What is the Matter with Bill Bennett?????

in the meantime, care to explain how eliminating all black police officers would not affect the crime rate, in case Finn d'Abuzz isn't up to the challenge?

yitwail wrote:

in the meantime, care to explain how eliminating all black police officers would not affect the crime rate, in case Finn d'Abuzz isn't up to the challenge?

Is your thesis that if you were to eliminate all black law enforcement officers, the staffing requirements of the various law enforcement agencies would not be met by police officers of other races? Municipalities would just throw up their hands in exasperation because they couldn't find qualified people to hire for their law enforcement needs?

If you were to eliminate all black criminals, would there be criminals from other races scrambling to fill the void? Or would there just be a void?

I also don't think that anyone needs to spend even a half a second analyzing the likely outcome of Bennett's hypothetical. The actual consequences are impossible to predict.

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.

Because he does agree with it, he just thinks it would be morally reprehensible to carry it out.

If someone opens up a thread about Farrakkan and his statements I am sure people would have something to say about it. For my part if he said that, it was a stupid thing to repeat. This is the first I heard or read about the statement.

If you were to eliminate 12% of the population at random, you don't think there would be a reduction in crime ?

What's preventing you from starting one?

People know and understand Farrakhan is insane. His words are as meaningful as spit. Bennett, on the otherhand, was an unexpected source of outrage. That's why it makes headlines and valuable chat-room fodder.

Steppenwolf wrote:

I also don't think that anyone needs to spend even a half a second analyzing the likely outcome of Bennett's hypothetical. The actual consequences are impossible to predict.

wonderful, so we all agree now that this statement is not factual:

Quote:

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.

thank you Steppenwolf.

CerealKiller wrote:

If you were to eliminate 12% of the population at random, you don't think there would be a reduction in crime ?

that's not what Bennett said. obviously, crime would go down. Bennett said the crime rate would go down.

Crime rate is crimes per 100,000 persons.

If you eliminate 50% of the population your crime rate wouldn't necessarily change one bit.

[And what does that show? That he was probably incorrect about his absurd hypothetical? And? I can't believe that's what all the fuss is about.

Headlines across the nation: Bennett probably incorrect about off-the-cuff hypothetical.

Where are you going, my friend?

If you were to eliminate all black criminals, would there be criminals from other races scrambling to fill the void? Or would there just be a void?

(3) Crime, in many respects, is like an ecological niche. If a city killed all of its pigeons, that would probably result in an increase in the rat population, because both occupy the same general niche. The same with criminals. When the feds cracked down on the Italian mafia, it just made more room for Hispanic, Chinese, and other ethnic gangs. Likewise, if a future black criminal is aborted, there's a good chance that his place will simply be taken by a non-black criminal. A policy of universal abortion for black babies, then, would merely open up opportunities for non-black criminals.

I agree Joe. Racist, no ... stupid, yes.

i'm puzzled why you asked this, since a week ago you agreed with this observation:

Finn d'Abuzz wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

I have a hard time believing that anyone who would say such things, as a politician, on national radio. is not an inherent racist. I don't care if the statistics match up to what he was saying; it was an idiotic thing to say and Bennett deserves what he is getting.

The truly delicious part of this is that all the Righties defending Bennett don't matter one whit; the man is ruined, and rightly so.

Cycloptichorn

Why is this not hard to believe?

The fellow who advocated a "niggardly" approach to the DC budget must have been a racist. He, like Bennett, should have known that a large segment of the population haven't the intelligence, or education to understand his point, and therefore because he, nevertheless, made his comments; he must be a racist.

Of course you don't care that the statistics match up to what Bennett is saying. He is a conservative, therefore he is wrong!

Notwithstanding the fact that this flap has hardly ruined Bennet, it is telling that the primary point you distill from the matter is that it is "delicious" that a conservative might be involved in a faux pas. To hell with logic and truth...if it can hurt the damned Righties, Cyclo is all for it.

The utter stupidity expressed in this post and others is truly depressing, notwithstanding my already low opinion of Liberals.

What utter tripe.

No borrowing here. Imitiation is the greatest form of flattery.

Bennett isn't wrong because he's a Republican, he's wrong because he could have used any term in order to make his point, as you point out in your last post, and he chose to choose Blacks. It was a stupid thing to do, and he's reaping the rewards of doing it; referring to meaningless physical distinctions between folks is insulting and wrong. He should have known better, it was a stupid thing to do.

A2K is hardly a reliable indicator of the Buzz in the US. I've been in Bermuda since Sunday and so have not kept up with US political heandlines, but I doubt (and prove me wrong if you can) that the Bennet flap has dominated US news since Sunday.

Bennett's comments were stupid only to the extent that he should have, but did not realize the extent of stupidity that prevails American society.
I would argue, until proven otherwise, that Bennett had the right assessment, since he was not likely to focus only on Liberal America.

I have not read Coulter's comments on this issue, but find it very hard to believe that she came out, flatly, with a critque of the Bennett comments as stupid. More likely she is coming from my area which concludes that Bennett was stupid for not appreciating that comments such as he made, irrespective of whether or not they were valid, would cause a fire storm. Coulter and others have accepted the role as Fire Starter, but Bennett is perceived as a Wise Man of conservatism. Despite the fact that there is nothing, at all, invalid about his comments, he has an obligation to better protect the image of conservatism in the US.

Given the context of a radio talk show, it is expecting too much to argue that Bennett should have chosen his words, and examples more wisely.

He responded spontaneously, and in a very intelligent, and benign fashion. What he did not, apparently, have time to consider was the way the Left might chose to misinterpret his comments.
-
I think Bennett has lost his job over this and certainly taken a whole lot of scorn. Forget the WH, I even saw ol' Ann Coulter talking about how he shouldn't have said what he said. That to me is certainly indicative of a politician who has been ruined... his own party turns against him and he loses his job. What do you call it?

You think he has lost his job? Unless you know he has, who the hell cares about your ideologically based suspicions?

I usually feel that the angrier/more scornful you are about a topic, the more correct the opposite poster is, yaknow? Given your history and all.

Well Cyclo, knowing how you gravitate to the most facile of arguments, I'm not surprised that you have reached this absurd conclusion, but since you hold it in some regard perhaps your research on the issue should include your own commentary? I know, I am asking too much of a simple cyclops.

Cycloptichorn

I would say that anyone who speaks as Bennett does would have difficulty keeping even a low-level job dealing with the public, such as selling slacks in a Sears menswear department or selling wrenches in a hardware store.

And yet with that disability he managed to become the Director/Chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities, Secretary of Education, the National "drug czar,"...