The Godwining of the American dialogue (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


AnimusRex -> The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/9/2011 4:53:33 PM)

The unindicted co-conspirators of the Giffords shooting tragedy are Roger Ailes and Sarah Palin.

It isn't that they used strong language to attack their political opponents; I think strong opinions are a good thing, even delivered in harsh terms.

If someone honestly and sincerely believes that Obama is a dictator who wants to kill Granny, I think they should say so, loudly and in the strongest of terms.

But Fox and Palin don't believe this. Instead, their messages about "death panels" and "Government takeover of medicine" were just cynical craven attempts at fanning the flames of fear and rage so as to gain ratings and political advantage.

It the political equivalent of hysterically accusing someone on a message board of being a Nazi- except in this case it had tragic results.

This is also why I don't accept the calls for "toning down" our rhetoric- as if everyone is doing what Fox does.

Saying hateful things is not the same as saying things hatefully.

If I said, politely and civilly, more in sorrow than anger, mind you, that black people were less intelligent than whites, and someone were to respond with obscene suggestions about my mother, which one of us would need to tone down our rhetoric?

It is the Right that is offering succor and comfort to the notion of white supremacy by altering history (such as the Texas textbook commission or Haley Barbour), and it is the Right that is openly proposing we allow people to die for lack of money (As AZ Gov, Jan Brewer is doing at this very moment), it is the Right that openly regards unemployed people as lazy stray animals, and it is the Tea Party that is suggesting that only property owners be allowed to vote.

These things are being said politely, calmly, in measured civil tones.

These are also hateful thoughts and ideas, and we should respond to them with fury and righteous indignation.





TreasureKY -> RE: The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/9/2011 4:56:45 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: AnimusRex

These are also hateful thoughts and ideas, and we should respond to them with fury and righteous indignation.


This is precisely how I feel about what you've posted.  [:'(]




Elisabella -> RE: The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/9/2011 5:08:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AnimusRex

If I said, politely and civilly, more in sorrow than anger, mind you, that black people were less intelligent than whites, and someone were to respond with obscene suggestions about my mother, which one of us would need to tone down our rhetoric?

It is the Right that is offering succor and comfort to the notion of white supremacy by altering history (such as the Texas textbook commission or Haley Barbour), and it is the Right that is openly proposing we allow people to die for lack of money (As AZ Gov, Jan Brewer is doing at this very moment), it is the Right that openly regards unemployed people as lazy stray animals, and it is the Tea Party that is suggesting that only property owners be allowed to vote.

These things are being said politely, calmly, in measured civil tones.

These are also hateful thoughts and ideas, and we should respond to them with fury and righteous indignation.



I fully, wholeheartedly disagree. Fury and rhetoric dilute the truth, they don't enhance it.

Compare:

Prima: Black people are less intelligent than white people.
Secunda: That is not true. Here are studies that prove equal intelligence between the races.

vs:

Prima: Black people are less intelligent than white people.
Secunda: Wow that's really racist.
Prima: I'm not racist, it's just a fact.
Secunda: No, you're fucking racist. Fuck you, racist.
Prima: I'm not racist, you just have white guilt.
Secunda: No, you're racist.

See how in the second version, the issue itself was obfuscated by "righteous indignation" and got sidetracked into a discussion about Prima's theoretical racism? That is a problem.

In my opinion, it is far better to react calmly, than to get bogged down in rhetoric the other side can use to their advantage to prove how "out of touch" the left is with the "average person" because they try to turn everything into talk about racism.

Would you vote for the person who called you racist, if you genuinely felt you weren't racist?




MrRodgers -> RE: The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/9/2011 6:00:40 PM)

quote:

Godwining
quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella


quote:

ORIGINAL: AnimusRex

If I said, politely and civilly, more in sorrow than anger, mind you, that black people were less intelligent than whites, and someone were to respond with obscene suggestions about my mother, which one of us would need to tone down our rhetoric?

It is the Right that is offering succor and comfort to the notion of white supremacy by altering history (such as the Texas textbook commission or Haley Barbour), and it is the Right that is openly proposing we allow people to die for lack of money (As AZ Gov, Jan Brewer is doing at this very moment), it is the Right that openly regards unemployed people as lazy stray animals, and it is the Tea Party that is suggesting that only property owners be allowed to vote.

These things are being said politely, calmly, in measured civil tones.

These are also hateful thoughts and ideas, and we should respond to them with fury and righteous indignation.


In my opinion, it is far better to react calmly, than to get bogged down in rhetoric the other side can use to their advantage to prove how "out of touch" the left is with the "average person" because they try to turn everything into talk about racism.

Would you vote for the person who called you racist, if you genuinely felt you weren't racist?

I would agree that is it better to react calmly but I also agree that far too many on the right have not. I have heard such ridiculous vitriol from many on the right that far surpasses anything I have heard in politics in far too many years that I care to recount.

This admin and even all of the left-wing, liberal establishment, are just like any other of that variety with the possible exception of Clinton that this country has experienced say since WWII. So many from the center/left believe this brand of 'overreaction' from the right can only be attributed to the one obvious glaring difference...he's black.

Rather than calm at all...it is the over reaction of the radical right stoked by media that I think inspired this post...and others.




popeye1250 -> RE: The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/9/2011 6:06:10 PM)

Rex, you need to look at the big picture. We have a president who doesn't know what he's doing and who nobody likes.




Charles6682 -> RE: The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/9/2011 6:06:13 PM)

Well said AnimusRex.Its good someone can see through the right wing hate and see it for what it truly is.




nighthawk3569 -> RE: The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/9/2011 7:18:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: AnimusRex

The unindicted co-conspirators of the Giffords shooting tragedy are Roger Ailes and Sarah Palin.

It isn't that they used strong language to attack their political opponents; I think strong opinions are a good thing, even delivered in harsh terms.

If someone honestly and sincerely believes that Obama is a dictator who wants to kill Granny, I think they should say so, loudly and in the strongest of terms.

But Fox and Palin don't believe this. Instead, their messages about "death panels" and "Government takeover of medicine" were just cynical craven attempts at fanning the flames of fear and rage so as to gain ratings and political advantage.

It the political equivalent of hysterically accusing someone on a message board of being a Nazi- except in this case it had tragic results.

This is also why I don't accept the calls for "toning down" our rhetoric- as if everyone is doing what Fox does.

Saying hateful things is not the same as saying things hatefully.

If I said, politely and civilly, more in sorrow than anger, mind you, that black people were less intelligent than whites, and someone were to respond with obscene suggestions about my mother, which one of us would need to tone down our rhetoric?

It is the Right that is offering succor and comfort to the notion of white supremacy by altering history (such as the Texas textbook commission or Haley Barbour), and it is the Right that is openly proposing we allow people to die for lack of money (As AZ Gov, Jan Brewer is doing at this very moment), it is the Right that openly regards unemployed people as lazy stray animals, and it is the Tea Party that is suggesting that only property owners be allowed to vote.

These things are being said politely, calmly, in measured civil tones.

These are also hateful thoughts and ideas, and we should respond to them with fury and righteous indignation.




Pretend you're conducting a seminar for a group from another planet. Define 'left', 'center', 'right'...along three examples of each, from the present American political scene.

'hawk




Lucylastic -> RE: The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/9/2011 7:27:35 PM)

What were obamas latest numbers??? around 50 %?? thats an awful lot of no-ones
keep drinking howies kool aid, or have you slid back down to savage?
Edited for missing letters




TheHeretic -> RE: The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/9/2011 7:34:10 PM)

I think any number of comments on the already in progress, 18 page discussion in this same forum would provide a suitable slap to your attempts to politicize this tragedy, Animu.

I'd say "shame on you," but I suspect you can't comprehend such a concept.




Elisabella -> RE: The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/9/2011 8:10:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

This admin and even all of the left-wing, liberal establishment, are just like any other of that variety with the possible exception of Clinton that this country has experienced say since WWII. So many from the center/left believe this brand of 'overreaction' from the right can only be attributed to the one obvious glaring difference...he's black.



I actually don't think that's the most obvious glaring difference - the American mindset is so different now than it was before 9/11 and moreso, the war in Iraq.

We have large numbers of people in our own country who think that our previous President should be charged with war crimes. There is a general sense of shame and stigma associated with Americanism, and "traditional American values" of Christianity and capitalism are viewed by the left as outdated anachronisms holding us back from progress.

This is a culture war. It's not about a black president. It's about war in Iraq - an unauthorized invasion or a justified intervention? It's about Islam - a peaceful religion corrupted by terrorists or a culture diametrically opposed to Americanism? It's about social democracy vs. capitalism, progressivism vs. traditionalism, globalism vs. nationalism, and the lines are more sharply drawn than ever before.

These are two distinct views of civilization - the traditional American individualism contrasted with the progressive Western European community-oriented model. This is even more important when you consider that for the 50 years before 9/11, America and Western Europe were the tightest of allies.

Saying it's about the black guy is sticking one's head in the sand. It's inexcusable.




DarkSteven -> RE: The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/9/2011 10:13:40 PM)

Animus, I disagree.  The haters on both sides are not responsible for this nutcase killing (it seems he fused his own bizarre belief system together and conventional liberal and conservative viewpoints were both too reasoned for him), but they have been responsible for a disappointing amount of weirdness since, in which each side has imagined that the other has infiltrated this guy's mind.






Charles6682 -> RE: The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/9/2011 10:23:17 PM)

The more I read about this guy,its clear his viewpoints were all over the place,like DarkSteven said.Perhaps he is the far left liberal that the media is saying he is.That still dosent change all the hate filled speeches that have been going on.The left does need to temper their anger in better direction.However,the very far rights speech really needs to be seriously lighten up alot.Going around with bulls eyes on people head,having a rally where people are shooting rifles in the air is getting to be very violent.The discussion needs to be brought back to "agree to disagree".I dont know where that fell short in America but thats the area we need to return to.This is why its so important to have the moderate/independents in there so much.When all you have is 2 extreme viewpoints running the show,this is what happens.A never ending aurgument about who is right and wrong.




Termyn8or -> RE: The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/10/2011 12:30:58 AM)

I am responding to the OP for my own reasons.

For one, take race out of the picture, if someone is indeed stupid why call them that ? It is more polite to criticize actions etc. than to attempt to label the person. But then that's not the,,,,, err maybe it is the point. When someone posts sopmething stupid, do you call the person stupid or the idea they put forth ?

I've always been a bit on the smart side, and blunt. When I was young I called another kid in school stupid and he started crying. I adjusted my behavior and call people stupid very rarely. They have to really be ignorant for me to go that far..........

In this case I belive that you used a certain point as an impetus for discussion of something that is a different point. As you can see it sometimes backfires. But let's address that point anyway. Take a dictionary from the 1950s or something and look up the Nword. Black person is only a secondary definition, the first usually being shiftless, lazy and stupid.

While political correctness had not gained the mass it has today, there was no reason to insult people. And there are many misconceptions about the past. I've been told of it. It is a sore spot and unfortunately it has been played upon for gain. What that gain is I am not sure.

Now I will put a similar statement out there. Say back in the 1950s that it was true that Blacks were not as intelligent as Whites. Well let's have a look at the facts. Whites had thousands of years to develop this society, and didn't really do all that great of a job either.

So take a look at them now. What was it 230 years ago ? It used to be ilegal to teach Blacks how to read. Get this straight, illegal to teach them how to read. Not only are they kidnapped and enslaved, now Whites wanted to keep them that way. What does that say about us ? In fact is there an us in the first place ?

That's the crux of it. Even though society focuses on what may have been said, it has no idea how it was thought. And there is reality. Since there are streets and cars now, how about at intersections we put a timed signal that stops traffic in one direction so it can pass in the other direction so the cars do not collide. Who thunka that ? You think that guy fell out of MIT with a 3.9 ? I doubt it.

It is the epitome of hypocracy for Whites to call others animalistic, unintelligent or brutal. One look at our history says it in spades. Whites started just about every major war on this planet, and usually did so to steal the resources of another race, whether it is a mineral, oil or gas or even sweat. We conquer. that's what we do. We take.

That is one of our traits, and if I speak of a different people defining their shortcomings it is "racist" or something. But I realize what I am. I call mtself a White Euro-American who has had alot of unearned advantages in life. Not so much compared to some, but just due to my "race" and/or in some cases my white skin. I am not proud of that. I prefer to earn what I have, and that includes respect.

We ignore this pack mentality, which translates into gang mentality in humans. We don't deal with it, we suppress it. In that we are wrong, we should deal with it. We should be able to do this openly, but really the human race is not advanced enough for that. That means everybody.

Birds of a feather flock together, this is an innate thing in just about all life on this planet. We purport to be beyond that, but the reality is that we hide that part of ourselves, even from ourselves at times. For example what could I call you ?

Hang on a minute........

OK, a quick perv reveals that you are a sexist, a male supremacist. That's how I read it. "natural order of things", a "chauvanistic" attitude to say the least. There are Women who will not be happy until all of "your kind" have died off the face of the planet. Now get this - I agree with you. I know that there are fundamental difference in the way a Woman's mind works versus that of a Man. Those differences in characteristics defined their roles back when society worked. (not everywhere, and it did not work perfectly)

What is the difference if you are "bigoted" against 50% of the population or 22% ? Does that matter ? If you think your judgement is better than others based on inborn attributes, you are as guilty as the KKK. Or so they say.

People with that type of attitude have wrecked it for the rest of us, and now we can't even discuss these issues without walking on eggshells. It's all your fault.

To complicate matters we use words all kinds of different ways now, verbs can be used as nouns and vice versa, nouns become adjectives quite easily. The language is fluid. In a society of adults, a bunch of things would not be so unacceptable. I use any word I want in my house. I use the Nword, the Kword, the Sword, you name it, and I don't care who is here. I don't call people names.

I said at one point "Richard is a fucking Jew". Now Richard is not Jewish at all, far from it. That usage was based on a stereotype, not that I hold that view, but I got the point across. So what ?

A guy does something I didn't like, I said "What are you a fucking N_____ ?  " Yep, blue eyed blonde haired dude of German descent.

Is it wrong to use those words in that context ? Possibly. If Richard was a Jew or Bernd (yes that is the correct spelling) was Black, I think it would. Know why ? Because it is not nice to call a person on crutches a "gimp", or a blind person "blinky", or a person with one arm or deformed arms "flipper".

And then we have another aspect of it, you can use those words with those people if you're friends and they know you don't mean anything derogatory. I ran someone up to the store a few years ago. I'm sitting in my car and a White calls across the street to a Black - "Hey N_____". I was thinking, OK, free entertainment or something. But there was no fight, they knew each other. they had shed that oversensitivity, they were past all that bullshit.

Anyone who wants to make assumptions about intelligence based on race listen up. Why do Orientals kick our ass, right here, on our own standardized tests ? Why do Arabs and Jews do well in business ? How do Russians get such good jobs when we have degreed people working at restaurants, as cashiers and whatever ?

Now the shoe is on the other foot. How do you like it ? Look at us, we live in the supposed land of opportunity, plagued with high unemployment and many other ills. Yet others will still come and excel. Who is inferior now ?

Let's take Mexican drug dealers. What do they do ? Discount the legal shit, what do they do ? They have obtained possesion of a desirable substance that will sell, they deliver the goods, collect the money and remit to their suppier minus their cut of course. They don't smoke up the profits, they don't do much anything wrong if left alone because they do not want to attract attention. How did they get that substance ? Obviously their customers couldn't. That is actually success no matter what you or I, or even the government thinks about it.

We are the land of opportunity apparently, for everyone except us. Who is inferior now ?

There is alot more to this issue than meets the eye. I responded directly but I saw the other replies. The problem now is to really go into depth about it would take a long time (err post) and people are probably about clawing their eyes out about now. This is long enough.

I will end this post by saying that those who thought they were superior to others really weren't. It was all an illusion. Everybody grow a little skin, and then maybe, just maybe we can deal with it and get past it for real instead of faking it.

T




truckinslave -> RE: The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/10/2011 1:46:34 AM)

Roger Ailes and Sarah Palin, unindicted co-cospirators uh? Liberals will stop at (almost) nothing to shut down the speech of anyone sufficiently effective to threaten their agenda; your pitiable little effort here is nothing new.

Stop the hate? All for stopping the hate: http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/10/the-progressive-climate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/




Charles6682 -> RE: The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/10/2011 2:27:07 AM)

Thats a very interesting link Truck.It just shows that there is extremism everywhere.Extremism should not be tolerated period.I think a civil debate on this could perhaps ease tension on all sides.




truckinslave -> RE: The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/10/2011 2:41:20 AM)

You probably think that's the cleverest, most intelligent post you've made in a while.
Sadly, I concur.




Charles6682 -> RE: The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/10/2011 2:45:07 AM)

Whats wrong with having a civil debate on this matter?I just think extremism should never be tolerated.




DarkSteven -> RE: The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/10/2011 3:08:01 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Charles6682

I just think extremism should never be tolerated.


Ah, but in a free society, what do we do?  Extremist actions are easy to punish, but punishing extremist thoughts is not.  Then entire idea of being intolerant for a set of beliefs bothers me a lot.




truckinslave -> RE: The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/10/2011 4:57:55 AM)

I was going to give you the benefit of the doubt and take the edited post (#15) as a sort of left-handed apology for the crassness of your original, unedited post- which was an immature snark that went on about, "Gee, wonder if that Sarh bitch would like another one?". 
Turning it into an attack on me changes that somewhat.
Grow a pair, stand by what you write, and learn to write coherently.

Meanwhile, I'll try to get my quote function restored so that you can't pull that kind of cowardly dishonest shit on me again.




thishereboi -> RE: The Godwining of the American dialogue (1/10/2011 5:18:37 AM)

quote:

These are also hateful thoughts and ideas, and we should respond to them with fury and righteous indignation.


Or you could stop posting them. But since you seem intent, let me ask you a few questions?

Do you have this much contempt for your fellow countrymen or is just the Americans you hate so much?

Do you think that spewing this kind of hate actually helps anyone?

Does it make you feel better about yourself to talk about how inferior others are?




Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.078125