Bennett is now and has always been and a s s.
makes wonder about " education" in america
Bennett is now and has always been and a s s.
Robert Gregory Browne
KISS HER GOODBYE (now available)
KILLER YEAR: Stories to Die For (Jan. 2008)
WHISPER IN THE DARK (2008)
St. Martin's Press
Like he left any room for misrepresentation of his words.Originally Posted by Ernstinen
"But I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could, if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down," said Bennett, author of "The Book of Virtues."
WTF is this? Jeez. And this is based on just a "hypothesis"?, what, backed by crime statistics? So he's saying either that every black baby is going to be a criminal, OR it is OK to kill all those black babies, irregardless of their potential, just to get those that were going to be criminals? How naive of him to think that he can say that without being incredibly offensive. How moronic of him to think that he can nullify the offence by saying that actually, eugenics and the final solution is immoral. Duh.
But you know he may simply be reflecting a persistent institutionalised racism, seeing as crime statistics are still being compiled in terms of race:- because that's is actually meaningless. It says little about the cause of crime, -or what, the pigment from the skin affects their brain? Obviously the statistical link is social, not racial. But then, present the statistics in terms of social groups, not racial.
There really isn't any way to climb down from that remark, is there.
I try soooo hard to stay neutral on politics discussions but in the words of Bugs Bunny, "What a Maroon!"
Bennett just stepped on his lower appendage.
I find it completely amazing that you guys don't even know what you are arguing about...have no clue about the point he was making...don't even realize that he was making a ridiculous argument on purpose (which a sentence later he said was absurd and horrific), in an attempt to equate it and point out another ridiculous argument that some democrat economist made that said abortions reduce the crime rate...so we should all be in favor or abortions.
But no...go ahead and stop before the point where he said he was arguing a ridiculous hypothetical...because then it serves the opportunist democrat's political purpose of trying to label him and the republicans a racist group. (The republicans that passed the civil rights act years ago...the republicans who have put more african americans in positions of power in the US ever...unlike the democrats...who have fought it all the way legislatively...and even put a head KKK member, senator Bird of WV as one of their leaders). Go ahead...continue to look foolish by being selective with which part of Bennet's words you all chose to form an opinion on.
...never ceases to amaze.......
The context is that Bennet was talking about the slippery slope of abortion.
Well, in that case he's implying that people who fight for a woman's reproductive rights are closet supporters of genocide. And that's better?
Here's the deal:
1) He brought up the topic of aborting black babies. If he can't predict the reaction, he hasn't got a clue.
2) One can't assume that the crime rate would go down with such a policy. In fact, it would likely cause a bloody revolution.
3) Why didn't he single out the poor, the stupid, the criminals or any other group? That he singled out blacks shows his latent racism - whether he sees himself as a racist or not.
4) The majority of people in this country support abortion rights within limits. Virtually no one supports mandatory abortions of any kind, nor do we support genocide.
This gambling moralist is nothing more than another hypocritical, right-wing, big-mouthed bigot. There's a market for everything...
Brian, why do you automatically take the conservative jackass position, even when it flies in the face of all common sense?
I personally think there are *far* more important things to get outraged about than moronic comments by a former government official. But look at what he said: the crime rate would go down if the black population didn't grow.
Of course he's not saying that all black children should be aborted. What he's saying is that blacks are responsible for crime, and as long as there are more blacks, there's going to be more crime.
Is it honestly amazing to you that some people might take a dim view of that? Not only is it racist, it's absolutely retarded. Even your fantasy pinup boy George Bush made a point of distancing himself from this.
What we should be talking about is how this is a distraction from Karl Rove, now that Judith Miller is out of jail.
Noooooo...he is saying that making the argument that one should support abortion because it will lower the crime rate is about as horrid and irresponsible as singling out groups in general and arguing that aborting african americans would also lower the crime rate because there are more african americans in prision proportionally.Originally Posted by Nick Batzdorf
It is the context of his argument that one has to take into consideration.
Can you all see that he is not arguing that position. He is arguing that that position is horrid and is concluding that the original economist's position is on that same level.
The interesting thing is that you all know you are taking it out of context and are just using it as a way to attack another republican when the guy is actually making an argument that make sense. And that argument is that those positions are ignorant, irresponsible and abbhorant. It has nothing to do with african americans.
Heck Larry Elder in L.A. has been arguing the same thing...is he racist? He is African American. What does that make him?