quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mupainurpleasure

I'm sorry but can you give me some examples of non right wing people talking about political correctness? I pointed out the meaning because it is so maligned and misunderstood. I'm not exactly sure but I dont think you get to decide what a word means when you dont like the actual meaning. I believe the Websters dictionary is the best source on the english language. It would get confusing if we all decided to have out own definitions of words wouldnt it? People on the liberal side understand it to be basic civility. It doesnt mean they all proctice it but damn oppossing the concept seems to be a conservative core beleif

I think we're at cross-purposes here, MPUP. I can't give you any examples of non right wing people talking about political correctness because it's not a term that the left wing uses. If a lefty were to stamp on the US flag, for instance, and a righty were to see this action and get upset about it, the lefty wouldn't then charge the righty with being 'politically correct', nor would the righty believe that his feelings of outrage have anything to do with he, the righty, being 'politically correct'.

From what I've seen, the term 'politically correct' has become so embracing that, by now, it can refer to pretty much anything that the Right doesn't like about the sensibilities of the Left. Those on the right will deem these lefty sensibilities to be 'ideologically based'. The Right's own views, though, are commonly assumed not to have any 'ideology', as such, behind them at all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Karmastic
I should have been more clear. My post was about the phrase "political correctness", and my comments were directed at those who make it about the nebulous right v left, or repubs v dems. It was starting to sound like a shill party.

I don't understand where you're going with the right/left angles; seems that can only be half-baked in. The phrase has a definition outside of the right/left or political parties, so no amount of wrangling will change that.

It's mostly a term used by the right wing, Karmastic, used pejoratively of certain facets of left wing policies and sensibilities. (Parties are neither here nor there on that.) That really is just how it's used. Unless you can think of specific examples, in common usage, that show otherwise?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mupainurpleasure

I am proud of the work I did and the slodiers lives it saved. It's a caricature to think liberals knee jerk flag burners and anti countrey. EWe love our country we just have a different and equally valid perspective.

quote:

You are an american so am I

quote:

The right has an ideology Private sector is more effiicent, goverment as a problem, opposition to prtogressive taxation... You are worng on ideology. both sides have one and both sides overstate the others extremism

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:



I'll do a check later and post the results.

oh no need I am familar with the numbers cant blame a guy for trying. The growth is still far slower than under W unless you include census


I like your sinature by the way. I also believe only the truly need y shoulds get social safety net support but believe the term truly is redundant. needy is needy.

Although I am not for a conservative or liberal take on the constitution I am very strongly opposed to the type of activism that throws out a long established precendence as in citizens united. I also think that case by instructing the group bringing the challenge to come back with a new argument the next term speaks to a desire to rule a certain way rtehr than judge legal arguments. It and the abortion ruling are the 2nd and third most activist decuions in my lifetime. We will all pay the price those corporate doantions arent given freely they are an investment with an expected return in favorable treatment. When unlimited money flows we can expect we will se ethe same type of bought and paid for goverment thast existed before laws wer epassed to stop it.

The most activist has to be Bush vs Gore where the court stepped in and overturned state law and did so while making a statement it was to hbave no precedence which is ridiculous. If it has no mprecedence as law they had no right. That isnt partisan. The court makes rulings on laws not events. In that case they ruled on an event just some thoughts on activism and the courts and the misconception many have all activism is liberal


i supprt limited govderment as well. it's a broad term. Are there parts of goverment you would eliminate? Myself I think the medicare advantage program, corporate welfare programs ( three times citizen welfare costs) and farm subsidies on farm s s,maller than a certain acreage and larger than a certain acreage so we stop paying subsidies on a Lawyers ten acres and Monsantos 2000k and return to the idea of supoorting family farms... That would be my start... seee, lierals dont like all goverment or think all of it a good. Those are just handouts to the unneedy not thetruly needy. It';'s like the inasane tobacco subsidies in Va given to farmers with net worths of 800k a few years ago. Wealthy people dont need a handout only the needy need a hand up


Consumption is tricky. have you read how high rates would have to be to replace the Income tax or how regressive it would be in terms of poercentasge of income paid?? We already have a regressive system form what I understand that system would be a huge cut in high end rates that are already lower than middle class rates and a huge increase in the rate the poor and middle class pay

(in reply to DesideriScuri)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
The right *does* have ideology, but they have generally claimed otherwise. Right wingers are wrong to do so, in my view - but I think it's important to understand that that's how they often see themselves - as 'ideology free'. They see lefties as having 'bought into' ideology whereas they, the righties, have stuck with 'common sense', what's 'real', what's 'natural' etc, etc.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mupainurpleasure

I'm sorry but can you give me some examples of non right wing people talking about political correctness? I pointed out the meaning because it is so maligned and misunderstood. I'm not exactly sure but I dont think you get to decide what a word means when you dont like the actual meaning. I believe the Websters dictionary is the best source on the english language. It would get confusing if we all decided to have out own definitions of words wouldnt it? People on the liberal side understand it to be basic civility. It doesnt mean they all proctice it but damn oppossing the concept seems to be a conservative core beleif

I think we're at cross-purposes here, MPUP. I can't give you any examples of non right wing people talking about political correctness because it's not a term that the left wing uses. If a lefty were to stamp on the US flag, for instance, and a righty were to see this action and get upset about it, the lefty wouldn't then charge the righty with being 'politically correct', nor would the righty believe that his feelings of outrage have anything to do with he, the righty, being 'politically correct'.

quote:

From what I've seen, the term 'politically correct' has become so embracing that, by now, it can refer to pretty much anything that the Right doesn't like about the sensibilities of the Left. Those on the right will deem these lefty sensibilities to be 'ideologically based'. The Right's own views, though, are commonly assumed not to have any 'ideology', as such, behind them at all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mupainurpleasure

I am proud of the work I did and the slodiers lives it saved. It's a caricature to think liberals knee jerk flag burners and anti countrey. EWe love our country we just have a different and equally valid perspective.

Of course. In the UK, there are various brands of nationalism. English nationalism, at least as far as the nationalist parties are concerned, is basically right wing. It's chauvinistic and to some extent or another (UKIP, versus, say, the English Defence League) xenophobic. Scottish and Welsh nationalism isn't the same at all. It's generally liberal and inclusive. In England, a flavour of the same liberalism has grown up in English nationalism, but it's still pretty nascent. English nationalism is still much more characterised by the Union Jack, the Monarchy and 'fine old conservative traditions'. That, to me, seems to be equivalent to the bigger strand of American nationalism: there, as here, nationalism has been 'taken by the right as its own'. But it doesn't *have* to be that way. Not at all.

quote:

You are an american so am I

No, I'm British.

quote:

The right has an ideology Private sector is more effiicent, goverment as a problem, opposition to prtogressive taxation... You are worng on ideology. both sides have one and both sides overstate the others extremism

The right *does* have ideology, but they have generally claimed otherwise. Right wingers are wrong to do so, in my view - but I think it's important to understand that that's how they often see themselves - as 'ideology free'. They see lefties as having 'bought into' ideology whereas they, the righties, have stuck with 'common sense', what's 'real', what's 'natural' etc, etc.

One intriguing little sign of this lack of consciousness of ideology is that those on the extreme right very often don't even realise that they're on the extreme right. Those on the extreme left, though, always do.

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
It's not what is offensive or not. It's who gets to decide what is offensive or not.

I will tell you, it offends me when people get offended over stupid shit that should simply be ignored.

quote:

The distinction is that it is not the government but private citizens. I am under no obligation to give my private business to anyone (well, that may change depending upon the Supreme Court's ruling on the Individual Mandate... but that is another issue). If I don't like the food at a particular restaurant I do not have to eat there. I am also perfectly free to let them know why I don't like their food ("crab salad my ass, I know that cheapo fake crab shit when I see it"). I if am the only one (or only one of a few) of that opinion, the restaurant's business will likely be unaffected. They can ignore me. If I am one of thousands, the restaurant has a problem on its hands and will need to make some changes or risk going out of business.

I see no difference when it is the radio business. If a radio station is not pleasing its listeners it not going to have many listeners. It is then up to the radio station to either change or go out of business. Do not confuse the demand that a DJ be removed from the air with the actual authority to carry it out. I can demand all day long, that doesn't mean I have the authority to carry it out. If the DJ in question is removed it will be his employers making the decision and exercising their authority... in response to the market place. The DJ will still be free to express his opinions on the proper corrective measures for potential teenage lesbians... he'll just have a smaller audience. Like wise, if the chef at the above mentioned restaurant is fired, he will still be free to make his crappy "crab" salad... he just wont be getting paid for it anymore.

There are social conventions that arise in any group. The questions is whether those conventions arise out of the interactions of individuals that comprise the group... or are imposed upon it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

quote:


There are social conventions that arise in any group. The questions is whether those conventions arise out of the interactions of individuals that comprise the group... or are imposed upon it.

Succinctly and to the point!

Bravo

The group in this case is the people of the United States, who want to be able freely to choose who they want to listen to on the radio, on television, or on the Internet. Yes, you have every right to purchase from whomever you wish, or not, and to use your power as a consumer to influence decisions by bringing financial pressure to bear on those who make them. My quibble is not with your methods, it is with your ends. The next time something like this happens, when it's some Christian Decency movement mounting a boycott to get a show taken off the air, I'll expect you to cry "Bravo" and explain that they're not trying to "impose" anything on anybody.

K.

quote:

As for the DJ in question, well, I’d still like to hear an audio before I make up my mind as to whether he bears any legal culpability. As for his notion of humor, however, I will use my freedom of speech to once again declare him a shithead. Somebody really needs to smack him upside the head with a two by four… I don’t mean that literally, of course... in case there are any nutcase out there reading this.

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

I say let's get Bubba the Enormous Ex-Con and his Enormous Whatsit to screw this idiot gay.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

It isn't even a matter of being PC.  Some things are just so outrageous, they shouldn't be tolerated in a civilized society.  

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Ah yes. "Politically correct". I'd *love* to see a definition of that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Karmastic

you still seem to be complaining about them trying to control your viewing habits, but not realizing it's on you to counter-protest. The loudest group (the squeaky wheels) will always be heard first, that's just the way it is. So really, what's your real issue?

What's this about my viewing/listening habits? Do you see this as being about nothing more than what you or I happen to like or find offensive? Is that all you got out of my posts? And why are you telling me that it's on me to counter-protest? What the hell do you think I'm doing? The difference is, I'm squeaking to the people I have a difference with, not trying to shut them down or ruin their careers by squeaking to somebody else.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

FR

Given that "corrective rape" is something that has, and does continue to happen, this is similar to someone advocating any type of hate crime (e.g., inciting people to burn a cross on someone's lawn, or inciting people to "lynch" someone, inciting people to physically attack someone who is homosexual). Forget about PC for a moment. Do people really think that inciting people to commit a hate crime is something good??

I think context is everything here. Living in a society where these types of hate crimes actually occur means that people have to have some sensitivity about encouraging hate crimes. I would also argue that given what we know about humor, the fact that some people find certain things humorous actually says something about who they are as people. Anyone who thinks it's funny to say "you should one of your friends to screw your daughter straight" is both homophobic and misogynistic. I feel ZERO need to protect someone like that. ZERO.