enquiring minds want to know

rusty

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 24, 2006
4,627
11
0
Under a mask.
If that is true, I guess thats what cheating the government and the rest of the tax payers via unemployment. I think you owe the rest of us a big thank you.

There you go again harping on the same old subject.I get a good laugh though everytime you bring this up.99.9% screw unemployment by working under the table while collecting benefits.

You call me out for collecting and then reporting my earnings when I was fortunate enough to have work while I was on unemployment. :facepalm: :mj07:

Keep em coming though there comical:mj07:
 

rusty

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 24, 2006
4,627
11
0
Under a mask.
This is a correct analogy. It's a perfect world list for white males, in respect to these issues. Otherwise, it's a problematic list in many situations, in fact most, for people of color. That is what is meant by white privilege - unearned benefits, merely due to the color of your skin. All are examples. I guess it makes you feel better that not all of these things happen all the time to all people of color.

Yes, things are better for people of color now, than when we showed up in this country. Things were pretty shitty for people of all non-white colors back then... but the list above shows how in some ways things haven't changed at all. The thing is, you don't have to worry about any of these things, as you are a white male - thus, it's not important to you. I understand, you don't have to care. We all have to care about what's right and justifiable in our world.

I'm not disagreeing that minorities are disadvantaged.I agree.My point is things have changed since the 60'sThey do have rights like me and you .A white man can be homeless if he doesn't care about anything.(for example)That's all I'm saying.

Isn't the individual responsible sometimes for his own successes and failures??I get the white privilege thing.It doesn't work for everybody though.Some people are born to fail,don't matter what race they are.Those same rules you posted might not pertain to them.Understand.
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
I'm not disagreeing that minorities are disadvantaged.I agree.My point is things have changed since the 60'sThey do have rights like me and you .A white man can be homeless if he doesn't care about anything.(for example)That's all I'm saying.

Isn't the individual responsible sometimes for his own successes and failures??I get the white privilege thing.It doesn't work for everybody though.Some people are born to fail,don't matter what race they are.Those same rules you posted might not pertain to them.Understand.

Ok, we agree minorities are disadvantaged. Things have changed in many ways for the better, we agree. They have rights like you and I do, but they experience racism unlike we do, purely because the color of their skin. White privilege does essentially work for every person born with white skin, in the ways posted above. There are other things that come into consideration, yes, like wealth and the lack of it. Not sure what you mean that some are born to fail - meaning some are not born with the same intelligence, physical appearance, etc., and will fail simply because of how they were born? Yes, ableism is a disabler, to be sure, and a lack of intelligence is tough for some to overcome - but those are not simple skin color - you have that in all races. No difference, really, other than maybe the wealth issue.

The one defining issue from birth for all, is skin color, that actually applies across race. Most everyone can work hard, yes, but not many can change the color of their skin. The individual is partially responsible for their successes and failures, yes. They are not responsible for their race, and in that there is a difference for most in how hard they have to work and what they have to overcome to "succeed."
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,484
160
63
Bowling Green Ky
Ok, we agree minorities are disadvantaged. Things have changed in many ways for the better, we agree. They have rights like you and I do, but they experience racism unlike we do, purely because the color of their skin. White privilege does essentially work for every person born with white skin, in the ways posted above. There are other things that come into consideration, yes, like wealth and the lack of it. Not sure what you mean that some are born to fail - meaning some are not born with the same intelligence, physical appearance, etc., and will fail simply because of how they were born? Yes, ableism is a disabler, to be sure, and a lack of intelligence is tough for some to overcome - but those are not simple skin color - you have that in all races. No difference, really, other than maybe the wealth issue.

The one defining issue from birth for all, is skin color, that actually applies across race. Most everyone can work hard, yes, but not many can change the color of their skin. The individual is partially responsible for their successes and failures, yes. They are not responsible for their race, and in that there is a difference for most in how hard they have to work and what they have to overcome to "succeed."

Have question concerning your theory Chad.

Why can one minority be at greater disadvatange than all others by having to learn language and get adapted to culture yet statistically excell in most catagories even over non minority whites.

Yet another can be here for generations and consistantly lag in all catagories.
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
Was wondering when you would bring up the model minority theme, Wayne. There are plenty of reasons for this, and not all of the conceptions of the comparison are true. For starters, the immigration differences between the two minorities are incredibly different - one was welcomed here with positive opportunities through immigration standards and economic promise - and a majority of those that came already were successful in their homeland and had financial wherewithal to compete. Many had degrees and were already in positions of financial success. And the media was quick to portray these prime examples of the minority who came here as the standard of the entire minority, which was not representative. The other race? Brought here as slaves, and continually repressed after they got here. Of course the model minority was rounded up and placed in internment camps when politically uncomfortable for the country, there is that, but in that case our government admitted our mistake and made restitutions to those it admitted to wronging.

Of course, there are statistical differences between asian groups, as you may know - for instance Japanese and Chinese, or Lao, or Hmong, etc.

Have read studies on the economic situation, showing where this minority primarily settled and live now, major high economic cost areas with higher average cost of living and rates of pay. Success is measured purely on average salary, with no mention of spending more on a higher cost of living, and not being better off overall. In this minority, there are more workers per family than in other races, which produce more income. Usually the reason for this is because Asian American workers in many cases don't make as much money, so they have to work. There is a huge disparity in income for this minority, highs and lows, and when things are looked at at base average, the numbers can appear skewed. Per capita averages place Chinese Americans making considerably less than the national average, for instance. And non Japanese/Chinese are even further down the financial totem pole, as you probably know. Maybe not.

There are positive examples, and many good reasons for this minority to be looked at as they are. Many of these reasons have been used to repress the other race throughout history, as well, especially by whites.
I had the same conception before I learned more about this. I know you are married to a great woman, and don't mean to cast aspersions, I think you know that.

That would be a few reasons I think the opinion exists, Wayne.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,484
160
63
Bowling Green Ky
Thanks Chad You are to be commended.
You have been very 1st to attempt to answer that question--aside from typical one liners.

I disagree on slave theory as don't see how anything happen several generations ago has anything to do with today and are not these same demographical pecking orders not mirrored in all countries? Can you give me example of just one country where it deviates?

I believe the diff to be cultures.
--and leading factor there to be family values.
It is unthinkable for asians not to take care of family--especially elders
--by contrast 80% of African Americans grow up without typical family atmosphere--which leads to numerous adversities children have to overcome in addition to the norms.
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
Thanks Chad You are to be commended.
You have been very 1st to attempt to answer that question--aside from typical one liners.

I disagree on slave theory as don't see how anything happen several generations ago has anything to do with today and are not these same demographical pecking orders not mirrored in all countries? Can you give me example of just one country where it deviates?

I believe the diff to be cultures.
--and leading factor there to be family values.
It is unthinkable for asians not to take care of family--especially elders
--by contrast 80% of African Americans grow up without typical family atmosphere--which leads to numerous adversities children have to overcome in addition to the norms.

Very much agree with your take on the latter comments, Wayne, and there is plenty of responsibility issues with the African American situation in underprivileged areas. By same token (so to speak), these areas are repressed by socio-economic issues that continue the circle of problems - funding, education deficiencies, quality of teachers, etc. Although I haven't studied family issues as much, my thinking is that Latino/a families are similar in taking care of families - seems they are very closely knit and stick together, often in large numbers.

As for the demographic pecking order, I was referring to the climate and immigration policy established to draw Asian Americans to this country, which produced a disproportionate amount of successful members of that group coming to this country. Big difference in how the African American group was established in this country, thought of, and subsequently considered for years - and still happens today, in ways like I discussed here.
 

Trench

Turn it up
Forum Member
Mar 8, 2008
3,974
18
0
Mad City, WI
This is a correct analogy. It's a perfect world list for white males, in respect to these issues. Otherwise, it's a problematic list in many situations, in fact most, for people of color. That is what is meant by white privilege - unearned benefits, merely due to the color of your skin. All are examples. I guess it makes you feel better that not all of these things happen all the time to all people of color.

Yes, things are better for people of color now, than when we showed up in this country. Things were pretty shitty for people of all non-white colors back then... but the list above shows how in some ways things haven't changed at all. The thing is, you don't have to worry about any of these things, as you are a white male - thus, it's not important to you. I understand, you don't have to care. We all have to care about what's right and justifiable in our world.
All very true Chad. Those who deny the existence of white privilege in this country deserve about as much attention as holocaust deniers: NONE. The list you posted bears witness to the continued existence of white privilege.

Just one example: NFL head coaching positions. Six black head coaches (out of 32) in a league where approx. 65% of the players are black and most head coaches are former players.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,484
160
63
Bowling Green Ky
Chad Here's interesting view--

Culture


What Hope?

  • John McWhorter
    picture-18522.jpg

    John McWhorter
    Contributing Editor
    <SCRIPT type=text/javascript>var addthis_config = { services_compact: 'facebook, twitter, digg, delicious, google, favorites, more', services_exclude: 'print,email,mailto' } </SCRIPT><SCRIPT type=text/javascript src="http://s7.addthis.com/js/250/addthis_widget.js?pub=tnrp2tech"></SCRIPT>

Race, Wrongs, and Remedies: Group Justice in the 21st Century

by Amy Wax

Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 190 pp., $36.75
This book is depressing because it is so persuasive. There is a school of thought in America which argues that the government must be the main force that provides help to the black community. This shibboleth is predicated upon another one: that such government efforts will make a serious difference in disparities between blacks and whites. Amy Wax not only argues that such efforts have failed, she also suggests that such efforts cannot bring equality, and therefore must be abandoned. Wax identifies the illusion that mars American thinking on this subject as the myth of reverse causation?that if racism was the cause of a problem, then eliminating racism will solve it. If only this were true. But it isn?t true: racism can set in motion cultural patterns that take on a life of their own.
Wax appeals to a parable in which a pedestrian is run over by a truck and must learn to walk again. The truck driver pays the pedestrian?s medical bills, but the only way the pedestrian will walk again is through his own efforts. The pedestrian may insist that the driver do more, that justice has not occurred until the driver has himself made the pedestrian learn to walk again. But the sad fact is that justice, under this analysis, is impossible. The legal theory about remedies, Wax points out, grapples with this inconvenience?and the history of the descendants of African slaves, no matter how horrific, cannot upend its implacable logic. As she puts it, ?That blacks did not, in an important sense, cause their current predicament does not preclude charging them with alleviating it if nothing else will work.?
Wax is well aware that past discrimination created black-white disparities in education, wealth, and employment. Still, she argues that discrimination today is no longer the ?brick wall? obstacle it once was, and that the main problems for poor and working-class blacks today are cultural ones that they alone can fix. Not that they alone should fix?Wax is making no moral argument?but that they alone can fix.
A typical take on race has no room for stories such as this one. In 1987, a rich philanthropist in Philadelphia ?adopted? 112 inner-city sixth-graders, most of them from broken homes. He guaranteed them a fully-funded education through college if the kids would refrain from drugs, unwed parenthood, and crime. He even provided tutors, workshops, after-school programs, summer programs, and counselors when trouble arose. Forty-five of the kids never made it through high school. Thirteen years later, of the sixty-seven boys, nineteen were felons; the forty-five girls had sixty-three total children, and more than half had their babies before the age of eighteen. Crucially, this was not surprising: The reason was culture. These children had been nurtured in communities with different norms than those that reign in Scarsdale.
What this means, Wax points out, is that scrupulous recountings of the historical reasons for black problems are of no significant use in finding solutions. She notes:
The black family was far more stable 50 years ago, when conditions for blacks were far worse than they are today. Black out-of-wedlock births started to climb and marriage rates to fall around 1960, long after slavery was abolished and just as the civil rights movement gained momentum. Perhaps a more nuanced explanation for the recent deterioration is that the legacy of slavery made the black family more vulnerable to the cultural subversions of the 1960s. But what does this tell us that is useful today? The answer is: nothing.
One of the most sobering observations made by Wax comes in the form of a disarmingly simple calculus presented first by Isabel Sawhill and Christopher Jencks. If you finish high school and keep a job without having children before marriage, you will almost certainly not be poor. Period. I have repeatedly felt the air go out of the room upon putting this to black audiences. No one of any political stripe can deny it. It is human truth on view. In 2004, the poverty rate among blacks who followed that formula was less than 6 percent, as opposed to the overall rate of 24.7 percent. Even after hearing the earnest musings about employers who are less interested in people with names like Tomika, no one can gainsay the simple truth of that advice. Crucially, neither bigotry nor even structural racism can explain why an individual does not live up to it.
There are those who would beg to differ, but Wax is especially good at showing the flaws in their arguments. The Implicit Association Test (which tests split-second mental associations) does show that people subtly associate black people with negative adjectives?but also that people with those biases do not necessarily act on them and sometimes even favor blacks in their actions. Moreover, a study by Kathryn Edin and Maria Kefalas showed that poor women (many of them black) decided not to marry their children?s fathers not because the men didn?t have jobs, but because of their undependable behavior.
The weakness?and sadness?of this fine book is that it has no prescription. Wax makes a series of arguments?stop focusing on the past, think about culture rather than structure, criticize failure and emulate success?but she does not tell us how to accomplish these goals. The task is certainly huge. The focus on culture that Wax champions would be one in which a black family would be deeply ashamed of the man with two ?baby mamas? who works only ?odd jobs? and largely gets by selling drugs. But the implacable present-day fact is that in his actually existing community today that man is considered less than ideal but still quite normal. He is loved and accepted, not least as a consequence of the latent meme that only so much can be expected of black people because of the oppressiveness of The System. Hence as Wax notes, Tavis Smiley could produce a whole volume called The Covenant With Black America, urging blacks to ?hold leaders to account? and include a mere two lines about out-of-wedlock child-rearing. The black radical is considered, even if ?a little crazy,? as ?having something to say.? Many black church audiences are now eager to get an earful of Jeremiah Wright.
Wax stipulates that the government should do all that it can to ensure equal opportunity, which includes providing decent education and enforcing civil rights laws. I would say that there is somewhat more that the government can do, given the historical circumstances. Programs to ease ex-cons back into society could do infinitely more for black inner-cities than suing car companies over small differences in loan deals. Those who think that Obama has no ?black agenda? are unaware of how many black people attend the community colleges to which he has given extra (if insufficient) funding.
Still, at the end of day, as Wax puts it:
The government cannot make people watch less television, talk to their children, or read more books. It cannot ordain domestic order, harmony, tranquility, stability, or other conditions conducive to academic success and the development of sound character. Nor can it determine how families structure their interactions and routines or how family resources?including time and money?are expended. Large-scale programs are especially ineffective in changing attitudes and values toward learning, work, and marriage.
It would have been rather callous if anyone wrote this a few years past the Great Society heyday, when little could be known as to whether a New New Deal was going to turn black America upside down. But now these truths must be stated.
The typical way of having one?s cake and eating it too here is to say that we need to think about both government help and self-help. But in practice this too often becomes a handy way to focus on the comforts of underdoggism while genuflecting to the obvious but undramatic logic of self-direction. Wax usefully asks: ?Is it possible to pursue an arduous program of self-improvement while simultaneously thinking of oneself as a victim of grievous mistreatment and of one?s shortcomings as a product of external forces?? To the extent that our ideology on race is more about studied radicalism than about a healthy brand of what Wax calls an internal locus of control, her book provokes, at least in this reader, a certain hopelessness. If she is right, then the bulk of today?s discussion of black America is performance art. Tragically, and for the most part, she is right.
John McWhorter is the author of Our Magnificant Bastard Tongue: The Untold History of English and teaches at Columbia University.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,484
160
63
Bowling Green Ky
---and saving the best for last--one for the archives to bring back ever time the T brothers and Muffins and libs in general whine about why they need all these entitlements and higher taxes on the productive to support them-

BY Thomas Sowell

<TABLE border=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top noWrap align=middle>
Thomas Sowell

Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow
The Hoover Institution
Stanford University
Stanford, California 94305

tom_4b.jpg

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>​

One of the biggest fallacies of our time is the notion that, if all groups are not proportionally represented in institutions, professions or income levels, that shows something wrong with society. The very possibility that people make their own choices, and that those choices have consequences-- for themselves and for others-- is ignored. Society is the universal scapegoat.
 

Trench

Turn it up
Forum Member
Mar 8, 2008
3,974
18
0
Mad City, WI
---and saving the best for last--one for the archives to bring back ever time the T brothers and Muffins and libs in general whine about why they need all these entitlements and higher taxes on the productive to support them-
You can answer the question Chad asked Rusty... Do you deny the existence of white privilege in this country?

or... you can keep doin' the ol' Neocon Shuffle... :0064

:0corn
 

rusty

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 24, 2006
4,627
11
0
Under a mask.
You can answer the question Chad asked Rusty... Do you deny the existence of white privilege in this country?

or... you can keep doin' the ol' Neocon Shuffle... :0064

:0corn

Have a question.If a white privileged kid has a better school system to attend then a minority ,but doesn't apply himself and fails is his only advantage at attending the better school?

I guess what I'm asking is ok we have better facilities better opportunities etc. but if we don't apply ourselves what does it matter.We might just end up on the same playing field.

One might of gotten there different, but both might end up the same.Does this make sense?
So the privilege would be the opportunity ,not the success.
 

Trench

Turn it up
Forum Member
Mar 8, 2008
3,974
18
0
Mad City, WI
Have a question.If a white privileged kid has a better school system to attend then a minority ,but doesn't apply himself and fails is his only advantage at attending the better school?

I guess what I'm asking is ok we have better facilities better opportunities etc. but if we don't apply ourselves what does it matter.We might just end up on the same playing field.

One might of gotten there different, but both might end up the same.Does this make sense?
So the privilege would be the opportunity ,not the success.
Sorry Rusty... I have no idea what you're trying to say here.
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,497
260
83
Victory Lane
Have a question.If a white privileged kid has a better school system to attend then a minority ,but doesn't apply himself and fails is his only advantage at attending the better school?

I guess what I'm asking is ok we have better facilities better opportunities etc. but if we don't apply ourselves what does it matter.We might just end up on the same playing field.

One might of gotten there different, but both might end up the same.Does this make sense?
So the privilege would be the opportunity ,not the success.

..........................................................

To keep it simple for you Rusty

If you are white ...... all right

If you are brown...... stick around

If you are black ........ get back


Believe me its relevent
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
Have a question.If a white privileged kid has a better school system to attend then a minority ,but doesn't apply himself and fails is his only advantage at attending the better school?

I guess what I'm asking is ok we have better facilities better opportunities etc. but if we don't apply ourselves what does it matter.We might just end up on the same playing field.

One might of gotten there different, but both might end up the same.Does this make sense?
So the privilege would be the opportunity ,not the success.

If a white privileged kid has a better school system to attend thAn a minority, then the white kid has privilege, and has a better opportunity because of the advantage. If the kid does not take advantage of it, that's his choice or shortcoming. If he doesn't apply himself, and ends up on the same playing field as a disadvantaged minority, then the privileged kid has wasted his advantage. The thing is, HAVING the privilege is a motivator in itself, NOT having it is a demotivator, and that makes the situation even more unequal.

I agree with your point, that the privilege is the opportunity, and it's an advantage - that the other kids do not have. Therefore, the unprivileged have to work harder for the same results. So the original playing field is not the same, if the final playing field is, good for the minority, bad for the white kid.

HAVING the advantage IS the point. What you do with it when you HAVE it is all on you. It doesn't change the advantage, or make it equal - at all. And that is the difference.

To use your word: Understand? :shrug:
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,484
160
63
Bowling Green Ky
You can answer the question Chad asked Rusty... Do you deny the existence of white privilege in this country?

or... you can keep doin' the ol' Neocon Shuffle... :0064

:0corn

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/weird/Obama-Effigy-Replaced-by-Hillary-and-Bush-100525504.html

Is this white priviledge your talking about :)
Obama Effigy Replaced by Hillary and Bush



Updated 10:34 AM EDT, Thu, Aug 12, 2010
081110ObamaBoardwalk01.jpg


Hmm they won't even let pic up :)
you'll have to use link
http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/...100525504.html

<!--endclickprintinclude--><SCRIPT language=javascript1.2>var trkcid=100525504;var partnerID=397274; var _hb=1;</SCRIPT><SCRIPT language=javascript1.2 src="http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/g/g/button/button_1.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT language=JavaScript> window.onerror=function(){clickURL=document.location.href;return true;} if(!self.clickURL) clickURL=parent.location.href; </SCRIPT>
<!-- // nbc_print_icon \\ --><!-- \\ nbc_print_icon // --><!-- // nbc_share_icon \\ --><SCRIPT language=javascript type=text/javascript src="http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/includes/position.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT type=text/javascript> function position(o) { var pos = Position.get(o); Position.set('share_box',pos); }</SCRIPT><!-- // start nbc_share_icon \\ --><!-- \\ end nbc_share_icon // --><!-- \\ nbc_share_icon // --><!-- // nbc_yahoo_buzz_icon \\ --><SCRIPT type=text/javascript>yahooBuzzArticleHeadline = "Obama Effigy Replaced by Hillary and Bush";</SCRIPT><SCRIPT type=text/javascript src="http://d.yimg.com/ds/badge2.js" ____yb="1" badgetype="text">nbc_philadelp610:http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/weird/Obama-Effigy-Replaced-by-Hillary-and-Bush-100525504.html</SCRIPT><!-- \\ nbc_yahoo_buzz_icon // --><!-- // nbc_twitter_button \\ --><!-- \\ nbc_twitter_button // --><!-- // nbc_digg_button \\ --><SCRIPT type=text/javascript> (function() { var s = document.createElement('SCRIPT'); var s1 = document.getElementsByTagName('SCRIPT')[0]; s.type = 'text/javascript'; s.src = 'http://widgets.digg.com/buttons.js'; s1.parentNode.insertBefore(s, s1); })();</SCRIPT><!-- \\ nbc_digg_button // --><!-- // nbc_post_fb_icon \\ --><STYLE type=text/css>.postToFBArticlePage {background:transparent url(http://media.nbclocalmedia.com/designimages/facebook.gif) no-repeat scroll 0 0;display:block;float:left;height:14px;padding-right:5px;width:70px;text-align:right;}.postToFBArticlePage span {padding-top:0px;margin-top:3px;display:block;}#slideshow .yahoo_buzz .postToTwitterArticlePage span, #slideshow .yahoo_buzz .postToFBArticlePage span { margin-top: 0px; }#slideshow .yahoo_buzz .postToTwitterArticlePage a, #slideshow .yahoo_buzz .postToTwitterArticlePage a:link, #slideshow .yahoo_buzz .postToTwitterArticlePage a:visited, #slideshow .yahoo_buzz .postToFBArticlePage a, #slideshow .yahoo_buzz .postToFBArticlePage a:link, #slideshow .yahoo_buzz .postToFBArticlePage a:visited { color:#C3C7C7;}.facebookRecommend {color:#777777;display:block;float:left;font-family:georgia;font-size:10px;font-weight:bold;height:22px;line-height:10px;padding:0 0 0 5px;text-transform:capitalize;vertical-align:top;width:120px;}.imwarelist { width:438px;}</STYLE><SCRIPT> // also publish comment to Facebook nbc.fbparamshare = { contentTitle: "Obama Effigy Replaced by Hillary and Bush", contentUrl: "http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/weird/Obama-Effigy-Replaced-by-Hillary-and-Bush-100525504.html?__source=Facebook", contentThumbUrl: "http://media.nbcphiladelphia.com/images/100*75/081110ObamaBoardwalk01.jpg", bundleId: "104938618682", contentType: "article", summary: "The boardwalk game's creator came up with this creative solution.", moodStatus: "Hillary & Bush effigies replace Prez" }; </SCRIPT>
<!-- \\ IMAGE OVERLAY // -->
Operators of a Jersey Shore boardwalk game have removed a mannequin representing President Barack Obama.
It has been replaced by effigies of former President George W. Bush and Hillary Clinton.

"It?s just to show we?re not anti-Democrat or anti-Republican," Tommy Whalen told The Star-Ledger. He's the manager of Lucky Leo?s where the "Walkin Charlie" game debuted this summer.

The game requires patrons to throw baseballs at plates held by the rotating caricatures.

A plastic bag -- pink -- was placed over the Obama character's head after some people earlier this week said it was disrespectful to use the president's likeness.

Whalen says a Secret Service agent visited the Seaside Heights concession on Wednesday and told him none of his employees had urged patrons to throw at or hurt Obama.

The Obama figure might not be packed away for good.
"Maybe we'll put it back up in a couple weeks after everything dies down," Whalen said.
 
Last edited:
Bet on MyBookie
Top