Anyone else tired of the media playing the race card?

[solo]

I am already tired of the media making a big deal out of 2 African Americans making it to the Superbowl. What should be an interesting piece of trivia is being turned into one of the main stories of the Superbowl.

2 great coaches worked hard to get their teams to the Superbowl. Why must the media play the race card when race really is a nonfactor?

 

[Satans Little Helper]

I am already tired of the media making a big deal out of 2 African Americans making it to the Superbowl. What should be an interesting piece of trivia is being turned into one of the main stories of the Superbowl.

2 great coaches worked hard to get their teams to the Superbowl. Why must the media play the race card when race really is a nonfactor?

Because outside of coastal areas in this country it still is an issue. This country is far from being equal in mind. There is a long way to go and i agree the media just makes the division more evident. But if it takes the media pointing this out to get more kids out believeing they can do something i dont see whats wrong with that.

It is an example that the sky is the limit for anyone in this country and with dedication and hard work, anyone can be anything. I am happy for both of them.

BTW, They both coached for Tampa a while back and i still feel bad that TD got the shaft the year before Gruden came in.

 

[Freeman Ara]

I am already tired of the media making a big deal out of 2 African Americans making it to the Superbowl. What should be an interesting piece of trivia is being turned into one of the main stories of the Superbowl.

2 great coaches worked hard to get their teams to the Superbowl. Why must the media play the race card when race really is a nonfactor?

I don't think they are really playing the race card here, its your typical 14 days until game day kind of stuff, they have to talk about something besides x's and O's. Besides this might come as a shocker but this is actually pretty groundbreaking considering 20 years ago most people didn't believe that black coaches had the ability to lead a team to the super Bowl. Is it Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier? No, but it is an important moment in NFL and sports history. Plus, there not saying they got there because they are black just pointing out that they are the first in NFL history to do so, so can you really call it the "race card"?

 

[Satans Little Helper]

I don't think they are really playing the race card here, its your typical 14 days until game day kind of stuff, they have to talk about something besides x's and O's. Besides this might come as a shocker but this is actually pretty groundbreaking considering 20 years ago most people didn't believe that black coaches had the ability to lead a team to the super Bowl. Is it Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier? No, but it is an important moment in NFL and sports history. Plus, there not saying they got there because they are black just pointing out that they are the first in NFL history to do so, so can you really call it the "race card"?

nicely put. PS. i like your signature LOL!

 

[solo]

I don't think they are really playing the race card here, its your typical 14 days until game day kind of stuff, they have to talk about something besides x's and O's. Besides this might come as a shocker but this is actually pretty groundbreaking considering 20 years ago most people didn't believe that black coaches had the ability to lead a team to the super Bowl. Is it Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier? No, but it is an important moment in NFL and sports history. Plus, there not saying they got there because they are black just pointing out that they are the first in NFL history to do so, so can you really call it the "race card"?

My point is that them getting to the Superbowl had nothing to do with race and the fact that the media feels a need to point it out shows just how far we have yet to go.

When Dungy was hired by Indy, I expected him to be in the superbowl rather quickly. You combine his brilliant defensive mind with the Peyton Manning and the machine that is the Colts offense...it was a match made in heaven. I fully expected him to be in the exact position he is in right now and I am happy for him to be there. I felt that he was wronged by Tampa and am glad to see him on top.

I find it similar to when Tyrone was hired and fired at ND. The media made a big deal out of it each time. The race card was played on each end. Tyrone was hired because White felt that he could get the job done and he was fired because he proved that he couldn't. End of story.

i am tired of people viewing the world in colors and looking at individual accomplishments in the backdrop of race. How about we just congratulate these 2 coaches on the excellent job they have done and let the race thing be a one liner, an aside, a "by the way, this is the first time in history...". In my opinion, this shoudln'r be a major story.

 

[solo]

Because outside of coastal areas in this country it still is an issue. This country is far from being equal in mind. There is a long way to go and i agree the media just makes the division more evident. But if it takes the media pointing this out to get more kids out believeing they can do something i dont see whats wrong with that.

It is an example that the sky is the limit for anyone in this country and with dedication and hard work, anyone can be anything. I am happy for both of them.

BTW, They both coached for Tampa a while back and i still feel bad that TD got the shaft the year before Gruden came in.

I take slight offense to your implication that the Coasts are the only part of the country with enlightened thought on this topic...

 

[Satans Little Helper]

My point is that them getting to the Superbowl had nothing to do with race and the fact that the media feels a need to point it out shows just how far we have yet to go.

When Dungy was hired by Indy, I expected him to be in the superbowl rather quickly. You combine his brilliant defensive mind with the Peyton Manning and the machine that is the Colts offense...it was a match made in heaven. I fully expected him to be in the exact position he is in right now and I am happy for him to be there. I felt that he was wronged by Tampa and am glad to see him on top.

I find it similar to when Tyrone was hired and fired at ND. The media made a big deal out of it each time. The race card was played on each end. Tyrone was hired because White felt that he could get the job done and he was fired because he proved that he couldn't. End of story.

i am tired of people viewing the world in colors and looking at individual accomplishments in the backdrop of race. How about we just congratulate these 2 coaches on the excellent job they have done and let the race thing be a one liner, an aside, a "by the way, this is the first time in history...". In my opinion, this shoudln'r be a major story.

I agree completely with you 100%. But the reasosn why they do this is a little jab to Jim Bob Hillbilly in Oakenbucket, Kanasas sitting in his living room going, "What is this world coming to? First all the players are black now the coaches too.! I swaney! Stuff like this just helps those types of people realize a little better with the fact the world constantly is changing, or shall we say progressing.

 

[Satans Little Helper]

I take slight offense to your implication that the Coasts are the only part of the country with enlightened thought on this topic...

Please dont. I meant none by it.. I only mean that the truly liberal and i mean truly liberal states are the likes of Oregon, Washington, Cali, Mass, Conn, VT. NH, Fl, DC, in general.

I live in SC as an example and we just recently voted on a ban for gay marriage. The counties assoicated with the coastal regions (which bythe way have an enormous Yank population) voted to not ban it. However outsdie of those counties the entire state went95% for the ban. I was just pointing out some demographics. I know plainly that all of middle amereica is not jim bob hillbilly and would never claim such..

 

[Freeman Ara]

My point is that them getting to the Superbowl had nothing to do with race and the fact that the media feels a need to point it out shows just how far we have yet to go.

When Dungy was hired by Indy, I expected him to be in the superbowl rather quickly. You combine his brilliant defensive mind with the Peyton Manning and the machine that is the Colts offense...it was a match made in heaven. I fully expected him to be in the exact position he is in right now and I am happy for him to be there. I felt that he was wronged by Tampa and am glad to see him on top.

I find it similar to when Tyrone was hired and fired at ND. The media made a big deal out of it each time. The race card was played on each end. Tyrone was hired because White felt that he could get the job done and he was fired because he proved that he couldn't. End of story.

i am tired of people viewing the world in colors and looking at individual accomplishments in the backdrop of race. How about we just congratulate these 2 coaches on the excellent job they have done and let the race thing be a one liner, an aside, a "by the way, this is the first time in history...". In my opinion, this shoudln'r be a major story.

Personally, I don't think it has been a major story, I haven't noticed any indepth exposes on their lives as black coaches coming up in the world of the good old boys network or anything like that. I don't think the media pointing it out shows anything about race relations(which by the way are screwed up in both direction, but I digress) its just a fact that it is the first time in NFL history that any black coach has lead their team to a Super Bowl, yet alone two.

Now as far as the Ty thing is concerned, I am sure he was hired for his abilities and fired for his lack of delivering or showing signs of delivering on his abilities to coach. But again him being the first black coach hired at a prestigious religious institution like ND is also news worthy, almost on par as the Tubby Smith hiring at UK in basketball. The media points these things out and makes stories out of them to show that hey maybe we are chnaging and things are progressing.

Not sure why you think Dungy got screwed in Tampa because they had kind of leveled off and he wasn't showing signs of getting the job done there. Yes he had made that franchise a winner but an owner has to decided when its time to get a guy that might be able to take them to the next level, and if I remember correctly Parcells was all but locked up when they let Dungy go then he backed out, thats how Gruden stepped in, they were trying to get a proven winner to take them to the next level.

 

[IRISHDODGER]

Please dont. I meant none by it.. I only mean that the truly liberal and i mean truly liberal states are the likes of Oregon, Washington, Cali, Mass, Conn, VT. NH, Fl, DC, in general.

I live in SC as an example and we just recently voted on a ban for gay marriage. The counties assoicated with the coastal regions (which bythe way have an enormous Yank population) voted to not ban it. However outsdie of those counties the entire state went95% for the ban. I was just pointing out some demographics. I know plainly that all of middle amereica is not jim bob hillbilly and would never claim such..

I wouldn't lump gay marriage in the same category as social progress by a race of people. Social engineering makes me want to puke. And the tone of this thread is leading into arguments that will never be solved b/c one side isn't going to convince the other that they were wrong in their thinking (i.e, gay marriage, gun control & abortion). THat's what makes America great, we can all have opinions & not be incarcerated or killed b/c of them . Unfortunately, based on some of the remarks made earlier, if you reside in "fly over" country you are not as socially enlightened as the coastal states. The irony is those same elitists most likely either elected our last 2 Presidents that come from the very part of the country that they criticize: Clinton from Arkansas & Bush from Texas. I appreciate the fact that you clarified your thoughts on the fact that not all of middle America are hillbillies, b/c that was exactly the tone I got from your original post (so Thanks!).

 

[Satans Little Helper]

I wouldn't lump gay marriage in the same category as social progress by a race of people. Social engineering makes me want to puke. And the tone of this thread is leading into arguments that will never be solved b/c one side isn't going to convince the other that they were wrong in their thinking (i.e, gay marriage, gun control & abortion). THat's what makes America great, we can all have opinions & not be incarcerated or killed b/c of them . Unfortunately, based on some of the remarks made earlier, if you reside in "fly over" country you are not as socially enlightened as the coastal states. The irony is those same elitists most likely either elected our last 2 Presidents that come from the very part of the country that they criticize: Clinton from Arkansas & Bush from Texas. I appreciate the fact that you clarified your thoughts on the fact that not all of middle America are hillbillies, b/c that was exactly the tone I got from your original post (so Thanks!).

I understand you point i just want to clarify something. social progress is social progress and that includes all things social. Public executions were a part of society but we dont do that anymore for good or bad.

I just think disliking someone because they are gay or black or any other form of discrimination is disgusting. The fact the people are still fighting over gay marriage or civil unions or the ten commandments in government buildings indicates to me that this is still a discriminatory country. Crap like this does not matter. lets argue about something beneficial to the country like exporting more than we import or public education first and formost. As far as presidents representing the people who elected them, i think we can all agree there has not been one president that truly reflects the people as a whole, the popularity (last man standing) contest that it is.

 

[IRISHDODGER]

I understand you point i just want to clarify something. social progress is social progress and that includes all things social. Public executions were a part of society but we dont do that anymore for good or bad. I just think disliking someone because thaey are gay or black or any other form of discrimination is disgusting. As far as presidents representing the people who elected them, i think we can all agree there has not been one president that truly reflects the people as a whole.

I get, and appreciate, your point as well. However, it's all dependant on a person's perspective. For instance, I guarantee that you could find some people that could make a sober argument for public execution or requiring every individual serve at least 2 years in the military upon HS graduation or flat taxes or prayer in school or women competing in any male dominated sport w/o handicap or even women serving on the front lines in the exact same capacity as males. You get the idea. What might be the gospel for one person might be anathema to another & no cogent argument will change either's minds b/c we all have different values instilled in us. Again, that's one of the freedoms that makes America THE greatest country in the world. That's the frustration w/ the "limousine liberal". They love to impart THEIR values on you but file a civil suit as soon as you try to reciprocate. In other words: "Freedom of speech as long as we (the elitist) agree with/approve of it".

 

[Satans Little Helper]

I get, and appreciate, your point as well. However, it's all dependant on a person's perspective. For instance, I guarantee that you could find some people that could make a sober argument for public execution or requiring every individual serve at least 2 years in the military upon HS graduation or flat taxes or prayer in school or women competing in any male dominated sport w/o handicap or even women serving on the front lines in the exact same capacity as males. You get the idea. What might be the gospel for one person might be anathema to another & no cogent argument will change either's minds b/c we all have different values instilled in us. Again, that's one of the freedoms that makes America THE greatest country in the world. That's the frustration w/ the "limousine liberal". They love to impart THEIR values on you but file a civil suit as soon as you try to reciprocate. In other words: "Freedom of speech as long as we (the elitist) agree with/approve of it".

there in lies the conudrum.. with that line of thinking, discrimination for any reason is acceptable, it just depends on how you look at it. "I dont like chinese people because that is the way i was brought up." I dont think that is valid and that certainly does not make America THE greatest country in the world.

My point is that once people become more accepting to others lifestyles this country will be the best in the world but it is hardly a shining beacon of leadership.

BTW You dont think that middle america and the christian conseravtives are trying to shove anything down the american peopls throats? Freedom of speech as long it is covered by the bible. Intelligent design (ha!) I think it has been shown the bible is a good set of fables, but hardly a book to form a society on. it is just as violent and subjugating as the Koran and the Torah. And now we have a president in office who "talks to god and advised him to go to war with iraq." Geez.

How about using scripture during the 60's to fight the civil rights act? It is high time we leave that stuff in the past and progress past the short sighted thinking.

 

[IRISHDODGER]

there in lies the conudrum.. with that line of thinking, discrimination for any reason is acceptable, it just depends on how you look at it. "I dont like chinese people because that is the way i was brought up." I dont think that is valid and that certainly does not make America THE greatest country in the world.

My point is that once people become more accepting to others lifestyles this country will be the best in the world but it is hardly a shining beacon of leadership.

BTW You dont think that middle america and the christian conseravtives are trying to shove anything down the american peopls throats? Freedom of speech as long it is covered by the bible. Intelligent design (ha!) I think it has been shown the bible is a good set of fables, but hardly a book to form a society on. it is just as violent and subjugating as the Koran and the Torah. And now we have a president in office who "talks to god and advised him to go to war with iraq." Geez.

How about using scripture during the 60's to fight the civil rights act? It is high time we leave that stuff in the past and progress past the short sighted thinking.

No, that's my point. After I listed all those arguments (none being race based), you play the race card. I'm talking abortion, guns, women in sports & combat, flat taxes, etc. & you interpret that as being equal to being discrimatory towards a person based on race (chinese in your example). Regardless of what side you come down on the aforementioned arguments, they are valid arguments that continue to be parts of healthy debates all over America. In fact some of those arguments decide which congressman is elected. Again, if your pro-life or pro-choice (for example), you are not going to convince the opposing view that they are wrong & you are correct. The same goes for the death penalty, gun control, gay marriage, etc. But one thing that both sides should agree is that no one should be discriminated by their race which you seem to insist on infusing into my retort. I'm pretty sure Tony Dungy & Lovie Smith want to be known as great husbands, fathers & coaches before they want to be known as "the black coach". Yeah, they're proud of their accomplishment & it was a first in NFL, but to make that the focal point is an insult to the talent & class of both of those individuals. I'm sure they'd prefer to avoid being used as photo ops w/ the likes of Jesse & Al, and instead concentrate on coaching their team to a Super Bowl victory. Finally, I hate to point out the obvious, but you're back to stereotyping middle America again but added the Christian conservatives as well. I guess it's ok to discriminate vs. some but not others. Not everybody has to agree on all the issues I mentioned...that would be boring & unhealthy. They should, however; agree to respect each race as equal.

 

[Timugen]

I just think disliking someone because they are gay or black or any other form of discrimination is disgusting. The fact the people are still fighting over gay marriage or civil unions or the ten commandments in government buildings indicates to me that this is still a discriminatory country.

Just because one is not in favor of gay marriage does not mean they "dislike" gay people.

 

[IRISHDODGER]

Just because one is not in favor of gay marriage does not mean they "dislike" gay people.

Exactly.

 

[Satans Little Helper]

Exactly.

Sure it does. It means you are willing to deny two peoples right to marry who they want. That is discrimination just as much as denying a woman the right to work or denying any other freedom this country is supposedly built on. You might not have a problem with the local gay person you know or work with, the fact that there are laws denying this right for them is discrimination and is in essence saying the country does not approve.

Up until 1965 they did not approve of desgregated schools and had laws that said so until they had to inact new laws that said otherwise, and i am pretty sure there was some dislike between the two groups of people.

My point is is that no matter if it is gun control or gay marriage or interracial marriage, if this is a truly free country who is anyone else to tell me how i can live my life? Who does the government think they are to legislate over a personal choice. It seems that no matter who is in office they want to legislate their beliefs (Rep. and Dems.) and force them on others. I think we see that the same, but if you do not approve of say gay marriage for example and then vote for someone who goes into office and legislates that gay marriage should be illegal passes a law against gay marriage then not only is the law discriminatory but you are as well. An you know it.

Anyone can argue well i just dont agree with it and i am doing no one wrong. That is your opinion but when you act on that opinion either by voting against it or voting for someone who will legislate against it is or just as much discrimination. That is my initial point which seems to be getting missed. I see no difference between racial discrimination or handicap discrimination or gun control discrimination or gay discrimination.

So why do we need government other than to protect us anyway? LOL!

 

[Stalking_Eagle]

Yes I am also without taking away from the great accomplishments of African Americans in all lines of work in this country. One....it is cool to use this as a trivia fact of the super bowl or mentioned when the two teams were going to the Super Bowl but please let it rest. I feel like it is taking away from the game all together.

 

[IRISHDODGER]

Sure it does. It means you are willing to deny two peoples right to marry who they want. That is discrimination just as much as denying a woman the right to work or denying any other freedom this country is supposedly built on. You might not have a problem with the local gay person you know or work with, the fact that there are laws denying this right for them is discrimination and is in essence saying the country does not approve.

Up until 1965 they did not approve of desgregated schools and had laws that said so until they had to inact new laws that said otherwise, and i am pretty sure there was some dislike between the two groups of people.

My point is is that no matter if it is gun control or gay marriage or interracial marriage, if this is a truly free country who is anyone else to tell me how i can live my life? Who does the government think they are to legislate over a personal choice. It seems that no matter who is in office they want to legislate their beliefs (Rep. and Dems.) and force them on others. I think we see that the same, but if you do not approve of say gay marriage for example and then vote for someone who goes into office and legislates that gay marriage should be illegal passes a law against gay marriage then not only is the law discriminatory but you are as well. An you know it.

Anyone can argue well i just dont agree with it and i am doing no one wrong. That is your opinion but when you act on that opinion either by voting against it or voting for someone who will legislate against it is or just as much discrimination. That is my initial point which seems to be getting missed. I see no difference between racial discrimination or handicap discrimination or gun control discrimination or gay discrimination.

So why do we need government other than to protect us anyway? LOL!

Timugen was correct IMO. You can't read people's minds & know their true feelings. Disagreement is healthy but you prefer to call people who disagree w/ your line of thinking discriminatory. That's rather shallow and close minded. And if hard earned tax dollars subsidize the subject of debate, that taxpayer has every right to voice their opinion either vocally or at the polls. You may not agree w/ their opinions but men & women sacrificed their lives so we could all voice them. This ain't some European Socialistic Politically Correct Utopia. You can say want you want about the USA, but there's not a freer nation in the world & yes I'm biased (or discriminating in favor of America). You are right...we do agree that politicians want to legislate their beliefs, usually to prop themselves up. And why does the politically correct insist that everybody be the same? By your logic, I could be friends w/ my male neighbor but if I disagree w/ his right to be a Hooters waitress, then it's discriminatory OR if my daughter's best friend fights for the right to be admitted into the Boy Scouts of America & I disagree w/ that notion but still have no personal problem w/ the kid, then it's discriminatory? Silly examples..yes, but they've been documented as actually occurring. If a dude wants to marry another dude that's their business. But they still can't procreate, so that's a difference you can't legislate. Life is tough & not always fair...wear a helmet. People are different & that's a good thing. Celebrate our differences. If we were all lemmings socialized to make the same amt of money, be ruled by the same government w/o vote, live in the same kind of house, have the same number of children, life would be boring or as the former USSR called it...Communism. Funny how those who ruled never had to live by the same standards. And when you bash one sect of people, you're no better than they are. It's politically incorrect to criticize the Muslim faith post 9/11, but rail away vs. the Christian and you're celebrated. After all, 09/11 was years ago & we can't lump all Muslims as terrorists...but we can lump all Christians as moral hypocrites according to the politically correct. BTW, I don't claim to have memorized every piece of legislation ever passed, but I don't recall a vote on whether or not interracial marriage should be banned or legalized. So I'm not sure why you lumped that in w/ gun control, gay marriage, abortion & other hot button topics b/c I'm not aware of any sane people being against it.

 

[Satans Little Helper]

not a communist nor do i condone it, BTW. thanks for the healthy discussion!

 

[IRISHDODGER]

not a communist nor do i condone it, BTW. thanks for the healthy discussion!

Good to hear it Domer. I appreciate your rational discussion points as well. Screw politics, we got recruits to worry about!