DescentBB

callmeslick wrote:I have a daughter, and 3 grandchildren. If ANY of them came to me and said they were crossing the street to avoid people because of color I would either slap or disown them. Period. Luckily, stupid doesn't run in our family, and Woody's daughter may have a degree with honors, but clearly inherited the bigotry of her father.

Well if slapping them or disowning them prepares them for the realities of life, I'll leave the readers of this board to determine who is really stupid here. I guess you missed the part where my daughter learned her "bigotry" by have it happen to her after she grew up anti racist.

callmeslick wrote:oh, and bitter denials from Woody(who I've debunked, with links, data and other proof, at least 25 times on this board)who posts outright, obvious lies to bolster his points, and then repeats them after them being proven as lies, is rich, indeed.....

Then show us where you did.

callmeslick wrote:
You have no clue about the man(who, I remind you, I've actually met and chatted with)

Does anyone here really believe we have someone who frequents a low level game board has ever chatted with the president?

woodchip wrote:

callmeslick wrote:
You have no clue about the man(who, I remind you, I've actually met and chatted with)

Does anyone here really believe we have someone who frequents a low level game board has ever chatted with the president?

Does anyone believe that a person from outside the circle who does chat with the President isn't there because he is a part of the problem, being used to expand the problem and/or financing the problem?

Any useful idiot can find himself there or anyone with enough money can buy access. All it proves is they paid the price of admission.

woodchip wrote:Well if slapping them or disowning them prepares them for the realities of life, I'll leave the readers of this board to determine who is really stupid here. I guess you missed the part where my daughter learned her "bigotry" by have it happen to her after she grew up anti racist.

Bigotry is taught by the parents

Ferno wrote:

woodchip wrote:Well if slapping them or disowning them prepares them for the realities of life, I'll leave the readers of this board to determine who is really stupid here. I guess you missed the part where my daughter learned her "bigotry" by have it happen to her after she grew up anti racist.

Bigotry is taught by the parents

Did you notice the quotation marks on the word?
In that use it means the word may not be the perfect choice...
Bigotry certainly can be taught by the parents but then it has to have started somewhere...Did the first bigot on earth learn from a non-bigot?
So it doesn't exclusively have to be taught by a parent or there would be no bigotry at all. Unless bigotry is a natural state of mind (actually it is in many ways, all species tend to prefer their own as a matter of survival of the species).

In this case though I think Woodchip is describing his daughter has developed a dislike and distrust for black males based on her own first hand experience with them...a dislike that some people would call 'bigotry'.

But for you to acknowledge you understand that distinction you would have to abandon your cheap shot insult. Can't have that can you?

Ferno wrote:

woodchip wrote:Well if slapping them or disowning them prepares them for the realities of life, I'll leave the readers of this board to determine who is really stupid here. I guess you missed the part where my daughter learned her "bigotry" by have it happen to her after she grew up anti racist.

Bigotry is taught by the parents

So you approve of parents beating their kids to get them to conform. I bet you're another one of those posters who have no children of their own.

Here is a tip for Will: If you are really concerned with thugs and racism (which you aren't), try to be more diverse in your discussions. All we ever get from you is "the thug blacks." Why not focus on the problems in Hawaii? I have a friend who lives there and he has experienced racism on a level never experienced in Chicago where we grew up. He has literally had to run for his life on occasion, something that is harder to do as we get older. Why not focus on the racism experienced by Asians in America, especially South Asians who get confused for Arabs by our idiot populace? And while we are at it, how about racism against Arabs? A good deal about the immigration debate is racist, but maybe Hispanics don't scare you as much as the blackies? And what about racial tensions between Blacks and Hispanics? You don't actually give a ★■◆● about problems with race. Every post you have made betrays your disgust of black people. Go ahead and say we are misquoting or twisting your words, but if you really believe otherwise then you are a terrible writer and maybe you should learn how to express yourself better before you post again.

Vision what you have failed so miserably to realize is it usually isn't "race" that is the focus of my comments. I know you three amigos jump in right away and try to steer the conversation into that. But then the topic becomes your creation not mine!

If you look back you will find most of my commentary is on the way our political leaders and self appointed social engineers use race the way they exploit the sensitivities! hide their agenda behind the banner of race etc.

On the shooting of Martin by Zimmerman I had no comments because I initially believed the mainstream media reporting that a white guy shot a black guy who was doing nothing but carrying candy and tea down the street. I thought damn what psycho.

Then the facts began emerging about how the media doctored 911 recordings to make it sound as though Zimmerman was a racist. And they doctored the video from the police station to hide his injury...etc.

Then I had something to say because that is some serious crap going on!

Harmful to all of us much more than events on some island thousands of miles away where Howlies get beat up once in a while but no federal legislation is resulting from, or failing to be implemented because of bad political expediency affecting all of us.

You are afraid to discuss the nuts and bolts of how the sacred race industry has perpetuated disharmony. You are afraid to say anything controversial.
I purposely say it because the definition of what is controversial commentary about race has been pushed into the edge of ridiculous pandering and results with creating the very problem it is designed to solve.

Sorry but in terms of America as a whole the kind of stuff I'm pointing out is far more important than your friends problems in Hawaii.

Granted the N Korea thread is a different thing altogether, it is poke in the eye at you three and a snarky commentary on Obama's foreign policy weakness.
But I'm entitled to be a prick like you and slick once in a while.

I do believe he won't be able to resist a reaction though because race is his badge of honor.

Bigotry is taught by the parents

Again, this is something someone told you which you have no personal experience with or children of your own. My youngest son was never taught anything but that all men were created in the image of God. Yet, at this moment he chooses to be an atheist and dislikes blacks. Why? Because they are always causing grief. Not all of them, but that conditioning does give rise to hatefulness and a sense of entitlement to do whatever you want because of past wrongs. I imagine all my ancestors were poor white trash and never had slaves, probably only be one step above them for that time. The real people who are to blame for what we reap now is the rich, white landowners (Uh hmm;) who in past times went too extreme one way and now to purge themselves go too extreme the other.

Here is another example for you vision.

Someone starts a thread about guns.

Someone quotes American death rates by handgun as an ominous sign that we need to ban guns.

I point out that if you remove the statistics of inner city gangbangers from the stats things aren't nearly so out of whack.
I suggest, if the death rates are so damning, and thugs are 20 times more murderous than the rest of America, yet the rest of America also has guns then it isn't the guns that are the problem you have cited with those numbers.

And instead of diving into the discussion behind all those numbers and conclusions the three amigos go on a two page tear about Will the racist.

I know lots of these things make black people uncomfortable. It needs to be said however and making someone uncomfortable doesn't mean I'm a bigot.
I don't start threads saying why do black people do x, y or z.

I just don't pretend stuff isn't the way it is to protect their sensitivities because cultivating highly sensitive people and then letting them suffer from it for political or personal gain isn't my thing. I'm not the one who set them up for the ultimate collision with reality.

George W Bush was no great spokesman but he used a phrase that is right on target.

"The soft bigotry of low expectations"

That is what too many of you leftys are creating. Recognize it or not you are practicing the soft bigotry.

Will Robinson wrote:If you look back you will find most of my commentary is on the way our political leaders and self appointed social engineers use race the way they exploit the sensitivities! hide their agenda behind the banner of race etc.

Here is an example of you doing exactly the opposite. Instead of focusing on socially engineered manipulation by race you bring to everyone's attention a story about a impotent lunatic in a backward country who made a racist comment (hint: racism is virulent in the non-Western world) and then expecte the president to take some sort of action against it instead of doing the sensible thing, which is, ignoring it. What exactly would you have the president do? You didn't specify, which is odd because you are soooo thoughtful and thorough with the content of your posts. I guess maybe more sanctions against an staggeringly crippled country? How about some bombs? Maybe Obama should call him a gook?

Or maybe you really want to blame the Washington Post for running a race story and stirring the pot? Well gee, where does that leave you when YOU REPOST IT?

Ok, I'm bored of this thread. You can have the last word. I bet it will be magical.

flip wrote:

Bigotry is taught by the parents

Again, this is something someone told you which you have no personal experience with or children of your own.

Oh I'm sorry, it's not like my alcoholic father tried to teach me it or anything. I probably need to be enlightened by you or something.

Yet, at this moment he chooses to be an atheist and dislikes blacks. Why? Because they are always causing grief

and by this, you have zero right to tell me, or anyone else here about bigotry. The rest of your post was just lol.

Therein lies the problem. Transference. Just because it applies to you does not mean it applies to everyone.

You really are ridiculous Ferno, I know you don't realize that, but you are.

sigma wrote:If you are at least theoretically imagine the possibilities and the consequences of even a local nuclear war, I do not think politicians are ready to go out to spend the rest of their lives in bunkers.
If you knew the peculiarities of the Russian mentality, you would know that the Russian are ready to die for the sake of justice and for the protection of its great homeland.

http://freebeacon.com/national-security ... -exercise/

You know, if you go back and study history from the end of WW2 till today, there has really been the proliferation of 2 main ideals. Communism and forms of democracy. One based on rule by the State and one based one rule by a majority. Anybody who thinks that just magically ended in the late 80's and early 90's are either delusional or didn't even exist at the time. It's been quiet for some 20-30 years, but the flames are being rekindled again.

vision wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:If you look back you will find most of my commentary is on the way our political leaders and self appointed social engineers use race the way they exploit the sensitivities! hide their agenda behind the banner of race etc.

Here is an example of you doing exactly the opposite. Instead of focusing on socially engineered manipulation by race you bring to everyone's attention a story about a impotent lunatic in a backward country who made a racist comment (hint: racism is virulent in the non-Western world) and then expecte the president to take some sort of action against it instead of doing the sensible thing, which is, ignoring it. What exactly would you have the president do? You didn't specify, which is odd because you are soooo thoughtful and thorough with the content of your posts. I guess maybe more sanctions against an staggeringly crippled country? How about some bombs? Maybe Obama should call him a gook?

Or maybe you really want to blame the Washington Post for running a race story and stirring the pot? Well gee, where does that leave you when YOU REPOST IT?

Ok, I'm bored of this thread. You can have the last word. I bet it will be magical.

Did you actually miss where I told you that the N Korea thread (this thread by the way, no need to link to it) was different and why I posted it?

This thread was all about flipping you the bird, not supposed to be a substantive conversation. I said as much a few posts back. Sometimes I do stuff just for my own amusement. And, yes, you have amused me as predicted.

CUDA wrote:

no President in my lifetime has been subjected to anything close to the type of attacks Obama has. No President in my lifetime has faced the complete lack of respect and cooperation from elected representatives of the other party(bordering on treasonous).

You really should do a little historical research. Because you are SO wrong its almost embarassing.

You can't count Lincoln, because he had no secret service protection and never completed his term.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/1 ... 44005.html

So why is Obama the velcro president? Most of the stuff blamed on him is due to the actions of PAST presidents.

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jul/30 ... y-20100730

Plus, he might just leave office with a federal surplus.

http://www.aei-ideas.org/2014/04/surpri ... t-surplus/

I note a few days have passed and CUDA couldn't back up his mockery with fact. Surprised, anyone?

callmeslick wrote:I note a few days have passed and CUDA couldn't back up his mockery with fact. Surprised, anyone?

I think the most vilified president AFTER they served office would have to be FDR. When my husband was a teenager, he made the mistake of saying something in passing about FDR in polite conversation with a neighbor. The neighbor was a Republican. Sooooooooooooo, you can guess what happened when he brought up that "ewww" name in the presence of a "conservative". The guy immediately blew up and went into a rant about all the evils FDR did and to NEVER mention his name again. Right wingers just can't let FDR's accomplishments live on.

ok, but, FDR was before my time. Also, as you note, he was dead, and I'd bet those people were a lot more cooperative and respectful during his lifetime. I was talking about things like:
getting up and calling him to pack up and leave before being lynched(with GOP elected officials on the stage when the comment was made)
having people claim he wasn't an American citizen at all, or doubting his legal birthplace(NEVER heard that before)
reading people predicting his immediate murder after his Inauguration(those of you who were out on the net in 2009 know)
people claiming he is a practitioner of a religion of which he isn't(and, once again, GOP leaders keeping silent).
yelling rude remarks before a Joint Session on national TV(such a person would have been ostracized in every other case in my lifetime)
elected officials standing idly by, and in some cases leading the charge, to defy literally EVERY move made by his admin, INCLUDING on foreign
affairs at critical times(NEVER,EVER heard that during any President's tenure until now).

CUDA says such a claim is a joke, inferring that other Presidents saw far worse. Thus far, he has backed that up with??

callmeslick wrote:I note a few days have passed and CUDA couldn't back up his mockery with fact. Surprised, anyone?

YA sorry I just started a new Job on the first and my father in-law died Saturday night and I've been busy making funeral arrangements with little time for the childish gibberish you spew daily. so I say with all sincerity

★■◆● YOU

CUDA wrote:YA sorry I just started a new Job on the first and my father in-law died Saturday night and I've been busy making funeral arrangements with little time for the childish gibberish you spew daily. so I say with all sincerity

**** YOU

I'm sorry to hear that CUDA. I hope things go OK with the funeral and I wish you and your family condolences. It sad to lose a relative. If we don't hear thread replies from you, we'll understand. Don't mind us when we give you a bad time, it's part of the fun. We may carp at you, but that means we're all friends here and understand when family issues like a death in the family or a job change crop up and change your life and your schedule.

I hate to ask, but how come you have a new job? I thought you were pretty well ensconced in managing that body shop.

CUDA wrote:

callmeslick wrote:I note a few days have passed and CUDA couldn't back up his mockery with fact. Surprised, anyone?

YA sorry I just started a new Job on the first

well congrats for that. And, you ought to know I'm just busting stones.

and my father in-law died Saturday night and I've been busy making funeral arrangements

for that, you have my sincere condolances, and more so for your wife and her family.

with little time for the childish gibberish you spew daily. so I say with all sincerity

**** YOU

simmer down. I was busting stones. Sorry about the passing, hope the new job means happier times ahead. And, when you DO find the time, dredge this up and give me one example of ANYTHING remotely close to Obama's experience in our lifetimes.

Sorry to hear CUDA....

...........................

Oh come on….

Reagan was going to start the apocalypse…kill your children…destroy Christmas…force women to get back ally abortions…I seen the cartoons with Reagan pitch forking babies into the backs of straw carts….

Etc….I really could go on.

I’m pretty sure what I said before is correct…the more popular a president is…the more the other side tries to take them down a peg or two.

And of course there’s all that matter of perspective and all that. (if you like the guy, you notice the crap more)

Spidey wrote:Sorry to hear CUDA....

...........................

Oh come on….

Reagan was going to start the apocalypse…kill your children…destroy Christmas…force women to get back ally abortions…I seen the cartoons with Reagan pitch forking babies into the backs of straw carts…

and these were put forth, or even so much as tacitly endorsed by who, exactly? I lived then, and can't remember ONE serious pol or even partisan citizen who uttered any of the above. Ever..
Note I focus on shows of PUBLIC disrespect, and attacks upon his validity to serve. Those are where the current situation makes ANYTHING in my life seem tame.

callmeslick wrote:

Spidey wrote:Sorry to hear CUDA....

...........................

Oh come on….

Reagan was going to start the apocalypse…kill your children…destroy Christmas…force women to get back ally abortions…I seen the cartoons with Reagan pitch forking babies into the backs of straw carts…

and these were put forth, or even so much as tacitly endorsed by who, exactly? I lived then, and can't remember ONE serious pol or even partisan citizen who uttered any of the above. Ever..
Note I focus on shows of PUBLIC disrespect, and attacks upon his validity to serve. Those are where the current situation makes ANYTHING in my life seem tame.

I think broadcasting it on television counts as public disrespect and Reagan was constantly ridiculed on television by the loudest, most watched source of broadcasting...American entertainment.
Obama has had only a fraction of that AND, unlike Reagan, he enjoys protection from most of the contributors to that same media voice.

Spidey nailed it, and your perspective is showing. Your list is hyperbolic and Obama has the assistance of those who are supposed to be his official critics.

Will Robinson wrote:I think broadcasting it on television counts as public disrespect and Reagan was constantly ridiculed on television by the loudest, most watched source of broadcasting...American entertainment.

oh please.....Reagan, like all Presidents I can remember, was fodder for entertainment. If you are suggesting that ANYONE showed the level of stupidity, and willingness to lie that Obama's opposition has done, you are either lying or deluded:
let's add to the list these 'claims':
Born in Kenya, Muslim inscriptions on wedding rings, swearing in on the Koran, was adopted into American family, was disbarred from law practice
and on, and on and on.
You seem to forget that I'm old enough to remember EXACTLY what Reagan's era consisted of.

callmeslick wrote:..
You seem to forget that I'm old enough to remember EXACTLY what Reagan's era consisted of.

Yes, you probably remember but your perception was likely much different since you were laughing along instead of getting all indignant that your guy was being ridiculed.

You totally are glossing over the fact that the media, pop culture, the majority of any broadcasted voice was strongly opposed to Reagan. There was no Fox News or RightWing radio etc. no internet/alternative voice to counter the narrative that he was senile, his wifes astrologers tool, a closet bigot, etc. etc.

Obama gets lots of willing accomplices jumping to his defense in all those mediums that Reagan either didn't have in existence or were not sympathetic to him.

I remember a Genesis video on MTV with little buffoon Reagan puppets, had him accidently nuke the world....made by Jim Hensen no less...Sesame Street doing their part.
.Saturday Night Live tore Reagan a new ★■◆● every week and it carried on long past his end of term as you can see by the videos I linked.
Ridiculing Reagan was a frikken industry that is only recently losing market share.

Not only was a whole generation taught to loath Reagan but the whole conservative side of the spectrum by a conglomerate of sources that dont go after Obama.
Obama is a coddled protected species, ridiculing him is rare by comparison.

Will Robinson wrote:

callmeslick wrote:..
You seem to forget that I'm old enough to remember EXACTLY what Reagan's era consisted of.

Yes, you probably remember but your perception was likely much different since you were laughing along instead of getting all indignant that your guy was being ridiculed.

I was still a Republican then, so no.

You totally are glossing over the fact that the media, pop culture, the majority of any broadcasted voice was strongly opposed to Reagan. There was no Fox News or RightWing radio etc. no internet/alternative voice to counter the narrative that he was senile, his wifes astrologers tool, a closet bigot, etc. etc.

nonsense.....some of the newly forming Conservative coalition made that claim, but I thought it largely BS then, and still do. It was the growing agitation by that wing that drove me from the party by 1984.

You aren't the only one who has lived through it. I'm betting all the non left wing kool aid drinkers remember what I do.

Dig up all the pop culture examples of Obama ridicule and let's compare...lol

Will Robinson wrote:There was no Fox News or RightWing radio etc. no internet/alternative voice to counter the narrative that he was senile...

The unfortunate fact is that Reagan basically was going senile by the end of his second term, or more accurately that he'd reached a stage of Alzheimer's that would have started noticeably affecting his daily life. That's not a knock on the man at all: I wouldn't wish that disease on my worst enemy, and we certainly know far more about its progression now than we did back in the late 80s. Looking back, it raises some theoretical questions about how the Constitutional provision regarding the President's capability to perform his duties might be invoked in a case where the President himself was in a mentally-degenerated state. It didn't get to that stage with Reagan, but it's not hard to envision a scenario where it could have.

it will be interesting to see when history sorts it out, but I've heard more than one report that Nancy was a driving force behind most of the second term, which, ironically, was where most of his foreign policy achievements occurred(first term was a lot of saber rattling and bluster, and all of a sudden the US policy became much friendlier and more cooperative). In fact, I recently had an old Republican pal who was sort of close to the Admin(via Bush family) joke that Hilary wouldn't be the first female president, because Nancy Reagan had already proven it could be done.

Great, another Bush. LOL

exhibit # 500212:

http://www.necn.com/05/19/14/NH-officia ... edID=11106

let's hear those Reagan stories again!

Ooooh, let's have some more of the Bush Dynasty. Jeb! Jeb! Jeb!

Of course, I don't particularly want any more of the Clinton Dynasty either. We need a new clan choice for 2016!

NK calls Obama a monkey but they practically worship their formerly megalomaniacal dead leader as God.