It's not an analogy because you have made it a judgement. Your judgement of what you think Rush's intent was/is.
In the end, it is opinion. Unsubstantiated and subjective.
I mean really!
Limpbaugh wants to own an NFL team :0) - Won't happen
- Thread starter blackascoal
- Start date
It's not an analogy because you have made it a judgement. Your judgement of what you think Rush's intent was/is.
In the end, it is opinion. Unsubstantiated and subjective.
I mean really!
Sammy Jankis
Was it me?
No. It's not race baiting. The point has to do with race. There was no way to avoid using the word black or negro to address the point.
ANy usage of the word "negro" is not automatically race baiting.
You're simplistic, and sad.
Again, it doesn't matter at all what the intent was. Even if you think I have in the past assigned some motivation rather than just a possible rationalization (I don't believe I have) it doesn't change my statement or meaning in any way.
No matter the motivation, it was still the wrong thing to do and it just furthers a negative stereotype of the R party to defend it.
There is a way to avoid using specific language that was used directly to shock. You are now just being deliberately obtuse because you have nothing left.
If you pretend there was no other way to describe what was happening without using "Magic Negro" in the article then maybe you can squint and pretend it isn't hypocrisy to play the same game to point out the hypocrisy of others while at other times declaring the R party to be the more color blind party...
Sammy Jankis
Was it me?
No. Your trying to pretend something is "race baiting" when it's not.
It's just that simple.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
LOL.why do you keep repeating the words magic negro....your racism offends me....
Which again is a simple declaration without reason, and it is very clearly circular logic.
Anyway, it is not effective as a parody if you have to explain it is a parody in order to defend against cries of racism. An effective parody (like a joke) is immediately obvious to people without explanations, this one isn't.
IMO, this particular parody does exactly the opposite and actually cements in the mind of those who believe people in the R party to be racist as racist and defending it so vehemently does it even more effectively for them.
It isn't something we should defend, even if it is just to note that it was an ineffective means to get the point he wanted across to anybody other than his more avid listeners.
Yeah, he went a bit over the line. I sent him an e-mail telling him so... <- this is IMO, the proper response.
Like a joke, it loses all effectiveness if you must explain it while constantly defending against claims of racism. It therefore failed as a parody, was still a step over a line he shouldn't have crossed "too" for whatever reason IMO, and shouldn't be defended because it only makes us all appear to be what we are claiming the song isn't.
Choose your battles, this parody song isn't one we should be fighting, this isn't where the line should be drawn because it is ineffective as a tool to move forward and in fact is far more effective in the hands of the other party to push us further backwards.
IMO, this particular parody does exactly the opposite and actually cements in the mind of those who believe people in the R party to be racist as racist and defending it so vehemently does it even more effectively for them.
It isn't something we should defend, even if it is just to note that it was an ineffective means to get the point he wanted across to anybody other than his more avid listeners.
Yeah, he went a bit over the line. I sent him an e-mail telling him so... <- this is IMO, the proper response.
Like a joke, it loses all effectiveness if you must explain it while constantly defending against claims of racism. It therefore failed as a parody, was still a step over a line he shouldn't have crossed "too" for whatever reason IMO, and shouldn't be defended because it only makes us all appear to be what we are claiming the song isn't.
Choose your battles, this parody song isn't one we should be fighting, this isn't where the line should be drawn because it is ineffective as a tool to move forward and in fact is far more effective in the hands of the other party to push us further backwards.
Sammy Jankis
Was it me?
Actually the race baiting is trying to convince people that this is race baiting.
Nobody look to you for guidance on what we should be doing.
Continuing the declarations and circular logic. And as far as I understand you aren't even part of the party.
Sammy Jankis
Was it me?
There's no cicular logic. You're making stuff up again.
Your circular logic...
It isn't because it isn't because it isn't because it isn't...
I am pointing it out to you, so that you can amend it.
Oh yes you have assigned intent, but I am not going to go ferret out the example(s). I am satisified that the others and I see it for what you wrote. I don't care you have a contrary opinion, but the manner in which you to try to drive it home is the issue.
That you have tamped it down so noticeably is all I really need and in the end tells the story.
Peace Dad.
There you go again...he wasn't race baiting! He was showcasing what the left were saying and feeling ...he used parody to showcase what the LEFT WAS SAYING. You continue to make this about how you feel and about the motives you thought were behind what he did because you spoke before knowing. Then when the reasons Rush had, were provided, you go on to say he chose a bad way to do it, and now its race baiting...
Pick a square and land on it Damo...but unless it is the square of "he showcased in parody what someone else said in order to bring to light lftist crap which was already explained by him, the source for the parody provided (the LA times guy)...all the rest of your offerings are BS!
Right, and we can tell that because of how much time you must take to try to explain that it "really is just a parody, not really race baiting in the same way"...
It simply is race baiting. Mockery doesn't change what the words were from the beginning, nor does it make it "appropriate", especially so when it simply drives a negative sentiment that is directly opposite of what it was supposed to communicate and directly against the statements made earlier by the same host (that the Rs are color blind)...
The square has been the same from the beginning. I simply point again to it.
Now you want to watch too! Wow, you really are a kinkster! But alas, I am as of yet still happily married and I once again must disappoint you, this makes me sad.Cripes Damo. You're getting all revved up just talking about it. Easy on the uhhhh....ummmm... keystrokes, k Daddy? I say just take a lil ol' break and go to the men's room. Stop at the hand lotion dispenser.
The only thing I want to see is you get some uhhh...relief, for that errr...affliction.
LIHOM
No Damo, I took just as much time defending Rush's actual and I might add his own stated reason, for playing the song because you think you can read his mind and know he really had the motives and reasons you have assigned him...that's why I say fuck you. You want to play the condescending father message board fine, but that does not give you the "I'm right because I said I'm right final say~~~
Again, the stated reason makes no difference whatsoever in what I have stated. The motivation does not excuse the action, nor does it serve us well to defend it.
Oh, so now you are also the arbiter of what matters and what we should defend too? Motives always matter Damo...always. And unlike you I will defend a man or woman who is having false motives ascribed to them without your permission....or some collective group of people who are nothing more than pc light meadow muffins.