Oh, what the heck, let's have a poll on Nevada rancher, Cliven Bundy:

[CreekDog]

Is Cliven Bundy a racist?

Cliven Bundy:

“I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” he said. Mr. Bundy recalled driving past a public-housing project in North Las Vegas, “and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids — and there is always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch — they didn’t have nothing to do. They didn’t have nothing for their kids to do. They didn’t have nothing for their young girls to do.

“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he asked. “They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/us/politics/rancher-proudly-breaks-the-law-becoming-a-hero-in-the-west.html

13 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Yes, he is a racist.
	13 (100%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[bravenak]

1. I though the last poll was the best poll.

You win!

[enlightenment]

2. You forgot the option of

"needs to be stripped, covered in honey, and staked to a fire ant nest".

[CreekDog]

3. I recommend starting your own poll with that option if you want to vote that way

[enlightenment]

8. Probably not - Bundy just

annoys me. I'm not really the violent sort.

[The Straight Story]

4. Let's deconstruct the whole thing and see what comes up:

To answer the question we could generate an algorithm of sorts, feed in the data, and see what the outcome is.

Racism is one word with a specific meaning but is applied to something similar (ie, it is a way to sub classify a broader idea).

The basic formula might work out like this:

You have 1000 samples to work with. Out of those samples you have 9 which are, by some pre-defined method, found to be 'defective' (that word could apply in a way like '9 out of 1000 do not wear sunglasses' - it is labeled defective only in a clinical/coding sense).

Now if you take the 9 and declare/imply that all 1000 are somehow equally as defective you have a bias. That bias gets different names based on the subject at hand (racism/sexism/just about any word you care to add).

So, by definition, what he said was racist.

We could apply the same thing folks who have the same outcome on other things, the algorithm stands. Another example would be to say something like "We need to watch Muslims more closely because of what some did on 9/11". When you apply the things above you end up with a small sampling of a group and the larger sample not relative to the desired outcome is thrown out. That may often happen because you believe that at the core the many are exactly like the few so you throw out the rest of the sample that does not match.

I can think of others things people apply the same sort of bias to as well. Lots of things actually. From smokers, to pit bulls, to a lot more....

Racism/bias/bigotry are ugly, and it is good to discuss it and show how some can take the actions/etc of a few and apply it to the many.

[quinnox]

5. Now this is your best poll ever!

[MFM008]

6. good choices

[Egnever]

7. I had to vote pass because

I think this needs to be discussed thoroughly before we make our decision and move on. Preferably enough times so that every person voting in 2014 has had a chance to view the evidence and weigh in.

Also because Obama.

[WillyT]

9. Obigatory Other... You Forgot Obligatory Other !!! - LOL !!!

Actually I love your choices.





& Rec !!!

[NuclearDem]

10. Another CreekDog witchhunt poll

[CreekDog]

11. how so?

[NuclearDem]

12. See the chuckle smiley.

It was a joke.

[CreekDog]

13. oops

sorry!