hispanic" before this. I won't deny it exists but it does not equate to white, especially when he does not appear white and does not consider himself white.

How would you classify a person from Spain or Portugal?

[Phishfan]

^^^I have every reason to believe a black man talking about his own community as much as I have a reason to believe the polls you posted. After all those people did not tell it to me directly either and are anonymous. This guy is on record talking about his community,

As for the quote you posted it was followed by this quote stating that people who celebrated the OJ verdict were not even convinced of the innocence. What were they worried about then? Past issues with the justice system that had nothing to do with OJ and everything about race.

"But did the African Americans rejoicing at O.J.'s acquittal really believe he was innocent?

Absolutely not. I don't think we should make the mistake of believing that black people who celebrated a) thought O.J. was innocent, or b) were even concerned most about O.J. as opposed to their Uncle Charlie or Bubba or their sister Shanaynay or their Aunt Jackie, who had been screwed by a system that never paid attention to them.

Again, O.J. was beyond his body. "O.J." was a term that represented every black person that got beat up by the criminal justice system, and now we have found some vindication, and guess what, white America? It was with a black man that you loved. It was with a black man that you said was better than us. It was with a black man that you said wasn't like us. He was different than we are. He wasn't a troublemaker. He didn't cause racial consternation, or he wasn't controversial. Ha, ha, ha. The very guy you thought was so perfect turns out to be the one who turned the tables on you. That was a delicious irony of the victory as well. …"

As for what I call someone from Spain or Portugal, Hispanic.