Crazy? Maybe, Maybe Not
139 RepliesJump to last post
[quote=BondGuy]Let me take these in order:
Put: What do you think it makes a person who murders someone? The old guy using the N word is a racist. If that's all he does then that's all he is. [/quote]Nope, you whiners throw the word racist around like it was a manhole cover. Wait, I forgot, you worship at the altar of political correctness so I should say "person hole cover." So sorry, hope you didn't faint straight away.
Let me explain something to you. Racists are people who believe that the differences between the races result in a superior and inferior relationship AND--important that you understand that it is AND---that the superior race has a manifest destiny style right to dominate the inferior race.
There are exactly 3,921 racists in the United States.
The guys who tied that James Byrd soul to a pickup truck and pulled him until there was nothing left are racists--pulling somebody behind a pickup truck is an example of the manifest destiny style right to dominate.
Racists do things like that, or like lynching, or marching the inferior race into rooms to be gassed. Again, there are very few racists--almost none. It is EXTREMELY unlikely that you've ever met one.
On the other hand there lots of bigots. Bigots are people who believe that there are critical differences in the races--but do not go so far as to believe that those differences justify dominance of the inferior by the superior.
Those who make statements such as "I won't vote for a N-word" are bigots--there is no indication that he thought that there is a superior/inferior dynamic. He just had a personal opinion that he voiced to a few people who were close enough to hear him. The "Sticks and Stones may break my bones.........." rhyme is what applies.
Those who mock others are not racists either, they're simply telling jokes and/or stories based on universal truths that all of us recognize. When Chris Rock warns that you'd have to be crazy to drive down Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd there is not an American adult who does not understand why that is a funny thing to say.
Stereotypes are not drawn out of thin air, and whining about them paints the whiner as.....well............a whiner.
[quote=BondGuy]Let me take these in order:
Put: What do you think it makes a person who murders someone? The old guy using the N word is a racist. If that's all he does then that's all he is. Babs: Sorry sweetie, we've already got big brother under your boy Bush. It's called Real ID. As a fist pounding conservative you know all about this. You remember- the conservatives were chanting their normal "no more government mantra" until someone flew an airplane into a building. That ended that! Now conservatives can't get enough big government. They got real liberal real fast. "Here take all my rights away. I'll gladly trade them if only you protect me from the big bad terrorist." That would be Real ID. I chuckle whenever I hear conservatives speak out against big government. Government couldn't get big enough fast enough to protect their rich fat asses. What a joke! This is an area that I agree with you 100% BG. Bush's biggest downfall was his spending, and the expansion of the federal government. To borrow a phrase, we do not need more of the same. Of course there is a difference, Obama's expansion of government will make the expansion under Bush pale in comparison. Back on the racist question, the question posed by my scenerio is just that, a question. It doesn't forward an opinion one way or the other. It's purposely vague and only intended to provoke thought. This question predates Obama being on the national scene by at least a generation. So too, it is not Obama specific. ANON- My answer to the question is we don't have enough information to make a judgement. That Jeane used race as an identifyer would probably be viewed by many as a racial tendency. Why did she pick race to define this guy when it had nothing to do with the story? She didn't define him by his stature, his clothing, his car or any other trait. Only by his race. Many of you may believe this is ridiculous-it's not. Assuming Jeane is caucasian would she say" this white guy stopped?" No, we all know she wouldn't do that. Unless it had something to do with the story it would sound ridiculous. She might pick out some other characteristic, if it was important to the story. Yet everyday we get into conversations where people, for no reason relative to the subject at hand, define those different than they by their race. That in itself doesn't make them racists. But why race? Something to think about. [/quote]OK, I’ll throw in a few more points on this, if for no other reason than because ana doesn’t approve of the topic. Plus, I’m in a philophical mood with the election finally upon us.
[quote=BondGuy]ANON- My answer to the question is we don’t have enough information to make a judgement. That Jeane used race as an identifyer would probably be viewed by many as a racial tendency. Why did she pick race to define this guy when it had nothing to do with the story? She didn’t define him by his stature, his clothing, his car or any other trait. Only by his race. [/quote]
And also, as ice rightly pointed out, by his gender. Does that make Jeanne sexist?
Moreover, it’s carrying it too far to say she “defined” him by race, or even by sex. There is a subtle but significant difference between “defining” someone and “describing” someone. In your hypothetical she clearly described her rescuer rather than defined him.
To infer anything beyond that as to whether or not she might be racist or have racial tendencies is to take leave of the facts and enter into speculation.
You're right that it is something to think about, but not necessarily for the reasons of racism or "racial tendencies."
For example, Jeanne also did not mention what language he spoke or what country he was from, since one would assume that he was American and spoke English based on the context of the story and where the events occurred. But had be been a white man speaking French, you can be sure she would have described him as a Frenchman, and few people would accuse her of having nationalistic tendencies, much less being nationalistic.
Or if the story had taken place in an area where the vast majority of people were black, and her rescuer was black, and those listening to the story were aware of that fact, I doubt she would have described her rescuer as black, but if instead he was white, I would expect she would mention that fact, doubtless without anyone accusing her of being racist or having racial tendencies.
Perhaps it's not so much race itself that is at the root of this as it is our natural human tendency to screen out as so much noise that which we see a lot of, and notice disproportionately those things that are exceptions to what we come to accept as the norm.
It is what we believe about this information about the exceptions that we notice that determine and define if we are racist, not the mere fact that we notice them or mention them.
Enough all ready. Time to get to work.
Remember to exercise your duty as a citizen and vote today. And remember there is much more that unites us as Americans than separates us as Democrats or Rebulicans.
Well, with the possible exclusion of everybody who doesn't agree with absolutely everything I believe and say.
[quote=BondGuy]Babs: Sorry sweetie, we’ve already got big brother under your boy Bush. It’s called Real ID. …They got real liberal real fast. “Here take all my rights away. I’ll gladly trade them if only you protect me from the big bad terrorist.” That would be Real ID. [/quote] +
What a steamy pile of Jimmy Carter. Real ID is nothing more than the Feds requiring the states to have standards on how IDs are issues and their design to lessen forgery. There are no rights being taken away as a result of Real ID, it's just lunacy. Had a Democratic administration proposed it BG would be hailing it as the second coming.Every time one of the whiners brings up lost rights all you have to do
to shut them down is ask them to name a right they had in the year 2000
that they do not have now.
ANON- My answer to the question is we don’t have enough information to make a judgement. That Jeane used race as an identifyer would probably be viewed by many as a racial tendency.
OMG, I get so tired of the liberal tendency to see everything through the prism of race, and to seem so eager to scream racist in the most innocent of situations. Ever consider that she mentioned his race for the same reason that she mentioned his gender, because those two are extremely significant descriptive elements? Blacks make up 12% or so of the population in the <?: prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />US, if only 12% of the population were over 5’7”, do you think we’d hesitate to apply “tall” to anyone 5’10” when describing them? It’s nothing but BS PC rules that attempt to make someone feel guilty, or at the very least suspect, because they happen to notice someone’s race when describing them.<?: prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Now, had she said she felt threatened because the person stopping to help her was black, I’d have my suspicions about her “real” agenda, unless of course she happened to be Jesse Jackson…
I wonder how many votes Obama will be getting from people who will cast it to feel good about themselves and their views on the issue of race? I know BG won't be among them, being a committed Democrat whose vote was never in question, but I'm confident there will be loads of "ain't I a good person" votes being cast.My first thought wasn’t OMG is this person is way off base. No, my firstt thought was, “Oh yeah, Obama is black.” That’s how far removed his skin color is from my thought process.
The Demo’s are starting to take control…SHumer was just on Fox talking about how they want to control content on radio…here we go…“making it fair”
[quote=bspears]
The Demo’s are starting to take control…SHumer was just on Fox
talking about how they want to control content on radio…here we
go…“making it fair”
[/quote]
They have a “Ram Slam Jam” agenda.
Destroying talk radio is but one of the things they want to do right away.
The highest priorty will be unionize Wal*Mart and Home Depot by outlawing secret ballots.
When Home Depot increases their prices to pass along the increase in
their costs due to unionization I will consider that to be a form of a
tax increase.
Anytime government action causes prices paid by consumers to rise it’s a back door tax increase.
Morh and Ice- gender is the noun, and perfectly acceptable. It’s the adjectives that can get us into trouble. Not always, but at times.
Morh, good post, lots of thought including scenerios we've discussed among friends. And as i've said there are no right or wrong answers. We can agree or not, we can see each other's viewpoint and accept it or not. Just an interesting exercise. GVB-I knew I could count on you to show up. I see that your reading comprehension hasn't improved. Off course you might do better without the blinders on. take them off, start at the top of the thread and carefully reread everything. Or don't, I really don't care. Primo- This is one thing i don't get when it comes to conservatives; For years they were banging the drum to expand government. Now the American government is the biggest it's ever been. And now they're anti government again? Put- start with the fourth amendment. DHS illegally searching laptops. That it's illegal hasn't stopped them from violating citizens rights. DHS also is stopping, detaining, and searching citizens far from our borders. Again, a fourth amendment violation. Meanwhile the supreme court is scratching their head trying to figure out just how far the fourth amendment exception should go. The laptop thing is definally beyond the scope of the exception, but the non border search and seizure is still being debated. I know this is all good as far as you are concerned. You're not the one being illegally stopped and searched or having your computer seized by the government. And since it's all in the name of protecting your fat butt, all the better, right? Additionally, you might have noticed the mini police state that use to be your local airport. And did you know if you visit one of our fine cities and take a scenic picture of your wife with a bridge in the background that some guys in black Crown Vics will roll up on you and take your camera away? Lot's of nice expensive busted cameras among us amateur photo types. One of my riding buddies got face planted to the hood of one of those Crown Vics after he took a picture of the City Hall in a Texas town. The LEOs broke his three hundred dollar camera and roughed him up after he refused to answer any of their questions. They violated his rights from here to next Sunday and he would know, he's a civil rights attorney. He was on a motorcyle tour where you have to take pictures of the town halls of the places you visit to prove you were there. It's one of those crazy Ironbutt rally things. Perfectly innocent and perfectly legal. That was four years ago and now poor little town is trying to figure out a way to pay the settlement. He definately twisted their short and curlies. But most of us aren't civil rights attorneys who can fight back and win. No most of us are just poor slobs who have to accept broken cameras, ruined clothes and wrecked trips. On your threshold for racism, among the more ridiculous things you've posted. Generally, i try to pull something of value from your posts, thus giving you the benefit of a doubt. There is nothing to pull from this one- ludicrous.[quote=BondGuy]
Put- start with the fourth amendment. DHS illegally searching laptops. That it's illegal hasn't stopped them from violating citizens rights. DHS also is stopping, detaining, and searching citizens far from our borders. Again, a fourth amendment violation. Meanwhile the supreme court is scratching their head trying to figure out just how far the fourth amendment exception should go. The laptop thing is definally beyond the scope of the exception, but the non border search and seizure is still being debated. I know this is all good as far as you are concerned. You're not the one being illegally stopped and searched or having your computer seized by the government. And since it's all in the name of protecting your fat butt, all the better, right?[/quote]
What I asked was if you can cite a right that YOU have lost since the year 2000. Coming back with black helicopter crap about DHS searching laptops is not responsive.
What would be an example of a citizen being detained and searched far from our borders? Are you whining about having to clear security in order to board a US bound airplane?
[quote=BondGuy]
[/quote]
I'll call bujllschidt on that. I take pictures of whatever I want--including the inside of airports and airplanes--and nobody in a Crown Vic has pulled up and taken my camera, much less broken it.
[quote=BondGuy]
One of my riding buddies got face planted to the hood of one of those
Crown Vics after he took a picture of the City Hall in a Texas town.
The LEOs broke his three hundred dollar camera and roughed him up
after he refused to answer any of their questions. They violated his
rights from here to next Sunday and he would know, he’s a civil rights
attorney. He was on a motorcyle tour where you have to take pictures of
the town halls of the places you visit to prove you were there. It’s
one of those crazy Ironbutt rally things. Perfectly innocent and
perfectly legal. That was four years ago and now poor little town
is trying to figure out a way to pay the settlement. He definately
twisted their short and curlies. But most of us aren’t civil rights
attorneys who can fight back and win. No most of us are just poor slobs
who have to accept broken cameras, ruined clothes and wrecked
trips.
[/quote]
I thought you said “expensive” cameras were broken. $300 cameras are disposables.
I’d like to look into the story–what town in Texas has civil servants who behaved so poorly?
[quote=BondGuy]
How so? I'll ask again---if a guy who uses the "N word" is a racist what word do you use to describe somebody who lynches somebody of color?
How about a guy who owns a duplex and refuses to rent it to a tenant of color?
It's perfectly responsive. The fourth amendment is a biggie and your boy Bush has shit all over it.
And how do you feel about some low paid government male employee using technology to strip your wife? He's seeing it all, as if she was standing there bare assed naked. Not a violation? And if they want to see more to the back room she goes for the private lap dance. You're right, a $300 hundred camera isn't very expensive, but isn't a disposable either. Does it matter? Many IBA rides as well as Team Strange rides have picture requirements to prove you did the ride. Cheap cameras that ride in saddle bags or tanks bags are the norm. They are not the expensive cameras I spoke of. One guy lost an expensive Nikon D200 when he tooka picture of a canal lock. Others have had equally expensive camera seized or damaged by ham handed LEOs while taking pictures of ships, airplanes, chemical plants (very cool night photos). Others have had memory cards seized. Still others have had to explain stored photos that violated the officer's sense of morality. AS if a police officer should be the decider? Google up some camera forums and the stories are there. And by the way- you are not permitted to take pictures of bridges anymore. They are a big no-no. All violate your rights. But go ahead come on up and take a picture of the GWB and see what happens. AS for my buddies run in with the small town Texas justice, sorry Put you can believe what you will. I don't care. Just so you know, their defense was that someone had phoned in a bomb threat. Yeah, that didn't fly, even in a state full of bull shit. The planes that flew into those buildings were seized by arab men. Now swedish grandmothers in wheelchairs get pulled out of line and strip searched. A bungling idiot, tried to blow up a plane with a shoe bomb. Now for the next fifty years we'll be taking our shoes off in airports. Police want to know why a senior citizen on a motorcycle just took a picture of their courthouse. Law enforcement violates our rights, does what ever it wants to us and justifies itself by slapping a 9/11 sticker on it. Put, i'm not gretting what you mean on the race question. I would call the lyncher a murderer. The land lord is a racist. The guy who uses the N word may be a racist depending on how he uses it. The nursing home guy you mentioned-racist . the won't vote for black- racist. Lyncher-murderer, race as motive.BG- How do you feel about The Fairness Doctrine and your boy Schumer’s comparing/contrasting to pornography?
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/schumer-defends-fairness-doctrine-as-fair-and-balanced-2008-11-04.html
[quote=BondGuy]
It’s perfectly responsive. The fourth amendment is a biggie and your boy Bush has shit all over it.
[/quote]
Again, what is a liberty or freedom that YOU have lost? Recounting internet stories is meaningless.
[quote=BondGuy]
And how do you feel about some low paid government male employee using technology to strip your wife? He's seeing it all, as if she was standing there bare assed naked. Not a violation? And if they want to see more to the back room she goes for the private lap dance.[/quote]
What a load of crap. I pass through airport security no less than thirty times a year and I have NEVER encountered the machines that are used by El Al.
I am aware that the technology is there, and I am also aware that the image is not of the person standing there "bare assed naked." It's a gray background with a lighter gray image of the person--should they have anything strapped to themselves it can be easily seen. It's not an invasion of privacy, it's a devlopment in technology.
If it is deployed in the US, and it may be, the rules require the person who will be inspected to opt out--to go for a manual search.
As for the comments about a private lap dance---guys with IQs in excess of 70 wouldn't buy into that crap, much less repeat it.
El Al does strip search every passenger--every one of them. But it's less of a big deal that stripping down in front of a doctor or a corpsman at the induction center. You seem to have some sort of "issue" with being ashamed of your body. Perhaps you can find somebody to talk it out with.
[quote=BondGuy]
[/quote]
That entire paragraph is garbage. There are some rules against taking pictures of certain structures, but does it make sense to you that there are goons hiding in the trees on the off chance that somebody might come by and snap a picture?
But, just because you're not paranoid does not mean they're not out to get you.
I have lots of shots of the GWB, many taken since the War on Terror began. Once I took my cameras and went down to the little lighthouse and took some great shots up at the bridge with the moon in the background.
There were no goons lurking around--and none came rising up from the water to seize me and my cameras.
[quote=BondGuy]
[/quote]
All I asked was what town in Texas did that? Surely you didn't make up the story without considering that a honesty merchant would ask you to identify the town?
[quote=BondGuy]
The planes that flew into those buildings were seized by arab men. Now
swedish grandmothers in wheelchairs get pulled out of line and strip
searched. A bungling idiot, tried to blow up a plane with a shoe
bomb. Now for the next fifty years we’ll be taking our shoes off in
airports. Police want to know why a senior citizen on a
motorcycle just took a picture of their courthouse. Law
enforcement violates our rights, does what ever it wants to us and
justifies itself by slapping a 9/11 sticker on it.
[/quote]
The reason that the grandmothers and babies encounter the TSA at the
airport is because of whiners like you. You know damn well that
you were out front screaming–probably marching in a giant circle
jerk of losers carrying signs–about racial profiling when the TSA was
so bold as to suggest that singling out grandmothers and babies for
spot checks was a waste of time.
You are not in the same area code with intellectual honesty.
[quote=BondGuy]
Put, i'm not gretting what you mean on the race question. I would call the lyncher a murderer. The land lord is a racist. The guy who uses the N word may be a racist depending on how he uses it. The nursing home guy you mentioned-racist . the won't vote for black- racist. Lyncher-murderer, race as motive.[/quote]
The point is you whiners throw the word "racist" around without thinking. Dealing with your type makes one want to sing--to the tune of Old MacDonald Had a Farm---".........here a racist, there a racist, everywhere a racist racist........"
If somebody believes that Asians have a superior intellect to Caucasians are they a racist?
I say no. They'd be a racist if they believed that their intellectual superiority gave them some sort of right, or even a duty, to dominate the caucasians.
There's lots of bigots--and there are lots of people who are prejudiced. But there are almost no racists.
It would be nice if you whiners toned down the rhetoric.
Regarding the guy who owns some real estate and refuses to rent to tenants of color.
He’s not a racist, nor is he a bigot. He’s prejudiced–he
"pre-judged" the situation and decided he didn’t want to deal with
whatever issues his experience has taught him to expect.
Should he be allowed to pre-judge like that, or should he be sent somewhere for remedial training?
How about the woman who is driving alone at night and gets stopped by a red light in the "rough part of town."
If she hits her car’s door locks is she a racist?
How about a securities industry branch manager who won’t hire
applicants of color because he has never known one who was able to
break out? Is that manager a racist?
See, people who react negatively to another race are
prejudiced—they’d be a racist if they wanted to kill that other
person for no reason other than that person’s race.
This is one thing i don’t get when it comes to conservatives; For years they were banging the drum to expand government. Now the American government is the biggest it’s ever been. And now they’re anti government again?
The reason you don't get it is that you are unable to distinguish between Conservatives and Republicans. Clue.....not always the same thing. McCain is a Republican but is NOT a conservative. Bush is a Repbulican but NOT a conservative. Once you figure this out, you might "get" a few more concepts.Ice- exactly the point. She could have said somebody. She could have told the story in many different ways. That’s the lesson of the exercise. Why race? Does it mean something or nothing?
Rugby- My boy Shumer? What about your girl Palin? How do justify that vote? "Sarah, it's Nick, he wants to talk to you." Stupid! I don't know enough about FD to have an opinion beyond you can't have it both ways. This is something being stirred up by the right wing venom machine- Rush - Malkin etc. Babs- Since when is Bush not a conservative? He was hand picked to be prez by the most conservative fathers of his party. Conservative is a relative term. Bush is much more conservative than McCain. McCain is much more conservative than Obama. Put- thanks for the thoughful reply, but are you serious? Try looking up the meaning of the word racism. You'll find that prejudice based on race is racism. So is discrimination based on race. Both examples of which you've conveniently excluded from your definition. I know living in the south as you do, members of your generation have come up with all sorts of ways to get themselves through the night when it comes to racism, but way way over the top. Your lucky you got out when you did. ou wouldn't last ten seconds in the biz today with that attitude. Even in nashville or wherever you're from. Put on the civil rights thing- i keep forgeting you are one of the people who's Ok with this. So just as you ignore racism in your midst, you ignore your civil rights circling the drain. But you're safe! Oh and the town, it was a county. I misspoke. And it was three years ago not four. And it's not so small- I can't believe my recall is so poor. i've heard this guy tell the story so many times. Neuces County- does that sound right? On the coast somewhere. I'm not much of a Texas geography person. And make me laugh some more with the honesty merchant BS. This is more fun than watching sean hannity lie about Obama. Come on Put make me laugh!Bondguy, you wrote “ANON- My answer to the question is we don’t have enough information to make a judgement. That Jeane used race as an identifyer would probably be viewed by many as a racial tendency. Why did she pick race to define this guy when it had nothing to do with the story? She didn’t define him by his stature, his clothing, his car or any other trait. Only by his race.”
When asked about the fact that his gender was also being used, you tried to make the point that it didn't matter because it is a noun and not an adjective. Let's try to understand your logic. According to you, "A black guy helped me" might be a racist comment, but can't be a sexist comment because "guy" is a noun. What happens if she changed her words and said, "A male black helped me."? Would you now say that it could possibly be a sexist comment, but couldn't be a racist comment because "black" is now being used as a noun and male is being used as an adjective. To take this to more of an extreme, "A male nigger helped me" could be considered sexist, but not racist following your logic. "black guy" and "male black" are equally racist and sexist and mean the exact same thing. In this case, they are equally not sexist and not racist. They are descriptive without any value judgement attached. By the way, we do have enough information to make a judgement. Without any evidence to the contrary that shows that someone is making a racist or sexist or some other "ist" comment, we need to assume that it's not racist. Otherwise, racism and sexism or another ism can be used for the reason behind every action.Blacks voting for Obama instead of McCain can’t be racist because “Blacks” is a noun. (Sorry, but I couldn’t resist.) Actually, I don’t see any racism with that stat unless it differs greatly from the % of blacks who are registered as Democrats.