Everyone's talking about Obama, when McCain's allied with John Hagie

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Utoo said:
Never being able to catch a cab in DC because you're black (despite the fact that half of DC is black..) has as much to do with racism as an outright hate crime.

Seriously?

I don't think James Byrd, Jr.* or Matthew Shepard's** families would agree with you at all.





* On June 7, 1998, Byrd, 49, accepted a ride from three drunk men named Shawn Allen Berry, Lawrence Russel Brewer, and John William King. He had already known one of them. Instead of taking him home, the three men beat Byrd behind a convenience store, tied him to their pickup truck with a chain tied around his waist, stripped the man naked, and dragged him about three miles. It is not known whether he was alive during the dragging. Although Lawrence Russell Brewer claimed that Byrd's throat had been slashed before he was dragged, forensic evidence suggests that Byrd had been attempting to keep his head up, and an autopsy suggested that Byrd was alive for much of the dragging and died after his right arm and head were severed when his body hit a culvert. His body had caught a sewage drain on the side of the road resulting in Byrd's decapitation.


** Shortly after midnight on October 7, 1998, 21-year-old Shepard met McKinney and Henderson in a bar. McKinney and Henderson posed as gay men and offered Shepard a ride in their car.[3] Subsequently, Shepard was robbed, pistol whipped, tortured, tied to a fence in a remote, rural area, and left to die. McKinney and Henderson also found out his address and intended to burglarize his home. Still tied to the fence, Shepard was discovered eighteen hours later by a cyclist, who at first thought that Shepard was a scarecrow. Shepard was still alive, but in a coma, at the time of discovery.

Shepard suffered a fracture from the back of his head to the front of his right ear. He had severe brain stem damage, which affected his body's ability to regulate heart rate, body temperature and other vital signs. There were also about a dozen small lacerations around his head, face and neck. His injuries were deemed too severe for doctors to operate. Shepard never regained consciousness and remained on full life support. As he lay in intensive care, candlelight vigils were held by the people of Laramie.[4]

He was pronounced dead at 12:53 a.m. on October 12, 1998 at Poudre Valley Hospital in Fort Collins.[5][6][7][8] Police arrested McKinney and Henderson shortly thereafter, finding the bloody gun as well as the victim's shoes and wallet in their truck.[9]
 
Utoo said:
Seriously? It has everything to do with race. It's the same way I was never followed around in a convenience store unless I went in with my black friend. Or how in high school I could walk through the halls and chat with the principal, but my friend would consistently be asked for a hall pass.

The "serious issue of race" doesn't only have to do with outright hatred or abuse. In fact, it's the little things that, when piled on together throughout one's life, makes the effects of race even larger.
.

464px-Rosa_Parks_Booking.jpg



The law that had Rosa Parks arrested and put in jail because she would not give up her seat to a white person was repealed and made illegal.

On the face of it, it was a racist law.

If there was a Cab Company that had a policy not to service people of color it would be subject to legal action.



Who are these cabbies that are not picking up black people?

r145449_509194.jpg


Does the KKK own Cab companies?

Do you think Denzil Washington can get a cab in NYC?
Could a person with alcoholic beverages or a dog catch a cab?





Did your school have a policy that said, stop only black students in the hall?
 
Do you honestly think that it's not?

I'm surprised the cave that you live in has an internet connection.
 
/\ ok, if many is not enough

Why do you think it is difficult for MOST black men to catch a cab?






Cabbies for the most part are “independent contractors’.
They work for themselves.


They want to make as much money as possible.
If Denzil walks out of a club in NYC, he will get a cab.

If some middle age white bastard like me, that wants a lift to the upper west side steps up,
I get a cab. :shrug:



If an immigrant cab driver thinks a fare will take him to Harlem,
and he will not get a return fare, he will dodge that fare.
If he ends up in a part of town where he gets robbed.
he will avoid fares that he believes (rightfully or not) will want to go to those locations.


I am not defending ignorant thinking.
We have serious problems with race in America.

What fares cabbies will or will not pick up,
has nothing to do with Government, or institutional racism.

It goes to each individual ignorant cab operator.
 
Utoo said:


I'm surprised the cave that you live in has an internet connection.

He actually lives in a turquoise green beach house with black and white tile thru-out post Hollywood art deco style right out of the 80s.

Quite swanky.:up:

if you're nice he may even post a picture of his crib, the cab drivers never want to pick him up on his front door step, and we can't figure out why :angry:

dbs
 
A_Wanderer said:
And what top down action could be enacted by the state to prevent that type of discrimination?

perhaps it should be required that

everyone listen to a blistering sermon by the right Reverend Wright :shrug:

"Hillary never had a cab whiz past her and not pick her up because her skin was the wrong color.

Hillary never had to worry about being pulled over in her car . . .

Hillary ain't never been called a ******"

Hillary looks like a good tipper, cabbies love that.

Hillary doesn't knock back a forty and grab the wheel (that would be Cheney)

Hillary called ******? I don't think so.
but has Wright even been caller a middle aged CUNT in a dumpy pant suit?
 
deep said:

Hillary called ******? I don't think so.
but has Wright even been caller a middle aged CUNT in a dumpy pant suit?



i can agree

that sexism and racism are different experiences that are inextricably linked

and "iron my shirt" is just as bad as "shine my shoes"

but Rev. Wright is speaking about one specific topic

this does not necessarily imply

that one experience is necessarily worse than the other

Hillary will never be called a n*gger

Obama will never be called a c*nt

but Michelle could be called both

and Bill will never be called either

i can always get a cab

because drivers know that i will never ask them to take me to SE DC

and, truth be told, i don't think it's wrong that i get a little bit more aware of my surroundings when walking around at night and a group of young black males passes me on the street

than i do

if i were passed by a bunch of drunk white women

statistics bear this out

but that does not mean that the young black men who've never mugged me

aren't going to feel as if i've singled them out

and aren't going to resent the slight stiffening of my walk, the shift of my eyes to a point in the near distance, and a bored-but-guarded look settles across my face

it's how it is

and no one is to blame

and everyone is
 
Last edited:
yes, my heart bleeds

but I must choose

what battles to fight

what is a subtle slight

and what is a wrong

that can be made right
 
martha said:


:confused:



Acronyms. :down:

Fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD) is a tactic of rhetoric used in public relations. FUD is generally a strategic attempt to influence public perception by disseminating negative (and vague) information.
 
deep said:

Hillary called ******? I don't think so.
but has Wright even been caller a middle aged CUNT in a dumpy pant suit?

Actually that's an interesting point. I'm quite sure some people would feel free to call her that word in public and/or in discussion. How many would feel just as free to call Senator Obama the n word? I have seen the c word used on Interference plenty of times, including in FYM to describe various women. Is the n word allowed here in that same context? Don't think so.

While I agree with Rev Wright that Hillary has never been called the n word, I disagree completely with him when he says that she, as a woman, doesn't know what it's like to be treated as a non person. Many women know what that is like. Is it on the same level as racism? Most likely not, and not for me to say really as a white person. You can argue the c word vs the n word, but both are dehumanizing.
 
I can think of an example where it was used by the other party in a perfectly reasonable way without a hint of self-deprecation, it was not a misogynistic joke.

How a word is used is dehumanising, there is a big difference between calling somebody a cunt because they are a bastard or a dick personality wise (there isn't any misandry in calling someone a dick or a cockhead etc.) and reducing a woman to a mere tool for base function. I do not think that words can be inherently dehumanising in and of themselves.

The instantaneous response however makes it fertile ground for high comedy; getting up on stage and spewing sexist drivel could border on genius if done right.
 
Last edited:
For the same reason that Borat interviewing the Veteran Feminists of America ilicits laughter. It is the mockery of the self-righteous attitudes - it has nothing to do with the merits of universal suffrage and equality and everything to do with making fun of something considered beyond repproach.

If somebody was truly commited to staging such a routine I think that it would be more controversial than an act that involved burning a Bible.

And to clarify the reason even in writing this I anticipate an negative response that implies that I think womens rights are a laughing matter ergo they don't matter.
 
Well Jane Fonda using that word on the Today Show when she was talking about the Vagina Monologues was fine.

But if a male uses that word at me, I ain't gonna like it and I know what it means and what the intent is. No confusion there. Words aren't inherently dehumanizing and it does depend upon the context. But if Kramer had gotten up and used that word and went into a sexist rant there wouldn't have been the (or any really) outrage about it. What if it had just been "hos" instead of "nappy headed hos"?
 
MrsSpringsteen said:


Actually that's an interesting point. I'm quite sure some people would feel free to call her that word in public and/or in discussion. How many would feel just as free to call Senator Obama the n word? I have seen the c word used on Interference plenty of times, including in FYM to describe various women. Is the n word allowed here in that same context? Don't think so.

While I agree with Rev Wright that Hillary has never been called the n word, I disagree completely with him when he says that she, as a woman, doesn't know what it's like to be treated as a non person. Many women know what that is like. Is it on the same level as racism? Most likely not, and not for me to say really as a white person. You can argue the c word vs the n word, but both are dehumanizing.

This is actually a rather illogical post, because, if anything, 'cunt' and, for that matter, 'prick' are much more likely to be used as insulting words against men rather than women.

It's interesting that the culture views 'cunt' as a much more offensive term than 'prick'.

One is a slang term for the female genital organs, while the other is a slang term for the male sexual organ.

However, 'cunt' is viewed as much more offensive - almost a taboo word - yet 'prick' is only viewed as a mild profanity.

Could it be that this is because when women complain vociferously (and justifiably, it must be said) about a slang term for the female genital organs being used as an insult, their concerns are taken seriously by society - whereas mens' concens aren't?

Could it actually be that men aren't permitted to get offended, but are just expected to lap it up, take it on the chin, etc?
 
Last edited:
financeguy said:


This is actually a rather illogical post, because, if anything, 'cunt' and, for that matter, 'prick' are much more likely to be used as insulting words against men rather than women.

It's interesting that the culture views 'cunt' as a much more offensive term than 'prick'.

One is a slang term for the female genital organs, while the other is a slang term for the male sexual organ.

However, 'cunt' is viewed as much more offensive - almost a taboo word - yet 'prick' is only viewed as a mild profanity.

Could it be that this is because when women complain vociferously (and justifiably, it must be said) about a slang term for the female genital organs being used as an insult, their concerns are taken seriously by society - whereas mens' concens aren't?

Could it actually be that men aren't permitted to get offended, but are just expected to lap it up, take it on the chin, etc?



could it be that the word "cunt" was often followed by a rape or a beating?

would you similarly differentiate between (and these are American phrases, so we already know how much culture matters when it comes to this stuff) "honkey" and "n*gger"?

or does the structural power difference between men and women, and between whites and blacks, actually have much to do with the actual definition of the word and the reason why it's so offensive? that embedded into the definition of the word is the threat of violence?
 
Here's one for you guys to fight over, written by an intelligent *man of color who is an intellectual giant and conservative, liberals' worst nightmare. Operational db9 chaos theory rolls forward, gleefully.

I suspect mr. deep may even agree with Dr Sowell's piece.



Sowell.JPG



March 25, 2008
The Audacity of Rhetoric
By Thomas Sowell

It is painful to watch defenders of Barack Obama tying themselves into knots trying to evade the obvious.

Some are saying that Senator Obama cannot be held responsible for what his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, said. In their version of events, Barack Obama just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time -- and a bunch of mean-spirited people are trying to make something out of it.

It makes a good story, but it won't stand up under scrutiny.

Barack Obama's own account of his life shows that he consciously sought out people on the far left fringe. In college, "I chose my friends carefully," he said in his first book, "Dreams From My Father."

These friends included "Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk rock performance poets" -- in Obama's own words -- as well as the "more politically active black students." He later visited a former member of the terrorist Weatherman underground, who endorsed him when he ran for state senator.

Obama didn't just happen to encounter Jeremiah Wright, who just happened to say some way out things. Jeremiah Wright is in the same mold as the kinds of people Barack Obama began seeking out in college -- members of the left, anti-American counter-culture.

In Shelby Steele's brilliantly insightful book about Barack Obama -- "A Bound Man" -- it is painfully clear that Obama was one of those people seeking a racial identity that he had never really experienced in growing up in a white world. He was trying to become a convert to blackness, as it were -- and, like many converts, he went overboard.

Nor has Obama changed in recent years. His voting record in the U.S. Senate is the furthest left of any Senator. There is a remarkable consistency in what Barack Obama has done over the years, despite inconsistencies in what he says.

The irony is that Obama's sudden rise politically to the level of being the leading contender for his party's presidential nomination has required him to project an entirely different persona, that of a post-racial leader who can heal divisiveness and bring us all together.

The ease with which he has accomplished this chameleon-like change, and entranced both white and black Democrats, is a tribute to the man's talent and a warning about his reliability.

There is no evidence that Obama ever sought to educate himself on the views of people on the other end of the political spectrum, much less reach out to them. He reached out from the left to the far left. That's bringing us all together?

Is "divisiveness" defined as disagreeing with the agenda of the left? Who on the left was ever called divisive by Obama before that became politically necessary in order to respond to revelations about Jeremiah Wright?

One sign of Obama's verbal virtuosity was his equating a passing comment by his grandmother -- "a typical white person," he says -- with an organized campaign of public vilification of America in general and white America in particular, by Jeremiah Wright.

Since all things are the same, except for the differences, and different except for the similarities, it is always possible to make things look similar verbally, however different they are in the real world.

Among the many desperate gambits by defenders of Senator Obama and Jeremiah Wright is to say that Wright's words have a "resonance" in the black community.

There was a time when the Ku Klux Klan's words had a resonance among whites, not only in the South but in other states. Some people joined the KKK in order to advance their political careers. Did that make it OK? Is it all just a matter of whose ox is gored?

While many whites may be annoyed by Jeremiah Wright's words, a year from now most of them will probably have forgotten about him. But many blacks who absorb his toxic message can still be paying for it, big-time, for decades to come.

Why should young blacks be expected to work to meet educational standards, or even behavioral standards, if they believe the message that all their problems are caused by whites, that the deck is stacked against them? That is ultimately a message of hopelessness, however much audacity it may have.

Copyright 2008, Creators Syndicate Inc.
 
Last edited:
[Q]One sign of Obama's verbal virtuosity was his equating a passing comment by his grandmother -- "a typical white person," he says -- with an organized campaign of public vilification of America in general and white America in particular, by Jeremiah Wright.
[/Q]



i think this wins the "distortion of the week" prize.
 
Irvine511 said:
could it be that the word "cunt" was often followed by a rape or a beating?

I find this an odd question, as in my experience this term is generally used against men rather than women (usually by other males, it must be said.) So, no, if I jokingly called one of my male friends a cunt, I probably wouldn't follow it up with a rape or beating.


Irvine511 said:


would you similarly differentiate between (and these are American phrases, so we already know how much culture matters when it comes to this stuff) "honkey" and "n*gger"?

Do black criminals call white victims 'honkey' before they attack them?

Because all the available evidence shows that white people are considerably more likely to be victims of crime perpretated by blacks than vice versa.
 
financeguy said:
This is actually a rather illogical post, because, if anything, 'cunt' and, for that matter, 'prick' are much more likely to be used as insulting words against men rather than women.
Not in the US, in fact it's almost unheard of for a man to be called 'cunt' here. 'Bitch' is the reigning casual pejorative in US English for a woman one feels disgruntled with.
However, 'cunt' is viewed as much more offensive - almost a taboo word - yet 'prick' is only viewed as a mild profanity.
Because comparing someone to female sex organs is seen as a much lower blow than comparing them to male sex organs.
 
Last edited:
I am genuinely surprised.

Well, I guess it's another example of cultural differences.
 
Back
Top Bottom