Being White in Philly

[Cancel 2016.2]

SF:

It's OK for us to have different standards for what contitutes assholery. And it's OK for different people reading the same thing to have different reactions to it. No need to be a dick about it.

Dung:

1) When someone calls me an asshole for not seeing what made this guy an asshole, I feel compelled to ask
2) I agree everyone has different standards, I am asking for examples of what this guy did to make her think he was an asshole.
3) The one being a dick at the moment is you

 

[Timshel]

that is truly comical... I responded to your quote directly. Your response was completely unhinged, so I called you out on being overly emotional. Probably had something to do with your earlier bullshit being rebutted.

Unhinged? Are you referring to my response to you accusing me of expressing racist ideas? That was warranted.

 

[Timshel]

So a father concerned about his son = he is only concerned about WHITE people? Either way you want to spin it, he didn't assume what YOU wanted to pretend he did.

But thanks for proving you are just overly emotional right now.

Again String... the article is about WHITE people in Philly and their perspective. White people are not actually black people and thus you are not going to hear stories about crimes on a black guy. Nor are you likely to hear one of the white people tell you about crimes they committed.

LMAO... see, now you go to hyperbole. What conservatives have stated there is no racism to speak of? Saying it is not as prevalent as people like you proclaim it to be within conservative circles is not the same as saying it doesn't exist.

here is the waiter part... tell me what part you think he is being 'critical of his perspective'...

You accuse me of racism because you were upset over the criticisms of the author. You are unhinged.

He was discussing race issues and only showed concern for crimes against whites. You have not rebutted anything.

 

[Bonestorm]

Dung:

1) When someone calls me an asshole for not seeing what made this guy an asshole, I feel compelled to ask

String didn't call you an asshole until after you accused him of having racist views. And I thought his post made pretty clear why he thought the author was an asshole.

2) I agree everyone has different standards, I am asking for examples of what this guy did to make her think he was an asshole.

And she said pretty much the whole article.

3) The one being a dick at the moment is you

Thanks.

 

[Timshel]

here is the waiter part... tell me what part you think he is being 'critical of his perspective'...

Where he says its just a seventh grader, not someone who needs to worry about getting by. See, that's what is sort of funny. He only considers how paul might be wrong in being too forgiving. Maybe paul is wrong about the guy's age.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Unhinged? Are you referring to my response to you accusing me of expressing racist ideas? That was warranted.

No it was not warranted. I find it humorous though that you accuse the author of being racist, then when someone points out that you injected racist views into it you fly off the handle.

While you may not have intended your response to be racist, it was. you claimed the author was only concerned about white people... which was clearly not the case. You are the one that pretended Temple Students = White people...

 

[Timshel]

No it was not warranted. I find it humorous though that you accuse the author of being racist, then when someone points out that you injected racist views into it you fly off the handle.

While you may not have intended your response to be racist, it was. you claimed the author was only concerned about white people... which was clearly not the case. You are the one that pretended Temple Students = White people...

Yeah, it was warranted. I said the article was rather racist. He only showed concern for white victims of crime in regards to the race issue. How is it racist to point that out?

I never said anything about Temple students. I mentioned crime in that area as the author did.

 

[Howey]

How the hell can you tell which kids are which? I'd wager the ones doing the harm are just like the author's white kid - upper middle class privileged white kids playing wiggger to impress their friends.

Hell, whenever I see black kids anymore they're wearing nice, clean preppy shirts and shorts. It's the white boys with their pants hanging half off their asses.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

You accuse me of racism because you were upset over the criticisms of the author. You are unhinged.

ANOTHER emotional outburst from you?

I was asking you if you were projecting your racist views onto the author. You weren't being critical, you were insinuating he was a racist that only cared about crimes against white people in the early part of the article. In reality he mentioned crimes against Temple students. YOU were the one that brought race into it.

Funny how you feel it is ok to question whether or not he was a racist based on his article, but it is not ok for anyone to dare question you for being racist with your words.

He was discussing race issues and only showed concern for crimes against whites. You have not rebutted anything.

Again poor deranged lunatic, the title of his article was 'Being WHITE in Philly'. What part of that are you not comprehending. Of course he was going to interview white people. When discussing crimes against themselves, white people don't suddenly turn black. The point of his article was also not to show concern about crime, it was to get people to open up about race. To discuss the issue of race. Another point you cannot comprehend in your deranged state.

 

[Phantasmal]

Thats a trait so typical of the lefties.....I don't get it....if you can't refute a post, why not just stfu and let it go.....

If you say black, they will insist you meant white or implied it....and they all do it.....

anyway...his reply to your question ought to be interesting if its actually on topic.....

You need to follow your own advice Vanilla Nova.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

String didn't call you an asshole until after you accused him of having racist views. And I thought his post made pretty clear why he thought the author was an asshole.

He injected race into it while calling the author an asshole and insinuating he was racist. Funny how liberals don't like the same treatment coming back at them. String whined about it right out of the gate and it was String that equated 'Temple students' to 'White people'. When I called him on it, his lame ass response was 'well the only Temple student he mentioned was his son' <---- very good example of desperation.

And she said pretty much the whole article.

which is a cop out and you know it. If you can't point out examples, odds are you are simply providing a knee jerk reaction.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Yeah, it was warranted. I said the article was rather racist. He only showed concern for white victims of crime in regards to the race issue. How is it racist to point that out?

You realize the entire thread can still be viewed... don't you?

You whined about him only caring about crimes against white people. That is complete bullshit. Do you really need me to quote your actual original statement again? We can go back and do that, but it will only embarrass you further and cause another emotional outburst from you.

I never said anything about Temple students. I mentioned crime in that area as the author did.

I guess you do need me to post that for you.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

What a crappy article. I don't know if it is "yelling fire" but it is rather racist and a lousy piece of journalism.

The author starts with the apparent assumption that crime in and around Temple is only a problem or concern for white people. If his white son was not there it would not matter. He continues this throughout the article assuming all crime is the result of african americans and only harms white people or only matters when it does.

The above is how you started your comments on the thread.

1) You call him a racist right out of the gate

2) You pretend he has an assumption that crime in and around Temple is only a concern for white people (when in fact he stated that it was a problem for Temple students... you were the one that put race into it.)

3) You then pretend he only cares about crime around Temple was because his WHITE son goes there (pure bullshit on your part)

4) You then give us this gem: "He continues this throughout the article assuming all crime is the result of african americans and only harms white people or only matters when it does" (he does no such thing... not in the least... again you project your bullshit onto him)

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

Sf if I were you and i really wanted to consider another perspective, I would google for black responses to this. Black people write on the Internet and for media. But you are a reactionary who then doubles down. You are not someone interested in other views. You lash out and want to "win" whatever that means in this context. I know you don't get that some people have better things to do than engage in endless round robins with reactionaries.

Anyway, I will call this...it will come out that this guy made up some of these interviews and these people don't exist. My prediction.

 

[Howey]

Sf if I were you and i really wanted to consider another perspective, I would google for black responses to this. Black people write on the Internet and for media. But you are a reactionary who then doubles down. You are not someone interested in other views. You lash out and want to "win" whatever that means in this context. I know you don't get that some people have better things to do than engage in endless round robins with reactionaries.

Anyway, I will call this...it will come out that this guy made up some of these interviews and these people don't exist. My prediction.

You might have a point Darla. Is the author connected with Breitbart or The Daily caller?

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

You might have a point Darla. Is the author connected with Breitbart or The Daily caller?

Lol. Nah. But you know some very mainstream reporters have been caught doing that. It's not that unusual. I just have a feeling. A lot of anonymous bs in that article. I like the woman who claims only black men make comments to her, the white guys just look. Boy do I call bullshit on that. We'll see.

 

[cawacko]

String, I apologize if I am missed labeling you but I believe you have stated before you are a libertarian. The mayor of Philadelphia has stated this article violates the First Amendment. I was just curious if you felt that way as well.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Sf if I were you and i really wanted to consider another perspective, I would google for black responses to this. Black people write on the Internet and for media. But you are a reactionary who then doubles down. You are not someone interested in other views. You lash out and want to "win" whatever that means in this context. I know you don't get that some people have better things to do than engage in endless round robins with reactionaries.

Anyway, I will call this...it will come out that this guy made up some of these interviews and these people don't exist. My prediction.

ROFLMAO... yeah Darla, I am the reactionary. You idiots come out with the typical knee jerk reaction to a white guy daring to try and discuss race, but I am the reactionary.

Run along if you don't wish to discuss.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

The article was criticized for quoting people only by their first names, and one audience member questioned whether they were actual people.


McGrath said the magazine contacted everyone quoted in the story as part of its fact-checking process. "We are confident Bob did not make any of this up," McGrath said.


Several participants noted that Monday was the fifth anniversary of President Obama's famous Constitution Center speech on race, after his 2008 campaign was rocked by the Jeremiah Wright controversy.


While anger was directed at McGrath and Huber, there were several heated exchanges between some black audience members and black panelists about crime and personal responsibility in African American communities.

http://articles.philly.com/2013-03-...ia-magazine-robert-huber-racial-insensitivity

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news...y-Article-Sparks-Racial-Debate-198866881.html

There are plenty of people who slam the author as our beloved Darla and String do... calling him a racist blah blah blah...

But there are others who realize that he is not a journalist, so while it is certainly not a Pulitzer (<--- exaggeration liberal morons) it is doing what the author intended. It is bringing the issue to the forefront. Encouraging people to discuss the issue of race. While Darla and String may wish to slam any white guy that dares to discuss race, the adults of the world understand that a discussion on race is a good thing.

Chad Lassiter, a sociologist who teaches at the University of Pennsylvania and West Chester University believes the article has provided a valuable opportunity for the city to openly discuss the issue of race.


“We need not engage in reactionary politics,” he said. “We need to call for a race dialogue in the city of Philadelphia. We need to look at ourselves and how we’re not being tolerant. We need to become more tolerant and embrace difference.”

Darla and String should read that quote over and over again until it seeps into that lonely brain cell.