Kramer Loses His Mind

Off Topic
181

Of course, society now is not “officially” racist, and certainly not as racist as say 30 or so years ago. But it is. And most people are ok with that. Most people are ok with how things are overall, based on how nothing has changed over the past number of generations.

And some comic somewhere cuts down a heckler and everyone gets their knickers in a knot and are SO shocked. And they all will come out of the woodwork, condemning the comments of a really insignificant person and act. And which will be the sum of their grand contribution. Bullshit hypocrisy.

You want to know how deep the hypocrisy goes? White folks cant use the word “nigger”, even in jest, and whites are ok with that, because for most thats their official contribution to eliminating racism from society. So everyone toes the official pc line around the word, while doing absolutely fuck all otherwise. Its like, thats how people prove they arent racist, by how bent out of shape they get over the “n” word.

And notice how black comics will use “cracker” and whites will chuckle and giggle. Why? Because it gives these whites the chance to show how cool and hip and pc they are, and how impotent the term “cracker” is.

Truth is, we all have elements of racial prejudice. Doesnt mean its good, doesnt mean it should be celebrated, but its there. But the political agendas are not really brimming over with issues of racial inequality or tolerance are they? Why not? Because basically people are pretty much ok with how things are.

182

“Kramer’s” big sin was not racism, it was not being funny. If he came across at least halfway funny he wouldve been “controversial”, or simply entertaining. But he came across as not funny, which was his ruin.

Ive always liked Chris Rock’s take on “nigger”. He differentiates between respectable black folk, that are relatively hard working, honest, decent people and the niggers who give the decent black people a bad rep. Its the same as comparing relatively hard working, decent white folk and the stereotypical trailer-park white trash.

I dont know, seems to me blacks are able to use the terms “trailer-park white trash” or “rednecks” without attracting the wrath of the socially pure in heart. But a white person cant refer to some black that is being an asshole as a “nigger”. Why is that? And please, let no one refer to the years of oppression in past tense, because that oppression hasnt gone away, Oprah and the NBA aside.

183

[quote]Hambone1818 wrote:
Once it is thrust in front of them and they realize that the quality of the person is considerably more than skin deep most people–with the exception of those extremely ignorant and stubborn people, which I consider to be unforgivable–will realize the error of their ways.

This becomes more difficult as people grow older and their racist mindset is further ingrained into their being, but I believe anyone worth the time to interact with should be openminded enough to realize the error of theirs ways, parents and preconceived notions be damned.
[/quote]

Really? I have various types of friends - non-white, women, gay. And these relationships are genuine and authentic. Yet, occassionally, I find myself saying something or thinking something that makes me wonder if Im sexist, racist, homophobic, at least to some degree.

I dont see it as a “I see the error of my ways” black-and-white perspective. I see it as fundamental to society, perhaps even human nature. Its not that there are racists and non-racists. We are all racists (and sexist and phobic). The difference is that some choose to embrace and celebrate what others see as weakness.

184

[quote]Julius_Caesar wrote:
tweaker wrote:
What does this really have to do with racism? I can find plenty of african-american comics that are openly racist against whites.

Has anyone considered the idea of fighting words?

That’s because many blacks openly hate us whites. If you notice from the Kramer video, some of the blacks there are actually shouting back epithets at him like “cracker.” Any white who grew up in a city has experienced this first hand.
I was jumped many times by blacks just because I was white and many times I also was called names like cracker, honkey, white bread, etc.

This is all the meanwhile my tax dollars are feeding them in prison and on welfare…

[/quote]

80% of Welfare recipients are WHITE. What’s your next great statement of proof?

185

[quote]Scotacus wrote:
Hambone1818 wrote:
Once it is thrust in front of them and they realize that the quality of the person is considerably more than skin deep most people–with the exception of those extremely ignorant and stubborn people, which I consider to be unforgivable–will realize the error of their ways.

This becomes more difficult as people grow older and their racist mindset is further ingrained into their being, but I believe anyone worth the time to interact with should be openminded enough to realize the error of theirs ways, parents and preconceived notions be damned.

Really? I have various types of friends - non-white, women, gay. And these relationships are genuine and authentic. Yet, occassionally, I find myself saying something or thinking something that makes me wonder if Im sexist, racist, homophobic, at least to some degree.

I dont see it as a “I see the error of my ways” black-and-white perspective. I see it as fundamental to society, perhaps even human nature. Its not that there are racists and non-racists. We are all racists (and sexist and phobic). The difference is that some choose to embrace and celebrate what others see as weakness.[/quote]

Scotacus, your last three posts are spot on. Good job.

186

[quote]GERRY.P.SHARMAN wrote:

Why do you keep posting videos? Good job, you found some videos with black stereotype comedy and racial statements made by a politician. Try some other cultures, I’m sure you can find some there too. Maybe some Mencia footage making fun of Mexicans.

If all you do is look for bad, then guess what? All you will find is bad.

187

Looks like nothing short of a good 'ol roid rage, how could anyone mistake it with that jacked physique of his.

188

[quote]MaloVerde wrote:

80% of Welfare recipients are WHITE. What’s your next great statement of proof?

[/quote]

189

Apparently, 1 in 3 black men in the US are under surveillance of the state - that is, incarcerated or under court supervision. The penal system is way disportionate in terms of white to non-white populations, with non-whites making up 20%-30% more. In California, the likelihood of a young Hispanic male coming into contact with the courts is ridiculously high.

In the 80s, under Reagan and the neoconservative front, politicians got white society hyped up on fear, and provided the “answer” of harsher - some would rightly argue barbaric - sentencing (after all, how many in inner cities vote? Its the white vote they were after). The result has led to the examples presented above. Clinton’s liberal’s were no better. Prison building is Huge Business in the US, under liberals and conservatives alike. Take “war on crime” and replace “crime” with “non-whites” and you get a clearer picture. States provide Huge $$$ incentives for private companies to build prisons but give dimes for actually tackling the problem at grassroots levels.

Take the “war on drugs”. Replace “drugs” with “inner-city non-white” and you get a clearer picture of what thats about. I liked the picture painted in “Traffic”, where the kid tells the senator about how huge amounts of cash can be made from white middle class buying drugs, so who is someone who has taken privilege for granted to judge that?

Speaking of which, the largest importer of drugs from central AMerica into the US, for the past 25 years or so, has been the CIA.

In fact, it is estimated that on an annual basis approx $400 billion of drug cartel profits gets laundered through Western, predominantly US, financial institutions. This flow is deemed essential to keeping “legitimate” portfolios healthy and growing.

Check out how the US and Britain attacked Afghanistan after the Taliban pledged to get even tougher on poppy production. At the time of the initial bombings virtually all of the poppy fields had been plowed under and replaced with food crops. In fact, those food crops were what Blair and Bush were actually bombing, not poppy fields. Since then, with the Western powers involved, poppy production has blossomed, to the point where currently Afghanistan provides 92% of world supply. Where is the money going from this production? No one ever mentions that. I guarantee you its not being buried in the sand.

Just a little broader picture of the social costs argument being suggested.

190

[quote]Scotacus wrote:
Apparently, 1 in 3 black men in the US are under surveillance of the state - that is, incarcerated or under court supervision. The penal system is way disportionate in terms of white to non-white populations, with non-whites making up 20%-30% more. In California, the likelihood of a young Hispanic male coming into contact with the courts is ridiculously high.
[/quote]

When you mean “non-white” what you really mean is black and Hispanic, because Asians aren’t white, but have much lower crime rates than blacks and Hispanics. It’s funny how Asians seem immune from white “racism”.

191

[quote]GERRY.P.SHARMAN wrote:
why isn’t the black community branding this PUTZ a racist ,And jumping up with outrage from his racist words ???

- YouTube

If you say anything… suddenly YOU are the racist. Its a double standard.

Suddenly the minority is right just because they are a minority.

That mayor is a fucking douchebag.

192

[quote]WS4adumbastard wrote:
I’d seen interviews where he kind of came off as a prick, but that was just ridiculous, i’m all for freedom of speech, but when you use that freedom for no other reason to insult somebody, to try to take them down a peg, then you don’t really have a reason to be speaking at all.

Any bit of career that he had left is gone, he should just go live off his seinfeld money, because nobody is going to want to hear anything he has to say now.[/quote]

I don’t know much about the guy, apart from him apearing in Seinfeld, and I haven’t seen anything of his act, except when he lost it.
But I don’t see he’s a racist. He puts on an act. His character calls people a nigger.
In my book that takes the namecaller down a peg, not the people that were adressed.

Does anybody here think that Archie Bunker was a racist?

193

[quote]Wreckless wrote:

Does anybody here think that Archie Bunker was a racist?[/quote]

Archie Bunker was a stereotype himself, meant to push the limits of what was even socially acceptable on tv at the time. Back then, it was like Married with Children multiplied by 20.

Without opposition to his state of mind, represented by his daughter and her husband’s offense to everything he said…and later the addition of the black neighbors that eventually had their own show (The Jeffersons), the show would no doubt be branded as racist if no one ever said anything against his comments.

He represented what was no doubt a common mentality in many non-minority males in the country at the time…that no one ever talked about openly.

The difference was in the presentation of BOTH sides of that issue on every show. If you are relating this “comedian” to All in the Family, you are severely off. For one, All in the Family hit on many social issues head on and never just offered the “older racist” view of things.

That gave the show a message, one that few people missed even if they didn’t get it at first. Are you saying there was a deeper message here?

I think everyone got that message loud and clear…and it wasn’t deep at all.

194

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Wreckless wrote:

Does anybody here think that Archie Bunker was a racist?

Archie Bunker was a stereotype himself, meant to push the limits of what was even socially acceptable on tv at the time. Back then, it was like Married with Children multiplied by 20.

Without opposition to his state of mind, represented by his daughter and her husband’s offense to everything he said…and later the addition of the black neighbors that eventually had their own show (The Jeffersons), the show would no doubt be branded as racist if no one every said anything against his comments. He represented what was no doubt a common mentality in many non-minority males in the country at the time…that no one ever talked about openly.

The difference was in the presentation of BOTH sides of that issue on every show. If you are relating this “comedian” to All in the Family, you are severely off. For one, All in the Family hit on many social issues head on and never just offered the “older racist” view of things.

That gave the show a message, one that few people missed even if they didn’t get it at first. Are you saying there was a deeper message here?

I think everyone got that message loud and clear…and it wasn’t deep at all.[/quote]

Don’t you a have a Black Panther meeting to head off to there…Or maybe dinner with Lois Farrakhan ?

195

[quote]Scotacus wrote:
…

Check out how the US and Britain attacked Afghanistan after the Taliban pledged to get even tougher on poppy production. At the time of the initial bombings virtually all of the poppy fields had been plowed under and replaced with food crops. In fact, those food crops were what Blair and Bush were actually bombing, not poppy fields. Since then, with the Western powers involved, poppy production has blossomed, to the point where currently Afghanistan provides 92% of world supply. Where is the money going from this production? No one ever mentions that. I guarantee you its not being buried in the sand.

Just a little broader picture of the social costs argument being suggested.[/quote]

Incredibly ignorant post.

The Taliban was the biggest poppy dealer of all. They controlled the whole market and only plowed under some fields to drive up the prices because there was such a glut.

They continue to fund their ways through opium sales.

196

[quote]GERRY.P.SHARMAN wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Wreckless wrote:

Does anybody here think that Archie Bunker was a racist?

Archie Bunker was a stereotype himself, meant to push the limits of what was even socially acceptable on tv at the time. Back then, it was like Married with Children multiplied by 20.

Without opposition to his state of mind, represented by his daughter and her husband’s offense to everything he said…and later the addition of the black neighbors that eventually had their own show (The Jeffersons), the show would no doubt be branded as racist if no one every said anything against his comments. He represented what was no doubt a common mentality in many non-minority males in the country at the time…that no one ever talked about openly.

The difference was in the presentation of BOTH sides of that issue on every show. If you are relating this “comedian” to All in the Family, you are severely off. For one, All in the Family hit on many social issues head on and never just offered the “older racist” view of things.

That gave the show a message, one that few people missed even if they didn’t get it at first. Are you saying there was a deeper message here?

I think everyone got that message loud and clear…and it wasn’t deep at all.

Don’t you a have a Black Panther meeting to head off to there…Or maybe dinner with Lois Farrakhan ?[/quote]

that’s where the inspiration for the screen name ‘huey’ came from. and no, i’m not joking.

197

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:

Incredibly ignorant post.

[/quote]

Then it fits right in with this thread.

198

[quote]Julius_Caesar wrote:
MaloVerde wrote:

80% of Welfare recipients are WHITE. What’s your next great statement of proof?

http://www.newcoalition.org/Article.cfm?artId=152

[/quote]
uh oh

199

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:

Incredibly ignorant post.

The Taliban was the biggest poppy dealer of all. They controlled the whole market and only plowed under some fields to drive up the prices because there was such a glut.

They continue to fund their ways through opium sales.
[/quote]

Let me know what you think. Here’s something to start you off:

Who benefits from the opium trade?

The spoils of war: Afghanistan’s Multibillion Dollar Heroin Trade

These articles of course are complete with links to UN sources upon which the statistical evidence is based. Any evidence to back up your argument, or are you just expressing an opinion?

What did you think of the rest of my post?

200

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:

Incredibly ignorant post.

Then it fits right in with this thread.[/quote]

Keep in mind you have posted to this thread yourself…OUCH!..Oh by the way the bald guy in your Avatar has some chalk or some dry wall on the side of his head …I’m guessing it might be dry wall ,as he may have been hit with a slab of sheet rock …which would explain why it looks like he’s screaming …(LOL)