Gibson knew school shooter was white because "[b]lack shooters don't" shoot themselves; "they shoot and move on"
SUMMARY: On his radio show, while discussing an incident in which a student shot four
people at his Cleveland high school before killing
himself, John Gibson asserted
that "I know the shooter was white. I knew it as soon as he shot himself.
Hip-hoppers don't do that. They shoot and move on to shoot again."
On the October 10 broadcast of his nationally syndicated Fox News Radio show, while discussing 14-year-old Asa H. Coon, who earlier that day shot four people at his Cleveland high school before killing himself, Fox News host John Gibson asserted that "because the school is very heavily African-American, I did leap to a conclusion" that "the shooter might have been African-American." Gibson went on to say that he "knew this was not a classic hip-hop shooting" once he learned Coon killed himself. Gibson continued: "Hip-hoppers do not kill themselves. They walk away. Now, I didn't need to hear the kid was white with blond hair. Once he'd shot himself in the head, no hip-hopper." Gibson later stated, "I know the shooter was white. I knew it as soon as he shot himself. Hip-hoppers don't do that. They shoot and move on to shoot again." Gibson added: "I know there's a few of you who want to call me racist. But when you do, remind -- let me remind you, African-Americans are dying in major cities because people won't face this problem."
After a commercial break, Gibson repeated his assertion: "All right, it turns out, though, the kid in Cleveland who did the shooting today -- three teachers, three students -- white." Gibson added: "And I could tell right away 'cause he killed himself. Black shooters don't do that; they shoot and move on."
Later in the program, while speaking to a caller who identified himself as an African-American, Gibson said that "one of the other things that you also don't do -- you being the plural of the [black] community -- is you don't shoot somebody and then kill yourself." After the caller responded, "That is very true," Gibson said, "White people do that." The caller again responded, "That is very true." Gibson continued: "So when I heard the kid shot himself, I said, well, you know, ordinarily I would expect it to maybe be a rapper, thug, gangster on campus with his nine -- 'I shining my nine, you know how I do.' But, you know, it turns out it was a kid who would shoot himself -- well, story over, not a black kid."
The caller later asserted, "I just want to tell you that it's quite easy for someone to step up and be like a Jesse Jackson or an Al Sharpton, because it's easy to point out the 20 percent of our problem, which is the white man." Gibson then asked the caller, "Am I a part of your 20-percent white man problem?" The caller responded, "Oh yeah!" Gibson replied, "Oh man, you had to go racist on me?" He then thanked the caller and ended the segment by saying: "OK, I thought the kid was a black man, I'll admit it, until I heard he shot himself. Does that make me a racist?"
Gibson has previously made numerous controversial statements on both his nationally syndicated radio show and on his Fox News Channel program, The Big Story. For example, as Media Matters for America has documented:
- During his September 21 radio broadcast, while discussing recent events surrounding the so-called Jena 6 with the show's executive producer, known on air as "Angry Rich," Gibson asserted that the demonstrators who gathered the previous week in Jena, Louisiana, only "wanna fight the white devil." Gibson aired news coverage of the Jena 6 protests and challenged protestors' claims that the incidents in Jena are representative of ongoing racism in this country. He said: "[W]hat they're worried about is a mirage of 1950s-style American segregation, racism from the South. They wanna fight the white devil. ... [T]here's no -- can't go fight the black devil. Black devils stalking their streets every night gunning down their own people -- can't go fight that. That would be snitchin'."
- On the May 31 edition of The Big Story, Gibson said he was "mesmerized" by what he called "[t]he TB Man story" -- the news that American attorney Andrew Speaker traveled by airline while infected with what was reported to be antibiotic-resistant tuberculosis. Gibson stated: "It seems every time a story pops up about somebody who has suddenly contracted some strange or incurable disease, it's somebody who is either from the third world, or was traveling through some godforsaken hellhole, and somehow managed to contract ooga booga fever." During the June 1 edition of The Big Story, Gibson asserted that Media Matters was "going after him" in reporting his comments, and responded: "Well, the whitest man in America, who is the black man's best friend, is now being alleged to be a racist for having invented something called ooga booga fever." He also said, "I should have said Ouagadougou fever," a reference to the capital of the African nation Burkina Faso.
- On the May 11, 2006, edition of The Big Story, Gibson advised viewers during the "My Word" segment of his program to "[d]o your duty. Make more babies." He then cited a May 10 article, which reported that nearly half of all children under the age of five in the United States are minorities. Gibson added: "By far, the greatest number [of children under five] are Hispanic. You know what that means? Twenty-five years and the majority of the population is Hispanic." Gibson later claimed: "To put it bluntly, we need more babies." Then, referring to Russia's projected decline in population, Gibson claimed: "So far, we are doing our part here in America but Hispanics can't carry the whole load. The rest of you, get busy. Make babies, or put another way -- a slogan for our times: 'procreation not recreation'."
From the October 10 edition of Fox News Radio's The John Gibson Show:
GIBSON: Well, we have an inside look at the production of The John Gibson Show today because there was big news out in Cleveland, Ohio, and I teed it up saying, "What we have here is another example of hip-hop culture bringing murder and mayhem into the rest of our society."
Now, this was a terrible incident out in a school near Cleveland. It's called "SuccessTech." It's one of those alternative schools. Eighty-five percent African-American. Eighty-five percent. First thing you see when you see the pictures today is a whole bunch of black kids. Three teachers -- did it turn out to be three teachers or two?
ANGRY RICH: Three.
GIBSON: And three students shot. Now, all of the teachers and students that were shot were -- survive. The wounds are not serious. Well, I guess there's one of the teachers is in surgery and so forth, but they're all expected to live. The shooter committed suicide. This is one of the students who was shot in the elbow and, you know, was not seriously hurt, although he was shot.
[begin audio clip]
REPORTER: This is Darnell Rodgers, age 18. He was shot today. Darnell, can you tell us what happened to you?
RODGERS: I was walking from my locker to my teacher's classroom. Like, as I was walking to the classroom, I heard gunshots. And then, like, one of the gun shots, like, hit me, and, like, I was, like, shot, and I was like, "Oh my God, my God, I got shot," or whatever. But I would also like to send my prayers out to all the other victims and their families, and I'm looking into starting a nonprofit organization to stop violence in schools and give more security in schools.
REPORTER: Darnell, did you know the shooter?
RODGERS: I might have, but I don't know for sure. I got to see him to see if I really knew him, but I probably didn't know him, though.
[end audio clip]
GIBSON: Now why would there be guns in schools?
[audio clip -- 50 Cent's "Fully Loaded Clip"]
GIBSON: Well, that's my working theory, but, you know -- and, of course, because the school is very heavily African-American, I did leap to a conclusion.
ANGY RICH: What was that, John?
GIBSON: Well, that the shooter might have been African-American. Turns out it's a white guy.
[audio clip -- "Is Gibson wrong?"]
GIBSON: Gibson's not wrong. Gibson is not wrong. No, in the -- in years past, in the many of these shooting incidents that I've covered, you've always looked at things like video games, Grand Theft Auto, and desensitizing kids to shooting people and stuff like that, and all I can say is, "Hey, times change. We move on." All of a sudden, you know, the gun violence in the culture is coming at the kids from a different direction.
[audio clip -- 50 Cent's "Touch The Sky"]
GIBSON: Well, you know, you can't deny it. I mean, there's a gazillion of those things out there and the kids are listening on their iPods, and the kids listening on their iPods are not all black kids. Some white kids listen too.
ANGRY RICH: This kid was a Marilyn Manson fan.
GIBSON: He's a goth type.
ANGRY RICH: Yes.
GIBSON: So he wasn't picking up the hip-hop?
RICH: I don't think so, John.
[...]
GIBSON: Angry Rich, you know why I knew that this -- through our afternoon of mystery wondering about the kid that was the shooter, I knew this was not a classic hip-hop shooting.
ANGRY RICH: How's that John?
GIBSON: He killed himself. Hip-hoppers do not kill themselves. They walk away. Now, I didn't need to hear the kid was white with blond hair. Once he'd shot himself in the head, no hip-hopper.
ANGRY RICH: So it's not a classic hip-hop --
GIBSON: It's not even close. I mean it's whatever he is, and it's clear to me that this gun culture right now primarily promoted by hip-hop music --
[rap clip]
GIBSON: "I bought a brand new gun today. I'm gonna shoot you in the face." This culture has even reached the school campus. We're not in the Kip Kinkel era of school shootings anymore; it has changed. Yes, I know the shooter was white. I knew it as soon as he shot himself. Hip-hoppers don't do that. They shoot and move on to shoot again. Triple-8, 788-9910. I know there's a few of you who want to call me racist. But when you do, remind -- let me remind you, African-Americans are dying in major cities because people won't face this problem. Gibson on Fox.
[...]
GIBSON: Well, you look at cities around the country, and many of them are suffering an enormous murder rate of African-Americans by African-Americans, and when you wonder why, sometimes it occurs: Could it be the music?
[rap clip]
GIBSON: All right, it turns out, though, the kid in Cleveland who did the shooting today -- three teachers, three students -- white.
ANGRY RICH: Oops.
GIBSON: And I could tell right away 'cause he killed himself. Black shooters don't do that; they shoot and move on. My next guest is [comedian] Patrice Oneal.
[...]
CALLER: Listen here, first of all, you sure the other caller was not [Rep.] Charlie Rangel [D-NY]? He sounded just like Charlie Rangel.
GIBSON: I wish it was, but it wasn't.
CALLER: All right John, listen, I'm going to give you the black/white crime Litmus test.
GIBSON: All right, go ahead.
CALLER: All right, white crime: Mom grounded me, I didn't get my Mercedes, so I'm going to wipe out the whole school. Black crime: You stepped on my shoe, you said something about my mama, I'm gonna shoot you.
GIBSON: Or, "I got a new gun today, I'm gonna shoot you in the face."
[rap clip]
GIBSON: See?
CALLER: You know, 'cause there's just some crimes we don't do, like serial killing, white guy, you know, rob -- stole someone's hat --
GIBSON: Oh, I'll tell you something - do I take it that you're a African-American gentleman?
CALLER: Yes.
GIBSON: All right, one of the things you also don't do, you being the plural of the community, is you don't shoot somebody and then kill yourself.
CALLER: That is very true.
GIBSON: White people do that.
CALLER: That is very true.
GIBSON: So when I heard the kid shot himself, I said, well, you know, ordinarily I would expect it to maybe be a rapper, thug, gangster on campus with his nine - "I shining my nine, you know how I do." But it turns out it was a kid who would shoot himself, well story over, not a black kid.
CALLER: Yeah, but I don't think, you know, blacks ain't killing each other in school like that --
GIBSON: No, they're killing each other in the street. They generally do not open fire in school. What's going on is in the street. Now you're in Atlanta. How's your murder rate running there?
CALLER: It's pretty high. I'm originally from the Bronx, though. But it's pretty high here.
GIBSON: Well, I mean, don't you find that shocking, [caller] seriously, when you look at towns like Atlanta, New Orleans, Jacksonville, Philly; I've been talking about the worst cases. And you see these -- I mean, Philadelphia's got a raw number of murders that's almost exactly the same as New York, and Philadelphia is a third the size, or a fifth the size?
CALLER: Now listen, I agree with you and I just want to tell you that it's quite easy, you know, for someone to step up and, you know, to be like a Jesse Jackson or a Al Sharpton, because it's easy to point out, you know, probably the 20 percent of our problem, which is the white man. But the 80 percent, which is each other in our own situation, that's a much harder fight. So --
GIBSON: Well let me just ask you something, [caller]. Am I a part of your 20-percent white man problem?
CALLER: Oh yeah! I mean, come on, you --
GIBSON: Oh man! Oh man, you had to go racist on me? I thought that was [earlier caller]'s gig today! All right, [caller], thanks a lot.
OK, I thought the kid was a black kid, I'll admit it, until I heard he shot himself. Does that make me a racist?
Please tell me he did not say this. Please?
Can you hold your breath until tomorrow? I'm sure Gibson himself will do exactly that.
Sorry, Dorris. One of the water carriers for the color blind party just spilt a bucket of black paint again.
OT, but looky here. Turns out it was the republicans who launched the attack against our 12 year old!
I guess I should not be suprised, these people have no shame.
At long last, can this ignorant racist be taken off the air?
Yes and he has said many things equally as bad (if not worse) as Imus ever said.
Oh, and by the way, great way to talk about a shooting that just happened.
his toupee is on too tight, filter his brain waves and only bulls^^t comes ougt.
Oops...an article (in part) by the Associated Press. Note the title. (found on Blacknews.com)
Black Student Shoots 4 at Cleveland High School; Commits Suicide
By The Associated Press
CLEVELAND (AP) — A 14-year-old suspended student opened fire in his downtown high school Wednesday, wounding four people as terrified schoolmates hid in closets and bathrooms and huddled under laboratory desks. He then killed himself.
A fellow student at SuccessTech Academy alternative school said Asa H. Coon, who was suspended for fighting two days earlier, had made threats in front of students and teachers last week...................
[-]
Get me an iced tea motherf*cker!!!!
What is wrong with this guy. Gotta say the race of the school shooter never even entered my head...why would it...as far as I am aware race isn't even a factor in the profile of these types of school shooters.
I swear Gibson only said this in order to instigate an O'Reilly-type fued? Why else would he insert a racial angle into a story where none existed? He is shameful, they way he pimps himself for publicity and relevance is staggering......the guy is an absolute joke.
You may be right. At the risk of sounding conspiratorial...could it be that he's trying to pick another fight with MMFA? Maybe these little foodfights keep their base energized?
Tommy and Nerz,
You guys found the meat in the coconut. Gibson is pretty much talentless...like many of the talking heads endlessly filling what seems like limitless air time.
Just trying to provoke outrage and another worthless media catfight for ratings.
Yeah, he's a phony beyond belief.......spewing his provocative rhetoric to garner some much needed attention, all the while cloaking it in some lofty discussion about how African Americans are dying in the streets and the world needs John Gibson to give us all a reality check.
that is right, It is all about ratings. buy nothing his show advertises.
"...'cause he killed himself. Black shooters don't do that; they shoot and move on."
Perhaps Gibson consulted with Billo before going on the air and learned that the reason black shooters are so predicatable is they don't usually think for themselves...except in Harlem, of course, where they are particularly well behaved and don't scream for more MF'ing ice tea. Isn't it wonderful to have at our disposal the knowledge and expertise of FOX News?
Don't be silly. Black shooters are extremely respectful.
"OK, I thought the kid was a black kid, I'll admit it, until I heard he shot himself. Does that make me a racist?"
It just means you are especially well qualified to work for FOX News, Congratulations, John...keep it up and one day you may take over Billo's microphone.
Maybe these school shooters could do us all a favor and shoot themselves first?
I've always said that I thought the murder-suicide perpetrators should give some serious thought to switching around the order they do things. I mean, why prolong you're own suffering? Get it out of the way early.
Here's an idea you might like. Have a force of 2500 soldiers backed up with attack helicopters, arial drones and 40 ton battle tanks "evacuate" all the civilians from his neighborhood, confiscate all the guns and then level the area to teach them a lesson.
i apologize in advance. maybe gibson heard he was a "coon"?
LOL! That was a good one. ;)
Now that's funny! lol
I'm taking all bets! Who will be the 1st poster here that defends Gibson? I'm picking billybob for $5.
Who will be the first to defend Gibson's right to peddle his trash on our airwaves?
It's right there in the Constitution: "Life, liberty and a microphone."
Nah, it'll be AA. He'll start off by saying, "While I'm not a fan of Gibson and find him to be an idiot, I do agree with his point that..."
Preston,
Thanks for the plug. I find it interesting that you laughed at a joke with racial slur as you did above, calling it "a good one".
It also seems that you have no problems with Gibson's stereotype about only whites shooting themselves. (Obviously you are not the only one.)
Why is that?
I think peopel have problems with both of Gibson's stereotypes.
it was not a "racial slur". i was making fun of gibson's supposed cluelessness. he heard the guy was a "coon" because that was his last name. the apology was in case someone didn't get it right away. you? you'll never get anything.
I got it all along. The connection is obvious it did not bear repeating. I did not write the apology in advance like you did for using the racial slur. By slyly putting it into the words of a conservative you must feel you are home clear. And you were by most here.
Had a conservative attempted the same joke but put the words into the mouth of a liberal, everyone would have been all over it in a heartbeat. The double standard here is very telling.
because as preston says below about you "o oblivious one", you wouldn't hear the word "coon" coming from a liberal in a serious way, nor did i suggest he said it. but if you're going to suggest the word doesn't get used by conservatives way more, then you are out of it. i was making fun of gibson, not calling anyone a name. talk about clueless.
You're the one with the empty clue box and a the desire to pretend you don't know what that post was about.
He was deploring Gibson and Gibson's backwards, pre-modern-era views on race, which are tantamount to thinking the word "coon" means something besides a person's name.
We're still waiting for you to post something worthwhile on these boards. When will you get around to that?
It is obvious you can use racial slurs freely only as long as you put it in the mouths of conservatives.
Typical liberal logic.
Gibson is typical of this type of hate but leave it too lowlifes like melast to use any type of racial smear as a joke to try and prove a weak point. I for one do not believe any racial language is acceptable , joking or not joking. The last name may be that but it does not make it less funny or a "goodone"
As for Gibson, nothing will happen to this piece of garbage, it is more clear than ever that racism is accepted for employees of FOX news and its idiotic radio network.
says the troll
The person that thinks FOX is legitimate is calling me a troll, the person that smears fellow posters calls me a troll. Look at yourself troll.
lying as usual. what i said was that the democratic candidates should not participate in debates on fox, but not do a blanket boycott of the network because that just gives ammunition to the conservatives who say the democrats are afraid of fox. anything else is just your lie.
How did you feel about Republicans debating on MSNBC right after the moderator opined that the current Republican administration would be caught in their criminality? Or a previous debate moderated by Keith Olbermann, an outspoken administration critic?
They had the cajones to go there, why don't the Democrats have the same?
you make my point tommy. i said don't do a blanket boycott. your contention that they are afraid of fox is contradicted by the fact that the democrats do go on. thanks again for making my point. now explain it to your pal jlyons.
So why won't the Dems debate on Fox and face rightwingers, when the Reps went on MSNBC and faced leftwingers? You didn't answer.
thanks again. they go on fox and get grilled by "rightwingers" all the time. ergo,the falseness of your claim.
Never mind, if you can't answer why they shunned a Fox sponsored debate, then just ignore me. Whatever you're doing here is ridiculous.
tommy calls me "ridiculous"? cue laugh track. i answered you, you don't like the answer so you will go away. don't let the door...
Really? You answered nothing, but your urging me to move on is all one needs to know.
didn't you say "just ignore me"?
He does that all the time. "Waaah. I'm not going to talk to you anymore cuz you're meeeeean."
HAHA
The time to leave is when hysterical liberals who get caught in a glaring double standard need rescuing from other hysterical liberals.......hence, your entrance.
you still can't explain. how are democrats afraid, when they do go on fox.
You can't explain why they opted out of a Fox debate. And sorry, you can't use the illegitimate excuse because, as you say, they go on Fox all the time. So, what are they afraid of, specifically?
again you do not give them the prestige of holding a debate. do i answer you? yes. do i have a great opinion of you? no. would i show up for sunday dinner to chat? no. just because you do not like the answer is not my problem.
Because Fox isn't a legitimate news organization.
It's the communications arm of the Republican Party.
Of course. Good line when you have no argument.
Well Tommy, it has become the arm of the Republicans, no?
Yes Doris, it is decidedly rightwing.
But the Democrats aren't appearing on a Fox debate not because it's an illegitimate news network, that's ridiculous - but rather because apparently they are afraid of something? Either their filtered soundbites will be challenged, or they will have to answer tough questions.
Either way they look like wimps.
the cluelessness continues. they are on every sunday, unafraid of chris wallace.
Wait - I thought they were illegitimate??......wow, this is really liberal doublespeak at it's finest.
They won't debate there because the network is illegitimate, but they will stomach that illegitimacy for an hour on Sunday - do you honestly expect anybody to believe that baloney?
again, they shouldn't give talking points to people like you. you say they are afraid to go on fox. they do go on fox. you are wrong.
"Yes Doris, it is decidedly rightwing."
Read the complaint Fox filed against Al Franken and his publisher.
Under oath Fox reveals exactly what it is and it isn't a legitimate news organization.
i never said they were legitimate. but why let them claim democrats are afraid of fox?
Tommy I do not think Democratic candidates should go on FOX ever. Sorry just my opinion. Debate or interviews. That network helped the Bush agenda and killed 3000 plus innocent American military men and women.
'cuz they're smarter maybe?
So why won't the Dems debate on Fox and face rightwingers, when the Reps went on MSNBC and faced leftwingers? You didn't answer. Tommy
The same reason people of color don't go to Klan meeting. It is a waste of time. You have to have no agenda, an open mind and be willing to listen to different ideas. Does that sound like Fox News? I don't think so.
The liar is you and how you smear people. I think your racist remark today may finally wake up some people. I never bought your act for a second. I know I think racist are disgusting and usually hide behind "jokes" like you tried to pull earlier. You owe all African Americans an apology for your "C**N" remark. it was disgusting.
i never made any racist remark. i mocked gibson's cluelessness. you keep trying to discredit me because i'm on to you. [among other people]
Yeah sure you were. Racism is never funny. Many here are on to you now. I do not need to discredit you, between your smears of people, and racism you are digging your own grave.
are you denying that i said exactly what i claimed? that i said don't do a blanket boycott of fox, but skip their debate? did i say that or not?
are you denying that i said exactly what i claimed? that i said don't do a blanket boycott of fox, but skip their debate? did i say that or not?
The only thing I am denying is that you are credible. You are a troll in my opinion.
answer the question. don't call me a name or try to deflect. is that what i said?
for those so inclined, you can read what i'm talking about here from a previous thread. this "person" called me a "fox apologist" because i said exactlly what i said here. don't do a blanket boycott, but don't attend their sponsored debates. that means i "support fox" to this person.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200710030002?offset=20&show=1#comments
J you know I feel Mefirst is a horrible person, with his personal attacks. However I see nothing racist in his statement. Your heart may be in the right place but your picking on the wrong mountain here. Gibson is the racist. mefirst is nasty and I do not know him but from his remarks I have never seen anything racist said.
and the other troll arrives.
notice how when i put a direct question to jlyons, someone else has to step in? cmon jlyons, answer my question.
I answered your question troll. Notice how you play word games, and smear people?
the old tried and true chestnuts, "word games", "smear", yada yada...
You certainly don't owe me an apology. I understood your post quite well. We all hang out here together so we know when we are joking. I knew it was a joke.
Exactly Lynn, we know one person from the other.
"You owe all African Americans an apology for your "C**N" remark. it was disgusting."--jlyons
Lynn,
I know you aren't as offended as jlyon thinks you should be, but can you put mefirst in touch with the black folks' newsletter so he can get that apology out as soon as possible to everyone? Thanks.
; )
As an African American I am offended. Sorry if that is not good enough for some on here.
You indeed have a right to be offended. You do realize that you don't speak for all African-Americans, though. Don't you?
Now that J is AA maybe she can start a newsletter. She should call it Black Like Me
Lynn, again I do not find the subject of race funny. It is very serious to me.
Actually after reading many of your post you don't seem to find much of anything funny, and your skin is paper thin. But if you were indeed insulted by Mefirst of course that's your business. But as I've said I've read many of Mefirst's post and there has been no indication that he is in anyway harboring racist attitudes. You don't like him and he doesn't like you and that seems to be the basis of all your exchanges today. So I'll leave you to that.
Yes I do , you are correct. I do not speak for anyone but myself.
Then I guess the late great Richard Pryor wasn't funny to you, right? After all, he is considered the greatest comedian who dealt with issues such as racism, and you mean to tell me he wasn't funny? Or how about Mel Brooks and "The Producers"?
Sorry, J, but just because a topic is grim doesn't mean a person with great wit and talent can't make it funny.
Actually I never did find Richard Pryor funny. I prefer Bill Cosby.
Did you SERIOUSLY say you thought Bill Cosby was funnier than Richard Pryor???? WOW/
Bill Cosby's stand-up work is very funny, particularly the first eight or nine albums. If you haven't listened to "Wonderfulness" in particular I highly recommend it.
I've heard his early albums and his stand up is funny. I am not saying he is like Dennis Miller but funnier than Richard Pryor? I mean I think Dirk Novitsky is a pretty good center I just would never say he was better than Wilt Chambelain.
And Preston one other thing , to compare Richard Pryor to a troll like melast is a complete and total disservice to Richard Pryor.
LOL! Well, I can see how you thought I was comparing Mefirst to Richard Pryor, but that wasn't my goal. I think even Mefirst will admit that he's not Richard Pryor. Even Dave Chappelle, Chris Rock, Chris Tucker, Eddie Murphy aren't as funny as Pryor. Pryor, along with Bruce, Allen, Cosby and Carlin, was a pioneer in comedy, a one of a kind. He was a comedian that almost all modern comedians have cited as an influence (e.g., Jon Stewart, Whoopi Goldberg, Chris Rock, Eddie Murphy, Denis Leary, Bill Hicks, Robin Williams, etc.) Thus, Pryor wasn’t just someone on stage throwing out racist slurs and people lapped it up and found the slurs funny; there was much sociopolitical analysis behind many of the jokes he made about race. In fact, some were more enlightened about race by listening to his routines.
But different strokes for different folks...
I just have a different taste in humor than others. Allthough I loved Richard Pryor and Gene Wilder in Stir Crazy.
How about "Blazing Saddles", which Pryor helped to write?
Talk about a classic film! The humor still holds up today.
Bringing up Blazing Saddles makes me think of a point here. Remember the scene where Gene Wilder and Cleavon Little want to infiltrate a Klan meeting Cleavon hides behind a rock and Gene Wilder gets the attention to two Klan sheets and pulls Cleavon from behind a rock. Cleavon says "Where all the white women at"? Now that is using a racist stereotype to make a point. Isnt that essentially what the joke that insulted jylons did?
I think that is a great point. And I do somewhat sympathize with Jlyons on this point as well now that Blazing Saddles - a favorite of mine was mentioned. Many objected to Pryor's frequent use of the n-word and it was used pretty often in Blazing Saddles as well. It can make it a little difficult for some black people (including my wife) to take. Not because she doesn't get the satire in it, but because of the fear being that some people won't get (what I consider to be) the obvious satire and take these stereotypes seriously. I disagree with that opinion, but I have learned to respect it and I can see how she believes that.
As a white person, myself, I often need to realize that not having to worry about people not getting the satire in these racial situations is a priveledge I didn't know I had until it was pointed out to me. I think that is something that needs to be considered when analyzing our perspectives. To some the racial slur's mere presence is enough for the joke not to be funny. I can respect that, but I disagree that Mefirst was being racist in any way. Not even close.
i do agree that some might be bothered by the word and that is why i said a sorry up front. and i realize i'm a white guy saying this. people have mentioned pryor and i would not flatter myself to think i could match that rare talent. i remember him telling a very puzzled barbara walters why he used slurs in his act, and he basically said that he wanted to take away the power of those words. my intent was somewhat the same. to mock the word itself is to take away the ability of those who use it to hurt. i do not advocate it's casual use, and i really did think about it first. but i think most people got the point. i was using a joke to illustrate the cluelessness of gibson, who originally did think the shooter was black based on no other reason than the school was mostly black.
is sueeld also african-american?
Mfirst, you know I've heard a lot of bull sh*t in my time but that....... I'm speechless.....simply speechless.
I think she/he is Hispanic.
J in all the time you've been posting here you never once in all that time said you were AA. Anyway you said that Mefirst should apologize to all AAs for his joke, well I didn't find Me first’s comment offensive and no apology is do. I think I've been around here for 3 years now and Mefirst has been here almost as long. I must have read hundreds of his posts and he is certainly not what you are attempting to characterize him as, and the regulars here know that. I’m wondering why you are doing that. Now maybe I read too much in the relationships we’ve developed here but I kind of consider you guy’s my cyberspace playmates and we can certainly joke among each other in a manner that is more familiar than you would do with a stranger correct. Mefirst was being satirical and making fun of Gibson.
lynn, thank you. i'm sure you must realize by now that i am very careful in what i say and can prove. and i thought for a full minute about it, and then i posted. i already knew what the response would be. the right wingers would be "double standard", when a lot of them are the same people that excused o'reilly. these are a lot of the same people who insist that the democratic party is the "plantation" when all they have done is try and make a level playing field. i am opposed to "reparations" per se, but i think you cannot just say everything is equal after three centuries of keeping people down. hence, we need affirmative action. if anyone was really offended by the word [i'm sure you have heard it], i did apologize, but the joke was all about the fox bobblehead mentality. it was not racist so i can't apologize for what i did not do. anyway, have a good evening.
Lynn, I never once thought my race was important to bring it up. The only reason I did was because there was some on here posting that as African Americans they were not offended. That is fine, I however felt different. Melast said a racist comment in my opinion. Most will defend melast because he tends to spew things most like on here.He calls long time posters "trolls" and i found it ironic how he took over this thread with his "joke". I do not like racist jokes, they are not funny when racists say it, they are not funny when slime like Imus say things and they are not funny when trolls like melast say it. My two and a half cents.
i did not make a "racist joke". i did not even say gibson used the word. i said he heard the guy's last name, and made an assumption, because gibson did say originally he thought the gunman was black. the point was to show the general cluelessness at fox, a network that spent a solid week supporting o'reilly's amazement that blacks can run a nice restaurant. but, you know all this.
I think it is good that some of you are seeing first hand how easy it is for someone to take your words and misinterpret them. You know the intent of what you said, and yet you are trapped by a subjective interpretation of those words.
The whole concept of MM seems to be a gotcha game instead of a real substantial argument. MM's job shouldn't be to pull out ambiguous statements from commentators and try to vilify them for it. MM should instead formulate an ideological argument based on facts instead of conjecture.
It should be, "Republicans believe this about issue x and here are the facts that make them wrong", and not "You'll notice he used this phrase only a minute and 50 second after making the first, and some would say that makes it irrelevant."
This whole era of mudblogging is getting completely out of hand. Pretty soon no one is going to want the job of public representative because of all the smears coming from the left and the right. Everyone has made mistakes in their life. Everyone says things that can have their meanings misconstrued.
Unless someone emphatically states, "I hate minorities," or "dissenting soldiers are phony" then you really are fighting a pointless battle.
Nonsense. By your standard, people can say whatever they want as long as they don't say it directly. They can make all the implications and insinuations they like. Some left-wing radio host could say "George Bush would have prevented 9/11 in the week beforehand, but he was too busy selling his airline stock".
Now, I'm asking you...no, begging you...to tell me that every right-wing blog would not be screaming bloody murder over that, but would instead be saying "well, he didn't explicitly say that Bush knew about it ahead of time, so we can't really criticize him". Please tell me that you believe that would be the case. I'd like to see you make that argument.
I have to admit I wasn't sure how mefirst's comment would be received. I understood his comment but I have to admit I found it uncomfortable and could see how people would think it may be inappropriate. I don't think it was funny but I also don't believe mefirst was being racist when the comment is taken in context.
There's no need to go into any of this. All you have to do is say "That's not what I meant". Then if she asks what you did mean, you just say you explained yourself already and if she didn't see it, that's her problem.
She seems to think that's an adequate explanation, so she should accept that.
I believe this is what Limbaugh, Gibson, and O'Reilly should do as well. If someone, like Media Matters, chooses to misinterpret your words for mudslinging purposes then all you can do is simply explain your true meaning and move on.
That's why MM keeps losing these battles. They spend several pages paring words and battling over semantics instead of finding actual facts on which to base an argument.
No one but the speaker knows their true intent or meaning in regards to ambiguous phrases. Only emphatic statements are clear enough when arguing someone is a racist, or unpatriotic.
You don't understand the context of my comment. The point was that JLyons did not explain her comment at all. "That's not what I meant" is in itself not an explanation.
This argument of yours is simply not tenable. If there's no rational alternate explanation for someone's comments, then it's fair to judge them for it. If someone said "we'd host the NAACP conference here, except we're short on fried chicken and watermelon", is that emphatic? Not really. Is it racist? Of course it is.
You owe all African Americans an apology for your "C**N" remark. it was disgusting.
I'm African-American and he doesn't owe me an apology. I can't speak for other posters here who are black, but I thought the joke was clever and funny. Then again, I've been known to have a dark sense of humor in the first place, so maybe it's me with the problem.<scratches head and thinks for a moment>
I'm African-American and he doesn't owe me an apology. I can't speak for other posters here who are black, but I thought the joke was clever and funny. Then again, I've been known to have a dark sense of humor in the first place, so maybe it's me with the problem. <scratches head and thinks for a moment>
What did you mean by "dark sense of humor." Does that mean only black people would get the joke?
This is the environment of gotcha games that MM has created...
No it's not. There needs to be a modicum of reasoning behind your argument. That appears to be missing in your post.
Jlyons, Mfirst does not owe me an apology. I'm not stupid and having been a person of color all my life know when someone is making a 'racial' slurs.
There are times, especially when discussing race, you use words that may be uncomfortable for some. In trying to get your point across in this type of forum you have to cross lines that leave you open to criticism. I myself when discussing race use the word 'white folks' and 'black folks'. It seems, IMO, to make some here (Tommy & Jeter) uncomfortable. Why? I'm not sure but I use the words to try in this limited forum to express myself. Since I have noticed some discomfort, I'm now using 'people of color'. While I'm sure I'm going to slip up and use 'black/white folks' again, my intent is to not make anyone feel uncomfortable when discussing race with me. I have no racial bias but I'm simply trying to talk about a difficult and sensitive subject. I enjoy discussing race with Mfirst. I appreciate the fact that he as well as Snoopy and HBL are willing to put themselves out there, say words that might leave them open to unwarranted criticism and discuss it. I sincerely appreciate them for it. HBL came up with 'spokesnegro' for Juan Williams. He was unsure but I thought it was funny cause, IMO, it was sooo appropriate for Williams. It seem to make AA extremely uncomfortable and I have tried not to use it, not because I don't think it applies to Juan but I want to discuss issues of race with AA and using that word will not further any discussion that we may have if he can‘t see past that word. Gibson, Rush, Sean and Bill use stereotypes in discussing 'people of color'. They discuss it like they are experts but actually it’s from a point of ignorance. That's why when they discuss race it's sooo offensive. Bill saying 'people of color are finally thinking for themselves' or Gibson saying that he know that 'hip hop shooters don’t kill themselves'. Neither one of these men know a damn thing about ’people of color’ and everytime they open their mouth everyone else know it.
AA that’s why some conservatives can’t use certain words. They don’t know a damn thing about the very people they are discussing. They simply know what they have been told which is 9 times out of 10 incorrect.
Pearl I don't know if you read Jlyons post above, but she is now claiming to be AA. I'm beginning to wonder about J.
Lynn, you know I'm not willing to say Jlyons lying but after all the discussions we've had on race she NEVER mentioned she's AA? I also think that Jlyon and Sueeld and Casyspring are all the same person and since Sueeld thought Imus was 'lynched' by his firing that AA claims becomes more unbelievable. Having said all that, hey if Jlyons is or wants to be AA more power to her.
We know that Sueeld and Casey are the same person, and from their styles it seems quite possible that Jlyons is that same person as well.
I find it extremely difficult to believe that Jlyons is AA, because I had the exact same thought about how many race-based threads we've had, and this is never brought up. But when she has a chance to act offended by someone who she has frequent conflicts with, then we hear about it. What timing.
She's always been a little batty, and sometimes flat-out unhinged. Lying about something like this seems entirely consistent with her personality.
I've been reading through the posts and somehow, Jlyons went from saying he/she is African American, to posters saying now he/she admitted to being AA.....as in AnotherAmerican, one of the regular posters????
I believe the above posts have confused something along the thread, as you are all talking about posters with multiple IDs. See original coment below.
"As an African American I am offended. Sorry if that is not good enough for some on here."
The AA refers to African American in these posts not Anotheramerican. Hope that cleared it up for you.
Yes, I understood that AA was for African American, no need to clear it up for me.
Reading some of the posts above, I thought that some thought AA refered to AnotherAmerican since some of the talk was about mulitiple IDs, and many do refer to AnotherAmerican as AA.
Perlene said above: " AA that’s why some conservatives can’t use certain words. They don’t know a damn thing about the very people they are discussing. They simply know what they have been told which is 9 times out of 10 incorrect".
She may have been adressing AnotherAmerican in that paragraph, however; she was addressing Jlyons through her comment, and I saw no coments from AnotherAmerican above.
See why I asked?
Gray, you were correct. I added that comment to AA rather than post another one. Sorry for simply being lazy.
AA in this thread and others continues to complain that we do not accept 'conservatives' use of certain words and phrases. He was questioning why some could say certain things (MFirst) and why it is not acceptable for others.
Sorry for the confusion.
The idea that anyone would think we were saying Jlyons was AnotherAmerican didn't even occur to me. I thought I made it clear I wasn't saying that, in any event;"I find it extremely difficult to believe that Jlyons is AA, because I had the exact same thought about how many race-based threads we've had, and this is never brought up".
What's more, this was in the post I was responding to;"Lynn, you know I'm not willing to say Jlyons lying but after all the discussions we've had on race she NEVER mentioned she's AA?"
Obviously, "AnotherAmerican" has no inherent involvement in discussions about race. I don't think anyone actually thought we were talking about him, but in case they did I'm sure they appreciate the clarification.
thanks pearlene, since the guy's name was asa coon, i was joking that the clueless gibson thought he was black because he heard.... anyway, i know you got it.
Hi Pearl, great post. You nailed it discussing issues dealing with race and racism are extremely difficult...even more so when you don't have a personal relationship with the people participating in the discussion. I don't have to fear being misunderstood when speaking amongst my friends but with acquaintances and certainly these forums we don't really know each other and obviously tone is missing so it is hard to navigate that path. I agree based on the interaction with posters here you get a feel of the person's intent and if they don't have a pattern of it you can give them the benefit of the doubt. As a white folk (-: I do find it very uncomfortable when racial slurs are used even when used in the manner mefirst did. Frankly, I get uncomfortable when black people use these terms around me too. Obviously, several black posters have said they understood mefirst's comments and weren't offended but I still am uncomfortable...maybe that says something about me...I don't know. But you are right it is difficult and sometimes humor helps but it can often backfire too.
Excellent post, Pearl! I also find it odd too, Lynn, that J is suddenly revealing that she’s African American. In all the discussions about race where she participated, she has never revealed to any of us that she’s black. I’m confused here—I don’t want to call her a liar but something ain’t adding up.
Pearl, I agree with you about avoiding the discussing of race with some posters here. Not because I'm afraid of a challenge, rather I get tired of explaining and explaining things that an open-minded American shouldn't have problems coming to grips with. It's as if some people refuse to learn things beyond their boundaries because they're scared learning something might force them to reexamine their political ideology and stereotypes of particularly groups. If America is such the great melting pot and country of diversity, why are so many of us so ignorant about different cultures, races and ethnicities?
I’m with you though, Pearl, I’m so worn-out discussing such issues. Even when you back up your arguments with academic studies and a little history lesson, many will just flippantly dismiss it entirely and refuse to look at things from another person(s) perspective.
Preston,
I do appreciate your openness as I do Pearlene's. I simply find there is a double standard applied here with the use of racial slurs.
How can someone here, even in jest, put the racial slur in the mouth of a pundit, (in this case Gibson,) or anyone for that matter be acceptable? Gibson's comments were uncalled for and racist. Call him out on it is fine by me. It was a stupid comment.
But I think you and a lot of the liberals here are missing the subtle racism, including mefirst, expressed by mefirst's double entendre only because he used a conservative as his mouthpiece.
I am never comfortable with using racial slurs. Never. Not even in jokes. Even though we disagree much of the time, I do enjoy reading your posts and hearing it from your perspective.
I am never comfortable with using racial slurs. Never. Not even in jokes. Even though we disagree much of the time, I do enjoy reading your posts and hearing it from your perspective.
AA, i do not think you and I agree on anything politically, I may be wrong? But I think you get the point about making jokes and using racial slurs. Thank you so much for getting the point.
"... expressed by mefirst's double entendre only because he used a conservative as his mouthpiece."
Mouthpiece? This is a bit odd. You admit that what Gibson said was racist, but when someone attributes a racist sentiment to Gibson...then somehow it must be because he harbors racist sentiments himself?
That seems to be your meaning, and that would be a wild assumption on your part. Do you really think you can justify it?
AnotherAmerican, I’m going to admit something that may shock some posters here: I do like you. One of the reasons why I often evoke your name and bait you in certain conversations because I find people such as yourself fascinating. I often try to understand how people like you come to this black-and-white (no pun intended) binary thinking on subjects as complex as race. Not to sound patronizing or insult you in any way, but there’s a part of me that feels sympathy for conservatives such as yourself who, at times, refuse to put themselves in someone else’s shoes and see things from other’s perspective. Honestly, I do think that you try to seek understanding on race, but one of the reasons why so many find it hard to take you seriously because many of the questions you pose demonstrates a person with little to no contact with minorities. Sadly, the only thing some people know about minorities is what conservative pundits tell them or the one-dimensional exploitation of black people on channels like MTV, BET and VH1. You see, AnotherAmerican, I get the impression whenever I read your posts is that you come from an insolated environment where you have no close tides with a diverse group of black people. I say this because when you asked me the question a while back as to why is it okay for black people to say the ‘N’ Word to each other but whites can’t say it to blacks, that demonstrated to me that you’ve have little experienced with black people. And the ones you came in contact with somehow fitted the stereotypes that are proliferated through the media. This is why I have sympathy for you because I can somehow understand why you carry such race.
The fact is, Mefirst made a great joke about Gibson’s racism because based on Gibson’s past, it’s not far off that Gibson would actually derive a conclusion like that (i.e. Coon = black person who kills other blacks at school). From his disgusting Boogla-Boogla disease joke, to his snarky, condescending “the black man’s best friend” comment, to his recent statements about Jena 6, is it really far off that Gibson would actually think or even say such statements when he has a pattern of making racist comments about blacks? Mefirst didn’t just make this joke about Gibson simply because he’s conservative, Mefirst made this joke because Gibson has a history and pattern of this type of behavior.
As far as the joke being unfunny to you, well I can’t convince you to laugh at something you didn’t like. However, making fun of racists/bigots—pointing out their absurd behavior and laughing AT them not WITH them—isn’t something new in this country. From The Jeffersons, All In The Family, Sanford and Son, Richard Pryor, Lenny Bruce, Eddie Murphy, Don Rickles, etc., some of our greatest comedians and sitcoms satirized the absurdity and backwardness of racism. Their goal was to show the inner-bigot in us all, and by laughing at the bigotry we recognize in ourselves, or in family members and friends, it at times shows us how silly it is to hold such anti-progressive beliefs. You don't laugh at the racism per say, but the idea of how silly racism is in the first place.Thus, context and intelligence means everything to me when it comes to making fun of racism, and I thought Mefirst achieved that with his joke.
Preston, young man that was one fine post. Bravo! Bravo! Bravo!
Thanks, Pearl, I appreciate that! Excuse the grammatical errors, though, I tried to type this fast since I’m juggling posting and studying at the same time. Lol.
Great post, great point. Personally I have always liked AA even when we go at each other with ferocity. He is usually decent and fairly bright even when fairly deluded.
Thanks, Solon. I wanted to point out to you that I enjoy reading your posts here at MMFA. I enjoy it when you rip into some of the usual posters here (e.g., AnotherAmerican, Rino Hunter, etc.), and you do it with such great wit and fire. Don't change that about yourself. ;)
I agree, AnotherAmerican is a good guy. I often tease him a lot because while I consider him a good-hearted person, he's someone so trapped inside an ideology this makes his perception a lot harder to see things differently from another point-of-view. I've grown fond of him in a weird way, I don't know why.
That would only make SENSE if you took the obvious POINT out of the equation. What was Gibsons POINT? Was it to denigrate African Americans overall? Of course it was. And was that Mefirsts POINT? No it was to characterize Gibsons obvious racism. Since the points of BOTH were obvious and since they CLEARLY had two differnt points, there is NO double standard.
Pearlene, you are certainly entitled to your views and opinions, I for one never found race or jokes about race to be funny. I also stayed away from discussing my race because I still want to believe race does not matter. I found the "C**n " comment offensive.
As for me being Sueeld" and that other gentleman, give it a rest. If you have proof give it otherwise you are smearing me like melast has smeared people on here. I have been here for over 3 years, I have opinions that are almost 95% yours. However sometimes I question things and melast does not like that, so he in turn smeared me. He has fooled you, not me. Do not fall into that trap.
Again if you have proof I am those other people, provide it , otherwise stop the smearing. It does no one good on here.
Jlyons, I must admit, I have been pretty amazed at the vociferousness leveled against you in this thread.
I'd say you and I disagee 95% of the time ourselves but I would never have thought you as anyone else.
It seems to me there is a groupthink by many here, almost a mob mentality that if you go against the accepted gospel, you are branded and attacked. Because the slur was put in a conservative's mouth and probably because I questioned it, the progressives here instantly took to mefirst's defense and started insisting that the use of the racial slur was acceptable. Since you did not agree with the orthodox view, and decided to reveal something personal about yourself, you have been cast out.
It is too bad. Some of us conservatives have also been accused of having multiple handles. Why that matters or why anyone would doubt your word, I do not know. Almost daily someone comes out of the woodwork to level insults toward those of us who have contrary opinions. I think it simply comes with the territory of going against the prevailing mob mentality.
AA, thank you and you hit the nail on the head. If you go against as you call it the "gospel" you are attacked. There sometimes is a "Children of the Corn" Mentality here. I like to listen to others and I think for myself before I make an opinion. I consider myself a very liberal person, that does not mean I give liberals free passes to say things that are untrue. Now I felt Gibsons comment was very racist, but I thought the comment by melast was also not only not funny but had a racist component. I hate that C**n word, it is disgusting I place it in the same league as the N word. It may be a play on the last name of the young fellow with the gun, but just becuase melast says it does not mean it is acceptable or ok. The attacks on me have been common on here, I am not a member of the Children of the Corn, I think for myself so I get attacked even now my race is being questioned, I am attacked as being sueeld or some other fellow. Will never stop me from speaking my mind. Thanks , I have gained some respect for you tonight as a person, I do not agree with you politically but you showed you are respectful, something lacking in our society.
Jlyons and AA, I think you need to look deeper for the reason people interact with you in the way they do...perhaps they are reacting to your own tone and manner in your interaction with them and others. Because it certainly isn't because you disagree with them. I often disagree with posters here and for don't experience any of the things you are complaining about. In fact I was critical of mefirst's comments and no body attacked me for my opinion...maybe it was the snarky attackthat accompanied your opinion. You did attack mefirst. Perhaps if you simply explained your opinion and left out the nastiness you would get the same respect back.
Excellent point. You and I agree more often than not,but I always respect your opinion and how it's reasoned and stated. Sometimes the other posters come off a little disingenous in their outrage and the level of outrage seems to be more of a response to someone they don't like then it is to actually what was said. That's when it gets nasty and personal. I must admit it even though it doesn't happen often but I certainly have posted something where the tone was a bit much when responding to a poster that I found particularly irritating. I try to watch that although I'm not always successful. I'm not here to have food fights, but I do enjoy a spirited discussion.
Pearlene, you are certainly entitled to your views and opinions, I for one never found race or jokes about race to be funny. I also stayed away from discussing my race because I still want to believe race does not matter. I found the "C**n " comment offensive. JLyons
A persons race should not matter but to deny that race plays a major role in today’s society is to deny that it played a role in the past and we all know that is not true, but that’s MO.
As for me being Sueeld" and that other gentleman, give it a rest. JLyons
I don’t care if you are Sueeld or Caseyspring like I’m sure NoMoBush didn’t care if you thought he was Sue but that didn’t stop you from accusing him each and every time he posted. That’s MY opinion. I’m not only entitled to it but also entitled to express it as are you. I suggest you don’t worry about it if it’s not true. I also suggest you give the Sue crap a rest since now you have an idea how it feels to be called someone you claim you are not.
However sometimes I question things and melast does not like that. so he in turn smeared me. JLyons
Mfirst is the named in his posts which I sure you’re aware of and honey he doesn’t have me fooled anymore than YOU do. I too damn old and have seen and heard way too much. Personally one of the great things about posting her is no one knows you. You are free to do, be and say what you want. I don't take things personally but if you feel so smeared, I suggest you stop responding to MFirst. Just a suggestion.
Thanks Pearlene, as always your opinions are respected by me. As Jeter said everyone had a problem when Sue/Ellie would come and play games but its fine for others to accuse me of being 2 or 3 people. I do not care if you think I am 2 or 3 people, I just ask that posters on here not be smeared.
I think its sad that just because you hold the opinion that you do that some people think you aren't really a particular race. What words or opinions do people of your race stereotypically have to have in order for the crowd here to accept you as who you say you are?
Even if you were outright lying, which I don't think you are, their behavior would still be just as atrocious.
The shock they pretend to have at your admonition of color makes me wonder if they want MM to implement a system of racial emoticons that each minority must place on their posts. Perhaps they'll start requiring live webcam feeds as proof of race?
That should read "admission" instead of admonition.
You're new here. I'm not. There have been dozens, if not hundreds of threads about race over the last few years, where JLyons has been present, and not once was there some reason for her to say "as an African-American, that offends me"?
Not once? The only time we hear about this is when someone she has a long-running personal feud with makes a joke? It stretches the imagination to the outer limits.
I myself when discussing race use the word 'white folks' and 'black folks'. It seems, IMO, to make some here (Tommy & Jeter) uncomfortable.
Huh? Pearlene I don't recall ever be uncomfortable by either phrase, in fact I've used both here myself. I can't honestly remember Tommy being disturbed by it either, but he can clear that up with you himself.
I really don't have much to add to the ongoing discussion about whether JLyons is African American other than I find it odd that she would lie about something like that. But then again we're all anonymous here, for all you know I might really be Derek Jeter ;-)
And even though mefirst is not one of my favorite posters, I knew he was joking & is certainly not a racist.
Now on topic: Gibson's remarks were racist. Worse than O'Reilly's ignorant statements a few weeks ago, & certainly on par with Imus.
Now on topic: Gibson's remarks were racist. Worse than O'Reilly's ignorant statements a few weeks ago, & certainly on par with Imus
Jeter thank you for not joining the mob and attacking me because I brought my race into the conversation. As for your remarks on the topic I actually think Gibsons comment is WORSE than Imus.
JLyons,
Some here reveal more about their backgrounds than others. For example I've no idea whether Clams is a guy or a gal [though I'd guess guy], black or white, married or single. I could also say that about any number of other posters.
I've mentioned my wife, three sons & that I'm Italian at some point during the [almost] 3 years I've been here but I don't think it's a huge deal about whether folks here give an autobiography unless they feel compelled to, or there's a reason to bring it up.
I do find it a tad comical that those that are now dissecting you get so annoyed when Tommy, myself or others out "SUE" every time she shows up here with a new moniker.
I'm sorry mefirst has chosen to harass you. There have been times I've wanted to tell him to just knock it off, but he's on my *Ignore List* ;-)
And after further thought, I agree with you, Gibson's remarks were worse than what Imus said.
Hang in there J.
Thanks Jeter, its people like you that do bring me back, I enjoy reading others opinions in a nice respectful tone.
"Respectful" is the key word here. What you seem to miss is that many of us like to read respectful posts. But this is a two-way street. When you act like people are trying to "pick a fight" whenever they question your posts or ask for clarification, that does not show respect. When you accuse posters of being terrorist sympathizers, then insult their intelligence by claiming that you "explained" it, that does not show respect.
This has been explained to you before, you get what you give. It's not unfair.
Brabanito, when my words are taken out of context, I am accused of being other people, I am accused of being a Conservative I find that not respectful. One poster has an issue with me and smears me that is what I am taking about as being respectful.
If I recall correctly, in the first disagreeable exchange between the two of you it was you who was incapable of admitting that you had misread what he wrote, and called him a right-winger. A perfect example of my point, you disrespect him, he disrespects you. I think both of you have gotten carried away at times, but don't pretend it's one-sided.
Besides, I'm not talking about one poster specifically. You have shown disrespect to several other posters, including me, without cause. You are not a victim of anyone but yourself.
Well I guess we all including myself have a different view of "respect". But when you are attacked I have learned not to be swift boated like they did to Kerry. I do not let anyone define me or take my words out of context. If that is disrespectful, sorry.
I think the question is how you define "attack". It seems to be your pattern that if someone asks you to clarify or justify your viewpoint, you take that as some sort of personal insult, almost as if they have no right to question you. This is something I brought up to you years ago, and you fail to grasp it still.
Nobody expects you to allow someone to take you out of context, that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about your behavior here, not your reactions to that of others.
And when YOU are not respectful of others THEY are not respectful of YOU. You seem to be saying that its ok for YOU not to be respectful but if others are not respectful to you THAT is just terrible. The love you take is equal to the love you make. That is true of disrespect too.
It's really amazing how someone who called many of us terrorist sympathizers, then refused to explain or apologize, now thinks that she can act offended about an obvious joke from her arch-rival and that people are supposed to care what she thinks.
If she doesn't care when she offends others, why should anyone care when others offend her? I can't believe anyone is buying into her garbage here.
Brabantino, I think we all need to take a step back, I was sort of amazed at the amount of vitriol toward JLyons on this thread, what J may have done in the past should be irrelevant to this topic. I know its tough sometimes to bite the lip and remain above the fray but this is again how topics get off track and derailed. The references that J is another person is completely wrong as it was when they attacked notthatgeorge.
"what J may have done in the past should be irrelevant to this topic."
I have to take serious disagreement there. This is exactly how you create double standards. She behaves one way...then demands better treatment now, because "oh that was in the past". So what? Let's assume for a moment that JLyons is actually black. Let's say Mefirst made an actual racist comment, something that really can't be taken any other way. If he just brushed off all criticism, obviously not giving a damn what people thought, then later acted offended by something someone else said, what would your reaction be? Would you accept "that's in the past"? Should people avoid bringing that up ever again, out of fear of derailing a thread?
I would hope not. Outside of behavior that is truly egregious, this is a self-policing site. And as has been discussed here, character is determined by behavior. In order to assess the credibility and respectability of people, you recognize their pattern of behavior and treat them accordingly. One's reputation is key here, and that's why whitewashing one's past should not be allowed.
The issue with notthatgeorge was that he/she was attacked several times for being "Sue" even when they were making perfectly reasonable arguments. JLyons and Sueeld have both displayed behavior that is not only similar, it is not responsible or honest. There is some difference there. I, personally, think there's a basis for believing they are the same person, and that speaks to credibility and hypocrisy. I agreed with that theory, but I also agree it's not definitive criticism and shouldn't be used as such.
Brabanitino I actually agree with what you are saying but in reality there does seem to be a double standard on this site. Mefirst is one poster who actually attempted to smear me, and sadly not many people called him on it. I have been consistent , I thought that the behavior done toward notthatgeorge was wrong, I think that calling JLyons, Sueeld is also wrong. If we have rules for one set of people, we need them for everyone. I remember back in the spring there was a poster named peg who would be vile toward me because I was in support of the Imus firing. Many people remained quiet about that. Why? I do not know but Jlyons was there as was Tommy, Lynn in showing support. Yet it was weird I never saw the outrage that I saw yesterday in the posts toward JLyons.
I'm not making blanket excuses for Mefirst, I'm just pointing out that Jlyons is in no position to cry foul and expect an apology or explanation. If he characterized you unfairly, then that merits criticism. I hold very few, if any, allegiances. I'm more interested in fair and honest discussion, and those that I have a beef with have been demonstrated to not uphold such basic standards.
I vaguely remember Peg, although I don't know why people wouldn't jump on someone who was unfairly attacking you. I certainly would have.
first of all doris, jlyons was quite willing to jump in on the sue/ellie/notthatgeorge parade along with tommy, casey, and jeter. she has nothing to talk about because she did accuse that person of being sue. she keeps claiming i'm smearing her when she keeps calling me a supporter of fox. everyone here knows that to be untrue. and i will tell you again that i was suspicious of you because you said when you first started posting here about hillary: "it's not like her people are not capable of smearing others", but you offered not one iota of evidence why that was so. if you would like me to provide that link, i can. want to take me up on that?
that's pretty rich jeter. you guys can go after "sue", but those of us who think jlyons is more than one person, and there are several of us, are wrong to do that. as far as me harassing her, if you will read the threads on here, she has accused me several times of "supporting fox" and being a "fox apologist". which is simply and plainly a lie. i guess you support liars.
and you are lying when you claim I am another poster. But why should the truth stop you from smearing me.
that's my opinion, shared by some others on here, that you are more than one person. however, it is, in fact, a lie that i support fox or am a fox apologist.
that is your opinion that it is a lie. I do not find FOX to be legitimate and do not believe any Democratic candidates or poltiical figures should ever go on FOX.
that's fine, that is called an opinion. i never ever have said fox is "legitimate". i have said don't hand the right a talking point by doing a blanket boycott. that does not mean i "support fox" or am a "fox apologist". both of which you have said of me. and then you whine about being "smeared". that is the position of most of the democratic candidates, but i don't see you calling them fox apologists.
J, I echo Jeters statement. As we know I was also "smeared" by mefirst. I choose to ignore him, I do not engage him directly, he is very good at games. You do have some supporters here. You lose credibility when you engage in a level of attacks. Stick to topics and try and stay abouve the fray, but always stand up for yourself, never let anyone define you. The use of the word "troll" is old , as is accusing people of having multiple names. I did not like it when people attacked notthatgeorge and I do not like it now. It is silly and should end.
Race is a sensitive subject to some people.
Jeter, Maybe it's me and I'm just a blabbermouth and I reveal too much about myself. There have been times when I’ve read my own posts and thought wow TMI Lynn It's kind of silly I guess, but I think of you guys as cyberspace buddies and I like it when we share a little piece of our real worlds in our discussions. With the exception of Tommy most of my favorite posters have revealed many things about themselves. You talk about your family. Pearl proudly exclaims her age and speaks about her kids and grandkids. Preston has revealed his ethnicity and sexual orientation. Lost talks about her family. HBL is confirmed fun loving bachelor, Open's wife is AA, and Snoop’s wife is Hispanic I believe, Julia speaks of her husband; I could go on and on. Now Tommy keeps his information close to the vest. I once asked him about that and he said he didn't want to reveal too much as people would use it to "marginalize" him, as if someone could marginalize Tommy. I said all that to say I was indeed surprised that J never talked about her background and of course that's her prerogative. But I wish she would toughen up. I'm going to keep trying to man her up until she tells me to stop of course. BTW, I'm also a Nubian princess a direct descendant from the Queen of Sheba. I’m in exile of course, hiding out in Baltimore. :)
Jeter,
Maybe it's me and I'm just a blabbermouth and I reveal too much about myself. There have been times when I’ve read my own posts and thought wow TMI Lynn. It's kind of silly I guess, but I think of you guys as cyberspace buddies and I like it when we share a little piece of our real worlds in our discussions. With the exception of Tommy most of my favorite posters have revealed many things about themselves. You talk about your family. Pearl proudly exclaims her age and speaks about her kids and grandkids. Preston has revealed his ethnicity and sexual orientation. Lost talks about her family. HBL is confirmed fun loving bachelor, Open's wife is AA, and Snoop’s wife is Hispanic I believe, Julia speaks of her husband; I could go on and on. Now Tommy keeps his information close to the vest. I once asked him about that and he said he didn't want to reveal too much as people would use it to "marginalize" him, as if someone could marginalize Tommy. I said all that to say I was indeed surprised that J never talked about her background and of course that's her prerogative. But I wish she would toughen up. I'm going to keep trying to man her up until she tells me to stop of course. BTW, I'm also a Nubian princess a direct descendant from the Queen of Sheba. I’m in exile of course, hiding out in Baltimore. :)Huh? Pearlene I don't recall ever be uncomfortable by either phrase, in fact I've used both here myself. I can't honestly remember Tommy being disturbed by it either, but he can clear that up with you himself.
Jeter, that’s just the feeling I've gotten. Hard to explain but it was a feeling I had. You tell me I'm wrong and I accept that.
I really don't have much to add to the ongoing discussion about whether JLyons is African American other than I find it odd that she would lie about something like that. But then again we're all anonymous here, for all you know I might really be Derek Jeter ;-)
We have had many discussions regard race and I’m sorry but it’s just a little mind boggling that Jlyons now announces she is black. If she says she is fine by me. Honey if you Derek Jeter let me say you really are one fine looking young man and you play a mean game of baseball. ;-)
And even though mefirst is not one of my favorite posters, I knew he was joking & is certainly not a racist.
I can accept that some posters don’t get along but Jlyons lectures on hateful speech and calling people trolls but she has no problem dishing it out herself. You treat people the way you want to be treated, if they can’t treat you nice, don’t bother with them, but that’s MO.
As to Jlyons being Sueeld or Caseysprings that’s what I feel. Does it mater… not at all. I find the song and dance from her about my thinking that she is kind of ironic since she had no problem in joining you guys with the Sue crap directed at NoMoBush.
So conservatives can't discuss race because they have no race? What exactly is your point?
Are you saying that all conservatives are white?
Are you saying that whites are not allowed to discuss issues of race?
See how ridiculous all of this parsing of words is? When we try to guess what someone else meant to say, and project our negative view of the world onto their words, we are doing them a disservice.
I don't think you meant to insult minorities who are conservatives, but someone out to smear you could easily harm your reputation by claiming such. Just like MM has set out to harm the reputations of those they disagree with politically.
So conservatives can't discuss race because they have no race? What exactly is your point?
You can’t discuss a subject if you know nothing about the subject because you have no point of reference. If your only point of reference is a ‘stereotype” and not fact what do you have to contribute to the discussion?If you're discussion engines and you don't know damn thing about them why open you're mouth? Questions would be all you could contribute to the discussion. Gibson has NO point of reference regarding people of color, only stereotypes which is why when he say ‘hip-hop’ shooter he appear like the stupid old white guy that he is.
Are you saying that all conservatives are white?
You appear clueless cause I certainly didn’t say that.
Are you saying that whites are not allowed to discuss issues of race?
Again, if you are white and the only reference you have to ‘people of color’ is what you’ve heard or what someone told you or what you’ve seen on TV you cannot have anything factual to add to the discussion. You will simply carry those same ‘stereotypes’ not facts to another conversation. In other words repeating incorrect information again and again.
See how ridiculous all of this parsing of words is? When we try to guess what someone else meant to say, and project our negative view of the world onto their words, we are doing them a disservice.
I said: There are times, especially when discussing race, you use words that may be uncomfortable for some. In trying to get your point across in this type of forum you have to cross lines that leave you open to criticism. I myself when discussing race use the word 'white folks' and 'black folks'. It seems, IMO, to make some here (Tommy & Jeter) uncomfortable. Why? I'm not sure but I use the words to try in this limited forum to express myself. Since I have noticed some discomfort, I'm now using 'people of color'. While I'm sure I'm going to slip up and use 'black/white folks' again, my intent is to not make anyone feel uncomfortable when discussing race with me. I have no racial bias but I'm simply trying to talk about a difficult and sensitive subject. I enjoy discussing race with Mfirst. I appreciate the fact that he as well as Snoopy and HBL are willing to put themselves out there, say words that might leave them open to unwarranted criticism and discuss it. I sincerely appreciate them for it. Get it?
Just like MM has set out to harm the reputations of those they disagree with politically.
MMFA simply reports what conservatives say. Don’t shoot the messenger for simply reporting the what conservatives say.
It's as clear as glass that you are pretending a poster here made a racial slur just so you can go "tsk-tsk" and wag your finger. It isn't working because we're not as stupid as you'd like to think.
"The double standard here is very telling. "
Maybe, if there actually was a double standard here. All you did was express what you THOUGHT might happen, but there is no example of what you think is a double standard in evidence. It's a worthless argument.
I find it interesting that you laughed at a joke with racial slur as you did above, calling it "a good one".
Because it was funny. And I wasn’t laughing at the "slur," oh oblivious one, I was laughing at the HOW it was used. Saying “coon” by itself isn’t funny, but I thought Mefirst was smart how he connected the shooter's last name and Gibson’s racism and isolationism all into a simple joke. Context, AA, context! ;)
It also seems that you have no problems with Gibson's stereotype about only whites shooting themselves. (Obviously you are not the only one.)
Huh? Please point to any statement I’ve made in this thread where I said I had no problem with Gibson stereotyping whites shooting themselves. Once again, AA, you’re assuming things and putting words in my mouth. I don’t like stereotypes, period! I don’t like it when black folks do it to whites, vise versa. Nor do I like people using the entertainment industry (e.g., Hip Hop, Marilyn Manson, gangster movies, etc.) as the root cause for youth violence in America. I think it’s a cheap and lazy way to avoid confronting the systemic issues of incidents like this one because it's easier to point a finger at entertainers who are only serving the public what they want to buy. Isn’t that how the "free market" work?
Preston wrote: "Once again, AA, you’re assuming things and putting words in my mouth. I don’t like stereotypes, period."
Hahahah.. Now that is rich! I only quoted you and asked why you did not respond to the blatant racism used to make that joke. That is not putting words in your mouth.
The irony is that you are the one who more than once in this thread (and other threads) putting words into my mouth by making up quotes supposedly to be said by me. In case you missed it, that ranks right up there on the "assuming and stereotype" scale my friend.
another conservative who needs to tell blacks how they feel. i pointed out a hundred times o'reilly's phrase "i couldn't get over the fact....". and all we heard from most of the conservatives was he's really praising blacks. presumably by admiring how they know how to use silverware and not swear in a restaraunt.
restaurant.
Hahahah.. Now that is rich! I only quoted you and asked why you did not respond to the blatant racism used to make that joke. That is not putting words in your mouth.
AA, you said that I didn’t have a problem with Gibson stereotyping whites killing themselves. I said no such thing. Further, Mefirst was not being racist with his joke, he was ridiculing and LAUGHING AT Gibson's racism.
The irony is that you are the one who more than once in this thread (and other threads) putting words into my mouth by making up quotes supposedly to be said by me. In case you missed it, that ranks right up there on the "assuming and stereotype" scale my friend.
True, I did put words in your mouth when I suggested you would be one of the posters defending Gibson’s comments. However, if you didn’t have the spotty track record in defending racist statements here at MMFA in the first place I would never ASSUMED you would do it in this thread. Your actions have been quite predictable as of late.
Preston,
You missed it. I simply mentioned how it looked to me and asked you what that is.
I find it funny that I have not answered at all in defending Gibson but only pointed out his stereotype towards whites in addition to blacks, which no one else seemed to notice.
If that, and feeling mefirst's comment was racist, is in your view being predictable, so be it.
oops. My question to Preston should have read "..why that is". Sorry for the confusion.
i did not make a racist comment. i spoofed gibson's cluelessness in him saying he thought the shooter was black originally.
SAVE DEMOCRACY, VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT!!
"OK, I thought the kid was a black kid, I'll admit it, until I heard he shot himself. Does that make me a racist?" Gibson
In a word: YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
The real question is why are you on the public airways?
Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady
I know this is asked often, but are there any equivalents on the Liberal/Left/Democrat side who are anywhere near this bad? I've heard Randi Rhodes, Al Franken, and the few others who are obviously on the Left side of the aisle, and they are NEVER this ugly. NEVER.
The Cons are oblivious to racist comments, and have their own inside jokes that are funny to them and racist to us. Those comments are starting to slip, and their cry of "PC is bad for the nation" is being bought by other racists. Civil discourse is not possible with them, and although I know the Cons write the same about Liberals, I'm not buying it. Just take a look at TownHall.com and simply read article titles (believe me, you do not want to venture into the discussions) to see how bad things are. Childish blanket statements from even the authors themselves.
You can look at one report or listen to 1/2 hour of Coulter or Weiner, Gibson, Hannity, O'Reilly, and others like them and know immediately that they are racist, fearful pigs. How can they even stand to trust or live with each other?
- The Cons are oblivious to racist comments...Childish blanket statements - scooter
Careful now...you condemn blanket statements...after using one yourself. You don't want to appear elitist, do you?
"Civil discourse is not possible with them" > ".....racist, fearful pigs"......Scooter.
Pot, meet kettle.
Sorry, you are correct. I miswrote. I should have been more specific and said radio & TV personalities, where it no longer becomes a guessing game.
Rush, O'Reilly, Hannity, Beck, Coulter, Savage, Gibson, Medved, Hewitt, Bennett, Prelutsky.... I can personally peg 100% of my list and 90% of all I have ever heard as racist, and this would be according to any definition of racist. No blanket statement needed when you can look at just about any segment from any week from these guys and pick a racist statement.
It is very difficult to find anything of the sort for radio & TV on the right. I bet I can find at least five racist statements for every one in my list within an hour.
Who is Prelutsky?
Use the Google.
That thar google are perty nifty!
Scooter went mano a mano with one of the columnists named Perlutsky over on townhall.com.
There was some misunderstanding between the two and Scooter came away thinking Perlutsky called him an idiot. (Hope I spelled his name correctly.)
"...are there any equivalents on the Liberal/Left/Democrat side who are anywhere near this bad?"
There are. But they exist only in the imaginations of those on the right (and also in the main-stream media who need to make it appear that both sides engage in this type of thing).
Serious question - why do you think there are more bombthrowers on the right than on the left? I will admit they certainly get the headlines and if there is some scorecard somewhere, those on the right - media personalities that is, would win in a gutter-slinging context........but why are there more, do you think?
And I don't believe it's because the left doesn't have the appetite or the stomach for it, there is plenty of vitriolic nastiness brewing on both sides.
I am just curious as to why it is more prevalent from the rightwing talkers?
Contest, not context.
Well, one of the key reasons has to be that conservatives have 92% of the talk radio market.
Tommy, you strike me as intelligent and rational but your question makes me wonder about your ability to face the truth.
Ever hear of the Southern Strategy? I'm only 49, but I understand how the GOP leveraged race and racism to achieve ascendancy.
Do you recall when Lyndon Johnson said he was signing away the south when guaranteed Blacks the right to vote by signing the voting rights act? Segregationist Dixiecrats flooded the GOP giving them almost unprecedented electoral college influence.
Do you remember when Ronald Reagan launched his successful campaign in Philadelphia, Missouri, and gave a speech about state's rights. In a shameful place where three freedom riders were murdered for pushing integration and voting rights.
Do you remember Ronald Reagan saying in a debate with Jimmy Carter that there were no race problems when he was a youngster in Dixon, Illinois (Black population nil)?
Do you acknowledge that the GOP has provided haven for unrepetent racists and racially naive whites?
Do you remember Trent Lott saying that we wouldn't have all the problems we have now if openly segregationist candidate Strom Thurmond had won the election?
Do you acknowledge that talk radio has totally demonized and misrepresented liberals and progressives and don't have any counter to their lies on the AM bandwidth?
Do you acknowledge that you should tear up your voter registration card if it aligns you with these people?
Thanks for the historical snapshots of days gone by.......but you failed to address the question in your stroll down memory lane.
Tommy, the answer I expected since you seem to have a problem with my providing historical context. When you actively recruit or appeal to the lowest common denominator you attract these types of hateful "bomb throwers." It would have taken you a minimum of creative thinking to make the connection regarding my otherwise inconsequential "stroll down memory lane." GEEZ . . .YOU GUYZ! (And believe it or not I do respect your opinions and courage in posting honestly and frequently on this leftie site).
I simply asked for people's opinion.....instead you gave me a litany of Republican strategy tactics, mostly from over 25 years ago. That was not the gist of the question, or even why there are more nasty talkers from the right - you are free to make the connection, and I understand what you are saying, it may have an historical impact on voter's misperceptions - I just don't think it's a direct link to the topic and their reasons today. But we disagree.
Serious question - why do you think there are more bombthrowers on the right than on the left?
You asked the question. He provided a list of ways that the Republican party has carefully catered to those with that sort of mentality, thus creating a party that has a large contingent of "bombthrowers." And now, you have radio and TV talking heads that need to keep the bombthrowers engaged.
I thought it was a great answer. Now you simply dismiss him without addressing the valid point he made. Why did you ask for "opinions" if your intent was to simply dismiss them?
And I answered him, I disagreed with his reasons.....if he felt compelled to clarify or discuss it further, he would have.
He really didn't need help from a liberal bombthrower right here in our midst, but thanks for another hapless rescue attempt.
Tommy, you're smart. Your comments made it clear that you would not concede a lost argument. Knowing that, I opted not to engage you further on that particular topic. Sometimes a concession is proof of character.
Kromecom48, your post was excellent and I thought it thoroughly answered Tommy's question.
Well they don't have to do this anymore since they've got a shi-tload of media surrogates doing it for them. The right owns that.
Tommy,
You are not paying attention! The bombthrowers on the left consist of the Democratic Pary leadership, or are runing for President. ;-)
Hat tip - that is why I specified "media personalities".....because as far as elected officials go, the nasty left ain't got no moral highground over the right.......you are absolutely correct.
What are the most eggregious examples in your mind?
Ted Kennedy calling Bush a liar........Durbin's Pol Pot comparison........Harry Reid saying the war is lost.......Tom Harkin calling a talk show host a drug addict on the Senate floor.
To name a few.......
I know I'm Biased, but those don't even come close to the calls of treason and traitors and surrender monkeys and commies etc etc.
Those were spoken by elected leaders and come with far more accountability and responsibility than private citizen/talk show screamers.
Dumb lefties should just use surrogates to do their name calling like the right has been doing for the last umpteen years. All they have to do is pay them back by appearing on their shows and inviting to the halls of power for luncheons and such.
Maybe they can also appear at their movie premiers and invite them to sit with ex-presidents at conventions. :-)
...And just who are you talking about? Did MM call anyone a traitor; question the morals of people who didn't live and love like him, fantasize about poisoning political opponents, beating political opponents with bats, or locking up dissenters. Sorry AA there are no equals to Rush, Savage, Coulter on the left. You guys have got the nastiness thing all sewn up, in fact the right wingers introduced it to the political arena and now political discourse has devolved into what it is today. Now this guy Gibson I believe is a pretender. He knows there is a lot of money to be made in saying outrageously insensitive remarks. There is an audience for this crap and the people that lap it up are the same ones going around the country hanging up nooses because it's really funny. God in peace my brother, God will sort it all out later ;)
To even things out, aren't there Republans in the Senate that say that the Democrats don't support the troops, the Democrats do not care about National Security and that the Democrats are unpatriotic, sorry, that was the Vice President and President. Or are these just political statements. Don't you think the politicians even themselves out? Just asking
Then again THEY were TRUE. Is Rush a drug addict or isnt he? Is Bush a liar? Of COURSE he is. Being TRUE makes a huge difference
Not to mention that, apart from the Durbin comment, they're also either made up or misquoted. Reid said we had lost if we continued on the same track; Harkin didn't call Rush a drug addict, but he did make a comment about Rush being "high on his drugs" when he made the phony soldiers comment (not to mention that Limbaugh actually is a drug addict); and along those same lines, I don't know the context of the Kennedy comment, but Bush actually is a proven liar, so I don't understand what's so outrageous about pointing that out.
In other words, they can all be rationlized in a neat and tidy way because they are spoken by your beloved Democrats against people you despise. Yet, let a talk show host utter some offensive slur and you go ballistic.
Glad to see your sensibilities are as partisan as your opinions are.
"In other words, they can all be rationlized in a neat and tidy way because they are spoken by your beloved Democrats against people you despise. Yet, let a talk show host utter some offensive slur and you go ballistic."--tommy
Just how do you compare mentioning someone's drug use (I don't think Harkin even mentioned addiction) to saying the only way to talk to a certain group of people is with a baseball bat. Or that the NYT should have been bombed or the COIT tower should be bombed or that people should be poisoned etc. You are comparing apples and handgrenades. You have no real point at all.
Because as I have said umpteen times, I do not hold talk show hosts to the same standards as elected public officials......even for you that shouldn't be too hard to figure out.
If you do, that is your business......but I don't, sorry.
That is just a rationalization on your part. How many hours of air time does Dick Durbin and his much more mild comments get compared to Hannity, Limbaugh, O'Reilly or even Coulter in a day, month or year?
At least Durbin &al are checked by having to face an electorate every so often. They are mindful of their image and how they are perceived - which arguably serves to temper what they say.
Cynthia McKinney would probably be a better example, but she is a nobody in the party and her voters had enough of her to toss her on her butt a while back (although she is back due to her replacement seeking higher office).
Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter &al. thrive with the approval of a much much smaller percentage of the population, but aren't accountable to anyone at all that I can see.
Check back with me when Hannity and Coulter vote on legislation, make laws in this country, and serve the people in their capacity as paid public servants.
Tommy, that is not really fair becuase the like of Hannity and Coulter help push Conservative agendas in our government.
Actually it isnt RATIONALIZING when they are TRUE.
The AP reports: The war in Iraq “is lost” and a US troop surge is failing to bring peace to the country, the leader of the Democratic majority in the US Congress, Harry Reid, said Thursday.
“I believe … that this war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week,” Reid told journalists.
Uh where is the misquote?
"Where is the misquote?"
Check Clams book of Democratic spins and equivocations.......it's all in there.
Nice ellipsis. Oops!
Aw, C'mon, open mind, they're just three little dots.What could they possibly be doing wrong?
Barney, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming you got that pre-edited from some wingnut site. Even you're not that shameless.
Gomer, Do you ever get tired of putting your foot in you mouth? All you have is lame putdowns.
Some wignut site eh? Put some mustard on this ol buddy.
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/19/reid-iraq-war-is-lost/You have devolved into a troll.
Sorry my link came out so small. I'll try again.
[link to thinkprogress.org]
I take your word for it. The thinkprogress story did not make it clear the difference between what the AP story left out.
Just as a rule of thumb, though, it is always a good idea to avoid ellipsis when using quotes or at least try to find the original quote and make sure the ellipsis doesn't contain mitigating informaton like the quote above had.
Openmind, did that link have anything to do with the topic from AA?I think I missed something.
HBL,
AA had a bad link. MMFA keeps screwing up the links. Here is a corrected link or you can click AA's link and delete the paragraph html tag (</p>)at the end of the url that comes up and then hit enter:
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/19/reid-iraq-war-is-lost/
Backup:
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/19/reid-iraq-war-is-lost/
I'm sorry, AA, where is that quote on the Thinkprogress page. I may have missed it, I'm at work and just skimmed. It's a good idea when linking to something to support yourself, if the source is a large page of several items, give a little detail (i.e., "see the item titled X, 2nd paragraph)
Ok, thanks Openmind. here's the full quote;
“And as long as we follow the President’s path in Iraq, the war is lost. But there is still a chance to change course — and we must change course.”
Gee, that's a pretty different quote, isn't it, Barney?
You are correct about Reid, Clams.
Reid said:
"As long as we follow the President’s path in Iraq, the war is lost. But there is still a chance to change course and we must change course. No one wants us to succeed in the Middle East more than I do. But there must be a change of course. Our brave men and women overseas have passed every test with flying colors. They have earned our pride and our praise. More important, they deserve a strategy worthy of their sacrifice.""
Don't forget about Cheney telling a Senator to go f*** himself on the Senate floor. No, wait. He was still standing on the tiles in the hallway and not on the carpet, so it doesn't really count. How's that for a nice, tidy explanation?
I agree with you, Cheney was way out of line.
While Cheney may have been out of line, people constantly refer to the place where it happened as if it were part of a speech or something. Yes it was on the Senate floor, but Cheney was not speaking to the Chamber. He was involved in a photo op when Leahy after getting into an argument with Cheney over Haliburton, wanted his picture taken with Cheney.
I'm not excusing Cheney's language, but it seems it was reflexive. If one is going to criticize Cheney, then one must criticize Kerry for uttering the f word numerous times in an interview for Playboy.
"If one is going to criticize Cheney, then one must criticize Kerry for uttering the f word numerous times in an interview for Playboy."
No, that doesn't follow. Does the phrase "rules of decorum" mean anything to you? Trying to maintain civility and respectability in our halls of governance is not even remotely similar to a magazine interview.
"Ted Kennedy calling Bush a liar." Um, you really think this belongs here? Bush IS a liar, and every congressperson knows it, but not all of them say it.
"Durbin's Pol Pot comparison" I'm not so sure him comparison was as bad as the reality. We DO torture "prisoners" or whatever the Bush admin wants to call them. I don't think that the comparison was accurate or warranted, but his point was overlooked. We torture.
"Harry Reid saying the war is lost" The war has been a losing situation since day 1. Good luck with finding something worth winning.
"Tom Harkin calling a talk show host a drug addict on the Senate floor." The drug addict he was speaking of was (is) a drug addict, and should be in jail according to his own rules. He is on the armed forces radio, so most people feel that drug addicts who avoided war and carry other people's Viagra on vacation should not be representing the US.
I guess if Durbin's Pol Pot comparison is bad, so is this one.
On the October 10 edition of MSNBC's Tucker, while discussing the presidential campaign of Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) and its [link to online.wsj.com] color="#0052a3">targeting of young voters in Iowa, host Tucker Carlson told guests -- nationally syndicated radio host Bill Press and TownHall.com contributing writer Matt Lewis -- "[Y]oung people like [Obama] anyway. ... [P]oliticizing children -- there's a Khmer Rouge quality to it. I think it's scary," adding: "[I]f a right-wing candidate came and targeted my kids, I'd be mad about it. I don't want my kids near political candidates. ... They're creepy."
The [link to www.britannica.com] color="#0052a3">Khmer Rouge, headed by Pol Pot, was a brutal and repressive regime that [link to query.nytimes.com] color="#0052a3">ruled Cambodia in the mid- to late 1970s, leading "to the deaths of nearly a quarter of Cambodia's seven million people."
Durbin's a sitting Senator - Carlson is a talk show host. I don't weigh their comments the same, sorry.
I know Tommy. I'll e-mail them and advise them to get surrogates like they do on the right. That's the only dignified thing to do.
You've been on this site longer than I have, surely you remember this headline:
Aug. 2nd 2007 "White House soirée, part deux: Beck, Bennett, Ingraham, Medved, and others met with Bush"
When was the last time Durbin or Kennedy was invited to the White House?
And since you have been on this site everyday since its inception, you should know that Bush is a liar, Rush is a drug addict, and you should also know that Durbin was comparing American-run prisions to the conditions found in places like the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany. He was saying that that is not what America is about and I whole-heartedly agree with him.
But what about Santorum comparing homosexuality to incest and child molestation? Or Bush campaigning at the anti-catholic Bob Jones University? Or Jim Inhofe saying that global warming is a conspiracy cooked up by the Weather Channel(slandering their good name)? And what Democrat called a dark-skinned man "Macaca"?
I am sure you remember this being the devotee to this site that you are.
Scooter - meet Clams..........rationalize away, it changes nothing, and is still indefensible.
President Bush a liar? That does seem to be quite mean. Just curious, but which lie was Kennedy referring to BTW?
I don't agree in calling the President a "liar" - unless the President has arguably exceeded what is to be expected or customary of them with regards to lying. I think it can be demonstrated that this president has greatly exceeded that threshold.
How dare Dick Durbin compare the prisoner treatment at Club Gitmo to a regime like Pol Pot's? Did you know they serve rice pilaf down there? Damnit! Rice Pilaf, man!
But seriously. Durbin was outraged by the FBI agent's email he read. I would expect a human being to react that way. I don't find his remarks inappropriate at all. It actually almost lured me into really liking the Democrats...until he caved-in and apologized.
Harry Reid said the war is lost? That's terrible. I think he is every bit as bad as the [link to www.cbsnews.com] target="_blank" title="harry reid">majority of Americans who agreed with him at the time. Shame on them (or us) as well.
I think Reid should have shown a little more discretion in his remarks, but considering the amount of people who appear to have believed what Harry said at the time (a 54% majority), he was hardly bomb-throwing.
As far as Harkin's remarks about Limbaugh, It was definitely bomb-throwing. I don't really have a problem with fighting fire with fire. Limbaugh deserves what he puts out. If anything, I think Harkin should not stoop to even mention Limbaugh period, but I suppose that was the subject at hand.
I don't see where any of those people are running for president, so maybe AnotherAmerican has something else in mind he can share as well.
The POTUS has lied. I'm okay with calling him a liar.
Bush IS a liar, that cannot reasonably be denied. Durbin compared specific actions taken to those used by Pol Pot, not anybody to Pol Pot, Reid made it clear he meant if we kept with Bush's tactics the war was lost which is correct and Rush IS a drug addict. I dont see why you conservatives think TELLING THE OBVIOUS TRUTH is bomb throwing
AA, the 'bomb-throwers' on the right don't know what they are talking about. They use stereotypes in their discussions not actual people cause they never interact with those people.
What is a 'hip-hop' shooter and how many 'hip-hop' shooters does Gibson know?
Hip-hop is music. How much hip-hop music has Gibson listened to? What does music have to do with a school shooting? Are you getting my point? Gibson knows NOTHING about 'people of color', 'hip-hop' music and yet he can say 'hip-hop school shooting' as if he is knowledgeable about either subject. He simply took a popular word for him 'hip-hop' and added it to a school shooting with the TV visuals showing 'people of color' running out of the school.
You find me someone on the left who does that.
I agree with you regarding Gibson.
One that comes immediately to mind was the darling of the left, Cindy Sheehan.
“The biggest terrorist in the world is George W. Bush,”
“What they're saying, too, is like, it's OK for Israel to have nuclear weapons. But Iran or Syria better not get nuclear weapons. ... It's OK for Israel to occupy Palestine, ... for the United States to occupy Iraq, but it's not OK for Syria to be in Lebanon. They're a bunch of (expletive) hypocrites.”
“Am I emotional? Yes, my first born was murdered. Am I angry? Yes, he was killed for lies and for a Neo-Con agenda to benefit Israel. My son joined the Army to protect America, not Israel. Am I stupid? No, I know full-well that my son, my family, this nation, and this world were betrayed by George [W.] Bush who was influenced by the neo-con PNAC agenda after 9/11,”
I think you get the picture. Her anti-semitism ranks right up there don't you think?
No, you probably don't.
I think you get the picture. Her anti-semitism ranks right up there don't you think?
No, you probably don't. AA
Now AA, don’t put words in my mouth. That’s not fair.
I have started reading some books on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict and it’s history. I cannot place blame on either side but each side not just one is responsible for the conflict. I know for a fact that there is no simple solution and any solution will be made harder because it involves religion. So no I can’t agree with Cindy in that regard.
Junior is a different story. I don’t like Junior. I don’t respect Junior. I absolutely HATE being lie to as if I’m stupid and I think that’s what he has done with this war. How can this war benefit the US? I cannot see it, sorry I just can't see it. If shoring up 'democracy' in the Middle East was the plan, Lebanon would have been a better option IMO. Better safety for Israel, closer to Syria and a lot simpler if one really wanted to address 'democracy' in the Middle East. I don't believe that 'democracy' was Juniors objective, it just sounded better. I agree with war as a last defense. I think you have you think and plan long and hard before you ask someones son or daughter to give their life. In this war, that has not been done. I think this war has simply added fuel to the fire that has been the Israeli/Palestinian conflict making it harder on all of us.
"And I don't believe it's because the left doesn't have the appetite or the stomach for it, there is plenty of vitriolic nastiness brewing on both sides."
You may not believe it, but it doesn't make it false. Two facts of the market: They wouldn't be out there if your right-winged compadres weren't spending money on it; Left-wing versions would be more prevalent if Left-wingers were willing to support it financially.
It certainly exists out there in Left-wing land, there are a LOT of angry people with stupid ideas, but they are not mainstreamed, and they are not supported with the eyes, ears and wallets of millions of like-thinkers.
Gibson is a total fake and fraud. Here's an idea Gibby, instead of going after individual artists, how about going after the companies that produce the offensive music?
Okay MediaMatters, it is not April 1..so this can't be an April Fools Joke.
By golly, I've got it....Rush is so busy still lying and defending himself that he wanted to try his new comedy act and sent his new jokes to Gibson. This way, the jokes are tested and Rush fools MM again. Can't get anything by these Republans. They are too smart for me.
And Gibby, Why should a white kid kill himself after shooting other kids? He'll just get help and the world will be good again.
Gibson may be a "non-entity" on the media landscape, but he is still a purveyor in rightwing misinformation. The fact that slope headed neo-racists whose provenance is the GOP thanks to a successful southern strategy rely on contextual arguments and "right to say it" defenses doesn't make it any less racist, as the recent Coulter comments support.
So what good is MMFA really doing? First it is exposing their rank hypocrisy and divisiveness. Second, the "middle" is loathe to be associated with a party that does acknowledge or condemn these anti-american, regressive, attitudes.
The good news? The GOP will be out of power for AT LEAST another 40 years and will be forced to changed for the better before they have a significant voice again. The pendulum as swung again, beheading these goons in the process. The pit awaits.
Do you get the feeling that Gibson will speaking at a KKK rally this weekend?
If THIS type of comment doesn't get a 2nd rate neocon HACK thrown off the air (apparently O'Reilly is invincible), then we know we have an even bigger pro-bush croney bias in all the media.
sidenote: One thing you have to understand is that polarizing politics have been and are still currently being used in order to keep us "rooting" for "our team" so that when the election rolls around, we'll vote for a bad candidate just to see "our guy" beat the other. This is horrible and not REAL democracy. A real democracy isn't biased against third parties, nor does a real democracy give more exposure to "pre-selected" top-tier candidates. Choosing from the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil, yet if you abstain from voting they shun you. Why? Because the politicians know that if no one votes, their victories will have 0 legitimacy. We need to work to get rid of all the hacks who peddle the govt agenda in the media and all the liberal and conservative hacks who just attack one side while ignoring the other in order to gain $ and power (this site is included in that)
Without this site, Mr. Gibsons' comment may not have been noticed. Was there a lie here or is it what he said? Rush said phony soldiers but has lied ever since. Why not have a site like this?
So, your idea of REAL democracy includes getting rid of radio talkers you don't like? Nice.
How about equal time for the other side? If Clear Channel broadcast 8 consecutive primetime hours of conservative rants how about at least allowing the other side to have their say? That was and is the fairness doctrine. Adding to the number of voices represented, not taking anything away. Equal time does not jeopardize your messiah Rush Limpbrain (failed every single college class, including speech).
How would the FD be implemented? Who would monitor all the media choices today? Does opinion count, or just factual inaccuracies? Is the internet included? And all the hundreds of cable channels? What about Comedy Central and it's political satire programs, are they included? What about Leno or Letterman?
Fair questions. How about if it was onl applied to the AM/FM bandwidths and broadcast network TV? That's how it was applied before for decades and it was, contrary to current belief, fairly well administered. The AM/FM bandwidths belong to the American people, but only serve a minority on the right.
Fine, but how do you counter opinions espoused? Or just offensive language/slurs, specifically?
Regarding countering opinions. Three hours of Rush each day = three hours of liberal conservative bashing each day. It's really simple.
I live in Chicago, and all we have on our AM stations is rightwing talk. How does that serve a very liberal market?
So, what station is forced to carry that? If you owned a radio station and the govt. came in and said "Sorry, you need to put a liberal talker in three hours a day to counter Rush, never mind if they get ratings and you lose advertisers, your loss, too bad, it's the FD - Have a nice day"
Now, that's really fair, isn't it?
It is fair, thus the name of the act. We -- through our elected representatives -- give these businesses licenses to broadcast over PUBLIC airrways. Part of that license is to broadcast information that meet community needs and serve the public good. It seems I'm whittling away at your objections. I recommend you study the history of the act as opposed to listening to false arguments perpetuated by those who don't want fairness.
You have addressed each one, but you have offered no constructive implementation of how such a doctrine would work in the vast age of media information.......the fact is it won't. And that is why many here don't support it, and it will never become the law again.
Bottom line, the FD is only trotted out by those who are losing in the free marketplace - they want the government to step in and rescue them because, apparently, their ideas are not strong enough on their own. That's what this is really about.
Retool your ideas, or find some marketable personalities who people want to hear and you won't need a government bailout. I would suggest that route.
All well stated. kudos for sound argumentation. But remember Donahue's program on MSNBC. He was cancelled within a few weeks even though he had higher ratings than is on-station competition.
I should let you know I work in media as fair disclosure.
I mean't "his on-station competition."
So cable, specifically Fox News, would not be covered either?
No cable would not be covered since people pay for the privilege of being misinformed or having their preconceived notions confirmed. No one has ever suggested equal time for the Internet or cable so that's a straw man. But again, a valid question.
No equal time is needed. It is being earned. Rush/O'Reilly/Hannity have given this small site a lot of recognition and new visitors. Liberal talk must earn their own way, just like the Cons did.
I wholeheartedly disagree. How has Gibson earned anything. Many of them "pay" to be carried because they lack audience and advertisers. See Fox Radio. NewsCorp can afford to subsidize these clowns as a means of cross promotion for FNC.
im just saying you all are part of the problem. you cling to this site like no tomorrow, a site that only attacks one side and ignored the 'happy negro' comment by the black lib on cnn
Wouldn't "happy negro" have been a comment on Rush's song about Obama? (I've not heard about the comment you're referring to.)
As for attacks, where does MediaMatters attack anyone? MMFA quotes conservatives when they lie or make outrageous statements. It's now an "attack" to quote a conservative?
syracuse prof boyce watkins called juan williams a happy negro - twice on cnn -
[link to www.narbosa.com]
syracuse prof boyce watkins called juan williams a happy negro - twice on cnn - Genl Petraus
I called Juan Williams 'spokesnegro' because Fox uses him as their 'go to black person' for any & all things relating to issues involving black people. You seem to find that acceptable while I don't. Juan cannot speak for all AA and since I resent both Fox and him for trying to appear to, I gave him that title. Was it offensive? Sure it was. It was mean to convey my extreme dislike at Fox for using him and at Juan Williams for allowing himself to be used in that manner. If he would start off by saying 'IMO' or 'For me as an black man, I feel' or even 'I can't speak for all black people' I would have no problem with him or Fox for using him. But he does not! He comes off like he IS the authority for any & all things relating to the 'right kind of black person', which is offensive to me.
I would love to find a site that records the Left misinformation in the same manner, and I would gladly read it. It has to quote or record around the misinformation, and not take snippets. I would not mind at all if it accurately reported the news, and if it were not hateful.
We need a MMFA for the other side. Not a Gibsonesque site either.
Just listen to Hannity and Rush. ;-)
I taped Rush one day and edited out words like driveby media, liberals, feminazis, his desk pounding, his laughing at his jokes and an assortment of his other kind words and here is what I ended up with " Me, Myself, I, Me, Myself, Reagan" but it was said very well.
Just listen to Hannity and Rush. ;-) AA
Before or After they edit the transcript? ;-)
we need to pull people like gibby, rush, oreilly and hannity OFF the air along with their left wing counterparts
Wow!!
Thats the thing General. There are no left wing equivelents. Oh sure Mike Malloy (Nova M Network) is as emotional as anybody on the radio, but he dose not missinform, or lie.
Can't say removing the rightwing goons just cause we don't like them sets well. You really wont to see this prescident showing up in a court of law down the road.
I'm thinking that its the owning companies. The broadcasing leviathans that use our public airwaves. Breaking them up might allow progressive voices to actually be heard and seen.
I'm open to other suggestions. Someone recently said socialism has a slippery slope. Censorship has one also, I think its angle is steeper, and there's a facist waiting to punch you in the face at the bottom.
Hey everybody! I've been gone for a while what did I mi......ew......did Gibson really just say that?
One of the great things about conservatives is that when a conservative screws up and makes a mistake, he is the first one to admit the error and then try to make it right.
I actually went to the John Gibson show website and found this promo for today's show:
Petard! Gibson blows up his first hour Live during his first hour. Upon news of a Shooting at an Inner City School in Cleveland, OH, John immediately fixed blame on the Hip Hop Culture he has battled for two years. Turns out the Shooter appears to be a Caucasian, Marilyn Manson Fan. Gibson’s scheduled guest Comic Patrice O’Neal joins John to get some payback.----------------------------------------------------------------------
It takes a big man to admit he was wrong. And John Gibson is a big man.
So let me just offer this one critique of MMFA and its supporters. Many times you guys only half-listen or don't listen at all to conservatives such as Rush, Hannity, Gibson, etc. etc. And when you guys do "listen" it's only to find fault so you can take "offense" without giving these hard working folks a chance to make their case.
Honestly, if some of you guys would actually start listening with an open mind you just might find out how good and decent they really are and that they are not the horrible people you constantly try to make them out to be.
I'm taking all bets! Who will be the 1st poster here that defends Gibson? I'm picking billybob for $5.
LOL
Hey Monk,
What number reason are we up to now?
5 or six I think. I haven't gone through all of the posts yet.
Gibson admitted some mistake? How?
You are entitled to listen and be a fan of Gibsons, but his shock schtick to get ratings traction and some sliver of relevance is quite transparent.
I don't buy his schtick.
BillyBob, aren't you assuming that we have never listened to these people before? Do you remember when Limbaugh first started? I have tried to listen to their "talk SHOWS" but I turn them off when they become LIBERALS SUCK SHOWS. Try to go 5 minutes without some hate of liberals being talked about.
My electronic devices have on/off switches for a reason. My challenge to you. Listen to a guy like Thom Hartmann for a day and see(hear) if you can tell the difference. I bet you'll even hear a Conservative on his show
I'm sure that there are dozens and dozens of people across the nation who enjoy Air America radio. And certainly, if I start listening to TH I would probably create a blip in his ratings.
However, I'm sure that Michael Medved has just as many, if not more, people with opposing views on his program. So does Dennis Prager.
Do you ever listen to these guys?
How did Gibson admit he was wrong?
Medved? MEDVED??? Please tell me you don't read anything this guy writes! There isn't a history scholar on the planet (peer reviewed, not some Gish type) who woud even bother to read more than the title and first paragraph.
Did you know that "SLAVERY EXISTED ONLY BRIEFLY, AND IN LIMITED LOCALES, IN THE HISTORY OF THE REPUBLIC – INVOLVING ONLY A TINY PERCENTAGE OF THE ANCESTORS OF TODAY’S AMERICANS."? America's never been a multicultural society"? He writes "Why TV Addiction Links to Liberalism"?
Dear Lord (of your choosing), get a grip.
There isn't a history scholar on the planet (peer reviewed, not some Gish type) who woud even bother to read more than the title and first paragraph.
You might be correct about today's crop of Maxist history profs.
And you might live in a world of complete delusion. You certainly NEVER know what you are talking about. You do realize that post was ignorant and without merit dont you?
Billybob, I actually have listened to Medved and Prager many times.They're both full of sh*t, and their radio shows are directed at an audience completely lacking in critical thinking skills, but they're good for a larf.
They do have people with opposing views on their shows, but rarely let the debates get beyond their own daffy talking points.
Dennis Pragercurrent books listed for "dennis prager" on Amazon.comHappiness Is a Serious Problem: A Human Nature Repair Manual by Dennis Prager (Paperback - Jan 1, 1999)Buy new: $14.95 $10.17 66 Used & new from $5.07 Think a Second Time by Dennis Prager (Paperback - Oct 9, 1996)Nine Questions People Ask About Judaism by Dennis Prager and Joseph Telushkin (Paperback - April 21, 1986) Why the Jews? The Reason for Antisemitism by Dennis Prager and Joseph Telushkin
Happiness Is a Serious Problem : A Human Nature Repair Manual by Dennis Prager (Hardcover - 1998)
The Gifts of the Jews: How a Tribe of Desert Nomads Changed the Way Everyone Thinks and Feels. (book reviews): An article from: First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life by Dennis Prager (Digital - Jul 28, 2005) - HTMLBuy: $5.95 Eight questions people ask about Judaism by Dennis Prager (Hardcover - 1975)10 Used & new from $1.9210. Michael Medvedcurrent books listed for "michael medved" Right Turns: From Liberal Activist to Conservative Champion in 35 Unconventional Lessons by Michael Medved (Paperback - Dec 27, 2005)Buy new: $14.95 $11.21 44 Used & new from $7.16Get it by Monday, Oct 15 if you order in the next 22 hours and choose one-day shipping.Eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping.Other Editions: Hardcover, Audio CD, Audio Cassette, Audio Download2. Hollywood vs. America Hollywood vs. America by Michael Medved (Paperback - Aug 4, 1993)Buy new: $14.95 $11.66 123 Used & new from $0.01Get it by Monday, Oct 15 if you order in the next 20 hours and choose one-day shipping.Eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping.Other Editions: Hardcover, Audio CassetteExcerpt - Back Matter: "... Mahony," Los Angeles Times, February 7, 1992, pp. B1, B3; Michael Medved, "A Sickness of the Soul Replaces the Tinsel," Los Angeles ..." › See more references to michael medved in this book.Surprise me! See a random page in this book.3. Saving Childhood: Protecting Our Children from the National Assault on Innocence Saving Childhood: Protecting Our Children from the National Assault on Innocence by Michael Medved and Diane Medved (Paperback - Aug 15, 1999)Buy new: $13.95 $11.86 78 Used & new from $0.75Get it by Monday, Oct 15 if you order in the next 17 hours and choose one-day shipping.Eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping.Other Editions: Hardcover, Audio CassetteExcerpt - page 39: "... radio show that illus- trates just what listeners to The Michael Medved Show are ..." › See more references to michael medved in this book.Surprise me! See a random page in this book.==============================
Give these guys a little credit. Few people have accomplished as much as these guys.
Do you have a list of Goebbels' pamphlets available on Amazon? I'd like to give him some credit, too.
The Goebbels Diaries, 1942-1943 by Joseph Goebbels (Hardcover - Mar 26, 1970) Buy new: $123.95 9 Used & new from $26.00 Get it by Monday, Oct 15 if you order in the next 15 hours and choose one-day shipping. Eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping.
Other Editions: Hardcover, Unknown Binding
===========================
Ok, you can give him "credit" if you want to.
Not really ironic. More deliberate. I consider all three of them fascist Jew haters, Goebbels was only missing the self-loathing.He probably had slightly higher self-esteem than Medved or Prager.I think Goebbels was the only one of the three that was out of the closet, that may have freed up some of his hate as compared to the other two, who haven't (as far as I know)come to terms with their sexual orientation.
By the way, both Prager and Medved are observant and religious Jews. Ironic that you reply by mentioning a fascist Jew hater, don't you think?
If I were to list Chomskys books here it would be over the word limit since he has more than ONE HUNDRED PUBLISHED. He has also won the NOBEL PRIZE. Where is HIS radio show? The guys are just lucky there is a market for ignorance.
Apology? Now that is funny.
And I thought I was outraged by Gibson's comments.
Ain't he sumpin. He followed us home, threw up on the carpet and called the cat a bastard. You meet such hi toned folks here sumtimes.
The conservative record on apologizing is pretty spotty. I am not even sure John is apologetic yet. I am not going to give him credit for it unless he earns it by giving a genuine apology
As far as watching these TV shows - I don't watch any of them. I have tried in the past and find them terribly uninformed and obnoxious. MMFA watches these guys so I don't have to.
Along those lines, I listened to Glenn Beck on the radio today for about 20 minutes. I hope MMFA was listening so we can comment on his idiocy as well.
Real men don't apologize or admit to being fallible that's for "sissies" and girls.
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!
If only Billy Boob would have been cutrteous enough for more people to take you up on that bet.
I think he did it on purpose.
It takes a big man to admit he was wrong. And John Gibson is a big man. What on earth are you on about? Where/when did he retract this?: "I know the shooter was white. I knew it as soon as he shot himself. Hip-hoppers don't do that. They shoot and move on to shoot again."
"Rush, Hannity, Gibson, etc. etc.
Honestly, if some of you guys would actually start listening with an open mind you just might find out how good and decent they really are..."
Good and decent? Limbaugh? Hannity? Gibson? What f*'ing planet are you from? What kind of simpleton are you? Have you ever listened to Limbaugh? Hannity? Gibson? Good and decent? Kill yourself now because you are truly hopeless.
I guess by conservative standards, that's being a "big man". an anonymous post acknowledging something you said publicly that has been recorded and noted by others.
At least Gibby's a bigger man than Billybob, who doesn't directly admit to being a liar, but only involuntarily surrenders by avoiding supporting his positions.
Holy Hell! This puts the Jimmy the Greek comments back in the 80's to shame! I am absolutely stunned at the level of disrespect shown by Gibson on so many levels. He was totally dismissive about a young boy taking his own life ("shot himself in the head? Had to be a white kid."). I imagine Gibson had to bite his tongue to keep from adding "wuss." And then the outright racism! I'm absolutely aghast.
If wishing Gibson gets "jacked" by a bunch of "hip-hoppers" is wrong, then I don't want to be right.
Gibson and O'Reilly should get together and have lunch with this guy:
[link to www.bradblog.com]
Maybe the three of them can figure out why the Regurgicon Party doesn't do so well in the Black community.
this guy probably shot the black kids because they were picking on him.
At this point, no one knows. I would advise you to avoid using stereotypes as part of your speculation and wait until we know some more facts. You look pretty foolish when you say things like that BTW, but I assume that was your intention from reading some of your previous work.
well its his fault for going to an all black school to begin with. i wouldnt ever go there or send my kids there. would you?
this guy probably shot the black kids because they were picking on him. Gen P
I have to walk away from my keyboard. You are simply not worth my blood pressure rising.
The "mefirst coon" and the "Limbaugh phony soldiers" stories...quite a lot in common...just depends on your perspective.
mmfa and their legions spilled gallons of ink ripping Limbaugh for his comment. They howled when he defended his position by claiming the quote was taken out of context and that anyone who knew him...knew what he meant.
Now comes mefirst with his "coon" comment...and what happens...the legions defend him with the same argument that they tore into Limbaugh about.
- I think I've been around here for 3 years now and Mefirst has been here almost as long. I must have read hundreds of his posts and he is certainly not what you are attempting to characterize him as -
- i can't apologize for what i did not do. -
- I also don't believe mefirst was being racist when the comment is taken in context. -
- There's no need to go into any of this. All you have to do is say "That's not what I meant". -
- based on the interaction with posters here you get a feel of the person's intent and if they don't have a pattern of it you can give them the benefit of the doubt. -
- you are pretending a poster here made a racial slur just so you can go "tsk-tsk" and wag your finger. -
- Context, AA, context -
Often repeated here is the statement, "words mean things"...and that is certainly true. But those same "words" can evoke entirely different scenarios...depending on whose ox is being gored.
Wesley, mefirst used the coon comment to make a joke. It was about Gibson, who has demonstrated his racial ignorance, making that jump.
When Rush called soldiers who don't support the Bush administration phony, who was he making the joke about? That is, he must have been "in character", so who was he implying would call those soldiers "phony".
Just like I said...it depends on whose ox is being gored...and you didn't even need cue cards...thanks for the validation.
Mfirst starts off by saying in advance that if anyone is offended he apologized.
i apologize in advance
He goes on in post after post explaining what he meant. Lynn, Preston and myself, all who are AA let Mfirst know that we were not offended.
When Limbo uttered his ‘phone soldiers’ quote he said he was ‘taken out of context’. When actual soldiers informed Rush they were offended by his comment did he apologized? HELL NO he simply went on the attack, blaming MMFA and Dems. To make matters even worse, did he simply say he was taken out of context but apologized to anyone who was offended? HELL NO, HE apologized on BEHALF of MMFA because they had the nerve to post his actual transcript not his ‘edited’ one.
well its his fault for going to an all black school to begin with. i wouldnt ever go there or send my kids there. would you? Genl Petraus
Let’s take this post from Genl Petraus. I find it racists and extremely offensive. How can a school be ‘all black’ if you send your ‘white’ child to the school? What he meant to say IMO is he would not want to send his child to a school with more black students than white students. If the school has a majority white and 'a few' blacks THAT would probably be OK. Is that what he meant? Or was that 'taken out of context'? Is there something wrong with going to school with black children? It is up to him if he chooses to explain or let the statement stand. It is up to me to form my opinion based on his actions.
Mfirst apologized and Rush apologized on behalf of someone else which IS NOT the same as what Mfirst did.
Pearly (don't be offended...after all...you call our president Junior),
I swear you're looking over my shoulder at the cue cards...
mefirst said "I apologize in advance)"...then later stated " i can't apologize for what i did not do"...what a tangled web we weave when partisanship takes precedent over principles.
I understand your position...since it's your ox that is being gored. But, I would hope that you would understand others feelings when you're goring their ox.
Gen.Petraus? Oh good lord...I'm with you 100% on that guy. Gibson and the general...way beyond clowns and buffoons.
"Pearly (don't be offended...after all...you call our president Junior), "
So what? She calls him the same thing George Sr. probably calls him. Because that is what he is!
And if you think that's bad, you should hear the names I call him on a daily basis. And he seems to give me a new reason to every freakin' day of his presidency.
Technically, he's not "junior", since his name is not exactly the same. The only need for "jr." or "III", etc, is to distinguish between people who have exactly the same name. As it is, we distinguish between "George H. W. Bush" and "George W. Bush".
At least, I believe that's the proper usage. If George H.W. Bush named his son "George W. Bush jr.", that would be somewhat surprising.
But I have much worse titles for him as well, of course.
Pearly (don't be offended...after all...you call our president Junior),
Wes, you've kind of grown on me a little but not enough for you to call me Pearly. ;-)
I call the President Junior cause it's my sign of disrespect. I do not respect him and I do not feel I have to apologize for. I would hope that others understand since they have no problem calling former President Clinton 'Slick Willie".
I see where you are coming from and the point you're trying to make. Don't' agree but I can see the point you're trying to make.
Thanks Pearl,
Nothing wrong with disagreement...in fact it's healthy. That is one of the reasons why...as a conservative...I regularly read and participate on this liberal site.
A society where everyone believes the same way reminds me of the classic movie "The Time Machine" with Rod Taylor. The population appeared happy, healthy and homogeneous...while marching in lockstep to their demise every time the siren sounded.
Disagreement...even with sharp elbows...keeps everyone on their toes. This site produces lots of engaging conversations with lots of reasonable people.
However...it also provides a venue for radicals...who can best be described as "screech monkeys"...and they're from both the left and the right...unreasonable and narrow-minded lemmings.
You know...and I know...who they are. And I mostly avoid conversation with those types...because it usually leads nowhere and clogs the threads.
I'll paraphrase Gingrich's (gasp) position on Hillary's health care plans. He is strongly opposed but also admits that her plan has several good ideas that should be addressed.
Here's hoping we have more disagreements.
"mefirst said "I apologize in advance)"...then later stated " i can't apologize for what i did not do"...what a tangled web we weave when partisanship takes precedent over principles."
The apology would seem to be for using the term, which he obviously did. Using the term as an expression of racism on his end is something he didn't do. Two different things. He's not going to apologize for making a "racial slur" since that's not how he was using the term, as he was attributing that sentiment to someone else.
As for "partisanship over principles", I'm curious as to what principle you feel you're abiding by when you harass someone for months over an honest mistake, even when they try to engage you in a civil discussion. It would seem you're the last person who has any right to talk about such a thing.
It's not a question I expect you can answer in a reasonable manner, or even at all, but I thought I'd give you a chance anyway.
While I did not find mefirst's coon comment offensive...i did find it in poor taste. Your defense of mefirst proves my point about context. Those that dislike Limbaugh chose to use his "exact" words...without context...to blast him.
Those that like mefirst chose to examine his "exact" words using context...something not afforded Limbaugh...making it clearly partisan.
If you feel that mefirst's pre-emptive apology absolved him of responsibility for his words...then a principled rather than partisan stance would apply to people like Coulter...as long as she gives a pre-emptive apology when making offensive or poor taste comments...lol.
Harassment over an honest mistake...please you're killing me with your vanity. Your comment didn't show an "honest reading mistake"...it showed your lack of knowledge on the topic...something you're clearly uncomfortable having revealed...que sera sera.
What "defense" of Mefirst am I using? You yourself said you didn't find it offensive, so obviously you didn't think he was using it to display any racism on his part. The apology was because of the use of the term itself, which he surely knew some would think was in poor taste...just like you said. So how is that different from what you said, really?
Your take on the Limbaugh matter is highly skewed. Many of us posted dozens of time explaining how the context didn't support Limbaugh's explanation. In fact, many of us pointed out that Limbaugh's treatment of the previous caller showed his attitude. Talk about context!
I'm honestly not sure what "vanity" you think I'm displaying, since I admitted I wasn't familiar with that specific report. The assertion that the mistaking of the inch symbol for the foot symbol is anything but a reading error is highly delusional. Supposedly I knew that I was saying feet when you said inches, for the purpose of...? My lack of familiarity with the report does nothing to explain that.
So again, what "principle" are we talking about? AnotherAmerican made a flat-out false assertion, while insulting people who said otherwise. He admitted he was wrong. Nobody ever held that over his head, because of his "lack of knowledge on the topic". What principle are we liberals missing out on for not harassing someone over an honest mistake for months? Please explain.
Obviously you have no principle to defend, which proves that you yourself are more interested in being a partisan jackass, and a hypocrite to boot.
Well, King, this case is closed.
How do you feel validated by dodging my question?
Not in either case you are citing. Its all in the context. Rush's explanation claimed he was talking about an actual phony soldier but as HBL pointed out that could ONLY be taken seriously in context IF, as he agreed the press only talks to THOSE kind of soldiers we ASKED AND ASKED for examples of the press lionizing these guys or any REAL press coverage that included them and you guys never offered any real examples. So NO, the only reason to believe Rush is that you WANT TO. Mefirst's joke was making fun OF the racist Gibson that is CLEARLY the point again you can only miss it if you WANT TO.
Wesley, I have a bone to pick with you. I am pretty sure you took a couple of my quotes to make your point...only problem is you selectively cherry picked from my entire comment so it would fit your theory. See I clearly stated I didn't think mefirst's comment was funny, I didn't think it was appropriate, I was uncomfortable by it. So please explain how my comments fit your theory. Pretty disingenuous of you to cherry pick and not include my criticism of mefirst's comments don't ya think?
Exactly right...that's why context is important.
Limbaugh's comments were clearly cherry picked and taken out of context...but his detractors glommed onto "the words" and lampooned him with partisan rancor.
Now, many of those same people who blasted Limbaugh take mefirst's coon comment and claim that one must examine the context and evaluate what those "words" really meant.
Consider your bone picked...because you get it.
Actually, Rush's words were not taken out of context. If you want to give Rush the benefit of the doubt it would be correct to say he misspoke that he didn't mean it how it came out. Unfortunetly, as is often the case, he decided to claim it was out of context. Please show where it was taken out of context if that is the claim you are sticking with. Out of context is what you did with cherry picking my words out of context to prove your theory which in context it most certainly did not.
I have listened to and called Limpbrain over the course of 19 years. I had no choice living in Syracuse where there were many "Rush Rooms."
You know why his Roger Ailes produced TV show failed? Because it gave a homogenous face to his hateful rhetoric.
That's the truth. Take it or leave it. The were also mostly fat, pasty and unattractive -- both the men and women. Classic nerds and talk radio constitutes their revenge.
These were the kids no one would associate with in high school or college.
"There's no need to go into any of this. All you have to do is say "That's not what I meant"."
Obviously you have no concept of what you are talking about. Jlyons made a ridiculously offensive comment about many posters here, then refused to explain it, clarify it, or apologize. What I'm doing is saying that since Jlyons thinks saying "that's not what I meant" in itself is sufficient, then that's all the explanation that anyone owes her.
That has nothing to do with citing the context of his remarks, so why did you put it in your list?
There is humor that identifies with the oppressed, it can be tricky.
I've really got to dig up a book on humor disgiused as a science fiction story by Eric Idle. Can't remember the title. With all the discusions and abuses of humor here, (I indict myself of the latter) it could be useful.
When was the last time a black kid shot up a school? I can't remember the last time. Shooting up schools is a white kid thing. So when John Gibson says that when he first heard about the shooting and assumed the shooter was black, what is he thinking?
I am so sick of radio and tv host making racist statements, I'll bet that some fool listing to gibson's show went to work and reapted it.
havent watched olberman, but gibson has gotta win worst person in the world for this
this trumps coulter and lufa boy by a mile
the man is an unapologetic racist
Actually John is wrong on all counts. There was a young black man that went on a shooting spree at a carpet mill where I worked in the early 90's. After he killed two at home, he came to work and shot two more. About a day or so later they found him. He had hid in one of the storage bins an shot himself.
I don't know why he used this opportunity anyway to get down on black culture since the shooting was done by a white youth and the music he listened to was not rap. What's with the rap argument? The whole argument is very bizarre.
What kind of idiot thinks black kids do random school shootings? Only white kids do that. Usually rich white kids.
What's the deal, are the right-wing talk nazis just trying to outdo each other?
Surely, we are not working under the assumption that there will be any repercussions for his obnoxious racist-speak? In 2007, the GOP and their extremist-mouthpieces know that the shriller they are, the more money they make.
Just ask Ann Coulter.
I love the continual blame placed on rap and hip hop for the influence of violence on teens in america. As if that were the only source of violence that they/we are exposed to on a regular basis. Turn on the news and the wonderful graphics departments at every major news outlet has made war the coolest thing on television. As if rap and video games are the only thing pushing violence on our culture. Try remembering you live in a country that starts pre-emptive wars and then say violence is wrong. Gibson himself constantly proves that he is far removed from even understanding all other ways of life outside of the rich privlidged white guy routine. It's sad he's even given a microphone to reach such a wide audience. The people that buy this guys crap are lazy thinkers.
Krome I totally agree with your examples about the racism inherent in some conservatives. I just want to make one small correction to your post earlier it was Philadelphia, Mississippi not Missouri. Yeah we have our fair share of racists here in MO but Reagan never launched his campaign here. But the good thing is I see my home state of MO going an even deeper shade of purple if not totally blue in the next election cycle.
Considering this crap came from the same guy who said Whites "need to make more babies" I am not shocked he'd be spewing more racist comments.
My name is Sincere, I am a promoter in Cleveland OH. I recently listened to the comments by Gibson. This past year i put together an Aids Benefit hip hop show in Cleveland Oh.over 150 hip hop artists/djs/other promoters/fans ect came out to support the event from ACROSS THE STATE!no fighting no gun shots no issues at all....My Bday bash...over 600 hip hop fans/artists/djs came together for a great time no fights, no issues, no problems...i didnt even have security in the building thats how much faith I have in Hip hop scene around Ohio. I fought tooth and nail to get media attention for the Aids benefit when hip hop was coming together for a greater good which never came through.... but then to hear someone with national attention give hip hop in a negative way so quick to pass judgement with crazy assumptions while there are those of us in hip hop fighting to make positive moves and mr gibson with his comments is why it's ten times harder to shake the stigmatisms that we already face in hip hop.It's unfortunate that he blamed music off the bat for a shooting...the media has power, why not do your homework on a situation like this before you assume anything...We in Cleveland in the hip hop scene are doing things together and making positive moves that are over looked but the something negative happens that has nothing to do with us we find all our positive efforts smacked in the face.It's just a little bit absurd that in 2007 people are still blaming music for other issues when it really is probably issues at home or mental with someone...and sending out false information to the masses!WOW!I have listened to hip hop my entire life, and never shot anyone, and have never been a part of a shooting and have attend over 400 hip hop events. Why doesn't the media shine positive light on those that are making positive moves and balance out the karma? I also manage a rapper in ohio that chooses not the cuss in his music, and is fastly becoming one of the most respected up and coming rappers/lyrists in the city not even close to a gang banger a truely god fearing family loving man, but to get him shine in the media is like pulling teeth, but if he would go out and shoot someone he would be all over the news and his musical tastes would most certainly be brought into play...wow...it's crazy to me! So SincereCEO Added Bonus Ent.(440)969-3228 addedbonusent@yahoo.com