Something that has happened (not hypothetical)

[TandJ]

Sure, Wade. Just 'cause I know how much yuo lvoe me...

Of course he loves you Sparky, errr.. Chris..

Oh Sires, can I be elected to this level too?? See below quote...

Actually, I was ready to offer either "tyflier" or "wade" as the new insult to middle-aged fat guys with too many snakes..

 

[Ricky87]

Ricky--

The color of your skin, the race of your ancestors, or the struggles of your historic people does not give you pain, understanding, and a sense of opression. Those feelings come from a life that is led through hardships, tribulations, and trials, and actually being oppressed.

I don't pretend to know the pain of the slaves of American History. I don't pretend to know the pain of the slaves of Current Times. I don't claim to know the pain of any other individual in the world. But that does NOT mean I don't know pain and suffering, and it absolutely does NOT mean that I cannot empathize, sympathize, and appreciate the pain of my dear friends that have lived a more oppressed life than I...even the white ones.

Your arguments are ignorant, and I don't say that to insult you. I say it to hopefully urge you to look deeper than the surface of your arguments, and really get down to what it is that you are discussing.

Saying that someone cvan't understand something because of the color of their skin is just as ignorant as saying people can't accomplish something because of the color of their skin. Success, failure, victory, defeat, pain, pleasure, love and hate...these human emotions are not bound by color or race. They are not caused by it, either...

Like I said, I am really not trying to insult you, and I hope you don't take it that way. I would really like you to go back, read what you wrote, and try to understand, beyond the surface of the words(the color of their skin?), why it is ignorant, and where it falls short of true comprehension.

I very much respect that, and get what your saying...I think what I should have said is that you can understand it, but until you're sure that you do you shouldn't pretend to..As for digging deeper into my arguments, it takes me a while to form my thoughts exactly the way I want to, and sometimes when I'm reading things I feel compelled to explain too soon...I feel like when I had time to collect my thoughts I was able to respond to Wade a bit better, and hopefully it helped further my points..If it didn't than I suppose I pick up the pieces and try again later, but either way I appreciate what your saying and I'll make a better effort next time!.

 

[Camby]

This thread is about Palin getting her granny drawers in a bunch about Rham's use of the word retard to describe Obama's proposed bill which is flipping retarded IMO so the term used was fitting and not offensive.

I am betting she doesn't wear granny panties, I could care less about what others think, I fully believe she is HOT. I am glad they didn't get elected. I do not think it is proper to have "those thoughts" about the vice president.

Also, maybe I am wrong and I am not stirring up the "political" pot (stayed out of it for too long now), but I wonder if Palin was an ugly democrat like Reno or Clinton (Hillary, not Bill), would her comments carry more wieght?

back to the shadows of the general chit chat forum.

dc

 

[Outcast]

I am betting she doesn't wear granny panties, I could care less about what others think, I fully believe she is HOT. I am glad they didn't get elected. I do not think it is proper to have "those thoughts" about the vice president.

Also, maybe I am wrong and I am not stirring up the "political" pot (stayed out of it for too long now), but I wonder if Palin was an ugly democrat like Reno or Clinton (Hillary, not Bill), would her comments carry more wieght?

back to the shadows of the general chit chat forum.

dc

IMHO, probably not....

 

[TandJ]

I am betting she doesn't wear granny panties, I could care less about what others think, I fully believe she is HOT

Thinks... * Must have a safe word!* *lol*

 

[tyflier]

...Also, maybe I am wrong and I am not stirring up the "political" pot (stayed out of it for too long now), but I wonder if Palin was an ugly democrat like Reno or Clinton (Hillary, not Bill), would her comments carry more wieght?...dc

I would guess not. The fact that she is moderately attractive with an impressive(and probably expensive) set of mammary glands has no influence over the words she chooses to use and the comments she makes. The woman is not intelligent, in my humble opinion, and she seems to bask in the glory of taking every opportunity to prove me right.

To be perfectly honest with you, if she were an ugly anything, I believe her "political career" would have faltered before it ever started. Hill and Janet may not be the hottest babes at the party, but at least they aren't [sarcasm]very, very, very, very, very not intelligent[/sarcasm].

But that's just my opinion...

 

[medusacoils]

I find the use of the word "retard" in the OPs quoted statement offensive! I really find it offensive when people use the statement, "flipping retard!" My being offended has absolutely nothing to do with politics.

Do I count?

Wayne

 

[ComoxCorn]

If this was a thread about Canadian politics....it would have ended after the original post.....because Canadian politics is just plain boring:boring:

 

[Michael823]

I agree with you Wayne. I find the word "retard" highly offensive, and using it with malicious intent or not is besides the point, because the word is personally offensive to many people.

I also find it disingenuous for people to turn this into measurement of how offensive the word is versus who said it. For this to become political, it really shows the low level that people will go to point fingers. It's equally exploitative of the word to use it as political leverage.

If someone is taking offense to the word because they find it barbaric that someone would use an offensive slur to ridicule the mentally challenged, then I understand, and can relate in not liking the use of the word (in any context).
But when you source it to fox news, it really comes across as a selfish, because then you're trying to establish political lines, when this should be kept in the context of who it targets, and who we should advocate to protect from the use of the word.

 

[Camby]

I would guess not. The fact that she is moderately attractive with an impressive(and probably expensive) set of mammary glands has no influence over the words she chooses to use and the comments she makes. The woman is not intelligent, in my humble opinion, and she seems to bask in the glory of taking every opportunity to prove me right.

To be perfectly honest with you, if she were an ugly anything, I believe her "political career" would have faltered before it ever started. Hill and Janet may not be the hottest babes at the party, but at least they aren't [sarcasm]very, very, very, very, very not intelligent[/sarcasm].

But that's just my opinion...

As usual, we disagree, she is not moderately attractive, wake up man, she is hot. Seriously, I would not argue with anyone that she is super intelligent. Another point I meant to leave in the other post is the fact that when Palin was running, most of the media blasted her for lack of experience, however, the same media never said a word about Kennedy when she ran for her dad's vacant seat. I guess it just doesn't pay to be good loking and in politics.

Dang Palin is hot, Levi is an idiot to leave that family, you know what they say, daughters look like their moms when they get older...

dc

 

[Ricky87]

lol...I don't get the Sarah Palin thing at all. People say if she weren't attractive would she still be in politics, but doesn't it work the other way too?. If she weren't a politician I think most of her appeal would evaporate..l mean, I really don't get it; she's way too obnoxious to admire and her accent is just plain silly :/.

 

[KJUN]

I relearned something new in this thread - no white person has EVER been repressed in history. I keep forgetting that and remember real history.

The problem is that I want and believe in TRUTH. All the current administration gives us is Pravda.

"Debating" anything with you is just as useless, since evidently you are the only person in the world with the ability to make sense, eh?

I think he was saying that you have trouble writing in a coherent manner. Maybe he was looking at the below sentence when he wrote that post:

So it is safe to assume that you have never uttered a single, solitary insult about any individual, publicly, or in private, or(as in this case) privately in public, right?

Come one and admit it. You have to laugh at the structure of that sentence, too. :laugh01:

 

[tyflier]

Well, KJUN...there hasn't been an administration or politician in recent history that has EVER given ANY of us truth. Not the current, previous, or recently past.

Really, your "problem" is that you can't handle a democratic president, and you will rise to arms at any opportunity against one, using any referance to socialism to drum up support from people that can hardly spell socialism, let alone define it.

But you'll never admit that...

As for your English lesson...I'll pass on any advice from you, thanks...

 

[tsst]

I think everyone has a different idea of offensive. I think we need to try and look from others perspectives to better understand.

My grandmother used to say if I wouldn't say it to a crowd of people then I shouldn't say it. While being a little indifferent in this case I surely wouldn't go to a room full of Down's kids and their parents and describe something as retarded. Even if I were not offended I can only imagine some in the room would be. Just my $.02 :shrugs:

 

[tyflier]

I think everyone has a different idea of offensive. I think we need to try and look from others perspectives to better understand.

My grandmother used to say if I wouldn't say it to a crowd of people then I shouldn't say it. While being a little indifferent in this case I surely wouldn't go to a room full of Down's kids and their parents and describe something as retarded. Even if I were not offended I can only imagine some in the room would be. Just my $.02 :shrugs:

That's an excellent point. Location and context are incredibly important.

I, personally, am not offended by the word "retard" or "retarded". However, if someone used that word to describe someone with Downe's Syndrome or Cerebral Palsey, I would be first in line to put that individual in place.

I dno't begrudge anybody's right to be offended. What I take issue with is people looking to be offended. If this Rham guy had used that word in referance to disabled individuals, or something like that, I would be furious. If he used it during a speech, or press conferance, he would deserve to be hung from his toes. But to use it as a whispered inside joke to describe people that obviously do not have mental disabilties just doesn't seem worthy of such uproar...not even from Palin...

Of course...just my opinion...

 

[mike17l]

I agree with you Wayne. I find the word "retard" highly offensive, and using it with malicious intent or not is besides the point, because the word is personally offensive to many people.

I also find it disingenuous for people to turn this into measurement of how offensive the word is versus who said it. For this to become political, it really shows the low level that people will go to point fingers. It's equally exploitative of the word to use it as political leverage.

If someone is taking offense to the word because they find it barbaric that someone would use an offensive slur to ridicule the mentally challenged, then I understand, and can relate in not liking the use of the word (in any context).

Fro what started off as fairly coherent and logical, it ended so poorly.

But when you source it to fox news, it really comes across as a selfish, because then you're trying to establish political lines, when this should be kept in the context of who it targets, and who we should advocate to protect from the use of the word.

How is sourcing information from the most viewed news channel selfish and establishing political lines? Would you have viewed it the same if it came from one of the lesser viewed/listened/read news sources?

Really, your "problem" is that you can't handle a democratic president, and you will rise to arms at any opportunity against one, using any referance to socialism to drum up support from people that can hardly spell socialism, let alone define it.

How is calling a socialist a socialist a bad thing? Really, do you think he is anything other than a socialist? .Gov run health care, .gov run industry, redistribution of wealth, ect. Those are socialist ideals. I really do not understand why you get offended when BO is called a socialist. If he is not a socialist, what is he?

As for spelling lessons; it is reference not "referance".

As for your English lesson...I'll pass on any advice from you, thanks...

Just curious, how many degrees do you have?

 

[Drizzt80]

It's just a word...

It's just a word.

Location and context are incredibly important.

If this Rham guy had used that word in referance to disabled individuals, or something like that, I would be furious. If he used it during a speech, or press conferance, he would deserve to be hung from his toes. But to use it as a whispered inside joke to describe people that obviously do not have mental disabilties just doesn't seem worthy of such uproar...

If it's "just a word", make up your mind. Use it or don't. Don't give me a list of situations where it is appropriate and where it's not. If the R-word is "just a word" it's always appropriate, otherwise it's not. The N-word is another of those words that's wholly inappropriate for anyone to use. Any amount of situational justification on anyone's part is just a lot of . . . words.

Almost all of us long for peace and freedom; but very few of us have much enthusiasm for the thoughts, feelings, and actions that make for peace and freedom. ~Aldous Huxley

D80

 

[Nanci]

So back to the original post. I was raised thinking that calling someone or something "retarded" (unless they actually were) was rude. It's not really in my vocabulary in that context. Even knowing that the moms, here at any rate, of DD kids don't take offense to its casual use, I still don't think I'd feel right using it. Just my opinion! Not to mention using the F-word at work is sort of tacky...(Which I am quite guilty of, but still- I cringe inside when it pops out).

 

[medusacoils]

So back to the original post. I was raised thinking that calling someone or something "retarded" (unless they actually were) was rude. It's not really in my vocabulary in that context. Even knowing that the moms, here at any rate, of DD kids don't take offense to its casual use, I still don't think I'd feel right using it. Just my opinion! Not to mention using the F-word at work is sort of tacky...(Which I am quite guilty of, but still- I cringe inside when it pops out).

What about a Dad of a child with a "DD", who DOES take offense to it?

I'm guessing that the use of ANY word is OK as long as some people don't take offense to it? :shrugs:

Wayne

 

[medusacoils]

If it's "just a word", make up your mind. Use it or don't. Don't give me a list of situations where it is appropriate and where it's not. If the R-word is "just a word" it's always appropriate, otherwise it's not. The N-word is another of those words that's wholly inappropriate for anyone to use. Any amount of situational justification on anyone's part is just a lot of . . . words.

Almost all of us long for peace and freedom; but very few of us have much enthusiasm for the thoughts, feelings, and actions that make for peace and freedom. ~Aldous Huxley

D80

Thank you Brent! Excellent post!

Wayne