Black Racist CBS Contributor Flaunts Her Protected Status

[_beastie]

The "mental blockage" is Bennett's actual words.

On the Wednesday edition of his radio show, "Bill Bennett's Morning in America," syndicated by Salem Radio Network, a caller raised the theory that Social Security is in danger of becoming insolvent because legalized abortion has reduced the number of tax-paying citizens. Bennett said economic arguments should never be employed in discussions of moral issues.

If it were your sole purpose to reduce crime, Bennett said, "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," he added.

[_Droopy]

So is there a white subculture that is equally problematic?

I'd say there are several, one of which I and other kinds around junior high school were frequently on the receiving end of.

[_beastie]

So is there a white subculture that is equally problematic?

I'd say there are several, one of which I and other kinds around junior high school were frequently on the receiving end of.

As long as you recognize that all cultures have problematic subcultures, I don't have a problem with it.

I do have a problem with your denial of Bennett's obvious meaning.

[_Droopy]

Recently on my radio show, Morning In America, I was having a discussion with a caller about good and bad arguments for and against abortion. He said that if we aborted fewer babies, we would increase our Social Security trust fund. I said that’s not how you want to argue against abortion. In the course of this discussion, I hypothesized another argument you don’t want to make, a deliberately abhorrent argument for abortion—that the abortion of black children would lead to a reduction in crime. I did so to show why amoral or immoral arguments for or against abortion are not good arguments. Rather, I suggested, stick to the morality of the issue, not cold calculations reducible to statistical analysis that can be argued both ways. I was putting forward a bad argument to immediately shoot it down. Widely circulated versions of my remarks – for example, on the Today Show, in Time Magazine, on MSNBC, and in a flurry of press releases from Capitol Hill – inaccurately reported what I said during that conversation, and what I meant. They reported or emphasized only the abhorrent argument, not my shooting it down.


...So today, although I cannot apologize for what I said and meant, which when understood in context ought not be objectionable, I regret that people have misrepresented my views so that they have been the cause of hurt, controversy, and confusion. What was presented in some of the media as my opinion would shock me as well; so I cannot blame many people for being mad as hell at what they heard. But such characterizations of my statements and views are not a fair, accurate, or true picture of either what I believe or what I said. In my conversation, I was raising an abhorrent hypothetical—and said so—an idea contrary to everything I believe, and contrary to the record of my life, my work and my writings, including 17 books. Could I have said it better? Maybe. But my position, one of moral condemnation, could not have been clearer. “Morally reprehensible” are the words I used immediately, in the same breath and thought as this ugly hypothetical. What do my critics not understand about the meaning of the words “morally reprehensible”? Do they think it means approval?

Apparently, regardless of the way it came out in the rapid-fire, highly time delimited environment of talk radio banter, he does not actually think that, were this to happen, it would have any appreciable effect on crime rates.

I suspect the reason is that, as a serious philosophical thinker and Christian moral theorist, he understands that human beings have free will and that, regardless of what empirical statistics say about the past or present, there is no reason that any future black persons need slavishly adopt the traditions and value sets of the past, even among those regions of black society disproportionately susceptible to those value sets.

In other words, present culture need not be future destiny, and no human being could possible make deterministic predictions of that sort about how any group of future human beings will behave, collectively speaking (or individually).

[_beastie]

I will say this one more time. Bennett said that the idea of ABORTING BLACK BABIES was reprehensible. He did NOT say that the idea that CRIME RATE WOULD GO DOWN was reprehensible, and your own words also suggest you think he had good reason for saying that.

I know you will not see or concede this point, so I'm going to ask something else.

Did Rick Santorum say something racist when he said “I would not make bla— people's lives better by giving them other people's money.”