Today the president, who could be a source of reason on the issues we are facing, decided to join the chorus excusing bad behavior. Notably, Obama said, "When Trayvon Martin was first shot, I said that this could have been my son. Another way of saying that is, Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago."
Yes, sir! If 35 yeas ago you were a teenager who, if asked what he was doing in the neighborhood, would have felt it was your right to answer by assaulting your questioner, then I suppose it could have been you (were the marijuana use, school suspensions, fighting and so on also part of your teenage repertoire?)
Huffington post also noted that:
"Obama said he understands why people are so upset that George Zimmerman was found not guilty for shooting and killing Martin, an unarmed teen who was walking down the street one night in his Sanford, Fla., neighborhood in February 2012. Zimmerman, a neighborhood watchman, pursued Martin for no clear reason and ultimately shot him in what he said was self-defense."
For no reason? Zimmerman "pursued" (I think there is some contention on that description and how well it hews to the facts) Martin because his neighborhood had seen some recent burglaries and Martin appeared suspicious (and even if it had been racially motivated, which there is no evidence to support, it would still have been for that reason) and was moving in manner that made him seem out of place. If a neighborhood were being burglarized by young men your white males, would it not make sense that an unrecognized white male who seemed out of place and might be skulking would be suspicious. Why does this have to include race? Zimmerman did not accost Martin; he did not, as far as the evidence shows, assault him in any manner. He did not throw the first punch nor was he the first person to lay hands on the other. He was trying to ascertain Martin's reasons for being there. If Martin found that insulting, a simple "Fuck you!" and walking away might have sufficed, not a sucker punch. However, the data show that Martin could have been home by the time he confronted Zimmerman, had he chosen to walk away.
Obama noted:
"There are very few African-American men in this country who haven't had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. That includes me."
The president, like so many others seems to be suggesting that being followed or asked a question - whether innocuous or insulting - justifies a physical assault in response. It does not and this seems a terrible message to give any young person. It seems as if this point is lost on people - people who should know better, including the president. It is a disservice to be standing there and saying to young people "If someone - in this case a white-looking someone - follows or stops you - in this case a black you - and asks your reasons for the being where you are, since history has been unfair, you can beat his ass". How is that not what is being said?! I have been followed in department stores, too. As a young white man I was detained without cause in many such places as well as walking down the street. None of that can ever be allowed to justify violence!
Now, I could say that this is clearly a race thing - no one wants to make race an issue (except those who need it to be one, Mr. President), but by saying Martin was justified to assault Zimmerman because Zimmerman "pursued" him is doing just that - because so many black citizens have been unjustly followed, they are justified in lashing out. That is, that no white person has a right to follow or ask this of a black person and, if they do, they deserve the beating they get. The way we settle such issues is violence! In that case, this would all have been all right if Zimmerman had been killed, I suppose. We would never have heard about it (is that because were it to go down that way, it would be too "typical"?). Would Obama still say that it could have been him 35 years ago who did the killing?
And this is the truly laughable part:
"More generally, Obama lent support to the idea of creating a coalition -- of business leaders, elected officials, celebrities, athletes -- to address the need for African-American men to feel that they are 'a full part of this society.'"
How is telling someone that they are justified in assaulting people who follow them, who they see as challenging them, helping anyone to feel a full part of this society. It is double-talk, BS. You have told them they do not need to be. You're creating a special, disabled class of people who need to be part of society. Is beating your way into your place in society a good goal?
Swing and a miss, Mr. President. Time to be President - you were not elected by one race or ethnicity - and not an apologist for bad behavior, no matter who is committing it.
No comments:
Post a Comment