Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Collins and Manchin plan to vote YES

1246

Comments

  • PurpleThrobberPurpleThrobber Member Posts: 46,577 Standard Supporter
    edited October 2018

    I like you better when you stick to debauchery. That's your sweet spot (not like that).
    Not my fault I'm well educated, have a big throbber and like porn.

    But you do see the point, right?

    Tom got whacked for refusing to beat the other slaves and didn't rat out the ones who escaped.

  • TurdBomberTurdBomber Member Posts: 19,999 Standard Supporter
    edited October 2018
    I think this discussion really highlights the problem of the double-standards that are propagating like rabbits in our society today. I'm supposed to treat non-whites like I would whites, and I think I do that pretty well, because I'm normally not associating with anyone because of their immutable characteristics, but because of common interests. I think that's true of most people, btw.

    But the partisans in the Left send the message that the world is very different if you're black, minority, women, etc., etc., implying skin color or gender as a causative factor in everything, when it clearly isn't. When a kid misbehaves, is it BECAUSE of his skin color? Or does that not have Jack shit to do with it? I believe the latter. Conversely, many libs, black & white, will jump forward with excuses any time some black kid beats somebody or steals their shit with something along the lines of "society has failed that kid" or "it's harder being black" or "blacks are poor, and poor people have to steal to survive" etc. Yes, people actually still say that shit, even about delinquents living in half million dollar houses around town. I actually believe these double-standards liberals commonly embrace enhance stereotyping and harm race relations, relations between the sexes, etc. What I'm hearing a lot of times is "they can't help it, because they're black/women/minorities," etc. And what the FUCK message is that sending? That some groups are doomed by their gender, race, or any other immutable characteristic? Jesus Christ! That's about as racist, sexist and xenophobic as can be, and liberals do it all the fucking time. Proudly.
  • SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 33,181
    edited October 2018
    The bottom line is what I've laid it out to be. Just because a liberal white person takes a black person to task for (1) their political ideology or (2) their performance does not make them racist.

    The strawman's asshole just got fucked. I didn't say that a white liberal simply taking a black person to task for the political ideology made them a racist. For such a well educated guy you sure love to fuck a lot of strawman ass.

    What I said was calling someone an "Uncle Tom" or an "Oreo" or a "sell-out" because you disagree with their politics and because you don't think blacks should hold certain political views lest they render themselves "inauthentic" and not "real" black people makes you a racist.

    And your claim about people calling Conservative blacks "Uncle Tom" as a way to just say they aren't on my team would be fucking laughable if the statement hadn't been made by such a smart and well educated person such as yourself.
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 110,653 Founders Club
    Creep we said the same thing on the wall believe it or not. Almost. The argument against the wall has nothing to do with person making or receiving the argument.

    A Mexican American is not hurt by the wall because he is MA. But he can have many arguments against it which we all have heard

    Saying you need to be against it because you are MA is racist

    And I'm not moving from that
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 110,653 Founders Club

    Same answer.

    Politics are dirty; nobody is clean here.

    But if the idea is rooted in, "great, you're with them," I might call it short-sighted, but I wouldn't call it racist.

    If, on the other hand, I meant in the sense that she isn't smart enough to think for herself, which no clear thinking person would ever say about Condi, then yes, racism.

    I don't think most people who took her to task were being racist. They were being political. Those are not the same.

    Let's put it this way: Bob's intentional use of stereotypical terminology and assumption of the worst from every conceivable angle in the Trayvon Martin thread is a helluva lot more racist than me taking Thomas to task having his heart broken at being rejected by the establishment.

    I'm sorry man. My feet are taped to the pedals on this one.

    It's very hard (hard) for people on the right to be so touchy about the 'racism' label and then call liberals racist for criticizing team choice by a black or brown person. Not saying the latter is right; don't twist. Just not necessarily, or even usually, racist.
    Showing Condi with big lips etc is no different from call Blacks monkeys. It's not political it's racist

    Oliphant is an American liberal icon

    And a piece of shit racist. Call it what it is
  • TurdBomberTurdBomber Member Posts: 19,999 Standard Supporter
    I think racism is overused and inappropriately used, perhaps, when tribalism would more properly describe certain forms of group behavior.
  • SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 33,181
    The tone of Uncle Tom, usually, is "Fuck dude. You're really on the wrong team."

    What a load of horseshit. The mere fact that someone thinks that there is only one "team" that blacks should be on shows how fucking stupid your interpretation of the word is. Uncle Tom, the way it is used today is intended to be an insult letting that person know that they think and or believe and or act in ways that the other person doesn't think blacks should.

    Uncle Tom, sell-out, and Oreo are all used to shame the Conservative black person and let them know they are thinking and or behaving in ways that other liberals don't think they should be.
  • SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 33,181
    What "team" should blacks be on Coug?
  • TurdBomberTurdBomber Member Posts: 19,999 Standard Supporter
    I really need a beer right now. And after that, some BBQ. From a black owned and operated BBQ joint. Because everyone knows black BBQ>>all other BBQ imposters - in the NW, at least.

    I guess I'm racist about my BBQ. But I'm sure @purplethrobber would agree, "It's Goddamn Delicious!"
  • SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 33,181
    Seriously, how is calling someone an "Uncle Tom" or an "Oreo" or a "sell-out" any different than calling some white person a "wigger" or a "n***er lover?"
  • PurpleThrobberPurpleThrobber Member Posts: 46,577 Standard Supporter

    I really need a beer right now. And after that, some BBQ. From a black owned and operated BBQ joint. Because everyone knows black BBQ>>all other BBQ imposters - in the NW, at least.

    I guess I'm racist about my BBQ. But I'm sure @purplethrobber would agree, "It's Goddamn Delicious!"

    I judge my BBQ not by the color of the skin of the pitmaster but by the goddamned delicious stain it leaves on my soul.

  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,841

    Not my fault I'm well educated, have a big throbber and like porn.

    But you do see the point, right?

    Tom got whacked for refusing to beat the other slaves and didn't rat out the ones who escaped.

    But he was also taken to task for being a company man and that's the point of the term.

    It may have been adulterated a lot since then. I, too, have not read the book. But I know what people generally mean with they use the term.
  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,841
    SFGbob said:

    What "team" should blacks be on Coug?

    You really are not following along.

    Or can't read.

    For your benefit, I wrote at least 3x that whether you, or I or Jesus Christ agrees with the sentiment is not the point.

    But, of course, that flew over your head because you're a dumb fuck.
  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,841

    I think this discussion really highlights the problem of the double-standards that are propagating like rabbits in our society today. I'm supposed to treat non-whites like I would whites, and I think I do that pretty well, because I'm normally not associating with anyone because of their immutable characteristics, but because of common interests. I think that's true of most people, btw.

    But the partisans in the Left send the message that the world is very different if you're black, minority, women, etc., etc., implying skin color or gender as a causative factor in everything, when it clearly isn't. When a kid misbehaves, is it BECAUSE of his skin color? Or does that not have Jack shit to do with it? I believe the latter. Conversely, many libs, black & white, will jump forward with excuses any time some black kid beats somebody or steals their shit with something along the lines of "society has failed that kid" or "it's harder being black" or "blacks are poor, and poor people have to steal to survive" etc. Yes, people actually still say that shit, even about delinquents living in half million dollar houses around town. I actually believe these double-standards liberals commonly embrace enhance stereotyping and harm race relations, relations between the sexes, etc. What I'm hearing a lot of times is "they can't help it, because they're black/women/minorities," etc. And what the FUCK message is that sending? That some groups are doomed by their gender, race, or any other immutable characteristic? Jesus Christ! That's about as racist, sexist and xenophobic as can be, and liberals do it all the fucking time. Proudly.

    Generally agree with all that. My point is that, using those terms in political gamesmanship is not being a racists, at least not in the traditional use of the term.

    If we want to expand the term, I'm all ears.

    I also agree that there is an intended or unintended consequence of it's 'harder being black' that leads to more stereotyping, or at least reinforces it. I don't dispute that, and in fact, agree with it wholeheartedly.
  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,841

    I think racism is overused and inappropriately used, perhaps, when tribalism would more properly describe certain forms of group behavior.

    This, I think, is what I'm getting at.
  • PurpleThrobberPurpleThrobber Member Posts: 46,577 Standard Supporter

    But he was also taken to task for being a company man and that's the point of the term.

    It may have been adulterated a lot since then. I, too, have not read the book. But I know what people generally mean with they use the term.
    Not how the book was written. Go do the research. Tom was a good cat in the book. Whitey made Tom a bad guy over the years. Well, whitey in black face.

    But the bruthas should be praising allah that Tom was the central character to a very important piece of literature relative to Lincoln's ascension to power.

    The more you fucking know.

  • SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 33,181
    edited October 2018

    You really are not following along.

    Or can't read.

    For your benefit, I wrote at least 3x that whether you, or I or Jesus Christ agrees with the sentiment is not the point.

    But, of course, that flew over your head because you're a dumb fuck.
    Your problem is that I am reading what you say. I'm not saying that you think blacks should be on a certain "team" but you are running cover for people who do use the term "Uncle Tom" by claiming they are just saying, "hey you're on the wrong team." The mere fact that anyone thinks that blacks should be on a certain team, reveals how stupid your excusing the use of the term really is.

    But since you do believe that it's an innocuous term and that it simply means, "hey, you're on the wrong team" what "team" do you think blacks should be on? Since you claim to be able to speak for all people who use that term and know what they are really thinking and mean when they use the term, I figured you'd be able to give me some insight into what "team" they believe blacks should be on.
  • SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 33,181
    edited October 2018

    Going Hondo I see.

    You could have just said, "I lose."

    I'm not revisiting Trayvon. The whole board saw what you were up to in that thread.

    Are you saying that liberal people cannot criticize black people?

    Why not?

    Or is it black conservatives that enjoy special protection in your world?


    I laid this out for you as clear as glass. If you can't do better than this, you might as well just call it a day. This is honestly some of your worst work.
    And I'm going Hondo? Who do you pretend the strawman is while you're fucking it in the ass Coug? I never claimed or intimated either of those things.

    And I'm still waiting those stereotypical characterizations of Trayvon.

    I believe you've confused being a pompous blowhard with intelligence somewhere along the line Coug.
  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,841
    SFGbob said:

    The bottom line is what I've laid it out to be. Just because a liberal white person takes a black person to task for (1) their political ideology or (2) their performance does not make them racist.

    The strawman's asshole just got fucked. I didn't say that a white liberal simply taking a black person to task for the political ideology made them a racist. For such a well educated guy you sure love to fuck a lot of strawman ass.

    What I said was calling someone an "Uncle Tom" or an "Oreo" or a "sell-out" because you disagree with their politics and because you don't think blacks should hold certain political views lest they render themselves "inauthentic" and not "real" black people makes you a racist.

    And your claim about people calling Conservative blacks "Uncle Tom" as a way to just say they aren't on my team would be fucking laughable if the statement hadn't been made by such a smart and well educated person such as yourself.

    Which one of us wrote this?

    Thomas is plenty bright enough. Read his opinions. That's a knock the left hit with and it became a lazy way for people to criticize him. It's also a fairly thinly veiled way for liberals to express their racism for Conservative blacks.

    Translation from Bodbleed: When someone of a liberal persuasion says Thomas isn't bright, it's racism. Why? Because any time a liberal finds fault with a black conservative it's racism.

    Your thought process asshole, not mine. There is literally no way for you to have this both ways.

    The guy who screams "don't call me racist" takes a 180 degree different tack when a black guy who meets with his approval is criticized for performance or politics.

    You don't have to like it and I don't have to like it. One person can question another person's allegiances on grounds that implicate race and it does not follow that the person doing the questioning is a racist. They may be. But it doesn't follow that they are. And for a guy who is as touchy about that word as you are, you ought to be able to grasp this.

    Webster (since you like the textualists):

    racism noun
    rac·ism | \ ˈrā-ˌsi-zəm also -ˌshi- \
    Definition of racism
    1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
    2a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles
    b : a political or social system founded on racism
    3 : racial prejudice or discrimination

    If Team A believes that Team B doesn't represent Bob's interests, and Team A tells Bob he's a fool for aligning himself with Team B, it does not mean that Team A believes that Bob is genetically inferior to the members of Team A. Team A is telling Bob he's making a mistake. If the history of people like Bob is pretty severe and loaded, it might be more personal than that, but that's what it's about. Teams. Politics. Power. Whatever.

    What it ain't is racism.
  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,841
    SFGbob said:

    Your problem is that I am reading what you say. I'm not saying that you think blacks should be on a certain "team" but you are running cover for people who do use the term "Uncle Tom" by claiming they are just saying, "hey you're on the wrong team." The mere fact that anyone thinks that blacks should be on a certain team, reveals how stupid your excusing the use of the term really is.

    But since you do believe that it's an innocuous term and that it simply means, "hey, you're on the wrong team" what "team" do you think blacks should be on? Since you claim to be able to speak for all people who use that term and know what they are really thinking and mean when they use the term, I figured you'd be able to give me some insight into what "team" they believe blacks should be on.
    Happy to use another word, if Uncle Tom is racists in and of itself.

    The point stands: a liberal calling a black person's politics into question because he or she, rightly or wrongly, think that those politics are not in the best interest of black people, is not a racist.

    They are a critic.

    Can liberals, white or black, not criticize black people? Or just not their politics? How about their performance on the SCOTUS?

    You see, Bob, your problem is that I am reading what you actually write. You said critiques of Thomas on the SCOTUS is thinly veiled liberal racism. It's right there in the post. Go read it.
Sign In or Register to comment.