Printable View
Dopple,
How many times have you been called a Retard in your life? 10-20 thousand?
And a fag? 5-10 thousand?
And a Nigger? 0?
If you don't see the difference between Strom Thurmond/Trent Lott's and Rahm Emanual's "verbal transgressions" then I guess maybe it was more like 30-40 thousand.
Schmoj,
I guess you must run with a very different crowd than I do based on your response. Retard? Fag? Folks didn't use that sort of language and remain healthy where I live.
Did you even know what Lott said? From your response I doubt it. FYI living in the south I have been called a nigger even though I am white. Also you should have noticed black folks call each other nigger with wild abandon yet if someone else uses the word they are racist.
My point in the prior post is the Republican's tend to do the "right thing" and resign while the Democrats / Liberals would not know the "right thing" if it bit them in the ass - which IMHO is going to happen in November this year.
I also think the whole thing is over blown but the Liberals / Democrats are great at dishing it out but pretty thin skinned when it comes to taking it.
Exit soapbox stage right!
Doppel, people aren't going to resign (or fire someone) just because someone from the other political party thinks they should.
Wild Walleye, you really do put the 'Wild' in your name.
Some of your stuff is so far out it cannot be taken seriously. But you do it so often it starts becoming difficult to take you seriously. I like your intellectual arguments (honest) but they are so frequently peppered with wild statements that I don't know what to make of it.
[QUOTE=Wild Walleye]He believes that capitalism is inherently evil [/QUOTE]Absurd. Obama like Dems in general recognize the shortcomings of capitalism, and want to address them while still maintaining a largely capitalistic system.
[QUOTE]He longs to seize the private property of individual citizens [/QUOTE]GM was a special situation. He has said and done little to suggest this is what he thinks about every day.
[QUOTE]The problem here is that while the right holds its own to certain standards, there are no standards for the left.[/QUOTE]Rather one-sided don't you think?
[QUOTE]Opposition to Obama's candidacy and opposing anything Obama proposes is racist [/QUOTE]Never heard anybody suggest that until now.
[QUOTE]His intended swan song is to bankrupt the US[/QUOTE]Oh boy.
Yes, I believe I will now have to address you by your first name.
Folks. Why can't we all get along.
When it comes to blacks, African Americans, coloreds, Negros, or what ever.
The truth be told, if you meet someone from above and their nasty mother fucker with no redeeming value as a human being (I. E rappers, thugs, gang bangers) the're a NIGGER in my book.
But if their civilized and willing to assimilate and contribute to society and leave the race issue in the past, then their cool. Using the word NIGGER is a racist comment and reflects badly on you as a person.
Bottom line:
The word NIGGER is fitting and appropriate in my opinion to reflect the distain society should have for people who are undermining spciety and trying to game the system, regardless of color.
[blue]Greetings Everyone,.
I am aware that the vast majority of references to racial issues are legitimate. However, past discussions in the Forum has repeatedly demonstrated that the subject simply cannot be discussed intelligently, in any form or for any reason, without being misinterpreted and without starting flame wars.
Please do not engage in discussions about race or racism in the Forum. Please read the Forum's Posting Guidelines for further information.
Thanks,.
Jackson[/blue]
Feel free to take issue with any of the facts or opinions that I have stated. You may label me any way you like, cast dispersions, what have you. As you have hopefully noticed, I enjoy deploying the razor tongue and being part armadillo, I have thick skin. However, your rush to dismiss me as a right wing kook is an obvious ploy to try to discredit anything I say, a tactic seen over and over again.
Scmoj, welcome back. The attached photo is for you.
My personal opinion, formed within my own tiny brain, is that Obama is bad for the nation, its citizens and its founding principles. I prefer not to wait until the country is broken and on its knees to take issue with 'leadership' that promises to destroy what has made this nation great. If you cannot or chose not to see the facts, you will need to rely on others to protect your rights for you.
If you were screaming about Bush, you should be howling about Obama. His words and deeds speak volumes for his disregard for the rule of law, specifically the Constitution (not that he, as a 'Constitutional Expert' should be expected to be able to discern between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution) The left seems to think that he is so brilliant and special that we should allow him to be untethered from the constraints of the Constitution so that he can fix what is wrong with the country. Further, because he is do divine and the Democrats so enlightened, we should weaken checks and balances so that they don't get in the way either. Silly supreme court justices making decisions he doesn't like (and clearly doesn't understand) While we are at it, why don't we reduce the number of votes needed for a super majority in the Senate (you might be surprised to know that it wasn't always 3/5s (used to take 2/3s) to make a super majority) so the pesky minority doesn't get in the way?
Look, I am certain Obama is much smarter than all of the founding fathers combined, so let's just make him Supreme Ruler.
You dismiss out of hand the very real example of what happened in the case of GM.
[QUOTE=Esten]GM was a special situation. He has said and done little to suggest this is what he thinks about every day.[/QUOTE]Obama: "Because of the terrible mess I inherited from George W. Bush (who by the way is really Beelzebub) I am going to ignore and willingly contravene the Constitution and take these assets (GM) from their legal owners (bondholders in top UCC position (you probably don't know or care what that means) and give them to the unions (who were instrumental in getting me this gig) Just this one time. OK, just twice because I am going to do it with Chrysler, too." "Other than that, I am A-O-K with that Constitution thingy."
Suspending provisions of the Constitution is no small matter that can be dismissed as a special situation. Lincoln suspended habeus-corpus in 1862 and that is a major moment in US history. This is a slippery slope. Next stop, tracking your every move via your cell phone.
Exhibit #1: Case 08-4227 "In the Matter of the Application of the United States of America For An Order Directing A Provider of Electronic Communication Service To Disclose Records to the Government United States of America" The appellant in that case is none other than the Obama administration, which "has argued that warrantless tracking is permitted because Americans enjoy no "reasonable expectation of privacy" in their--or at least their cell phones'--whereabouts. U. S. Department of Justice lawyers say that "a customer's Fourth Amendment rights are not violated when the phone company reveals to the government its own records" that show where a mobile device placed and received calls."
I am sure you were all over Bush for 'warrantless wiretapping' (which was nothing of the sort and is an activity currently being used by the Obama Administration.
Esten,
Perhaps you could explain that to Trent Lott et al.
[QUOTE=Doppelganger]Perhaps you could explain that to Trent Lott et al.[/QUOTE]That's hilarious. Notice how you (and some Republicans) make the comparison with Lott as the entire basis of your position. Rather than judge what Reid said on its own.
I'm not going to debate what they said, it would bore me to tears. I think what they said was different, though neither warranting a resignation. Though Lott's statement was a bit on the edge. Black leaders did not have an issue with Reid's statement. Please note the use of the word 'just' in my prior post.
Esten,
Trent Lott is only one of several Republicans which could be named. That aside, based on your postings - it seems you are permitted to make grand pronouncements on your beliefs but no one else is afforded this "privilege" if they disagree with you.
Is this a case of either "Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story" or "Don't confuse me with the facts"?
By the way – I'm an independent not a Republican.
Because I never said that. We are all entitled to post and respond to what we wish to.
[QUOTE=Esten]Black leaders did not have an issue with Reid's statement. [/QUOTE]This is not critical of Esten's statement.
Just pointing out that feigned outrage is overflowing when a republican says something that is inappropriate or can be misconstrued, however, when the source is a protected liberal, the aggrieved constituency is silent, or at least the anointed leaders (I. E. Those I nlock-step with the left) speaking for them (or more accurately claiming to speak for them) are notoriously absent.
I don't think that either Lott or Reid should be drummed out of office for their comments. Let the voters decide. That said, this is a blood sport and language is one of the avenues of attack favored by the left, therefore, the right cannot shy away from demanding a two-way street on this (although they will never get it)
[QUOTE=Sidney]Just saw where the U. S. Govt. Is spending $400,000 to pay for Gay men to troll Gay Bars in Arg. To study their frequency of having sex after drinking alcohol.[/QUOTE]I bet it's part of their "Stimulus Plan".
ROTFLMAF!
Jackson
[QUOTE=Esten]Though Lott's statement was a bit on the edge. Black leaders did not have an issue with Reid's statement. Please note the use of the word 'just' in my prior post.[/QUOTE]Esten:
How can you take Palin to task for giving Limbaugh a pass but not do the same for the self-appointed "black leaders" who gave Reid a pass? It's the exact same issue. Each chooses not to feign offense when members of their own constituency utter supposedly off-color remarks.
Candidly, what Reid said is objectively more offensive than anything Limbaugh and especially Lott said.
The idea that black leaders didn't have an issue with what Reid said is the point: They've got a double standard. If they want to insist that Lott resign, they darn well better stand on the same principles with Harry Reid. The fact that they didn't just shows that they are obvious hypocrites. And, yes, I would paint Palin with that same brush.