Rock Sexton wrote:
Please, don't act like your little anecdote about Nazis wasn't an attempt to generalize what I was saying. And it may be the case that we have different experiences with the term, but you certainly are belittling what I'm saying while I am attempting to address everyone's comments.
You say that I'm talking about other issues, but look at the two threads containing this topic carefully. What you'll see is a number of posts that immediately relate Hyde's article to the idea that the 'race card' is over-used as a cop out and that our country is suffering from it. These posters made it about the 'race card' in general and that's why I responded to it the way I did, by stating that the term is inappropriately used as a way to not deal with the challenging issue.
Your way of belittling my comments by associating them with Al Sharpton certainly illustrates how these issues can be quickly trivialized and stereotyped according to certain preconceptions we have about people using the 'race card'. You have a negative bias toward people "pulling the race card" and you associate that with Sharpton, and thus you lump me with that group.
............ Negative bias? Nah, more like ZERO
tolerance for posters who can't stick to the topic and fixate on off-tangent comments....... then begin to lecture us on how something like the "race card" is inappropriately used giving us no clear examples of why other than it's a "challenging" issue. The "race card" has most definitely been used appropriately in this thread.
So I must be the first person to take a thread off topic? Not to mention people were already making reference to the underlying issue of race and the race card way before I joined in. Don't act like what bothered you was my going off topic, what you are against is my particular perspective, just own up to that.
I can certainly give you examples of people treating serious issues as trivial using the race card term, but then I ould get accused of "lecturing", and the apparently nonredeemable crime of steering a conversation "off topic".
Yes but even the example you gave (which was later clarified you say) is about the context of football, and more than likely motivated by the double standard applied to Gerhardt's line of questioning. You came in here bent on telling people they were wrong for using the term 'race card' in society as a whole. If you would have stuck to the context "football", there would have been less heartburn over it. Instead you lashed out over the injustice of using the term 'race card' in society as a whole. The fact remains though, his point was spot on. The race card was used here and there has been a double standard here concerning the NFL. Your taking the context and applying it towards society at large is a sermon that is best left for the political forum. Matter of fact, at this point in time, this whole thread probably belongs in the political forum because of how off track it has gotten.
Again, I see what you mean and I am not claiming that I stuck on the subject of football. But those comments and others like it, despite being about football, were dripping of political commentary about the issue of the race card in general. Not to mention, the NFL is political just like anything else, and we know all sorts of social issues are involved in something as benign seeming as sports. I didn't bring this conversation about the race card into this...other people posted on it and I replied. I didn't "lash" out at anybody, I was very cautious in explaining I understood why people were upset with Hyde's article. It was you guys who started referring to my posts as a soap box, a sermon/lecture and all of these other personal, off topic things.