Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Jesse Jackson has a suggestion:Follow

#52 Nov 30 2006 at 2:48 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,339 posts
Samira wrote:
Not really a suspense thing, that was pure sit-com.


OK, point taken. But really all this thread makes me think of is the badger song... with different lyrics of course.

#53 Nov 30 2006 at 2:53 PM Rating: Decent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Mushroom! Mushroom! Spade!
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#54 Nov 30 2006 at 3:07 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,339 posts
I was thinking Chitlins. And then leave the snake, just try to work "Alabama Black" into the lyrics.

But close enough!
#55 Dec 03 2006 at 10:16 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Atomicflea wrote:
Mmm-hmm. This is interesting.

Wait, wait, which N-word are you referring to? I thought it was ****.


Smiley: laugh
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#56 Dec 03 2006 at 11:51 AM Rating: Default
The civil rights movement can sometimes lack integrity. Has this become the main focus of Jesse Jackson's time, or is it just a little side project of his? It seems like banning the N would be pretty low on the overall priority list of the continued civil rights crusade. I don't know anybody who's gotten shot 50 times, right before a wedding, for using a WORD.

Society is at a point where quiet, unspoken racism is more dangerous than ever. The KKK may be not be marching in DC anymore, but I can think of a few parts in Alabama where you can still get pulled over for being black after 8 PM on a week night.

My business partner can't talk money with certain customers, because he's black. If he starts discussing money like he actually knows what he's talking about, the prospect will get this funny look on their face; like someone just fed them a mouthful of rotten fish. But when I step in, because I have to, they look relieved again. It's OK, that uppity N was just forgetting his place and trying to do business like a white man.

Maybe Jesse's just getting old and frustrated, and he wants to score some kind of victory before there's no more air left in his lungs. He probably realizes that the battle against discrimination IS a battle of culture. Mind of Mencia might be a mildly entertaining show, for example, but it's pretty ************* Who the hell is going to watch Mencia's show without hearing something they've already heard thirty million times? The issue is not that people haven't HEARD of equality, it's that they turn a blind eye to it.

It's like when Kanye West opens his big, stupid mouth and says that George Bush doesn't care about black people.

REALLY, Kanye? Did you forget that out ALL by yourself? Did you then devise that cunning plan to combat discrimination by just waving your proverbial **** on TV? Well played, sir... well played.

The tacit endorsement of thug glamorization by people like BET, whose entire platform is allegedly based upon the cultural flowering of Black America... it doesn't help. It is, in fact, the silent partner of the unspoken institutes of prejudice that continue to reign in White America.

Banning a word? Futility. We need LESS silence and MORE talking.

But I do agree with Totem. He's my n--... I mean, he's totally rad, dude.
#57 Dec 03 2006 at 11:58 AM Rating: Default
Ahahahahahahha, using the "n" word is like Pollocks telling Polish jokes, is like Jews receiving most favored Jewish joke telling status, etc. Hip hop rappers using the "n"-word has done more to de-demean the "n"=word than Uncle Jesse could ever imagine. But, that's just petty sociology. Jesse's just upset that no street-credible would be slanderer would send him anything other than a lilly.
#58 Dec 04 2006 at 2:57 AM Rating: Decent
I have a question if there are two races in a given area under one goverment and one of these races gets special treatment not paying taxes goverment handouts etc. would those special treatments be racist.
#59 Dec 04 2006 at 3:20 AM Rating: Default
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

I have a question if there are two races in a given area under one goverment and one of these races gets special treatment not paying taxes goverment handouts etc. would those special treatments be racist.


It would. If one of those races was given special treatment because they had been given vastly unequal opportunities in every other aspect of that society, however, those rasicst specail treatments would be inadequate to adress the problem.

Thanks for making that so clear.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#60 Dec 04 2006 at 5:40 AM Rating: Good
N;gger is now, always was, and always should be an appropriate way to refer to a class of people. That people not in that class take offense to it's usage is simply indicative of ignorance on their part. I like nothing better than strapping on my helmet and walking in to a ring of dice throwers on the wrong side of the tracks, yelling "n;gger!" and turning to run.

They call me Dan. Danger Seeker Dan.
#61 Dec 04 2006 at 6:22 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
MoebiusLord wrote:
N;gger is now, always was, and always should be an appropriate way to refer to a class of people. That people not in that class take offense to it's usage is simply indicative of ignorance on their part. I like nothing better than strapping on my helmet and walking in to a ring of dice throwers on the wrong side of the tracks, yelling "n;gger!" and turning to run.

Best strap that helmet to your ***, boy, coz that's what they're gonna bust a cap in!

Quote:
They call me Dan. Steely Dan.

Smiley: laugh
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#62 Dec 04 2006 at 7:53 AM Rating: Decent
Imaginary Friend
*****
16,112 posts
#63 Dec 04 2006 at 9:45 AM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

I have a question if there are two races in a given area under one goverment and one of these races gets special treatment not paying taxes goverment handouts etc. would those special treatments be racist.


It would. If one of those races was given special treatment because they had been given vastly unequal opportunities in every other aspect of that society, however, those rasicst specail treatments would be inadequate to adress the problem.

Thanks for making that so clear.


Ah... So you're saying it's ok to be racist as long as you're "fixing a problem".

Got it!

Edited, Dec 4th 2006 9:49am by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#64 Dec 04 2006 at 9:49 AM Rating: Decent
Nexa
*****
12,065 posts
gbaji wrote:

Ah... So you're saying it's ok to be racist as long as you're "fixing a problem".

Got it!


As much as I hate that affirmative action is necessary, I think it would be better worded as "it's ok to recognize that racism exists in order to fix a problem". I would love to believe that if we ignore it, it will go away, but I'm not functionally retarded so I guess that's out.

Nexa
____________________________
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.”
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
#65 Dec 04 2006 at 10:02 AM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Nexa wrote:
As much as I hate that affirmative action is necessary, I think it would be better worded as "it's ok to recognize that racism exists in order to fix a problem". I would love to believe that if we ignore it, it will go away, but I'm not functionally retarded so I guess that's out.


Sure. But that's not what you're actually doing with AA. You're not "recognizing that racism exists". It's not even "taking actions to end racism". That would be creating laws against discriminatory practices and enforcing them. You know. Actually punishing people who commit acts of racism.

What Affirmative Action programs do (and what the earlier poster was talking about and to which Smash responded) is *create* a racial inequality. They specifically apply different standards/results based solely on the racial/ethnic backround of the individual or group.

Smash isn't saying that recognizing racism exists is necessary to fight it. He's saying that institutionalized racism is "ok" as long as you're using it to fix some problem. My suggestion is that you're creating more problem then you fix in that case. You can't end racism if you institutionalize it. No matter what your reasons are for doing it. I'm sure that southern slave owners equally rationalized their actions, but it was still racist in nature. And so is affirmative action.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#66 Dec 04 2006 at 10:17 AM Rating: Decent
Nexa
*****
12,065 posts
gbaji wrote:

Sure. But that's not what you're actually doing with AA. You're not "recognizing that racism exists". It's not even "taking actions to end racism". That would be creating laws against discriminatory practices and enforcing them. You know. Actually punishing people who commit acts of racism.

What Affirmative Action programs do (and what the earlier poster was talking about and to which Smash responded) is *create* a racial inequality. They specifically apply different standards/results based solely on the racial/ethnic backround of the individual or group.

Smash isn't saying that recognizing racism exists is necessary to fight it. He's saying that institutionalized racism is "ok" as long as you're using it to fix some problem. My suggestion is that you're creating more problem then you fix in that case. You can't end racism if you institutionalize it. No matter what your reasons are for doing it. I'm sure that southern slave owners equally rationalized their actions, but it was still racist in nature. And so is affirmative action.


I understand what you're saying, but racism is *already* institutionalized by our society at the most basic levels. AA seeks to *counter* an already existing institutionalization of racism in the only effective way that the government can at this point, unattractive as it is to you and I. Once AA is unnecessary to put all of our citizens on equal footing (or at least try to), I'm all for ditching it. You know, in a perfect world...

Nexa
____________________________
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.”
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
#67 Dec 04 2006 at 10:21 AM Rating: Decent
Quote:
As much as I hate that affirmative action is necessary, I think it would be better worded as "it's ok to recognize that racism exists in order to fix a problem".

How can educated, otherwise intelligent people make this kind of asinine statement and not appear even remotely taken aback at it's blatant insult to the community in question?

How about better worded as "We don't think you're capable of succeeding on your own so how about we let you in even though your less qualified or how about we give you the contract even though the work would be better performed by more competent people."
#68 Dec 04 2006 at 10:51 AM Rating: Default
Where are the hordes of slack-jawed minorities being shunted into positions of high influence and prestige, again? You people make it sound like the ACLU is exhuming Attila the Hun and making him a Senator.

This argument sounds an awful lot like, "All black people on welfare drive Escalades and have multi-platinum rap careers."

If I were to come in here and say something like, "All white people with high-paying jobs have them only due to centuries of nepotism and graft," I'd be laughed out of town like Peewee Herman.
#69 Dec 04 2006 at 11:14 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

Ah... So you're saying it's ok to be racist as long as you're "fixing a problem".


Yup.

Also sexist.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#70 Dec 04 2006 at 11:15 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts



As much as I hate that affirmative action is necessary, I think it would be better worded as "it's ok to recognize that racism exists in order to fix a problem". I would love to believe that if we ignore it, it will go away, but I'm not functionally retarded so I guess that's out.


Have my children.

:)

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#71 Dec 04 2006 at 7:14 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Nexa wrote:
I understand what you're saying, but racism is *already* institutionalized by our society at the most basic levels. AA seeks to *counter* an already existing institutionalization of racism in the only effective way that the government can at this point, unattractive as it is to you and I. Once AA is unnecessary to put all of our citizens on equal footing (or at least try to), I'm all for ditching it. You know, in a perfect world...


No. An institution is an "official" part of some structure. Racism occurs in our society. It exists. It is not institutionalized. Unless you can show me where in the law it says that black folks can't get the same opportunities as white folks, you can't say it's institutionalized. Well. You can, but then you're not using the word correctly.

Can we please acknowledge that there is a huge difference between something we don't like occuring in violation of the law within a country, and the country actually creating laws that require that this same bad thing occur? You can't hope to prevent the small percentage of people who'll apply racist ideas by creating laws that create more racial division. You'll only make the problem worse, not better.


If the government provided a 15% subsidy to white owners of mexican-food restaraunts on the thinking that mexican's have an unfair advantage in that field due to their historically superior burrito cooking skills, would you not agree that was unfair? Now explain how it's fair to apply similar subsidies to mexican business owners seeking contract work purely because historically white folks have gained the majority of past contracts?

It's the same inequity. And the fact that most people actually think those two are different is a huge part of the problem. More interetingly when you analyze *why* you might think that the subsidies for government contracts for the mexican employer is ok, but the same for a white owner in a traditionally mexican field is wrong is based entirely on racism itself. When you treat two groups differently solely based on their race, that is racism. Period. It does not matter who's gaining an advantage. It's still racism. And it's still wrong. No matter how noble your reasons.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#72 Dec 05 2006 at 1:51 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

No. An institution is an "official" part of some structure.


It's an act right? No one who can walk upright can really reasonably be this fucking stupid.

You're making it too obvious, pull it back a little.



Edited, Dec 5th 2006 4:56am by Smasharoo
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#73 Dec 05 2006 at 3:22 AM Rating: Decent
Nexa
*****
12,065 posts
gbaji wrote:

No. An institution is an "official" part of some structure. Racism occurs in our society. It exists. It is not institutionalized. Unless you can show me where in the law it says that black folks can't get the same opportunities as white folks, you can't say it's institutionalized. Well. You can, but then you're not using the word correctly.


My apologies, I should have specified that I was using the commonly accepted definition that you could find if you wanted to look it up. "Institutional racism is distinguished from the bigotry or racial bias of individuals by the existence of systematic policies and practices that have the effect of disadvantaging certain racial or ethnic groups. Race-based discrimination in housing (see restrictive covenants) and bank lending (see redlining), for example, are forms of institutional racism. Other examples include the systematic profiling of members of certain races by security and law enforcement workers, use of stereotyped caricatures of certain racial groups by institutions (like "Indian" mascots in sports), the under- and mis-representation of members of certain racial groups in the media, and barriers to employment or professional advancement based on race."

No, it's not so much "written down" but it is a structural part of our lives, unfortunately.

Nexa
____________________________
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.”
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
#74 Dec 05 2006 at 7:04 AM Rating: Default
It's a good thing there's no sort of racial bias in our society anymore. That's why we have all those female Asians and blacks on our money. Not, you know, notorious rednecks and Indian fighters.

Whew.

Now that racism is completely over, a view propagated only by certain enclaves of white people (of a demographic historically not dissimilar to the one which benefits the most from its perpetuation), we can get to electing a new president.

Because it's not like the Bush family represents white interests or anything.


Oh, wait... HOW hard did the NAACP have to hound Bush to get him to even appear and give a speech? Huh.

Who did John McCain visit first? Alabama A&M, or Jerry Falwell?

I'm so glad I can see an equal dispersal of religious and political views whenever I turn on the major news networks. I tell you, I really enjoyed Bill O'Reilly's last rant about how traditional soul food is underappreciated by the common American, or about how most people only think of Guangdong regional dishes when they think of "Chinese food".

Did I ever mention how cunning of a plan it is for the media establishment to quietly forment a mistrust of all things Muslim for the past several years, when Arab diplomacy is at its most critical? And I'm so glad that the average American has a clear, lucid understanding of WHY terrorists hate us so much.

OH WAIT. They don't hate US... they hate our FREEDOM. My bad. Jealous haters, all playa-hatin' and whatnot. They just don't know how to keep it real.

I haven't even gotten to how our aloof, condescending attitude toward foreign relations has funded and trained our nation's most militant adversaries in recent years? Or how Iran's revolution was sparked by the callous incompetence of a puppet leader WE handpicked?

I bet it's all those minority 5 star generals who were handed their job out of affirmative action. Either that, or it's the pimps on welfare.


Edit: Aww, there goes my "decent" user rating.

Edited, Dec 5th 2006 10:58am by rckndl
#75 Dec 05 2006 at 7:13 AM Rating: Decent
****
5,311 posts
Moe wrote:
I like nothing better than strapping on my helmet and walking in to a ring of dice throwers on the wrong side of the tracks, yelling "n;gger!" and turning to run.

They call me Dan. Danger Seeker Dan.
Okay, thanks for giving me a good giggle, Danger Seeker Dan.

I won't read the rest of your posts in this thread on accounta they just make me all sad and stuff.
#76 Dec 05 2006 at 7:15 AM Rating: Decent
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
MoebiusLord wrote:
Quote:
As much as I hate that affirmative action is necessary, I think it would be better worded as "it's ok to recognize that racism exists in order to fix a problem".

How can educated, otherwise intelligent people make this kind of asinine statement and not appear even remotely taken aback at it's blatant insult to the community in question?

How about better worded as "We don't think you're capable of succeeding on your own so how about we let you in even though your less qualified or how about we give you the contract even though the work would be better performed by more competent people."


The idea of Affirmative Action seeming to be an insult is a rationalization propogated by people in power to justify the maintenance of their power. Basically, it's not about being less qualified but ensuring that rather people aren't specifically discriminated against because of their race and gender in certain companies. Given that we have two women and one African-American CEO in the Fortune 500, Massachusetts has the second elected African American Government since the reconstruction and Iraq has a higher percentage of women in office, I think the status quo isn't equality currently and thus the need for protective measures.
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 359 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (359)