Posted by blackwater (anonymous) on July 22, 2009 at 10:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm glad to see that this type of systematic racial discrimination won't be tolerated. The Justice Department needs to make an example out of these biggots. Equal opportunity isn't an act of kindness, its THE LAW.

Posted by penandpaper1 (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 12:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I am glad to see some one had the good sense to follow up with those complaints. Enough time has pasted for people to adjust and and stop these acts of discrimination. Their ignorance has forced this situation.

Posted by blackwater (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 6:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Glad to find some commonground with you American_Nimrod. I was out of the area in 1998 during my military service. I wasn't aware that this happened wiht the BOE. I did hear about a proposed massive KKK rally in Clanton in 1998 that didn't happen. I heard they were pretty miffed that there wasn't a big turnout.

Posted by juswannabeheard (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 7:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Racial discrimination is the snake in our garden of life. The more we try to chop its head off the more it slithers away. Not many people are willing to tackle racism head on. I recommend all of you watch the documentary that Morgan Freeman did on the segregated prom in Mississippi. I saw it yesterday. Very enlightening.

As for these idiots at Rolling Oaks... Ignorance isn't so blissful for them

Posted by REK1138 (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 7:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm shocked, completely, utterly shocked.

The Clanton Advertiser...investigative reporting...shocking.

Posted by Care4GodsEarth (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 7:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)

This story is very good, and it's very important for folks to know that Clanton is a good place to live, and that Clanton won't stand for any racist nonsense.

Posted by kittycreek (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 8:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Thank you, for this story, Clanton Advertiser. I can't believe those people at Rolling Oaks are that ignorant. Of course, prejudice and ignorance go hand in hand.

Posted by southernpride (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 10:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)

While I agree people need housing. I just don't like having anyone crammed down my throat. I have a black friend that rents mobile homes. He only rents to Mexicans. He says they are the only ones that will pay rent and not cause trouble. I don't think he is rascist but practical.

However, I would rent to whomever had a credit report and a positive report from their last landlord. As I say, I just don't want anyone or any belief rammed down my throat.

Posted by jewelry4u35045 (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 10:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Have to's (Law) are always one sided,and by whos standards are they going by. business is business unless its controled by the government then its socialism. We all need to do what is right. Our whole world is not going by this and we all are caught in a trap now. Who will be the first to step up and just love your neighbor?

Posted by chiltontransplant (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 10:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Just playing a little devil's advocate here with all of you white freedom riders........How many of you have or would, if in the market for another home, search out the available properties in the predominantly black section of West End?

Be careful lest you choke on your own hypocrisy.

Posted by southernpride (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 11:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Transplant is right. Whites don't seek out black churches to attend and blacks do not seek out white churches.

Posted by kittycreek (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 11:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Chiltontransplant,

That is the most rediculous thing I've ever heard. I might seek a property in a the predominatly black section of West End if I spotted my dream house there - but, I don't think that's gonna happen in that particular area. But If it did happen, well...some black folks are getting this honky for a new neighbor!

Posted by getbizi (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 12:13 p.m.

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Posted by kittycreek (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 12:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

getbizi,

Were any of the other neighbors getting ripped off or were you getting singled out?

Posted by kittycreek (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 1:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Ooops,

Where'd they go??

HEY- I was trying to respond to a post here, and it went away.....what a bummer!

Posted by getbizi (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 1:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I figured a truthful post would be removed. Kitty, according to the sheriffs dept. in Dallas county it was pretty common on my street. I do, however, feel like I was an easy target. Nobody would "snitch" to help out the "whitey".

Posted by kittycreek (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 1:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Reverse discrimination is just as bad.

Prejudice and ignorance isn't just the white man's burden.

Posted by justme (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 1:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

THIS STORY SHOULD BE ON THE WORLD NEWS.PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW HOW PEOPLE ARE TREATED AROUND HERE.ITS NOT JUST RACISM AGAINST BLACKS .THERE ARE JUST AS MANY RACIST BLACKS AND HISPANICS ,BECAUSE THE WAY EVERYBODY IS SEPERATED AROUND HERE.THATS THE WAY BIGGOTS WHAT IT .THEREFORE OPPISITE RACES WILL NEVER UNDERSTAND EACH OTHER.

Posted by getbizi (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 1:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

My comment being removed is exactly why we can never have an HONEST debate about racism and discrimination. Black on white crime is something we dont like to discuss.

Posted by justme (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 1:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

THIS COUNTY HAS ALWAYS BEEN A HUNDRED YEARS BEHIND . IT WILL ALWAYS BE THAT WAY ,UNTIL WE GET THE GOOD OL BOYS OUT OF OFFICE.

Posted by sapuser (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 2:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

AMEN To That... I say lets VOTE and get all those Good ol' Boys out of office and make something out of this County!!!

Posted by chiltontransplant (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 3:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

So who are the good ole boys and what do they have to do with race relations? I mean it sounds good to say, "let's vote and get all those Good ol' boys out of office," but who are they and what are they doing to disrupt race relations? Just curious, being an outsider.

Posted by justme (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 3:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I hope the black citizens of Chilton County realizes that a large number of white people are not racist . People are not born racist they are taught that way .It goes both ways there is good and bad people in EVERY race.So please do not stereotype a whole race of people,that will make you a racist pig yourself!

Posted by lmfriley (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 3:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)

With this story people need to look at the whole picture. Let me be the first to say it was wrong IF some people were turned away just because of the color of skin. Do we really know if it was because of skin color or of some other reason, like maybe a credit problem. I have heard more black people say something about racial discrimination than white people. If a so called white person says something then we get fused at and say we are a racist. I remember in high school, my senior year, of hearing about all the special scholarships for "black" people but never hearing about "white " people scholarships. I have many friends of all colors and ALL have a right to be here. I would rather win or earn something based on studying and or working hard. One person said we are one-hundred years behind. I don't think that is true. Some people just keep bring up the past.

Posted by justme (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 3:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The same Good ol boys that has kept this county in poverty for years. They do not want change . Thats why people cant get along they want to keep people poor here, that way they can control everything that goes on .And U know who Im talking about,They are the ones you probably voted for.

Posted by TheDude (Michael Wells) on July 23, 2009 at 4:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Cain't we all just get along? ...

Posted by chiltontransplant (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 5:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Brilliant justme.....Brilliant!! The county is in poverty and the good ole boys are everyone I voted for. And you think the politicians are the problem in Chilton County???

Posted by cleckll1 (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 6:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I'M NOT A RACIST BUT.... I LIVE IN A DIFFERENT CITY AND IN A MOBILE HOME PARK. BLACKS MOVED IN AND CRACK WAS EVERY WHERE. POLICE EVERY DAY AND NIGHT. NOW THERE GONE AND MEXICANS MOVED IN AND EVERY THING IS CALM. BUT IT'S WRONG TO DISCRIMANATE? GO FIGURE

Posted by mrjones0913 (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 7:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This is a VERY sticky situation. First off I would like to defend Rolling Oaks. I looked to get an apartment there before and they stated not that would lead to discrimination. Next we do not know what was said because often times once it gets past the cats mouth, it becomes a big tall lie. I am not racist, I do have many colored friends, but Chilton County has done this to themselves. We have Agees for black and Martins for whites. So lets sue them..... You know no matter who we sue, the problems are still in front of our eyes. Black people have the rep of drugs and guns. Mexxicans live inpacks of 20 but pay there bills and whites well you got the trashy white who dont give a dang and the whites that think their crap dont stink. NO MATTER WHAT the problem will not go away until we all grow up and forget that our skin color is different. I also do not believe that we should name the names of accused individuals. After all we do not name those accused of child abuse and molesting. Innocent until PROVEN guilty is still a right our country is built upon.

Posted by justme (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 7:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I agree, I lived at Rolling Oaks before.The same manager was there and Blacks ,Hispanics,Czechs,and people from Pakistan lived there . I noticed as long as you paid your bills you stayed.I really do not think these guys are guilty just yet.

Posted by justme (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 8:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Is this Debbie Rowe ?Sounds like someone is looking for a "settlement". A single mother of fifteen children with no job looking to rent with no money for rent. So she is hollering racisim for free money. So what, she didn't get in the smurf apartment anyway right?

Posted by mrjones0913 (anonymous) on July 23, 2009 at 11:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

justme, I must agree. People these days will do anything for a dollar even if it means ruining others credibility. BTW did you all know that the owner of the aprtments is a minority himself. Now isn't that a laugh.....

Posted by TheDude (Michael Wells) on July 24, 2009 at 7:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

SNORE! ... record stuck ... minimal grammatical databases resulting in repetitious rantings.

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 24, 2009 at 5:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I was mainly compelled to post on this topic due to the previous AN2 post. I would like to start by saying that I believe, aggregately, you have made some solid points in various discussions on this site. And, I can certainly relate to being passionate about beliefs, despite finding yourself in direct opposition with the majority. That being said, you do a fair amount to discredit yourself in this process, taking away from the validity of an otherwise strong argument. Before I start, please know that if I did not think you had some good points to make, I would not have made it this far into the post.

I guess it would be best to illustrate what I am saying by breaking down the paragraph you posted.

“Well, I agree. Clanton is segregated big time. But let me tweek it a little bit. Its not only about blacks. Its also the disabled. Since the Americans with Disabilities Act took affect in 1990, most of the workforce in Chilton County are [subject-verb agreement] non-disabled. What do they do? They get the most crooked lawyers to overrule the Act. As Johnny Paycheck sang the famous old song and I direct it to the hypocritcal owners of the businesses and county and city workers. You know the song and bear it and keep it....”

“Clanton is segregated big time”
Yes it is and I dare say that this is a conclusion beyond question. Not only that, but it is directly on point with the discussion at hand. But why is it segregated? This is rhetorical, of course. I ask to say that, even though this is a statement relevant to the discussion, you leave it unsupported by not following up with solid observation or facts.

I personally believe that Clanton is segregated for several reasons. First, most of the native residents are not that far removed from true unapologetic racism. I am not going to call out any parents or grandparents as racists. However, if you have two previous generations that lived in this area, I promise you that people of your grandparent’s age were either prominently practicing this type of racism or they were suffering from it. The group of people in this area your father’s age, as a group, did not practice or suffer to the same degree as their parents, but racism was still very strong, despite being discussed more behind closed doors. For this hypothetical, I am using a person roughly my age. This would have your grandfathers fighting in WWII and your fathers in school during Brown v. Board I and II, and probably in high school during the passage of the Civil Rights Act. Even though racism has been diminished by time, people no farther removed than this are still tainted with some degree of racist though, unless, in my opinion, they have actively sought to overcome this mindset through objective rational though and education.

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 24, 2009 at 6:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Part II

My take on prejudice is that it is an easy pitfall for people to fall victim to. This is especially true if you were exposed to racism at a young and impressionable age. As far as how these people view racism through current observation, this is really just a matter of taking the racist foundation and allowing that to dictate your conclusions. To illustrate this, just image going up to a person who is truly racist and ask them: “Based on your day-to-day life, why are you racist?” If being honest, that person would likely recite a list of specific traits or behaviors that he or she find indicative of that particular race. And, they will also likely believe those traits to be engrained in that race. But, though these beliefs are valid within that person’s mind, they are in fact untrue. I think it safe to say that blacks have a higher rate of poverty in this state than do whites. Taken as fact, it is also safe to assume that this results in more black families living in government subsidized housing. Now, if you add to that a belief that more crime occurs in housing projects, you may well be right. However, without understanding why that crime occurs, a person would be quick to assume that it was because blacks were “lesser people” and therefore worth their loathing. This conclusion is, however, ludicrous.

The poverty observed is a product of past and present discrimination that has minimized the opportunities for black families. Fewer opportunities leads to fewer dollars and fewer dollars leads to making decisions that people of greater means would not have to make. Following this simple progression, it is easy to see why blacks might be more likely of taking advantage of government housing. Also, just because a parent has less money does not mean that parent wants less for their child. In a time when blacks are being treated as criminals even though their actions are perfectly above board, it would be easy for a black parent to choose to break the law in order to better provide for their family. If a child grows up seeing that his mother or father might have broken the law to take care of him, he would find some nobility in this act and would be likely to accept this conduct as necessary. As this hypothetical progresses through time, you have a people becoming more and more disconnected from a lifestyle accepted as legal by the predominantly white government. When you factor in the legal v. illegal decision required to become a drug user, the illegal choice is much more palatable than it would be on the better side of town. Besides, there is also the motivation to seek the escape that the drug provides. If you like is great, you would be less likely to want to escape it.

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 24, 2009 at 6:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Though this is not an historical description of the way things are today, it at least fairly highlights some of the factors that have contributed to the current climate of poverty among the black race. When viewed at a glance, without knowing WHY these situations exist, it is extremely easy for someone from a different walk of life to merely associate poverty, crime, drug use, black skin. This leads to a very strong and very flawed belief.

Next, to a large degree, people of like races and like cultural ties choose to congregate together. If you look at New York City, there is a “___________ Town” for every ethnicity that resides in the city. This is not because they were force to live together because of social forces. Rather, this is because they chose to love together because they had things in common. They were all new people in an unfamiliar land. This makes the thought of being around others of your origin very appealing. Also, in communities such as this, you can continue to openly practice cultural elements that otherwise you might be persecuted for. One can draw an analogy to these situations and the choice of a native-born race to congregate together. The only difference here is that the forces that bring them together is the fact that they are all treated with the same in society. Also, if society is against you as an individual, then as a group you are far stronger. However, just as with the issue of crime and poverty, the underlying “cause” of this behavior—at least to some extent—is the racist behavior of the majority.

Back on track:
“Its not only about blacks. Its also the disabled.”
Here, you have appropriately identified the similarity between blacks and the disabled—they are both classes of people who have historically suffered discrimination. HOWEVER—yes, this is a very big however—your statement about seeing more people with disabilities in government jobs is entirely off-point. If you go to city hall and take a mental survey of how many people you see who are able-bodied compared to how many people you see who suffer a physical disability, then yes, you will find the numbers heavily weighed on the side of those up and walking. But, the ADA is targeted to a far greater sect of the population than just the physically disabled. To equate all disabled people with people who are physically disabled is bad reasoning argument. This is confusing correlation with causation. To map out this error would go like this: “All people with physical disabilities are disabled. (True) Therefore, all people who are disabled are physically disabled. (Not true)

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 24, 2009 at 6:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The sad truth is, a large portion of the physically disabled population is not able to hold down normal job. And, even if they were, these people would be a small percentage of the total working class just due to the fact that they are a minority. So, if you just went and conducted the aforementioned survey, of course you are going to see mostly able-bodied employees. Now figure that, rather than all, only half of these physically disabled people are able to work and you will cut that already-low by a factor of two.

I have made a big point of the distinction between a disability and a physical disability to illustrate that people who fall under the protections of the ADA are far nuanced than one might think. In fact, I have zero reservations in telling you that, under the ADA, I am a disabled American. I am disabled, and you would never know it be looking at me, talking to me, or following me around observing my every more. Also, in my humble opinion, I am pretty damn sharp, so what is there to be ashamed up? My point is, if I worked at city hall and you took that survey that I talked about, you would count me as a person without a disability, even though I fully enjoyed the benefits of the ADA.

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 24, 2009 at 6:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

“What do they do? They get the most crooked lawyers to overrule the Act.”
This requires the easiest and the shortest critique.
Lawyers are only as crooked as the law permits them to be. If the law is such that an attorney can manipulate it to benefit her client, then either the law is designed to allow such flexibility, or the law is flawed. If designed as flexible, the law is this way either because some element of public policy—either obvious or obscure—requires it, or because political forces allowed it. If the law is flawed, then the government that we as a people elected screwed up. If this is the case, it is the duty—read, the DUTY—of the people to fix it. The part of this that is a bit quirky is that “the people” refers to every person within the electorate acting as a single entity. If you take into account the fact that elections are a product of majority rule, then you are left with the conclusion that as many as 49% of “the people” might have voted against the person that screwed up. So long as the 51% is willing to vote for him again, “the people” will keep him in office. To put this
another way; whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government. Yeah, okay—I did not come up with that last part on my own. That was in fact copied from the Declaration of Independence. But you know, this famous passage is really perplexing to think about. Really, think about how divided we are politically. Can you really imagine if out government was so repugnant that “the people” chose to revolt and overthrow the government? Really, this sounds like something you hear about on CNN during blurb about some third-world country that you can’t spell or pronounce. But yep, this is a principle that serves as a cornerstone of the American foundation.

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 24, 2009 at 6:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Back on point now: You mentioned something about these nefarious lawyers overruling the Act. I am sure you will say that you meant something else, even though you used these words. However, if you want to present a well-founded argument based on sound reasoning and facts, you must be accurate in the wording of your assertions. Lawyers can not overrule anything. The word “overruled” means to make something void, or to make its existence irrelevant. An Act, as used in this context, is a group of laws. Without exploring a couple of exceptions—none of which apply—laws are created by the Legislature, reviewed by the Judiciary, and can be vetoed by the Executive. Attorneys are officers of the Judiciary, but they are subordinate to the judges and justices or the courts. Only the judiciary can overrule something, but to do so, the action overruled has to be one of a lower tier within the judiciary. This can be a lower court ruling, or an attorney’s motion. When the highest court does this to their past rulings, it is a reversal. And, even when dealing with a lower court, reversal is usually the accepted term. And, no actor within the judiciary has the authority or overrule and law passed by congress. The Judiciary can only rule as to the constitutionality of law. I go much further out of the way than necessary to make the point of how removed a lawyer is from overruling a law.

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 24, 2009 at 6:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

In closing, there is this last nugget.
“As Johnny Paycheck sang the famous old song and I direct it to the hypocritcal owners of the businesses and county and city workers. You know the song and bear it and keep it....”
The only logical choice of Johnny Paycheck songs that could fit into this statement is his 1976 single, “I Can See Me Lovin’ You Again.” This is obviously your way of extending a hand of friendship to the community and government of our fair city. Oh, I know it has been a hard road between you two. In fact, there were times when you proclaimed how much you hated each other. But, a love like yours can not be vanquished. Though the fire had subsided, a solitary flame remained. And, as is true with any great love affair, the rekindling of a heart’s true passion can restore even the most damaged of relationships to their full luminous glory. Way to be the bigger man my friend!

Posted by justme (anonymous) on July 24, 2009 at 7:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

davyhay... go write a book we are on the clanton advertiser not world news yet.

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 24, 2009 at 9:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

So, as Clantonians, we are somehow inferior in our intellect and reasoning ability...is that what you are inferring? If so, I would tend to disagree.

If I want to engage in a well reasoned debate, as a local, and I serving my community in any way by finding an outside forum?

I see several people on here who like to criticize the veracity of the reporting in the paper. Has it ever occurred to anyone that staff of the Advertiser might endeavor to produce a more intellectual product if the reader base proves that they can appreciate their efforts?

Posted by blackwater (anonymous) on July 24, 2009 at 11:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Davyhay. Man I thought I should warn you that trying to reason with some of these people that post on here is like communicating with a brick wall. Good on ya for giving thought out opinions. I always try to give props for that.

Posted by TheDude (Michael Wells) on July 25, 2009 at 5:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Somebody has a lot of time on their hands. Next time you want to copy from a book or the internet, do it elsewhere. Weird stuff, man. You even from around here? When I attempt to read something and it puts me to sleep.

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 25, 2009 at 9:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Does such a nice neighborhood not have a homeowner's association? These groups do have the power to regulate the aesthetic appeal, at least.

Any sort of zoning that ran counter to Section 8 scope would be unconstitutional. Section 8 housing is created by administrative law and that is a portion of the executive branch of the federal government. Zoning laws are municipal ordinances enforced through a power grant from the state legislature. A state government can not constitutionally place such limitations on federal power.

Mr. Wells:

Thanks for the kind words. For you to suggest that I plagiarized the above tells me that you feel that my writing is worthy of publication. I mean you obviously read it. After all, commenting on something that you did not even read is really somewhat foolish. One observation though...Seeing as how tailored the post was to the specific topic, and even a specific post, don't you think it would have taken just as long to whittle it to fit the discussion as it would to just write it in the first place?

As far as time on my hands, No I really don't have that much spare time. Right now, I am studying for a massive test that starts on Monday. When I wrote that post--it was one post to begin with and I had to break it up--I was actually taking a study break.

And yes, I am from Clanton, Alabama. My grandfather was a local plumber who installed indoor facilities in many of the old houses around town, and through my grandmother, I am related to the original founder of Chilton County--of course then, it was called Baker County. I grew up in a house on 4th Avenue North, about a block or so from Martin's. And, I am a proud CCHS Tiger, class of 1993.

I was a bit confused about your last sentence fragment. "When I attempt to read something and it puts me to sleep..." You do what...turn on the TV? Talk to the wife? Buzz on over to Youtube? Update your Facebook account? Go play with your dogs? I am only to assume that you were just trying to offer up some autobiographical detail of your life and somehow got distracted or just forgot to finish the sentence. After all, I know you were not talking about my little post. After all, that would only be like three pages, typed. I mean, even a 5th grader could slug through that much without passing out.

Actually, I am just trying to become more involved in the community that I call home. I decided that having ideas and criticisms is great and all, but they really account for nothing unless you endeavor to do something about them.

Thanks,
Davy

Posted by TheDude (Michael Wells) on July 25, 2009 at 9:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Davy, all I am sayin' is, geez ... can you get yer point across in like 40 words or less? I mean, look what you did to Dr. She wrote 3 long paragraphs and a piggy tail and forgot what she was trying to say about half way through! Sorry about the unfinished sentence ... I fell asleep ...DOH! I'm just pickin' at ya. :)

Posted by TheDude (Michael Wells) on July 25, 2009 at 9:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Another thing, Davy. Your comeback after my smartaleck remark was respectful and a bit surprising, considering some of the stuff you see on here. I appreciate that and feel kinda low for doin' that to you. I apologize.

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 25, 2009 at 10:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Don't feel mad man. My last post was straight eaten up with passive aggressive undertones. It's my own little brand of comedy. The thing is, there is no name-calling involved and it is good-natured.

I tell you, I was really surprised that the American Nimrod guy--the guy I was responding to--deleted his post. I really thought I gave him the benefit of the by framing my post constructively. He really did have some valid thoughts, I would have just liked for him to support his thought with facts. Or, perhaps he was just too embarrassed after I accused him of requesting a sappy county love song to the city of Clanton.

Also, the post right before mine was a post of your expressing your displeasure for the "minimal grammatical databases" of those who post on this site. As kind of a pride thing, I probably wanted to show you that some of us did in fact possess a grammatical prowess of command of the English language that transcended there mere modicum of accepted casual diction.

Also, are you by any chance the Michael Wells that live on County Road 410? Just wondering because the person listed at that address is in the same age group as my dad. I was just curious whether or not you knew him.

Posted by Owilli (anonymous) on July 25, 2009 at 11:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I was raised in the city of clanton in the west end section. Now I must admit that there is a lot of drugs and other things that go on in that part of town. My problem with the city of clanton police department is that sometimes they are guilty of racial profiling. For example everytime I come home the police make some fake story up to stop me and my wife and mess with us only because we have very nice cars and everytime they see a young black man they associate it with drugs. Now to change the point me and my wife are two very sucessful young black people. I am a SSG in the United States Army only been in for five years. My wife is from valley, al she graduated from Auburn University with a Bachelor of Science in Biology.She then went on to AUM where she graduated top in her class with her certification in Cytotechnologist ( study of cells) . We currently live and work in Seattle, Wa where I am a Health Care Information Manager at Madiagn Army Medical Center Ft. Lewis, Wa. My wife is a Cytotechnologist at Swedish Medical Center Seattle, WA. We are currently in the process of relocating to Washington, D.C. due to my military orders. I say all these to say that since we will be coming home on leave and since we have a 500 benz and just recently bought a 7 series Bmw I know we will be stopped and mess with when we come home only because it happens every time I come home. So in my opinion racism still exists in Chilton County to some extent. And for those who will differ with me and argue that Chilton County is not like that. I have been to 2 tours to Iraq, Hunter Army Airfield Ga, Ft. Sam Houston, TX, Ft. Lee, VA, Ft. Jackson, S.C, Germany,Ireland, Kuwait, Dubai, UAE and here to FT. Lewis, Wa and numerous of other places on vacation. I have never in any of the other places had problems like I have in Chilton County . I usually don't even get involved in these articles but I look on the internet and see people here in Chilton County always bashing one another and wanted to speak my mind. True there are plenty of people in the west end area that break laws and do things that are wrong and I must admit that in an area where black people live there is usually going to be more crime. On the other note there are a lot of people that in clanton judge people off the skin of there color and automatically assume that since you are black and have nice things that you sell drugs. All people should be judged equal.

Posted by mrjones0913 (anonymous) on July 25, 2009 at 12:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Owilli, Thanks for the great information. You are RIGHT. I am a military brat and have been all over the country. Chilton County is not normal, they are racist and that is why I am trying to leave Chilton County. For all those without knowing, there is REAL LIFE OUTSIDE CHILTON COUNTY.

Posted by TheDude (Michael Wells) on July 25, 2009 at 2:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Owilli, I respect the service you have completed in the Armed Forces. I traveled with my family for 17 years in the Air Force. Brat, also. I understand what you are saying, but one thing is for sure, Chilton County isn't the only place in our Nation with racial inequality.

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 25, 2009 at 2:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am going to make a rare statement of personal opinion. It is not rare that I have opinions on issues--it is rare that I state them without factual support. In other words, this is just a personal belief, so please take it as such.

Racism is a class of behavior that falls without the much larger confines of prejudice. I have never looked up the root of the word "prejudice" but I am going to go out on a limb to say that it breaks down as; "pre," meaning to come before, and "judice," related to justice or judicial, meaning to judge. So, I take prejudice to be when we pre-judge a person based on a immutable characteristic, or in some instances, based on their way of life.

Prejudice is something that you will not escape no matter which corner of this would you choose to call home. Not only do I consider all prejudice to be evil, I also consider all prejudice to be, for the most part, equal. And, I dare say that there is not one among us that is not guilty of harboring prejudice toward someone.

Yes, there are types of prejudice that are more overt and more damaging than others. But, when that is the case, at least you know what the score is--little consolation, I know, but still. Take racism for example: You know if a part of the county bears the taint of racism. It is not hard to spot and you don't have to look far. BUT, this being the case, you are more informed as to whether or not you wish to live there.

Racism between blacks and whites is very real and very shameful. But, part of the reason for this shame is the fact that it was so widely exposed. To take this out of the American context, consider this. Prior to World War II, the world--at the individual level--though relatively little about the plight of the Jews in Russia and parts of the former Soviet Republic. But, during and following the war, the atrocities exacted on the Jews was thrust in the face of every man woman and child. It was then that the true shame of the Holocaust was imposed on the Nazi party. This is not to say that their actions were any worse after they were known; just that until they were fully known, they were not judged as being wrong.

I say this to point out that racism is the horrible thing it is because of the horrible nature of the acts. But, it was only considered truly shameful after the people of this country and the people of the world had the images of racism thrust before them.

I personally believe that, at a fundamental level, all other forms of prejudice is just as bad as racism. I feel racism is more widely accepted as shameful, but just because we admit that it has existed and that it still exists. On the other hand, I feel that the forms of prejudice that are not considered as shameful are possibly more dangerous. This is because, though perhaps not publicized as such, they are more accepted. This acceptance is what fuels the fires of hypocrisy and leads to even greater societal upheaval.

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 25, 2009 at 2:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

So, to make my belief here plainly known:
If you say you are not racist, but you look down on homosexuals, you are a hypocrite and you are part of the problem.
If you say you are not racist, but you look down on Muslims, you are a hypocrite and you are part of the problem.
If you say you are not racist, but you look down on the kid you see at Wal-Mart who is covered in tattoos and piercings, you are a hypocrite and you are part of the problem.
If you are open and honest about being a racist, and you hate everyone who aint like you: Hey, at least you're honest...but you are still an ignorant blemish on society and you are the embodiment of the problem.

Just sayin, don't start thinking you are on the right side of the street until you know in your heart that you are free from all prejudice. After all, anybody can free their mind of a type of prejudice when it is splashed all over the news casts and papers. The trick is in learning to spot the prejudice in your own heart that society is not calling attention to.

Posted by eagle1 (anonymous) on July 25, 2009 at 5:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well, it looks like I'm going to have to stay home now, and quit going to Walmart. I am not a racist. davy, I would venture to say (from the heart), that you would find only a select few that met your criteria as a "non-racist".

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 25, 2009 at 6:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I doubt that. However, I think I would be hard pressed to find many people that met my criteria of not being prejudice.

That is my point. Even if you are not a "racist" as it applies in the context of black/white hostility in the United States, your being prejudice towards another group, just because they are not like you, is hypocritical.

Hate is hate--whether it is hate against another race, another sexual orientation, or another gender. If, as a majority American, you are not racist and you are this way for the right reasons, it will be because you are not instilled with, or you have overcome the requisite mindset of hatred. If you truly have overcome or never had that mindset, you would also not be prejudice to people unlike yourself.

On the other hand, if you say you are not racist, but then you start talking about how much you despise homosexuals, then you have that requisite mindset of hatred. If this is the case, then there are a couple possibilities to explain your non-racist assertion.
1. You are lying.
2. You were not raised in a place where racial prejudice was part of your societal fabric.
3. You were raised believing that racism was wrong.
4. You chose to not be racist because you do not want to be branded with the stigma placed on such thought by modern America.

If any of these apply, with the exception of #1, then true, you are better off, but there is still a defect. The reason for this is simple. Racism is a sub-component of a much larger culture of hatred. It is a battle within the much larger war. It takes more than winning one battle to win the war.

To overcome racism without overcoming the predicate hatred means that we did not really learn from our mistakes. When you catch a child with his hand in the cookie jar, he immediately tells you he's sorry. Is he really sorry for his action, or is he sorry because he was caught? If we do not learn from the mistakes of our past generations, then we will for a fact repeat those mistake on the next minority group in line.

150 years ago, society accepted a slave-owning culture. 75 years ago, society accepted overt racism and a "Jim Crowe" approach to governance. 25 years ago, many white churches taught that the black race was inferior because it was born born of Ham's incestuous acts toward his father, Noah. And today, society accepts many types of prejudicial hatred. The common thread is that these are product of the same cultural flaw and they are all dead wrong.

Posted by TheDude (Michael Wells) on July 26, 2009 at 7:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

kw, I though you were hibernatin'. Davy, all I can say is, I try to do right and do good. I may think things about certain people, but not a particular race, and I ask God to forgive my sins each day. So, that's what counts in my book. All the other "stuff" you have contributed above ... well that's really deep and not so interesting to me. Adios

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 26, 2009 at 11:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Sir, I wish I knew your name so that I could address you properly. However, Kwsrgraves will have to suffice. I am going to write more than one or two paragraphs, but I hope you will stick it and see what I have to say.

I never figured to have an audience here that would be chomping at the bit waiting for my next philosophical musing. That is pretty well why I predicated that post the way I did. I just felt that I would be remiss if I failed to say what was on my mind. If anything, the most I hoped for would be for a couple people to read it and ponder over one or two points that they found interesting.

As far as a need to be understood goes; everyone wants to be understood. However, I am not here seeking personal edification, and I am not here to find others to adopt my beliefs. Are you positive to a reasonable degree that you were not mistaking your own person lack of understanding for what I was saying with my perceived need to be understood? I am widely understood among my peers. As I stated in another post, I live in Clanton, I have not been one to post much in the past, I keep seeing the same circular arguments and analytical reasoning failures, and I just wanted to try to contribute to the community I have called home for over thirty years.

New ideas—at least ideas new to an area—are often times misunderstood. I assumed that risk before my first keystroke. However, it is an ignorant mind that rejects ideas merely because he does not understand them. I don’t understand how my computer’s processor works, but I don’t reject the notion that it does.

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 26, 2009 at 11:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Perhaps it is unfortunate, but I really don’t have to spend days to write something like this. My values are pretty well galvanized and underpinned with a well-reasoned belief structure. So, when a subject falls within my wheelhouse, I can pretty well hit the road running and knock out what I have to say.

I’m not here to try to lay the smack down in a big name-calling fiasco, and I am not here to do battle with anyone’s ego. I know you are not a psychologist, and to be truthful, I am not either. This being so, your words as to my “tweeking” [sic], self indulgence, coming to grips with my sexuality, need for counseling, etc. must be disregarded. The reason is, these statements were not made in a manner related to or in response to anything that I said. During an exchange of ideas, when a person is not able to counter assertions with reason-based observations, that person will start attacking the person who made the statements. This is the analytical reasoning fallacy of “attacking the messenger.”

Also, I admitted that I was not a psychologist, so I fully expect you to disregard what I am about to say. However, I tend to believe that some of the people who post here would not be so quick to do so. From what I have read of your postings—and please know, I read for months before making my first post—it would seem that you might be a little insecure about some of the facets of your life and how you are viewed by others. I am not saying this is true in every aspect, just some that specifically come across on this site.

Rather than stating your belief and defending it on its merits, you have an observed tendency to recite what you feel are certain personal attributes to, instead, try to make people believe that you are qualified to speak on the subject, so therefore, they should not question you. You did this a couple of times in your previous post. For instance, you reciting who you have had dinner with, or how many states you have been to is not germane to anything you were trying to say. You were saying that you felt my posts lacked common sense. If you had merely said, “I have known bikers that make more common sense than you,” then you would have made you point with as much strength as possible. Everything else you added was unnecessary, and seemingly designed to conjure my intimidation. Quickly on this issue of common sense: Common sense is purely subjective. Many people consider common sense to be ideas that make practical sense within their personal world-view. I assume you fall into that camp. Therefore, perhaps a more appropriate thing to say is that you and I have different world views. I know that does not sound as harsh or diminutive of the other person, but I am not a harsh person and I don’t wish to cast you in a diminutive light

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 26, 2009 at 11:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I also know that other people have criticized the fact that you have, on more than one occasion—though I am just assuming here—touted yours salary as a way to show your status. This too would tend to make you look like a weaker opponent in a debate, and it would lead people to believe that you are trying to compensate for what you might feel are other personal inadequacies.

In closing—and this is me succumbing to my own irrational pride—I’m not a Nazi or a skinhead, and I am not a transvestite, transgender, transsexual, or even homosexual. And truthfully, I don’t really believe you thought I was. Honestly, I think you just wanted to do some name calling and you figured that by giving your actions the guise of skilled observation, it would not come across as weak as it would otherwise. One thing I will admit to though; I am not a racist, but I do struggle with prejudice. I do my best to live life free of any prejudice but I have thus far failed—though I am getting better. Right now, I am fairly prejudicial against hateful ignorance. I do know, to a large part, these people can not help their actions, but it seems far more of a lifestyle of choice than is anything else people are prejudice over.

And, in response to the litany of attributes you recited, I have also had little bit of schoolin; I have shared time with some pretty respectable people; I have NOT been to all 50 states, though I have been to 20 foreign counties; AND, as a musician, I once performed for a Monarch. Sorry again, we all have our little pride issues.

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 26, 2009 at 11:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Mr Wells:
Sir, I think you are doing everything a person can be expected to do, and I appreciate you comment. Also, as to whether you find what I say interesting or not--I admire honesty above all, so you being straight up with me makes you okay in my book!

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 26, 2009 at 12:37 p.m.

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 26, 2009 at 1:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well fair enough, I suppose. I never cared who you were before I chose to direct a post at you, so there was no need to look.

What were you correlating my word to? I never said homosexuality equated to racism. I said that the state of mind that hates another race is the same state of mind that hates another minority group, such as homosexuals, Muslims, etc.

When was I talking about "tweaking?" I know that the term is used to refer to a fine adjustment or to a person's behavior while on meth. However, I am pretty sure it is easy to figure out when one meaning of the other is intended. I don't do drugs, if that is what you are saying.

So, if someone was talking and you did not understand what they were saying, or if it seemed to you as though they were not making sense, you profiled them as a drug user?

I never said I was thirty. I said I have lived in Clanton 30 years. In your last statement, you are again trying to diagnose me with some disorder, and I am pretty sure that you don't have an advanced degree in any for of cognitive science, so I would appreciate it if you held off on the diagnosis. Besides, if I were to suffer from the issues you assert, I would have an inferiority complex. I am of average height and stature, so I would not have a Napoleon Complex.

As to whatever degree of arrogance I conveyed in my unqualified statement, I completely agree with your statement. The posts in question, on the subject matter in question were delivered with a degree of assertion that could be considered arrogance, and the assertions were also completely unqualified. However, I made that perfectly clear before stepped foot into the topic. Please see above where, before talking about the subject of race I wrote: "I am going to make a rare statement of personal opinion. It is not rare that I have opinions on issues--it is rare that I state them without factual support. In other words, this is just a personal belief, so please take it as such."

Please don't think you know what is going on with me, what sort of person I am, where I measure as a man, the breadth of my intellect, the convictions in my heart, or the state of my mind. If you would kindly afford me this consideration, I promise you that I will reciprocate the same respect to you. I would love to debate with you in the future, but I will not engage in hostile debate. There are two sides to every story, and to some extent, they are both wrong.

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 26, 2009 at 4:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Yeah, I repeated something that the guy said, agreed with his assertion, and then said that I wanted to tweak it a bit--I did spell it wrong--meaning I wanted to make some small adjustments to the assertion. I did not mean that I was about to hit the meth pipe.

You are right, I will be 35 next month.

Yes, I was pointing out what I considered ignorance, but there is nothing wrong with being ignorant. You and I are both ignorant about far more things than we are educated about--and that will always be true. Honestly, I would just like to see the quality of debate on this site increase. I might just be spinning my wheels, but I thought it was worth a shot.

Well see there, you and I have similar areas of study, we just use them in a different. This is also an analog to the way we view the world around us. I have a BS is political science and minors in law and philosophy. And, I hold a J.D. with legal concentrations in elder law, real estate and estate planning, family law, and alternative dispute resolution.

I can write as concise as I please, and i can be as frilly as anyone. Believe it or not, I write as a stress release--sort of a stream of conscience on whatever is on my mind. I have been mired in the torture and rigor of preparing for the bar, and I have written my little rantings while taking study breaks. If I am on break, then I am going to lean a little more to my therapeutic, musing style of writing. I suppose I was looking to do a little recreational writing and discuss topics of interest at the same time. However, I honestly never fathomed that I would be accused of being a gay, Nazi, racist, drug addict with a mental disorder.

But, to be completely honest, I am sure my writing has been a bit more flighty than is the norm. After all, my brain is at full-on, butt-kicking, take-no-prisoners mode, fueled by adrenaline, a lack of sleep, and a fair amount of caffeine. Being that caffeine is a drug, and I am using it, I guess your charge was not completely off the mark. But, if I happened to get pulled over and the officer found my drug-o-choice, they would just send me on my merry way.

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 26, 2009 at 7:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well the Powell dude had already mentioned about you address over on the counterfeit discussion. However, he said he got that info from his "sources, who keep him informed." I just asked was just source the same as mine--Google.

No intention to upset anyone. I would honestly never think reciting public record would upset anyone. However, I can see where there are extenuating circumstances that would lead a person to want to keep even public info on the down-low, so sorry for that.

Oh yeah, and I did convince the same guy that he did not have an actionable case against you for the little "hemlock" statement you made. He though you had threatened to kill him and therefore, by making a copy of your statement, he could use it against you. That is obviously nonsense.

I'll do what I can on shortening things up. But do me a favor--if you see a post that might be longer than you think appropriate, give it a read anyway, with an open mind. Many times I will use the way I get to a point in the same way as I use the words to articulate the point.

Here's to good spirited debating!

Posted by davyhay (anonymous) on July 26, 2009 at 8:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

You know he is posting under a different name, right?
wlpowell63
Check the bottom of the page.
http://www.clantonadvertiser.com/news/20...

The guy is somewhat grammatically challenged.

As for the swatter, I prefer the German model. It is not as powerful, but it is more refined and more stable around the twisties.

Posted by gkeys (anonymous) on July 27, 2009 at 1:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)

TMI, TMI....

There is nobody can push buttons like I can….isn’t that right Graves :-)

Davy, got to summarize :-)

Posted by ken1955 (anonymous) on July 28, 2009 at 1:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

hey did you know the manager at rolling oaks had open heart surgery 5 bye passes bye a black surgeon some raciest he is that man was notified bye notice on his door july 11 he had recined due too health issuesafter working hard for years trying too keep it a safe place for every one abc 3340 interviewed every black and anyone they saw couldn't find any one too say one bad thing about him left saying there was no story here

Posted by heather6869 (anonymous) on July 29, 2009 at 11:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

This story is complete crap! I know Ken Scott and he is a solid man with good morals- FAR from racist! He was the hardest working landlord I have ever come across,whenever me and my BLACK fiancee had a problem he was right over to fix it! It's a shame,people will do anything for a buck these day, everyone is sue happy!!

Posted by jennihansen77 (anonymous) on July 30, 2009 at 4 p.m. (Suggest removal)

You people call this discrimination when say a single mom of young chlidren wants to insure her safety in areas where violence and drugs are located! I call it being protective of your loved ones. These men where being honest and helpful individuals if you ask me. I agree with heather6869's comment that people are so sue happy that they will drag honest hard working people into court to make a dime. There is a difference between being a racist and being honest!