No proof that the epitaph hurlers were members of any Tea Party organization In fact I'd like to see a police report detailing these alleged transgressions. Might turnout that the trouble makers are agent provocateurs.
Wouldn't be the first time.
<<doing stuff like that so as to lay blame on the opposition is something right out of the liberal playbook, page 47.>>
You're delusional. It's pure GOP. Look up Richard Nixon, Don Segretti, White House Plumbers and Dirty Tricks Squad. Before you were born, Kramer. It's that old and it's that Republican.
<<doing stuff like that so as to lay blame on the opposition is something right out of the liberal playbook, page 47.>>
You're delusional. It's pure GOP. Look up Richard Nixon, Don Segretti, White House Plumbers and Dirty Tricks Squad. Before you were born, Kramer. It's that old and it's that Republican.
There was a lot of noise in the video. Apart from the stuff that was chanted in unison, it was impossible to make out any slogans or random taunts.
If the Congressman heard "nigger!" 15 times, I believe him. Just because nobody heard it in the videos is absolutely meaningless. "Kill the Bill" was audible because it was chanted in unison. The rest of the noise was a din of conflicting shouts and slogans, but I defy anyone to pick out one sentence or even one word from that cacaphony. That does NOT mean that the Congressman wouldn't be able to hear "Nigger" if shouted at him from close by.
People believe what they want to believe, so the truth doesn't matter.
ROTFLMFAO. What we actually have is a video of the event in which not a single word from the crowd is distinguishable unless chanted in unison by the zombies in the mob. Why on earth the word "Nigger" should be uniquely distinguishable on tape when not chanted in unison by zombies, when no other word of that din is distinguishable on tape unless chanted in unison by zombies, has not been explained to us by anyone.
The likeliest reasons for not pressing charges would include inability to ID the perp, not wanting to get involved, fear of right-wing violence if charges were pressed,
I bet this kid is against health care legislation
Right. Shoot the messenger.
The provided video, as I seem to have proven without rebuttal, is of no assistance whatsoever to either side in determining whether or not members of the mob hurled racist insults ....
If the Congressman heard "nigger!" 15 times, I believe him. Just because nobody heard it in the videos is absolutely meaningless.
Please. "Tom" indicates he betrays his own people.
Expecting people to act in a certain way , based on race, is racist.
======================================================
Which is more racist, to fix pork chops when the rabbi comes to visit or to NOT fix pork chops?
<<And you can't betray your people unless your people are expected to act in a certain way.>>
False
<<Expecting people to act in a certain way , based on race, is racist. >>
False
plane, just use your own ears. In all that din, was there one word or phrase that you could distinguish, apart from what was chanted in unison by the mob? You know that there wasn't.
Does that mean that one guy could not distinguish a single word shouted out to him at close range? Of course not. The camera wasn't everywhere and it didn't pick up everything that the Congressman heard. Why is that so hard to believe?
I`m not sure what racist means anymore.
I`m pretty damn sure i brought this up
my question is ,if I say "I hate all manchu`s "
am I a racist?
for thinking thier pretty annoying people.
Yes.
my question is ,if I say "I hate all manchu`s "
am I a racist?
<<Fifteen times?If it was said loudly and frequently the chances for the several microphones present to pick it up are very good , better than the chances of a single person to hear it fifteen times while none of the mikes do. There might also have been reporters present , few of whom were deaf I might bet.
<<Someone being that persistant would be on the mike.>>
If you can't distinguish one word in all that ambient noise, how could you distinguish it if it were repeated fifteen times or fifteen hundred times?
Well, let's explore your scientific theory a little more closely. Why do you think, since the microphones did not pick up any other word in the entire cacaphony of shouts, cat-calls, insults etc., why do you think that of all the words shouted or hollered by that mob, that the microphones should have been able to pick up "Nigger?" Inquiring minds need to know.
<<There is also the possibility that what he heard and what was shouted was diffrent , Whipoorwills don't really want you to whip poor ol will , their hoot just sounds a bit like that , Bobwhites are not related to Robert White, their whistle just sounds a bit like that.>>It isn't unlikely , go have this arguement with Dr. RRorschach
Sure, that's plausible. What do you think he heard 15 times that sounded like "Nigger?" Trigger? Bigger? "Jigger?" "Digger?" (could he have been mistaken for an Australian?) "Figger?" "Rigger?" You know what I think? I think it could easily have been ANY of those words, but it couldn't have been "Nigger!" No way.
<<When exposed to incomprehensable croud noise and lots of anxiety a person might really hear what he is thinking.>>The more he has heard it , the more he would hear it , haveing this anexiety is somewhat justified , even if it betrayed him this time.
Yeah. That's it. He's never heard "nigger" shouted at him by an angry white mob before, so it's really hard for him to know it when he hears it.
<<By the way on a related topic , did you know that there was no necessity for the congresspersons to walk through the croud?
<<Usually they travel from their offices to the Capitol building via an underground tram , but it is hard for hams like these to avoid a good theatrical gesture .>>
Yeah, I thought so - - it's all HIS fault. He could have snuck into the Capitol underground where no decent self-respecting white man or white woman would have had to see him, but instead he had to rub it in and walk there in broad daylight. Serves the bastard right, doesn't it?
I don`t really hate them
I just use them,because I know so few rare races personally and the one I do know don`t mention it.
alot of chinese really do hate manchu.
unlike germans who gets forgiven in 2 decades.
it takes the death of every single witness for people to forgive transgression of one race to another.
alot of people still hate the japanese to this day.
Judaism is a race? I thought they were Caucasian?
==========================================
There are Black Jews, the Falashas of Ethiopia.There also Jews in India and China. So it is not JUST a religion or JUST an ethnicity.
The question "Who is a Jew?" has been a controversy for generations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_is_a_Jew%3F (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_is_a_Jew%3F)
===================================================================
I think it is safe to say that only a small percentage of those known as "White" people originated in the Caucasus Mountains. Being as most (but not all) European nationalities speak Indo-European languages. it is theorized that people from the Hindi speaking parts of India, Persians and most Europeans are all related, and populated Europe after the ice melted in the preceding Ice Age.
<<If it was said loudly and frequently the chances for the several microphones present to pick it up are very good , better than the chances of a single person to hear it fifteen times while none of the mikes do. >>
Really? Even though the mikes weren't able to pick up even one other word in the entire English language?
Huh? Howzzat?
Tea Party or the DNC
What if he did? He sure as hell wouldn't be the first white person to think the thought. And he still wouldn't indulge in racist name calling and never did. So your example of Saul Alinsky in this context is somewhat mystifying. Looks a lot to me like trying to change the subject when you're totally at a loss for arguments.
Being a white guy or black, a Jew or a Christian, doesn't add to or lessen the shame of a bad action or enhance the lustre of a good deed, does it? How can it?
Depends on the circumstances, the context.
A Tom betrays his people without giving a shit how they behave. He sells them out. He helps Whitey fuck 'em up the ass, as for example, by siding with Whitey's opposition to health-care reform, knowing he's taking a position inimical to the interests of most blacks but by his presence helping Whitey to maintain credibility when he claims that the movement is not racist at all. His betrayal has nothing to do with expectations of how blacks are supposed to act. They are supposed to defend their own interests and to oppose white racism. When Tom joins Whitey's attack on black interests and furthers the cause of white racism, he has betrayed his own people.
Wow, Michael. Could you be more self-contradictory? "His betrayal has nothing to do with expectations of how blacks are supposed to act. They are supposed to defend their own interests and to oppose white racism." Apparently the "betrayal" has everything to do with how blacks are supposed to act. Could you be more racist?
And yes, claiming people as a group determined by skin color are supposed to think and do certain things because of their grouping by skin color is racist. And the racism that disgusts me most is the kind that couches itself in indignation about betrayals of "black interests". It puts people of dark skin color in a box and says "this is what you are supposed to think, what you are supposed to feel and how you are supposed to act; now conform like a good little darkie."
If the "nigger" remark is made by one black to another in locker-room banter, there you have one meaning of the word, and if it's shouted out by an angry all-white mob at a passing black man, there you have a different context and a different meaning.
We can't be sure
Might as well ask, who were the leaders of a lynch mob and how did they come to have so much control. A mob is assembled to protest against health-care reform that will put the government in a position of responsibility over the health of the poorest, weakest and sickest members of society, the most feckless and foolish among them, those that for whatever reason are least able to take care of their own health. That gathering, like as not, has been talked up many times in the past and showered with approval by the richest and whitest of right-wing talk-show hosts, the Rush Limbaughs and their ilk. What kind of person is going to heed that call? Is it any wonder that the most racist, bigoted, vicious and asocial members of the general society will gravitate to the call like flies to shit? Is anyone really, honestly surprised when racists and bigots show up at these gatherings? Nobody has to advertise for them to come and nobody has to set up a guarded gate posted with signs that any decent, compassionate person with goodness in his heart, who wants to help those of his neighbours who can't help themselves, need not apply and cannot enter. There's no need for such precautions because no decent, good-hearted individual would want to show up in support of such an event anyway.
[...]
My post title is pure fact, and I can fully understand why you are so uncomfortable with the facts. There is also no "need" to slur - - when I comment on events and/or people, I tell it like it is. But I DO understand your need to whitewash crimes, especially the crimes of racist bigots and haters.
I guess I should have said that these racists are not all that complex. They're easily manipulated fools who feel a blinding resentment at the thought of a black man in the Oval Office who is all too obviously a lot smarter than they are and doesn't do a helluva lot to hide it. Add that to their resentment of having to suck hind tit all their lives while minorities, Jews and others have long since edged past them or seem to have done so, and voilà ! you're looking at something like the ruined lower middle classes of the early Weimar Republic.
Obama is Hitler
hitler is turning in his grave right now and nobody cares
Racism if overt will turn off more people than it attracts.
I guess I should have said that these racists are not all that complex. They're easily manipulated fools who feel a blinding resentment at the thought of a black man in the Oval Office who is all too obviously a lot smarter than they are and doesn't do a helluva lot to hide it. Add that to their resentment of having to suck hind tit all their lives while minorities, Jews and others have long since edged past them or seem to have done so, and voil? ! you're looking at something like the ruined lower middle classes of the early Weimar Republic.
This is complete nonsense that is as unrepresentative of the situation as the "Obama is Hitler" signs and just as hateful.
Who were the leaders of the crowd? How do they have so much control over a bottom up organization?
Where were the mass produced signs, most looked hand made.
This is a group that you don't understand.
And that is evident by your post title and your need to slur.
<<Turn off more of what people?
<<Do you contend that racism appeals to few Americans?>>
Unfortunately, not. But racism is the guilty secret, something like what gay sex is to "family-values" GOP legislators. Something they crave but can't be seen to crave.
Ways have to be found for the GOP to tap into that buried, unacknowledged mother lode of white American racism so that the secret urges of the flock are slaked while the outward appearances scrupulously avoid any hint of what lies beneath.
<<Where is Occams razor when you really need it?>>Why should I accept that?
Good question. I guess once one accepts the power of social taboo (in this case the taboo against racist politics)
then Occam's Razor, if it takes in the reality of all three factors: racism, the taboo against racism, the need for secrecy IS the simplest explanation for the absence of overt racism in the Tea Party's public utterances.The reality of all three factors has to be assumed in order to accept this incident as proof of the reality of all three or any one of them?
<<It isn't possible that Racism is simply unpopular, it has to be very widespread and popular but entirely covert , like an occult cult that everyone is in .>>
I think it's dying a slow and lingering death. The society is nowhere near as racist as previously but it hangs on tenaciously in large (but shrinking) segments of the population. Also, as it's dying down, events can fan the flame and it will blaze briefly again before continuing its decline.
http://tinyurl.com/yc7jehl (http://tinyurl.com/yc7jehl)
Give it up, plane, FIVE WITNESSES WHO WERE WITH CONGRESSMAN LEWIS heard the shouts of "nigger" from the crowd.
| Another time, while sailing close to the shore, Walter was steering his boat when he saw someone on shore waving his arms. He waved back smiling and kept going, and in another 30 seconds we hit bottom. Walter looked around and said. 'What just happened?' I replied, 'Didn't you hear what that guy was yelling? He was yelling, 'LOW WATER.' He looked at me and said, 'I thought he was saying, 'HELLO, WALTER.' |
Personally, I am not in the least surprised. I know the American people.
Give it up, plane, FIVE WITNESSES WHO WERE WITH CONGRESSMAN LEWIS heard the shouts of "nigger" from the crowd.
http://tinyurl.com/yc7jehl (http://tinyurl.com/yc7jehl)
Another time, while sailing close to the shore, Walter was steering his boat when he saw someone on shore waving his arms. He waved back smiling and kept going, and in another 30 seconds we hit bottom. Walter looked around and said. 'What just happened?' I replied, 'Didn't you hear what that guy was yelling? He was yelling, 'LOW WATER.' He looked at me and said, 'I thought he was saying, 'HELLO, WALTER.'
And also, I feel I should point to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondegreen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondegreen).
The point being that claiming something was heard doesn't mean that something was actually said.
<<Why should I accept that [the power of the social taboo against racist politics]?>>
I see it, so I accept it. Racism, or the open expression of it, seems taboo.
<<I don't know if you understand the operation of Occams Razor or not, if there is a simple explanation why search out a complex explanation?>>
Sometimes the complex explanation happens to be true. Sure I understand the operation of Occam's Razor, I think I made a mistake in trying to rationalize its application here. Or at least in the way that I tried to rationalize it. Let me try again.
The Congressman and five others with him say they heard shouts of "Nigger" from the crowd. Simplest explanation? They heard shouts of "Nigger!" from the crowd.
There. That's better.
<<I don't know if you understand the operation of Occams Razor or not, if there is a simple explanation why search out a complex explanation?>>
Sometimes the complex explanation happens to be true. Sure I understand the operation of Occam's Razor, I think I made a mistake in trying to rationalize its application here. Or at least in the way that I tried to rationalize it. Let me try again.
The Congressman and five others with him say they heard shouts of "Nigger" from the crowd. Simplest explanation? They heard shouts of "Nigger!" from the crowd, that had Democrat plants strategically placed.
<<or that the microphones were the less sensitive veriety.>>
Doesn't seem to matter how sensitive or what variety, the point you can't seem to get around is that they weren't picking up ANY distinct word from the crowd, and so if they couldn't pick out any single word, how the hell would they be expected to pick out the N-word?
plane, with all due respect, I don't think you've ever offered any explanation that even came close to the utter simplicity of this one: Those racist bastards were shouting "Nigger!" at Congressman Lewis, and the Congressman and the four or five other people with him all heard them shouting "Nigger!"
Simpler than that, plane, it does not get. They shouted "Nigger!" at Congressman Lewis, and Congressman Lewis heard them. FIVE PEOPLE all heard them. Give it up, plane. Believe me, you will not find a simpler explanation. That is it. The simplest.
Look at the videos availible, there were mikes in every direction there is no where that an opprobrious shouter could have beenisolated from the mikes but also proximate to the congressmen.
I do not accept that the chatter of the croud was unintelligable and intelligable both at the same time , this is an impossibility whether it is simple or not.
I think that people eager to beleive a lie will indeed beleive it .
<<Were these shouts said useing sound waves?>>
All shouts are transmitted by sound waves.
... I've never seen anyone fight harder against an obvious truth than you.
It?s time for the allegedly pristine character of Rep. John Lewis to put up or shut up. Therefore, I am offering $10,000 of my own money to provide hard evidence that the N- word was hurled at him not 15 times, as his colleague reported, but just once. Surely one of those two cameras wielded by members of his entourage will prove his point.
And surely if those cameras did not capture such abhorrence, then someone from the mainstream media ? those who printed and broadcast his assertions without any reasonable questioning or investigation ? must themselves surely have it on camera. Of course we already know they don?t. If they did, you?d have seen it by now. THOUSANDS OF TIMES.
Rep. Lewis, if you can?t do that, I?ll give him a backup plan: a lie detector test. If you provide verifiable video evidence showing that a single racist epithet was hurled as you walked among the tea partiers, or you pass a simple lie detector test, I will provide a $10K check to the United Negro College Fund.
I'm also a little concerned that rather than deal with the points that I raised, which IMHO are virtually unanswerable,
Please don't turn this argument into another of your wild-goose chases - - just deal with the basic concepts here; five witnesses heard the word "nigger!" from the crowd and not just once or twice. That should be the end of it. They were lying or they weren't lying. Choose one.
They yell "Nigger" and "faggot" at elected representatives.
He knows the only evidence of the slurs is the testimony of the five eye-witnesses, Lewis for sure having an excellent reputation and none of the others being known as liars.
The issue is, are these upstanding, truthful men or are they fucking liars?
(2) although the mikes couldn't pick up any word uttered by the crowd, if the word "Nigger" HAD been uttered, it WOULD have been picked up, so the absence of "Nigger!" on the tapes proves that it was never uttered, which in turn would prove that all five witnesses had lied.
<<All that is required is that the recording microphone be closer to the shouter than the shoutee and there is not a way that the words intelligable to the shoutee could be unintelligable to the microphone closer to the sorce.>>
I think kimba also pointed out that it is also required that the mike be pointed at the speaker, did he not?
Fuck does Biden know? I'll take kimba's side on that one because common sense tells you (a) there is probably a reason why interviewers point their mikes at the speaker and (b) we've already seen how "good" the unpointed mikes are at distinguishing individual words from the general noise of the crowd.
Too bad there wasn't a shouting mob in the background to drown it out.
Speaking directly into it or off an an angle? What angle? How do you compare the background noise of applause in a closed space with the BG noise of angry shouting mob in an open space?
<<He was at an angle, and his head was behind Obama, to whom he was speaking (Obama was between Biden and the mike). Also, it was picked up by mikes in the audience as well as those at the podium (youtube has some video taken from cell phones in the audience where it fairly clear).>>
Well there's obviously way too many variables and unknowns in Biden's situation to be of any useful comparison with the mikes in the crowd.
"...except that we know for a fact that no mike in the Lewis scenario was capable of capturing a single word from the crowd, due to ambient crowd noise. End of story."
Labeling folks as racist is a well worn demonization tactic, doesn't matter if the charges are true, what it does is deflect from the real issues and garner sympathy for those with no realistic responses to the issues raised.
It ISN'T the CBC that's singled out, the Tea Parties are racists, they hate ALL blacks, not just the CBC.
<<This is you admitting that the earwitness testimony cannot be reliable.
<<Not a single word was intelligable, in spite of several mikes being present you have been admitting this all along.>>
Don't you see that you have just assumed the superiority of the mikes being used, over the human ear? Can't you admit the possibility that no mike could pick out a single word from the din but that a human ear could easily do so at close quarters?
Also, let's finally get this "surrounded" bullshit out of the way. How many reporters in all do you see "surrounding" the Congressmen and how many do you see pointing mikes?