Jesse Jackson wants to cut off Obama's nuts.

[quote name='thrustbucket']Who do you suppose is better for the black community? Rev Jackson or Bill Cosby?[/quote]


Bill Cosby by far.

He didn't sugar coat his message. He essentially told it like it is. People's egos couldn't handle it though. Because of that people thought he was elitist, a snob, and a bunch of other things. It's funny, because for a large portion of the urban community "keeping it real" is sacred and Cosby kept it as real as you could get with his comments.

Also, unlike Rev. Jackson Cosby hasn't been known to make racist comments that I am aware of. That being said, the media has proven that we really don't know public figures as well as we think we do.

Rev. Jackson has done some good, so has Sharpton, but like Al Sharpton whenever there is race in the issue their judgement becomes clouded. That will always overshadow any good they may do.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Who do you suppose is better for the black community? Rev Jackson or Bill Cosby?[/QUOTE]

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?h...snL&q=inniss feagin&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=ws

Cosby's not considered an ideal person any more than Jackson is. The general view on Cosby is kinda complex:
1) what The Cosby Show did for mainstream black acceptance on television, and thus legitimizing them as more than "The Jeffersons" or somesuch, is immensely felt among many blacks, yet
2) many blacks feel a sense of betrayal (or, more innocently, that The Cosby Show is simply unrealistic) because the show, not *once*, dealt with racial issues on the program. As a result of never dealing with race in any of his public works or material, there was immense
3) resentment and agreement with Cosby when he finally began to address racial issues. Folks generally agree with him in part, but think that he overlooks the causes of inner-city black cultural antiintellectualism in favor of candy-coating the harsh, racist reality that puts up immense barriers to opportunity in the form of persistent discrimination. Cosby acts, in other words, like blacks are the sole agents in their destiny - which, of course, is not true; Moreover, since his only approach to racial issues is to slander blacks on the whole and talk down to them and talk bad about them, it was a mostly ineffective message. He was seen as partially correct in what he was saying, but also turned people off with his shitty tone, overall negativity towards blacks only - he cultivated a bit of an Uncle Tom imagery.

So black thoughts on Cosby aren't universally positive. Of course, for those of you who fall in line with (and ironic that we're having this conversation in a thread where a presidential candidate who speaks more eloquently than our sitting Pres and has great charisma is considered "talking down" to blacks) Cosby's approach - the "tough love," "get off your ass and do something" brigade simply fail to realize how discrimination works - as I've seen many of you all post in other race-based vs threads, most of you act like racism is a thing of the past and not the present at all - of COURSE you think Cosby has done more for blacks on the whole.

But that's just romanticism; his philanthropy is great and admirable, but that doesn't mean that his coinciding "blame blacks only" philosophy is sound or sensible.
 
Man, imagine if everyone were the same color, we wouldn't have this topic to bitch about and beat to death! Kinda seems to me like some people WANT racism, just so they can complain about it.
 
[quote name='VanillaGorilla']Man, imagine if everyone were the same color, we wouldn't have this topic to bitch about and beat to death! Kinda seems to me like some people WANT racism, just so they can complain about it.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, cause the Irish, Italians, Polish and Hungarians had it SO fuckING WELL OFF in the US during the late 19th and early-to-mid 20th centuries.

All we need is one race and people would NEVER DARE come up with another mechanism for classifying, arranging, and segregating people.

NEVER.

:roll:

;)
 
[quote name='mykevermin']

Cosby's not considered an ideal person any more than Jackson is. The general view on Cosby is kinda complex:[/quote]
So would you say that Cosby is "no better" than Jackson then? For black people? Your answer mostly just tried to explain why Cosby isn't as great as some people think. But who do YOU think does more for the black community?

I'd also like you to list a person you DO feel is the "ideal" person to represent blacks.


[quote name='VanillaGorilla']Man, imagine if everyone were the same color, we wouldn't have this topic to bitch about and beat to death! Kinda seems to me like some people WANT racism, just so they can complain about it.[/QUOTE]

I think there is a lot of truth to that. But people seem to inherently need a way to view themselves and classify themselves above others. It almost seems innate. And it sucks. Without race, it would be something else. Economic status, education, what car you drive.... I'm sure you know people that really do judge others by those as well.

Mykevermin has the most to say on the matter though, if he's bored enough I'm sure he'll explain more.
 
I think cosby was right in some cases and wrong in others. He was right when he said there were too many black men running out on their families (not to say that doesn't happen in all races), he seemed sincere about wanting to see that change. I think the cosby show was his idea of a perfect black family, i think he'd like to see that for all black people and it hurts him to see so many fathers running out on their families. He just wants to see people taking some responsibility for their own lives. "The man" isn't always the reason that someone's life sucks.

Now on the flip side, i know that there is still racism and discrimination in this country. I also know it is a factor in some people's lives, i just don't like to see it used as a crutch. If a person has tried to better themselves, but is still held back, i'd be the first to say something is wrong. I just get sick of people complainging about their shitty lives when they haven't done anyhting to improve them, that goes for people of any race.


Now about this Jackson business, i think it just shows what Jackson really is. Someone who preaches one thing, but practices another. He claims he wants the black race to stand together, yet he makes comments like that about the first black man with a real shot at becoming president. Actually, it sounds like he may be a little jealous, jealous that Obama has a real shot at winning the presidency when his own attempts failed so miserably.
 
Well right. In a perfect world, if suddenly racism ended tomorrow by magic, Jackson and Sharpton would essentially be out of jobs and have no purpose in life.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']Actually, it sounds like he may be a little jealous, jealous that Obama has a real shot at winning the presidency when his own attempts failed so miserably.[/QUOTE]

This, but change "a ltitle" to "very".
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Well right. In a perfect world, if suddenly racism ended tomorrow by magic, Jackson and Sharpton would essentially be out of jobs and have no purpose in life.[/quote]I once read something that said Martin Luther King Jr. and Jesse Jackson had a falling out, because King accused Jackson of using the civil rights movement to promote himself. It makes perfect sense. Like you said, without racism, Jackson is out of a job.

I still don't understand the whole "Reverend" Jackson thing, the guy is about as holy as i am, which is to say not at all. Where did he receive this title, by mailing in cracker jack box tops?
 
I wouldn't mind him cutting off his nuts for FISA, but I don't think he has any merit in doing it for "talking down to black people." I didn't read this whole topic, but South Park had Jesse's character down to a T.

Token: Jesse Jackson is NOT the Emperor of Black People!
::walks away::

Stan: He told my dad he was....
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I'd also like you to list a person you DO feel is the "ideal" person to represent blacks.[/QUOTE]

Obama_Hope.jpg


EDIT: This is the case EVEN if he's currently a no goodnik capitulating wimp Democrat who voted in favor of Big Brother and the Corporate Oligarchy via his "Yea" vote on the FISA Amendment this week.

EDIT2: Also, Dick Gregory. I think even you may like that guy.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']What do you think of Alan Keyes?[/quote]

Don't ask questions when you know the answers ;).
 
[quote name='mykevermin']http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:eek:fficial&hs=snL&q=inniss%20feagin&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=ws

Cosby's not considered an ideal person any more than Jackson is. The general view on Cosby is kinda complex:
1) what The Cosby Show did for mainstream black acceptance on television, and thus legitimizing them as more than "The Jeffersons" or somesuch, is immensely felt among many blacks, yet
2) many blacks feel a sense of betrayal (or, more innocently, that The Cosby Show is simply unrealistic) because the show, not *once*, dealt with racial issues on the program. As a result of never dealing with race in any of his public works or material, there was immense
3) resentment and agreement with Cosby when he finally began to address racial issues. Folks generally agree with him in part, but think that he overlooks the causes of inner-city black cultural antiintellectualism in favor of candy-coating the harsh, racist reality that puts up immense barriers to opportunity in the form of persistent discrimination. Cosby acts, in other words, like blacks are the sole agents in their destiny - which, of course, is not true; Moreover, since his only approach to racial issues is to slander blacks on the whole and talk down to them and talk bad about them, it was a mostly ineffective message. He was seen as partially correct in what he was saying, but also turned people off with his shitty tone, overall negativity towards blacks only - he cultivated a bit of an Uncle Tom imagery.

So black thoughts on Cosby aren't universally positive. Of course, for those of you who fall in line with (and ironic that we're having this conversation in a thread where a presidential candidate who speaks more eloquently than our sitting Pres and has great charisma is considered "talking down" to blacks) Cosby's approach - the "tough love," "get off your ass and do something" brigade simply fail to realize how discrimination works - as I've seen many of you all post in other race-based vs threads, most of you act like racism is a thing of the past and not the present at all - of COURSE you think Cosby has done more for blacks on the whole.

But that's just romanticism; his philanthropy is great and admirable, but that doesn't mean that his coinciding "blame blacks only" philosophy is sound or sensible.[/quote]


I just have a problem with any of the black population that expects social dialogue on racism out of a comedy that isn't designed to be that way. Not every show is All In The Family. Not every entertainment avenue for blacks has to have a social commentary. For example, there is too much mysogyny in hip-hop, but I certainly don't want to hear rapping about Darfur or Liberia from Snoop Dogg and I don't need to hear about racism in this day and age from a sitcom. That is what debate, discussion, and school is for.

While Cosby's message could have been tempered, I have seldom found that anyone with strong social or political views does that. All one has to do is look at any person on TV, left or right, speak their mind.
 
[quote name='SpazX']Don't ask questions when you know the answers ;).[/QUOTE]

I'm sure he dislikes him, especially politically. But I'm interested in hearing what myke, or anyone, thinks of him as a 'black leader'....
 
Jackson's full quote:

"I was watching The Waterboy on DVD. On the DVD's deleted scenes section, he [Bobby Boucher] gave a speech at a black church and it came off as speaking down to black people. I wanted to cut his nuts off. Then, I changed my mind because I am a huge fan of Adam Sandler’s work."

A conspiracy theory:

Shortly after Clinton's impeachment, an executive order was signed. The executive order stated that all future presidents would need to have their libido disabled to govern the country without sexual indiscretions preventing the president's important business. When Bush was sworn in, his testicles were anesthetized. Frankly, we're all disappointed by the US having a numbnuts for President. To maintain the executive order and be an improvement over Bush 43, the next president will have to be castrated. Assuming Obama wins, Jackson, a preacher and a licensed surgeon, wants to perform the castration on Obama to ensure nothing bad happens.

A terrible realization:

Removal of the testicles prevents production of testosterone. Without it, the male body partially reverts to a sexless state. One side effect is a higher voice. If Obama was castrated and spoke at a church afterwards, he would be speaking even further down to them.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I have to go back two decades to get to Jackson's "hymietown" comment, his most flagrantly racist remark on air. I have to go back to SUNDAY OF THIS WEEK to see you do so twice.

So you tell me, given the posts you make, how dare *you* have the audacity to make the posts you do and try to claim another person is racist? At all, let alone a sentence or two after suggesting you're going to get your "coonhound" and go hunt down a black person?

Did I ever say I wasn't racist? I just claimed that he was, I didn't say anything me. Me being hypocritical has nothing to do with it.
[/quote]


[quote name='mykevermin']Which, of course, negates everything he's ever done. I'm no fan, at all, of modern America's ability to apologize for its fuck ups. But let's be honest; you're using this as a convenient after-the-fact patchwork excuse to make it look like you decided you hated Jackson after a well-reasoned debate session with yourself, as opposed to deciding that you hated the guy and then building your case after the fact. [/quote]

You're right there. I've always hated Jesse Jackson, even before I knew why. Because my family told me to do so, and as a stupid little kid, I believed them. Was that statement 'patchwork'? Somewhat. Doesn't really metter.

[quote name='mykevermin']Case *in* point: the fact that you suggest he can't apologize when he's wrong, and only being able to cite one incidence of that, carries with it the implication that he is more often than not right and justified in what he says/does (otherwise his need for apologies would be all-encompassing and mundane). But you can't bring yourself to give him credit for anything, as you are too busy attacking him.[/quote]

I do know more than one case where Jesse Jackson refused to apologize. I really don't want to list them, as I can't remember them vividly. (There was one case with the black girl who was 'raped', then later confessed to never being raped. Happened years ago. Also, sometime during the Don Imus deal, he failed to apologize, or even admit about some racist comments he made towards Greeks years ago. There's more, but I can't remember.)



[quote name='mykevermin']Funny you should mention that...[/quote]
Maybe I did somewhat make an idiot of myself. Only because I didn't complete the thoughts I had. (Was in a hurry.) Hardly think the flaming was necessary though.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']for those of you who fall in line with ... Cosby's approach - the "tough love," "get off your ass and do something" brigade simply fail to realize how discrimination works - as I've seen many of you all post in other race-based vs threads, most of you act like racism is a thing of the past and not the present at all - of COURSE you think Cosby has done more for blacks on the whole.[/quote]

Discrimination also works even better against a group of people who segregate themselves by their self proclaimed disenfranchisement. Playing the victim has been the inefficient strategy of the so-called "black leadership" mouthpieces, like Jackson and Sharpton, for decades. Discrimination doesn't "work" or function by any process or procedure, it just exists. There is no formula for people hating each other so assuming the existence of one to erase the problem is illogical. Getting over it and up off your ass was Cosby's point, and it still is the only viable remedy existing in a vacuum of solutions offered by people like Jackson.

Successful people of any color, race, or group are the ones who do not complain about their obstacles to success, they are the ones who rise in spite of those hardships. They are not the ones who demand that a step be built for them to get a leg up, they take their own steps. I would never expect you to acknowledge this, however, because I know that you don't believe in individual accomplishment. We've previously established that you believe achievement can only be given, whether it is from whites to blacks, or from rich to poor, or from the "people" to an individual, or from one group to another. Asking someone to earn their status is an absurd notion in a world where badges are distributed on a "by need" basis.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']Discrimination doesn't "work" or function by any process or procedure, it just exists.[/quotes]

What in the world are you trying to say here? There's no patterned and identifiable process by which discrimination occurs? You may as well try to tell me the Nintendo Wii is a bomb and nobody wants one; both statements are equally true.

Getting over it and up off your ass was Cosby's point, and it still is the only viable remedy existing in a vacuum of solutions offered by people like Jackson.
Click to expand...

So, I take it this means we can eliminate the EEOC, since things work themselves out in ways that only the best qualified for the job get it. right. I take it I'm not the only one who started drinking early this weekend.

I would never expect you to acknowledge this, however, because I know that you don't believe in individual accomplishment. We've previously established that you believe achievement can only be given, whether it is from whites to blacks, or from rich to poor, or from the "people" to an individual, or from one group to another. Asking someone to earn their status is an absurd notion in a world where badges are distributed on a "by need" basis.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because it's a socialist communist capitalism-hating fucking nightmare of epic proportions to think that a person who is qualified for a position, qualified for a promotion, worked hard, fit in with the corporate image, gone above and beyond to prove themselves, would ACTUALLY GET THAT VERY THING THEY SEEK even if they would normally be denied that very thing because they happen to be too dark for the hiring manager's preferences.

Again, you can bait me with this "individual achievement" nonsense all you want, but it's you who is putting your hands over your ears with a LALALALAICAN'THEARYOU approach to the world in which we live, and the wholly predictable, repeatable, and reliable patterns by which qualified blacks are excluded from the meritocratic processes you hold so dear, and that whites are forgiven and included beyond their achievements (the natural logical corollary of discrimination is racial preference, y'know).

You buy into Adam Smith's emotionless bureaucracy working as a well-oiled, efficient machine that exalts the best and brightest - which they do, if you happen to be white. To deny the existence and persistence of discrimination in the modern labor market is to deny the existence of the sun. It may not matter if you're surrounded by millions of fools who would comfort you and tell you how correct you are, they're just as blind.
 
I don't think anyone here is denying discrimination exists.



Anyone that identifies themselves as a victim is automatically setting themselves up for a life of failure. Even if it's true.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Again, you can bait me with this "individual achievement" nonsense all you want, but it's you who is putting your hands over your ears with a LALALALAICAN'THEARYOU approach to the world in which we live, and the wholly predictable, repeatable, and reliable patterns by which qualified blacks are excluded from the meritocratic processes you hold so dear, and that whites are forgiven and included beyond their achievements (the natural logical corollary of discrimination is racial preference, y'know).

You buy into Adam Smith's emotionless bureaucracy working as a well-oiled, efficient machine that exalts the best and brightest - which they do, if you happen to be white. To deny the existence and persistence of discrimination in the modern labor market is to deny the existence of the sun. It may not matter if you're surrounded by millions of fools who would comfort you and tell you how correct you are, they're just as blind.
Click to expand...


I've never denied the existence of racial discrimination, mkye. I'm simply saying that the self-deprecatory, entitlement mindset isn't a recipe for success no matter what color your skin happens to be. The "whitey's keeping me down" excuse for living a life on the public dole, mistreating your baby momma and kids, and never making any personal accomplishment just doesn't compute. Minorities don't become business owners, lawyers, or presidential nominees by claiming victimhood and demanding reparations for past or present injustices. None of this is a denial that injustice and racism exist, only that they are not impediments that cannot be overcome with one's own effort, and not only remedied by the nearest white person or government bureaucrat.
 
So, myke - to quote you from the Helms thread :

[quote name='mykevermin']

Though if you think that I'd express disdain for one person over one act, you're being deliberately naive. A person who makes a career and leaves behind a legacy of hatred, bigotry, and for imposing a hierarchy based on race and sexual orientation in this country, on the other hand, is one whose removal from this mortal plane puts me at ease.

EDIT: Drinking *to* someone's death and drinking *for* someone's death are not identical acts, Spaz. Thanks for the defense, but I was celebrating that he was dead.[/QUOTE]

Since Jackson has made a living as a bigoted hate-spewing race hustler, you'll be buying the rounds when he takes that final journey?
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Anyone that identifies themselves as a victim is automatically setting themselves up for a life of failure. Even if it's true.[/quote]

Quotable.
 
[quote name='Heavy Hitter']So, myke - to quote you from the Helms thread :



Since Jackson has made a living as a bigoted hate-spewing race hustler, you'll be buying the rounds when he takes that final journey?[/QUOTE]

If you think of him as that, go right ahead. I don't think of him like that.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']If you think of him as that, go right ahead. I don't think of him like that.[/quote]

You can't? AARRGH! There goes another brain vein.

How is Jackson not a bigot or a race hustler?
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']

How is Jackson not a bigot or a race hustler?[/QUOTE]

Probably because he's black himself. :roll:

I'm pretty sure sooner or later, if Race Hustler ever makes it into the dictionary or an encyclopedia, his picture will be there.
 
I really have nothing against Obama, he's hard not to like. I just don't think he can/should run the country (from what I've seen so far).

I feel the same way about my sisters, my boss, my parents, and my mechanic. I love them all, they are great people, with great ideas, that do great things, but I wouldn't vote for them.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I really have nothing against Obama, he's hard not to like. I just don't think he can/should run the country (from what I've seen so far).

I feel the same way about my sisters, my boss, my parents, and my mechanic. I love them all, they are great people, with great ideas, that do great things, but I wouldn't vote for them.[/quote]

I'm not a fan of Obama's liberalism, but the campaign to put a lump of shit or and an inanimate rod of carbon on the ballot against McCain is sorely underfunded. That and the average American education makes it impossible for enough people to write-in "lump of shit" legibly to overcome McCain's guaranteed 10% of the people.

You need to get in touch with your inner Buckley: the average American citizen can run the country better than the average American politician.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I really have nothing against Obama, he's hard not to like. I just don't think he can/should run the country (from what I've seen so far).
[/QUOTE]

C'mon, what's the worst that could happen? Another Carter-esque administration? Instead of $4 gasoline we'll get rationing and 4 hour waits at the pump ?

I'm actually leaning towards voting for Obama. Anything would be better than McCain, who's a self-admitted foreign policy and economic dufus. Plus we'd have the added bonus of the marginalization of Jackson and Sharpton for for 4 years.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']C'mon, what's the worst that could happen? Another Carter-esque administration? Instead of $4 gasoline we'll get rationing and 4 hour waits at the pump ?

I'm actually leaning towards voting for Obama. Anything would be better than McCain, who's a self-admitted foreign policy and economic dufus. Plus we'd have the added bonus of the marginalization of Jackson and Sharpton for for 4 years.[/QUOTE]

Here's the thing about Jackson - I asked my mother about this (we get along on a political level about as much as I get along with you in the vs forum ;)) issue by saying "how does Jackson's comment resonate with the conservative stereotype of Jackson as an everpresent opportunist, given that he's now clearly put himself at odds with the would-be Obama administration?"

Now, of course, Jim Borgman's take is that this is politically savvy by making Obama more appealing to moderate America by setting him at odds with a person largely considered divisive:
100091tn590.jpg


Now, whether or not Jackson did this intentionally (again, going back to someone who, in Jackson's position, should know bloody well not to mouth off when being mic'd) is another question, and somewhat moot. It, in the end, has not hurt Obama at all, and surely helped his standing.

But it doesn't answer how people who have come to view Jackson as a "civil rights ambulance chaser" can frame this faux pas in a way that is consistent with said framing.

[quote name='Heavy Hitter']You may want to think before painting others with that brush - you're one of the most rigid and unflexible people here.

Is the view nice from way up there on your high horse? :roll:[/QUOTE]

What makes, say, you, or thrust, or bmulligan, or Msut77 any less rigid and inflexible?

Now, to maintain a viewpoint despite being clearly incorrect, that is problematic. Being stubborn and having reasons and data for feeling so? Not as much.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']
What makes, say, you, or thrust, or bmulligan, or Msut77 any less rigid and inflexible?

Now, to maintain a viewpoint despite being clearly incorrect, that is problematic. Being stubborn and having reasons and data for feeling so? Not as much.[/QUOTE]

Misinterpreting data, manipulating conclusions and assuming causality isn't a good excuse for being rigid. Neither is "all the other kids are doing it." In any scientific enterprise, where data collection is empirical and objective, conclusions can be incorrect and only invalidated decades, or centuries later through more precise measurements. The social sciences, especially, can't be said to be as exacting and unhindered by human fallibility and interpretation as, say, astronomical data collection. Human psychology is certainly more problematic to quantify than the quantity of infrared emission from the nearest galaxy. It's also much easier to validate my latest bridge design by driving a car over it than testing an economic or social theory. I'm not trying to knock your noble pursuits, myke, but that concrete wall you like to lean on for support is more like a mud hut in the rain.

And trying to consider Jackson as anything but an ambulance chaser is crazy talk. Sharpton learned from the master of showmanship. His entire career is built on the premise that America are racist. Any hint of a racist incident across the country results in an overnight flight, subsequent rally/protest/boycott, the blaming of white america for black peoples problems, and resulting newspaper headlines and CNN soundbyte. Regardless if the incident has merit, Jackson and his ilk use any media attention to toot their own horn as self-appointed saviors and defenders of the black race as a whole from the omnipresent white conspiracy that keeps the black man from succeeding. There is never any analysis of the situation or the truth because the truth is what Jackson says it is.

Having at least 50% of the country embrace a black man for president practically negates his life's purpose. Obama wrapping up the nomination must have been a crushing blow to his projected earning estimates for the next half decade. I'm willing to wager that instead of looking at this as progress for America, he sees it as a tragedy which will result in his eventual irrelevance.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']


What makes, say, you, or thrust, or bmulligan, or Msut77 any less rigid and inflexible?

Now, to maintain a viewpoint despite being clearly incorrect, that is problematic. Being stubborn and having reasons and data for feeling so? Not as much.[/QUOTE]

Hehe.

Well, in my defense, I would like to point out that some months ago you did change my mind on some things.

I like to think I'm teachable. In fact, if there is any glaring flaw I can admit to, it's that there are very very few things I feel that strongly about. I am first to admit I dabble in everything, but not enough to be an expert on anything. I change my mind on many things way too often. It drives many people close to me crazy.

That being said, I can also admit that I have been known to argue for arguing sake, which I am guilty of more than a few times here. More often than not, when I am arguing in this thread, it's just to be contrary rather than standing by something I firmly believe in (specifically anything religious, aborition, or homosexual rights)
 
fatherofcaitlyn is right, It's ok to say the N word if your black, didn't you get the PC memo?

On the other hand, if you are not black, and you use it, you are as bad as a slave owner.

But what does it make you if you are half black? Very confusing, this pc stuff gets....
 
The Rev. Al Sharpton, who has joined Jackson in opposition of the word, said on CBS News' The Early Show on Thursday that he was "very disappointed" by this latest revelation.

"I think this certainly does not reflect the Reverend Jackson that we all know and love," Sharpton said. "I think that we have to be consistent. We have denounced the N-word… I think clearly all of us must strive to do in private what we profess in public. Once we take this public position we have that responsibility. I've said and many of those in other groups, NAACP and others, that we've all used it in the past. And we've got to stop it as we challenge this nation. We can't challenge others without challenging ourselves."

"I still hold Reverend Jackson in high esteem, but I certainly do not at all condone the use of the word by Reverend Jackson, myself or anyone else," he added.
Click to expand...

at least Al is getting more coverage.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']1. It isn't a racial slur when used by AAs. See Dave Chappelle.

2. Will he make the apology tours on BET and Al Sharpton's show claiming he has lots of black friends? See Trent Lott and Michael Richards.[/quote]


Even Richard Pryor stopped using that word and he carries more weight than Chapelle ever could.

First of all, it has nothing to do with it being a racial slur if black people use it with other blacks. I'm black and I am as offended when a black person says it to me as any other person would. It shows a total lack of respect and a high amount of ignorance on that part of the person that uses it.

Second of all, Jackson called for entertainers to stop using it, then he uses it himself. There's the hypocrisy.

*edit* Forgive me if you were being facetious. It's hard to tell online sometimes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm sure you give every "Media Matters" link you get a fair shake, too.

:roll:

I suppose I have to give every Skrewdriver album a fair listen before I think they're fascist racist assholes as well?
 
[quote name='bmulligan']Misinterpreting data, manipulating conclusions and assuming causality isn't a good excuse for being rigid. Neither is "all the other kids are doing it." In any scientific enterprise, where data collection is empirical and objective, conclusions can be incorrect and only invalidated decades, or centuries later through more precise measurements. The social sciences, especially, can't be said to be as exacting and unhindered by human fallibility and interpretation as, say, astronomical data collection. Human psychology is certainly more problematic to quantify than the quantity of infrared emission from the nearest galaxy. It's also much easier to validate my latest bridge design by driving a car over it than testing an economic or social theory. I'm not trying to knock your noble pursuits, myke, but that concrete wall you like to lean on for support is more like a mud hut in the rain.[/quote]

Fancy words coming from someone whose rigidity is based solely on Adam Smith's fucking philosophy. These criticisms are akin to laughing at a knife I brought to a fight (remember the Crocodile Dundee scene?), saying "That's not a knife, THIS IS!" - and then holding up a pillow, or a duck.

And trying to consider Jackson as anything but an ambulance chaser is crazy talk. Sharpton learned from the master of showmanship. His entire career is built on the premise that America are racist. Any hint of a racist incident across the country results in an overnight flight, subsequent rally/protest/boycott, the blaming of white america for black peoples problems, and resulting newspaper headlines and CNN soundbyte. Regardless if the incident has merit, Jackson and his ilk use any media attention to toot their own horn as self-appointed saviors and defenders of the black race as a whole from the omnipresent white conspiracy that keeps the black man from succeeding. There is never any analysis of the situation or the truth because the truth is what Jackson says it is.
Click to expand...

I thought we were talking about my rigidity here, not exposing your unwillingness to consider your own potential points of stern positioning that would be better placed in the "ambiguous" or "complex" pile.

Having at least 50% of the country embrace a black man for president practically negates his life's purpose. Obama wrapping up the nomination must have been a crushing blow to his projected earning estimates for the next half decade. I'm willing to wager that instead of looking at this as progress for America, he sees it as a tragedy which will result in his eventual irrelevance.
Click to expand...

Our great grandchildren will be dead before racism is "gone" from the US - and if you really think Jackson believes that this cuts into his "bottom line," you're absurd - that's like thinking "doctors are upset about new medicine being introduced that might heal people - because that means there will be less sick people to see." It's faulty logic that thinks there will ever be a lack of racist incidents in this country in our lifetime.

But, then again, it would appear that you're the kind of person who would celebrate Obama's election as evidence that racism is totally stricken from American society (absurd to think that), rather than looking at it as a magnificent milestone - but one that ultimately shows how divided we are socially; when race becomes irrelevant (much like, say, a candidate's protestant faith!), then we'll clink glasses of fine ale. In the meantime, a milestone is that, a marker - not the finish line.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I'm sure you give every "Media Matters" link you get a fair shake, too.

:roll:

I suppose I have to give every Skrewdriver album a fair listen before I think they're fascist racist assholes as well?[/QUOTE]

You're only helping prove my point, so thanks for that.

As far as Media Matters goes, since it is a "Progressive" endeavor, I certainly will take that into consideration when looking at their content, but I wouldn't automatically dismiss it.

Shocker alert - I actually agree with their front-page article about non-coverage of McCain's flip-flopping over illegal immigration!
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Fancy words coming from someone whose rigidity is based solely on Adam Smith's fucking philosophy. These criticisms are akin to laughing at a knife I brought to a fight (remember the Crocodile Dundee scene?), saying "That's not a knife, THIS IS!" - and then holding up a pillow, or a duck.[/quote]

The nice thing about Capitalism is that the knife I bought is made with better steel, has a keener edge, and cuts more cleanly instead of that jagged, government issue shiv you're wielding, which was sharpened on the sidewalk.


Our great grandchildren will be dead before racism is "gone" from the US - and if you really think Jackson believes that this cuts into his "bottom line," you're absurd - that's like thinking "doctors are upset about new medicine being introduced that might heal people - because that means there will be less sick people to see." It's faulty logic that thinks there will ever be a lack of racist incidents in this country in our lifetime.

But, then again, it would appear that you're the kind of person who would celebrate Obama's election as evidence that racism is totally stricken from American society (absurd to think that), rather than looking at it as a magnificent milestone - but one that ultimately shows how divided we are socially; when race becomes irrelevant (much like, say, a candidate's protestant faith!), then we'll clink glasses of fine ale. In the meantime, a milestone is that, a marker - not the finish line.
Click to expand...

C'mon, myke, this kind of hyperbole is beyond even your realm of absurdity. You really deduce that I'll think racism is "totally stricken from american society" when Obama gets elected? Would I think that the elimination of welfare and social security programs would eliminate socizalism from american society? Of course not, there are too many people like you for me to think that's even in the realm of possibilities. In either case, I agree that there is never a finish line. Maybe one day when your party gains complete behavioral and economic control of human beings, you can eradicate racism and poverty by fiat and save us all from ourselves.

For you not to believe that Sharpton and Jackson rely on keeping us divided by race to maintain their own standing is in keeping with your other bouts of reality denial. That simple milestone you refer to is just that - a detour signpost for Jackson and his comrades that it's time for them to get off the highway and keep to the service drive- blacks have found real leaders who don't blame others for obsticles. Cut his nuts out for talking down to blacks? How exactly has Obama done this? Has anyone asked this question or bothered to ask Jackson to define this? Of course not. If talking to blacks like they are intelligent, rational people is talking down to them them Obama is certainly guilty and we must need more of that strait talk Jackson provides to keep whitey at bay and blackie in his place.

Frankly, I'm not going to celebrate either of these two dopplegangers (Obama, McCain) getting elected. We deserve better, and we should be voting for better. My guess is we would be voting for better if we weren't swayed by public opinion and mass thinking into backing candidates who are "electable" instead of those who are capable. We need more people who aren't afraid to be independent thinkers (A concept of which I'm sure you disapprove).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top