https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/michigan-lawmaker-racial-slur_us_5b75da49e4b05906b4119cb5
Thankfully, at least from what I'm reading, Chang did end up beating her at least.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Michigan Lawmaker Under Fire For Alleged Racial Slurs Against Asian Opponent
- Thread starter Falconbox
- Start date
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/michigan-lawmaker-racial-slur_us_5b75da49e4b05906b4119cb5
Thankfully, at least from what I'm reading, Chang did end up beating her at least.
Play stupid games; Win .... nothing. Seriously though. How hard is it to lose with grace and a plum? As opposed to stale ass, booty drippin, (hopefully) career ending, publicly spouted racism. What a lameass.
Tell me about it. Thankfully she lost.
Both of the candidates in this story are women
Gross.
Asian Americans are a growing demographic and gaining political and economic power. Racism agaisnt Asians is gonna start becoming more blatant
Asian Americans are a growing demographic and gaining political and economic power. Racism agaisnt Asians is gonna start becoming more blatant
ShortNasty wasn't telling you to read the article because they disagreed with the concept that people can run as a republican. Short told you to read the article because you misgendered the racist lady in this story.
Utah has a black lady Republican representative. I think she's the only one, but it's happened.
User Banned (2 Weeks): Casting aspersions on reported news based on racial bias. History of severe infractions.
Let me be that guy: here we have an article by an asian journalist reporting the claims of an asian association that a black woman running against an asian candidate "allegedly" used racist remarks against asian people.
I'll wait for some additional evidence before calling this person a "piece of shit".
I'll wait for some additional evidence before calling this person a "piece of shit".
Hey buddy, why is the fact that the journalist was asian an issue?
Chang (probably the family name "Zhang" in Mandarin) is common in both Taiwan and China. Lin or Tsai would be more common in Taiwan.
So she admitted it. That's evidence enough. What a world we live in.
It's not? I'm just pointing out it's clear and natural that the news would gain traction in the asian community (since they were the victims of the racism) which could justify some caution if they news remained at the "alleged" state.
We had a similar case here, where the indian community picked up news of a pakistani imam apparently making a very violent speech about pakistani-indian relationships in the local community. A fairly well known journalist of indian origin picked up the news and wrote a pretty strong piece on it, except in the end turns out the entire thing was a big misunderstanding that the right wing party exploited to cause strife.
All in all, if she admitted it, she deserves the vitriol. What could possibly lead a person who should know everything about discrimination to think this was a good idea?
People from China wouldn't spell it as Chang though (it would be Zhang) unless they were super early immigrants or something but then they still wouldn't be part of that recent Chinese immigration wave Scott is trying to insult.
Let me be this guy: this is a very ignorant, ridiculous and honestly pretty racist post.
I'm sorry if it comes off that way, but since you're the second person pointing it out, what's racist and ridicolous about it?
I was simply questioning the idea of taking alleged statements at face value during a political race. "Race" has nothing to do with it, and I'm curious as to why you think it does.
"Race" has nothing to do with it besides the fact that you explicitly brought up that the journalist was Asian like the canidate as if that has any barring on anything.
But "Race" has nothing to do with it... lol
I think to assume that the journalists reporting was inherently biased because she was asian, and to assume that because two groups out of NINETEEN calling her to apologize happen to be asian associations makes the claims suspect is being extremely unfair to the groups involved.
Yes, let's attempt to discredit reporting based on the race of the people reporting it.
Let's not, eh?
It was admitted by the person involved too, but this sort of attack is completely unwarranted and tinged with racism.
Ok, I see where the misunderstanding lies. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply the journalist is uncapable of being objective because she'd be biased. Just that since she's asian she probably have ties with the asian community and thus she's reporting what one side of the fence has to say. Race isn't the relevant thing here: it would be the same if the candidate allegedly had commented on mom'n'pop stores being tax evaders and the community had reacted to it.
It's not about race, it's about sources. As presented the news seemed to come from a single, omogeneous source of information, and thus I was being cautious. But she admitted doing it, so that's two pieces of evidence.
It's not about race, it's about sources. As presented the news seemed to come from a single, omogeneous source of information, and thus I was being cautious. But she admitted doing it, so that's two pieces of evidence.
Oh god, it's not that. It's not about them being asian, it's about alleged declarations apparently coming from a single source during a political race.
Seriously does my message read as "oh these people are all asians, and asians are notoriously unreliable"? Isn't that implying a bit much?
So basically Trump never says anything racist because he never admits it, right?
Yes it does.
You've implied that a journalist isn't to be trusted because they happen to be of the same ethnicity as someone who is part of the story.
That's 100% racial profiling at best and outright racism at worst and brings FUD into a discussion that doesn't require it.
Think about just what you're saying, honestly.
Ok, this is clearly bait, but would it be so absurd to give a democrat black woman some extra benefit of doubt compared to Trump?
You have implied all that. I'm simply stated that in a political race context, alleged news all came from a single source, so some caution could be warranted. It's not about racially profiling the journalist as unreliable or biased, but assuming that in a local election context she probably had ties to the community the news came from and got the news from the sole source.
It's about sources, not ethnicity. You're seeing something that isn't there.
So you give that 1 democrat black woman the benefit of doubt, but say you should be careful to believe the other 19 groups (only 2 of which consist mainly of asian-americans)?
Also maybe read the article in the OP. It even quotes the democratic party so it was clear that what was said is a fact...
I was guilty of the detestable habit of reading the thread title and not the full article. The "alleged" part had me do what I usually do when I read news about alleged statements, which is: check the number of sources.
The lady admitted doing it, so the discussion is moot. She's guilty, she deserves to be blasted for it. The discussion has now shifted apparently on whether I'm a racist or not, I guess.
So why did you mention the person's race 3 times in your post?
If race wasn't a factor, why didn't you say "this is only one source, is there corroboration?"
You brought race into it. And as stated, there's corroboration in the OP.
Would it be absurd to give Asians some extra benefit of doubt when they're the one suffering from the racist attacks?
