Proper Debate - Head to Head Face-off

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Well now, you seem all upset there Mak - Is mommy charging you rent now to live in the basement? Tell me how many times does an “artist” have to say the “n” word and attach a negative comment to it before he is considered a racist? Once and rightly so. And that is at the heart of my point. The left screams for tolerance regarding cop hating lyrics, homosexual weddings and a host of other things, but has no tolerance for anything beyond their tight little world view. It IS about that hate filled line! It doesn’t matter what else he’s saying![/quote]

Personal attacks? I don’t live with my parents. Haven’t for a long time. But I’ll play.

Your explanations are for naught when you can’t grasp the simple fact that context matters. Read the whole thing, or stop commenting.

As far as I can tell, you are the same as a 9/11 truther. You seek anything that proves your point and ignore all other evidence. How does it feel knowing that you are the same as the people who insist the people that died on that terrible day were faking it?

62

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
I posted the lyrics on this site junior. And when someone says that they have an uzi and are not going to run away if the police come that pretty much says it all.[/quote]

No, you selectively posted certain lines to paint an unfavorable picture. Read the whole thing and comment, or shut up. It’s not a dissertation, it’s a few god damn lines. Old people aren’t meant to be lazy you know. It’s the first sign we should put you in a home.[/quote]

So you say it’s ‘a few lines’ therefore we shouldn’t be concerned about the suggestion that President Bush should be burned or support for cop killers? smh23 says the words ‘no time for that cause there’s things to be done’ changes the meaning of EVERYTHING before it? I wouldn’t have the indecency to compare you to 9/11 truthers who accuse the victims, their families and the government of complicity in mass murder however I will say that your statements are ridiculous.[/quote]

What a truther does is look at what evidence suits their point and ignore the rest.

This is exactly the same. It’s vile, disgusting behavior. You seem to be doing the same. Yes, a few lines should be ignored. BECAUSE THEY ARE LINES OUT OF CONTEXT. Put them back into context and evaluate them as a part of the whole instead of this bullshit that I’m seeing.

How about I take a comment from this website where someone is talking about pedophilia and only quote a few lines? Ignore the rest of the post and thread, and paint that person as a hardened child molester. That’s only fair right?

63

[quote]Makavali wrote:

As far as I can tell, you are the same as a 9/11 truther. You seek anything that proves your point and ignore all other evidence. How does it feel knowing that you are the same as the people who insist the people that died on that terrible day were faking it?[/quote]

How typical of the left: “If you disagree with me then you are no better than a truther” a typical lefty argument. I’m a really bad and very confused guy because I don’t appreciate cop hating lyrics in a rap song. Beyond that if you cannot see how this breaks down demographically between O’Reilly and Stewart, after I’ve explained it now three times, I can only wonder what color it is in your very tiny world.

In all honesty from the bottom of my heart I thought you were smarter than this. I won’t make that mistake again.

64

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
I posted the lyrics on this site junior. And when someone says that they have an uzi and are not going to run away if the police come that pretty much says it all.[/quote]

No, you selectively posted certain lines to paint an unfavorable picture. Read the whole thing and comment, or shut up. It’s not a dissertation, it’s a few god damn lines. Old people aren’t meant to be lazy you know. It’s the first sign we should put you in a home.[/quote]

So you say it’s ‘a few lines’ therefore we shouldn’t be concerned about the suggestion that President Bush should be burned or support for cop killers? smh23 says the words ‘no time for that cause there’s things to be done’ changes the meaning of EVERYTHING before it? I wouldn’t have the indecency to compare you to 9/11 truthers who accuse the victims, their families and the government of complicity in mass murder however I will say that your statements are ridiculous.[/quote]

Show me one idea from the left that isn’t ridiculous. Mak is the poster boy for the intolerant left. And while not very bright at least he’s entertaining.

65

[quote]Makavali wrote:
BECAUSE THEY ARE LINES OUT OF CONTEXT. Put them back into context and evaluate them as a part of the whole instead of this bullshit that I’m seeing.[/quote]

Yes, good idea. just as the left did when Senator Trent Lott said many good things about Strom Thurmond at Thurmonds 100th birthday party. Saying that he would have made a great President. How many days did he last as Senate majority leader after that fate filled day? Was it 5 or 6? The MSLM fried him over an open grill and had him for lunch. I bet you liked that huh? While many on the right pleaded to take his comments within the context in which they were said, at a man’s 100th birthday party. But nope, he said what he said and HE MUST PAY.

Now you tell me that context is important?

Want more examples of the left’s double standard?

66

[quote]Makavali wrote:

What a truther does is look at what evidence suits their point and ignore the rest.

This is exactly the same. It’s vile, disgusting behavior. You seem to be doing the same. Yes, a few lines should be ignored. BECAUSE THEY ARE LINES OUT OF CONTEXT. Put them back into context and evaluate them as a part of the whole instead of this bullshit that I’m seeing.

How about I take a comment from this website where someone is talking about pedophilia and only quote a few lines? Ignore the rest of the post and thread, and paint that person as a hardened child molester. That’s only fair right?[/quote]

I have read the whole thing. The comments are NOT ‘out of context’. Quoting things out of context is an attempt to distort the meaning. Please explain how I have distorted Common’s intended meaning and how previous/subsequent lines alter the meaning of these:

‘Tell the law my UZI weighs a ton
I walk like a warrior from them I won’t run’

‘I got the black strap to make the cops run
They watching me, I watching them’

‘Burn a Bush, cause for peace he no push no button
Killing over oil and grease, no weapons of mass destruction’

67

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

As far as I can tell, you are the same as a 9/11 truther. You seek anything that proves your point and ignore all other evidence. How does it feel knowing that you are the same as the people who insist the people that died on that terrible day were faking it?[/quote]

How typical of the left: “If you disagree with me then you are no better than a truther” a typical lefty argument. I’m a really bad and very confused guy because I don’t appreciate cop hating lyrics in a rap song. Beyond that if you cannot see how this breaks down demographically between O’Reilly and Stewart, after I’ve explained it now three times, I can only wonder what color it is in your very tiny world.

In all honesty from the bottom of my heart I thought you were smarter than this. I won’t make that mistake again.[/quote]

I, on the other hand, know full well that you are incapable of looking at things in the big picture.

68

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:
BECAUSE THEY ARE LINES OUT OF CONTEXT. Put them back into context and evaluate them as a part of the whole instead of this bullshit that I’m seeing.[/quote]

Yes, good idea. just as the left did when Senator Trent Lott said many good things about Strom Thurmond at Thurmonds 100th birthday party. Saying that he would have made a great President. How many days did he last as Senate majority leader after that fate filled day? Was it 5 or 6? The MSLM fried him over an open grill and had him for lunch. I bet you liked that huh? While many on the right pleaded to take his comments within the context in which they were said, at a man’s 100th birthday party. But nope, he said what he said and HE MUST PAY.

Now you tell me that context is important?

Want more examples of the left’s double standard?

[/quote]

So these guys did it before, so it’s okay for me to do it. Well shit ZEB, why not rape women and children, other people have done it before! Double standards! Bigotry!

69

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
I have read the whole thing. The comments are NOT ‘out of context’. Quoting things out of context is an attempt to distort the meaning. Please explain how I have distorted Common’s intended meaning and how previous/subsequent lines alter the meaning of these:

'Tell the law my UZI weighs a ton[/quote]

A reference to Public Enemy’s My Uzi Weighs A Ton in which an Uzi is used as an extended metaphor for intellectual/lyrical power.

[quote]I walk like a warrior from them I won’t run’
*On the streets they try to beat us like a drum[/quote]

The men who are victimized by the police in certain communities continue to walk with pride, even though the police randomly harass and attack them

Note the play on words: warrior and beat us like a drum. Drums are usually associated with warrior marches, but here, the warrior himself, is beaten like a drum.

[quote]‘I got the black strap to make the cops run
They watching me, I watching them’[/quote]

A reference to the Black Panthers, who initiated armed patrols in Oakland, CA in the late 1960s with the intention of monitoring police interactions with black civilians.

The Black Panthers wanted to offer the community legal assistance first as well as armed resistance as a last resort.

[quote]‘Burn a Bush, cause for peace he no push no button
Killing over oil and grease, no weapons of mass destruction’[/quote]

A play on the burning bush from the Bible that appeared to Moses. In the passage God told Moses through the bush to free the Israelites from slavery.

The narrator in this piece evokes the same imagery with reference to then-president Bush. In the context of the work, it emerges as a general affirmation of freedom from oppression rather than a literal call to violence.

In spite of using every resource at their disposal to convince Americans and the world of the need for war, the Bush administration did little to promote broader peace or stability.

When the Bush Administration failed to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, critics claimed that the undertaking was an Oil War - same criticism that had been made of the first Gulf War.

Also:

No time for that, cause there’s things to be done

In other words, there is no time for violence, neither the romanticized/fantastical thug-life version in the preceding lines nor the ground war version that follows in the coming lines.

Stay true to what I do so the youth dream come

The opportunity cost of continued violence would be borne by future generations if we do not heed the narrator’s advice.

All this information is there and available (hell, almost all of the above is copy-pasted from a link from this very thread). You don’t understand the lyrics, or the meaning. That’s OK. It really is. What isn’t OK is out of context quoting and DISPLAYING that general ignorance while claiming to have a valid point.

70

An ‘extended metaphor’ for ‘intellectual/lyrical power’? So if I say:

‘Tell the negroes my lynching rope is strong’ I can claim it’s a metaphor for ‘intellectual/lyrical power’ in my just fight against racial discrimanation that white people suffer at the hands of blacks?

You think the Black Panthers walking around in public places armed with loaded, 12 gauge shotguns was conceived with the intent of ‘monitoring police interactions with black civilians’? Not highly provocative behaviour likely to result in injury/death to both parties and likely to further incite tensions/divisions?

How does the fact that the ‘burn Bush’ line is a play on the biblical story change the fact that he is referring to burning the President of the United States? So if I say:

‘Hold Obama’s head under water till he’s dead
Because he isn’t prosecuting the war effort effectively’

It’s OK because it’s a play on the parting of the Red Sea and the drowning of the Egyptians?

‘In other words there is no time for violence’

  • Right, so his suggestions for murdering police and the President are fine because he then says that he doesn’t have time to do so.

BTW - I already read all this crap at the Common Letter to the Law apologist site I was sent to.

71

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
How does the fact that the ‘burn Bush’ line is a play on the biblical story change the fact that he is referring to burning the President of the United States? So if I say:

‘Hold Obama’s head under water till he’s dead
Because he isn’t prosecuting the war effort effectively’

It’s OK because it’s a play on the parting of the Red Sea and the drowning of the Egyptians?[/quote]

Wow. Just wow. Yeah, I’m about done here. You guys want to criticize Obama so badly, but you just don’t know how to do it without coming off as asses.

72

It is truly pathetic how you sad little people will feign outrage at the hint of any non-issue as long as it means you get to whine about Obama.

The funny thing is that, though you could argue that it is in large part due to the nature of his occupation, Obama is far more responsible for far more war, suffering, and death than Common could ever dream of being. Maybe we should be criticizing Common for accepting an invitation into the home of a man responsible for the deaths of children.

73

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
How does the fact that the ‘burn Bush’ line is a play on the biblical story change the fact that he is referring to burning the President of the United States? So if I say:

‘Hold Obama’s head under water till he’s dead
Because he isn’t prosecuting the war effort effectively’

It’s OK because it’s a play on the parting of the Red Sea and the drowning of the Egyptians?[/quote]

Wow. Just wow. Yeah, I’m about done here. You guys want to criticize Obama so badly, but you just don’t know how to do it without coming off as asses.[/quote]

That’s a criticism of smh23’s reasoning not Obama as I’m sure you’re aware.

74

[quote]Makavali wrote:

So these guys did it before, so it’s okay for me to do it. Well shit ZEB, why not rape women and children, other people have done it before! Double standards! Bigotry![/quote]

Inaccurate example, not even close. These are political waters that we are sailing on. And what is good for one side should be good for the other. And when a republican steps out of line regarding a slip of the tongue the left is there to castigate him and see to it that he is severely punished and humiliated. But the left wants a double standard. When one of their own threatens to shoot police officers they cry for a free pass in the name of what is it today? Art? Context? He didn’t really mean it?

No, no that’s not how it works. We either give everyone a free pass and say that freedom of speech is a good thing, or we don’t. Currently we are in the middle of a pc revolt. But it seems that it’s only directed toward the right. When an unseemly remark is used on the left it is brushed aside.

I already gave you an example of someone on the right having their carrier ruined simply because they tried to make an old man feel good on his 100th birthday. Now let’s recall Joe Biden’s comment about Obama before Obama became President:

“I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” he said. “I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”

Trent Lott loses his leadership position for what he siad, and what happens to Joe Biden? Obama chooses him to become VP.

Want more examples?

You either embrace freedom of speech in which case rappers can say what they want, and so can everyone else. Or, we continue down this politically correct road that YOUR SIDE built. But keep in mind that as we move down that road the old double standard is not going to work.

75

[quote]Makavali wrote:
You guys want to criticize Obama so badly, but you just don’t know how to do it without coming off as asses.[/quote]

I’t not about wanting to criticize Obama. In fact, if you recall I even began a thread giving him credit for getting Bin Laden and not showing us the photo’s. But this is far different and I think you’re beginning to realize it.

It’s about welcoming someone into the white house that has written a song about getting police officers with his uzi. It is at least as untoward as anything recently said on the right. And those on the right were humiliated and punished for it.

The MSLM may not give this the amount of press that it deserves as they serve up the biggest slice of double standard in the country. But I assure you that the millions of police officers, friends and family will punish Obama reelection time. And that makes the President’s recent bad move well worth it in my book.

76

[quote]smh23 wrote:
It is truly pathetic how you sad little people will feign outrage at the hint of any non-issue as long as it means you get to whine about Obama.

The funny thing is that, though you could argue that it is in large part due to the nature of his occupation, Obama is far more responsible for far more war, suffering, and death than Common could ever dream of being. Maybe we should be criticizing Common for accepting an invitation into the home of a man responsible for the deaths of children.[/quote]

I’m not the least bit surprised that you still don’t get it.

77

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

So these guys did it before, so it’s okay for me to do it. Well shit ZEB, why not rape women and children, other people have done it before! Double standards! Bigotry![/quote]

Inaccurate example, not even close. These are political waters that we are sailing on. And what is good for one side should be good for the other. And when a republican steps out of line regarding a slip of the tongue the left is there to castigate him and see to it that he is severely punished and humiliated. But the left wants a double standard. When one of their own threatens to shoot police officers they cry for a free pass in the name of what is it today? Art? Context? He didn’t really mean it?

No, no that’s not how it works. We either give everyone a free pass and say that freedom of speech is a good thing, or we don’t. Currently we are in the middle of a pc revolt. But it seems that it’s only directed toward the right. When an unseemly remark is used on the left it is brushed aside.

I already gave you an example of someone on the right having their carrier ruined simply because they tried to make an old man feel good on his 100th birthday. Now let’s recall Joe Biden’s comment about Obama before Obama became President:

“I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” he said. “I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”

Trent Lott loses his leadership position for what he siad, and what happens to Joe Biden? Obama chooses him to become VP.

Want more examples?

You either embrace freedom of speech in which case rappers can say what they want, and so can everyone else. Or, we continue down this politically correct road that YOUR SIDE built. But keep in mind that as we move down that road the old double standard is not going to work.[/quote]

You see something as terrible behavior, but because the other guys did it, you can too?

Seriously, you should just run outside and rape the first person you see.

78

I agree with Zeb that there is a double standard, but it exists on both sides or he and others would have feigned outrage over Bono, Springsteen and Dylan.

I still haven’t seen the difference between any of those people and Common.

And I’m not saying it was a good thing Common was invited to the White House. I think the President should have shown more discretion but at the same time I think it’s a non issue. My main issue is the double standard that exists on both sides, which neither is willing to admit.

79

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

And I’m not saying it was a good thing Common was invited to the White House. [/quote]

It was a good thing politically. Do you realize how many voters he turned off by that move?

80

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

And I’m not saying it was a good thing Common was invited to the White House. [/quote]

It was a good thing politically. Do you realize how many voters he turned off by that move?[/quote]

HMM .001%? I doubt this would change anybodies mind on whether or not to vote for Obama.