Townhall meetings, healthcare, Rosa, and Hitler..who would have thunk it

So I have been watching, reading, listening to pretty much everything I can about the goings on in the US of A as of late regarding the town hall meetings and Health Care Reform. To recap, a Black woman attending this meeting was sitting in her chair with a rolled poster sitting on a chair in front of her. A reporter approached her inquiring as to the contents of the poster. Turns out it was a picture of Rosa Parks. A White gentleman ( and I use that term to be polite)...to hell with it, this asshole, gets up, walks over to the Black lady, destroys the poster and sets back down. As the police or glorified security roughly escorted the lady from the premises, the audience had the audacity to cheer them on. For those of you who may have watched this incident on any channel OTHER than CNN, what you saw was a vocal, agitated Black woman being escorted out of the hall. you did not get the whole story. What you did not see is the footage of the police confronting a White male, female, and child holding signs, then laughing and walking away...as the signs stayed. What you did not see were the posters being held by White folk showing Obama as Hitler. What you did not see was the White folks holding signs calling Obama the "n" word. No, what you saw was the Black lady being escorted out after SHE was assulted by the White male. And for what? Having a poster with Rosa Parks rolled up on a chair in front of her...how dare she!
So what does this tell us? White privilege exists...of course. Why did the police treat a Balck lady..who was assulted remember, as a criminal and escort her...no forcibly remove her from the premisis, and at the same time, say nothing to the asshole who assultes her..or nothing to the assholes holding signs using the "n" word or the Hitler posters? So what else does it tell us? People, no those who fear they have something to lose with the Healthcare Reform (the haves vs the have nots) are not impressed with the idea of giving a little to help those in need. After all, is it not many of the haves that have been helping themselves to what little the have nots have for years? People no, the privileged, have an issue helping those who need help (taking from themselves to help others. No, because as I recall there was a special on ABC back in February where Diane Swayer went to visit the poor of Appalachia (everyone interviews was White) and low and behold, the day after the special aired, offers of money, scholarship, and all came pouring in for the poor White folk. So what does this prove? The haves do not mind helping out the have nots...as long as the have nots look the same.
By looking closely at what is happening and what is being said during this volitile time in the US, it is so easy to see that race is not just playing a part in the current atmosphere of heathcare reform, it is playing first, second, third, catcher, pitcher, outfield...and umpiring. This is so obvious, someone as dense as Rush Limbaugh should even be able to get it...but oh yeah, I forgot, now that there is a Black President, racism is over...WHATEVER

The meanings of Privileged language

I will be quick and to the point. I am very curious about the language not only society chooses to use but that of the media. I can remember seeing many protests or picket lines around Nova Scotia over the years. As a matter of fact, from what I recall, quite a number of them have been public civil servants (you know, the whole" I pay your salary" jobs..trust me, I can not stand this saying either). Now the issue I have here is the language used to describe these picket lines...just that PICKET LINE, or even more rebellious, how about protest ( a little more powerful sounding that demonstration). How many of us have heard of these picket lines not letting anyone through? no vehicles, no bodies. How many of us have heard of folks getting a bit, shall we say, roughed up by these lines? How many of us have heard the tongue lashings these folks throw out on these picket lines. So my question is, why do we chose such soft language to describe these lines, but when the Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation near Nelson House, Manitoba, forms a picket line, WHICH, keep in mind is blocking vehicles only and letting people through, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, aka the CBC, runs the headline "Natives blockade norther Manitoba dam project"?? BLOCKADE?? That sounds more like a demonstration to me.
By the way, if you are wondering what exactly are they demonstrating against, no, it is not that it is sacred ground. No, it is not over land that was stolen. It is over promised jobs. Now, for those of you who say they are protesting over jobs that were promised to Natives...WRONG..they are protesting over jobs that were promised to LOCALS, it just so happens that locals in this situation happen to be from a First Nations community. Just the same as if the dam was being built in Guysborough (or fill in the blank with any small town Canada or US name) and most of the jobs were promised to said town. Now, if said town were upset and decided to demonstrate against what was promised, I am damn sure the CBC would not use the word "blockade" in the headline...CBC...smarten up, or is that too much to ask, after all, I pay your salary