I see what you mean, but if you look at the first two responses to this thread along with some of the posts on the other thread, they became about the underlying issue of the race card and not so much about Hyde. Those two posts made generalizations about the media and our country's use of the race card, so I responded to it. What is taking the conversation off course is that I'm the only one disagreeing with everyone.

It's mostly comments like this that I was responding to (and not to pick on the poster, I know they clarified their comments later on):



The conversation certainly hasn't been all about Hyde. And If people think that I am sermonizing it's only because comments like this will always inspire a lot of conversation, not because I think I'm smarter than anyone.

............ 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.

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.

This was overdue.........

Bringing up the question of race shouldn't automatically get dismissed with the "race card" label. Race is a serious issue that plays a role in society whether people want to admit it or not, and while I understand that sometimes it isn't backed up well, like in this article, it's still an important issue that shouldn't be reduced to something trivial like "the race card".

The way Hyde wrote it was cheap and obviously for shock value, but that doesn't mean that race doesn't play an issue when it comes to player-personnel relations in the NFL.

Using the term "race card" implies that anyone whp talks about race is trying to hide behind it for personal gain, and while this may be true of some people, it certainly is not true of many people who have tried to bring up race in a serious discussion, yet get accused of pulling the dreaded "race card". Automatically pulling out this "race card" intimidates people from talking about issues that are real.

Not defending Hyde or saying that Ireland was racist. Trust me, I understand that article was arbitrary and written only for reader shock-value, just think it's unhealthy when our gut reaction is to deem everything that deals with race as the "race card".

Number one being the claim that our country is suffering from the race card. That, to me, is a complete exaggeration.

I will remember the posts that presented strong points against what I am saying, so certainly not yours.

I'm trivialized and my argument is made into a caricature.

So what are your thoughts on the questions given to Gerhardt in his interview with an 'anonymous' NFL GM?

Deservedly so.

What has cheapened the race debate in this country is those who do pull the race card at every opportunity.

Examples:

If you disagree with Obama and his policies you are racist. You do so because he is black, even if you disagreed with Clinton on the same issues when he was president.
If you agree with enforcing illegal immigration laws you are racist.

These are the "clarion calls" being belted out today and cheapening discussions about race.

I'm not one to suggest that discrimination can't go both ways, I never said that despite that being applied to my argument by some of you guys. I know it can go both ways these days, and the media hasn't latched on that story quite as much, I recognize that and I have in previous posts.

That's very thoughtful. How long did it take to punch that one out? I'm assuming as long as it takes you to type all of your other reasonable comments.

About as long as it took you to derail this thread with peripheral junk.

I could bring up would have far greater consequences than you feeling bad 'cus you can't openly disagree with Obama.

By the way, I like how you generalize your comments. "if you disagree with Obama you ar a racist". According to who?

Na, it actually took some thought and honesty to type what I did, knowing full well I was going to get blasted. Unlike your cheap comments out of left field.

“I’ve been in that same position and that same seat as a Dez Bryant,” Wiley told ESPN Radio during a Thursday morning appearance. “I can go back to when I was signed as a free agent by the Dallas Cowboys in 2004. Walking into Bill Parcells’ office — this is my, quote unquote, recruiting trip of sorts — I’ve been in the league, this is my seventh or eighth year, Bill Parcells, back turned to me, writing on the chalkboard, doesn’t even turn around to, say, ‘Hello’ or ‘Nice to meet you, Marcellus Wiley,’ just echoes, ‘Do you do drugs?’”

Wiley, who grew up in Compton, Calif., but played his football at Columbia University in the Ivy League, was understandably taken aback. But the fact he wound up signing with the Cowboys should tell you something about the thickness of his skin and maybe even about the jabbing nature of the Parcells Way.

“I took that in jest, ...


The connection of Bill Parcells and Jeff Ireland — you know what? I’m not going to look at this as something that’s going to degrade you. I’m not looking at this question as something that’s going to try and put an indictment on you. I’m simply saying, if you have these issues, and these pressures around you, maybe I should help you ...

And finally, shouldn’t Parcells, rather than letting Ireland twist in the wind, issue a statement of his own taking responsibility for (and maybe ownership of) the Dolphins’ approach in these pre-draft interviews and explaining where Ireland might have been coming from?

What greater consequence is there than to squash political dissent?



According to Democrats and liberals. Do you not watch the news?

So ALL Democrats and liberals think you are racist for bashing Obama?

And please, noone is squashing your political voice.