Bennett Fires Back Against Racism Charges

[Dragoon68]

Bennett Fires Back Against Racism Charges

Good for Bennett! I hope he stands firm on this. He said nothing wrong.

The problem is with those who took what he said out of context and are making it seem like something completely different.

Audio of Conversation

Listen to it yourself!

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Rush Limbaugh did a great job on this today.

Why don't these folks go after Byrd ?

 

[Johnv]

Did I miss something while I mourning the death of Maxwell Smart???

Did he really say or imply that crime would go down if more black babies were aborted? Can someone post a transctipt of the conversation?

 

[Bunyon]

I think I heared him refer to the Book Freakenomics. I think this book had something to do with it. The majority of people in prision are black men, so it would stand to reason that crime would go down, but he went on to say that for many reasons, this is a stupid road to go down. I agree.

 

[Dragoon68]

Statement By Bill Bennett on 30 Sep 2005:

On Wednesday, a caller to my radio show proposed the idea that one good argument for the pro-life position would be that if we didn't have abortions, Social Security would be solvent. I stated my doubts about such a thesis, as well as my opposition to such a form of argument (the audio of the call is available at my Website: bennettmornings.com).

I then stated that such extrapolations of this argument can cut both ways, and cited the current bestseller, Freakonomics, which discusses the authors' thesis that abortion reduces crime.

Then, putting my philosophy professor's hat on, I went on to reveal the limitations of such arguments by showing the absurdity in another such argument, along the same lines. I entertained what law school professors call 'the Socratic method' and what I would hope good social science professors still use in their seminars. In so doing, I suggested a hypothetical analogy while at the same time saying the proposition I was using about blacks and abortion was 'impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible,' just to ensure those who would have any doubt about what they were hearing, or for those who tuned in to the middle of the conversation.

The issues of crime and race have been on many people's minds, and tongues, for the past month or so--in light of the situation in New Orleans; and the issues of race, crime, and abortion are well aired and ventilated in articles, the academy, the think tank community, and public policy. Indeed the whole issue of crime and race is not new in social science, nor popular literature. One of the authors of Freakonomics, himself, had an extended exchange on the discussion of these issues on the Internet some years back--which was also much debated in the think tank community in Washington.

A thought experiment about public policy, on national radio, should not have received the condemnations it has. Anyone paying attention to this debate should be offended by those who have selectively quoted me, distorted my meaning, and taken out of context the dialogue I engaged in this week. Such distortions from 'leaders' of organizations and parties is a disgrace not only to the organizations and institutions they serve, but to the First Amendment.

In sum, let me reiterate what I had hoped my long career had already established: that I renounce all forms of bigotry--and that my record in trying to provide opportunities for, as well as save the lives of, minorities in this country stands up just fine.

 

[Dragoon68]

Many of us, in discussion, make statements for the purpose of argument, illustration, etc. that in no way suggest, imply, or affirm some personal belief. In fact we sometime state the opposite of our belief for emphasis. For someone to take such comments out of context and twist their meaning is completely unacceptable. That's what has happened to Bennett!

 

[LadyEagle]

Another dog and pony show.

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Dragoon68:
Many of us, in discussion, make statements for the purpose of argument, illustration, etc. that in no way suggest, imply, or affirm some personal belief.

It's called playing advocatus diaboli, or devil's advocate. It's clear that this is what happenned here. What's the big deal? Dog and pony show indeed, it seems.

 

[Bunyon]

I am sure the senate majority leader is of the same opinion. But with blacks voting democratic 90 percent of the time, they must keep them in the fold. With their growing economic success they might be tempted to vote republican, so the demos must use the racist scarcrow every time they can to keep their black base or they loose big time.

 

[Dragoon68]

Originally posted by Johnv:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Dragoon68:
Many of us, in discussion, make statements for the purpose of argument, illustration, etc. that in no way suggest, imply, or affirm some personal belief.

It's called playing advocatus diaboli, or devil's advocate. It's clear that this is what happenned here. What's the big deal? Dog and pony show indeed, it seems. </font>[/QUOTE]Perhaps the "devil" gets mad when we "play the devil's advocate" verses actually being his advocate.

I hope Bennett's reputation is not harmed by the false implications being made about what he said and meant.

I was disappointed with the "politically correct" response from the White House.

 

[just-want-peace]

I was disappointed with the "politically correct" response from the White House.

If the WH can't be NON-PC, then they ought to keep their mouth shut!

I voted for the Repubs because they were the "conservatives" & I look to them to counter the [inappropriate language snipped], not become a part of it!!!!

I think we've all heard how the democratic party left it's constituents; well it seems that the repub party is trying it's [inappropriate language snipped] best to do the same!

[ October 01, 2005, 01:23 AM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

[hillclimber]

Originally posted by just-want-peace:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />I was disappointed with the "politically correct" response from the White House.

well it seems that the repub party is trying it's [inappropriate language snipped] best to do the same! </font>[/QUOTE]It sure does.

[ October 01, 2005, 01:23 AM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

[Aaron]

Bennett is doomed. It doesn't matter how much effort is put into defending his statements, the liberal press and the Democrats will spin this till he's destroyed.

 

[Filmproducer]

The comment was innapropriate- point blank, whether it was taken out of context or not. It was offensive and it played on stereotypes of African Americans.

Before anyone tells me, I am fully aware that prisons have disproportionate amounts of African Americans compared to the total population of African Americans. There are, however, reasons as to why this "might" be. (emphasis on might)

 

[church mouse guy]

In other words, Mr. FilmProducer, you think that certain subjects are off limits even if one says that the hypothetical is reprehensible and false at the beginning and uses the hypothetical to denounce racism? However, we do know that African-Americans have a large percentage of the total abortions in relationship to their overall membership in the society--is this a cause for any concern?

Mr. FilmProducer, "On average, 1,452 black babies are aborted every day in the United States" (source cited below). What do you say about that, Mr. FilmProducer?

http://blackgenocide.org/black.html

cmg

 

[Filmproducer]

First of all it is "Mrs."

Secondly, I do not believe any subject is off limits. His comment was innapropriate, to me, because it was taken out of context and used, by others, to perpetuate stereotypes. He should have used a little more common sense. Remember, we are all selective listeners. While the Democrats selectively heard his comment put of context, there are most likely listeners who also took his comment out of context in the literal sense. This is how stereotypes are perpetuated. I hope this clarifies what I was trying to say.

Third, I do not totally agree with your comment on abortions. I do believe the abortion rate for African Americans is high, as I don't believe in abortion. However, teen pregnancy is much more prevalent. Whereas in their white couterparts abortion is higher. I do not have time to link to exact statistics, but I will do so in the next day or so. Studies have shown that African Americans are much more likely to have a baby out of wedlock, and white teenagers are more likely to have abortions. There are many reasons for this, the main one, I believe, would most likely be cost.

With that being said, I understand what he was trying to do. I just believe he could have pointed it out in a more constructive way.

 

[carpro]

Sometimes the truth is just not welcome in a discussion.

 

[Dragoon68]

Originally posted by Filmproducer:
The comment was innapropriate- point blank, whether it was taken out of context or not. It was offensive and it played on stereotypes of African Americans.

Before anyone tells me, I am fully aware that prisons have disproportionate amounts of African Americans compared to the total population of African Americans. There are, however, reasons as to why this "might" be. (emphasis on might)

I diagree with your conclusion. The context in which something is stated makes a lot of difference in how something should be taken. The mere mention of race need not be taken as a offense to persons.

 

[Daisy]

Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
Why don't these folks go after Byrd ?

Statute of limitations?

Bennet's assertion is offensive. While he and Rush insist that it it true, that is debatable.

 

[carpro]

Originally posted by Daisy:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bro. Curtis:
Why don't these folks go after Byrd ?

Statute of limitations?

Bennet's assertion is offensive. While he and Rush insist that it it true, that is debatable. </font>[/QUOTE]It's only debatable if one is in denial.