- Council Asks that Libraries Remain Open
- Good news! City Council stands up to the mayor, says "the public have questions!"
- Be There For Health Care Today at City Hall at noon
- City Paper on the effects of the YPP poll and other online organizing on budget cuts
- Another local library group organizes
- Kids organizing in Mantua to keep their library to open
- Talk solutions with Maria Quinones-Sanchez @ PFC Meetup tonight
- Talking Out of Both Sides on Libraries
- Vince Fumo, the Charmer
- SCI Camp Hill Update—Call for Action, Increased Monitoring, Constant Vigilance
Fattah comes unraveled in tonite's debate and he wants to be the leader of our city?
Submitted by mdcphilly on Mon, 05/07/2007 - 9:39pm.
How is it in a week when the central topic at YPP is race, this Mayoral campaign is no longer about issues, it’s about race?
Monday night, tonite, in the last debate of the campaign, Michael Nutter was talking about the fact that he is sensitive to racial profiling as it pertains to stop and frisk proposals. Nutter explained that he created the police advisory commission to protect civil rights and has been "black for 49 years."
Congressman Fattah responded that: "I'm sorry that the Councilman has to remind himself that he's an African American."
Fattah came unraveled tonite. It was unexcusable. Michael Nutter and Philadelphia voters deserve an immediate apology.
Read tonite's debate summary at Philly.com.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Yea
You know, I think sometimes I completely disagree with you, but that comment by Fattah was flat out insulting, to everyone. This time I do agree with you, we ALL are owed an apology.
I wonder how Barack feels about this?
Yeesh.
Wow, I somehow missed this; was cooking dinner early in the debate.
But I'll say this, and I don't feel like this is out of turn: what an asshole.
***
Volunteering for Michael Nutter
Well exactly why was Nutter reminding everyone that he was
black? Wasn't the point for him to use his race to shield him from the charge that his policy could lead to racial profiling? Because he was a really black candidate? So who should be apologizing for introducing race into the campaign?
I'm sorry, Stan. I know you
I'm sorry, Stan. I know you absolutely love Fattah's tax policy, but if you don't think that was a low blow, I don't know what to tell you. I can't imagine what he was thinking. But it was a pretty obvious attempt to piggyback on the "Nutter's not black enough" sentiment, which is in turns offensive and ridiculous. Like someone else said, I wonder what Barack Obama - who gets this crap all the time - would think.
I don't even think Nutter won the debate - Evans had by far the strongest arguments, and clearest answers. I can't help but think he was shaken up a little.
***
Volunteering for Michael Nutter
You're so blinded by your allegiance to Nutter
that you don't see that he was the one who introduced race into the debate. Please breathe slowly, settle down, and then think through just how Nutter's statement identifying himself as having been black for 49 years could be construed as being race-neutral.
It's NOT race-neutral. That
It's NOT race-neutral. That was the point - Nutter was alluding to his own experience as a black man as a reason why we should trust him to administer a policy. You can agree or disagree with the policy - and believe me, I'm not "blinded", I'm unsure about it at some level - but I think that's a fair argument to make.
But whatever it was, it wasn't insulting the racial self-image of another candidate. I know this is squeezing water from a rock, but you just can't think this is really okay.
***
Volunteering for Michael Nutter
It's not okay for Nutter
to say he's black to shield himself from the charge that he may be promoting a policy that will result in racial profiling. It is OK for Fattah to call him out on it. Nutter's policy may be good or bad for any number of reasons. The fact that he's black has got nothing to do with whether the policy is good or bad. It is atrocious that he used his race in that way.
Yesterday he insinuated that anyone who doesn't agree with the policy doesn't trust the police, as if there's something wrong with that. The Constitution doesn't trust the police. Today he suggests that no one can challenge the policy because he's black. Not too cool.
So you thought the way
So you thought the way Fattah called him out on it was "cool"?
***
Volunteering for Michael Nutter
Maybe I would have done it differently, but
the outrage coming from the Nutter camp is a little glass housish.
I think your suggestion -
I think your suggestion - "no one can challenge the policy because he's black" - is a little ridiculous, and it's exactly the kind of dumb thing people say about Fattah's policies as well. The fact is, when you're proposing a policy that has racially sensitive aspects to it - which Nutter is - it is different when a person with lived experience of being African American proposes it, and will prospectively be adminstering it. Race is relevant here. Nutter wasn't wrong to bring it up.
***
Volunteering for Michael Nutter
Do you
mean black cops are never brutal? And white cops can't be brutal if we have a black mayor? Bullshit, and both of those ideas are racist.
Whoa.
Yes, yes they are. That's why I didn't say either of those things. Cool down for a sec.
I'm saying that someone who has lived with racial profiling would be more likely to balance the need for strong law enforcement with a genuine sensitivity to this set of concerns. Do you disagree?
***
Volunteering for Michael Nutter
No. I don't agree
It depends entirely on the psychological response the individual had to that experience. And a black politician depending on white votes may feel less able to call out white cops. In general it's such a complicated question, and the consequences of raising it so potentially poisonous and misleading, that it simply has no place in the debate.
Move along folks, there's nothing to see here
This was an example of campaign rhetoric on both sides. Nutter trying to paper over very serious implications of his crime fighting policy, Fattah trying to drive a wedge between Nutter and his supporters.
This is what candidates do. It really has nothing substantive to do with the election. It really has nothing to do with race relations.
I think that Phillyblog and other venues are perfect for people who want to make the Nutter/Fattah exchange into something significant - maybe here we could stick to a more useful discussion of different crime-fighting policies so that, no matter who gets elected, we'll be able to advocate for implimentation of the best policies.
Stan: Are you still Jewish?
You must have to remind yourself every time you look in the mirror, cause you don't seem very Jewish to me.
Really, Stan, you are going someplace with your defense of Fattah that you don't want to go. He was a compelte 100% ADA approved ASSHOLE, and your defense of him makes you...?
What in God's name does that crack mean, Alex?
I mean I really have no idea except that it is incredibly offensive.
LOL!!!
Wow, you think so? Now maybe you know how Nutter felt.
(And for the record, if you didn't get that I was trying to push you to see things from Nutter's perspective, I was. I don't for one minute question your faith or identity, and neither should Fattah question Nutter's).
internal logic
let me see if I have this straight: any member of any identity group can say whatever they want about a topic and get instant cred?
So if I proposed closing down the gay bars because HIV is on the rise again in the gay community, and some men who meet at bars go home and have sex and then contract HIV, that would be ok?
If you raised any concerns about that, it would be fine if i told you to butt out because I am gay and therefore the expert?
What if Charlie, who is also gay, came on the blog and told me that what I was doing was wrong and a disgrace to our community? Who gets to decide which of is right?
not sure i understand...
I'm not sure I understand what you are asking with this:
First, I cannot speak for "any identity group", I can only speak from my own experience as being a liberal Jew. Actually, I am speaking as someone who is only half-Jewish and who has had people claim on the one hand that I'm not Jewish, or on the other hand that I'm not white/Irish. I have also been called an Anti-Semite, more times than I can count, because of a political position that I hold (that the Israelis are immoral in their actions against the Palestinians, regardless of the actions of the Palestinians), so I do think that my identity and my experiences make me sensative to claims against one's race/identity. I'm also pretty sure that Stan has had similar charges leveled against him because of his stances on Israel (and for the record for those who don't know, I was Bar Mitzvah'd at the Synagogue that Stan and my father helped to found), and so I believe that he should know better than to go down this highly offensive path.
I cannot speak to how this relates to any other identity, so you can tell me how it relates to being gay.
an analogy Alex
You said to Stan above:
I'll see if you can figure out what my analogy about gay people meant all on your own.
I cannot
Because I don't know how common it would be to say someone "Wasn't gay", nor can I assume how deeply offensive it would seem to the person being criticized. When I am told I am not Jewish or that I am an anti-Semite it is deeply painful. And given your response I am guessing such an appeal would not be so painful to you.
I guess I'm a bit confused: are you trying to defend Fattah's statement? Are you criticizing me for putting it in terms that relate to my own life experiences?
Honestly I still don't get it. I guess I'm dense.
More than a logical retort
If Fattah was trying to say that Nutter can't dismiss the possibility of his "stop & frisk" policy leading to racial profiling by simply stating that he's black, he should have said it. I think that would be a very appropriate, (and correct) statement. Luckily Nutter doesn't rely on that as an argument, but instead on the professionalism of the police.
Instead, it looks like Fattah was not only trying to point out this weak argument, but also insulting Nutter's blackness; something I'd bet Nutter has heard murmured before, something I could see Nutter (and others who heard it) being insulted by.
Just browsing first thing in the morning
and that hit me in the face. The reason it's pretty inappropriate is that as I say further along, I don't use my faith as an argument in anything. In fact it proves nothing. It's just completely illogical to do so, at best.
But was that exchange last night painful and repulsive? Yes, it was, from start to finish. From Evans to Nutter to Fattah. And it is very sad that the campaign is devolving to that point. But ultimately not surprising given the painful reality of race and the role it plays in the life of the City.
Didn't mean to hit you in the face...
Seriously, Stan, I didn't mean to offend you. I was similarly "hit in the face" when I opened my paper this AM and found Fattah's comments. It really made my blood boil, because of my own experiences, and I apologize if it seemed that I was attacking your ethnicity/faith. I did mean it to be a hard hitting reminder that this type of comment should be considered inappropriate, but I did not mean to attack your Jewishness at all, but rather to (bluntly) allude to attacks that are often leveled by one Jewish person against another, which I figured you would identify with.
This is all pretty painful stuff
On that we can agree. Some of us are just trying to say that no one is fault-free here, but beyond that, it's the horror of what's actually going on on the street that I think is adding to our revulsion. Maybe the very thin silver lining is that the campaign is making it that much less likely that this issue can again be made allowed to retreat to business as usual status. Maybe.
Who let race in?
I don't think Nutter brought race into this campaign per se; I think the "stop and frisk" policy which is integral in his platform has certain racial issues attached to it. It's legitimate then for other candidates to openly question this policy on several fronts, and one of them would be the concern for racial profiling.
Now, Evans was definitely wrong for saying that Nutter was for racial profiling, and Evans was really driving that home. Nutter was responding to this assertion by bringing up the fact that he is aware of the problem of racial profiling, he's been "black for 49 years." That is the context for Nutter's statement.
That being said, Fattah's short remark immediately registered as out-of-line with me (and with a significant portion of the studio audience). I have to believe even the most ardent Fattah supporters gave it a second thought. Actually, I simply don't believe those that say they didn't. It was guttural, but why?
I wonder if it's because recent polls are showing that a majority of Nutter's support comes from white people, maybe even kinda yuppie, gentrifying, Volvo driving, recycling white people. Me. Most black people seem to be split between Knox, Fattah, and a little to Evans. And it's certainly no secret that Nutter is trying to court more of the black vote. He cites the "black murder" rate now, not just the murder rate. He says stuff like "black genocide" now. I, until tonight, wrote this off as just Nutter's attempt to pick up another 3-6 points. Nothing out-of-the-ordinary. But now, in retrospect, Nutter was using race in the past few weeks to pick up some points. It's a shame because it seemed like this election was going so well without playing overtly to any racial card. He should stop.
If Fattah was trying to make this point, he should have made it clearly. The taste his comment left in my mouth was the notion that Nutter wasn't black enough. Instead of calling Nutter out on his political pandering, it sounded like Fattah implied that Nutter forgets that he's black. It sounded like it was supposed to be an insult at Nutter.
I'm not black, but I'm hoping someone who is can put their finger on this better than I. Racial issues are more than complicated because they reach deep into everyone's subconscious, but I feel the guttural reaction I had after hearing this aside was not only real, but warranted. What did Fattah mean?
Two hundred and ninety-six
Nutter's talking point, which is what Matthews originally asked about, has always seemed to me pretty racially complex. His fixation on the issue isn't new -- he was pushing for more police hires and for the mayor to declare a state of emergency while he was still on council, and I heard him break out the Ku Klux Klan analogy on "Live at Issue" quite early in the race.
When it comes down to it, the homicide epidemic in our city has been allowed to spread because it disproportionately affects a subset of the black community that nobody cares about: people with criminal records and those around them. Partly, the analogy is an indictment of a section of Philly's black political and police leadership. In effect, John Street wrote off these homicides, noting that they were victim-specific; essentially, if you're not into something you shouldn't be, chances are you're not going to get hurt. On the other hand, it's also an indictment of the racism existing in the city -- since most white people inside and outside the leadership take the same attitude as John Street, but for different reasons: not to cover their own inability to do anything, but because they simply wrote off entire neighborhoods a long time ago.
If it were white people killing black people, the city would be up in arms, crying for racial justice; if it were black people killing white people, the city would be up in arms, some of them spouting racist epithets. But since it is largely members of the black underclass killing other people in the same group, nobody outside of these communities, black or white, is paying attention to anything but the number. Because only the number, whether you're the black police chief or the white head of the tourism board, really has an effect on what you care about.
So it is definitely an issue touching on both racism and racial politics in the city -- but Nutter clearly seems to be as frustrated with the efforts of black politicians to downplay the violence, to try to act like it doesn't exist. (This is exactly what Stan has accused Nutter of doing with poverty.)
I am not totally sure, but one thought that I had about Fattah's position, both on this, on John Street, and on corruption in city politics, is that the common thread seems to be: "Don't air our dirty laundry in the street." ("Our" here meaning both Philadelphia Democrats and black people in Philadelphia.) It's not a position I agree with, but it's not totally unmotivated -- when you're already beleaguered, ultimately you don't want to give any outside group ammunition that they can use against you.
This is why the Klan analogy is so complicated. On the one hand, it says that the violence done to black men and women in the city is intolerable, that some of the indifference is based on racism, and that we need to be as outraged by the deaths caused by the indirect effects of racism as those caused by racism directly. On the other hand, it attacks black polticians, saying that, partly because of racial allegiances, they are unlikely to criticize other black politicians who are failing black people.
So, if it "plays" racially, it doesn't just play one card. It plays a whole hand.
It also has the virtue of being true.
Supporting Michael Nutter for Mayor.
What a terrific, thoughtful,
What a terrific, thoughtful, well written post.
C'mon Folks
Fattah was awful tonight, admit it. I don't know who's advising him but their strategy makes no sense. How do you win votes by appearing so desperate and petty. Even he didn't "inject race into the debate" it was a cheap shot and it will be used against him for the next 6 days. Fattah supporters have a practical choice to make, support Nutter or inadvertantly help Knox get elected. It's too bad because Fattah actually has some good ideas but he's been shockingly unable (uninterested?) in communicating those ideas coherently or broadly and exciting people beyond whatever supporters he had coming into this race.
Fattah was expecting a
Fattah was expecting a coronation -- and instead he's got not only a real race, but one that he's likely to lose. Doesn't seem to be bringing out the best in him, does it?
Unlike what Nutter's
expected coronation is now bringing out in him. Accusing people who question his stop and frisk policies of being anti-police, and bringing into the campaign the important fact that he's been black for 49 years.
If I was accused of being
If I was accused of being misogynist, I'd point out that I'm a woman. If I was accused of being anti- catholic, I'd point out that I grew up in the religion and was educated by nuns. And if I was accused of being insensitive to poverty, I'd point out that I once lived in public housing. In each case, I'd be suggesting that my life experiences make me unlikely to lack empathy for those similarly situated.
That's what Nutter did.
If you can't see the difference between his remark and Fattah's, I think your advocacy has overcome your common sense.
Stan is, unfortunately,
Stan is, unfortunately, starting to become as fanatical as the Nutter-fanatics he has been fighting against.
Stan, I think this argument you are best to back away from and stick to the tax policy. Depending what viewership was and how much it circulates in the press, Fattah could have sank his ship tonight and pushed Nutter over Knox.
Even if Nutter brought race into it, Fattah lost his head and walked into the trap. I think you are aware, it isn't about "who started it", but who gets caught with the worst quote.
--------------------------------------------------
Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website
Well, thanks for your vote of confidence
so unexpected, on my tax views. I fail to see what fanaticism you're talking about, just as I fail to see where your self-righteousness on Nutter is coming from. I said I didn't think Fattah's answer was great, but I also don't think Nutter was blameless. I can understand what may have prompted Nutter's comment, he was under pretty heavy attack all night. But being mayor means you have to stand the heat and do the right thing. His proposal is not right, and his manor of defending it, was irrelevant at best. And Portia, I'm very familiar from debates within the Jewish community in which there is sometimes the tendency to defend certain positions with the claim of identity. It doesn't hold water there, or anywhere else.
Yes, it does...
Stan, if someone claimed that a position you advocated for was Anti-Semitic, and you responded "uh, I'm Jewish, I think I know a thing or two about what is or isn't anti-Semitic" would that be a "tendency to defend certain positions with the claim of identity?" Don't let your love for Fattah blind you!
Actually, I'd bet $100 that Stan has used this tactic before, though I'm sure I cannot prove it. I say this because almost every liberal Jew who criticizes Israel for their policy towards the Palestinians is labeled "anti-Semitic" by Neocons and Conservative Jews. I have been attacked in this way about a gazillion times, and my response was "I'm Jewish, I lived in Israel, I have the right to criticize that State." And I never once felt that it was a "tendency to defend certain positions with the claim of identity", since I was challenged with being insensitive to the needs of my own people.
Actually no
I don't defend myself that way, Alex. My ethnicity is totally irrelevant to the validity of my argument. Either Israel is following a decent policy in Israel/Palestine or it's not. Whether I'm Jewish or not has no bearing on whether it's a good idea to uproot the home of a Palestinian to make way for a luxury hotel. Do you think it does, Alex? Do you think a black guy who gets brutalized by a cop will feel better about it because the mayor who made the policy leading to the brutalization is black?
OK...
But have you ever been called an anti-Semite because of your stance? I have, and I guess I was wrong to say "how can I be an anti-Semite, I'm Jewish?" but that was one of my responses. And to a large degree I do think that my identity and experiences ad weight to my criticism because it prevents the attacker from using the sort of cheap, and highly offensive, rhetorical trick that Fattah used (i.e. if you criticize Israel you are not Jewish enough, or if you push for aggressive policing in the communities which are most effected by violence--African-American ones-- than you are somehow not black).
So you acknowledge the defense of your argument
based on your own ethnicity is wrong. And so was Nutter's. And there is plenty of blame to go around here, much of which started with Nutter's proposal to virtually close down whole swaths of the City. I can see where that could raise a lot of anger in those who are part of that community, leading some of them to say some unpleasant things. Some of those things were said on the air last night, and I'm sure plenty are being and have been said out of public earshot. So the whole deal is complicated, and as I suggested to Marc below, has resulted in an atmosphere that no one should feel good about.
Exactly the opposite...
Stan, I am saying that my argument carries more weight because I am Jewish, because I lived in Israel, and because criticisms of my stance as "anti-semitic" are ridiculous because I am Jewish and claims of hatred towards Israel are equally stupid because I lived there for a year, loved the place and the people, and would gladly move back if the war was to abate.
So: I empathize with Nutter, and think that it is fine for him to point out that he is black when people criticize him of being racist (which was what was alluded to by Evans). I don't think that it is fine for anyone to say what Fattah said as a response.
I disagree
that your arguments carry more *legitimate* weight because you are a Jew. Evil is evil because it is, not because of the identity of the person who calls it out. Perhaps Nutter deserves empathy, maybe he doesn't. But he was trying to persuade that his policy was right. It is no more right or wrong because he's black. In the context of argument, noting your identity merely serves as a barrier to discussion of the merits of your point of view.
I write a security policy
I write a security policy paper for your company for your network. It involves biometric devices and cryptographic keys.
Does the policy paper have more weight if I have been dealing with security issues for 20 years or if I just graduated from college?
We can easily remove the race issue from the discussion by turning it into a widget of experience.
How do you know this learning program works for autistic children? Well, I have an autistic child and I have found it to be extremely successful.
What people deal with in their life is relevant to points of view and interpretation. It is just that the people defending Fattah are saying being black is not a life experience.
--------------------------------------------------
Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website
But you have been attacked for being a self-hating Jew
when you oppose some action of Israel. I don't know any Jew who supports a Palestinian state and who criticizes Israel who has not been attacked in that way. It is a despicable rhetorical move and not all that different from the one Fattah made.
I don't defend my views on the Middle East by saying that I'm Jewish. But I have pointed out to people that I am a committed Jew so as to point out not only that a committed Jew can criticize Israel but that my criticisms of Israel to some extent come out of the Jewish moral traditition in which I was raised. That's not an appeal based on my identity but on my beliefs. Similarly, Nutter was pointing out that, given his experience as a black man, he is aware of the dangers of racial profiling. He didn't defend his ideas on the basis of his racial identity but on the basis of his experience and beliefs.
Judaism is, as you say, a belief system too
Defending something based on a belief system is not the same thing as defending something because of experience. There's a similarity, but they're not the same. Was Nutter saying that he's been racially profiled and it's really not so bad? Therefore it's OK for him to recommend a policy that increases the likelihood that it will happen to others? Has he been profiled by a cop on a street thinking he had a gun? Does that experience make him feel that that's OK to subject others to as well? Sorry, none of that adds up to me. In evaluating the policy proposal I have no interest in knowing about Nutter's personal experience. I'm only interested in his belief system and whether it's elements are persuasive on their merits.
As to Fattah's comment, I don't think it was right, although I can understand if he was having a reaction like mine. If so, he didn't express it very well. Bottom line, I think the whole discussion was ugly and that both of them came out of this flap diminished.
I think Marc Stier has it
I think Marc Stier has it just about right.
It's worth noting, too, that Nutter began by pointing to his record on this issue: his work to establish civilian review (to counter the charge that he's indifferent to police abuse) and his work on civil rights (to counter the charge that he's indifferent to the racial dimension of the problem).
I'd further add that just as Stier's and others' criticisms of the conduct of Israel come out of the Jewish moral tradition, Nutter's position on declaring a state of emergency comes out of a genuine desire to reclaim black neighborhoods like the one he grew up in from crime. Too many Philadelphians have written off both the victims AND the criminals.
Nutter absolutely defended his ideas on his racial identy
His direct response to concerns raised about racial profiling was that he is black.
Look, Nutter's desire to reclaim black neighborhoods for the law-abiding is valid. But so are concerns about his policies. Once again, it just floors me that "progressives" are willing to overlook his disturbing rhetoric.
Just as with valid concerns about his tax-cutting policies, this is a case where he refused to proactively address criticism, and in fact dismissed opposing viewpoints out of hand.
Again, when asked "Are you concerned about racial profiling," his response was "Race is not an issue." Point of fact, race is an issue if people perceive it to be, whether or not he thinks that S&F is tantamount to racial profiling.
If he continues to be similarly insensitive to concerns about his policies, he will be a terrible mayor.
I think you're basically
I think you're basically right about his response at The Next Mayor, but wrong about his response in last night's debate. And I've never doubted that concerns are legitimate, and that Nutter could do more to proactively address them, but I don't think it's the case that he hasn't addressed them at all. Again, "I've been black for 49 years" wasn't an isolated response: it came at the end of a long end of accomplishments that suggests that Nutter isn't indifferent to abuses of police power or civil rights.
We're clearly talking past each other. We may just need a YouTube clip to sort this out.
YouTube not necessary
I get your point now. His statement did come as part of a larger statement. However, at no point in his larger statement did he allow for any credibility in the criticisms being offered.
Hopefully, that was just campaign rhetoric. Despite the fact that it turns me away from candidates, it seems that universally they believe that pretending they are bulletproof is a good strategy.
Still, my point stands. I am concerned about the possibility that it isn't just a campaign strategy, and that he won't address legitimate concerns if elected. It would be relatively easy for him to put such concerns to rest.
He has created a Police
He has created a Police Advisory Commission.
He has created an Ethics board.
If anything, his actions have proved he creates channels for people to raise issues.
--------------------------------------------------
Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website
experience and beliefs are not enough
sorry, that doesn't cut it. we all have experiences and beliefs. Those can't isolate us from making mistakes.
I know that the increased transmission rates of HIV among gay men under 30 could be slowed if we shut down Woody's. However, you don't hear me saying that. Because experience or not, some things are clearly just wrong.
I bring this example up because it actually happened in the 1970's and it created a huge disagreement between members of the LGBT community.
"REMIND HIMSELF"
Ray, closing of bath houses due to AIDS public health concerns/hysteria happened in the early to mid 80's. I'm unaware of gay bars being closed due to those same concerns and certainly not in the 70's.
This is quite simply about a vicious personal attack leveled by Fattah against Nutter. He didn't say I'm sorry the Councilman feels the need to remind the audience he's African American, which might have been defensible. He said, "I'm sorry that the Councilman HAS TO REMIND HIMSELF that he's an African American."
There are any number of very ugly epithets that African Americans use to describe other African Americans who they believe have "forgotten" their heritage. One of them is derived from the title character of a Harriet Beecher Stowe novel. The epithets get more ugly from there.
No one watching that debate last night would have thought that what Nutter was doing was REMINDING HIMSELF that he was African American. He was stating the obvious in a somewhat tongue-in-cheek way, thus the laughter from the crowd.
What Fattah did was make a personal attack, which, whether intended to or not, played into a very unfair perception of Michael Nutter's "black credentials." Thus the appalled reaction from the crowd.
He broke his pledge to be positive and not say negative things about other candidates. There are no two ways about that.
I support Michael Nutter for Mayor
There is a difference,
There is a difference, though, between arguing with you about whether it's right or wrong to shut down Woody's, and whether the reason why you'd want to shut the place down is because of homophobia.
If Rick Santorum says "Shut the gay bars and bathhouses down," there's good reason to believe it's because he's homophobic, even if he says his concern is about public health. If Ray Murphy says the same thing, then you're both wrong, but I wouldn't say it's because you're motivated by homophobia. I certainly wouldn't think you were indifferent to it.
There are serious concerns that can be raised about Nutter's crime plan, whether from the point of civil liberties, crime effectiveness, the potential for lawsuits, etc. But the ramp-up to this comment was all about accusations that Nutter was proposing racial profiling -- that he was indifferent to the racial dimension of the problem. And there, both his race and his record are relevant -- just as you and yours would be relevant to understanding your motives, or call back an earlier example, a Jewish critic of Israel would be for theirs.
So you can disagree with him, but I don't think you can say that Nutter is promoting declaring a crime emergency in high-violence black neighborhoods because of racism, or that he's indifferent to potential civil rights abuses -- unless you then say that Nutter has somehow either taken sides against these neighborhoods or otherwise forgotten that he's black. Which, sadly, is what Fattah proceeded to do.
Ray, I do find it
Ray, I do find it interesting that you haven't defended the substance of Fattah's comment without making a recourse to Nutter's earlier assertion. I agree with your comment that there's little to be gained by ending the conversation there. But don't you think it's worth HAVING a conversation about whether Fattah was right or wrong to claim that Nutter had somehow "forgotten" his blackness?
***
Volunteering for Michael Nutter
sure.
I have not defended Fattah because frankly it's not a topic that I think it is my place to talk about. I'm white. Conversations among black people about racial identity just aren't something I know enough to talk about.
That seems fair enough,
That seems fair enough, although I can't imagine that you'd be similarly cautious if Nutter had said the same thing about Fattah. I've not noticed your reticence on these issues in the past.
***
Volunteering for Michael Nutter
not true
I can't recall such a situation in the past that would be applicable.
Stan, stop being unexpected
Stan, stop being unexpected about my comments on you and taxes. I have never been unreasonable with you on that. Just because I don't agree with all of your points, it doesn't mean I doubt your credibility. The tax issue is your strong point and I take all your comments involving it very seriously and I do not dismiss them out of hand. The issue with economics is so much of it is theory with a dash of intuition thrown in. Also, it is very possible to have two opposing view points that are both correct and work. Again, a lot of economics comes down to ideology. I always keep that in mind when I discuss economics and many other topics.
Stop thinking I am the bad guy. ;)
The "growing" fanaticism I am referring to is that some of your dialog is starting to look like it is geared towards undermining Nutter for the sake of Fattah. Many of the level-headed posters on here have admitted Nutter is probably walking a fine line with the Stop & Frisk policy.
Even with that, Fattah's comment was inappropriate. No one said Nutter wasn't blameless .. he is pushing a topic that does have a racial component to it ... but nothing said or done by Nutter warranted Fattah's comment.
When Fattah starts talking about poverty, how would you view it if Nutter made a comment about how Fattah has to remind himself he is black after living in a multi-million dollar mansion for so long?
--------------------------------------------------
Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website
I'm not going all out to defend Fattah's statement.
I'm just trying to put it in context the way others are doing regarding Nutter's statement. I've said in numerous posts now that I think Fattah chose the wrong way to reply to Nutter's statement. But your analogy doesn't hold. It would only hold if Fattah made his defense of his poverty stand by suggesting no one could criticize it because he's black and he has a special understanding of poverty. He's made no such statement.
Chaka Fattah's education
How's that gang violence in the mansion, Chaka?
*** Disclaimer ... I am NOT attacking on this. I am merely illustrating that the reverse can be done to Fattah as well saying he can't relate to the poor and it would be an inappropriate statement to say it.
Again, I said my piece and not going to go in circles between us ... your time is better spent going back and forth with others. ;) I just agree with the (seemingly) majority that think Fattah was out of line.
--------------------------------------------------
Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website
It would only hold if Fattah
Or, if Fattah were to somehow suggest that Nutter's policies made him less authentically black. Like, for example, if Fattah were to stand in a room next to Nutter with a whole bunch of people, maybe some TV cameras, and say that Nutter needed to remind himself that he was African-American.
Yes, if Fattah were to say something like that, then the analogy would really have some bite.
Also, didn't Fattah just put
Also, didn't Fattah just put out and ad saying Nutter is going to cut services?
Seems Fattah is on paper saying he will cut programs if the irport doesn't work out.
--------------------------------------------------
Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website
What's missing from Mike's post
Mike says above:
How is that not Nutter injecting race into the debate?
Every other candidate for Mayor, not to mention many prominent Philadelphians, have expressed concern about enacting a policy that would engender racial profiling. Instead of addressing this very real problem, Nutter basically says "hey, I'm black. It's cool."
What kind of answer is that?
Just because Nutter is African-American does not mean that his policy, if enacted, would not lead to more institutionalized racism and mistreatment of people of color.
Ray - despite the fact that
Ray - both you and Stan have spent considerable effort trying to bring this back to Nutter - which I guess is fair, if your contention is that race really doesn't matter when implementing racially sensitive policies.
I think I'd like to hear a defense of why Fattah said what he did. Why it wasn't insulting, or hurtful, or mean.
***
Volunteering for Michael Nutter
Let me ask a relevant question.
How many of the commenters on here have ever been beaten up by cops after being stopped for no good reason?
As someone whose brothers were picked up by the cops all the time, one of whom was seriously beaten and almost killed, this discussion isn't quite as theoretical to me as it seems to be to the academic, privileged males who frequent this board.
What you all don't seem to get is that some cops get off on abusing the powerless. I don't have to be black to see the very real dangers in this policy.
Press secretary, Knox campaign. Blogger on hiatus, former award-winning journalist.
But the point of the topic
But the point of the topic was between two black men.
We are discussing the comments.
--------------------------------------------------
Staff member of Longacre for 5th Council District.
Longacre Website
Let me ask a relevant question.
How many of the commenters on here have ever been beaten up by cops after being stopped for no good reason?
As someone whose brothers were picked up by the cops all the time, one of whom was seriously beaten and almost killed, this discussion isn't quite as theoretical to me as it seems to be to the academic, privileged males who frequent this board.
What you all don't seem to get is that some cops get off on abusing the powerless. I don't have to be black to see the very real dangers in this policy.
Press secretary, Knox campaign. Blogger on hiatus, former award-winning journalist.
I think it was a
I think it was a particularly crappy thing to say. Similar to when people where I'm from telling another that they do not "remember where they came from" when they do something people question. It lowers the debate. And, it makes Fattah look petty.