Org Mobile Site
William Bennet is a disgrace. Here is he is, our former Secretary of Education, showing his ass to all of America. During a debate on crime, a caller on Bennet's radio show suggested that higher abortion rates are leading to less crime. Bennet's answer? (No offense intended to anyone...)
I don't care what he meant by that. I don't want anyone that categorically stupid on the radio. I've heard Klansmen with more wit and decorum then this.... The only defense I've heard is "Oh yeah, well you should hear what Charlie Rangell said last week..." (For the record, Charlie Rangell, D-NY said on the House floor that Bush is the Bull Shannon of today's day and age, Bull Shannon of course being the police chief that used dogs and firehoses to attack Rev. King). I don't care how bad Rangell's speech is, nothing, and I mean NOTHING, justifies this sort of thing. It's intolerable. So, before my worthy adverseries on the left ask about the silence, let me encourage conservatives of all ilk to condemn this statement.
Now, since I've done this, I imagine the response will have to shift to "And George Bush should resign too". Well, let's put an end to that right now. This was one buffoon who made a wildly inappropriate (racist, insensitive and pro-abortion for that matter) comment. Bush was out in front of the pack condemning it this morning.
Edit: Erh, Bull Connor. Bull Shannon was the bailiff on the sitcom 'Night Court'.
Originally Posted by :
You could abort every last black baby and you'd still have crime.
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/09/30/D8CUKRH04.htmlYou could abort every last black baby and you'd still have crime.
I don't care what he meant by that. I don't want anyone that categorically stupid on the radio. I've heard Klansmen with more wit and decorum then this.... The only defense I've heard is "Oh yeah, well you should hear what Charlie Rangell said last week..." (For the record, Charlie Rangell, D-NY said on the House floor that Bush is the Bull Shannon of today's day and age, Bull Shannon of course being the police chief that used dogs and firehoses to attack Rev. King). I don't care how bad Rangell's speech is, nothing, and I mean NOTHING, justifies this sort of thing. It's intolerable. So, before my worthy adverseries on the left ask about the silence, let me encourage conservatives of all ilk to condemn this statement.
Now, since I've done this, I imagine the response will have to shift to "And George Bush should resign too". Well, let's put an end to that right now. This was one buffoon who made a wildly inappropriate (racist, insensitive and pro-abortion for that matter) comment. Bush was out in front of the pack condemning it this morning.
Edit: Erh, Bull Connor. Bull Shannon was the bailiff on the sitcom 'Night Court'.
Well Bennet seems to have gotten beat up over this comment - and justly so in my opinion by especially by Colmes of Fox News. Happen to catch Colmes on my way home from work late at night on talk radio talking about Mr. Bennets comment. When I heard the sound bite in context - I was completely shock that someone stated that, what a ****** moron Bennet was for making such a ridiculous comment.
Condemned! What a moronic, stupid, ignorant thing to say.
Crazed Rabbit
Crazed Rabbit
The man is clearly an idiot who cannot keep his mouth shut...bad combination
this p.o.s. went to my alma mater.... 
Ouch. Agreed. Foot in mouth time for Mr. Bennett.
Here's the transcript from Media Matters:
From the September 28 broadcast of Salem Radio Network's Bill Bennett's Morning in America:
CALLER: I noticed the national media, you know, they talk a lot about the loss of revenue, or the inability of the government to fund Social Security, and I was curious, and I've read articles in recent months here, that the abortions that have happened since Roe v. Wade, the lost revenue from the people who have been aborted in the last 30-something years, could fund Social Security as we know it today. And the media just doesn't -- never touches this at all.
BENNETT: Assuming they're all productive citizens?
CALLER: Assuming that they are. Even if only a portion of them were, it would be an enormous amount of revenue.
BENNETT: Maybe, maybe, but we don't know what the costs would be, too. I think as -- abortion disproportionately occur among single women? No.
CALLER: I don't know the exact statistics, but quite a bit are, yeah.
BENNETT: All right, well, I mean, I just don't know. I would not argue for the pro-life position based on this, because you don't know. I mean, it cuts both -- you know, one of the arguments in this book Freakonomics that they make is that the declining crime rate, you know, they deal with this hypothesis, that one of the reasons crime is down is that abortion is up. Well --
CALLER: Well, I don't think that statistic is accurate.
BENNETT: Well, I don't think it is either, I don't think it is either, because first of all, there is just too much that you don't know. 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. That would be 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.
Wow. That was a poorly turned phrase. He needs a 60 minute timeout on the "naughty spot" so he can think about what he said.
I just made a "Super Nanny" reference.
Here's the transcript from Media Matters:
From the September 28 broadcast of Salem Radio Network's Bill Bennett's Morning in America:
CALLER: I noticed the national media, you know, they talk a lot about the loss of revenue, or the inability of the government to fund Social Security, and I was curious, and I've read articles in recent months here, that the abortions that have happened since Roe v. Wade, the lost revenue from the people who have been aborted in the last 30-something years, could fund Social Security as we know it today. And the media just doesn't -- never touches this at all.
BENNETT: Assuming they're all productive citizens?
CALLER: Assuming that they are. Even if only a portion of them were, it would be an enormous amount of revenue.
BENNETT: Maybe, maybe, but we don't know what the costs would be, too. I think as -- abortion disproportionately occur among single women? No.
CALLER: I don't know the exact statistics, but quite a bit are, yeah.
BENNETT: All right, well, I mean, I just don't know. I would not argue for the pro-life position based on this, because you don't know. I mean, it cuts both -- you know, one of the arguments in this book Freakonomics that they make is that the declining crime rate, you know, they deal with this hypothesis, that one of the reasons crime is down is that abortion is up. Well --
CALLER: Well, I don't think that statistic is accurate.
BENNETT: Well, I don't think it is either, I don't think it is either, because first of all, there is just too much that you don't know. 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. That would be 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.
Wow. That was a poorly turned phrase. He needs a 60 minute timeout on the "naughty spot" so he can think about what he said.
I just made a "Super Nanny" reference.
Before you use words like "moron" and "idiot" to describe Bennett, think for a second. He has a PhD from the University of Texas, and a law degree from Harvard. The man is not stupid. He may be (or is), however, rascist and out of touch. Calling him an idiot somewhat excuses him. For this, there can be no excuse.
You have a very good point Drone. Simple mean ignorance is not the order of the day here. Bennet allowed a glimpse behind the curtain.
Originally Posted by Don Corleone:
Bush was out in front of the pack condemning it this morning.
Considering I was hearing comments on this yesterday when Democrats were slamming it, and Bush spoke about it this morning, I get tickled by the "front of the pack" comment. Joining or following the pack would be more apt.Bush was out in front of the pack condemning it this morning.
It was a fairly racist comment, although repugnant in several other ways as well (and a particularly odd twist is in its worship of the almighty dollar.) If you dissect it looking only at the basic assertion it does illlustrate a problem some have of separating environment, etc. from race. What it appears he was getting at is the concept of children born into families that have a higher statistical probability of being incarcerated/convicted. So then he makes the leap to that being black and using a racist generalization. Sad to say, I've seen others make the same leap here recently. That failure is common across the political spectrum. Ironically, the international definition of racism isn't even accurate because it is so broad as to be unusable.
Originally Posted by :
You could abort every last black baby and you'd still have crime.
Is that not a true statement? You could abort every last black baby and you'd still have crime.
Originally Posted by Don Corleone:
Bennet allowed a glimpse behind the curtain.
Sums it up nicely. I tried to think of way to phrase hidden rascism, but could come up with something that sounded right.Bennet allowed a glimpse behind the curtain.
Ah, the speed of the internet. This fiasco is already in his Wikipedia entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Bennett
I really like the bottom entry, as a grad student he went out on a blind date with Janis Joplin.
It is true statistically that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could abort every black baby in the US and the crime rate would go down.
If you accept the fact that there is a higher crime rate amongst Afro-Americans than average, then, leaving other variables out of the equation, it is true by sheer extrapolation. Call it racist all you want.
I do think it shows a poor grasp of sociological and statistical reality if you believe that you can leave all other other variables out of the equation. In practice, it takes a racist leap of thought to not see this.
It is also true that aborting all black babies would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do. Now if only Bennet just tried to show the ridiculousness of these far-out, far-reaching, extensive extrapolations there wouldn't be a problem. Let's not forget that the first one showing his ass to all of America was that macro-economically challenged caller.
Where Bennet get's in trouble though, is when one deconstructs his answer. I can think of a thousand neutral, non-offensive examples that would've immediately revealed the mistaken train of thought in the assertion from that caller that 'the abortions that have happened since Roe v. Wade, the lost revenue from the people who have been aborted in the last 30-something years, could fund Social Security as we know it today'.
What Bennet probably revealed instead, was his racial mindset. That 'probably' meaning that there is the possibility that he came up with his example because the caller reminded him of the sort of silly extrapolations some statistically challenged racists make. That still doesn't explain why, when trying to show that that caller's statement is false, he comes up with an example he thinks is true, but is merely impossible to pull off.
But, even when applyin the 'principle of charity' and assuming that he was only trying to counter one silly extrapolation with another, he should've realized that a statement like his is offensive in the extreme.
So there are three layers of possible racism in Bennets statement. Firstly, by regarding the statement that 'blacks commit more crime' is inherently racist. If it is, then Bennet is a racist. I don't think it is.
Then there's the 'glimpse behind the curtain' theory, that Bennet unwillingly revealed a racist mindset. I think he did, but that's only based on circumstantial evidence.
Lastly, that only a racially insensitive fool would even bring up an offensive example like his, whatever his intentions with it may have been.
If you accept the fact that there is a higher crime rate amongst Afro-Americans than average, then, leaving other variables out of the equation, it is true by sheer extrapolation. Call it racist all you want.
I do think it shows a poor grasp of sociological and statistical reality if you believe that you can leave all other other variables out of the equation. In practice, it takes a racist leap of thought to not see this.
It is also true that aborting all black babies would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do. Now if only Bennet just tried to show the ridiculousness of these far-out, far-reaching, extensive extrapolations there wouldn't be a problem. Let's not forget that the first one showing his ass to all of America was that macro-economically challenged caller.
Where Bennet get's in trouble though, is when one deconstructs his answer. I can think of a thousand neutral, non-offensive examples that would've immediately revealed the mistaken train of thought in the assertion from that caller that 'the abortions that have happened since Roe v. Wade, the lost revenue from the people who have been aborted in the last 30-something years, could fund Social Security as we know it today'.
What Bennet probably revealed instead, was his racial mindset. That 'probably' meaning that there is the possibility that he came up with his example because the caller reminded him of the sort of silly extrapolations some statistically challenged racists make. That still doesn't explain why, when trying to show that that caller's statement is false, he comes up with an example he thinks is true, but is merely impossible to pull off.
But, even when applyin the 'principle of charity' and assuming that he was only trying to counter one silly extrapolation with another, he should've realized that a statement like his is offensive in the extreme.
So there are three layers of possible racism in Bennets statement. Firstly, by regarding the statement that 'blacks commit more crime' is inherently racist. If it is, then Bennet is a racist. I don't think it is.
Then there's the 'glimpse behind the curtain' theory, that Bennet unwillingly revealed a racist mindset. I think he did, but that's only based on circumstantial evidence.
Lastly, that only a racially insensitive fool would even bring up an offensive example like his, whatever his intentions with it may have been.
Originally Posted by Louis IV the Fat:
So there are three layers of possible racism in Bennets statement. Firstly, by regarding the statement that 'blacks commit more crime' is inherently racist. If it is, then Bennet is a racist. I don't think it is.
Yes, this is where he got himself into trouble in a hurry. This same sort of logic that he was applying could and was applied to Irish and other immigrants to the U.S. at various times in our past. It is one of those cases where the root problem is not race, but circumstance and the culture that developed around it. Take someone out of a destructive environment early, and things are different. So there are three layers of possible racism in Bennets statement. Firstly, by regarding the statement that 'blacks commit more crime' is inherently racist. If it is, then Bennet is a racist. I don't think it is.
There are a lot of people who have a sense of superiority/greater self worth because they were born with more than the next person. That is the "glimpse behind the curtain." Sometimes it is racist, other times it is more caste like, sometimes it is both. I've had coworkers who thought the inherent value of manual laborers was very little, and didn't really care if a manual laborer could live off their wages. I pointed out to one of these professionals with a bad back, that he had no more worth as a human being than the lowliest manual laborer, and that if I needed a ditch dug, he (with the bad back) was utterly worthless to me from a business enterprise standpoint. The truth is we need both, but one is in market excess.
He [Bennet] is a Fox News contributor and chairman of "Americans for Victory over Terrorism," which his Web site calls "a project dedicated to sustaining and strengthening public opinion as the war on terrorism moves forward.
Now why doesnt this surprise me at all?
I suppose his idea of wining the 'war on terror' is to prevent every muslim baby from being born?
BTW How did known republicans react to these comments?
Well, Pres. Bush quickly condemned it, as have the Don (obviously), I, and a number of other conservatives here at the Org.
Crazed Rabbit
Crazed Rabbit
Originally Posted by :
BENNETT: Well, I don't think it is either, I don't think it is either, because first of all, there is just too much that you don't know. 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. That would be 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.
Thank you Aurelian. Whats wrong with that statement? Its the truth. BENNETT: Well, I don't think it is either, I don't think it is either, because first of all, there is just too much that you don't know. 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. That would be 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.
Talk about hypocrisy. Are you people serious? Don Im really suprised at you and some of the other conservatives here falling oforthis BS. Its really funny how liberals use the fact that since arbprtion has been legalised violent crime has also gone down and that abortion is one of the reasons. These comments of his are taken out of context. He was answering the claim that abortion reduces crime. He said this is so but it is irrehensible. You could asy aborting all babies would reduce the crime level and it would be true. That doesnt mean you support such an action. We all know Bennetts stance on abortion. How about some of you reading all of what he said instead of what the press decided to say.
Your all to hung up on PC BS.
Whats wrong with what he said. Liberals use it to back abortion . He uses it to show how silly thus claim is.
What part of this did you all miss
Your all to hung up on PC BS.
Whats wrong with what he said. Liberals use it to back abortion . He uses it to show how silly thus claim is.
What part of this did you all miss
Originally Posted by :
That would be 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.
That would be 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.
http://mediamatters.org/static/audio...0509280006.mp3
listen to the man himself say it, and decide the context.
but to partially agree with Gawain's post, Bennet noted that he did not intend his comments to be racist. As shown by the high media profile of Bennett's comments, and the strong reactions of several other politicians and public figures, the broader discussion of the correlation, if any, between crime and the rate of abortions in the United States remains a highly controversial subject. while I disagree with Bennet's conservative record, there is no prior history of racism, which is almost always evident in situations like these when differentiating between racism and poor judgement.
listen to the man himself say it, and decide the context.
but to partially agree with Gawain's post, Bennet noted that he did not intend his comments to be racist. As shown by the high media profile of Bennett's comments, and the strong reactions of several other politicians and public figures, the broader discussion of the correlation, if any, between crime and the rate of abortions in the United States remains a highly controversial subject. while I disagree with Bennet's conservative record, there is no prior history of racism, which is almost always evident in situations like these when differentiating between racism and poor judgement.
I think the thing that did it was his stipulating that the babies aborted be black. He made no reference to income or socio-economic status, as though he thought that blacks are assumed to all be criminals who haven't been caught. A less ridiculable statement might have gone "you could abort every last baby who's parentage indicates a very high likelihood of a criminal future, but you'd still have crime."
Crazed Rabbit
Crazed Rabbit
Originally Posted by :
I think the thing that did it was his stipulating that the babies aborted be black.
His caller brought up the race issue not he.I think the thing that did it was his stipulating that the babies aborted be black.
his comment was made solely to point out how ludicrous the pro-murdering-babies advocates are
his comment is less ludicrous then their's, because at least he had a legitimate point behind his comment (the point being, pointing out their ludicrousity) whereas the pro-murdering-babies advocates' only point is that they rejoice in the slaughter of human babies
his comment is less ludicrous then their's, because at least he had a legitimate point behind his comment (the point being, pointing out their ludicrousity) whereas the pro-murdering-babies advocates' only point is that they rejoice in the slaughter of human babies
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny:
His caller brought up the race issue not he.
However Bennet used the race with his response. Right wrong or indifferent the statement in the context that he used it was wrong. The best take on the statement is Colmes as far as I can tell.His caller brought up the race issue not he.
Judging the future on the un-born. A ridiculous statement and not one worth defending, Bennet deserves all the criticism that he is getting for making such a statement,
Gawain, Louis wrote an exhaustive, comprehensive eplanation of the issue. To develope a serious discussion please direct your disagreement on that and explain which parts of his reasoning you don´t follow. Please don´t just do as if it doesn´t exist.
Originally Posted by Don Corleone:
William Bennet is a disgrace. Here is he is, our former Secretary of Education, showing his ass to all of America. During a debate on crime, a caller on Bennet's radio show suggested that higher abortion rates are leading to less crime. Bennet's answer? (No offense intended to anyone...)
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/09/30/D8CUKRH04.html
I don't care what he meant by that. I don't want anyone that categorically stupid on the radio. I've heard Klansmen with more wit and decorum then this.... The only defense I've heard is "Oh yeah, well you should hear what Charlie Rangell said last week..." (For the record, Charlie Rangell, D-NY said on the House floor that Bush is the Bull Shannon of today's day and age, Bull Shannon of course being the police chief that used dogs and firehoses to attack Rev. King). I don't care how bad Rangell's speech is, nothing, and I mean NOTHING, justifies this sort of thing. It's intolerable. So, before my worthy adverseries on the left ask about the silence, let me encourage conservatives of all ilk to condemn this statement.
Now, since I've done this, I imagine the response will have to shift to "And George Bush should resign too". Well, let's put an end to that right now. This was one buffoon who made a wildly inappropriate (racist, insensitive and pro-abortion for that matter) comment. Bush was out in front of the pack condemning it this morning.
Edit: Erh, Bull Connor. Bull Shannon was the bailiff on the sitcom 'Night Court'.
William Bennet is a disgrace. Here is he is, our former Secretary of Education, showing his ass to all of America. During a debate on crime, a caller on Bennet's radio show suggested that higher abortion rates are leading to less crime. Bennet's answer? (No offense intended to anyone...)
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/09/30/D8CUKRH04.html
I don't care what he meant by that. I don't want anyone that categorically stupid on the radio. I've heard Klansmen with more wit and decorum then this.... The only defense I've heard is "Oh yeah, well you should hear what Charlie Rangell said last week..." (For the record, Charlie Rangell, D-NY said on the House floor that Bush is the Bull Shannon of today's day and age, Bull Shannon of course being the police chief that used dogs and firehoses to attack Rev. King). I don't care how bad Rangell's speech is, nothing, and I mean NOTHING, justifies this sort of thing. It's intolerable. So, before my worthy adverseries on the left ask about the silence, let me encourage conservatives of all ilk to condemn this statement.
Now, since I've done this, I imagine the response will have to shift to "And George Bush should resign too". Well, let's put an end to that right now. This was one buffoon who made a wildly inappropriate (racist, insensitive and pro-abortion for that matter) comment. Bush was out in front of the pack condemning it this morning.
Edit: Erh, Bull Connor. Bull Shannon was the bailiff on the sitcom 'Night Court'.
Look into this a bit more deeply. I dont feel that what he said was bad at all, unless humans are supposed to communicate like robots. His quote was taken way out of context. The text that Aurelian and Panzerjager quoted was more full and comprehensive in regards towhat Bennet actually meant. I will look into past comments to see if he holds any well-rooted racial prejudicies.
Once, I told a bBack-Hispanic girl to clean up after a party so that i could take her friend to another party. As soon as i said that i wanted to put my foot in my mouth because I wasnt thinking color when I said that. It seems as though Bennet was attempting to defend the culling of black children in the name of crime prevention. Margaret Sanger of planned parenthood admitted to targetting the black population with affordable abortions and birth control explicitly to limit their population growth. I totally disagree with her here yet we never hear about this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger#Eugenics
The length some people will go, and the amount of logic abuse it takes them, to support what a republican said...
...is there ANYTHING in the world that you wouldnt justify?...
...very dishonourable
...is there ANYTHING in the world that you wouldnt justify?...
...very dishonourable
That doesn't appear to be a left statement...but anyway wheter it be left or rights, this is one of the most stupid things i've ever heard.
I think he was speaking from a purely statistical point of view not a social or even humane one. What makes it appauling, is that he tries to portray his viewpoint with wrong reasoning. For example if the hypothesis is that if every black baby was aborted crime would go down, that clearly insinuates a forced spree of abortions based only on race, therefore no different from genocide. It's Hitler saying that if every jewish person was aborted then Germans would have more money, it's true, but it's also very very wrong.
If you aborted all babies, crime would drop even more. Why didn´t he say that?
it seems the only one in here who doesn't think it was stupid is PJ. which says volumes about the guy.
Originally Posted by Soulforged:
That doesn't appear to be a left statement...but anyway wheter it be left or rights, this is one of the most stupid things i've ever heard.
That doesn't appear to be a left statement...but anyway wheter it be left or rights, this is one of the most stupid things i've ever heard.
I don't see the problem, besides for reverse-rascist AA Hatemongers twisting meanings...again. And the General Public (i.e. Yall) falling for it...again.
EDIT: Removed some questionable material.
EDIT: Removed some questionable material.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO