The Obama problem
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Yes, because comparing people to a monkey is never acceptable[^] in our society! We simply do not tolerate such bigotry!
Of course it is, and of course we do. It just depends on the context. Calling someone a monkey because of their African ancestry is offensive in an historical context, and idiotic in any context. However, I used to compare Stateler to a monkey all the time, due to his constant screaming and throwing virtual feces at passers-by. I think Ilion would be more of a cartoon orangutan -- think King Louie in Jungle Book, wanting to be like the humans and always falling just a little bit short, never realizing that humanity means more than fire/pretentious dic(tion|kery).
And I disagree with that. The only context is the context of a double standard. If George W. Bush can be openly mocked as a monkey and Barack Obama cannot, than Obama has an inherent advantage in any sort of political contest.
Please excuse my refusal to participate in the suicide of western civilization
-
Oakman wrote:
No he doesn't. There are no facts in his rant, only opinions - which he's entitled to, as long as no-one mistakes them for facts.
Even without supporting facts, opinions can be persuasive if the claims they make resonate with the reader by articulating what the reader may already sense (inarticulately) to be true. They certainly resonated with me. A case in point and an actual fact: Hillary Clinton made a big thing out of trying to embarrass Obama about the the fact that Farrakhan had endorsed him and that Wright had said some positive things about Farrakan. Was this because Clinton actually believes this is an issue and actually gives a damn about it? It seems not. During the Pennsylvania primary, Clinton drew heavily on the support of Governor Ed Rendell. Now read what Rendell had to say about Farrakhan (link below has the video).
"I would like to thank the Nation of Islam here in Philadelphia," Rendell said to the crowd, as Farrakhan looked on approvingly. "To thank you for what you stand for and what you stand for all the good it does to so many people in Philadelphia. And if there is anybody out here... who doesn't know, this is a faith that has as its principles, the family. This is a faith that doesn't just talk about family values, it lives family values. This is a faith where men respect their women and children and they manifest that faith by staying in the home with them. This is a faith that doesn't just talk about being against drugs but is out there every single day and night fighting against drugs. This is a faith that just doesn't talk about the value of education, it imbues in their children and schools that education is the way to opportunity."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/21/ed-rendell-clinton-surrog_n_97784.html[^]
John Carson
John, I did not say that a he said/she said type of argument couldn't be made about Clinton, or Obama, or Rudd, or Howard. Just that he didn't make the case. That, in this instance, he appealed to your already formulated convictions doesn't give it any more of a grounding in fact. That you attempted to give it such a grounding, seems to prove my point.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
John, I did not say that a he said/she said type of argument couldn't be made about Clinton, or Obama, or Rudd, or Howard. Just that he didn't make the case. That, in this instance, he appealed to your already formulated convictions doesn't give it any more of a grounding in fact. That you attempted to give it such a grounding, seems to prove my point.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
I'm not disputing that the original post omitted factual support.
John Carson
-
Oakman wrote:
First water comes from the gem trade. The clarity of diamonds is assessed by their translucence; the more like water, the higher the quality.
Ah. I've learned something.
Oakman wrote:
Unfortunately, the democrats seem to have a propesity for nominating the unelectable. Dukakis, Stevenson, etc. Bush was not so much elected as Kerry was unelected.
I think most of that comes from the fact that the political discourse is degraded and that personality-based non-issues dominate, with the Republicans being experts at taking advantage of this (having been mainly responsible for engineering it). A case in point was the huge fuss that was made over Dukakis's response to a question about what he would do if his wife was raped and murdered. Sensible people recognise that the immediate emotional response to a serious crime by immediate family is generally to want to inflict violence on the suspected perpetrator, but that a more temperate response is required from public officials. However, the fact that a candidate for the highest public office in the land did not respond emotionally but instead discussed the issue dispassionately was held against him. (You may or may not agree with his position on capital punishment, but he was right to treat the issue as a public policy one, not as an occasion to indulge his emotions.) Electing a President should be treated differently from choosing a friend. Kerry was a flawed candidate, but should have been more electable than Bush.
John Carson
John Carson wrote:
I think most of that comes from the fact that the political discourse is degraded and that personality-based non-issues dominate, with the Republicans being experts at taking advantage of this (having been mainly responsible for engineering it).
In spite of our other sub-thread I tend to agree with you. However, I think that many main street conservatives would tell you that they had been insulted and demeaned by the left-wing of the Democratic party that took it over in the wake of the '68 election and that the Republicans merely exploited their antipathy for the coastal intellectuals who have made it clear they despise their values. I don't know if you are aware of the Nine Nations^ map of North America, but - other than angering almost every Canadian who sees it - I think it describes a strength and a weakness of this continent and the three countries the purport to rule it. In this case three very populous 'countries' (Mexamerica, New England, Ectopia) attempt to find enough swing voters in the others to win elections. The Democrats tend to try to do this by nominating someone with ties to Dixie while the Republicans seem to win by nominating someone from Mexamerica. In the (good or not-so-good) old days the Democrats could take Dixie and the Foundry for granted, but their vision has narrowed and they have lost contact with these constituencies. This may make them purer and more attractive to folks on the other continents (whom Stan is sure they want to emulate) but it has, demonstrably, made it harder for them to win elections.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
I'm not disputing that the original post omitted factual support.
John Carson
-
Patrick S wrote:
I'm curious - what evidence have you that Wright said any of those things for 20 years? You've twisted the meaning of his words from just ONE speech
Twisted? how in the holy fuck can I twist his comments, those are literal quotes.
Patrick S wrote:
why should I believe you know a damn thing about anything else he's said for the last 20 years?
His ministry is founded on "Black lLiberation Theology" - it would be unusual in the extreme for him to say anything else. And by the way, the speeches (yes, that is plural) that have made their way to cable news shows ARE ON DVDs PURCHASED FROM HIS CHURCH.
Mike - typical white guy. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
His ministry is founded on "Black lLiberation Theology" - it would be unusual in the extreme for him to say anything else.
.... You know this cause Fox News says it is so? Or because you actually took the time to watch all 3,000 hours of the DVDs of his sermons available?
Mike Gaskey wrote:
And by the way, the speeches (yes, that is plural) that have made their way to cable news shows
come up to a sum total of 4 minutes. Out of 20 years of speeches. Yep, that's conclusive proof of anything.
It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. - Albert Einstein
-
John Carson wrote:
You make a persuasive case.
No he doesn't. There are no facts in his rant, only opinions - which he's entitled to, as long as no-one mistakes them for facts.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
There are no facts in his rant, only opinions - which he's entitled to, as long as no-one mistakes them for facts.
You're correct - this is my opinion. One I happen to think accurately reflects the way people discuss politics, but it's not intended to be 'factual'. If it were, it wouldn't be a rant :-D
It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. - Albert Einstein
-
John Carson wrote:
I think most of that comes from the fact that the political discourse is degraded and that personality-based non-issues dominate, with the Republicans being experts at taking advantage of this (having been mainly responsible for engineering it).
In spite of our other sub-thread I tend to agree with you. However, I think that many main street conservatives would tell you that they had been insulted and demeaned by the left-wing of the Democratic party that took it over in the wake of the '68 election and that the Republicans merely exploited their antipathy for the coastal intellectuals who have made it clear they despise their values. I don't know if you are aware of the Nine Nations^ map of North America, but - other than angering almost every Canadian who sees it - I think it describes a strength and a weakness of this continent and the three countries the purport to rule it. In this case three very populous 'countries' (Mexamerica, New England, Ectopia) attempt to find enough swing voters in the others to win elections. The Democrats tend to try to do this by nominating someone with ties to Dixie while the Republicans seem to win by nominating someone from Mexamerica. In the (good or not-so-good) old days the Democrats could take Dixie and the Foundry for granted, but their vision has narrowed and they have lost contact with these constituencies. This may make them purer and more attractive to folks on the other continents (whom Stan is sure they want to emulate) but it has, demonstrably, made it harder for them to win elections.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
This may make them purer and more attractive to folks on the other continents (whom Stan is sure they want to emulate) but it has, demonstrably, made it harder for them to win elections.
You are too good for this place. Insight is lost in a place like this one. It's rather why my posting here has been reduced to just a few times every couple of weeks.
It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. - Albert Einstein
-
Mike Gaskey wrote:
His ministry is founded on "Black lLiberation Theology" - it would be unusual in the extreme for him to say anything else.
.... You know this cause Fox News says it is so? Or because you actually took the time to watch all 3,000 hours of the DVDs of his sermons available?
Mike Gaskey wrote:
And by the way, the speeches (yes, that is plural) that have made their way to cable news shows
come up to a sum total of 4 minutes. Out of 20 years of speeches. Yep, that's conclusive proof of anything.
It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. - Albert Einstein
Patrick S wrote:
come up to a sum total of 4 minutes. Out of 20 years of speeches. Yep, that's conclusive proof of anything
Once someone has said what Wright said in those 4 minutes, it's up to him to provide proof that he didn't mean it, or was abjectly ashamed of saying it. It's only up to the media, or Mike, or anyone else to corrobarate that he did say it.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Oakman wrote:
This may make them purer and more attractive to folks on the other continents (whom Stan is sure they want to emulate) but it has, demonstrably, made it harder for them to win elections.
You are too good for this place. Insight is lost in a place like this one. It's rather why my posting here has been reduced to just a few times every couple of weeks.
It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. - Albert Einstein
Patrick S wrote:
You are too good for this place
I don't know whether to laugh or blush.
Patrick S wrote:
Insight is lost in a place like this one.
Not really true. One does have to wade through the trolls, of course, but I have learned things, and changed my mind about things based on exchanges with other soapboxers. John Carson is, for instance, is someone who differs from me on a number of issues but who almost always challenges me to think hard and long about anything we exchange posts about. As a result, I tend to be better informed, i.e. wiser, and, it is my hope, so does he.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Patrick S wrote:
come up to a sum total of 4 minutes. Out of 20 years of speeches. Yep, that's conclusive proof of anything
Once someone has said what Wright said in those 4 minutes, it's up to him to provide proof that he didn't mean it, or was abjectly ashamed of saying it. It's only up to the media, or Mike, or anyone else to corrobarate that he did say it.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
Once someone has said what Wright said in those 4 minutes, it's up to him to provide proof that he didn't mean it, or was abjectly ashamed of saying it.
I'm not saying he didn't mean it, or didn't believe it. I'm not in any way attempting to refute it. I'm simply saying that I'm not one to make rash judgements, as others are, and 4 minutes of speeches are not conclusive proof of anyone's worthiness to be a pastor or their standing as a Christian. Personalities are simply far more complex than the parodies made of them. But my real purpose in addressing this goes more to what I posted above - if anyone REALLY cared about these issues, they'd ask McCain about Hagee and Robertson, because they've said almost exactly the same things that Wright did. Only, nobody asks about them. It's a double standard, and it's there precisely because nobody really cares about this; it's only yet another way to be right, to 'beat' your opponent, to manipulate the voters.
It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. - Albert Einstein
-
Oakman wrote:
There are no facts in his rant, only opinions - which he's entitled to, as long as no-one mistakes them for facts.
You're correct - this is my opinion. One I happen to think accurately reflects the way people discuss politics, but it's not intended to be 'factual'. If it were, it wouldn't be a rant :-D
It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. - Albert Einstein
Patrick S wrote:
You're correct - this is my opinion.
And I shall defend to my death your right to express it. Which is more than Dick Cheney would do - he only defends things to other people's death.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Patrick S wrote:
You are too good for this place
I don't know whether to laugh or blush.
Patrick S wrote:
Insight is lost in a place like this one.
Not really true. One does have to wade through the trolls, of course, but I have learned things, and changed my mind about things based on exchanges with other soapboxers. John Carson is, for instance, is someone who differs from me on a number of issues but who almost always challenges me to think hard and long about anything we exchange posts about. As a result, I tend to be better informed, i.e. wiser, and, it is my hope, so does he.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
I don't know whether to laugh or blush.
Probably both responses are appropriate :)
Oakman wrote:
Not really true. One does have to wade through the trolls, of course, but I have learned things, and changed my mind about things based on exchanges with other soapboxers.
Perhaps it's that process of wading and weeding I got tired of. Life is complicated enough without having to learn how much of the noise to ignore, when there are other places where discourse is far more nuanced anyway. One might ask, then, why I continue to drop by, and really I suppose it's exactly what you say - it's not ALL lost, and there's always some value to be gleaned even from discourse of the sort you see here.
It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. - Albert Einstein
-
Oakman wrote:
Once someone has said what Wright said in those 4 minutes, it's up to him to provide proof that he didn't mean it, or was abjectly ashamed of saying it.
I'm not saying he didn't mean it, or didn't believe it. I'm not in any way attempting to refute it. I'm simply saying that I'm not one to make rash judgements, as others are, and 4 minutes of speeches are not conclusive proof of anyone's worthiness to be a pastor or their standing as a Christian. Personalities are simply far more complex than the parodies made of them. But my real purpose in addressing this goes more to what I posted above - if anyone REALLY cared about these issues, they'd ask McCain about Hagee and Robertson, because they've said almost exactly the same things that Wright did. Only, nobody asks about them. It's a double standard, and it's there precisely because nobody really cares about this; it's only yet another way to be right, to 'beat' your opponent, to manipulate the voters.
It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. - Albert Einstein
Patrick S wrote:
if anyone REALLY cared about these issues, they'd ask McCain about Hagee and Robertson, because they've said almost exactly the same things that Wright did. Only, nobody asks about them. It's a double standard,
I think you need to just wait. MoveOn.org is not known for letting the slightest conservative pecadillo go by without notice. Right now, I think they are laying low because of the general revulsion over their "Petreus/Betray us) ad. They seriously miscalculated the effect on the public when they published that. Besides, they want to wait until their efforts will do the most good, presumably after Labor Day.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Oakman wrote:
I don't know whether to laugh or blush.
Probably both responses are appropriate :)
Oakman wrote:
Not really true. One does have to wade through the trolls, of course, but I have learned things, and changed my mind about things based on exchanges with other soapboxers.
Perhaps it's that process of wading and weeding I got tired of. Life is complicated enough without having to learn how much of the noise to ignore, when there are other places where discourse is far more nuanced anyway. One might ask, then, why I continue to drop by, and really I suppose it's exactly what you say - it's not ALL lost, and there's always some value to be gleaned even from discourse of the sort you see here.
It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. - Albert Einstein
-
CataclysmicQuantum wrote:
I got the same exact thing the rest of the students got, a diploma.
But not a decent job. Looks like the system worked!
And when the sunlight hits the olive oil, don't hesitate.
End the end we all get the same thing. Money.
The Digital World. It is an amazing place in which we primitive humans interact. Our flesh made this synthetic machine. You see, we are so smart, we know a lot of stuff. We were grown from cells that came from the universe, which the matter and physics I'm typing in it is amazing how the universe is working. Human life is very amazing. How I experience this sh*t its like wow.
-
Patrick S wrote:
You are too good for this place
I don't know whether to laugh or blush.
Patrick S wrote:
Insight is lost in a place like this one.
Not really true. One does have to wade through the trolls, of course, but I have learned things, and changed my mind about things based on exchanges with other soapboxers. John Carson is, for instance, is someone who differs from me on a number of issues but who almost always challenges me to think hard and long about anything we exchange posts about. As a result, I tend to be better informed, i.e. wiser, and, it is my hope, so does he.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
Not really true. One does have to wade through the trolls, of course, but I have learned things, and changed my mind about things based on exchanges with other soapboxers. John Carson is, for instance, is someone who differs from me on a number of issues but who almost always challenges me to think hard and long about anything we exchange posts about. As a result, I tend to be better informed, i.e. wiser, and, it is my hope, so does he.
Aw shucks. :-O I agree with Patrick that the insightful and non-formulaic nature of your contributions sets you apart from most here and I certainly learn from our exchanges. My attitude to the Soapbox more generally waxes and wanes --- with more waning in recent times. As a forum for encountering a range of opinion that I would never experience in my offline world, it has been highly educational. Even, and in some cases especially, those on the far right have been interesting to engage. But, like Patrick, I come here less often these days. Most of the discussion is now fairly predictable.
John Carson
-
Wow - you really ARE stupid. It's not uncommon for people who fail at life, to then blame minorities, I mean, people who can't hold down a job or get laid are surely the people with enough residual bitterness at their own failings to be ripe for the picking from hate groups looking to give such people an external 'them' to blame for all their self made problems. Yeah, black people are oppressing you. Give me a break.
Christian Graus Please read this if you don't understand the answer I've given you "also I don't think "TranslateOneToTwoBillion OneHundredAndFortySevenMillion FourHundredAndEightyThreeThousand SixHundredAndFortySeven()" is a very good choice for a function name" - SpacixOne ( offering help to someone who really needed it ) ( spaces added for the benefit of people running at < 1280x1024 )
I would smack the shit out of you if I could. You totally twisted that into your liking. Get real you tardball, your understanding is severely corrupted.
The Digital World. It is an amazing place in which we primitive humans interact. Our flesh made this synthetic machine. You see, we are so smart, we know a lot of stuff. We were grown from cells that came from the universe, which the matter and physics I'm typing in it is amazing how the universe is working. Human life is very amazing. How I experience this sh*t its like wow.
-
Oakman wrote:
Not really true. One does have to wade through the trolls, of course, but I have learned things, and changed my mind about things based on exchanges with other soapboxers. John Carson is, for instance, is someone who differs from me on a number of issues but who almost always challenges me to think hard and long about anything we exchange posts about. As a result, I tend to be better informed, i.e. wiser, and, it is my hope, so does he.
Aw shucks. :-O I agree with Patrick that the insightful and non-formulaic nature of your contributions sets you apart from most here and I certainly learn from our exchanges. My attitude to the Soapbox more generally waxes and wanes --- with more waning in recent times. As a forum for encountering a range of opinion that I would never experience in my offline world, it has been highly educational. Even, and in some cases especially, those on the far right have been interesting to engage. But, like Patrick, I come here less often these days. Most of the discussion is now fairly predictable.
John Carson
John Carson wrote:
My attitude to the Soapbox more generally waxes and wanes --- with more waning in recent times.
I do understand. I was sick for a couple of days and when I logged in to CP after that short a hiatus, I had to force myself to jump to the SoapBox.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
Wow - you really ARE stupid. It's not uncommon for people who fail at life, to then blame minorities, I mean, people who can't hold down a job or get laid are surely the people with enough residual bitterness at their own failings to be ripe for the picking from hate groups looking to give such people an external 'them' to blame for all their self made problems. Yeah, black people are oppressing you. Give me a break.
Christian Graus Please read this if you don't understand the answer I've given you "also I don't think "TranslateOneToTwoBillion OneHundredAndFortySevenMillion FourHundredAndEightyThreeThousand SixHundredAndFortySeven()" is a very good choice for a function name" - SpacixOne ( offering help to someone who really needed it ) ( spaces added for the benefit of people running at < 1280x1024 )
Christian Graus wrote:
people who can't hold down a job or get laid are surely the people with enough residual bitterness at their own failings to be ripe for the picking from hate groups looking to give such people an external 'them' to blame for all their self made problems
One of the accomplishments CP may not want to claim is introducing CSS to Stanley and Ilidgit. Now he's parroting his (imperfect) understanding of their bushwa, next he'll shave his head and join up at Skinheads.net.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface