First, bottom line is that you are one of the few people on this forum who I actually respect. Even though I could list your apparent faults as easily as I could scratch my own ass, overall, I don’t fault how your parents raised you.
With that said, I will skip everything but what I believe are the main points that actually lead to a decent discussion.
[quote]
I’m sorry, were we discussing a study showing the media ignores missing black children? Or is this based on anecdotal evidence? And how, if at all, does that relate to the claim about the self-appointed “spokesmen” being accepted by the media because the spokesmen tend to have liberal views, which the media wants to accept?[/quote]
I’m sorry, are you claiming that you haven’t observed the same thing? I need to go find a study to show you that you couldn’t name the last black girl that went missing
Mind you, it is so apparent that it has its own name. Missing White Girl Syndrome:
Yes, those liberal newsmen…at it again.
Face it, the spotlight is on the white race with adoring eyes. The spotlight is on blacks only so people can see if their car keys get stolen.
You claim there is a “liberal media” only when it benefits you. Needless to say, they aren’t liberal…they’re just stupid enough to cater to the lowest common denominator…including the white folks.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
First, bottom line is that you are one of the few people on this forum who I actually respect. Even though I could list your apparent faults as easily as I could scratch my own ass, overall, I don’t fault how your parents raised you.
With that said, I will skip everything but what I believe are the main points that actually lead to a decent discussion.
I’m sorry, were we discussing a study showing the media ignores missing black children? Or is this based on anecdotal evidence? And how, if at all, does that relate to the claim about the self-appointed “spokesmen” being accepted by the media because the spokesmen tend to have liberal views, which the media wants to accept?
I’m sorry, are you claiming that you haven’t observed the same thing? I need to go find a study to show you that you couldn’t name the last black girl that went missing
Fine-
Britain’s National Missing Persons Helpline has reported on the degree to which the news media devote attention to vulnerable missing persons, noting that despite its efforts to generate news coverage for all missing persons cases, the news media themselves will only cover those cases that fit their publications. The NMPH also notes that those cases that generate the greatest publicity are those where the missing person is white, middle-class, female, and from a stable two-parent family, and where there is no indication that the missing person ran away from home. Two cases are given as contrasting examples: the murder of Hannah Williams and the murder of Danielle Jones. Despite the fact that in both cases the victim was a female teenager, there was far more coverage of Jones than of Williams. It is suggested that this is because Jones fulfils the criteria of being a model middle-class schoolgirl, whilst Williams, a girl with a working-class background whose parents were estranged and who had a stud in her nose, did not.
Mind you, it is so apparent that it has its own name. Missing White Girl Syndrome:
Yes, those liberal newsmen…at it again.
Face it, the spotlight is on the white race with adoring eyes. The spotlight is on blacks only so people can see if their car keys get stolen.
You claim there is a “liberal media” only when it benefits you. Needless to say, they aren’t liberal…they’re just stupid enough to cater to the lowest common denominator…including the white folks.[/quote]
Seems we’ve gotten pretty far off topic. I won’t argue the media isn’t stupid - but I do think they’re liberally biased (as I’ve argued in numerous threads previously - new thread for each study that came out…).
This may have run it’s course - if you want to though, we can start a new thread on Missing White Woman Syndrome, AKA Missing Pretty Girl Syndrome.
I see plenty of opinion pieces referenced in Wikipedia, which makes me think this is more anecdotal. Interesting stuff on the British media though… looks like class bias, as much or more than racism. Then again, I think a lot of the problems that get attributed to racism have more to do with economic class, as I’ve stated before.
What if John McCains Pastor for 20 years spouted racist comments from the pulpit? What if that same Pastor were looked up to and admired by McCain.
Do you think that McCain would have to drop out of the race? I can tell you right now that I would never vote for him if it were McCain who had such baggage.
Someone who wants to lead the most powerful country on the face of the earth should have made a better decision with his own life than to sit for 20 years and listen to racist remarks from a very hateful anti-white, anti-Jew Pastor.
And no, if you’re a black person the idea that the U.S. might have given blacks AIDS isn’t that controversial. The U.S. made black people personal property, everything from there seems reasonable.
You can’t mean that.
Slavery ended in 1865…right? Tell me how anyone who has not been declared insane could actually believe that the US government would spread AIDS to the black community.
I mean…when would this program have begun? Who administers it?
Can you see the headlines on that one? Clinton couldn’t keep a freaking blow job quiet.
Please, just admit you can’t think of any good reason why Obama would belong to a Church where the Pastor is obviously racist and we’ll let this one drop.
[/quote]
You keep coming up with false analogies…Wright isn’t a racist. He doesn’t hate whites, doesn’t hate jews, etc. and of course the “god damn” America is biblical so what’s the big deal?
Oh, and there’s more to the plight of african-americans than slavery. So, no I don’t think it would be a stretch for some in the black community to believe the government would be past giving AIDS to blacks. I mean plenty of whites believe the government killed a president…
Oh, and there’s more to the plight of african-americans than slavery. So, no I don’t think it would be a stretch for some in the black community to believe the government would be past giving AIDS to blacks. I mean plenty of whites believe the government killed a president…[/quote]
Can someone tell me how this series of thoughts makes sense? On the one hand, conspiracy theories are a parlour game of sorts; they occupy the idle or delinquent mind…HH, for example.
But to say the AIDS is a contrivance of the US govt to oppress a segment of our society…this is worse than demagoguery; it is an intentional manipulation to stupefy the audience, and to make them dependent tools of the speaker. In the particular example of AIDS, by depriving folks of education, it is a further disservice to the potential victims of the disease. (See the recent history of South Africa in this regard.)
So why should any of us care, and why the media interest?
I am familiar with Chicago, and nothing in Rev. Wright’s ideology (or theology, if one insists) is new over the last 40 years. And this rhetoric ceased being threatening long ago.
Need I restate the obvious? Obama is in the cross-hairs, not because of his race, but because:
He is a cipher, and intentionally so. If one is substantive at this point in a campaign, one becomes the target of criticism and particularlism. If a candidate says nothing of substance, he/she is less vulnerable. Vacuity wins primaries, and, sadly, general elections, too.
He has no reliable political background, and is the product of a political machine. So he has to campaign on his “exemplary judgment.” Hence, the criticism about his judgment in supporting this church, and the sodden attempts to conveniently distance himself from “some statements.”
Obama started at this church, by his own admission, to establish “street cred” on the South Side. He cannot write that off…not yet. In the mean time, the church’s website will continue to take down Rev Wright “objectionable sermons,” as it has done this last week, and the Machine will continue another sanitization project.
And what else does the media have? Just wait until someone decides to investigate the origins of Michelle’s $316,000 salary from UChicago, as an administrator for a health program for the poor! (That salary would pay for 5 to 7 residents in medicine, each with a caseload of 800 to 1000 patients.)
Well, we know the campaign slogan will not be, “Obama…He has the Wright stuff!”
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Went to Farrakhan’s Million Man March…goes to a church whose theology is based on the writings of a guy who wants to ‘extinguish’ whitey…may have secretly subscribed to Islam…
Damn! Is this guy some sort of secret plant out to destroy America? I actually thought of voting for the guy, now he’s pretty close to where I think he should be given a plane ticket to Indonesia, or wherever the fuck he’s from. Send him to fucking Kenya.
Many black men went to The Million Man March and very few of them went to support Farrakhan himself. You are clueless about different cultures in this country.[/quote]
I’m learning though. While realizing Obama’s hidden agenda (to extinquish whitey, according to his church’s philosopher) and reading your posts, I’m realizing and understanding things in a new light.
Well, I also learned a great deal from this thread. Wright is a racialist conspiracy nut, and leftists will defend that. If the color of the skin is right, of course.
Caught it before you editted it. Why be timid about stating the truth? He does consider most of us racist. He’s been taught that we are irredeemably evil and that our goal in life is to oppress black people. Judging people by what they produce is, by his definition, racist. Demanding proof is racist. To pay someone for how much wealth they produce is racist. To point out that a group is prone to crime and violence, that this group of people is collectively hellbent on having children out of wedlock and dropping out of high school at over 50% of population is…racist.
[quote]Mick28 wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Well, I also learned a great deal from this thread. Wright is a racialist conspiracy nut, and leftists will defend that. If the color of the skin is right, of course.
Yea…it’s actually a little weird…if they actually believe what they’re posting.[/quote]
Again, he’s most likely not a racist, or if he’s a racist (base on your say so) then you’re a racist. And yeah he’s said some nutty things, but from my perspective ALL pastors are saying and doing nutty things every Sunday (worshiping a demi-god, pagan rituals, etc.)
[quote]100meters wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Well, I also learned a great deal from this thread. Wright is a racialist conspiracy nut, and leftists will defend that. If the color of the skin is right, of course.
Yea…it’s actually a little weird…if they actually believe what they’re posting.
Again, he’s most likely not a racist, or if he’s a racist (base on your say so) then you’re a racist. And yeah he’s said some nutty things, but from my perspective ALL pastors are saying and doing nutty things every Sunday (worshiping a demi-god, pagan rituals, etc.)[/quote]
Obama has been well trained:
"This, too, prompted Obama to share with his readers a life lesson on how to handle white people: “It was usually an effective tactic, another one of those tricks I had learned: People were satisfied so long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves. They were more than satisfied, they were relieved – such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered young black man who didn’t seem angry all the time.”
First of all, I note that this technique seems to be the basis of Obama’s entire presidential campaign. But moreover – he was talking about his own mother! As Obama says: “Any distinction between good and bad whites held negligible meaning.” Say, do you think a white person who said that about blacks would be a leading presidential candidate?
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
100meters wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Well, I also learned a great deal from this thread. Wright is a racialist conspiracy nut, and leftists will defend that. If the color of the skin is right, of course.
Yea…it’s actually a little weird…if they actually believe what they’re posting.
Again, he’s most likely not a racist, or if he’s a racist (base on your say so) then you’re a racist. And yeah he’s said some nutty things, but from my perspective ALL pastors are saying and doing nutty things every Sunday (worshiping a demi-god, pagan rituals, etc.)
Obama has been well trained:
"This, too, prompted Obama to share with his readers a life lesson on how to handle white people: “It was usually an effective tactic, another one of those tricks I had learned: People were satisfied so long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves. They were more than satisfied, they were relieved – such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered young black man who didn’t seem angry all the time.”
First of all, I note that this technique seems to be the basis of Obama’s entire presidential campaign. But moreover – he was talking about his own mother! As Obama says: “Any distinction between good and bad whites held negligible meaning.” Say, do you think a white person who said that about blacks would be a leading presidential candidate?
[quote]orion wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
100meters wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Well, I also learned a great deal from this thread. Wright is a racialist conspiracy nut, and leftists will defend that. If the color of the skin is right, of course.
Yea…it’s actually a little weird…if they actually believe what they’re posting.
Again, he’s most likely not a racist, or if he’s a racist (base on your say so) then you’re a racist. And yeah he’s said some nutty things, but from my perspective ALL pastors are saying and doing nutty things every Sunday (worshiping a demi-god, pagan rituals, etc.)
Obama has been well trained:
"This, too, prompted Obama to share with his readers a life lesson on how to handle white people: “It was usually an effective tactic, another one of those tricks I had learned: People were satisfied so long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves. They were more than satisfied, they were relieved – such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered young black man who didn’t seem angry all the time.”
First of all, I note that this technique seems to be the basis of Obama’s entire presidential campaign. But moreover – he was talking about his own mother! As Obama says: “Any distinction between good and bad whites held negligible meaning.” Say, do you think a white person who said that about blacks would be a leading presidential candidate?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
100meters wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Well, I also learned a great deal from this thread. Wright is a racialist conspiracy nut, and leftists will defend that. If the color of the skin is right, of course.
Yea…it’s actually a little weird…if they actually believe what they’re posting.
Again, he’s most likely not a racist, or if he’s a racist (base on your say so) then you’re a racist. And yeah he’s said some nutty things, but from my perspective ALL pastors are saying and doing nutty things every Sunday (worshiping a demi-god, pagan rituals, etc.)
Obama has been well trained:
"This, too, prompted Obama to share with his readers a life lesson on how to handle white people: “It was usually an effective tactic, another one of those tricks I had learned: People were satisfied so long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves. They were more than satisfied, they were relieved – such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered young black man who didn’t seem angry all the time.”
First of all, I note that this technique seems to be the basis of Obama’s entire presidential campaign. But moreover – he was talking about his own mother! As Obama says: “Any distinction between good and bad whites held negligible meaning.” Say, do you think a white person who said that about blacks would be a leading presidential candidate?
[quote]orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
100meters wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Well, I also learned a great deal from this thread. Wright is a racialist conspiracy nut, and leftists will defend that. If the color of the skin is right, of course.
Yea…it’s actually a little weird…if they actually believe what they’re posting.
Again, he’s most likely not a racist, or if he’s a racist (base on your say so) then you’re a racist. And yeah he’s said some nutty things, but from my perspective ALL pastors are saying and doing nutty things every Sunday (worshiping a demi-god, pagan rituals, etc.)
Obama has been well trained:
"This, too, prompted Obama to share with his readers a life lesson on how to handle white people: “It was usually an effective tactic, another one of those tricks I had learned: People were satisfied so long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves. They were more than satisfied, they were relieved – such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered young black man who didn’t seem angry all the time.”
First of all, I note that this technique seems to be the basis of Obama’s entire presidential campaign. But moreover – he was talking about his own mother! As Obama says: “Any distinction between good and bad whites held negligible meaning.” Say, do you think a white person who said that about blacks would be a leading presidential candidate?
Oh no, he is talking about emotional and intellectually growth and having to find a way to deal with a society where race is obviously an issue.
Now wonder Ann Coulter has troubles grasping the concept of growing up.
When I was 16 I wanted to punch everyone-Period.
Are you a libertarian? Or, do you believe in government intervention (Affirmative Action and welfare programs) to foster “equality?”
Why do you ask?
Because I do automatically think anyone not agreeing with me is the debil?
[/quote]
Just cause you seem absolutely committed to defending a proponent of Affirmative Action and wealth redistribution programs, based on race. You know, totally opposite of the Libertarian stance.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
…
Are you a libertarian? Or, do you believe in government intervention (Affirmative Action and welfare programs) to foster “equality?”
Why do you ask?
Because I do automatically think anyone not agreeing with me is the debil?
Just cause you seem absolutely committed to defending a proponent of Affirmative Action and wealth redistribution programs, based on race. You know, totally opposite of the Libertarian stance. [/quote]
[quote]Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
100meters wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Well, I also learned a great deal from this thread. Wright is a racialist conspiracy nut, and leftists will defend that. If the color of the skin is right, of course.
Yea…it’s actually a little weird…if they actually believe what they’re posting.
Again, he’s most likely not a racist, or if he’s a racist (base on your say so) then you’re a racist. And yeah he’s said some nutty things, but from my perspective ALL pastors are saying and doing nutty things every Sunday (worshiping a demi-god, pagan rituals, etc.)
Obama has been well trained:
"This, too, prompted Obama to share with his readers a life lesson on how to handle white people: “It was usually an effective tactic, another one of those tricks I had learned: People were satisfied so long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves. They were more than satisfied, they were relieved – such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered young black man who didn’t seem angry all the time.”
First of all, I note that this technique seems to be the basis of Obama’s entire presidential campaign. But moreover – he was talking about his own mother! As Obama says: “Any distinction between good and bad whites held negligible meaning.” Say, do you think a white person who said that about blacks would be a leading presidential candidate?
Oh no, he is talking about emotional and intellectually growth and having to find a way to deal with a society where race is obviously an issue.
Now wonder Ann Coulter has troubles grasping the concept of growing up.
When I was 16 I wanted to punch everyone-Period.
Are you a libertarian? Or, do you believe in government intervention (Affirmative Action and welfare programs) to foster “equality?”
Why do you ask?
Because I do automatically think anyone not agreeing with me is the debil?
Just cause you seem absolutely committed to defending a proponent of Affirmative Action and wealth redistribution programs, based on race. You know, totally opposite of the Libertarian stance. [/quote]
I have to agree that he is a racist just because he believes in some stupid things?
He is a pastor he believes in invisible men in the sky.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
…
Are you a libertarian? Or, do you believe in government intervention (Affirmative Action and welfare programs) to foster “equality?”
Why do you ask?
Because I do automatically think anyone not agreeing with me is the debil?
Just cause you seem absolutely committed to defending a proponent of Affirmative Action and wealth redistribution programs, based on race. You know, totally opposite of the Libertarian stance.
[quote]orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
…
Are you a libertarian? Or, do you believe in government intervention (Affirmative Action and welfare programs) to foster “equality?”
Why do you ask?
Because I do automatically think anyone not agreeing with me is the debil?
Just cause you seem absolutely committed to defending a proponent of Affirmative Action and wealth redistribution programs, based on race. You know, totally opposite of the Libertarian stance.
Anti-American comes first.
Gotta have priorities.
[/quote]
The funny thing is, you’re serious. As long as he says “God Damn American” you could care less what a bigoted, self-seperatist, welfare statist has to say.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Sloth wrote:
orion wrote:
Sloth wrote:
…
Are you a libertarian? Or, do you believe in government intervention (Affirmative Action and welfare programs) to foster “equality?”
Why do you ask?
Because I do automatically think anyone not agreeing with me is the debil?
Just cause you seem absolutely committed to defending a proponent of Affirmative Action and wealth redistribution programs, based on race. You know, totally opposite of the Libertarian stance.
Anti-American comes first.
Gotta have priorities.
The funny thing is, you’re serious. As long as he says “God Damn American” you could care less what a bigoted, self-seperatist, welfare statist has to say.[/quote]
Well that being biblical, why would it bother you?