I have seen an overwhelming amount of fact-checking going on, to the point where I have to wonder if anything in it is factually true at all.
One quick example: on pages 115 and 116, she describes a debate she was in during the campaign for governor:
quote:It wasn't the last time I'd find that there's no better training ground for politics than motherhood. At one point during the general election, motherhood became the focus of a unique line of questioning. In my responses to a series of debate questions on abortion, I remained consistent and sincere, explaining how personal and sensitive the issue is and that good people can disagree. But the debate moderator decided to personalize his hypotheticals with a series of "What if..." questions.
He asked: "If a woman were, say, raped..." "...I would choose life." "If your daughter were pregnant..." "Again, I would choose life." "If your teenage daughter got pregnant..." "I'd counsel a young parent to choose life...consider adoption," I answered. I calmly repeated my answer to all of his "what-ifs,", then looked pointedly to my right and my left, to one opponent, then the other. Then I returned to the moderator and said, "I'm confident you'll be asking the other candidates these same questions, right?"
Of course, he didn't."
For what it's worth, I consider her response laudable. Not that I agree with it; I don't. But it's more consistent than the response of those who believe in the sanctity of life but get uneasy when rape babies get brought up.
But the last line: "Of course, he didn't" is a problem. Because he did. Right away, by immediately turning to another candidate and asking him the same thing. Here's the video of it.
So why add that last line, when the previous excerpt was accurate up till then?
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Alcon: Being a successful father is rare in his community?
You mean the African American community?
Now that you've just made a rather racist statement, maybe you should just stop talking now.
Do you believe it is racist to point out the fact that the African American illegitimate birth rate is 80%. Would you consider 20% a minority? Only 20% of African American fathers stick around. Obama is a rarity in that regard. I stand corrected...he is only HALF black. Your view of my racism should be reduced by one half since he is half white and was raised by his white grandparents. Without them, he would be nothing.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow, so you're essentially admitting that your remark about being surprised that Obama was a successful father was expressly over the fact that he was black.
While trying to 'roll with the punches,' you only make yourself look worse. Maybe you should find a different tactic!
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you watch Chris's clip go to 2:55 to see the moderator ask one of the other candidates the same question.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lets really break it down, I'm sexist as well. You only focus on the race but do not realize I am condemning men. I have the utmost respect for black women; they are the only ones holding that society together.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Do you believe it is racist to point out the fact that the African American illegitimate birth rate is 80%.
Which means, even assuming you didn't pull those numbers out of a hat, that 80% of African American babies are born to parents who are not married at the time. Doesn't mean they have broken homes or bad fathers, or even that the parents didn't marry later on, just that their parents weren't married before the birth. One of my children was born out of wedlock, the other born after we married. Does that mean my older son had bad parents?
(Also would appreciate a source for your figures)
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:So why add that last line, when the previous excerpt was accurate up till then?
Apparently she did a good job of hiring a competent ghostwriter, but not so much with hiring a fact-checker.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm sure the father is responsible: "•Black women have the highest teen pregnancy rate (134 per 1,000 women aged 15-19), followed by Hispanics (131 per 1,000) and non-Hispanic whites (48 per 1,000).[27]"
Here, I'll really prove to you I'm a racist. http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats08/trends.htm "Blacks represent only 12 percent of the total U.S. population, but made up more than 70 percent of gonorrhea cases, The chlamydia rate among blacks in 2008 was more than eight times higher than that of whites, The syphilis rate among blacks was about eight times higher than that of whites in 2008"
These are facts - government CDC statistics. Call me a racist all you want, I love my daughter and will warn her accordingly. If these statistics were equal across racial lines, it would be a non-issue. I love my daughter too much to play your PC games.
If I'm not mistaken, cancer rates among smokers vs non-smokers is less than that discrepancy but you wouldn't disparage me for pressing my daughter not to smoke.
posted
I would never tell her not to marry a black man. I live in a very diverse neighborhood and my children go to a very diverse school. My daughter is "crushing on" Deshuan; the black son of a fellow PTA member of my wife. Deshuan, is a very smart, well mannered son of a fellow PTA member. If you'd like me to show my racism, I'll point out that Deshuan's dadddy gone. Fortunately, his mother is amazing and has taught her sons well. When it comes to serious relationships, I trust my daughter's judgment. I will teach my daughter safe sex. Part of this lesson is who is the least safe to have unprotected sex with.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Tom, something else of some interest, perhaps. In that final season of high school basketball, she was determined that her team, the Wasilla Warriors, would win the state title. In a game shortly before the final game, she came down on one foot wrong, and heard something pop. Her coach had to carry her off the court. But she refused even to see a doctor or have X-rays, for fear she would be told it was broken. She toughed it and and played in the final game where they won the championship--even making the winning basket herself, despite being in great pain. She says to this day, her ankle is someone knobby and misshapen. This gives you an idea of what kind of drive and determination she has, her capacity to play through pain, and prevail despite opposition.
I'm sorry, is this supposed to make me think Palin is smart OR sensible?
She refuses to get her foot looked at so she can pretend to herself that she can keep playing a game, and then she permanently maims herself as a result?
This is supposed to be inspirational?
It makes me think she's a flipping idiot.
Completely agreed.
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: As for the way she earned her way through college--very few people pay all their own bills. Most have their tuition paid by parents, or rely on student loans.
False. Less than a quarter of current college students have all or most of their tuition paid by their parents. Also, how is taking out student loans NOT paying your own way? Unless the student defaults or is one of the very few who qualifies for some sort of loan forgiveness (usually by being a teacher or other public servant), they are simply delaying when they pay. Not if.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: Deshuan, is a very smart, well mannered son of a fellow PTA member. If you'd like me to show my racism, I'll point out that Deshuan's dadddy gone.
quote:False. Less than a quarter of current college students have all or most of their tuition paid by their parents. Also, how is taking out student loans NOT paying your own way? Unless the student defaults or is one of the very few who qualifies for some sort of loan forgiveness (usually by being a teacher or other public servant), they are simply delaying when they pay. Not if.
QFT. Preach it sister.
Ron, what fantasyland do you live in where most kids have their parents pay their way? Personally, I can only think of one person out of everyone I know who had their parents pay her way. Everyone else has had to tough it out with loans and grants.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
That probably has something to do with the population at the specific school you are at. And there are certainly some schools (Ivies, Stanford, and some others comes to mind) where in excess of 80% of the students have parents who pay their full tuition. (I'm approximating.)
However, they are a very small fraction of the national picture.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: If you'd like me to show my racism, I'll point out that Deshuan's dadddy gone.
Okay, why is it that whenever you try to point out reasons that you are 'showing your racism,' they have pretty much nothing to do with why you're getting hammered with the charge by other people?
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rivka: That probably has something to do with the population at the specific school you are at. And there are certainly some schools (Ivies, Stanford, and some others comes to mind) where in excess of 80% of the students have parents who pay their full tuition. (I'm approximating.)
However, they are a very small fraction of the national picture.
None of the people I was referring to actually go to school with me. They go to a dozen different schools, including but not limited to Purdue, University of Michigan, Michigan State University, Aquinas College, Alma College and the American University in DC.
Though, you might have a different point there, in that all of us came from one geographic area.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I guess most people are tired of talking about Obama and his Dec. 1 speech at West Point. Certainly, Sarah Palin is far more interesting. So even her detractors reveal they feel she still is someone to be reckoned with. I believe this is especially true, looking toward the 2012 election. This is likely why even after the last presidential election, the bloodthirsty left wouldn't let her alone, they intensified their efforts to attack her, flooded her administration in Alaska with hundreds of frivolous Freedom of Information Act Requests (all of which had to be responded to formally, requiring thousands of hours for her staff and millions of dollars), continued to badger her friends and relatives digging for something they could twist and play up in the tabloids, even making up stories like claiming she and Todd were about to divorce, and continuing to harp on the utterly stupid story that Trig wasn't really her baby.
The left knows, those who hate her most know, she is still a serious threat. Why? Because she is such an attractive example of what a real conservative is, and what a real liberated woman who still embraces conservative family values is, and she has proven herself to be consistent and successful in her defiance of the corrupt political machines whether Democrat or Republican, bringing about genuine ethical reform. We haven't had a politician and potential presidential candidate this good come along since Ronald Reagan, and it was not readily apparent going in that even Reagan was going to be as good as he turned out to be (at one point Republicans talked about a sort of co-presidency with Gerald Ford). Polls say that 40% of the population identifies itself as conservative, and only 20% indentify themselves as liberal. Liberal talk shows always die from lack of ratings, and conservative talk shows and commentators continue to reap record ratings. So liberals know they are "under the gun," as the lustre fades away from their Obama icon, and they feel a desperation that moves many of them to employ the utmost in meanness and deliberate dishonest slander--against Palin herself, and her family, even her children.
Palin tells in her book how months after the election a bunch of reporters pounced on 12-year-old Piper as she walked home from school, accompanying her all the way home, trying to get something from her they could use against her mother. (Sadly, Palin said, they realized they could not allow Piper to walk home by herself any more.) This shows true desperation and utter disregard for any moral restraint on the part of the left.
Since her book is doing so tremendously well, already selling over a million copies of the 1.2 million first print run--and her publisher has announced a second print run of another million copies--it is clear she is going to be plenty well off, now, with plenty of financial resources of her own. I don't know what the rate for autobiographies is, but in the general mainstream publishing business, a 15% of gross sales royalty rate is typical. Of course, Lynn Vincent may get a share of that, as ghostwriter (unless she worked under a contract for a set amount of money).
[ December 04, 2009, 11:09 AM: Message edited by: Ron Lambert ]
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: You cannot atone for sin, no matter how much good you do. Benedict Arnold probably did some good things too. Adolph Hitler probably did some good things in his life. But one was a traitor, and the other a monster. And Jeremiah has earned utter contempt.
Can you please elaborate on the sins that Jeremiah has committed?
I find this interesting too, if you don't mind.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:So even her detractors reveal they feel she still is someone to be reckoned with. I believe this is especially true, looking toward the 2012 election.
I hope she runs. It would guaranty a democrat victory.
I can see the ads now. "Sarah Palin quit her job as Governor of Alaska when things got tough. How can she say she won't do the same thing if she becomes President?" That gets aired, and she's done. Maybe Fox News will give her a tv show.
Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mucus, I would consider that all the negative, treasonous things Jeremiah said about America were indeed sins in the sight of God. Here is the Bible definition of sin: "Sin is the transgression of the Law." (1 John 3:4) He took God's name in vain--and daring to do it in the pulpit--when he said "God d--n America", violating the third commandment (Ex. 20:7), he spoke lies about America and Americans, thus also violating the ninth commandment: "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor." (Ex. 20:16)
He also spoke evil and utterly false things against dignitaries, which the Apostle Peter warned against in 2 Peter 2:10.
Anyone who speaks as Jeremiah did, and anyone who agrees with and would defend him, deserve to be stripped of their U.S. citizen and sentenced to permanent exile. They are not worthy of enjoying any of the privileges of being an American. By denouncing America, they have renounced the rights of Americans, because they show they do not appreciate them or deserve them.
[ December 04, 2009, 11:29 AM: Message edited by: Ron Lambert ]
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ron: Yes Ron, those on the left have absolute control over what journalists do to try and get a story. The moment a good chunk of people decided Palin was an interesting candidate, that they should take seriously, she was going to become the object of intense media scrutiny. In fact the moment she entered politics she should have recognized that. This isn't a left/right question. Do you honestly think the National Enquirer, US Weekly, OK!, and People magazine don't have serious numbers of staff and dollars invested in finding exclusives about Palin?
Further you have it all backwards. If you honestly thought Sarah Palin was done with politics after losing the 2008 elections, your grasp on the obvious is tenuous. I don't think it is, so surely you recognize that she was going to push on after losing. People on the left immediately recognized her ambition, and they also recognized that she had a strong appeal to large conservative constituency. Those things combined make for an obvious attempt at a political career at the upper levels. She readily gave up her governorship, so where does she go from there? Certainly not to the Senate, unless she has to, and certainly not to the House. She is going for executive power and everyone knows it, and she has been very clear about that.
What do you mean by "real conservative?" If by that you mean "Not what is currently running the Republican Party" then I heartily agree. If by conservative you mean somebody Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh supports, then no, I'm sorry, that's not what conservatism should be. That's the sort of conservative who takes pride in ignorance and low levels of intellectual attainments. Thinking that American is some sort of pure substance and not the product of many nations and cultures meeting together, and hence other nations are to be ignored and marginalized as they have nothing to share with us. Believing that government is the problem not the solution, as if many of the incursions of government up until now did not happen as a result of people being unable to deal with problems like education, equal rights, defense, and infrastructure themselves.
I hate the fact that the conservative movement is such a mess right now. We need smart moral conservatives to check the excesses of liberal thought. We need William Buckleys, not Sarah Palins. Reagan was a good president, but frankly he would be hate the almost god-like status he has been given today. If she is the best candidate since Reagan, what does that say about the two Bushes?
I almost wish some nation would attack us so that the left and right would suddenly all become Americans fighting a common enemy. We're all bloody Americans, and we all matter equally.
As for Piper, why on earth would you let your child walk home from school alone in any circumstance? My children will always get to and from school on the bus, if they can walk, they will walk home with a friend. The idea that Piper Palin is somehow unique in that she is the daughter of a famous political person and is the only one who can't walk home alone because of reporters is ridiculous. Palin has essentially announced her candidacy far in advance, do you think Obama's daughters walked home alone from school when he was just a Senator from Illinois running for president?
You are absolutely right that there are people who hate what Sarah Palin believes in and therefore want to destroy her in some fashion. But guess what Ron, lumping them with the many of us who feel we have real concerns with her running our country and calling us all "the left" is infuriating because we have little in common. You might as well define "the right" as "Those who support my ideas."
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: ... They are not worthy of enjoying any of the privileges of being an American. By denouncing America, they have renounced the rights of Americans ...
Fascinating,
Do you believe it is a sin for citizens of other countries to say negative things about or denounce their own countries?
Also, do you believe it is a sin for citizens of other countries to say negative things about or denounce America?
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
BlackBlade, no one else is being treated the way Palin and her family have been and are being treated, even way after the election is over. When somebody asked something about Obama's children during the campaign, Obama said, "My children are off limits," and all the news media went along with that, conservative and liberal. The bloodthirsty left is crucifying itself with its meanness and extreme unfairness and blatant dishonesty. Everyone can see this, except apparently the left.
Wasilla is a fairly small town, only a few thousand people, in a severe-climate state like Alaska where neighbors depend on each other, and most people know each other. I used to walk home from school alone when I was five. It should be safe for a 12-year-old to walk home from school in her own home town. But times have changed now, obviously, at least here in the big city and suburbs.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mucus, God will judge the sins of those who speak against America unjustly.
God is on America's side, as long as America remains for the most part on God's side. God has been using America for good in the world, as His primary tool to hold in check and even roll back the forces of tyranny, military conquest, and systematic abuse of human rights. All who speak against America are making themselves enemies of God, and they will answer to Him.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
I'll repeat the first question since that is more relevant to me. "Do you believe it is a sin for citizens of other countries to say negative things about or denounce their own countries?"
As for the second, why do you feel qualified to judge the sins of Americans that speak against America, but God has to judge the sins of non-Americans that speak against America?
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mucus, I think that if I were a citizen of a nation like Iran, I would still have an obligation to show respect for the government, but that would not prevent me from voicing criticism and calling for reform. Government, after all, is a servant of the people, and therefore answerable to the people. It depends on how you do it. Swearing at the government and using vulgar insults would be sin. That is not how do deal with servants.
In America's civil war, Seventh-day Adventists did not officially take sides, and were conscientious objectors to taking up arms (we still are). But we published statements against slavery, many SDAs were members of the Abolitionist Movement, and the largest share of the homes ("stations") on the "Underground Railroad" for escaping slaves were homes of Seventh-day Adventists. This is why Sojourner Truth, who conducted many groups along the Underground Railroad, remained a friend of SDAs to her dying day.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: BlackBlade, no one else is being treated the way Palin and her family have been and are being treated, even way after the election is over. When somebody asked something about Obama's children during the campaign, Obama said, "My children are off limits," and all the news media went along with that, conservative and liberal. The bloodthirsty left is crucifying itself with its meanness and extreme unfairness and blatant dishonesty. Everyone can see this, except apparently the left.
Wasilla is a fairly small town, only a few thousand people, in a severe-climate state like Alaska where neighbors depend on each other, and most people know each other. I used to walk home from school alone when I was five. It should be safe for a 12-year-old to walk home from school in her own home town. But times have changed now, obviously, at least here in the big city and suburbs.
If you think every single news outlet has completely avoided Obama's children I think you have alot of work ahead of you proving that, it seems very unlikely to me. If they didn't get to and from work in secret service cars you can bet there would be photographers and reporters waiting on their route home to talk to them. Wasilla being a small town has nothing to do with it. She is a major political player, news outlets are going to try to get at her anyway they can.
And get over this "left controlled media" thing you have going on. I've listened to the "right controlled radio" for months now, and believe me, if Obama said he ate Shepherds Pie, and some grapes for lunch, they'd complain that he isn't eating "American food." They have nothing positive to say about him, not...one...thing. I can't emphasize that enough, which is why I can't take them seriously. The Washington Post calls Glenn Beck the new voice of the Right, and Beck's substitute on the show that day (Beck was recovering from having his emergency appendectomy) accused the Washington Post of being sarcastic and disingenuous. The New York Times admits they were slow on the uptake with the Van Jones story that Glenn Beck and Fox News broke, and Beck's response was to gloat. Why not say, "Thanks for acknowledging my hard work?" Instead it's, "Obama has a secret socialist agenda and the left controlled media is on board!"
If you read print media it seems like the right is attacked, if you listen to radio the left is terrible. Christopher Buckley was fired from the National Review (The paper his father started) because he felt Obama was a stronger candidate than McCain. Do you really think the conservative media is fair and balanced all the time, and never engages in character assassination, while the left is without scruples?
I've only heard people complain that the left struggles to create a cohesive message to it's constituents, while the right has turned political information dissemination into a science.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mucus, God judges everyone's sins. It is easier for me to judge the sins of professed American citizens who speak against America, because I am better acquainted with what is involved, and they are without excuse.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Swearing at the government is a sin or just swearing in general?
If you were a a citizen of Iran though, would you *denounce* the government? Would you subsequently feel that you would have renounced your rights as an Iranian and accept permanent exile?
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: In America's civil war, Seventh-day Adventists did not officially take sides, and were conscientious objectors to taking up arms (we still are). ...
Ah, a tangent. You mentioned "God is on America's side." Was he on the Union or Confederate side during the Civil War and did the other side make themselves "enemies of God"?
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:He took God's name in vain--and daring to do it in the pulpit--when he said "God d--n America", violating the third commandment
By that logic, every time someone says "God bless America," the phrase he was deliberately referencing, they are also taking the Lord's name in vain.
quote:Anyone who speaks as Jeremiah did, and anyone who agrees with and would defend him, deserve to be stripped of their U.S. citizen and sentenced to permanent exile.
Heh. Do you want me to find some quotes from Palin's friends about seceding from the U.S.? They might amuse you.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Anyone who speaks as Jeremiah did, and anyone who agrees with and would defend him, deserve to be stripped of their U.S. citizen and sentenced to permanent exile.
Now, that sure sounds American!
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Anyone who speaks as Jeremiah did, and anyone who agrees with and would defend him, deserve to be stripped of their U.S. citizen and sentenced to permanent exile.
quote:Anyone who speaks as Jeremiah did, and anyone who agrees with and would defend him, deserve to be stripped of their U.S. citizen and sentenced to permanent exile. They are not worthy of enjoying any of the privileges of being an American. By denouncing America, they have renounced the rights of Americans, because they show they do not appreciate them or deserve them.
Oh Alanis Morrisette, goddess of unintentional irony, you bless me with this gift.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sounds like in the Revolutionary War, some of you clowns would have been Tories. I still abide by the original Boy Scout Motto: "Onward For God and Country."
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: Sounds like in the Revolutionary War, some of you clowns would have been Tories. I still abide by the original Boy Scout Motto: "Onward For God and Country."
Yeah, I totally see how that motto means "Permanently exile people who say things you don't like about America"
It's just so straightforward. So clear.Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by Ron Lambert: Sounds like in the Revolutionary War, some of you clowns would have been Tories. I still abide by the original Boy Scout Motto: "Onward For God and Country."
I'm Canadian so yeah, whats wrong with you people!? Rebelling against the Crown!
IP: Logged |
posted
Unless you're a Puritan McCarthyist, neither Christian ideals nor American ideals call for the disenfranchisement and exile of citizens who use speech to express criticism of the United States, you jackass.
I put the word 'speech' in bold because the Founding Fathers you no doubt claim to revere thought that the freedom of speech was so absolutely vital it was in their first amendment to the Constitution.
Demanding Wright's exile as an expression of American ideals makes you a much bigger enemy of those very ideals you claim to respect.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Remember though Rakeesh that as early as John Adams' presidency, the alien sedition acts were passed which seriously impeded free speech. Clearly not all the founding fathers thought it an absolutely pivotal right. Lincoln too arrested journalists both for revealing union movements and for speaking out against his policies during the Civil War.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
While that's accurate, it doesn't really diminish the idea that the Founding Fathers, when spoken of as a group, overwhelmingly reject the sort of ideals Ron is espousing.
Certainly Adams had a change of heart between the Constitutional Convention and his later presidency, or at least I think it's safe to say so-he was neck deep in the former, after all.
Lincoln takes a hit for jailing journalists speaking out against his policies, though definitely not for revealing Union movements. The one is free speech, however detrimental in the midst of a war. The other is outright treason.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: If you'd like me to show my racism, I'll point out that Deshuan's dadddy gone.
Okay, why is it that whenever you try to point out reasons that you are 'showing your racism,' they have pretty much nothing to do with why you're getting hammered with the charge by other people?
I'm illustrating how stating a fact can lead to being called a racist. Am I racist to state that African Americans score the lowest and have the lowest high school graduation rate in the nation? Am I an Asian supremasist for stating the fact that Asians have the highest graduation rate and test scores?...of course not, I'm not Asian. This is the PC problem. If an Asian stated that fact, you would interpret it as a supremasist comment. Truth is truth. The same truth said by one is ok but when said by another is not. I brought up the CDC stats because I knew that stating those facts would make me look racist despite the fact the the statement was accurate and verifiable. If Al Sharpton said the same, he'd be praised for helping his community. A white sais it, he's a racist. Deshuan's daddy is gone and so are 80% of children with his background. I pointed out his majority status but when I point out the minority status of a good black father, like Obama, it is also racist. I don't have the appropriate skin color to discuss such issues, either way I'm wrong.
posted
Am I the only one who thinks it's just a tiny bit, well, I don't know if it's offensive, but bothersome at least, to say "Deshuan's daddy"? The phrasing makes it sound like a diminutive reference. Daddy is a word that children use. Well, it has other wholly inappropriate connotations as well, but they aren't really applicable here.
Say father. Dad is fine even.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
My daughter calls me daddy. Dehsuan's daddy is gone, which is not uncommon at all. I'll admit the phrase "daddy gone" didn't originate in my family.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: If you'd like me to show my racism, I'll point out that Deshuan's dadddy gone.
Okay, why is it that whenever you try to point out reasons that you are 'showing your racism,' they have pretty much nothing to do with why you're getting hammered with the charge by other people?
Am I racist to state that African Americans score the lowest and have the lowest high school graduation rate in the nation? Am I an Asian supremasist for stating the fact that Asians have the highest graduation rate and test scores?...of course not, I'm not Asian. I don't have the appropriate skin color to discuss such issues, either way I'm wrong.
You are aware that Asians used to have much lower IQ test scores that whites, right, mal? I hope you are.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: While that's accurate, it doesn't really diminish the idea that the Founding Fathers, when spoken of as a group, overwhelmingly reject the sort of ideals Ron is espousing.
Certainly Adams had a change of heart between the Constitutional Convention and his later presidency, or at least I think it's safe to say so-he was neck deep in the former, after all.
Lincoln takes a hit for jailing journalists speaking out against his policies, though definitely not for revealing Union movements. The one is free speech, however detrimental in the midst of a war. The other is outright treason.
Wasn't Adams in Europe during the entire Convention? I'm pretty sure he was ambassador to either France or England, I can't remember which.
As for Lincoln, I don't remember reading about him jailing journalists for speaking out against him. In fact, I specifically recall an instance where a Union general shut down a major Chicago Copperhead newspaper for railing against Lincoln, and Lincoln overruled the general in ordering the paper reopened. I can think of another couple of examples where prominent figures were arrested either by locals or generals only to be saved by Lincoln, but I'd have to go back through my notes to get the names right.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Certainly Adams had a change of heart between the Constitutional Convention and his later presidency
According to the McCullough biography, he was against those acts but politically not powerful enough to fight them.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lyrhawn and Rivka are correct-I was getting my Founding Fathers mixed up. *embarrassed*
Fortunately, though, my error wasn't one made by our country as a whole, and Ron's outlook that critical or even hateful, contemptuous speech by citizens towards our nation, its government, or both, should be punished by exile, is about as unAmerican as anything gets.
It's a disgraceful perversion of American ideals, and he ought to be ashamed to suggest them. But since Ron (by his political expressions on this forum) is actually a profoundly bad American - that is, he routinely fails to cherish the best ideas of American, and often suggests trampling them - I wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't.
He should be ashamed but not, thankfully, exiled.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
