On December 4, 2006, six black students from Jena High School in Jena, Louisiana were charged for the beating of a white student. The event followed months of racially charged activities, the most notable of which was when three white students hung nooses from a tree at the high school. So when the “Jena-6″ were charged with attempted murder, protests began and spread throughout the country. It was argued that the charges were excessive and racially discriminatory. For some, the events in Jena have come to symbolize the continued racism that pervades the nation.
My questions for you, my students, are these: Do you think racism is as prevalent as it was a half century ago or even a generation ago? What are some possible solutions to the problem of race in America? Has there been improvement in race relations? If you can cite statistical evidence for your opinions, it would be very helpful.
October 25, 2007 at 11:39 am |
Yes, I believe racism is every bit as prevalent as ti was in the 40s or 60s, although the emotions surrounding this issue seem to have tempered a bit.
My statistics:
–while only 13% of the US population is African-American, they represent 20% of the US’ armed forces (www.nationalreview.com/buckley/buckley040803.asp)
–the following link: http://www.rasmusen.org/x/2005/11/29/percentages-of-blacks-and-whites-in-prison-by-state.html should bring up a graphic depicting the continental US and the diversity of prison population by state. Connecticut is relatively near the bottom, with only 5% of our black population behind bars. This isn’t 5% of the prison population, notice: it’s 5% of our total resident African-American population.
Our schools are segregated across town borders, and since most of the affluent and influential people live outside of those distressed towns, they do not acknowledge a problem. Money is poured into failing systems, to the same outcome that one would expect by pouring water into a leaking boat: it still sinks.
Unfortunately, I see Affirmative Action and similar programs as an endorsement of continued racist beliefs. I do not believe anyone should be granted aid merely because of the racial classification they fall into. Aid should be needs-based only. In the beginning of the racial equality movement, this was a necessary step to allow the African-American population some way to equalize themselves with the rest of the US. Its current stand, however, only reiterates the differences between “us” and “them”.
We see the same evidence of this thought with the current argument about immigration, and those here illegally. This is “our” country, and they don’t belong here. The last I knew, all of us were immigrants unless we can trace our heritage back to the Native Americans. When were we granted supreme ownership? Our vehemence to keep our country free of interlopers shows in stark relief our true feelings for those who are different. This is racism.
How to fix it? Maintain standards that apply to everyone. Brook no tolerance for hatred, racially motivated speech, actions, or policies (proactive or otherwise). Stop thinking in terms of separatism. Above all, cultivate an atmosphere of acceptance for talents, ideas, and abilities, over heritage, nationality, or ethnicity.
October 30, 2007 at 9:19 pm |
Over the course of my lifetime, I have witnessed what I believe is an astounding change in race relations. The residual prejudice I see is more related to socioeconomic standing than race per se. I just read the following editorial on this subject and very much agree with it:
Getting Beyond Race
November 1, 2007 at 2:18 pm |
Both Linda and Mary Ellen have made probing comments about the state of race relations in the United States. I do think that there have been great changes in the conditions of African Americans. For instance, the black middle class is both more affluent and more numerous than ever before. A record number of African Americans are going to college today. The income gap between whites and blacks is lessening.
On the other hand, many of the problems facing the black community today are urban problems generated by a vast array of complex issues. Inner-city poverty continues unabated, crime rates are increasing, and the extent to which law enforcement targets African Americans remains a problem. So too in the illegitimacy rate, which has hovered around 70 percent since the 1970s.
November 1, 2007 at 3:16 pm |
Why are trees subject to segregation? Because a black student sat until a tree used by white students, this all happen?
We are all of the same race. The Human Race and therefore should treat each other with the same respect and value as we treat ourselves.
Because not everyone believes we are of the same “race”, there is racism. Not nearly as bad as it was thirty years or more ago. I could cite all sorts of laws and regulations but that wouldn’t prove race or the minds of racist people had gotten better. It is a mind set. Until the minds of the racist is “cured” then there will still be racism.
People as a whole have gotten along better since the race riots of the 60’s.
November 2, 2007 at 12:56 pm |
I agree wholeheartedly with both Linda and Benji that people do get along better. But instead of growing one diverse community, the US has become a population of disparate communities–call them factions, for lack of a better term. There is not a brotherhood of Americans. There are whites, blacks, Latinos (sub-genred into Mexicans, Cubans, Puerto Ricans, etc…), along with more diverse pockets of Laotians, Haitians, and so on. We are all maintaining a “separate but equal” status with one another, as long as you’re here legally, of course. I do not see this separatist mentality as the end of racism, just an agreement to maintain it under civilized circumstances.
November 2, 2007 at 3:06 pm |
A couple of years ago, I recall watching a television news program (thinking 60 minutes) which featured a story about prosperous blacks choosing to live in affluent all-black neighborhoods. Some of the details have eroded from my memory, but I still recall an interview with a black woman who had tried living in a diverse upscale community for a while, but decided to move to an all-black one because it felt more comfortable to her. This was a woman who could live anywhere she pleased. This made me aware of the fact that segregation may be more complex than we think. Mind you, I’m not condoning it by any stretch of the imagination.
I tried locating a link to the program, but was unable to find it. If you can forgive the fact that the following article is 6 years old, I think it has some interesting info:
Minorities make choice to live with their own
November 2, 2007 at 3:28 pm |
I also recall reading this article on stereotypes, published a while back in “Scientific American.” It doesn’t pertain to race specifically, but more the tendency to make quick judgments about people based on appearance and demeanor. For some people who live more provincial lives, race might play heavily in these gut reactions. A book published last year called “Blink” deals with this same subject.
Speaking personally, some people scare me more than other people when I’m alone in an isolated dark parking lot. But race is less of a scare factor to me, in comparison to manner of dress, gender, facial expression, body posturing and speech. Gangsta dress and speak can absolutely make me feel threatened, regardless of race. I believe some of those alert reactions are vistages of a common a predator vs. prey evolutionary history we all share.
So, the instantaneous judgments and prejudices we all make, but rarely discuss, may be hardwired into us, and may be the hardest to eradicate. I think diverse interactions are the only way to make people cast away some of the fears of the “stranger.”
November 2, 2007 at 3:31 pm |
Oops…that last link didn’t work. Here it is again: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=00084214-52DA-123A-917983414B7F0000&sc=I100322
November 3, 2007 at 5:10 pm |
Here in Connecticut I will agree with Mary Ellen and the segragation of the school districts because of the towns you live in. Sheff vs. O’neill was suppose to turn that around. Unfortunatly I haven’t seen a lot of progress towards the fact.
November 4, 2007 at 12:56 pm |
Room E4: American Education on Trial by Susan Eaton was a great book that examined the issue of Sheff v. O’Neil. Ms. Eaton is a reporter from Massachusetts, pretty well informed about the case, and I think she honestly expected to come to Hartford and see us diligently working on the problem.
Instead, there’s the separatism mentality in play all over again. One of the answers to Sheff is to make sure the kids in Hartford have computers in school. They can’t read, they have no internet access at home to do research (some of them don’t have power 50% of the time), but they now have whiz-bang computer labs just like the kids in Avon!
My sarcasm masks my frustration, but I don’t have any answers, either. I truly believe we need a revolution in the organized educational system. We need to throw out district lines drawn by town, discard grade limits based on age, and instead institute fair population-drawn districts, and let kids mull things over until they get it. If this means a 10-year-old in Hartford is in 3rd grade and a 10-year-old in Berlin is in 6th, so what? They’ll be learning what they can handle. (And this last part really doesn’t address racism, sorry).
I think it was Frederick Douglass who first noticed that affluent blacks in the US were not mingling equally with whites, but rather starting their own successful black communities alongside the whites. He preferred this arrangement, as well. Linda raises a tremendous point when she talks about the snap judgments we make of people; this is based on evolution, instinctive assessments to help our survival. How do you combat instinct? Rationally I know I’m not going to get mugged by a group of different-looking guys in the courtyard at school. But in assessing them, their physical looks play a role in how comfortable I feel walking by them. I admit this is a form of racism.
November 5, 2007 at 3:01 pm |
Interesting points, Mary Ellen and BenjiMarie. And, I think your attention is focused in the right place. That being schools. Positive racial interaction at an early age can do the most good in ridding society of knee-jerk prejudice. But, here in Connecticut, many schools continue to be racially segregated, particularly in cities and rural areas. Other than the creation of a few magnet schools, Sheff vs. O’Neill has done very little to integrate Connecticut schools. I heard inter-district public school choice was part of the solution, but where is it?
And MaryEllen, I totally understand your frustration with the public school system as it exists. Forgive my digression here into the topic of education. I just can’t help myself! Providing each student with an opportunity to learn subjects to the point of mastery should be what education is all about, age segregation be damned. In my opinion, the No Child Left Behind act has hurt, more than helped the situation. There’s testing and more testing, but very little individualized instruction and provision of the optimal level of challenge to each and every student. The whole system is way too cookie-cutter to me. But, interestingly, I have heard that inner city schools have MORE latitude in offering special programs tailored to individual abilities and learning styles as compared to what is offered in the affluent suburbs. That seems to be particularly true at the elementary school level.
And with respect to your closing comment, I would say that your gut reaction to people you see out n’ about may or may not be ‘racist.’ When I was younger, I ignored my inner voice, warning me of danger, a couple of times. I did that because I felt guilty about judging a stranger based upon outward appearance. Well, both times, my ‘instincts’ were right, while my rational mind was not. So, I may feel some shame in trusting what my adrenaline reaction tells me, but I do it anyway. Again, I must say that my reactions have very little to do with race, and more to do with dress, speech, and demeanor.
Today, I’m going to spend some time reading about ‘Jena 6′, the spearhead for this discussion. It appears that ‘Jena 6′ had less to do with snap judgments based on race, and more to do with a pattern of incendiary behavior on the part of some white students intent on getting to some black students through highly symbolic gestures. Still, I don’t know enough about the case.
November 6, 2007 at 12:42 pm |
I think the question being raised the most with the Jena issue is, “Why were the white boys inciting the black ones?” If we, as outsiders to this community, read it as a race issue when it is not, then we are projecting racism into their society? Could be it was the wrestling team taunting the basket ball team. (Look, I can even read racism into that comment!) But if the group of white boys picked on the blacks simply because of their color, then nothing down there has changed in the last 150 years.
The bigger outcry was because of the charges brought against the black kids. They finally did a little “whoop-a**” on one of the white boys, who cleaned up, got a few stitches, and went off to a party that night. The police arrested the blacks in the fight and charged them with–attempted murder??? Hmm, that seems a little harsh for an after-school brawl, especially when the victim was dancing the night away later. In this same area of the country, a black kid can be dragged from the back of a truck, and the responsible parties are charged with assault. (No, I can’t find the statistics!)
So is it racism? Can we in New England judge it as so? Or is the same argument from pre-Civil War times still valid, that we can’t understand their culture because we don’t live there?
November 6, 2007 at 7:15 pm |
Um….I would say the same argument from pre-Civil War times was NEVER valid: I think Northerners back then, as well as now, can understand Southern culture even though they don’t live there. As my mama used to say: you don’t need to get run over by a truck to know that it’s a bad thing to happen to you. Plus, we share the same federal laws, so one would hope the same case law and interpretations would hold no matter where the crime was committed.
Re: Jena Six. I think the critical question in my mind was whether the three nooses hung from a tree were intended to be a threat of bodily harm, or something else, including as noxious as the idea may be, a symbolic gesture. Another key point has to do with whether the noose incident was the direct cause of the beating of the white guy three months later.
On the face of things, I do feel that the charges of attempted murder made against the black kids were excessive.
November 25, 2007 at 1:35 am |
http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/commentary/hc-commentaryperez1118.artnov18,0,721214.story?track=rss
I hope the above link works; I missed it in the paper, but picked it up from http://www.steveersinhaus.com in the rss feed. It’s better to read it online because you can also read the very revealing comments (up to 20 as of Saturday night) about what others think of Mayor Perez’ solution to desegregate Hartford schools.
November 28, 2007 at 1:18 pm |
Mary Ellen,
I retrieved your latest comment from the spam folder. I have no idea why it gets sent there.
DRF
November 28, 2007 at 10:31 pm |
Very interesting link, Mary Ellen. Thanks for posting it!
Hate to be a bit of a Cassandra here though, and say that I think the mayor is being a bit optimistic in his comments, but I *do* think that. In my experience, the larger the system, the more bureaucratic and insulated it is from the community it serves.
I am speaking as a citizen of a small town of approximately 6,000 people. We have two school systems: a town-governed K-6 system, and a regional 7-12 system which serves four towns. I have attended countless Board of Ed meetings at both, and find both of them entrenched and unresponsive to their communities. Any ‘innovations’ I see implemented in their systems tend to be the education-fad-of-the-month sort and always originate with the administrations. But, of the two systems, the regional one is much worse, kiddingly called the ‘fortress on the hill’ by most parents and involved citizens.
It seems to me that a 29 town-wide public school system would be a monster. Each individual family would appear insignificant to such a Goliath, I fear. I like the idea of racially integrated schools, but would not like to see larger systems bogged down with a stubborn bureaucracy. I homeschooled my kids in large measure to avoid the frustrations incurred by a rigid, unresponsive system. I would hate to see the next generation of families having to face an even larger, more impersonal giant.
November 28, 2007 at 10:49 pm |
Oh, just a bit of an aside…
I was watching the CBS national news on television last night. They did a segment on Obama’s bid for the presidency. They interviewed a young white guy with a strong southern drawl who said “I’m not prejudiced or anything, but I just can’t bring myself to vote for a colored person.”
I immediately thought of this discussion here, and said to myself “Yup, racism is still alive and well despite all the positive inroads made in race relations over the years.” Makes me wonder if racism will ever stop. What a shame.
November 28, 2007 at 11:43 pm |
Linda,
It is always sad to hear or see that level of ignorance among certain Americans. I suppose the difference between now and say 60 years ago is that that kind of thinking was enshrined into law, whereas in 2007 it is not. I hope Obama does well just so that we can get in some small sense past that color line that W.E.B. Dubois spoke about 100 years ago.
November 28, 2007 at 11:43 pm |
Linda,
It is always sad to hear or see that level of ingorance among certain Americans. I suppose the difference between now and say 60 years ago is that kind of thinking was enshrined into law, whereas in 2007 it is not. I hope Obama does well just so that we can get in some small sense past that color line that W.E.B. Dubois spoke about 100 years ago.
November 29, 2007 at 3:13 am |
I vaguely remember Shirley Chisholm’s run for the presidency in 1972. Some treated her efforts as a joke, saying the country wasn’t ready for either a woman or a black president at the time. Obama’s bid, to date, hasn’t been treated as an odd curiosity from what I have seen and I believe he’s a serious contender.
I did find something reported by CBS interesting, however. He may not be able to count on the ‘black vote’ because some do not perceive him as African-American. He was born of a Kansas white mother and a Kenyan father. Here’s an interesting article on the subject: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/02/us/politics/02obama.html?hp&ex=1170478800&en=258a5c83f02ad44e&ei=5094&partner=homepage
November 29, 2007 at 3:17 am |
Professor, I agree (I agree!), and thanks for finding my little post. I hope this one sees the inbox instead of the trash
Linda, I think I mentioned in class the racial bias my husband and I felt in South Carolina when we were there. On a different trip, we stayed with friends for 8 days, and when they went to church Sunday morning, I prepared myself to witness one of those, “Amen, Halleluiah” services where everyone gets up and sings. Despite it being a Baptist church, there was no dancing, and not a SINGLE black person in the place! My friends explained that they went to the “northern” Baptist church, while the coloreds–their word–went to the southern one. Code names for black and white? Bob Brown would know southern churches better than I do. These are well-educated people who associate well with a diverse population in our racing organization. Maybe it’s still so ingrained there that they don’t realize it? Hate to think it’s intentional.
Re Mayor Perez and his ideas for centralization, I agree with your argument that bigger is not necessarily better. I like that he’s thinking of something, though! I follow the Sheff case now and then, and this is the first anyone’s said in a long while. I can think of so many areas that would be against this, though, including the one I live in. I will also admit to you that if this was a done deal, I would consider pulling my son from public high school. We border New Britain, and Perez’ plan would also distribute those students into the larger community, as well as those from Avon and Simsbury. Mine went to parochial school (pre-K to 8), and while it’s not as diverse as I would like, it’s also small, less bureaucratic, and more accessible.
I’ve heard the same thing from Hartford teachers as one of the commenters to Perez’ letter said: rampant disrespect from the students, disregard from the parents. I really do think that spreading these kids out through the other towns would help them more than it would hurt suburbia–but how will it be reinforced? I think those who can commit to a higher standard should be allowed to jump the town lines for better schools. In this same parochial school there are many New Britain families who pay top dollar to send their kids to Mercy or Xavier. Berlin, Plainville, or Southington Highs would be such a nice alternative, but all are out of reach because of the way the education system is set up. (PS–all of these families are white. Are they racist?!) I’m planning on being part of this system soon, sigh.
November 29, 2007 at 5:13 am |
Sheff vs. O’Neill taught me many things, including this: meaningful change takes time. Note that Elizabeth Horton Sheff has been waiting since 1989 to see improvement. That’s 18 years. Certainly, her son Milo–now in his late twenties–has long since left the school system and moved on. I hope he has thrived and been well educated, despite injustices and inequities in the education system.
Who can blame parents for taking matters into their own hands? And not just black families, but all families?
Children have one shot at a basic education. Most parents are practical enough to see that, and may need to set ideals, such as desegregation, aside to insure their children get what they need academically before it’s too late. Of course, ’school choice’, particularly in the form of private school enrollment, isn’t possible for all since not everyone can afford the tuition. Maybe, providing easier interdistrict public school choice and private school vouchers to poor kids in failing inner city schools might help correct the inequities.
November 29, 2007 at 3:36 pm |
Oh, yes…and another thought. If part of the strategy to desegregate schools is to create attractive school choices, such as themed magnet schools and charter schools, why not locate those schools in safe suburbs? I was reading about how few whites avail themselves of these city magnet/charter school choices, and can’t help but wonder if some of their reticence is due to the location of the schools. I know that I avoid the irritation of city driving and finding a %&^&* parking space whenever I can.
One of my kids needs to be dropped off at Trinity College twice a week, and I can’t tell you how much I dread the hassle. If I had to do this five days a week, I would be one cranky mama!
November 29, 2007 at 7:00 pm |
MaryEllen….I’ve been thinking about your trip to South Carolina. Just wondering if you thought using the term ‘colored’ for African-Americans was racist. Back when I was a little kid growing up in Connecticut in the early sixties, this was considered a polite term. Of course, the politically correct term has morphed at least twice since then, and now I hear the term ‘people of color’ is acceptable. Not really all that different from ‘colored people,’ I think. Imagine learning these idioms as a beginner just learning English.
This reminds me of a college course I took years ago in rehab psychology. The instructor talked about the evolution of the proper nomenclature used to name a person who has a physical challenge which requires the use of a wheelchair to get around. In the 1960’s, calling such a person ‘crippled’ was perfectly acceptable. ‘Wheelchair bound’ was also in common use. But since then, the polite term for people using wheelchairs has changed several times. So we went from ‘crippled’, to ‘handicapped’, to ‘disabled’, to ‘differently abled’, or ‘physically challenged’, to ???
My point is that the language we use to describe people, as long as it doesn’t include all-out slurs and insults, is probably less important than how we actually treat people. Something about all these new coinages bothers me, so I tend to use terms with which I have become comfortable, knowing the term du jour is only temporary, anyway. In my case, a person with dark skin with some African heritage is ‘black’ and a person who needs a wheelchair to get around a lot is ‘disabled.’ In neither case, do I intend any slight. Could this also be the case with your friends from So. Carolina?
November 30, 2007 at 2:26 am |
Thanks for asking about this, Linda. In response to the evolution of nomenclature, my husband and I have a bad habit of calling our dogs “retarded”. Believe me, if you met my animals, you would totally understand why we say this! But then I try to cover my tracks by explaining to the kids that this is not something polite to say to a person… I did in fact think our friends were speaking from a racist perspective, because they didn’t say “colored people”. They said, “The coloreds”, as in the whole class of non-white residents. I was also raised with the term, “colored people”, whenever I can actually remember them being designated. My family traveled a lot when I was young (Air Force), so I think my upbringing was a lot more diverse than some who were raised in only one town. One of my father’s best friends in Ohio was black, and I never noticed a difference between they way he was treated and other base personnel (at least by my folks). I never heard the “N” word until we moved here, and our next-door neighbor used it. Frequently.
November 30, 2007 at 4:27 pm |
Hahahaha….well, Maryellen, I think our dogs might come from the same litter as yours because ours are cognitively challenged (term?), too. We call them ‘dumbo’ and ‘dumbalina’– also less than politically correct terms. Like you, we have needed to explain to the kids that such terms are never to be directed at people.
I’m thinking you are right about your being exposed to a more diverse population than I was as a kid. We didn’t travel much, and my experiences were largely shaped by my small world of neighborhood and school at that time. I grew up in a lower-class home in Bristol, and recall going shopping twice a year at G. Fox in downtown Hartford. One of my earliest memories was being utterly confused and shocked by all the black people waiting for the bus on one hot summer day on Main Street in Hartford. I think this was the first time I had ever seen someone of a different race.
When I was older, I had the good fortune of befriending the few black kids I met in my school. My experiences were very positive. I recall being invited over for a play date with one of my new friends when I was seven, or so. Her house was an uninsulated cabin with very few of the comforts I was accustomed to enjoying, and I wondered how they managed to stay warm in the winter. My memory is fuzzy on this point, but I think they moved shortly after this. Thinking back, the parents must have been migrant farm workers. This saddened me then, and now. They were a warm, loving family who deserved more economic stability in life. I hope they found it.
Later on, I met several really nice black kids in high school. One family was particularly ‘high profile’ in school, as the sons and daughters of a popular basketball coach there. They were all studious, athletic, attractive and college-bound. I wasn’t in the popular-kid circle back then, so I didn’t know them very well personally, but looking back, I wonder how they experienced being black in a predominantly white school. They certainly thrived there from all appearances, but these post-civil rights days were still tense.
Martin Luther King had been assassinated only the year before I started high school, and we saw images of black Panthers threatening revolution on the nightly news. The reverberations from Malcolm X’s revolutionary speeches and writings still rippled across the land. I still recall two athletes at the 1968 Olympics giving the black power salute. Charles Manson–the wild madman who slaughtered a dozen or so people in the late sixties–spoke of a plan called ‘helter skelter’ to create a race war.
So, my experience as a somewhat sheltered small town girl in the late 1960’s/early 1970’s was continually being challenged by the images I saw in newspapers and television. That was also true of the women’s movement. These were sort of like fillips to my drowsing consciousness at the time, and I’m guessing, all the rest of us trying to ignore everything around us and still pretending we were living in the ’50’s.
Fast forward several decades to now. I live in a small town in the Litchfield hills which is almost 100% white, and certainly even more isolated from ethnic diversity than Bristol was when I was growing up. We live here because we like trees, lakes and skiing. Our intent is NOT to seek out a place isolated from diverse populations, but that is the result. But, at least on the face of things, despite my kids limited experience with diversity, they seem color-blind to me. I’m happy about that, but wonder why we aren’t even further along in integrating our towns and cities.
November 30, 2007 at 7:29 pm |
Sorry to have waxed soooooo nostalgic there. Just wanted to address the use of the ‘N word.’ I’m often confused as to why this word is used so prevalently in hip-hop circles. Here’s an interesting link, apropos of this discussion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigga
December 1, 2007 at 12:12 am |
The first time I heard “ho” was from my niece, a reasonably nice girl, educated in one of those predominately white suburbs. She called her friend that, and looked ready to lock me up when I asked if it was a reference to the girl’s weight! I thought “Ho-ho’s”, like Ring Dings, Yoo Hoos, etc… and figured it was a nickname for eating too much junk food. Little did I know–! And thanks for all the first person references. Not only have I guesstimated your age (closer to my brothers than me), but realized that Connecticut was the same in 1975 as it was in 1955. You could have described my hometown (S…ton) to a T! We had an athletic black family in town, same as yours, 2 beautiful, smart daughters, 3 handsome, sports-hero boys, father a capable businessman, mother at home… We also had a scandal in the 80s because the realtors in town would gently steer any inquiring black families toward a certain section of town. And all the time I thought it was coincidence that the 3 (out of 600) black kids in my grade all happened to leave near each other.
Has the same thing been happening since the 80s? One reason I’ve heard for the density of minorities in cities is because of mass transit availability. Well, I would say I live in a small town, but I have city bus lines that run out to WestFarms, New Britain, and Meriden. But we don’t have a diverse population, because we’d also have to have reasonably priced housing. Here we have a very big attitude about that. In fact, a budget-style store came in a few years ago, and people actually wrote letters to the town paper complaining about the “type” of people it would draw to our fair town. I wonder what type they meant? They had the same argument about Wal-Mart.
December 3, 2007 at 1:28 am |
I love how the two of you have really gotten into this discussion. Kudos to both of you!