Kristi Noem’s headline-grabbing but completely impractical invitation fro the NRA to move its 2018 convention to South Dakota promptes freelance writer Jim Kent to call her an insensitive bobble-head. It also prompts the Brooklyn native to respond to a transplant-friend’s question about why we bother to live in South Dakota, a state that produces such political yahooliganism:
I moved here because it’s where I was called to be.
I stay for that same reason and because no matter where I would live, there would be battles to fight, insensitive politicians and their followers.
So, stay where your heart is, even if there are those where you live who would try to break it.
Stand with those who share your beliefs, regardless of their color or social background.
Speak out against the powerbrokers, the racists and, especially, all those bobbleheads [Jim Kent, “Reasons for Living in S.D.—People & Politics Don’t Top List,” Lakota Country Times, 2018.03.01].
Speaking of speaking out, this year’s Class AA state champion orator, Legislative page and Aberdeen Central senior Maggie Fouberg, won the state tournament Saturday with a speech on narrowmindedness. Fouberg called out her State Senator Al Novstrup’s racist statements in the Legislature. Fouberg also spoke up against her local xenophobes, the mostly anonymous “Americans First, Task Force,” for its foolish and uninformed alert about a World History assignment given at Central on basic facts about Islam.
It is difficult to live with people so ignorant and unneighborly. But it is difficult and dangerous to leave that ignorance and unneighborliness unchallenged. Thank you, Jim, Maggie, and other neighbors, for sticking in and speaking up.
I think Jim, a few years ago evoked Crazy Horse’s name as a model for 2nd Amendment hocus pocus, on public radio perhaps. I could be wrong, it may have been the other guy.
There is something wrong with people that go around calling other people racist. It’s really a nasty habit of sorts. It’s as if those that do that use it as a way of bullying other people just because they can. I don’t like Bullies. Never have. I think most civil people don’t like Bullies.
Does that bullying include you, Old Sarge?
You comment somewhat regularly here on DFP and just as regularly call people “idiots”, “stupid” and other such insults.
Condemning racism is not being a bully.
OldSarg, Roger makes a good point. Why do you find it acceptable to call us idiots, when I can vouch for the intelligence and good faith of people like Roger C., but you find it unacceptable for us to use the term racist to describe actual racist speech, behavior, and people?
Al Novstrup is a racist.
The Americans First, Task Force is comprised mostly of racists, or, if I’m generous, people who don’t realize they are being manipulated by racists.
It is not a nasty habit to speak the truth. It’s a nasty habit to be a racist.
I’m only pointing out the obvious calling some of you idiots. Idiot is a medical diagnosis: A derogatory term used indiscriminately for an obtuse person, regardless of that person’s tested IQ.~ Segen’s Medical Dictionary. © 2012 Farlex, Inc..
You can call anyone you like “racist”. I’m just saying that doing it all the time shows a level of social decorum that isn’t very attractive.
Does that help?
Roger “Condemning racism is not being a bully” is not what you are doing. You are calling people “racist”. You may not understand that but there is a difference.
Hey Moron, yeah you Old Sarge. First of all I haven’t called anyone a racist, why do just make things up as you go along? If you want to continue with the name calling, please proceed, but be aware I can be quite creative and return the favor.
Furthermore, I stand by my words that calling out a racist or racism is not being a bully, it is doing the right thing.
Since people like you ushered Trump into office racism has been a major issue with the biggest racist sitting in the White House.
Trump has brought out the worst in America and emboldened and condoned racist behavior and name calling.
Cory will continue to call out racism, as will I and most of the readers of Dakota Free Press.
When Roger says I’m doing the right thing, I take that as a pretty good sign that I’m doing the right thing.
OS, I don’t go calling just anyone “racist.” I use my words with meaning, to describe actual behavior evidencing actual attitudes. The champion orator I heard cited the same evidence and came to the same conclusion.
And don’t forget: racial profiling is also unconstitutional—and that’s another word I use meaningfully, intentionally, and accurately.
Roger you said: “First of all I haven’t called anyone a racist”. Ah, but you support the statements of Cory who claims it’s different because “my words with meaning” as if other people’s words have less of a meaning.
Cory, if the police describe the perp as a “masked man in a blue jacket” is that racial profiling? How about “white male eating a mayo and cheese sandwich”? What about “Small statured woman in a blue dress”? How about “black male 5’8”? Which of these statements do you consider “racial profiling”? I promise you if someone attacked you and the police announced they were looking for a “white woman in a green jacket with a prosthetic left leg” and I saw her I would do you the favor of reporting it to the police. Your defense of calling someone a racist because you feel anyone who thinks someone dressed in a shemagh might be a terrorist is racist is silly. . . How about someone dressed as a police officer, do you assume that person “is” a police officer? What about a black man in coveralls with a broom in the hallway, do you assume he’s a janitor? Are you a racist? Because someone’s life experience and observations leads someone to make the wrong conclusion doesn’t make them a racist. It can be a mistake, an error or even a stupid decision but it still doesn’t make them a racist. That was the label you applied but then in your own words “my words have meaning” thus your observations, life experience and conclusion are beyond reproach I guess. . . but I could be wrong.
Yes, OldSarg, you are wrong. Life experience that leads one to say, “Let’s deny all people of a particular racial appearance basic constitutional rights against unreasonable search and seizure” makes one both racist and anti-constitutional.
Your examples of searching for specific suspects are not what racist Al Novstrup was talking about. If you tell me that a 5’8″ black male robbed the Cenex this morning and is on the loose, it’s not racist for the local cops to keep their eyes open for a 5’8″ black male (though even in that specific situation, I’m open to arguments about the constitutionality of stopping and frisking black male of middling height without some additional probable cause). Al was talking about using the appearance of suspects already captured or killed to justify stripping an entire class of people of basic constitutional rights. That’s racial profiling. That’s racist. That’s unconstitutional.
“are not what racist Al Novstrup was talking about” how would you know? You interpret his statements and judge them as racist. Why can he not also see his statements in a non-racist way?
You know you are wrong in accusing everyone else of being racist as if you are innocent of any sin. Oops, I used the word “sin” and you are a professed atheist so you don’t believe in sin. What about morals? How are you about morals? Since we are on that track, since you don’t worry about God, sin or morals why do you care about someone being racist? Is it really that you don’t care about racism and are just damning Novstrup for political purposes? That’s it isn’t it! You don’t give a rats butt one way or another about racism, minorities or anyone other than your political agenda! Pretty shallow there Big Man!
Old Sarge, quit playing word games, my support for Cory or anyone else calling out racism is not supporting racism, that’ just ignorant. No matter how you twist words, you can make me a racists.
Old Sarge, do you support Al Novstrup’s call for racial profiling for what he perceives as terrorists?
Cory has said it quite simply, that identifying a criminal by their race is not racism, if cops weren’t able to do that, no criminal would ever be caught.
I know exactly what Al was referring to, OS, because I listened to his exact words. There’s no “interpretation” or “opinion” here. Al referred specifically, in Senate State Affairs on Feb. 21 and in crackerbarrel on Feb. 24, to the 9/11 attackers and to people who look like them. Review those exactly transcribed words here, then get back to me with something other than your wishful desperate spin.
Al said what he said. He said exactly what I’ve said he said. His words were racist. His policy proposal was unconstitutional.
I will also use his “exact” words. . . Is this the “racist” words you speak of: “As we search the people going into the rodeo in Brookings, South Dakota, should we be searching the 85-year-old Norwegian, or should we be looking for the people that are 19 years old from the Middle East?”?
I will try this one: If you see a “white man, in coveralls, with a mop in the school hallway” do you assume he may be a janitor? Of course! That would be no more than common sense. Now if you see a bunch of young men that appear to be middle eastern dressed in thawbs wandering around Aberdeen taking pictures of your public buildings and schools you may want to reconsider ignoring your “lack of racist bias”. . .
Searching an “85-year-old Norwegian” and expecting to find a terrorist is stupid so is being so ignorant as to think it is wiser to search everyone looking for potential terrorist in a wild pack of elderly Norwegians.
Once again; You labeling others as “racist”, based upon your experience (which is none) is no different that what Novstrup did. You are the same.
OldSarg, what is this experience with the Middle-Eastern school shooters. CNN reports, “A 2015 investigation found that since the 1999 Columbine High School massacre the “more than 40 people … charged with Columbine-style plots” were almost all white male teenagers, like the Columbine shooters Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold.” https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/28/opinions/raising-boys-violence-opinion-drexler/index.html
You may make a point about the ages, (or even genders) but why include the race? To me that introducing an inaccurate stereotype into the discussion – dog whistling.
ps Jesus was not white.
Sounds like OS interviewed for this piece-
On the other hand, if you have wide ranging discussions on myriad topics where neither of you has more command of facts/logic/rhetoric etc. and you never “win”, ie your friend never concedes his point, then we have to consider other issues tha the merits of the argument alone:
Your friend is insecure. Your friend is so afraid that that he is inadequate in the world that he must hang on tightly to his own viewpoint. Essentially defending his viewpoint is tantamount to defending is very self.
Your friend is not very smart. Your friend is truly incapable of abstract thought sufficient to see things from a different viewpoint than a heir own.
Your friend is arrogant. He is so used to being the smartest person (in his class, in his family) that he has created a mental habit of always believing he is right. Often these people will keep repeating their qualifications rather than talking to the points at hand.
Your friend has control issues. Your friend will never concede the point because it is essential for him to maintain control and superiority over you. (This is like the mother in law issue mentioned by a previous Quoran). Often these people will refuse to engage in any substantive discussion and just reiterate their position with no attempt at justification or logic.
os windbag: “professed atheist so you don’t believe in sin. What about morals? How are you about morals? Since we are on that track, since you don’t worry about God, sin or morals why do you care about someone being racist?…your political agenda!” sarge, where did you learn to think like this? pretty embarrassing really.
o we weren’t talking about school shootings. . .
Iowa you’re still around? I thought you’d still be eating dinner. Take a break and put your finger back in your nose.
o rightly brought up the school shooting as if you will recall was one of the topics brought up by Jim Kent’s article, which this post is supposed to be about.
Old Sarge just can’t himself, he says he hates bullies, but turns right around and bullies mike from iowa with an insult, “Take a break and put your finger back in your nose”.
OS continues to talk in circles and repeatedly contradicts himself as well as attempts to distract and deflect by introducing Cory’s atheism in the topic at hand, racism.
racism. . .Good one Roger. That’ll cause a red mark.
OldSarg, you absolutely brought schools into the discussion with your example of racial profiling: “I will try this one: If you see a “white man, in coveralls, with a mop in the school hallway” do you assume he may be a janitor? Of course! That would be no more than common sense. Now if you see a bunch of young men that appear to be middle eastern dressed in thawbs wandering around Aberdeen taking pictures of your public buildings and schools you may want to reconsider ignoring your “lack of racist bias”. . .”
Young, white, men are the ones bringing terror to our schools. My point is that you again tried to raise the specter of fear of the non-white, a fear based on inaccurate fear mongering to make your point. That is absolutely racist at its core. Even the underlying assumption that there is nothing to fear as long as a person’s skin is white is inaccurate and racist.
Where Roger just kicked you, OldStogie, you won’t see the mark without a mirror. Bwahahahahahahaha!
You’re really not very bright are you mike. . . It’s ok.