Conservatives are lucky that the liberals just cannot resist stories like this. They show that they are either too ignorant to understand the simple concept...or just too dishonest not to misrepresent it. Either way, the typical voter can clearly see that liberals in this country cannot be trusted.

Of course they did, I can't even get you guys to understand his motivations/intentions after three days! There is no way to explain this to people that don't want an explanation. A white man use the word "black" in a disparaging comment" end of story...he's a racist. Nevermind that he was saying it as an example of how stastical extrapolations can be twisted to support junk/even racist positions.

Oh well, this seriously helps me understand the left more clearly. It really is a rage anger thing now, you guys are completely irrational/incapable of objective reasoning. This was funny at first, but now I feel sorry for you guys. I hope I never surrender my intellect to rage.

LOL.

That's funny. For the most part, your righty compatriots here post in rage and/or reflex and with little, if any, intellectual honesty. I appreciate that you, Len, are often the sole exception, and in this thread, you really did try hard to reveal all the unsaid things we were supposed to take into consideration in hearing Bennett's words.

I seriously believe crime would be reduced dramatically if we abort the human race.

I agree and that is part of what is confusing me. When I listened to his remarks it was obvious to me and I am shocked that you guys don't pick up on it either. So I am spending all this time trying to explain something I think should be self evident.

He used the statement as an example of what someone with impure/racist motivations might say if allowed to use the same drawn out statistical extrapolations the caller was using to rail against abortion. That's it...

Sort of like saying: " no you don't want to go there because Hitler could have used similar logic to justify extermination of the Jews"

I guess I underestimate "assumed" racism in my party.

It will be interesting to watch China, as families restricted to one child are aborting females. The mix of teens and young adults in China will approach a 60/40 M/F ratio. At the same time, young boys being raised in China are being treated as "little princes" and over-indulged as their economy grows.

There will be a social result from this... and it won't be pretty.

That's part of it, but I think there has been so much effort to take quotes out of context, or alter them by 'your party' that some of us are more than happy to give them a taste of their own medicine.

Also, if you want know the truth, his comment is exonerating.

The whole purpose (as I've said) of this exchange was to show the caller the failings of his statistical argument. The were not discussing race, crime, poverty, etc.. at all in the segment. So in an effort to illustrate this failing to the caller he searched his mind for a truly vile example that could be used to show this. The fact that his mind IMMEDIATELY went to this example in a search for a vile stance that could also be supported by the callers statistical theory is more telling of his character than anything else.

The more clear you cut it, the more shrill they get. The dogs in my neighborhood are howling every time I open this thread b/c of the high-pitched squealing emanating from it.

Bush hates C

I don't see how its "Racism" to state a fact. Its widely published that blacks commit/are convicted of about 50% of all crimes in the U.S. (no, I'm not going to provide a reference, but I've seen it on PP and other places), but make up about 15% of the population. Is this a racist statement, or a statement of "Fact" that someone just doesn't want to hear? Now, if I say if you were to abort all the Black babies, (then future crime, assuming the past is an indicator of the future) would go down. What makes this statement racist? I don't believe Bennet said we SHOULD abort the black unborn, he even said it would be wrong.

What I would consider a "Racist" statement would be "We need to give Blacks a lower qualifying entry score to get into college" Now that's racist because I just said blacks, as a community, are inferior and need a handicap score to compete with Whites.

Right...Bush called this the "soft bigotry of lower expectations"

Liberals are very good at taking statements out of context to smear their political opponents in their usual smug, sanctimonious way...

Yes, but there is little value. Everyone knows better (at least in the US). The liberals continue to repeat it as if it is true (knowing it is not)...hoping to convince someone who is ignorant enough to buy such silliness..while the moderates and conservatives just shake their heads sadly.

I think I think I was. I don't know, because I don't remember. My point is that it isn't something you can prove, so intellectually, how does one know?

Having said all that, I'm guessing that for many abortions the mother doesn't give a crap whether she thinks of the fetus as a person or as a "thing", which is sad. Remember, I've already said I am anti-abortion.

Back to topic - Len said it guys:

I think his choice of example was ill-advised and probably was telling of his biases.

Interestingly, his rationale mirrors that of the planned parenthood chick's eugenics thing, except he at least referred to it as reprehensible.

Cam, are you messing with me? Bennett was searching FOR a vile example and came up with this. You think that is a bad thing?

The only thing he did wrong was not realize that he is a white man and hence cannot refer to minorities regardless of intentions.

This lack of comprehension is really amazing me. I know most of you guys are fairly intelligent so I can only assume this is a great example of how bias clouds or short-circuits intellect.

The difference is only in whether we consider it acceptable for him to do that. It is a very bad thing to voice that possibility when it was completely unnecessary in the course of his discussion.

Its at least more politically correct to refer to aborting children from a non-racially biased group of people. Can you not agree to that?

(second edit) The implication of talking about crime and race in that way is that the person talking believes (or avoids the opportunity to not imply) that race is the decider of crime levels. It implies that crime is racially biased because blacks are bad people.

I'm more inclined to think poverty, or being disadvantaged, or whatever, is the problem. Not skin colour.

I'm starting to think you're not reading my posts. I am also inclined to believe you didn't read or listen to the exchange between Bennett and the caller.

Someone help me out here. I think my dog gets it already.

So does Bennett, which is why he used the example in the first place.......

..BECAUSE IT WAS FLAWED [stop]

...JUST LIKE THE CALLERS EXAMPLE WAS FLAWED [stop]

...WHICH SHOULD HAVE SHOWN THE CALLER THE ERROR OF HIS PROCESS [stop]

How can you guys not get this?

Ah see now len, we don't agree there. The transcripts says:

Maybe - I know this is what you believe - he means that in an innocent, non-racially charged sort of way. But why did he use the words in bold?

Basically, I think he was very, very stupid for using those words. He may not be racist, but he comes across as racist. Wording it that way implies, or avoid the opportunity not to imply, that he believes it.

And my point is that the proof is in the Cam pudding...Undeniable.