T1B

JayDuck,

Consider his statements about Imus vs. his beloved Reverend. Imus, a clown, gets paid to make silly remarks and bring in advertisers. Reverend Wright, a purported "preacher", serious, spiritual, deep and moving. (Of course, the reality is, he's just a clown too but with more power because he's cloaked in the garb of religion)

Obama, called for Imus' head. The good reverend, gets a pass.


Doesn't that conern you at all ?

Tom In VA wrote:Obama, called for Imus' head. The good reverend, gets a pass.

I don't recall Obama calling for the beheading of Don Imus. Link?

Tom In VA wrote:
Doesn't that conern you at all ?

Honestly? No.

And, for the record I would say that Imus has more power due to a much larger audience.

BSmack wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:Obama, called for Imus' head. The good reverend, gets a pass.

I don't recall Obama calling for the beheading of Don Imus. Link?

Aaaaah, ever the literalist when it's convenient. I'll retract the statement and provide another one.


Obama took Imus' comments with more umbrage than he did the comments made by Rev. Wright. I think THAT is a problem.

That's more precise.

JayDuck wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:
Doesn't that conern you at all ?

Honestly? No.

And, for the record I would say that Imus has more power due to a much larger audience.

Fair enough. It does concern me though and I think your perception of a "Shock Jock" having more pull than a preacher whose entire platform is as divisive as it gets divisive is misguided.

Tom In VA wrote: Fair enough. It does concern me though and I think your perception of a "Shock Jock" having more pull than a preacher whose entire platform is as divisive as it gets divisive is misguided.

To be honest. I'm not even sure what there is to be concerned about in what Wright said. "America's chicken's have come home to roost"? "God Damn America?"

Perhaps the fact that I don't actually believe in god or any church plays a role in it, but but his statements simply don't scare me in any reasonable way.

Tom In VA wrote:

BSmack wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:Obama, called for Imus' head. The good reverend, gets a pass.

I don't recall Obama calling for the beheading of Don Imus. Link?

Aaaaah, ever the literalist when it's convenient. I'll retract the statement and provide another one.

Obama took Imus' comments with more umbrage than he did the comments made by Rev. Wright. I think THAT is a problem. That's more precise.

You do? What fucking planet do you live on? To draw an equivalence between Imus and Wright's comments is idiotic.

JayDuck wrote:

Tom In VA wrote: Fair enough. It does concern me though and I think your perception of a "Shock Jock" having more pull than a preacher whose entire platform is as divisive as it gets divisive is misguided.

To be honest. I'm not even sure what there is to be concerned about in what Wright said. "America's chicken's have come home to roost"? "God Damn America?"

Perhaps the fact that I don't actually believe in god or any church plays a role in it, but but his statements simply don't scare me in any reasonable way.

The Christian Robe is a sheepskin hiding a wolf of "racial" Nationalism, be it black nationalism or white nationalism. I think both are matters of concern because I think balkanizing the country would be a bad thing. That's just my opinion. Nobody is trying to scare you, we're having a discussion and dialog to waste time at work AND potentially learn a thing or two. The good Rev. Wright, is the candy coating on a Black Nationalist sour ball. I view him no different than I view White Nationalists. In my opinion, those would both be threats to this country and based on a "whose who" list at the Southern Poverty Law Center, I'm not alone.

BSmack wrote:You do? What fucking planet do you live on? To draw an equivalence between Imus and Wright's comments is idiotic.

That's not what I did. I did not draw and equivalence between Imus and Wright's comments. In fact, they ARE NOT, equalivent. Wrights comments are far more egregious than Imus'. Yet Obama seems to think otherwise.

mvscal wrote: That's because you're a fucking moron.

It's not supposed to scare you. It's supposed to make you think twice about putting somebody in the White House who shares that point of view, you fucking dimwit.

No. I'm well aware of what you'd liked it to do.

It doesn't make me think he shares that point of view. As I've stated before, perhaps its my skeptisism, but I doubt Barak Obama is particularly religuous at all. He was raised in a secular family, and needed a church tied to a community like Trinity to advance his political career. And from my experience, many, if not most church goers aren't particularly religiuous in this country in the first place, and don't place an particularly great amount of weight on their preachers/pastors/ministers personal beliefs.

Does that mean that Obama is lying when he talks about his faith? Yeah, to some degree. Do I give a shit? No, because this country wouldn't vote an atheist into office.

With that said, I've actually been to predominantly black churches before and they are very different from predominantly white ones. Its been that way for a very long time and they come from very different places than white ones. Not that you care, of course, but as little as 40/50 years ago when guys like Reverened Wright were young, in many places in this country blacks were treated pretty fucking poorly. And the church provided pretty much everything for them. If they were getting harrassed, stalked, or threatened by white people the police in many areas wouldn't even do shit for them. Instead their safe havens were their churches.

No. I don't believe things are like that anymore and I do think that there are many black people, particularly older blacks, that need to let go of many of these hangups. But, In every black church I've been to there are still a lot of remenants and reminders of this in sermons, and speeches, coming from the older blacks.

I feel no reason to be threatened by this and have absolutely no fears of white people being oppressed in this country because of it.

JayDuck wrote: I feel no reason to be threatened by this and have absolutely no fears of white people being oppressed in this country because of it.

Put the Public Enemy #1 CD down for a minute. That isn't the "fear".

Tom In VA wrote:

JayDuck wrote: I feel no reason to be threatened by this and have absolutely no fears of white people being oppressed in this country because of it.

Put the Public Enemy #1 CD down for a minute. That isn't the "fear".

It seems to me that is a fear I've seen people name.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/ju ... aryclinton

'We'll end up slaves. We'll be made slaves just like they was once slaves,' he said. Telvor, a white Democrat who supported Hillary Clinton in West Virginia's primary, said he planned to vote for Republican John McCain in November. 'At least he's an American,' he added with a disarmingly friendly smile.

That or that Obama is "Anti-American", which I guess suggests he's secretely going to be working to bring down America.



Sorry, but I just don't buy into any of these ridiculous assertions that long time associations with a black people who have been more Public Enemy than Will Smith suggest that Obama is going to work to damage America, or that he's Anti-American. I don't buy that a half-black guy, raised by the white side of his family, and gone through Harvard is anti-white. I don't buy that there is anything to fear from Barak Obama going to Reverened Wright's church.

"Anti-American" is the label that gets put on most liberals, by the right, anyway and I see all of this bullshit as really not much different than that.

mvscal wrote: He no principles and no loyalties and, evidently, no honestly held convictions. He's an empty suit. He offers nothing and stands for nothing.

Well, McCain's a full diaper.

I'll still take Obama.

JayDuck wrote: "Anti-American" is the label that gets put on most liberals, by the right, anyway and I see all of this bullshit as really not much different than that.

Well look at their policies. Don't you think signing laws that, in effect, hobble the American economic system to such an extent that other countries are drilling for oil 60-100 miles off OUR COAST and yet American companies ARE NOT ALLOWED to is in effect - ANTI AMERICAN ?

If you're going to SEE CLEARLY, the fringe element that suggests how Obama's policies will be one step to enslaving whites why do you ignore the fact that the same fringe - that propagates fear of oppression and sells the notion that blacks ARE being oppressed when they are not - exists ? AND that Obama spent 20 years in a church and considers a preacher who makes money off those very claims as a "spiritual advisor". And then claim nobody has a right to question that ? C'mon man, sell that shit somewhere else.

Tom In VA wrote:

BSmack wrote:You do? What fucking planet do you live on? To draw an equivalence between Imus and Wright's comments is idiotic.

That's not what I did. I did not draw and equivalence between Imus and Wright's comments. In fact, they ARE NOT, equalivent. Wrights comments are far more egregious than Imus'. Yet Obama seems to think otherwise.

Most sane people do think otherwise.

Tom In VA wrote: If you're going to SEE CLEARLY, the fringe element that suggests how Obama's policies will be one step to enslaving whites why do you ignore the fact that the same fringe - that propagates fear of oppression and sells the notion that blacks ARE being oppressed when they are not - exists ? AND that Obama spent 20 years in a church and considers a preacher who makes money off those very claims as a "spiritual advisor". And then claim nobody has a right to question that ? C'mon man, sell that shit somewhere else.

I thought I made that clear in my post. As I said, I do think there are many blacks that need to stop holding on to some of these hangups. However, the big difference is that blacks have been oppressed in this country during Reverened Wright's lifetime. I didn't ignore that fringe. That fringe just has a much more valid claim to reality. While I don't believe blacks are what I would consider oppressed in this country, to ignore that they are still impacted negatively by racisism is also bullshit, in my opninion.

And to your other point. Show me anywhere where I said nobody has a right to question it. I've never made any such claim. I've only said that I don't buy any of it. It seems you and mvscal are angry at me for not buying it. I never told you that you can't. This started because you asked me if I was concerned about this shit. I said "no" and have explained why I'm not concerned about it. I never told you not to be.

In the end, I don't think its going to make one lick of difference, though. You are either concerned about this type of shit, or you aren't. Those that are, were never going to vote for Obama in the first place. Nobody's sitting on the fence on this issue and going to be convinced to change their opinion to either side. And really, that's been my point. No, I'm not concerned and people continually saying "Really, your not concerned about this?" isn't going to all of sudden make me go, "well, now that you've mentioned it 1,000,000,000 times instead of just 999,999,999 times you know what, I am concerned"

Agreed. But to suggest that whites aren't also impacted by the racism of blacks AND other whites is bullshit as well.

No I'm not angry. I've just been engaging in an interesting dialog with you. Have I attacked you in some way ?

Okay.

Tom In VA wrote:Agreed. But to suggest that whites aren't also impacted by the racism of blacks AND other whites is bullshit as well.

Whites are impacted to a far lesser extent. It certainly happens, but most of the time its brought up its this mock outrage we've been talking about that does nothing to bring attention to it. Like this "old white lady" comment. Nobody's actually offended by it, they are offended that "if it was reversed it would be offensive". That's just stupid. As mscval actually correctly said yesterday

"The only thing that matters is how it is perceived by the group demeaned by his ignorant stereotype."

When blacks, or other minority groups are targeting with racial, sterotyped comments, they feel shamed, denigrated, as if they've been "put in their place"

When whites are targeted with racial stereotypes, they feel upset because they aren't allowed to do it too.

Talk about entitlement.

But, that's not the case in every instance. There are legitimate instances in which Whites are seriously racially targetted that shouldn't be ignored. Whites are minorities in some areas of the country (Hell, whites are minorities where I live right now in Los Angeles). And whites can be targetted, harrassed, beaten or worse because of their race.

But bringing up this mock-outrage reverse racisim is (in my opinion) bullshit because it ONLY serves to try and divide. Its not because anybody is acutally feeling hurt by it.

Papa Willie wrote:

JayDuck wrote: But, In every black church I've been to there are still a lot of remenants and reminders of this in sermons, and speeches, coming from the older blacks.

Stop it.

How many blacks are in Oregon? 12? 15? Shit - they're aren't enough blacks in Oregon to even make UP a fucking church. :D

Do you go to these churches? If so - why?

I haven't lived in Oregon for 10 years.

I've been to a black church in South Carolina, Florida and one in Seattle, all with a family friend.

Papa Willie wrote:

JayDuck wrote: But, In every black church I've been to there are still a lot of remenants and reminders of this in sermons, and speeches, coming from the older blacks.

Stop it.

How many blacks are in Oregon? 12? 15? Shit - they're aren't enough blacks in Oregon to even make UP a fucking church. :D

Do you go to these churches? If so - why?

He's cruising for BLACK COCK to SUCK. Isn't it obvious?

Cuda wrote:

Papa Willie wrote:

JayDuck wrote: But, In every black church I've been to there are still a lot of remenants and reminders of this in sermons, and speeches, coming from the older blacks.

Stop it.

How many blacks are in Oregon? 12? 15? Shit - they're aren't enough blacks in Oregon to even make UP a fucking church. :D

Do you go to these churches? If so - why?

He's cruising for BLACK COCK to SUCK. Isn't it obvious?

Unsuprising that that's the only reason you can think of to hang out with black people.

The banana on your avatar says more about you than the monkey.

Oooooh, I'm Rubber, You're Glue.

Good one, Gay Duck.

Cuda wrote:Oooooh, I'm Rubber, You're Glue.

Good one, Gay Duck.

More like, wear a rubber, so some black guy doesn't glue your eyes shut.

Papa Willie wrote: Dude - I can show you black churches around where I live where you'd get fucking shot if you walked in the door from being white. Bet your ass that blacks hate whites more than the reversal.

Until you grow up and live in the South, you're not going to understand.

I believe it. Believe me, I wasn't entirely comfortable in that church in S. Carolina.

JayDuck wrote:But, that's not the case in every instance. There are legitimate instances in which Whites are seriously racially targetted that shouldn't be ignored. Whites are minorities in some areas of the country (Hell, whites are minorities where I live right now in Los Angeles). And whites can be targetted, harrassed, beaten or worse because of their race.

But bringing up this mock-outrage reverse racisim is (in my opinion) bullshit because it ONLY serves to try and divide. Its not because anybody is acutally feeling hurt by it.

So you've taken Bobby Knight's advice and decided to "lay back and enjoy it" when it comes to double standards and RACISM - there is no such thing as REVERSE racism BTW. Why do you expect others to do the same ?

Do YOU somehow feel you deserve to be treated less than and ostracized because you happen to be white ?

Papa Willie wrote:

JayDuck wrote:

Papa Willie wrote: Dude - I can show you black churches around where I live where you'd get fucking shot if you walked in the door from being white. Bet your ass that blacks hate whites more than the reversal.

Until you grow up and live in the South, you're not going to understand.

I believe it. Believe me, I wasn't entirely comfortable in that church in S. Carolina.

I'd bet!

Neither was his upper sigmoid

Tom In VA wrote:
Do YOU somehow feel you deserve to be treated less than and ostracized because you happen to be white ?

I simply refer you back to my post, of which the point you've apparently completely missed. I feel that anything is fair game, as long as its not offensive to the people you are talking to/about.

I don't feel that comments like "my grndmother is a typical old white lady" is ostracizing, or treating any group of people, as less. And I don't believe that anybody was offended by it, in any way other than a sense of "we can't say that" entitlement.

JayDuck wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:
Do YOU somehow feel you deserve to be treated less than and ostracized because you happen to be white ?

I simply refer you back to my post, of which the point you've apparently completely missed. I feel that anything is fair game, as long as its not offensive to the people you are talking to/about.

I don't feel that comments like "my grndmother is a typical old white lady" is ostracizing, or treating any group of people, as less. And I don't believe that anybody was offended by it, in any way other than a sense of "we can't say that" entitlement.

I got that part. Where we disagree is where you seem to think it's a notion of entitlement, I disagree with that. I don't think whites feel "slighted" because their speech is limited. That it's scrutinized, and one slip up can equal the loss of a job, otherwise decent reputation, and a host of other nasty consequences based on what they say is another thing. It's about a double standard. So the question I asked remains, but I will rephrase it more appropriately.

Do YOU somehow feel you deserve to be held to a different standard because you happen to be white ?

Tom In VA wrote:
I got that part. Where we disagree is where you seem to think it's a notion of entitlement, I disagree with that. I don't think whites feel "slighted" because their speech is limited. That it's scrutinized, and one slip up can equal the loss of a job, otherwise decent reputation, and a host of other nasty consequences based on what they say is another thing. It's about a double standard. So the question I asked remains, but I will rephrase it more appropriately.

Do YOU somehow feel you deserve to be held to a different standard because you happen to be white ?

I'm not sure what you aren't getting here. I'm not held to a different standard. The standard is if the statements are offensive to the people you are talking to/about.

JayDuck wrote: I'm not held to a different standard.

Oh. Okay. Lucky you. So a white politican who consorts with White Nationalists but espouses CHANGE we can believe in would get your vote too.

At least you're consistent. RACK THAT I suppose.

Tom In VA wrote:Oh. Okay. Lucky you. So a white politican who consorts with White Nationalists but espouses CHANGE we can believe in would get your vote too.

Most of the white nationalists I've seen want to party like it's 1859.

Tom In VA wrote:

JayDuck wrote: I'm not held to a different standard.

Oh. Okay. Lucky you. So a white politican who consorts with White Nationalists but espouses CHANGE we can believe in would get your vote too.

At least you're consistent. RACK THAT I suppose.

If I would or wouldn't vote for this politician doesn't change what standards I am held to.

BSmack wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:Oh. Okay. Lucky you. So a white politican who consorts with White Nationalists but espouses CHANGE we can believe in would get your vote too.

Most of the white nationalists I've seen want to party like it's 1859.

Not really. They're actually no different than Black Nationalists.

Each believes in the genetic and spiritual superiority of their respective groups, "chosen by God" for something.
Each seeks separation from an integrated society. Black Nationalists believe the governments and corporations responsible for slavery OWE them the land and "start up capital" so to speak.
Each, hate Jews.

Etc.. etc..

Just out of curiosity B, you ever MET a true hardcore Black Nationalist ? or White Nationalist for that matter.

JayDuck wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:

JayDuck wrote: I'm not held to a different standard.

Oh. Okay. Lucky you. So a white politican who consorts with White Nationalists but espouses CHANGE we can believe in would get your vote too.

At least you're consistent. RACK THAT I suppose.

If I would or wouldn't vote for this politician doesn't change what standards I am held to.

We've already established that. You don't have to answer the question, I already know the answer.

Tom In VA wrote:Just out of curiosity B, you ever MET a true hardcore Black Nationalist ? or White Nationalist for that matter.

Define "true hardcore". I've met a lot of racists of both colors.

Tom In VA wrote:
We've already established that. You don't have to answer the question, I already know the answer.

Shouldn't your real concern be if a Black Nationalist would be allowed to run, and a White Nationalist wouldn't, rather than who I would vote for?

BSmack wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:Just out of curiosity B, you ever MET a true hardcore Black Nationalist ? or White Nationalist for that matter.

Define "true hardcore". I've met a lot of racists of both colors.

You haven't met any hardcores; you're still breathing

JayDuck wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:
We've already established that. You don't have to answer the question, I already know the answer.

Shouldn't your real concern be if a Black Nationalist would be allowed to run, and a White Nationalist wouldn't

I do find it troublesome and potentially damaging to give either one a pass rather than subject BOTH to the same level of scrutiny and disdain.

BSmack wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:Just out of curiosity B, you ever MET a true hardcore Black Nationalist ? or White Nationalist for that matter.

Define "true hardcore". I've met a lot of racists of both colors.

Strange birds aren't they.

Tom In VA wrote:

JayDuck wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:
We've already established that. You don't have to answer the question, I already know the answer.

Shouldn't your real concern be if a Black Nationalist would be allowed to run, and a White Nationalist wouldn't

I do find it troublesome and potentially damaging to give either one a pass rather than subject BOTH to the same level of scrutiny and disdain.

I would say the idea that one has gotten a pass and has not been scrutinized and disdained is bullshit. Reverened Wright and Obama's church have been hammered on TV continually for the past couple months non-stop.