Posted on 06/01/2018 3:27:58 PM PDT by Altura Ct.
For Roseanne Barr, star of ABC's hit show Roseanne, there would be no appeal. When her tweet hit, she was gone.
"Roseanne's Twitter statement, is abhorrent, repugnant and inconsistent with our values, and we have decided to cancel her show," declaimed Channing Dungey, the black president of ABC Entertainment
Targeting Valerie Jarrett, a confidante and aide of President Barack Obama, Roseanne had tweeted: If the "muslim brotherhood & the planet of the apes had a baby=vj."
Offensive, juvenile, crude, but was that not pretty much the job description ABC had in mind for the role of Roseanne in the show?
Roseanne also tweeted that George Soros, 87-year-old radical-liberal billionaire, had been a Nazi "who turned in his fellow Jews 2 be murdered in German concentration camps and stole their wealth."
The Soros slur seems far more savage than the dumb racial joke about Jarrett, but it was the latter that got Roseanne canned.
Her firing came the same day that 175,000 employees of 8,000 Starbucks's stores were undergoing four hours of instruction to heighten their racial sensitivities.
These training sessions, said The Washington Post, "marked the start of Starbucks' years-long commitment to new diversity and sensitivity programs after two African-Americans were arrested at a Philadelphia Starbucks on April 12."
The Philly Starbucks manager, a woman, had called the cops when the two black men she took to be loiterers refused to leave.
Rachel Siegel of the Post describes the four-hour session:
"At first the employees are prompted to find differences. They watched a video in which (Starbucks head) Howard Schultz talks about his vision for a more inclusive company and country. They reflected what a place of belonging means to them. And they examine their own biases.
"Each group viewed a documentary underwritten by Starbucks and directed by Stanley Nelson. In the film people of color talk about experiences of being followed in stores. Footage from the civil rights movement quickly progresses to 21st-century cellphone videos capturing people being dragged off a plane, threatened in a New York deli and choked at a North Carolina Waffle House."
On reading this, the terms "Orwellian" and "re-education camp" come to mind.
Earlier in May, the NFL issued a rule saying players who refuse to stand for the national anthem must remain in the locker room. If they take a knee on the field this coming season, they can be punished and the team fined.
Great was the outrage when this ruling came. The First Amendment rights of black players were being brutally trampled upon.
Yet the NFL has always had restrictions on behavior, from evicting players from the game for unsportsmanlike conduct to curtailing end-zone dances.
What is the common thread that runs through these social clashes from just this last month?
It is race. Each episode fits neatly into the great media narrative of an irredeemably racist America of white oppressors and black victims.
Had it been two white guys hanging out in that Philly Starbucks, who were told by the manager to buy a cup of coffee or get out, the spat would never have become a national story.
These incidents, coming as they do 50 years after the historic advances in civil rights, induce a deep pessimism that this country will ever escape from the endlessly boiling cauldron of racial conflict.
Today, because of cellphone videos, social media, 24-hour cable and the subsequent nationalization of even the most trivial incidents, our national conversation is more suffused than ever with matters of race.
For many, race has become a constant preoccupation.
And in each of these incidents and disputes, the country divides along the familiar fault lines, and the accusations and arguments go on and on until a new incident engenders a new argument.
The America of the 1960s, with its civil rights clashes and "long hot summers," was a far more segregated society than today. Yet the toxic charge of "racist" is far more common now.
And how much do these conversations correspond to the real crisis of black America? Here is a sentence culled from another Post story this week: "Three fatal shootings ... over the Memorial Day weekend brought the (Ward 8 total) to 30 homicides so far this year."
Are white cops really the problem in Ward 8, Anacostia, when 30 people in that black community have been shot or stabbed to death in the first five months of 2018?
Washington, D.C., spends more per student than almost any other school district. Yet the test scores of vast numbers of black kids have already fallen below "proficiency" levels by the time they reach fourth and eighth grade, and the high school truancies have reached scandalous levels.
How does ABC's cashiering of Roseanne, or apologies to the two guys at Starbucks, or restrictions on the rights of millionaire NFL players to kneel during our national anthem address the real crisis?
Is white America really black America's biggest problem?
“What do you suppose was their motivation for going down to Mississippi to stir up trouble?”
To stir up trouble for political purposes.
“Muslim” is not a race.
By "political purposes", do you refer to some means of gaining political power, such as in Washington DC?
So people from the NorthEast, deliberately travel to the South to stir up racial troubles because it somehow translates into power in Washington?
I'm not trying to be funny or anything, I have pinged several people whom I wish to make aware of this idea. I have been trying to make them aware of this idea for quite some time, and I regard your statements as relevant to the point I have been trying to get them to see.
The only thing that never changes is that things change.
Oh god yeah, tons of northern agitators went down south to stir up trouble ...where their was none..,from the vestigial Jim Crow laws. It all was withering away. “Freedom” buses. Lots of mayhem.
Yes. Black people will always hate white people
Exactly. She looks james earl jones turning into a snake in the Conan movie.
> What do you suppose was their motivation for going down to Mississippi to stir up trouble? Couldn't they have worked on "Racism" problems in the very safe Democrat districts from which they came?
> By "political purposes", do you refer to some means of gaining political power, such as in Washington DC? So people from the NorthEast, deliberately travel to the South to stir up racial troubles because it somehow translates into power in Washington?
> By "political purposes", do you refer to some means of gaining political power, such as in Washington DC? So people from the NorthEast, deliberately travel to the South to stir up racial troubles because it somehow translates into power in Washington?
Get a load of Faubus and Wallace.
Where do the these people come from?
Selective memory + Faulty public schools?
Yup.
Wow dude, if only you’d apply this logic to your Civil War arguments.
“Look, Roseanne uttered not one word of untruth-—Jarrett IS an Islamist sympathizer and she does have very simian facial features.”
Somehow I always see a lizard.
“As long as the money is good the divide will stand.”
Poverty pimps making a living.
Your statement is incomprehensible to me. If you have a point to it, you will have to make it clearer.
Dude, if I have to explain what irony is to you, you’re lost. Go back and read all the nonsense you post about ‘’evil Yankee bankers profiting from the slave trade’’ and ‘Lincoln being a tyrant’’ and Washignton DC the nest of vipers and warmongerer’s against the noble South and all that other delusional bs you Lost causer go on about. And now all of a sudden you’re trying to call someone out in saying Northerners when into the South in the civil rights era just to cause trouble.
Dumb question
the answer is all there in black and white
I'm asking why they were there. Why does someone travel from Massachusetts, New York and such to Mississippi? Weren't there enough problems in Baltimore, Detroit, or Washington?
Is there a political power angle to this? I'm suspecting there was. Look up "Free Soil Party", and be amazed that it was headquartered in New York instead of Chicago. Why people a thousand miles away cared about conditions in the territories doesn't make any sense on the face of it.
But if you look at the political power equation, then it seems to have a pattern, and that pattern always seems to favor dominance for North Eastern political preferences in Washington DC.
But I didn't ping you, I didn't consider you reasonable enough to even contemplate the idea.
Regarding every effort at upheaval, look who is poised to gain.
Cui Bono?
I'm asking if there is a political power angle, because I have started to notice such things.
Correct - it’s a cash cow no matter how you look at it... they profit with $, votes, attention and power.
It’s only still alive because these “progressives” refuse to actually progress. We don’t need to forget about the years of slavery and subsequent segregation our country endured, but I would like to believe we could learn from it and move on - leave it in the history books.
Leftists, whether they are in politics, the media or business won’t let it go. They can’t. For some, it’s pretty much the only angle they have.
Absolutely!
Gee, maybe they were motivated by the horrible realization that a segment of the American population were being brutally disenfranchised simply because of their skin color.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.