• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama's Zimmerman speech

What did you think of obama's Zimmerman speech

  • Horrible divisive speech

    Votes: 15 78.9%
  • Great speech, I loved it

    Votes: 4 21.1%

  • Total voters
    19
It is totally irrational to expect anyone to simply accept being pinned to the ground and continuously beaten by another while they are armed and decide not use their gun. I do not care what color your skin is, self defense should be universally understandable. It is way out in loony land to even attempt to try to excuse the beating inflicted upon Zimmerman on some "history" of white/hispanics having tormented Martin.

How many more years must all non-blacks be considered racists and therefore threats to blacks?

It is considered rational (normal?) for blacks to fear whites (even white/hispanics), the logical "justification" used for Martin attacking, a suspected "creepy ass cracka", Zimmerman, yet whites are never justified to react defensively in the presense of a black person - that is defined as pure racism or "profiling".

Right, it is not Obama's job to tell us how black people think, it is his job to CHANGE the way they think.
 
I think the reactions from the right wing are obscenely more divisive and angry than anything the president said in that impromptu address. The way they're frothing at the mouth, you'd think Obama said "Kill Whitey!!".
 
I think the reactions from the right wing are obscenely more divisive and angry than anything the president said in that impromptu address. The way they're frothing at the mouth, you'd think Obama said "Kill Whitey!!".

No he just said whitey is trying to kill you.
 
There needs to be another option. This poll is doing the same exact thing the poster is claiming Obama is doing. It is polarizing people to race vs race. If you hate the race excuse stop bringing it up.
 
Obama's job should be to tone the race issue down not ramp it up.

He only rampped it up to people like you who actually think the President had no right to comment on the issue. It's a ridiculous position.
 
On the actual post though, Obama was simply addressing what the public uproar was about. He is always attacked about avoiding the problems, now ya'll are attacking him for taking the problem head on? So confusing.
 
Right, it is not Obama's job to tell us how black people think, it is his job to CHANGE the way they think.

That could equally be said for Zimmerman. Why the **** did he not identify himself as neighborhood watch or try to explain why he had an interest in the actions/presense of Martin? After the situation turned into a serious fight, I, as did the jury, had to side with Zimmerman's decision to use deadly force, yet Zimmerman too had ample opporunity, IMHO, to at least try to reason with or explain himself (and his actions) to Martin.
 
You have to read the speech in total to understand what he was doing, taking lines out of context is not the real picture. IMO Maggie you are wrong here and need to bow to my age and wisdom and ummm gender. :lol:

That is one cheap way to get a Like, Mr. Sawyer. ;)

It is totally irrational to expect anyone to simply accept being pinned to the ground and continuously beaten by another while they are armed and decide not use their gun. I do not care what color your skin is, self defense (self preservation?) should be universally understandable. It is way out in loony land to even attempt to try to excuse the beating inflicted upon Zimmerman on some "history" of white/hispanics having tormented Martin.

How many more years must all non-blacks be considered racists and therefore threats to blacks?

It is considered rational (normal?) for blacks to fear whites (even white/hispanics), the logical "justification" used for Martin attacking, a suspected "creepy ass cracka", Zimmerman, yet whites are never justified to react defensively in the presense of a black person - that is defined as pure racism or "profiling".

I don't actually disagree with a lot of what you've said . . . but I still think Obama's speech was just fine. I think it was an attempt to further calm the waters, and I think it did that.
 
Obama has proven that whites are presumed racist until proven guilty...even if they are latino, but kind of look a little white.

The biggest atrocity here is that the POTUS is presuming guilt despite the lack of evidence.
 
Did he call Z a "typical white person"?
 
That is one cheap way to get a Like, Mr. Sawyer. ;)



I don't actually disagree with a lot of what you've said . . . but I still think Obama's speech was just fine. I think it was an attempt to further calm the waters, and I think it did that.

I don't. There is no rational reason for Martin to have violently attacked Zimmerman. Obama NEVER mentioned that "distrubing" part of the story, clearly seen by witnesses and backed up by physical evidence during the trial. It was not a theory or rumor that Martin was seriously beating Zimmerman. In fact, that was the sole basis for the not guilty verdict - self defense.

Obama simply said that Martin "could have been me" yet NEVER said that he would not have put a seroius ass whooping on Zimmerman as Martin did - implying, at least to me, that he though Martin reacted rationally in doing so.
 
It's sobering when you understand that the most powerful man in the most powerful nation on earth, was looked at like a threat on the street not too long ago.
 
It's sobering when you understand that the most powerful man in the most powerful nation on earth, was looked at like a threat on the street not too long ago.

Ya. He wasn't a real threat until he got into office.
 
Ya. He wasn't a real threat until he got into office.

I'll admit I kinda walked right into that one, or is that the conservative response is a bit homogenized and predictable?
 
Yeah?...he's just the president for Gods sake and this is just a situation that has inspired marches across the country, WTH

That he helped spark because he can't mind his own business. This case was not the business of the President to comment on publically.
 
I'll just point out some of the elements of his statement that I found to be entirely full of crap:

You know, 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.
Well, it couldn't have been your son because he would have the full protection of the US Secret Service if you had one. If one of your kids got shot, you'd declare it an act of terrorism, and the streets would run red with blood, like they do in Pakistan when you send your drones out to bomb the **** out of little brown people.

Now, this isn’t to say that the African American community is naïve about the fact that African American young men are disproportionately involved in the criminal justice system; that they’re disproportionately both victims and perpetrators of violence. It’s not to make excuses for that fact — although black folks do interpret the reasons for that in a historical context. They understand that some of the violence that takes place in poor black neighborhoods around the country is born out of a very violent past in this country, and that the poverty and dysfunction that we see in those communities can be traced to a very difficult history.
Says the Harvard educated guy who was born to a rich family, and doesn't know the first thing about the "poverty and dysfunction" of the poor black community.

Now, the question for me at least, and I think for a lot of folks, is where do we take this? How do we learn some lessons from this and move in a positive direction?
First off, let's take a moment to realize that Zimmerman isn't white. That would take a lot of confusion out of the topic. second, realize what's good for the goose is good for the gander. You people call it a miscarriage of justice, I think that's funny, because the same people didn't give a damn that OJ Simpson got away with murdering his ex wife, and her jewish boyfriend. I don't recall any statements made by any president about how this effects the jewish community, and their deep rooted fears based on a violent history against them, or how this effects the lives of battered women who come from abusive homes and relationships, which is another long standing tradition the world over.

Number one, precisely because law enforcement is often determined at the state and local level, I think it would be productive for the Justice Department, governors, mayors to work with law enforcement about training at the state and local levels in order to reduce the kind of mistrust in the system that sometimes currently exists.
Why? Crime comes out of poor black communities, not because they're black, but because they're poor (something you, Mr. President, don't know **** about). It doesn't help that they view selling drugs as a way to "get out the ghetto", because they haven't learned any other way. The government could change this attitude through the schools, local government could get involved by helping these people find jobs. Even open up government positions for them, but no, that's too hard. Let's just keep blaming the ****ing cops because they're an easy target that everyone loves to hate. That's just ****ing brimming with integrity and brilliance Mr. President.

Along the same lines, I think it would be useful for us to examine some state and local laws to see if it — if they are designed in such a way that they may encourage the kinds of altercations and confrontations and tragedies that we saw in the Florida case, rather than diffuse potential altercations.
Encourage? The only people encouraging these kinds of altercations are the government suits who keep these people in a state of poverty, giving them enough fish to survive the day, but never teaching them how to go out and catch the ****ing fish. You're extremely successful Mr Obama, maybe you care to relay how you did it to these people you claim to care about so deeply. Help them out with knowledge, instead of manipulation.

I’m not naive about the prospects of some grand, new federal program. I’m not sure that that’s what we’re talking about here
Everybody knows that's what you're talking about, and everybody knows that's the direction you're going to try to take this.

And then, finally, I think it’s going to be important for all of us to do some soul-searching. There has been talk about should we convene a conversation on race.
This sounds familiar...

And those of us in authority should be doing everything we can to encourage the better angels of our nature, as opposed to using these episodes to heighten divisions.
This gets the lolwut pear:

5f2785d8d2b550e3c067dc60c595d840


Because this is one huge divisive turd. Here's the full text of this speech.
 
That he helped spark because he can't mind his own business. This case was not the business of the President to comment on publically.

He did help spark anything, you have your head in the sand. These issues were already there and acknowledging them was his responsibility, it was indeed his business.
 
It was terrible, and he needs to stay out of it!

... I think the chief executive of the United States is endowed with the right to comment on the nation's cultural and social issues at his leisure and any terms he likes.
 
He did help spark anything, you have your head in the sand. These issues were already there and acknowledging them was his responsibility, it was indeed his business.

He didn't help spark the debate last year when he said if he had a son he would look like Trayvon? Please....
 
... I think the chief executive of the United States is endowed with the right to comment on the nation's cultural and social issues at his leisure and any terms he likes.

He added fuel to the fire. That is not the job of a responsible President. However, Obama is irresponsible in every way, it goes with his character.
:fueltofir
 
The verdict was handed down, and the entire process was acknowledged by Obama as legitimate. Not sure what your actual complaint is.

My actual complaint is that he should not be commenting on the trial before or after the verdict (he did both). Not to mention he did not acknowledge the process as legitimate. He said, "a jury has spoken", not "the jury has spoken" (which is the real expression). He said it the way he did because he directed the DOJ to immediately look into filing civil rights charges.

Again, not everyone shares your view on the case. I would not venture to say that racism was a component, but an argument could be made that race played a factor, however small. Addressing the concerns of his consituents from a credible platform and in a responsible manner should considerably less controversial.

Once again I have to debunk the same ignorance over and over again. The FBI investigated this, the DA investigated this, they both wanted to add hate crime charges, very much - and were unable to because even the folks trying to convict Zimmerman agree this wasn't about race. Epic fail on the part of the POTUS.

Why exactly would anyone feel "betrayed" by his remarks? Are you sure we're referring to the same speech?

Yes, and that you don't understand how the chief executive commenting on an active case and then making mewling sounds when the case doesn't go his way is betrayal of his oath and his office - well that's another sign of the slide of our country into the dumpster.
 
He added fuel to the fire. That is not the job of a responsible President. However, Obama is irresponsible in every way, it goes with his character.
:fueltofir

If you mean the right reacted against him, that is because the right is economically and socially organized to react against every word that proceeds from his mouth and every little twitch of his finger. Bloggers, news outlets, and radio personalities make their living off of it. It's nothing anyone else needs to make note of.
 
If you mean the right reacted against him, that is because the right is economically and socially organized to react against every word that proceeds from his mouth and every little twitch of his finger. It's nothing anyone else needs to make note of.

You don't think he added fuel to the fire? Wake up man.
 
Back
Top Bottom