BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Aug, 2009 02:11 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Sorry I did not even look at the certificate you posted before replying shame on me!
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Aug, 2009 04:33 pm
@dyslexia,
Should Snood run for president, he needs to come up with the long form of his birth certificate. Or, he can produce a video of his birth that has identifiable landmarks.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Aug, 2009 04:34 pm
@kickycan,
Holey moley, we have the same aunt.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Aug, 2009 04:59 pm
@snood,
ve one problem with the piece you posted, and its this line...
Quote:
or some hastily composed hate anthem by Hank Williams, Jr.


The author of the piece you posted has apparently never heard a Hank Jr song.
None of them are "hate anthems", they are in fact the complete opposite of that.
snood
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Aug, 2009 05:11 pm
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:

ve one problem with the piece you posted, and its this line...
Quote:
or some hastily composed hate anthem by Hank Williams, Jr.


The author of the piece you posted has apparently never heard a Hank Jr song.
None of them are "hate anthems", they are in fact the complete opposite of that.


I actually like some Hank Williams stuff - I get a good feeling when I hear "Country Boy Can Survive" - I'm a country boy from NC.

Weber chose an inappropriate example to make his point - but his ignorance of country western music doesn't dilute his point that a hateful subculture exists that just ain't comfortable with a black president.
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Aug, 2009 05:14 pm
@snood,
I didnt say it did.
But, his willingness to classify something he has never heard as "hate anthems" does call into question just how open minded he actually is, at least IMO it does.
0 Replies
 
Robert Gentel
 
  2  
Reply Thu 6 Aug, 2009 05:18 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:
Weber chose an inappropriate example to make his point - but his ignorance of country western music doesn't dilute his point that a hateful subculture exists that just ain't comfortable with a black president.


No doubt there are plenty of people who don't want a black president, but even as your own "swift boaters" example illustrates there are even more people who just don't want a liberal president. There has been the same lunatic fringe working against white liberals like Clinton and Kerry and who would use anything they can possibly come up with to fight a liberal presidency.
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Thu 6 Aug, 2009 05:41 pm
@Robert Gentel,
Robert Gentel wrote:

snood wrote:
Weber chose an inappropriate example to make his point - but his ignorance of country western music doesn't dilute his point that a hateful subculture exists that just ain't comfortable with a black president.


No doubt there are plenty of people who don't want a black president, but even as your own "swift boaters" example illustrates there are even more people who just don't want a liberal president. There has been the same lunatic fringe working against white liberals like Clinton and Kerry and who would use anything they can possibly come up with to fight a liberal presidency.


Geez, you almost need a Venn diagram or something to account for all the different flavors of crazy right wingers.

Cycloptichorn
Robert Gentel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Aug, 2009 05:53 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Geez, you almost need a Venn diagram or something to account for all the different flavors of crazy right wingers.


Out of curiosity, do you think there are more (crazies that is) on the right than on the left?
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Thu 6 Aug, 2009 06:29 pm
@Robert Gentel,
Robert Gentel wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Geez, you almost need a Venn diagram or something to account for all the different flavors of crazy right wingers.


Out of curiosity, do you think there are more (crazies that is) on the right than on the left?


No, but I believe that they have more violent tendencies, and a more aggressive way of promoting their craziness.

The Left has more flakes and spacey folks, the Right, more militant and combatant ones.

Cycloptichorn
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Aug, 2009 06:54 pm
I do not think it is entirely intellectually honest to use the word liberal, since only back in the '60's liberal had an entirely different connotation. Liberals then were inclusive in society to many groups that were often anathema to conservatives; today liberals may be as prejudicial to some groups that conservatives were in the '60's. And many of the liberal of the '60's wanted to be left alone to do his/her own thing. Today it seems to me many a liberal would like to see society march in unison to the belief that no one should have more than the next person. It strikes me as the class consciousness Marx talked about, and was not such a big deal in the '60's to think there were fat cats in society? Perhaps, the liberal mindset of the '60's has just become a mindset that now includes what reminds me of the stereotypical bitter spinster of Victorian novels. Angry at a world that passed her by?

The analogy might have merit, since the "spinster" was quite aware of time passing and her biological clock's time had run out. The liberal of today seems to me to also be very much aware of time, and not having what one would have hoped to have by one's respective age.

I think in the '60's these folks were thought of as having a "sour grape" attitude. Many of the liberals of the '60's were truly carefree.

Could it be that some with the "sour grape" mindset just became politicized to acquire the current liberal label?
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Aug, 2009 06:55 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:

mysteryman wrote:

ve one problem with the piece you posted, and its this line...
Quote:
or some hastily composed hate anthem by Hank Williams, Jr.


The author of the piece you posted has apparently never heard a Hank Jr song.
None of them are "hate anthems", they are in fact the complete opposite of that.


I actually like some Hank Williams stuff - I get a good feeling when I hear "Country Boy Can Survive" - I'm a country boy from NC.

Weber chose an inappropriate example to make his point - but his ignorance of country western music doesn't dilute his point that a hateful subculture exists that just ain't comfortable with a black president.


I agree with what Weber was trying to say. Many of his literary flourishes, however, made me cringe. The Hank Williams, Jr. line is a good example of how Weber's artificial literary style spoiled his essay.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Thu 6 Aug, 2009 07:00 pm
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Aug, 2009 07:02 pm
@edgarblythe,
well that's just wrong
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Aug, 2009 07:03 pm
0 Replies
 
Robert Gentel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Aug, 2009 07:30 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Violent unionists, eco-terrorists, race rioters, crazy animal rights activists, anarchists (collectivist ones), etc aren't too "spacey" and are plenty aggressive. I'd still say the balance (for violence) might tilt right, but mainly on the basis of the overwhelming majority of political violence in America being race-related. However, I don't think you are taking into account all the violent and aggressive lefties there are. Political violence in America has always been remarkably diverse (see Political violence and terrorism in modern America By Christopher Hewitt).

The violence from the right has typically been a greater threat to more lives than that of the left (e.g. Oklahoma City bombing) in recent times (post 1970) and prior to that white racists constituted a lot of violence that is probably largely attributable to right-leaning folk, but there's a pretty big spectrum of politically violent organizations and groups and left/spacey vs right/aggressive really doesn't do the subject justice.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Aug, 2009 08:00 pm
@edgarblythe,
Well, maybe Weber had a point. The anthem by Hank Williams, Jr. is a type of hate speech against "big city liberals."
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  4  
Reply Thu 6 Aug, 2009 08:08 pm
@Robert Gentel,
Robert Gentel wrote:
Out of curiosity, do you think there are more (crazies that is) on the right than on the left?

I'm not sure. In my view, the main difference is that the righty establishment is catering to its loonies much more than the leftie establishment is catering to its. For example, I can't see the leftie equivalent of the Schiavo case happening in the Obama adminstration. Would Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid call back their fellow Members of Congress from their vacations to enact a project as left-wing-nutty as the Schiavo case was right-wing-nutty? I can't see it happening. Indeed, I can't even see what that project might be.

Or for a different example: Take Republican House leader Tom Delay, stating that the Columbine massacre was the direct consequence of teaching children evolution. Can you think of a correspondingly left-wing-nutty pronouncement? And if so, can you conceive of Nancy Pelosi making it? Speaking for myself, I can't, and I can't.

To repeat, what's asymmetric between right and left isn't so much the numbers of the wingnuts. It's their success in reprogramming their party establishments to suit their agendas.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Aug, 2009 08:13 pm
@Thomas,
That's the 'thinking Thomas' that's such a pleasure to read!
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Aug, 2009 08:32 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
No surprise that this attitude is most prevalent in the area of America which historically had the worst problems with racism; and it's equally unsurprising that the South continues to wane as a political force in American politics, given their failure to adjust to the changing face of our country.


I wish you would think before you peddle horseshit like this. One of the earliest, and worst, riots in the history of the United States was the anti-conscription riot in New York, commonly known as the draft riot, and which took place over several days in 1863. The human targets of the rioters were blacks, who were beaten severely, or beaten to death in the streets--and several of them lynched. Race riots were common in Cincinnati, Ohio in the post-war years, being the largest city in the "border" area, where freed slaves came looking for work. The Urban League was formed in 1909, after a prominent and notorious lynching--in Springfield, Illinois.

Certainly racism was institutionalized in the South, and small wonder. It is nonsense, however to say that the South had the worst problems with racism. When blacks rioted in the 1960s, the cities they burnt were Los Angeles, Minneapolis, Detroit, Chicago, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Buffalo, Newark, Baltimore and New York. Certainly there were riots in the South, but to attempt to suggest that somehow racism was worse, or more prevalent, in the South is a failure to read and understand our recent history objectively.

By the way, far from being marginalized, the "New South" elected Ronald Reagan, in an historic change of political allegiance. In 2000, Bush took Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, West Virginia and Virginia--and he even took Tennessee, although that is the home state of his opponent.

If the South is waning as a political force in our nation, it's a pretty damned recent event.
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Birthers
  3. » Page 6
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/23/2021 at 06:47:31