When you disagree with the president or his staff you are racist

[weekender 0]

davjohns

*********Absolutely. To be clear, EVERY Founding Father of the US was considered to be a terrorist by the King of England.

Really? Where is that written in a history book or respectable document.

Where isn't it?

Simply look at the acts they committed from the viewpoint of the King of England. Terrorists and traitors every single one.

Or did you think England sent troops over here to simply have tea with them?

Actually, they were traitors to the crown. It's a bit different from terrorists. They were in open rebellion against the government and government forces.

agreed. after all, they did sign a rather public document declaring they were independent from the British Empire. additionally, they formed a legitimate and recognized Army and Navy, that did not attack innocent civilians purely to invoke terror. they openly took to the field of battle and fought well with in the boundaries of what was then, modern warfare. sad that the poster would even make such a comparison.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[regulator 0]

DanG

Quote

I didn't write the article.

No, but you wrote the stupid fucking thread title, didn't you?

Actually the democratic party throws the fucking race card every single chance they can when someone who doesnt agree with the president. So if you dont like the title...I honestly dont give a fuck. How you like them apples?

[wolfriverjoe 1,351]

weekender

agreed. after all, they did sign a rather public document declaring they were independent from the British Empire. additionally, they formed a legitimate and recognized Army and Navy, that did not attack innocent civilians purely to invoke terror. they openly took to the field of battle and fought well with in the boundaries of what was then, modern warfare. sad that the poster would even make such a comparison.

Really? Are you aware of the atrocities committed against the Tories and Loyalists?

There were atrocities committed by both sides, neither was blame free.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[SkyDekker 1,145]

regulator

***

Quote

I didn't write the article.

No, but you wrote the stupid fucking thread title, didn't you?

Actually the democratic party throws the fucking race card every single chance they can when someone who doesnt agree with the president. So if you dont like the title...I honestly dont give a fuck. How you like them apples?

You don't give a fuck, yet you post about it every chance you get.

[weekender 0]

wolfriverjoe

***
agreed. after all, they did sign a rather public document declaring they were independent from the British Empire. additionally, they formed a legitimate and recognized Army and Navy, that did not attack innocent civilians purely to invoke terror. they openly took to the field of battle and fought well with in the boundaries of what was then, modern warfare. sad that the poster would even make such a comparison.

Really? Are you aware of the atrocities committed against the Tories and Loyalists?

There were atrocities committed by both sides, neither was blame free.

i am not aware of acts of terrorism, comparable to modern day terrorism, in the American Revolution. I.E. the purposeful act of attacking civilians purely to inspire terror among that populous. certainly none by our founding fathers as implied by his post.

i stated nothing that implied blame on either side. nor did i mean to imply the war was kind.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[SkyDekker 1,145]

wolfriverjoe

***
agreed. after all, they did sign a rather public document declaring they were independent from the British Empire. additionally, they formed a legitimate and recognized Army and Navy, that did not attack innocent civilians purely to invoke terror. they openly took to the field of battle and fought well with in the boundaries of what was then, modern warfare. sad that the poster would even make such a comparison.

Really? Are you aware of the atrocities committed against the Tories and Loyalists?

There were atrocities committed by both sides, neither was blame free.

Are you kidding me? These are the Founding Fathers we are talking about. They never did anything wrong...ever.

I can prove it too, there isn't anything in any history books about it...so it can't be true.

[weekender 0]

SkyDekker

******
agreed. after all, they did sign a rather public document declaring they were independent from the British Empire. additionally, they formed a legitimate and recognized Army and Navy, that did not attack innocent civilians purely to invoke terror. they openly took to the field of battle and fought well with in the boundaries of what was then, modern warfare. sad that the poster would even make such a comparison.

Really? Are you aware of the atrocities committed against the Tories and Loyalists?

There were atrocities committed by both sides, neither was blame free.

Are you kidding me? These are the Founding Fathers we are talking about. They never did anything wrong...ever.

I can prove it too, there isn't anything in any history books about it...so it can't be true.

oh c'mon, you are over reacting a bit. i never stated or implied they never did anything wrong. nor do i believe they were imperfect saints. i just do not think by modern standards and using historical perspective, they can be called terrorist. its pretty lame to compare them to people who purposely bomb train stations or the WTC.

for the record, and to be very pedantic. i doubt the King of England would call them terrorist no matter of their acts. the word did not come into the English language until many years later during the French reign of terror.

so there.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[DanG 1]

Quote

Actually the democratic party throws the fucking race card every single chance they can when someone who doesnt agree with the president. So if you dont like the title...I honestly dont give a fuck. How you like them apples?

If you want to stomp your feet and throw a tantrum like a little child, who am I to stop you? Of course, you come off like a total fool, but if that's what you're going for, have at it.

- Dan G

[winsor 187]

Obama has the enviable advantage of being a mulatto.

If a Negro is mad at him, it is because he had a Caucasian mother.

If a Caucasian is mad at him, it is because he had a Negro father.

If either agrees with him, it is because they are accepting the Truth (tm) despite their prejudices.

It would be lovely if any issue had to stand on its own merits. I am fond of the Julliard audition, wherein the performer is not named and plays behind a screen so that the reviews are not tainted by any hint of prejudice.

Unfortunately, the political process is never to be so impartial. I will admit to being biased toward one group over another because of a perceived commonality of purpose (for example, a County Commissioner from my town, as opposed to one from a neighboring Borough, may be expected to vote more in accordance with my interests), but acknowledge that this does not always work out in practice (said Commissioner, once in office, may turn out to have a Conflict of Interest that turns the remaining farmland into a strip mall).

The whole idea that politics should be motivated by altruism is pleasantly naive. Whether or not the Capitol of Bulganistan is beset by various problems is an abstraction. Whether or not my particular County Seat does or does not have these same problems is an immediate reality.

I think flying the US flag at half-mast for the death of Ho Chi Minh would have been more appropriate than doing so for Nelson Mandela on the basis of the track records of each individual. Uncle Ho fought with us against the Japanese in the Great War, Part II, and only opposed us when he was seriously screwed by Truman.

Mandela, OTOH, never took a stance that was positive WRT the US of A or its inhabitants. Quite the contrary, he was not known to have a kind word regarding us at any time (maybe he did not want to wind up like Uncle Ho et al.).

In any event, reserving recognition for those who have been allies, such as Thatcher, makes sense for a level of sufficiency that Mandela certainly did not achieve.


BSBD,

Winsor

[weekender 0]

winsor

Obama has the enviable advantage of being a mulatto.

If a Negro is mad at him, it is because he had a Caucasian mother.

If a Caucasian is mad at him, it is because he had a Negro father.

If either agrees with him, it is because they are accepting the Truth (tm) despite their prejudices.

It would be lovely if any issue had to stand on its own merits. I am fond of the Julliard audition, wherein the performer is not named and plays behind a screen so that the reviews are not tainted by any hint of prejudice.

Unfortunately, the political process is never to be so impartial. I will admit to being biased toward one group over another because of a perceived commonality of purpose (for example, a County Commissioner from my town, as opposed to one from a neighboring Borough, may be expected to vote more in accordance with my interests), but acknowledge that this does not always work out in practice (said Commissioner, once in office, may turn out to have a Conflict of Interest that turns the remaining farmland into a strip mall).

The whole idea that politics should be motivated by altruism is pleasantly naive. Whether or not the Capitol of Bulganistan is beset by various problems is an abstraction. Whether or not my particular County Seat does or does not have these same problems is an immediate reality.

I think flying the US flag at half-mast for the death of Ho Chi Minh would have been more appropriate than doing so for Nelson Mandela on the basis of the track records of each individual. Uncle Ho fought with us against the Japanese in the Great War, Part II, and only opposed us when he was seriously screwed by Truman.

Mandela, OTOH, never took a stance that was positive WRT the US of A or its inhabitants. Quite the contrary, he was not known to have a kind word regarding us at any time (maybe he did not want to wind up like Uncle Ho et al.).

In any event, reserving recognition for those who have been allies, such as Thatcher, makes sense for a level of sufficiency that Mandela certainly did not achieve.


BSBD,

Winsor

in polite society we no longer use the term, "mulatto." i believe its proper to refer to those people as a "Quadroon" now.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[Andy9o8 0]

Heh heh. You said "taint".

[winsor 187]

weekender

in polite society we no longer use the term, "mulatto." i believe its proper to refer to those people as a "Quadroon" now.

In SA the common descriptor is 'zebra.'

[weekender 0]

winsor

***
in polite society we no longer use the term, "mulatto." i believe its proper to refer to those people as a "Quadroon" now.

In SA the common descriptor is 'zebra.'

i was mocking you. thought that was pretty obvious.

fyi, well mannered people use none of those descriptions. its just as easy and more accurate to say bi-racial. please do not talk to children. you will be doing the world a favor.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[winsor 187]

weekender

******
in polite society we no longer use the term, "mulatto." i believe its proper to refer to those people as a "Quadroon" now.

In SA the common descriptor is 'zebra.'

i was mocking you. thought that was pretty obvious.

fyi, well mannered people use none of those descriptions. its just as easy and more accurate to say bi-racial. please do not talk to children. you will be doing the world a favor.

Ah, to be so politically correct and humor impaired!

I suppose you should be the paradigm of proper behavior to which I should aspire, and your permission to talk to children is a blessing for which I could only dream.

What would I know about mocking?

BTW, 'mulatto' is specific to negroid and caucasoid mixed parentage. 'Bi-racial' could refer to any number of permutations, each with its own connotations (Eurasian, et al.).


BSBD,

Winsor

[weekender 0]

winsor

*********
in polite society we no longer use the term, "mulatto." i believe its proper to refer to those people as a "Quadroon" now.

In SA the common descriptor is 'zebra.'

i was mocking you. thought that was pretty obvious.

fyi, well mannered people use none of those descriptions. its just as easy and more accurate to say bi-racial. please do not talk to children. you will be doing the world a favor.

Ah, to be so politically correct and humor impaired!

I suppose you should be the paradigm of proper behavior to which I should aspire, and your permission to talk to children is a blessing for which I could only dream.

What would I know about mocking?

BTW, 'mulatto' is specific to negroid and caucasoid mixed parentage. 'Bi-racial' could refer to any number of permutations, each with its own connotations (Eurasian, et al.).


BSBD,

Winsor

im not politically correct. i am person who strives to behave like a gentleman. i find purposely using insensitive terms negates that.

also, there is no need for an explanation for your outdated, offensive terms. i am well aware of what mulatto means. i'm not a young man. you would not have to know that though, it should have been obvious by my use of quadroon. a hilarious word i use quite often to point out how silly people like you sound in 2013.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[futuredivot 0]

Wow-bet you're a blast at parties.

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[winsor 187]

weekender

im not politically correct. i am person who strives to behave like a gentleman. i find purposely using insensitive terms negates that.

also, there is no need for an explanation for your outdated, offensive terms. i am well aware of what mulatto means. i'm not a young man. you would not have to know that though, it should have been obvious by my use of quadroon. a hilarious word i use quite often to point out how silly people like you sound in 2013.

I am reminded of C. Hitchens' observation regarding Jerry Falwell to the effect that, given an enema, he could be buried in a matchbox.

[davjohns 1]

The last two posts were hysterical.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[weekender 0]

futuredivot

Wow-bet you're a blast at parties.

i admit i probably sound kinda boring and preachy in my posts. for the record though, i have probably spent more money in my life on coke and hookers than you have earned. my industry is pretty famous for our parties NOT being boring. its the only thing they get right in the movies. i might be an ass but i dont think you'd find me dull to party with.

with that said, i do not purposely use racially offensive terms. so in that sense, i am not a blast at parties.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[sfzombie13 307]

pathetic. people like you are what helps to perpetuate the damn "politically correct" bullshit that is at the heart of the government's movement to pacify and divide the people so that they can do whatever the hell they want to in order to make more money.

_________________________________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

[wmw999 2,148]

Sorry, but I'm down with weekender. I don't use those terms, either. I have no need for them.

Any more than I used to cuss when talking to my mother (and boy can I cuss -- my language in front of customers was the biggest criticism when I got my I rating many years ago).

If I can't express any thought by using the words to frame the thought, rather than by using the words as tools themselves, then I'm not much of a communicator, am I? If I really needed one (haven't yet), I'd use it.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[sfzombie13 307]

i rarely curse either. nor do i use any racially descriptive words, no matter how colorful they may be. and i can also be extremely eloquent when writing, it takes a little bit to achieve this in speech. but i will stand by my statement, for one reason. just because i don't use or condone the use of those terms or words, doesn't mean that i should be allowed to stop someone else from using them. period.

if we start there, where do we stop? who could you possibly trust in this day and age to make those kinds of judgement calls? like thinking that we need to reduce the population on the planet (i support this), but who gets to make the call on who goes?

_________________________________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

[winsor 187]

Iago

I thought a 'mulatto' was a coffee drink at Starbucks.

That's a Moo Latte from Dunkin Donuts.

[Andy9o8 0]

winsor

***I thought a 'mulatto' was a coffee drink at Starbucks.

That's a Moo Latte from Dunkin Donuts.

Speaking of which, would a "chocolate donut hole" be both racist and homophobic?

[wmw999 2,148]

Ah -- I guess we saw weekender's posts differently. I saw it as him saying he doesn't, and that he thought it was stupid -- not that he thought it should be outlawed.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)