'race card' became popular during oj simpsons trial when some people didnt think it could POSSIBLY be relevant that a lead detective was a bigot who opposed interracial relationships

since then, the term has taken off and, usually by people who would rather avoid or deny racism exists,,,,

some people are victims and use their gender, race, health, whatever,,as an excuse for everything,,,but I think the term 'race card' is much more overused than the racism charge is.....

crying wolf... after a while, people stop listening...

true, and sometimes they never start

which is why I find the 'race card' so irrelevant anyway,,,
there is no GAIN in it, besides sharing experiences

I'm not sure how the use of the term has evolved in all the different sphere of discourse in our culture, but it has been a popular term amongst some people (especially blue collar whites) for at least three decades.

I agree that the avoiders and deniers have a particular fondness for the term, but I disagree that it is 'usually' used by them. I see them as a tiny (if loud and repetitive) minority amongst the people who are concerned both about racism and manipulation/dishonesty. In some of the jobs I've had, I've saw the 'race card' getting played every single day. Which is to say: I saw people loudly claiming racism was at work when it wasn't, and doing so to avoid being treated equally.

Fortunately, it rarely won anyone any special treatment...unless you count dramatic argument and extra time-consuming attention as special treatment.

its often harder for people to walk in others shoes



I guess there is no way to know for sure whether the 'race card' is as big an issue as legitimate claims to racism are

I suspect, the legitimate claims are more common though, and I think that belief is probably divided amongst racial lines , because, like I said

its harder sometimes to see that someone else is being discriminated against if that someone else isnt US

As far as I know Ted Turner, the founder of CNN is not Jewish.

Go back and look up some history. Jews were barred from colleges and universities right here in the good ole USA. Prohibited explicitly from membership in a variety of organizations and jobs here in the USA. It is because of the history of discrimination of Jews in the US that so many Jews championed civil rights in the 50s and 60s alongside African American leaders.

Likewise look up the ownership of U.S. media organizations. They are not predominantly Jewish owned or managed it is simply a bunch of paranoid bunk. If Jews are disproportionately successful in their jobs in the US it is much to their credit and by overcoming their discrimination in their achievements.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_antisemitism_in_the_United_States

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_the_United_States

Visibility? It is there in your papers...the way you talk,
your social activities. Are you saying that there is a qualitative
difference in discrimination based on skin color? What about gays?
How about Muslims? Oh Come On!!



Was Sanchez' sin so serious? Worse than other "innacuracies"?
I don't know but he embarrassed himself and his employer badly
enough that his management decided to can him. Happens all the
time in all high profile public figures.
Just ask Eliot Spitzer!

there is a qualitative difference in discrimination and it is in the CHOICE one has

one has no CHOICE what race or gender they will be perceived as

their lifestyles, and their chosen APPEARANCE have alot to do with whether bigots will discriminate and last I checked, unless they are BLATANTLY obvious,, it is no way to know someone was muslim or gay when they are born,, or when they are in grade school(from birth),, the way it can be with race or gender


fat people today are discriminated against, but there are ways to BLEND in and lessen that type of discrimination, its not something they are BORN into without a choice,,,


same with religion, we CHOOSE it, others only know about it if we SHARE it with them or overtly EXPOSE it,,,



as to the news , here is useful information



Time Warner( Gary Ginsburg executive VP, Fred Dressler programming)

Walt Disney (Stanley Phillip Gold (born September 10, 1942) is President and CEO of Shamrock Holdings, Roy E. Disney's private investment company, Orin Aviv executive VP)

Viacom (Sumner Redstone, Les Moonves)

Rupert Murdoch

CBS Corp (Sumner Redstone, exec chairman)



that there is SIGNIFICANT jewish ownership and direction in the media is pretty difficult to disprove

Your information is not conclusive...and WRONG at that...
Oh well, you are not the first.
Here are a couple links you can use to educate yourself.

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1365

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion

Anyone can pick any U.S. industry and find many more Christians than Jews running them if you look at the total so selecting a few executives proves nothing.

Disneys aren't Jewish and Murdoch is not Jewish for example. So, you appear to want to also perpetuate these stereotypes....

Better think about it and examine your own prejudice in this regard.

Jews do not merely choose to be Jewish in general. They are born
with their religion and heritage also. In places where Jews have
been discriminated against (including the U.S. as I cited above),
religious documentation included family history. In WWII Jews were
required to wear ID on their clothing depending on their parents
and grandparents and greatgrandparents regardless of whether they
actually were religious. In Russia, Jewish ancestry was on their
state issued ID cards.

These types of anti-Jewish antisemitic stereotypes have been
circulated for hundreds and even thousands of years...but now it
is easier than ever to refute them and show their stupidity and
how they have been used to discriminate, bully and even kill
Jewish people in large numbers in the past. Please don't also fall
into this hateful practice.

Similar things can be said of Gays, Muslims, Fat people, Blacks,
Hispanics, Christians, Hindus, Japanese, Mormons, and Jehovah's
Witnesses.



Read the Wiki article on the Protocols of the Elders of Zion
and you will find the same garbage being falsely spouted a hundred
years ago - these same arguments which were later used by Adolf
Hitler and re-published in Der Stürmer in Germany and in the
antisemitic Dearborn Independent. At least the Dearborn Independent
was shut down. Ford publicly apologized but later accepted the
Grand Cross of the German Eagle from Hitler’s Nazi government in
July, 1938.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Der_Stuermer

and

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-semitism/ford.html

Rupert Murdoch is not Jewish..

I think Sanchez was correct in his analysis that Northeast liberals look down on everyone that are not like them. I don't agree with his singling out Jews because they are only a small minority and there are far more religion hating atheists that make up the elitist liberal ranks.

I agree, and I didn't mean to imply that 'false claims of racism' is a bigger issue than 'actual racism'. For clarity: I came into this conversation from the sidelines to express my views/experience, not argue to argue for a particular 'side'.

In my personal experience, and according to my personal values, actual racism is a far more important issue than false claims of racism - though both are important.



Oh, come on. You don't have to walk in other peoples shoes to see that they are obviously lying, or bat-**** crazy, or clearly keyed up to make everything about race for no reason.

Most places, if you run a red light in front of a cop, you're gonna get pulled over for running a red light - not 'because you're black'. If a store has a policy against bags in the store, they are going to ask you to leave your bag by the door because you brought one in, not because you are black. Some people simply don't give money to pan-handlers, its not 'because you're black'. Bus drivers are not allowed to let people on and off at places other than designated stops - its not 'because you're black'.

You say the belief may fall along racial lines - in some situations thats only for people who are so blinded by their prejudices that they can't see whats actually happening in front of them. So yeah, you are right, but that doesn't excuse it. There are white people who are so ignorant as to assume that an accusation of anti-black racism is 'probably someone playing the race card', and there are black people who are so ignorant as to assume that an accusation of anti-black racism is 'probably legit'. And then there are people of all races who have an interest in facts.

I did not have anything next to Rupert for the very reason that, out of the list, HE is not jewish

a predominance of the CEOS and OWNERS of the other conglomerates are ,,,

I think Sanchez was talking about jewish because of Colbert, but I totally understood and agreed with what he is saying as well

It was just dumb to go on public television and talk about his employer,,,lol

Visibility? It is there in your papers...the way you talk,
your social activities. Are you saying that there is a qualitative
difference in discrimination based on skin color? What about gays?
How about Muslims? Oh Come On!!


how many americans have to carry papers in America (except immigrants) and how often do people go around DISPLAYING those papers?.....can you really tell a jewish or catholic or gay person from the way they walk and talk? do you really know upon first seeing someone what their social activities are?,,,,,if the answer to any of those are yes,,,

I am impressed


lets stick to AMERICAN history, how many anti jewish LAWS were passed? How long did americans enslave jewish people? When were jewish people counted as mere property? How long did any of these practices go on in AMERICAN history? How difficult is it for a jewish person to BLEND in to the mainstream majority of white people?


race and gender are the only TWO characteristics that people assess the moment they LOOK at you,, without any observation, without any other REASON to discriminate(like what they see you doing or how they hear you talking, which are things that we all have a CHOICE in ,,,)


dont get me wrong, my family is very mixed, so I am not ANTI anyone, but I am cognizant of where the power and the money are in AMERICA

I appreciate the respect and I agree that facts are good. I think there is a bigger picture than laws and policies that many dont see though. Is it true that laws are laws and rules are rules..? yes

Is it true that RACE sometimes plays into how those laws or rules are ENFORCED? absolutely,

this latter part is the part that many who arent the subjects of profiling and racial/gender discrimination dont understand or believe

The Blacks sided with the Jewish People during the civil rights movement. Now after they have had Equal rights for six decades.Some Black People are siding with Muslims that happen to have a darker skin tone. Just so happens that 70% of Jewish people in America are now Multi-Million dollar Whites I don't understand

its not about picking sides, just choosing whats right

no group of people has a monopoly on that

If you had bothered to read the article I cited you would have most
of your answers about antisemitism in America. It was not the same
as slavery. Jews were enslaved and killed in other parts of the
world as you note. It does not make any difference.

Yes there were anti-jewish laws, yes, there were lynchings and
killings, yes they were also the targets of the KKK.

Anyway here is the beginning of the article. You can look it up
yourself and read the rest. Suffice it to say that the Jews
experienced plenty of antisemitism right here. It started in
America from the time the first Jews arrived and continues to this
day as ignorant statements of Sanchez' and others evidence.

It is great that many Jews have overcome antisemitism to succeed in
mainstream America and that many African Americans have overcome
anti-Black racism to succeed in America but it does not mean that
there isn't still significant antisemitism and racism still present.
There is. But it is easier to fight and condemn it with all the
info readily available online. What happened to black slaves was
awful but no worse than what has happened to Jews.

The bottom line is that the media in the U.S. is controlled by
Americans. The media in China is controlled by the Chinese. The
media in Israel is controlled by Jews. The media in France is
controlled by French people. The media in Egypt, Iran, Iraq,
Afghanistan, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Algeria, Morocco, Libya,
Syria, Lebanon and Gaza are controlled by Muslims. The media in
South Africa is controlled by Blacks.

Now the interesting difference is that in the U.S., Israel, and
France there is free speech and a free press. So conflicting views
are legally protected and cannot be fully suppressed whereas in
other parts of the world notably all the Islamic countries listed
as well as in China there is no freedom of the press and their
media does not tolerate the airing of all opinions but only those
with which the controlling parties agree.

See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_the_press



=-=-=-=-=
from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_antisemitism_in_the_United_States
Colonial era
[edit] North America

In the mid 17th century, Peter Stuyvesant, the last Dutch Director-General of the colony of New Amsterdam, sought to bolster the position of the Dutch Reformed Church by trying to reduce religious competition from denominations such as Jews, Lutherans, Catholics and Quakers. He stated that Jews were "deceitful", "very repugnant", and "hateful enemies and blasphemers of the name of Christ". He warned in a subsequent letter that in "giving them liberty we cannot (then) refuse the Lutherans and Papists". However, religious plurality was already a legal-cultural tradition in New Amsterdam and in the Netherlands. His superiors at the Dutch West India Company in Amsterdam overruled him in all matters of intolerance.

There were only about 250 Jews living in North America in the 17th century. These faced a number of restrictions, including being banned from practicing law, medicine, and other professions. As late as 1790, one year before adoption of the Bill of Rights, several states had religious tests for holding public office, and Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and South Carolina still maintained established churches. Within a few years of the ratification of the Constitution, Delaware, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Georgia eliminated barriers that prevented Jews from voting, but these barriers did not fall for many decades in Rhode Island (1842), North Carolina (1868), and New Hampshire (1877). Despite these restrictions, which were often enforced unevenly, there were really too few Jews in 17th- and 18th-century America for anti-Semitism to become a significant social or political phenomenon at the time (although anti-semitism as a phenomenon does not depend on the presence of Jews). And the evolution from toleration to full civil and political equality for Jews that followed the American Revolution helped ensure that anti-Semitism would never become official government policy, as it had in Europe.

By 1840, Jews constituted a tiny, but nonetheless stable, middle-class minority of about 15,000 out of the 17 million Americans counted by the U.S. Census. Jews intermarried rather freely with non-Jews, continuing a trend that had begun at least a century earlier. However, as immigration increased the Jewish population to 50,000 by 1848, negative stereotypes of Jews in newspapers, literature, drama, art, and popular culture grew more commonplace and physical attacks became more frequent.
[edit] Civil War

By the time of the Civil War, tensions over race and immigration, as well as economic competition between Jews and non-Jews, combined to produce the worst outbreak of anti-Semitism to that date. Americans on both sides of the slavery issue denounced Jews as disloyal war profiteers, and accused them of driving Christians out of business and of aiding and abetting the enemy...

etc. etc...

there is too much quoting going on here,,lol

I dont care to read books in a forum, but

If it is not obvious how much more difficult it is to assess that a person is JEWISH than it is to assess a white or black or chinese person or a man or woman


something is seriously wrong


and it is relevant in a discusson about ones experiences in AMERICA whether they stick to american history or start referencing WORLD history

its like me saying, things are great for me here in america because in AFrica, we were kings and queens once

I would never say that racial and gender discrimination are the only types of discrimination,,,,that would be insane

people are discriminated against because they are fat or skinny, because they are rich or poor, because they speak english or ebonics, because they are on assistance,,,,,the list goes on and on

BUT


my point is that race and gender are the only types that people can do NOTHING about,, I CANT change my race or my gender(barring surgery),,,, I CAN choose my social networks, I CAN choose how to carry myself, I CAN choose how to walk and talk, I CAN choose what religion I will follow, I CAN choose my social lifestyle,,etc,,,,


so THOSE types of discrimination are much easier to avoid, than racial or gender

racial and gender discrimination are things we are BORN into , (starts in the nursery ) unlike any other type of discrimination

If someone is "blending in" to try to avoid discrimination
then they are being persecuted. There is no "easy way out" for
discrimination and there is no "blending in" without persecution.

Just different ways to practice and show intolerance and hate.

we all do a fair amount of blending in,,,its part of culture,

we arent BORN knowing the proper way to talk or carry ourself, the CULTURE dictates those things and we choose to either abide or not


but there is no way to ABIDE by being a certain race or a certain gender