Reply
Fri 30 Sep, 2005 10:38 am
Have any of you seen his new solution to reduce crime????? I think he has lost his mind. Check out
www.Washingtonpost.com and check out Section A, the story under National News. I am dying to hear how he explains how these remarks were taken out of context. If you need a teaser, his solution involves forcing certain racial groups to abort their babies. Yes folks, the author of "The Book of Virtues" has thought of a way to prevent crime, or at least lessen crime. Please read it yourself and let me know what is happening here.
I for one am looking forward to Bill Mahrer's show tonight.
His excuse was to say that is was a hypothetical situation.
If he had any brains, he could have said something like.....
"Now, I'm going to bring up a purely hypothetical situation that would never actually occur, nor would I advocate"......
I read the book of virtues way back and thought, oh come on....then when I heard of his gambling problem, I felt justified in ignoring him after that.
His problem is that he is a part of the mouth breathing radical right.....
It's good to see that context has no place in the liberal world.
If you actually read what he said, most of you would actually agree with what he said. Instead, most of you seem to grab ahold of the sound bite and curse his name.
It wasn't a sound bite, but it showed an incredibly insensitive thought process. He should know better than to float such a ridiculous "final solution" idea on the air or in private. And by the way, I don't think I cursed his name, I just got scared. And also, Jesse Jackson got in a lot of trouble for the way he characterized New York some years back. But he wasn't talking about abortion as a solution to change the balance of New York. Shame on Bill Bennett and shame on anybody who trys to justify that odious remark. He needs to apologize sooner rather than later.
McGentrix wrote:It's good to see that context has no place in the liberal world.
If you actually read what he said, most of you would actually agree with what he said. Instead, most of you seem to grab ahold of the sound bite and curse his name.
I did read the context, McG. He said if all black babies were aborted, crime rates would drop. What subtle shading of the context did you find? Please share...
McG, do you honestly think that feet on the ground conservatives will agree with his remarks. Not the conservatives I know and work with. To reduce this to a liberal "windfall" tells a lot about your knowledge of human nature. I don't want to offend you personally, but I think you are obcessing on the political "tint" as if Bennett was the only standard bearer of the Republican Party. Bennett just had his "I didn't have sexual relations with that woman" moment.
This is from the AP summary of the story. The context would appear to be "We should never do this, but if we did, crime rates would drop." You be the judge of whether he has somehow been misrepresented:
Bennett, on his radio show, ''Morning in America,'' was answering a caller's question when he took issue with the hypothesis put forth in a recent book that one reason crime is down is that abortion is up.
''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.''
He went on to call that ''an impossible, ridiculous and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down. So these far-out, these far-reaching, extensive extrapolations are, I think, tricky.''
Even with the last statement about moral reprehensibility, he still tied the elimination of black, that's black, not white, or asian, or latino babies with the reduction of crime. Again I say, penis with ears.
Your wife would respect you more and be a better wife if you would beat her senseless everyonce in a while,,,Of course, I don't recommend doing that, because that would be wrong, and possibly something you could go to jail for (especially if you had a whole bunch of tree-hugging liberals on the jury)......but she would defininately pay more attention to your needs if you walk into the room carrying a bat. But of course that would be wrong, but it would reduce the amount of back talk from that woman you allow to raise your children, fix your meals and clean your house. Men just don't get the right amount of respect from women, I blame the femi-nazies that Rush has warned us about. Whole damn family value thing right in the crapper once they gave those girls the vote. Sad.
Well, am I on board with the right message now???? Poor helpless Bill Bennett, I bet the person who asked the question was some uppity female.
Yes, context is everything:
"If we did this horrible thing, it would work. But it would be wrong."
And this from a guy who lectures us on morals...
glitterbag, what do you tell a woman with two black eyes?
Nothing, you already told her twice.
Bear, my brother gave that joke to a guy who was about to address a workforce about domestic violence and sensitivity in the workplace. Michael told him he had a great ice-breaker for him, Michael said the guy nearly turned ashen and started to sweat. He thougth Mike was actually serious. His punch line is just a tad different, it goes "You just won't listen".
Did you ever hear the one about the man who came back from church with two black eyes?
McGentrix wrote:It's good to see that context has no place in the liberal world.
If you actually read what he said, most of you would actually agree with what he said. Instead, most of you seem to grab ahold of the sound bite and curse his name.
Quote:WASHINGTON - The White House on Friday criticized former Education Secretary William Bennett for remarks linking the crime rate and the abortion of black babies.
"The president believes the comments were not appropriate," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said.
Source
so is the president a liberal now? or are you suggesting only liberals would agree with Bennett after reading his remarks?
I guess Bush isn't much of a team player when it comes to musing about genocide in the US. Good for him.
What makes his statement worse is the fact that it assumes blacks are causing the most crime rate and if they only aborted their babies crime would go down. Even if he really did not in truth mean blacks should really abort their babies the fact that he believes most crime is inherently caused by blacks is a racist point of view. Every which way you look at it; it is a horrible statement and should be indefensible for anyone.
Bennett stood by his comments Thursday night.
"I was putting forward a hypothetical proposition. Put that forward. Examined it. And then said about it that it's morally reprehensible. To recommend abortion of an entire group of people in order to lower your crime rate is morally reprehensible. But this is what happens when you argue that the ends can justify the means," he told CNN.
"I'm not racist, and I'll put my record up against theirs," referring to Pelosi and other critics. "I've been a champion of the real civil rights issue of our times -- equal educational opportunities for kids."
"We've got to have candor and talk about these things while we reject wild hypotheses," Bennett said.
"I don't think people have the right to be angry, if they look at the whole thing. But if they get a selective part of my comment, I can see why they would be angry. If somebody thought I was advocating that, they ought to be angry. I would be angry."
"But that's not what I advocate."
Asked if he owed people an apology, Bennett replied, "I don't think I do. I think people who misrepresented my view owe me an apology."
McGentrix wrote:Asked if he owed people an apology, Bennett replied, "I don't think I do. I think people who misrepresented my view owe me an apology."
so how come the president didn't say, "Billy, you're doing a heckuva job?" why isn't it misrepresenting the remarks to call them "inappropriate?" does the White House owe Bennett an apology?