Sounds like this thread boils down to there being some blatant cherry-picking pushed by rabble rousers.

Quote: Original post by Dreddnafious Maelstrom

Quote: Original post by Mithrandir
Please parse his statement again. Or see the part I bolded.

"overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity".

He's not saying the overwhelming portion of all animosity; he's saying the overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity. For the most part I believe he's right.

The people who have valid counterarguments against the democrats are making them in calm and orderly manners. The people who are going batshit insane more often than not have no point whatsoever and accepted equivalent and worse behaviour by the previous administration (funny how they didn't have a problem with bailouts until Obama was elected!). What else can it possibly be? They didn't go this nuts when Clinton tried making the same reforms...


So I agree with his statement. Of course that won't stop every simpleton and his mother from simplifying it to "antiobama = racist"; but let's be honest, that ain't what he said.

I understand it can be parsed that way Mith. Hell, most of us here are smart enough to parse the English language to support whatever position we draw from a hat. But if you've read the entire text of his statement his meaning is clear.

It's a cynical and backhanded attempt to intimidate opposition to the health care debate. That seems a popular tactic these days.

To Obama's credit he distanced himself immediately. I've frankly admired Obama's ability to not get drawn in to the race baiting business. It can't be easy when his own political side is the one prompting him to do so. But he's very politically astute, and must realize there's a reason he won the presidency while Sharpton was never more than a circus act.

The reason is because he had the balls to run for president of the United States, not black president of the United States.

Whenever Obama made his "acted stupidly" statement about the professor Gates ordeal I was gratified. Disorderly conduct is a catch all tool to encourage police abuse and regardless of color it's safe to assume the arresting officer acted stupidly.

The institutional racism, that is much alive today didn't come from "birthers" and "rednecks", it came from mainstream media, both parties, and the vast establishment that chided him for making what should have been construed as a civil liberty statement.

Carter's race baiting is the ugly twin of racism and is a symptom of the institutional racism that both parties perpetuate.

k.

























sigh.

Quote: Original post by BerwynIrish
Giving it some more thought, I don't think that I adequately addressed a main point of disagreement between superpig and myself.

Allow me to summarize:

-Blame the messenger
-They were all just joking

Dont get me wrong: im all for prostitution and tax-evasion. Yet im not sure what is more fascinating: this closeup of the radars of a vote-buying machine churning away, or the distractions people come up with.

Quote: Original post by Eelco
Dont get me wrong: im all for prostitution and tax-evasion.

It's funny, I feel the same way. The problem is obviously that it's government funded. But then again, tax dollars going to the facilitation of prostitution. Now there's a social program I can get behind!(insert a few more bad puns here)

Quote:

Quote: Original post by BerwynIrish
Giving it some more thought, I don't think that I adequately addressed a main point of disagreement between superpig and myself.

Allow me to summarize:

-Blame the messenger
-They were all just joking

I'll allow you to summarize, but I won't allow you to be dishonest.

When the messengers are all liars, then it's fair to point that out, which is not nearly the same thing as blaming the messenger. And aside from the source being professional frauds, the evidence itself is sorely lacking and I have pointed that out. But just go ahead pretending that isn't the case. Twist one part that in a manner that makes you feel good and ignore the other parts that challenge your emotional attachment to smearing ACORN.

As to your second point, I never said any such thing.

You can either stop dishonestly defending these filthy liars, or you can show some integrity and go for reality-based substance over dishonest snarkiness next time.

Ditto for Dredd if he isn't joking. That's been his fall-back excuse the last couple times I've dealt with him. I neither know nor care anymore.

This is why I really wasn't so concerned earlier, superpig, about addressing the substance of the attacks. I know these people and they are always, ALWAYS full of shit. From the video tapers to Fox News to the ground troops. Superpig convinced me to address the substance anyway (which I really didn't do fully, but there was much more to what I've said than the likes of Eelco would have you believe), and look what I get for my efforts. Nothing but straw man arguments.

[Edited by - BerwynIrish on September 18, 2009 3:17:10 PM]

Quote: Original post by BerwynIrish

Quote:

Quote: Original post by BerwynIrish
Giving it some more thought, I don't think that I adequately addressed a main point of disagreement between superpig and myself.

Allow me to summarize:

-Blame the messenger
-They were all just joking

I'll allow you to summarize, but I won't allow you to be dishonest.

When the messengers are all liars, then it's fair to point that out, which is not nearly the same thing as blaming the messenger.

To be exact, its an ad-hominem. Unless the alleged dishonesty applies to this particular bit of information, what bearing does it have on it? Perhaps its reason to give their words closer scrunity: well, lets do that, instead of dismissing them out of hand, as you seem eager to.

If a liar states the sky is blue, is it? Does the allegation that the liar always wanted the sky to be blue anyway change a damned thing?

The majority of your writing here is dedicated to discrediting the messengers. Please spare me your talk about integrity.

Quote:
And aside from the source being professional frauds, the evidence itself is sorely lacking. But just go ahead pretending that isn't the case. Twist one part that in a manner that makes you feel good and ignore the other parts that challenge your emotional attachment to smearing ACORN.

I have no idea what the fuck ACORN is. What i see are people facilitating criminal activities. They dont appear to be joking. If these are just five bad apples (a conclusion you are quick to jump to without any supporting evidence), they sure do a good job of making it seem like an everyday affair.

Quote: As to your second point, I never said any such thing. But don't let that stop you from ignoring the rest of the defense of ACORN or stop you from defending these filthy liars. Or, show some integrity and go for reality-based substance over dishonest snarkiness next time.

I havnt seen any defense from ACORN. Im not defending any liars, as i am not buying into your ad-hominem-distractions in the first place.

The claim they were just playing along is ridiculous. Have you actually watched all these videos? 'reality based substance'? Perhaps thats what it looks like to the choir, but i suppose many would opt for 'crushing your credibility by grasping at straws' instead.

Eelco clearly can't bring himself to apologize for the two sraw men he attributed to me, and further demonstrates that he hasn't been listening to me. I'm not repeating myself for his benefit.

Quote: Original post by BerwynIrish
Ditto for Dredd if he isn't joking. That's been his fall-back excuse the last couple times I've dealt with him. I neither know nor care anymore.

This is why I really wasn't so concerned earlier, superpig, about addressing the substance of the attacks. I know these people and they are always, ALWAYS full of shit. From the video tapers to Fox News to the ground troops. Superpig convinced me to address the substance anyway (which I really didn't do fully, but there was much more to what I've said than the likes of Eelco would have you believe), and look what I get for my efforts. Nothing but straw man arguments.

Fall back excuse eh? Why so grumpy? My post wasn't directed at you, it was a bit of commiseration with Eelco that tax evasion and prostitution are either neutral or net positives in both of our views. It's funny the angle you have to approach news items sometimes because of how daft and backwards the coverage and intended reading audience is.

As for your premise that this is much ado about nothing, Fox News is evil, etc... Both houses of the legislature voted to defund ACORN, with majorities from both parties. Obviously both halls of congress felt there was more to the issue.

Quote: Original post by Dreddnafious Maelstrom
As for your premise that this is much ado about nothing, Fox News is evil, etc... Both houses of the legislature voted to defund ACORN, with majorities from both parties. Obviously both halls of congress felt there was more to the issue.

It's only obvious if you're on the vendetta bandwagon. What other reason could Congress have for doing this, do you suppose?

I find your respect for the swift judgment of the United States Congress surprising, and it sure as hell isn't evidence of anything. When Congress produces evidence of whatever-the-hell-ACORN-is-up-to which isn't already on the table, then you can get back to me about what Congress has to say.

Quote: Original post by Mithrandir
sigh.

Yeah, exactly. Post-racial society, right? Let's take that one around the block for a few more spins.

For the record, I think three of those last (just before the last) were photoshopped to include KKK heads. The pic I saw of the "lying African" had a grandmotherly type that looked like she'd make a mean apple pie for a complete stranger (erm... unless, of course, he was black).

As far as Obama distancing himself from Carter's charge goes, he has to, regardless of how he might feel. There's no tenable way he'll ever be able to call the opposition on racism, blatant or (as is more typical) covertly expressed. That would leave him in the role of victim, which does not fit with the stately air of president.

So someone else of distinction has to make the observation. I'm glad it was Carter, given his strong reputation.