Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Login | What's Hot
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons

Comment on: Heartland Patriot

I Plead Not Guilty

194 Comments
Wednesday, March, 19, 2008 12:24 PM Jimmy Carter writes:

Sorry,

but the Defendant doesn't get to decide the verdict.

It appears to Me that You are "guilty until You rewrite history."

Which gets Me to thinking: if "whites" can be "guilty" and held responsible for previous generations, then why can't "minorities" be found "guilty" and held responsible for those with which they associate today?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, March, 19, 2008 12:55 PM CW writes:

A difference in character


I thought of your post, 'Moral Vacuity from the Pulpit,' as the story about Obama's relationship with Rev. Wright has unfolded. Your reaction to - and discomfort with - a sermon that was at odds with your principles says something about your character. By that same token, Obama's lack of action in response to his pastor's hate-filled, crazy rantings says quite a bit about his character, or lack of it.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, March, 19, 2008 1:58 PM USA Eagle writes:

Scottie

Well said...you've taken a plethora of essays and opinions that are everywhere in the media and summarized nicely.The one good thing I see in this is that race is no no longer a taboo PC subject.It's out in the open and being discussed and labeled for what it is...racism.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, March, 19, 2008 2:12 PM Nee writes:

Here, here!

If I need defending, ever, I will plead my case to the most sensible gentleman I know. Scottie, of course! Amen.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, March, 19, 2008 6:47 PM ScarletPimpernel writes:

haha, Scottie

Build a bridge - that's what my Bishop's wife says to people feeling down or upset about things.

Speaking of jobs - sometimes I've been so selfish and greedy that I held 2 jobs while some folks didn't have any...

Obama still has not explained why he stayed in a church with a pastor like that. I've left 2 churches who try to soak me in fishy notions.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 20, 2008 7:17 AM Nee writes:

SP

C'mon- Obamba will never explain why...and man, could you give a lazy woman a break and hand over some of that "two-job" cash. I know you don't need it!
My question is this: Oprah has been hawking for this guy. Is she guilty by the same association or as blind as the rest? If so, what ever respect I had for her going ahead to champion her causes is finished. I cannot side with someone who supports a liar.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 20, 2008 10:44 AM Scottie writes:

Jimmy

I may not get to decide the verdict, but surely I'm still allowed to enter a plea. My history started when I was born, and I take no responsibility for the "sins of the fathers" prior to that. I have no control over them, and by extension, no responsibility for them.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 20, 2008 10:52 AM Scottie writes:

CW

The Missus pointed that out to me yesterday. I don't go to church for Marxist Economic theory, nor for political indoctrination; I go for spiritual guidance and biblical instruction.

If Obama is comfortable supporting a transparently racist preacher, let him suffer the consequences in the public square. He deserves nothing less.

The grand bargain he proposes, that past racism won't be held against whites in return for not holding his race against him now, is a sham that has been exposed as one. He cannot transcend racism on the one hand while simultaneously marinading in it every Sunday on the other.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 20, 2008 10:56 AM ScarletPimpernel writes:

the Oprah and choosing assoc.

I understand that the Oprah goes to the same church. Also, I respect O as a business woman but never fell for any of her vague feel-good shenanigans.

Scottie - you've struck on something very important about this Obama situation: He chose his associates and none of us chooses their family. "the sins of the fathers"
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 20, 2008 11:00 AM Scottie writes:

USA Eagle

I afraid these revelations about Obama point to the exact opposite conclusion. His promise of unity is false; he doesn't believe it himself. When he wins the nomination, you will see every single criticism of him and his policies spun as a racist attack.

If he and his minions are willing to throw Geraldine Ferraro under the bus for stating the obvious as a racist, I can't imagine they will refrain from playing the race card ad nauseum against John McCain this fall.

Personally, I'm not buying any of it. If black people are dumb enough to buy into this anti-American, anti-white ideology, let them stew in their own juices. It's pretty apparent that no matter how successful they are (Obama and wife make a half a million dollars a year), no matter how many breaks they get (both Obamas are graduates of Princton and Harvard), they will still spit on the hand that reached out to help them. Enough is enough. We could get the same result without any effort at accomodation at all.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 20, 2008 11:03 AM Scottie writes:

Nee

You are too kind my diminuitive little patriot. And should you summon me, I would gladly rally to your cause. Thank you for the kind words.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 20, 2008 11:09 AM Scottie writes:

Scarlet Pimpernell

Apparently he thinks blaming white people for all of the problems in the black community is the only way to be authentically black. And if someone with his background and opportunities can cling to that nonsense, I imagine the rest of the crowd in those sermons sincerely believed it as well judging by their enthusiastic support. If being black requires one to disavow any responsibility for their own life, then let them wallow in self pity. You can't help those that will not help themselves. When you get right down to it, we don't owe these perpetual victims any help at all.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 20, 2008 1:00 PM Redhead writes:

So you’re the one!

I applied for the pig poop job, and they said the position was filled! I nearly lost my cell phone because I couldn’t pay the bill!
Ok, I didn’t really want that job anyway. The benefits were terrible.

But I did get turned aside at a flower shop once, while the next guy in the door got served. Yeah, I’m white (really white, like copy paper white. Except when I’m toasty pink after a few minutes in the sun.) the next guy was black, and so was the owner. I never went back to that store, and that’s the end of it. He didn’t want my money, so I went somewhere else to buy roses to give to my wife on Valentine’s day.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 20, 2008 3:50 PM The Crawfish writes:

Scottie, it gets worse

The supposedly-reverend Wright claims that he gets his philosophy from Dr. James Cone. He's the guy who made up the philosophy that the New Black Panther Party uses. Scarey stuff. Of course, I've got it posted as of last night (hat tip to Glenn Beck).

I was born in the USA in 1965, birth parents unknown. I am a true native American. I have no family history of slave ownership or Jim Crow Law support (kinda easy when I have no family history, period). I don't owe anybody anything. I've seen the good, bad, ugly, and indifferent side of people of all races. Some people, unfortunately, make all of the stereotypes real. I choose not to associate with those people.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 20, 2008 3:56 PM The Crawfish writes:

BTW

You're white, so you're guilty! Your jury today is made up of: Jesse-be-the-Jackson, The Not-So-Reverend-Al, Calypso Louie, Rev(?) G-D America Wright, Kweezy Muff, and Malik Shabazz of the New Black Panther Party.

Am I the only one who has been informed by some people that whites can be racists, but blacks cannot, since they are not the ones with power? I had a troll trying to say that pro-black isn't anti-white, but pro-white is by definition anti-black. I'm trying to understand how this double standard is validated.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 20, 2008 4:20 PM Scottie writes:

RedHead

Welcome to the Heartland. If we're gonna let the likes of Crawfish in here, then Gingers are as welcome as can be.

As for your experience, money talks, BS walks. Good call. It ain't about black and white when you're in business, it's about the green.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 20, 2008 4:31 PM Scottie writes:

Crawfish

The only answer to the premise that only whites can be racist is that it is a double standard at work.

Anyone that wants to judge me by a different standard than they want to be judged themselves is indulging in blatant hypocrisy.

Or in simpler Crawfish type terms, the contention is utter HorsePuckey! I reject the prmemise on its face. For more on this see my post from November 2006 on this

http://heartlandpatriot.blogtownhall.com/2006/11/06/verbal_ stink_bombs.thtml
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 20, 2008 4:54 PM 1maschrom writes:

Bingo!


Whatever happened to judging people on the content of their character?! Whether someone is a good/decent human being, is ALL that has ever mattered to me. Period.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 20, 2008 6:25 PM Scottie writes:

1maschrom

Yeppers, seems like no matter what they ask for, once you give it to them, they just want more. I'm sick of it. If this is what passes for black culture, they should demand a refund. It's nothing but racist, anti-American poison, wrapped up in demagougery.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 8:32 AM Ed Lilly writes:

On Oprah and apologies

First, on Scarlet's point on Oprah, I don't know what the whole story is, but I've read stories over the past couple of weeks that indicate Oprah was a member of the same church w/ Wright and Obama, but that she left it. One more recent story went so far as to characterize it as Oprah having left the church quietly, implying that she was doing it to avoid publicity and scrutiny, perhaps because of some of the things Wright has spouted. If anyone is following this more closely than I, which is probably everyone, please correct me if I'm wrong on that.

On Scottie's more general point, I posted a few months ago on my now home state of New Jersey's apology for slavery. And I think I saw a news story in the past few weeks where this issue was either dragged to Washington, in part with the help of the New Jersey legislators who were involved in the slavery apology, or perhaps it was a "rogue" group of states who were trying to get some traction for a conglomerate apology. As Sam Kinison noted, "It never ends!"
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 12:06 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie

With the exception of getting straight A's and serving in the military, I can say what you just wrote in this article. I cannot remember having treated Blacks in a racist way. But I have come to a different conclusion.

When I was in school, the author of "Black Like Me" spoke at my high school. John Griffin told his friends what he was about to do. And his friends, probably some of who would deny they were racists, told him that his experiment would not work. They told him that, even with dark skin, he could not pass for a Black man because of traits such as how he talked and the words he used and so forth. In essence, his friends were showing that they were racists. Certainly they were not KKK racists, but because racism exists on a continuum rather than at a single pole, they were racists.

It might be that you are not a racist. What is wrong for your note is your logic. You reason that if you could overcome your obstacles, then all Blacks should be able to just suck it up. Perhaps if you had lived as a Black person, then your note might have more credibility.

But then we would run into another logical problem. Is it logical to expect the masses to be pick themselves up by their bootstraps because some exceptional people have done so? After all, it is the exceptional person who excels in an Ivy League school. If your answer is yes, then I will point to people who, when faced with higher taxes, were able to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and make even more money. And if they can do that, you can so you should never complain about higher taxes.

I don't think that we can always determine if we are racists. We should listen to others who belong to that race to verify that we are not. If they say yes, don't automatically believe them but consider why they have said so.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 3:15 PM Scottie writes:

caday5 (Part 1)

"...told him that his experiment would not work. They told him that, even with dark skin, he could not pass for a Black man because of traits such as how he talked and the words he used and so forth. In essence, his friends were showing that they were racists."

Since when is observing obvious facts a racist construct? Your mental gymnastics notwithstanding, you cry racism here without a scintilla of evidence to support it. Is it not true that there is more to being black than skin color?

"Perhaps if you had lived as a Black person, then your note might have more credibility."

And if I looked like Tom Cruise I'd get lucky more often. So what? Am I now unable to rebut the charge of racism simply because of my skin color? Isn't that a racist assertion on your part on its face?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 3:36 PM Scottie writes:

caday5 (Part 2)

"...it is the exceptional person who excels in an Ivy League school."

Ummm, you're referring to Barrack and Michelle Obama, right? I've certainly never had the opportunity to attend an ivy league school. Have you? And dispite this unbelievable good fortune, they still CHOOSE to marinate in victimhood theology in spite of their exceptional abilities and education.

"... you can so you should never complain about higher taxes."

What in the he1l are you talking about? The concept under discussion is white guilt, not economic policy. Are you incapable of composing a rational argument without trying to jam irrelevant and extraneous leftist talking points into it? I guess you weren't kidding when you said you weren't a straight A student.

"I don't think that we can always determine if we are racists. We should listen to others who belong to that race to verify that we are not."

So I have to let the victim decide (s)he isn't a victim anymore before I can get a clean bill of moral health? What incentive does a victim have to disavow their victimhood, especially if it is the sole source of their power?

Racism (n): The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.

It's not the definition that is the problem, it's the misapplication of the term by those seeking cover for their own dysfunctional behavior by blaming their inferior results on others.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 3:40 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie

First, I never claimed you were a racist. But what I am saying, and this applies to both of us, is that perhaps feedback from Blacks would be a better indicator of whether or not we are racists rather than our own declarations of innocence. Not that we should automatically assume any such claims to be true, but that we, that is any of us, could have racist assumptions and not know it. That cuts both ways. Whites are not the only ones who can be prejudiced.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 3:41 PM Scottie writes:

If I didn't know better

I'd swear I was being taunted by Loyal Democrat here. However, LD has a much better command of language.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 3:57 PM Scottie writes:

Ed Lily

It is as impossible to apologize for something you haven't committed as it is to forgive what hasn't been done to you. In both cases, you lack moral standing to act.

It is impossible for any living person to apologize for slavery here in America. Comceptually, they are speaking on behalf of people they do not know and have never met. Would you want someone that never met you speaking for you?

The converse would be someone forgiving a murderer. The only person with the authority to forgive the offense is dead. Nobody else can presume to speak on the victims behalf.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 4:09 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie

If it will help to identify who I am not, I have never voted for a Democratic Presidential candidate. In 2000, I voted for Bush. But afterwards, I had a change in thinking so that in 2004, I voted for Nader.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 4:13 PM Scottie writes:

caday5

"...is that perhaps feedback from Blacks would be a better indicator of whether or not we are racists rather than our own declarations of innocence."

You're kidding right? Are you seriously arguing that someone other than you knows your heart better than you do? How then do you ever control your own fate? Of what use is rationality when the responsibility for someone else's interpretations carry more weight than the actual truth only you can know?

Your argument is sheer madness. If you truly do not know your own heart, perhaps silence is the best course, but subcontracting its interpretation to others surely cannot be a viable, or even desirable solution.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 4:17 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie, Part 2

BTW,I mentioned taxes because this is where conservatives claim victimhood.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 4:21 PM caday5 writes:

Ed Lily

I am in partial agreement with you. There is neither obligation nor need to personally apologize for slavery. But that is not the issue. The issue is what has happened since slavery that we possibly contribute to.

On the other hand, realize that if we claim how America was a good country or a Christian country, part of that past includes slavery as well as the ethnic cleansing of our part of North America by removing the Indians.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 4:23 PM Scottie writes:

caday5

Do be so kind as to share the "thinking" that went into your decision to vote for Nader. You seem to have a penchant for saying the most amusing things so far, pray continue illuminating the forum with your observations.

You will find I'm a big fan of parody, satire, and irony; please do continue.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 4:31 PM Scottie writes:

caday5

Do you now or have you ever believed that race (not culture, but race) accounts for differences in human character or ability or that your race is superior to others?

If you haven't, you've done nothing to warrant the guilt you seem to carry with you and so desire to attribute to others. Any serious contemplation would lead you to that singular inescapable conclusion. You are parroting ideas devoid of any substance undergirding them as somehow self-evident facts.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 4:35 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie, regarding Nader

I had a change of thinking in the summer of 2001 after doing some summer reading. This reading included works by Martin Luther King Jr and Noam Chomsky.

Thus I found myself agreeing with Nader on far more issues than I agreed with either Gore or Bush. Issues, with which I agree with Nader, include the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the War on Iraq, and the illegitimate power that corporations have over our gov't.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 4:45 PM Scottie writes:

caday5

I suggest you stop reading Chomski and start reading Thomas Sowell instead. It's the difference between feeding your mind junk food and feeding it actual nutrition.

And if it hasn't been brought to your attention yet, MLK was a Marxist ideologue and staunch socialist, notwithstanding his tremendous accomplishments in the struggle for civil rights.

Chomski's anti-military, anit-americanism rings hollow when you realize he made his fortune working for the very defense department he now condemns. He's a linguist; he has no relevant expertise or training in political science.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 5:06 PM Jimmy Carter writes:

You're so full of it,

caday5.

That is one of the oldest tricks in y'alls' book; claiming to have voted for President Bush, only to have seen the light after some brush with liberalism.

If your ideas are better, why must you lie about how you came about them?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 5:08 PM Scottie writes:

To All

Make some popcorn and pop over to Caday's blog. It's just plain laugh out loud funny. It's even funnier when you realize (s)he's actually serious!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 5:33 PM caday5 writes:

Irony here

What I find to be a common trait amongst many conservatives is to spend ridiculing and more time making accusations than answering specific points. Scottie, doesn't your biography say that you "abhor personal attacks and name-calling?"
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 10:04 PM ch47 jockey writes:

double standards

It appears the great deliverer (?) of the masses is held to a different standard than other candidates. Although not a fan of HRC if she was to attend a rally of (sen)Robert Bryds previous cronies she would be seriously disabled in her bid, and if it was a republican then the whole party would be branded as racist. The thing that bothers me the most is how many of the gullible public will buy Obama's healing American racism BS. While many say he is eloquent that may be but his statements and rhetoric ring empty. maybe that is the secret of his success empty promises to empty minds......
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 10:53 PM Scottie writes:

caday5

Once again you confuse an accurate observation for an attack. The second time in this thread in fact. Why don't you come back after you've developed a little more intellectual gravitas? I'll still be here.

As long as you think it's a good idea to let others tell you how you feel and what you think, there is little ground I can cover with you.

Here's a link to someone that had the same misguided ideas you have that managed to reach an epiphany. Maybe you can follow in his footsteps. It's from the Village Voice, a notably left publication, so you should be quite comfortable.

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0811,374064,374064,1.html/ full
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 11:03 PM Scottie writes:

Chopperman

What the Reverend Wright episode reveals is that Obama is a fraud. How can he deliver racial unity while defending and explaining away the obviously racist and divisive behavior and ideology of his pastor of twenty years? If he cannot confront both sides of the issue, then he cannot achieve unity without unilateral capitulation by whites in the face of clearly unacceptable behavior by blacks. In short, he's not an honest broker and it's obvious for all to see that he isn't.

Best of all, this wasn't exposed before he had the nomination pretty well wrapped up. There's no way Hillary can steal the nomination from him at this late hour without throwing the Dems into chaos, so it looks like the presidency is McCain's to lose at this point.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 22, 2008 11:42 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie

Discrediting is attacking. Again, instead attributing characteristics you think you see, prove your statements.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 23, 2008 2:51 AM Scottie writes:

caday5

So I refuted your ideas, so what? That isn't a personal attack. Citing facts and telling the truth are prized commodities here. Are you going to contribute any, or are you going to just keep trowelling out leftist talking points without support, thought, or understanding?

Second;y, what point do you wish me to prove? The only "proofs" you've offered are laughably false assertions masquerading as deep observations.

Maybe you should try the shallow end of the pool, you're clearly out of your depth here.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 23, 2008 2:55 AM ShiningCity writes:

Hey.

1. I wish I had red hair so I could use the handle "redhead." It's just cool.

2. This topic infuriates me. My occupation has put me in contact with many black folks who think I've had a charmed life because I'm white. They say things like, "You just don't understand cuz you white" and such silliness. This attitude completely dismisses me and my life experience--they have no idea what hardships I've face--and overcome. It's lunacy to throw away opportunities to interact meaningfully with others like that.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 23, 2008 6:38 AM Scottie writes:

Shining City

If that irritates you, how about a couple of folks, both graduates of Princton and Harvard Law school, defending this attitude as a "black thing"? Hint, one of them is running for president. It's mind boggling on its face.

I think defending this obviously racist behavior from someone he deliberately adopted as the primary male role model in his life completely undermines any credibility Obama has with respect to being a "Uniter". He has revealed an unacceptable bias on the central theme of his alleged "Post-Racial" candidacy.

Sadly, I don't think you can win the presidency by backing someone that essentially spits in the face of 80% of the electorate, no matter what your race is. At least John McCain only defends behavior that is abhorrant to only half the electorate with his open borders leanings. Ultimately, and unfortunately, that may be the greatest telling difference in this next election.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 23, 2008 9:31 AM caday5 writes:

Scottie

Discrediting pretending to be superior does not equal refutation. Show one assertion of mine that was false.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 23, 2008 11:02 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Scottie

If I am reading caday5 correctly then only white people can judge whether Rev. Wright is a racist. If we tell him so he need not take that as true but he must consider why we think it is true.

Has anyone seen any evidence of this introspection? I think not. IMO, Obama and his mentor have set race relations back 40 years in this country.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 23, 2008 12:46 PM Scottie writes:

caday5

OK, how about: It is fundamentally false that others are better judges of your heart than you are.

As William F. Buckley aaid, “I won't insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said.”

Care to "prove" the inverse, since you asserted it?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 23, 2008 12:53 PM Scottie writes:

Sgt Relic

I strongly caution you to take some dramamine before trying to follow the logic of Caday's arguments.

He lost me with his reference to Chomsky as justification for voting for Nader without issuing the mandatory spew alert.

Still his bold assertions of the impossible as established fact are amusing.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 23, 2008 12:56 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie

I simply said that others from one group that has been oppressed can better tell us when we are racist against them.

They better tell because they recognize when you are not talking to or treating them as equals. They recognize the difference between how you talk to people from your group and how you talk to people from their group. Is their judgment without error? No. But they can see facial expressions and hear differences that we are not aware of. Finally, if we believe that racism is immoral, we are less likely to admit that we are doing something immoral.

Remember I said that you were to disprove one of my assertions. Whether or not the argument above proves my assertion is not the question. You have not disproved it. And you generalized the assertion whereas I was specific regarding to people being racist on a continuum.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 23, 2008 1:28 PM ch47 jockey writes:

happy easter

Have a happy,safe and blessed Easter to all
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 23, 2008 6:38 PM Scottie writes:

caday5

OK, I'll play along.

In essence you demand a double standard. An assertion by a black person, whether false or not, is presumed true. However an assertion by an equally sincere white person, whether true or not, is presumed false. Fairness (and justice) requres an objective standard that applies to all equally. That is the central flaw in your argument. You cannot hold black people to a different standard than whites without discriminating against one or the other.

Since discrimination based on race is wrong, your position contradicts itself. Whether discrimination exists or not cannot depend on the race of the person making the assertion. If it does, then it implies a difference in standard based soley on race and is discriminatroy out of hand, and therefore wrong.

Another problem with your position is that you cannot deem one party more reliable, even clairvoyant, with no legitimate basis for doing so. Neither blacks nor whites can know the heart of the other. If you assert that blacks can and whites cannot, then again by definition, your position is racist.

And that is a refutation of your position. You cannot assert that blacks claims of discrimination have any greater merit than whites claims that they haven't without taking a racist position in order justify discrimination based on race.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 23, 2008 6:49 PM Scottie writes:

Chopperman

Thanks buddy. And on behalf of the Missus and the whole Heartland bunch, we return your good wishes. have a wonderful Easter.

Christ has died, Christ has risen, Christ will come again. Amen.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 23, 2008 7:30 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie

All I am saying is that by listening to and watching us, Blacks might be able to detect racist attitudes in us. After all, it is not unusual for others, especially close friends, to detect attitudes we have that we might not want to admit to having.

And I never denied that it works both ways. In fact, in my March 22 note posted at 3:40, I said this applies both ways. Some have no problem saying that Rev Wright is racist. Should he listen to those statements? If you say yes, then shouldn't you give his statements a fair listening? A fair listening includes understanding the context from which he speaks.

There are many variables that determine whether people make it on their own or need help. Like you, I am not envious of people who make more than me. But I think it is reasonable for people who are barely struggling to survive, who did not start with the opportunities I had, to be envious. I don't think my example of not being envious with the opportunities I started with should be the standard by which all others should be judged.

What I find troublesome with the subject in general, not with your notes in particular, is that we are more concerned with receiving a clean bill of health with regards to being racist than in trying to eradicate racism. There is much that many Whites do not know about Blacks. Below are some stats from the Chicago metropolitan area for the year 2000 cited in a Paul Street article (http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/16947):

The Black Median income is 58% of the White median income

For the median income for the Black household is $6,000 less than the "basic family budget" as stated by the Economic Policy Institute.

More than 25% of Black households in the Chicago area lived on $15,000 while more than 50% lived on less than $35,000. Whites fared far better at 10% and 30% respectively

14 of the 15 city's poorest neighborhoods were mostly Black.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 23, 2008 7:40 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie Part 2

BTW, I never said Wright's statements should be assumed true. I have specifically said that claims made by Blacks that Whites are racists are not without error.

What I am saying is that our claims of not being a racist are more credible when Blacks from all backgrounds agree. I will also include that if Blacks want to eliminate racism, then they should listen to us while searching their souls to see if they have prejudices.

If we make racism the enemy rather than a particular group, and we allow others to assess us with regards to racism, we have a better chance of eliminating it. That is why I prefer to listen to Rev Wright, to his valid points as well as where he is wrong, and to others like him.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 23, 2008 10:49 PM Scottie writes:

caday5

I cannot continue this conversation with you in this format. The restriction on the amount of space does not permit me to adequately respond to your many points and ideas, and I'm sure you feel no less constrained. I do not question your sincerity, but I disagree with you almost completely.

I am happy to continue this dialog with you through e-mail should you so desire. Send an e-mail to: heartlandpatriot@yahoo.com with Caday5 in the subject line if that's the case. It may well make for a good article for one of us later.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, March, 24, 2008 8:23 PM Nee writes:

Man,

How is it I miss all the fun? LOL. New post up, as JC was picking on me...
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, March, 24, 2008 8:31 PM Scottie writes:

Nee

Let me get this ice cream bucket off of ol' Bessie and I'll be right over.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, March, 24, 2008 10:48 PM Sheila writes:

Scottie

Sadly, the people who's blood was shed to end slavery simply are never considered...

What I find interesting is that all the resentment seems to be on the left...blacks on the right have moved on and don't play the blame game, as people like Wright do...the racism and America hating is on the left of the spectrum...

Remember what the leftist black columnists did to Condi? If she had been appt by a dem, and she were a dem, she would be the woman wonder! They will never recognize the fact that Bush has appointed more minoriries than Clinton ever did...not because of the color of skin, but qualifications...the "color blindness" is on the right...

King's "dream" of character being how people are judged is real, on the right, not the left.

Wright/Farakahn/nation of islam all sound very similar...
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, March, 25, 2008 7:20 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Scottie

Sheila is absolutely on target. What is under discussion here is not Rev. Wright's race but rather his character and by extension the character of his mentee.

Caday5's verbal gymnastics don't change that.

Caday5, if your still around, here's your homework assignment. I believe that you are a racist, now prove that I'm wrong. Once you figure out that you can't prove a negative then you will know what it is like to defend yourself against an EEOC complaint, where the burden of proof rests with the accused.

This is been a favorite tactic of the public employee unions since the law was passed. In the late 70's, as Business Agent for the APWU, I personally assisted employees in filing these complaints. The union promoted this tactic because it sanctioned the budget of the local postmaster regardless of outcome. We schooled that the law only says that "you must believe that you have been discriminated against" to file and the beauty part is the impossibility of disproving another person's belief.

Most of the complaints are later ruled to be "unfounded", at some level of the process, but they always leave a mark on the target. By the way, this only works if the member is not a white male.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, March, 25, 2008 9:48 AM caday5 writes:

Sgt Relic

All you have done is asserted that I am a racist. You have not shown why that is the case.

I have simply said that before asserting I am not a racist, I need to listen to the WHOLE (note the word whole Shiela) Black community, and every other racial community, and consider, not automatically agree with, their feedback. And then make adjustments. Then if there is racism in me, I need to make changes. So your accusation does not give me any help feedback, rather it is given not to correct but to put down. My point is that we need to address racism in a way where we are given helpful feedback so we can change rather than to use the term as a way to elevate ourselves above others.

All the left has said is that racism is still a significant problem. The right has said that because individual responsibility determines everything, the existence of racism is a moot point.

I have heard from too many individuals who have, from what they have experienced or observed, say that racism is still a significant problem. From what I have seen and heard, prejudice still rears its ugly head, it holds people back either partially or completely, can exist in a person of any race, and needs to be addressed.

But we need to change how we address racism and prejudice. Instead of using accusations of racism as in a witch hunt, we need to listen to others to see if we have any racism in us so we can change.

Jesus' parable of the two men praying is most helpful here. The religious professional was content with his own proclamations of self-righteousness and went home condemned. The tax-collector, the lowest of the lows, begged for mercy and went home forgiven.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, March, 25, 2008 10:49 AM Frigglesnitz writes:

Wow

This needs to be in every newspaper in every city and town in this nation.

Beautiful writing, too, if you don't mind my saying so.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, March, 25, 2008 1:20 PM Scottie writes:

Frigglesnitz

Thank you for the kind words.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, March, 25, 2008 1:36 PM Scottie writes:

Sheila

Sadly, the people who's blood was shed to end slavery simply are never considered...

[We seem to remined all too often that this country had slavery while more often overlooking the fact that we nearly tore this nation apart to bring the abhorrent practice to a halt].


What I find interesting is that all the resentment seems to be on the left...blacks on the right have moved on and don't play the blame game, as people like Wright do...the racism and America hating is on the left of the spectrum...

[Remember Sheila, the left is the party of children. When you see hysterical ranting and illogical arguments, the source is generally obvious. Grown ups don't tend to blame others and throw temper tantrums shouting "It's Not Fair!!!"]


Remember what the leftist black columnists did to Condi? If she had been appt by a dem, and she were a dem, she would be the woman wonder! They will never recognize the fact that Bush has appointed more minoriries than Clinton ever did...not because of the color of skin, but qualifications...the "color blindness" is on the right...

[To paraphrase Reverend Wright, "Condi didn't fit the mold!"]


King's "dream" of character being how people are judged is real, on the right, not the left.

[In fact, no matter what is asked for, once it is ceded, more is demanded and no gratitude is ever shown, no recognition of the progress acheived is ever contemplated.]


Wright/Farakahn/nation of islam all sound very similar...

[Probably because the former idolizes the two latter.]
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, March, 25, 2008 1:41 PM Scottie writes:

Sgt Relic & Caday

I want a clean fight. No low blows, no rabbit punches, and in the event of a knock down I want the other fighter to go to a neutral corner. No cussing, name calling, or spitting. Protect yourself at all times. May the best man win.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, March, 25, 2008 1:55 PM Scottie writes:

Just a note in passing here

I have often observed the Left's stunning inability for introspection. I think this explains Caday's need to have his heart and his motives blessed by those no better than himself. Nonetheless, the only source of truth in the matter remains the heart which only he can know.

"Look well into thyself; there is a source of strength which will always spring up if thou wilt always look there." -- Marcus Aurelius
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, March, 25, 2008 2:53 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie

First, I didn't know sgt relic and I were finding.

Second, I shared the expectations I have of everyone as well as myself. For whatever reason, you are putting it in a negative light.

Third, Being introspective does not imply that you do not imply that you do not need to listen.

Fourth, why not listen to others?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, March, 25, 2008 3:25 PM Scottie writes:

Caday

Here's a quarter, go buy a sense of humor! Geez
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, March, 25, 2008 3:27 PM Scottie writes:

and a grammer guide

Wow, a triple negative!


Third, Being introspective does not imply that you do not imply that you do not need to listen.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, March, 25, 2008 4:05 PM The Interface writes:

Scottie...

...your short essay is a masterpiece and reflects what a large portion of this country believes and lives.

The discussion thread following is hoot to read!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, March, 25, 2008 4:14 PM Scottie writes:

Interface

I'm currently engaged in an e-mail exchange with Caday that allows us to trade thoughts at greater length than this format allows. He's not a bad guy, but he is bit misguided. Sure does make for an interesting thread for the readers though. Thanks for stopping by and your kind words, buddy. It's what makes it all worthwhile.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, March, 25, 2008 4:33 PM Jimmy Carter writes:

HAHAHA!!

"Third, Being introspective does not imply that you do not imply that you do not need to listen."


Man, I would like to have been in their head to witness the committee of neurons that came up with and agreed to THAT sentence.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, March, 25, 2008 7:17 PM Scottie writes:

Jimmy

That truly does look like a sentence created by some UN committee. But don't not worry that you you understand it not, even if its not understandable, 'cause I'm sure he didn't not mean for you to not understand it.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, March, 25, 2008 8:23 PM Sgt Relic writes:

Caday5

I am merely trying to demonstrate to you that you can't prove you are not a racist. The accusation only allows for your complete agreement to the charge because you can't offer proof to the contrary. Further, as I pointed out to you the burden of proof is not mine.

It is irrelevant what is in my heart or mind it is how I deal with others that is the measure of the character Dr. King was talking about.

It is a shame that the Rev. Wright chooses to hang on to old grievances but what I find most offensive is his us of the pulpit in God's church to condemn the country that makes his speech possible. His mentee has made himself conspicuous by his objection to wearing the flag of the country he seeks to govern. I can't look into their hearts and minds but I judge their character to be lacking.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, March, 25, 2008 11:17 PM caday5 writes:

Proof reader needed

As has been well-documented, I did a poor job of editing a point in one of my notes. Are there any volunteers to edit my notes?

Scottie: you missed on both accounts when describing me. I am not misguided. I am a sinner however and I take that truth seriously when listening to others.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, March, 25, 2008 11:31 PM caday5 writes:

Sgt Relic

It was never my intention to prove I am not a racist. It is my point that no individual can prove that they are not racists whether it is you or myself.

We can claim not to be racists but a better indicator of whether we are or not is the feedback we get from those who have suffered from racism the most. This is the point of contention in this thread. Can anyone inerrantly claim not to be racist in any way? If not, isn't it better to include, with our own introspection, the feedback we get from, again, those who have suffered the most from racism? If we want to reduce or eliminate racism, then including this feedback could only be seen as advantageous.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, March, 26, 2008 8:54 AM Scottie writes:

Just an Observation

Caday says he isn't misguided in one post, then proves that he is in the next. Now that is irony. Kudos!

As for Sgt Relic's points, I agree that you cannot prove a negative and while his expression is somewhat clumsy, I also agree that you cannot know the heart of another, you must base your judgement on their actual behavior and the positions they stake out.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, March, 26, 2008 9:20 AM caday5 writes:

Scottie

Doesn't the Bible ask:

Who can say "I have cleansed my heart, I am pure of sin"? Prov 21:9

If this is biblical passage, then for those who believe the Bible, relying solely on one's self-assessment is not an option.

And if you want to say I am misguided, be specific.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, March, 26, 2008 9:29 AM Scottie writes:

Another point

We are each responsible for our own feelings; we are in fact the only person with control of them. While we cannot control the behavior of others, or their perceptions, we can control our reactions.

What Caday is proposing is we allow others to foist the responsibility for something we have no control over onto us. It is as if the judgement and interpretation of others is somehow more valid than our own. However, doesn't that imply that others are somehow morally superior to us based on nothing more than their ability to claim victim status, whether real or manufactured?

The victim classes can tie themselves up in knots and make unreasonable demands to their hearts content, but I am under no obligation to take them seriously, and I'm not going to. That's the whole premise of the article.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, March, 26, 2008 9:38 AM Scottie writes:

You want the biblical support?

"Beware of false teachers who come disguised as harmless sheep, but are wolves and will tear you apart. You can detect them by the way they act, just as you can identify a tree by its fruit. You need never confuse grapevines with thorn bushes or figs with thistles. Different kinds of fruit trees can quickly be identified by examining their fruit. A variety that produces delicious fruit never produces an inedible kind. And a tree producing an inedible kind can't produce what is good. So the trees having the inedible fruit are chopped down and thrown on the fire. Yes, the way to identify a tree or a person is by the kind of fruit produced. "Not all who sound religious are really godly people. They may refer to me as 'Lord,' but still won't get to heaven. For the decisive question is whether they obey my Father in heaven. At the Judgment many will tell me, 'Lord, Lord, we told others about you and used your name to cast out demons and to do many other great miracles.' But I will reply, 'You have never been mine. Go away, for your deeds are evil." Matthew 7:15-23

"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!" - Isaiah 5:20

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, March, 26, 2008 12:49 PM ShiningCity writes:

Ok. I can't resist.

Scottie... I just have to.

You have a misspelling in telling Caday he needs a "grammer guide."

You know I heart you.


EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, March, 26, 2008 5:27 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie

I agree with you that we are responsible for how we feel about others and how we control our behavior.

But, are you saying that because we are responsible for these things, that our assessment of our feelings and behaviors is infallible? Also, how is the scripture I cited applicable if we are the only ones who assess our own behavior?

Also, why quote a verse that deals with those who oppose the faith here? After all, we are not talking about a fundamental tenet of the Christian faith. Is everyone who disagrees with you a false teacher?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, March, 26, 2008 8:43 PM Scottie writes:

caday5

If you want to voluntarily (and unnecessarily) carry a martyr's cross for something you KNOW you don't feel in your heart, you are of course free to do so. For my part, I categorically reject your premise in its entirety.

We've come full circle with you offering nothing more than restating your premise over and over again. Other mortal beings somehow know our hearts better than we do ourselves. We must distrust our own feelings and seek validation (or more likely condemnation) from them. Apparently these folks you seek to gain favor with are clairvoyant and their opinion is more important to you than what you and only you can know is the truth.

Further, you've offered no proof that your premise is correct beyond your own intuition and constant restatement. You instead demanded that I refute your assertion, which I feel I more than adequately have. At this point there is nothing left but to agree to disagree. I hope your voluntary burden of undeserved guilt lies lightly on your shoulders.

Do stop by again. Your participation here has been welcome in spite of, and because of, our disagreement.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, March, 26, 2008 8:53 PM Scottie writes:

Shining City

I've been hoist by my own petard by the good doctor. Now that's irony of the most delicious kind, self-made and self-inflicted.

I heart you right back, Doc. It's hard to take myself too seriously; my friends here are always ready to pop my ego bubble if it gets too big. Maybe I should change my handle to Icarus!

Grammar, grammar, grammar....
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, March, 26, 2008 8:59 PM Scottie writes:

And Caday

The biblical references I cited were to Reverend Wright, the Genesis of this entire kerfuffle. Sorry if it came across as oblique.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, March, 26, 2008 9:27 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie

You have not refuted anything I have said. The scripture I cited, if you regard the Bible as authoritative, refutes the confidence that you have in yourself. It is not that your own self-assessment is without validity, it is that it is not infallible. In fact, the verse I cited says no one can say they are pure or without sin.

We can have any opinion of ourselves that we want. But realize our self-image is often constructed with bias. That is why getting feedback from others can be, though is not always, helpful.

You made a good point when you said blood was spilled to free the slaves. We need to honor those who died for this cause. But our nation's oppression of the Blacks did not end with the Emancipation Proclamation or the Civil War. Either formally through laws, or informally as practiced by a significant number of the populous, our nation has oppressed Blacks far beyond the end of the Civil War. The question is, how far past the struggle for Civil Rights did our country continue to do so?

We grew up in times and cultures that oppressed Blacks. It is very possible that some of those attitudes rubbed off on us. That is where we need to get feedback. We need to know whether we hold on to some of those old stereotypes that either grandly or subtly put down Blacks or other groups.

So this isn't about making you feel guilty for what someone else did past; it is about letting ourselves be examined for attitudes that we would do better if we changed. To do that, we need to listen. And if we are going to listen, we need to realize that we can have faults that we are blind to.

There is no sin in listening to and learning from others. There is a deadly sin that keeps us from doing so: pride. Pride is the antithesis of faith.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, March, 26, 2008 9:29 PM caday5 writes:

Also Scottie

Where I see Rev Wright as being wrong is when he says: "God D*$& America." He would be more correct to say "God Have Mercy On America."

And he does need to let go of that anger. And we need to see that there are very legitimate reasons why he had that anger in the first place.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, March, 26, 2008 10:05 PM Cynewulf writes:

Hey, Scottie, you sound like

Mike Rowe's twin.

http://dsc.discovery.com/fansites/dirtyjobs/dirtyjobs.html
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 1:38 AM ShiningCity writes:

My favorite

Well, all "grammar" aside, you got "kerfuffle" correct. And it's one of my favorite words. So, I say you're the bomb D.

(http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Bomb+D)




EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 7:37 AM Scottie writes:

Caday5

If you want to subcontract your feelings and morality, and substitute the accusations of others for your own introspection, by all means do so. However, you haven't made a compelling case for me to follow you down that path, repetition notwithstanding.

Rev Wright isn't merely angry, he's absolutely hateful. Whatever was done to him, it was done by other individuals long ago, not by the white race as a whole. I've never even met the man and I'm certain I've never done him an ill turn. There is no justification for his hateful unhinged rhetoric, and I for one will not excuse it. Seems fair to me; he's not ready to excuse even imaginary slights on my (our) part.

And once again, repetition isn't enlightenment. If the best you can do is reassert your point again and asy "Uh Uh, no you didn't refute my point," it would be better at this point to let the matter drop. It's becomming tiresome.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 8:05 AM Scottie writes:

Unlike Mike Rowe

I didn't have the luxury of leaving at the end of the day knowing I didn't have to return the next to do it all over again, nor did I enjoy the compensation that would allow me to walk away from it. There is no shortage of back-breaking, dangerous, and filthy work to be done.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 8:08 AM Scottie writes:

Doc

Hot diggity!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 8:20 AM Peppermint2 writes:

Scottie

Amen to this. I almost wrote a similar article. We must be thinking alike on this.

I find myself not guilty too. My ancestors were not even in this country when slavery was going on and I won't be held accountable for for this.

I've got a new article up on Black Liberation Theology that might tie in a bit with what you wrote here.

And, btw, thanks for the fudge tip from Uncle Scottie. Goshawk is trying it out.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 8:28 AM caday5 writes:

Scottie

If we automatically accepted what people had to say to us, you would have a partial point by saying subcontracting our feelings and morality.

But I never proposed that. I simply said that considering the weaknesses of the culture and times we have grown up in, the seriousness of the issue, the sufferings that have been endured by minorities, and the Biblically documented weaknesses of our sinful hearts, feedback from others carries a credibility that self-proclamation does not have.

What was done to Rev Wright and people he is associated with was done by others. I agree entirely. But a couple of points come up here. First, with regards to us, were these actions performed by people who grew up in cultures that had similar views to race as the culture we grew up in, and if we see what those actions did, how do we reach out to correct the situation? You may not feel obligated to do so but would not reaching out imitate how God treated us in Christ? Did not God send his own Son to die for us while we were yet sinners?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 8:39 AM Scottie writes:

I have a thought Folks

Perhaps the reason I don't see black people as different is that I came of age in the military. Race was of no consequence there. We were all mistreated, abused, and pushed with equal abandon by the drill instructors. In that crucible of common suffering the truth of the matter was internalized: that whatever our differences, racial or otherwise, we were all really the same in the end. We all toiled, endured, and bled the same as everyone else. We each earned the right to belong to something larger than ourselves.

I cannot imagine being disappointed that a fellow soldier coming to my aid was black, nor can I imagine not going to the aid of another because he was. We were all "Brothers in Arms", an honorable construct largely lost on today's weak-kneed youth that deem themselves "too enlightened" for such honorable concepts.

That said, I find it particularly shocking that the hate filled rhetoric coming from the pulpit of Rev Wright is coming from the mouth of a Marine; someone that knows better.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 8:56 AM Nee writes:

Well said!

Having been there, too, I totally agree with you Scottie. We even had a chick who had a problem woth her arms and legs being different lengths. Because she could physically perform, she was treated no different, even if we did feel sorry when she struggled.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 8:59 AM Scottie writes:

Caday

We are not a nation of subgroups and stereotypes, we are a nation of individuals. Classism is a Marxist construct, not an American one. We are each responsible for our own acts. We should all be judged by the content of our individual character. As soon as you assign someone to a group, you remove all of the distinctions inherent in their individuality. Whatever happened to Rev Wright happened to him, not to all black people. And whoever perpetrated it was also an individual, not the entire white race.

Your thoughts are your own, not mine. Our disagreement here points out that white people are not some kind of monolithic entity, doesn't it? And I refuse to lump all black people into a monolithic group either. If I did, I would have to be as disgusted with Clarance Thomas as I am Rev Wright, wouldn't I? If "they're all the same" had any basis in reality, then Louis Farrakan is no different than Martin Luther King. Quit stereotyping people and lumping them into classes. Instead see them as the individuals they are. Having black skin isn't the totality of an individual and it tells you nothing about the person beyond his pigmentation. There is no "typical" black person, any more than there are typical white people, Barrak Obama's contention notwithstanding.

You're beginning to look foolish now. Stop it.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 9:18 AM Scottie writes:

Nee

That she struggled isn't the point, that she overcame and earned the honor of "siserhood" is. Her accomplishment wasn't tainted by special considerations, and subsequently her pride in the accomplishment was not diminished. And your respect for her if anything was enhanced. She wore the uniform with the same justified pride that you did, maybe moreso.

Belonging to a group only commands respect if you have to actually work and sacrifice to become part of it. Soldiers are a great example. It requires no effort or sacrifice whatsoever to be part of a victim group, and belonging to one commands no respect as a result.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 11:46 AM Nee writes:

I know

We just felt bad because sometimes we wished we COULD make it easy. She never complained, either.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 2:12 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie

WWII veterans were all treated a like until they went back to civilian life. Then the Blacks saw that the freedoms they had fought for others were not being extended to them.

Whether you like it or not, classism is reality regardless of the theories you reject. Those with money, have pull and influence over our gov't and this is why we have wars (http://www.fas.org/man/smedley.htm), laws that deregulate to favor the rich, and tax laws that favor the rich just to name a few.

The gov't does not treat each citizen equally. Take the scandalous rescue of Bear-Stearns. This financial institution was bought out by JP Morgan with significant help from the fed. Yet the homeowners who were deceived and abused were left hanging. If you do not want bailouts and welfare for citizens, then you must protest even more loudly when the rich receive the welfare. The inequitable treatment shows that we are not just one nation, it shows we are groups regardless of what any school of thought recognizes or denies.

What is missing is a consistency of morality. It is easy to denounce Rev Wright though much of what he said is true, it is just as easy to excuse yourself from helping those in need.

With all due respect, Scottie, if you apply the military model to society, then you did not serve your country to preserve its freedoms, you served your country to make it conform to your image. And even in the military, there are classes, these classes are called enlisted ranks and officers, classes are also called ranks.

Logically, your problem is that of reductionism. You think that personal responsibility explains it all. The only thing such reductionism does is give you permission to not to care for others. Because we live in a society where we are interdependent, we have both personal and social responsibilities. And if that bothers you and you don't mind if poor people die for lack of help, then perhaps you should reread what Rev Wright says to see who is spreading hate.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 6:01 PM Scottie writes:

Caday5

Let's address this shall we:

"WWII veterans were all treated a like (sic) until they went back to civilian life. Then the Blacks saw that the freedoms they had fought for others were not being extended to them."
[You're going back three generations in order to justify the grievances of today. No sale. I certainly wasn't in any position of authority back then, and I have no responsibility for whatever may have happened way back before I was born.]

"Whether you like it or not, classism is reality regardless of the theories you reject. Those with money, have pull and influence over our gov't and this is why we have wars (http://www.fas.org/man/smedley.htm)"
[The link is a speech from 1933. This whole post is starting to stink of desparation.]

"...laws that deregulate to favor the rich, and tax laws that favor the rich just to name a few."
[Yep those evil rich folks sure have the system wired. Maybe that's why the top five percent pays half of the taxes in this country while the bottom half pays in about five percent. Those bastards have really rigged the system, haven't they? And they don't even have the "audacity to hope" that they might receive some benefit for their contributions.]
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 6:17 PM Scottie writes:

caday5 (Part 2)

The gov't does not treat each citizen equally. Take the scandalous rescue of Bear-Stearns. This financial institution was bought out by JP Morgan with significant help from the fed.

[Let's see, the stock price of Bear Sterns dropped from $140 a share to $2 a share, so those wiley evil rich guys have somehow rigged the system so that they are financially wiped out. Then JP Morgan steps in and buys the company out to secure the bondholders and to prevent the employees from going down the tubes and losing all of that financial talent. That they got it at a bargain price sounds like good old fashioned capitalism to me.]


"Yet the homeowners who were deceived and abused were left hanging."

[Given the financial disclosure laws we have, I find it far more likely that the "poor homeowner's knew full well what they were getting into and they bit off more than they could chew based on the assumption that home prices whould continue to rise forever. Of course, none of those poor homeowners lied about having enough income to service these mortgages in order to qualify, did they?]


"If you do not want bailouts and welfare for citizens, then you must protest even more loudly when the rich receive the welfare."

[When have I ever stated that they should? I can't seem to locate the section of the constitution the empowers the federal government to provide welfare of any sort to anybody. Can you?]


"The inequitable treatment shows that we are not just one nation, it shows we are groups regardless of what any school of thought recognizes or denies."

[Other than your unhinged rant about the evil rich somehow getting all the breaks, did you have some specific inequitable treatment within the past decade or so in mind?]
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 6:18 PM Sgt Relic writes:

Scottie

"coming from the mouth of a Marine; someone that knows better."

Amen! The United States Marine
Corps is an equal opportunity abuser and out of that shared experience race just seems inconsequential. I never thought it possible but maybe there is such a thing as an ex-Marine.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 6:28 PM Nee writes:

Yikes

That Caday person is something. He and I have been discussing things(?!!!) He pulled the same crap on his blog with me. There are no what ifs in life...it is what it is. All that wussy whining and going back to other generations-Yikes!! BTW, I love capitalism, don't you?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 6:39 PM Scottie writes:

Caday5 (Part 3)

"What is missing is a consistency of morality."
[Morality doesn't come from groups, it comes from individuals. Maybe you've heard the phrase, "You can't legislate morality?" It's a oldie but a goody. Government is no substitute for the decency of the common man, and never will be.]

"It is easy to denounce Rev Wright..."
[At least we agree on something!]

"...though much of what he said is true"
[Well maybe not :( ]

"..., it is just as easy to excuse yourself from helping those in need."
[How do you know whether or not I help those in need? That's a pretty baseless accusation, and a false one at that.]


"With all due respect, Scottie,..."
[Here it comes...]

"if you apply the military model to society,..."
[I didn't, but do continue. Would you like a bigger shovel?]

"...then you did not serve your country to preserve its freedoms, you served your country to make it conform to your image."
[How dare you?! Where do you get the unmitigated gall to mock my military service? Care to say that to my face? It would be the last thing you said coherently for a spell.]

"And even in the military, there are classes, these classes are called enlisted ranks and officers, classes are also called ranks."
[What branch did you serve in again? I must have missed it.]

You've crossed the line here Curt. What you've said here is deeply offensive. Go crawl back to whatever sewer belched you out and beg for readmittance, you've worn out your welcome here.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 6:43 PM Scottie writes:

Sgt Relic

Only another Marine can call someone an ex-Marine. As a former Army Ranger, I don't qualify to make that determination. I'll leave that to the Eagle Globe and Anchor fraternity to hash out. When they have the meeting, I hope Jack Murtha's name comes up as well.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 6:49 PM Scottie writes:

Nee

He's some piece of work, I'll give you that.

Dispite it not having been particularly kind to me, I think capitalism is the cat's pajamas. I think its most salient attribute is that it recognizes people for how they really are, whereas the collectivist systems are based on how we wish people would be.

I'd rather live in a decent reality than waste my time chasing an unobtainable utopian fantasy.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 7:20 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie

You still have not refuted anything. The reality of classism exists. You can mock, or discount my statements, it does not change the fact that it is true.

Going back three generations is relevant. That was my father's generation and certainly that culture had an influence on me and no doubt you.

Going to Bear-Stearns, yes the rich did rig the system. While people are losing their homes, the rich got the gov't to save their financial institution. All you are showing is that you are a defender of the rich at their worst and an antagonist to the poor in their need. The question is why?

Aren't the rich the ones who are benefiting from the immigration laws that conservatives curse at and yet conservatives still defend them? Isn't it the rich the ones who benefit from war? That is something that is consistent throughout time. It was noted by Helen Keller as she spoke against war and former Marine Major General Smedley Butler. Forget NAFTA, most of our old manufacturing is in China. Why? Because the rich make money off the cheap labor of China. And yet, even China is now losing manufacturing jobs to other Asian countries because even cheaper labor markets are being found. Many of these labor markets are nothing more than slave labor in disguise.

BTW, what I have said in writing, I would be glad to say to your face. Again, if you think society must follow the military model, then you served not to preserve our freedom, but to enhance your control. The military model is not a model of freedom, but of totalitarianism. That is why it is not applicable to society. I don't know one vet who would agree with you and disagree with me on that point and I know quite a few of them.




EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 7:32 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie Part 2

Re: Capitalism, it is a mixed bag. It can bring out the best and the worst in people. Therefore it needs restrictions. But perhaps Helen Keller had the best description of Capitalism. She said:

"The only moral virtue of war is that it compels the capitalist system to look itself in the face and admit it is a fraud. It compels the present society to admit that it has no morals it will not sacrifice for gain. During a war, the sanctity of a home, and even of private property is destroyed. Governments do what it is said the "crazy Socialists" would do if in power. "

Jesus gives an unfavorable review of the ultimate Captitalist in his parable in Luke 12:13-21. He describes a man who worked hard to accumulate riches so he could enjoy them only he dies early and he finds himself poor toward God.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 9:27 PM Scottie writes:

Caday

Go pizz up a rope and tell yourself it's raining.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 9:43 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie

If you are the epitome of Capitalism, it isn't impressive.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 10:19 PM Nee writes:

Caday

Now you are being a punk. You said,

""if you apply the military model to society,..."
[I didn't, but do continue. Would you like a bigger shovel?]
"...then you did not serve your country to preserve its freedoms, you served your country to make it conform to your image."
In case you didn't know, you SFB, the Army doesn't give a rat's asss about how one thinks. Uncle Sam doesn't care if you're scared to go to war or you miss your Momma. Uncle Sam wants to know do you how to get it done and if you can't GTFO. There is no doubt in my formerly trained military mind that we all did it to preserve our freedoms and we did it Uncle Sam's way. And we know the sacrifices other assshats will never know or make and we really try hard not to hold it against those losers with whom you are identified with. But one thing another soldier will never tolerate is the lack of judgement in calling another person down for their service. Um, like you did.

You don't agree, so just get out of here like the good left-minded SFB you are and stop throwing around the judgements like it means something to anyone here.

We know where we stand, but your obsession with ranks and classes is laughable, as is you minimal knowledge of the military. Is that the door closing?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 10:21 PM Nee writes:

And Scottie,

Readily will I display the intestinal fortitude required to fight on the Ranger(Scottie's) objective and complete the mission, though I be the lone survivor.
Ranger, You lead the way! And I will follow- Hooah!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, March, 27, 2008 10:56 PM caday5 writes:

Nee

You and Scottie are making my point for me. Scottie did, at least partially, apply the military model to society in his note "I have a few thoughts." He then confirmed it with what he said he would do if I said it to his face. The military is an authoritarian environment that does not apply to society as a whole. BTW, I am not putting the military down for being authoritarian, it must be because of the job it does. It just doesn't work for a free society. And any vet who thinks he or she is elite and should be put on a pedestal in society because of their military service did not serve for our freedom. That is because freedom includes equality. One can appreciate the military for the tough job it does without putting people on a pedestal.

And no, I didn't call anyone down for serving itself. I noted that people using a military example for how society should act do not understand the difference between the two and thus did not have freedom in their mind when serving.

Finally, yous guys are so good at self-flattery and at minimizing the suffering of people you do not understand. The first part seems to be characteristic of the conservative websites I have visited. You say: "look at us, we are so good." Then you get furious when people don't share your self assessment. If I didn't know better, I would say that yous guys are afraid that some of the criticisms leveled at you have too much truth.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, March, 28, 2008 12:38 AM ShiningCity writes:

May I ask something?

I know this isn't my fight (nor do I want it to be--geesh, who has the time??), but I'm just wondering what's wrong with putting some people on pedastals--especially when they do work that is very self-sacrificing (such as military or law enforcement)?

Certainly, this should be done with an element of caution, but thinking one is beneath another is certainly better than thinking oneself better than another, and there is definitely scriptural precedence for such.

I think this "equality in society" business is hogwash. It's part of the liberal playbook of always "root for the underdog," I realize. If somebody's on a pedastal, then it means somebody else isn't...and that upsets lefties tremendously. It's something in the liberal mindset--the axis of the world is thrown off if one person excels....like some kind of "fairness alarms" start going off around the globe. Where does this mindset come from? I've always wondered if you guys were all fat kids, or what??

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, March, 28, 2008 12:50 AM caday5 writes:

What is wrong with equality?

Are people on the left the only ones left who favor equality? As for your scriptural reference, the difference is in the context. For example, Galations 3:28 talks about no distinctions implying an equality. Also the Scriptures are totally against inequitable application of the law.

But outside of that, are leftists the only ones remaining who agree with Thomas Jefferson who said all men are created equal?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, March, 28, 2008 7:33 AM Nee writes:

Jefferson was correct

All people were created equal. But their potentials are all different. If I want to help someone I do it of my own free will. I don't need to be forced.
Self flattery and fear? Uh, nope. Your approach and tone are condescending. I have tried to have a dscussion with you yet you insist that I have no clue (or Scottie) about the people who have a plight. No, I am no better. No I am not as briliant as some. But nor do I give in that I need to constantly excuse those who have less than I do. Spare me. Nor do I want the whole world to think like me as you claim the mIlitary is authoritarian. I have a mother, thanks, and for a while Uncle Sam was my "Daddy" so what! I do not need someone like yourself telling me I don't get it, when I do. But my solutions are different than yours and you pass judgement on it. I have told you I don't agree wtih what you say and still I get the same stuff. So does Scottie. At some point, you have to agree to disagree.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, March, 28, 2008 7:44 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Scottie

"I hope Jack Murtha's name comes up as well"

Where two or more are gathered together Murtha's name is bound to come up. GunnyG and I have spent a good bit of time restructuring that guy's family tree.

If you get tired of dueling with Caday5 I have a new post up.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, March, 28, 2008 8:18 AM Scottie writes:

Caday5

I have no problems with equality. I believe we should all have equal opportunity. You believe we should all have equal results.

Now don't let the door hit you in the asss on the way out. You're not contributing anything of value anymore. You've personally attacked me and demeaned my service. That service protects your right to spew crop out your piehole like you've been doing. If you're done sh*tting on the carpet in my intellectual home, hitch up your drawwers and waddle out.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, March, 28, 2008 8:33 AM Scottie writes:

Nee

I'm proud to have you in my unit dear. And yes you are better than he. You know what it is to be part of something greater than yourself. He's a narcissist at his core, with no honor, no manners, and ultimately no sense. The difference between you two epitomizes the unequal results of equal opportunities.

Thank you for coming to my aid, my diminutive but mighty warrior.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, March, 28, 2008 8:39 AM Scottie writes:

Shining City

The equality that matters is equality before the law (capitalism), not equality of outcomes (socialism). Some people have a better start in life, some get better breaks, but most successful people are like swans on a lake. The appearance of grace and tranquility on the surface masks the furious paddling going on beneath.

For what it's worth, I hold people dedicated enough to become a doctor in order to serve their fellow man on the highest of pedestals.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, March, 28, 2008 8:42 AM Scottie writes:

Sgt Relic

On my way over. Let's ride Bessie!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, March, 28, 2008 8:56 AM caday5 writes:

Scottie

Many of the successful, throughout America's history, are not swans but raptors. I understand your idealism, but facts, both yesteryear and now, speak otherwise.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, March, 28, 2008 10:07 AM Scottie writes:

Caday

It would seem that both ends of your alimentary canal emit the same product. Kindly emit it elsewhere.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, March, 28, 2008 11:38 AM The Crawfish writes:

Not Guilty?

Scottie, no matter the actual status of your guilt or innocence, Walter E. Williams has issued us all pardons.

http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/gift.html
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, March, 28, 2008 11:59 AM Scottie writes:

Crawfish

Funny, I don't feel I need a pardon as I've done nothing requiring one. But I do appreciate the gesture of goodwill on the part of Professor Williams. He's a good man.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, March, 28, 2008 2:31 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie

What actually impresses you? Does pretending to be a DI so you can try to talk down to those you disagree with impress you? Does your version of Capitalism where you either prove yourself or perish impress you?

Or does being able to acquit yourself while closing your ears to the rest of the world impress you?

BTW, if you are so innocent, then why would contrary opinions upset you?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, March, 28, 2008 5:43 PM Scottie writes:

Are you still here?

Caday, one thing that definitely doesn't impress me is you. Now drag your unhinged butt out of here.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, March, 28, 2008 6:28 PM Nee writes:

Boy...

some people just don't know when to quit! Scottie did you know being a Ranger equaled a DI? ROTFLMAO. I mean, sheesh. Need some pointers? HAHAHAHAHA!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, March, 28, 2008 10:45 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie

This is a public forum. And I would worry if I did impress you.

The question regarding the article is why shut out other voices and opinions? It is that philosophy, Bush's philosophy, that has isolated our country from the rest of the world.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 29, 2008 12:31 AM The Crawfish writes:

caday

doesn't understand something about people like Rev. Wright. He posted on the "church" website where he gets his philosophy and the philosophy of the "church" and it is Black Liberation Theology. It is inherently racist and anti-Christian. He even quoted Dr. Cone, who said that if God doesn't agree with their anti-white stuff, He needs to be killed.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 29, 2008 12:35 AM The Crawfish writes:

what is it

with the trolls these days? You've got caday here, and I'm dealing with some at Gunny's place while he's on vacation and some at my own Swamp. They're out in force, and none of them have a clue.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 29, 2008 5:44 AM caday5 writes:

crawfish

And we also have an American foreign policy that relies on murder. And what shall we say about American domestic policy where corporations are saved but individual home owners are gouged and kicked out. I would say that the three, Rev Wright, American Foreign policy and American domestic policy are on somewhat equal footing.

So why be so dismissive simply because people see things differently. For some conservatives, it seems that there should only be one amendment in the Bill Of Rights:

You have the right to conform.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 29, 2008 5:45 AM ch47 jockey writes:

Caday may have a point about the rich

rigging the system look at those horrible extreme conservatives that are super rich.....George Soros,Mike Bloomberg, Oprah Winfrey, et al. who want to raise taxes on the truly evil rich like your local car dealer, inventor,some dude who works hard and creates a small business that is successful. Perhaps the super rich are different there needs to be a party elite much like in stalinist USSR. after all socialism does concentrate wealth into the hands of a few.....
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 29, 2008 12:29 PM Sheila writes:

ch47Jokey

Isn't it interesting that the dems always hate conservatives who have "earned" their living the old fashioned way...but those who are the "trust babies" like Ted Kennedy, never get any criticism...

No one cares about the extremely wealthy leftists, like Jane Harman, Feinstein, Pelosi, (who's wineries don't employ union workers), and on and on...look at John Kerry, who married money...

I read an article recently that pointed out that the most charitable giving comes from the right not the left.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 29, 2008 1:14 PM Sgt Relic writes:

Caday5

No one is asking you to conform. What everyone has been trying to tell you, since last SATURDAY, is that we disagree with you and that your arguments are not persuasive.

How thick can anyone be not to have gotten this point?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 29, 2008 2:14 PM ShiningCity writes:

Ohhhh Scottie...

You're such the sweet talker....(I'll take it, BTW).

Re: the equality subject. Scottie, you hit nail on head with potential vs. outcomes.

Caday, I am quite scriptually literate. I agree with you that scripture should be in the appropriate context. And the context regarding equality is as Scottie has articulated: potential, not guarantee of outcomes.

There is nothing unscriptural about looking up to people who are accomplished role models. Simply because others fail to become same doesn't make society bad--some people just don't have the calling, the aptitude or the internal fortitude. Some are just lazy. It's frankly intellectually dishonest to act as though there's a societal force keeping the lazy people down.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 29, 2008 2:49 PM Scottie writes:

Sheila

I think the article was likely in reference to a recently published book. Here's a link:

http://www.amazon.com/Who-Really-Cares-Compassionate-Conser vatism/dp/B000WCTRPA/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=12 06816386&sr=8-1
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 29, 2008 3:03 PM Scottie writes:

Chopperman

Thanks for weighing in here. This troll is clearly an anti-capitalist.

For those interested, review my comments at 3/27 8:39 AM and then Caday's vigorous yet patently false contention that I somehow proposed that society should follow some military model. Since the text is there for all to see and uneditable after it's posted, I'll let his words and mine speak for themselves.

Once someone resorts to blatant falsehoods, mockery and personal attacks, I find little benefit continuing the conversation. He's been exposed as the intellectual lightweight he is; there is nothing more to be accomplished.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 29, 2008 3:14 PM Scottie writes:

Sgt Relic

Q: "How thick can anyone be not to have gotten this point?"

A: Thick as frozen molasses, apparently.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 29, 2008 3:16 PM Scottie writes:

Shining City

Well said Doc, well said indeed.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 29, 2008 3:33 PM Scottie writes:

Nee

It is very amusing to see people demonstrate their ignorance with such utter certainty. The truth of the matter is I never said or implied what he claims I did. It's there for all to plainly see.

I am reminded of a couple of Thomas Sowell quotes:

"Although I am ready to defend what I have said, many people expect me to defend what others have attributed to me."

And

"One of the painful signs of years of dumbed-down education is how many people are unable to make a coherent argument. They can vent their emotions, question other people's motives, make bold assertions, repeat slogans-- anything except reason."



EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 29, 2008 3:37 PM Scottie writes:

Crawfish

Take it as a badge of honor.

"It's amazing how much panic one honest man can spread among a multitude of hypocrites." -- Thomas Sowell
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, March, 29, 2008 8:04 PM caday5 writes:

Sgt Relic

But that is exactly what townhall conservatives are asking Americans to do. To conform to their image of capitalism, patriotism, and America.

And Scottie, you can talk about not caring about the race of the fellow soldier who helps on the battlefield or who goes thru basic with you, that is not the issue. What is the issue is how does society treat Blacks after they return home. That was the problem after WWII and other conflicts. The courage of Black Soldiers on the battlefield were officially noted and appreciated. But America did not honor them after they returned home.

As Scottie said:

"Is it not true that there is more to being black than skin color?"

The context of the statement was the story how John Griffin was told he would not pass as a Black man because of the way he talked or the words he used. It is part of being Black to NOT talk certain ways or use certain words? Suppose John was not going to hide his education, he would be detected as a White Man despite the color of his skin? The word is stereotype. It limits our expectations of others.

The problem Scottie is that WE, not just conservatives or liberals or just you or just me, are vulnerable to having gross or subtle forms of racism because of the context of our childhood. Our desire to see ourselves in the best light can easily interfere with any honest self-assessment. Our own self-assessment is never infallible whether or not the issue is racism. Therefore, listening to others can only help. Listening to others is not an abrogation of any personal responsibility. Rather, it might be both the full exercise of personal responsibility and the realistic recognition of our own limitations.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 30, 2008 7:32 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Caday5

I wrote:
"No one is asking you to conform."

You wrote:
"But that is exactly what townhall conservatives are asking Americans to do."

Is this a reading comprehension problem on your part, or are you saying that you are not an American?

Everyone here recognizes your right to speak but you seem to be operating under the misconception that the reader is under some obligation to agree with you. You have poured out words for an entire week, to little effect, and yet you persist as if no one heard you the first time.

At this point you have moved from the "troll" category, they can sometimes be interesting, right on to bore. Here is a quote from Benjamin Franklin that I think applies nicely.

"Guests, like fish, begin to smell after three days."
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 30, 2008 12:48 PM Scottie writes:

Sgt Relic

Caday somehow thinks repetition is a substitute for persuasion. I've rejected the entirety of the premises he presents. I've refuted them both here and in private e-mails. Yet he persists in reasserting the identical blather, distinguished from the last only by the prologue "No you haven't refuted what I said."

He speaks without listening, asserts without foundation, deliberately misinterprets arguments in order to set up straw men, and uses his own faulty misconceptions as a basis to act like a punk kid with no manners. This thread will live as an eternal testament to his personal ignorance, inability to reason, and condescension, as well as a sterling example of what passes for discourse from the left.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 30, 2008 2:38 PM caday5 writes:

Sgt Relic

I respectfully disagree with your assessment. Many conservatives on townhall, along with Michael Savage, will grant people only one right: the right to conform.

Though you have no power here to control who posts and who doesn't, a good indicator of how you would use that power if you had it is indicated by how you respond to those who disagree with you. Your responses, for the most part, aren't logical nor do they deal, point by point, with the issues discussed. Your responses are insulting with the intention of getting those you disagree with to leave.

I don't care if people disagree with me. I have friends at work who disagree with my political views who never resort to insulting others. Rather, we have respectful discussion because we also regard each other as friends. And even if we weren't friends, we do not insult each other for our views. We recognize the concerns the other is addressing though we sometimes disagree with the solution.

Let me quote from antiliberal blog from the post "WHY the Penalty for Treason MUST BE DEATH!"

"Both Stewart and Ramsey have defended "revolutionaries" and murderers, some whom were cop-killers. These people are of the same lineage as Hanoi Jane Fonda, Hanoi John Kerry, Chappaquiddick Ted Kennedy, Red Nanny Pee-Lousy, and a host of other liberals who have p*ssed on the Statue of Liberty through their anti-American activities. Few of them have ever been punished."

Please note the last line because the view they have of these unpunished liberals is the same view they have of non-conservatives who post comments on their blog.

We could even go outside the townhall blogs to the writings of Newt Gingrich, for example, where he wrote in one of his books how liberal professors who criticize the US should be fired. Of course after their firing, then these professors can have "free speech."

Gingrich here shows that he believes that we have the right to conform.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 30, 2008 3:04 PM Scottie writes:

Sgt Relic

He somehow thinks repetition is a substitute for persuasion. I've rejected the entirety of the premises he presents. I've refuted them both here and in private e-mails. Yet he persists in reasserting the identical blather, distinguished from the last only by the prologue "No you haven't refuted what I said."

He speaks without listening, asserts without foundation, deliberately misinterprets arguments in order to set up straw men, and uses his own faulty misconceptions as a basis to act like a punk kid with no manners. This thread will live as an eternal testament to his ignorance, inability to reason, and condescension.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 30, 2008 4:19 PM Scottie writes:

No you didn't refute my point!

He somehow thinks repetition is a substitute for persuasion; but then I repeat myself. ;-)
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 30, 2008 5:49 PM wil writes:

Scottie

I am very impressed with this article, whose sentiment I share. I also have enjoyed the thread of arguement between yourself, Sgt Relic and Caday, and while I am not much for extended arguements, I thought I would throw my two cents in. I had a coworker in the Military who once stated that all white people were inherently racist, that because of the advantages of our race in society, nothing we accomplish means as much, nothing we say can be trusted, nothing we do can ever make up for the historical and cultural racism perpetuated in America during and after the time of slavery. Basically his premise could be summarized as "There could never be racial reconciliation and there should never be racial reconciliation. The white race is too guilty to forgive."

My response was then why bother considering what you think? If I go through my life attmepting to as King said judge people on the content of their character and not the color of their skin, If I try to live by the Biblical injunction to love my neighbor as myself, regardless of ethnicity, you still will consider me a racist because of my race. He said yes.

And from that moment on, I stopped feeling like Caday that I was born with guilt, I stopped feeling guilty that my great great grandfather was a cavalry officer with Nathan Bedford Forrest (who founded the KKK) and had high enough regard for him that the oldest son in the family has had the middle name Forrest up to and including my cousin. All I can control is how I treat people and how I show respect for people, not how they percieve it. All I can contol is myself and the attitudes I teach my children, not the attitudes and mistakes of my forefathers.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 30, 2008 6:04 PM Ed Lilly writes:

Fla. Gov. won't rule out reparations?

Perhaps you guys have already hit this topic as well, but I saw while I was in Florida last week that not only has their state government apologized for slavery, but Gov. Crist has indicated that he has not ruled out the possibility of approving reparations.

Watch your wallets, Florida residents.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 30, 2008 6:26 PM caday5 writes:

Wil

There is a difference between assuming that we are born with guilt and looking to others for feedback. To look for others for feedback is to listen with the admission that one doesn't know everything. In preemption to a reply, I never said you assume the feedback to be true, but you do consider it.

This idea of listening to others for feedback realizing that one is not infallible in how they see themselves is threatening to some.

These points have to be repeated because these points are misrepresented by some.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 30, 2008 6:42 PM wil writes:

The problem Caday

is that you seem to be saying that an individual cannot assess their own racism, that only a person who is in the victim class can determine whether you are racist or not. I certainly look to others for feedback. Had the coworker I mentioned told me I had done or said something specific that was offensive, I would have analyzed that word or deed, and perhaps, if I saw its potential misinterpretation, apologize for the misspeak. Or if I did in fact say something racist, and not realize it until it was called to my attention, I would apologize. But I will not take the blame for being white, its like apologizing for being diabetic, it makes no sense. I am not going to argue on someone elses blog, that is disrespectful, at some point in the near future I will post on this and you can discuss my shortcomings and racism there.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, March, 30, 2008 7:00 PM caday5 writes:

Wil

You are close to saying what I am saying, that is that the individual, Black or White or any other ethnicity, cannot infallibly determine whether they are racist. You value feedback while I am noting that our own self-assessment can be flawed because of conflicts of interest.

As for apologizing for being White, there is no need to apologize for what our ancestors did though it is important to recognize what they did right and what they did wrong.

I have one of my classes read about the Nacirema--it is a classic article in sociology. Instead of describing the article, you would do better to read it. What I tell them afterwards is to watch how they describe other cultures because their descriptions can limit what they learn from people from those cultures. And that learning from others does not imply that you do not value what is good in your own culture.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, March, 31, 2008 7:02 AM Sgt Relic writes:

Scottie

Week 2, "Heartland" under siege. The adventure continues! Ha! Ha!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, March, 31, 2008 8:07 AM Scottie writes:

Wil

If I may ask for a salient fact, was your friend black?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, March, 31, 2008 8:23 AM Scottie writes:

Wil

Well stated. You've cut to the crux of the matter. If I may press for a little expansion from you, was your friend's contenion based on any behavior on your part, or just a blanket statement?

If it was a blanket statement as I suspect, then Caday has still not recognized the possibility of black racism nor has he given us any method to separate blatant black racism from valid criticism.

So much "racism" that whites stand accused of eminates from pure fantasy or deliberate misinterpretation by blacks. So much so that their cries no longer have any credibility. Now we're racist for simply disregarding what have been proven all too often utterly baseless and false accusations. I'm not buying the premise anymore. In the absence of some specific allegation, the 'big brush' appeals to widespread unrecognized racism are no longer a valid basis for undeserved "white guilt".
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, March, 31, 2008 8:32 AM Scottie writes:

Sgt Relic

Nonetheless, it's been a better than average thread. I fear no siege of the truth, a mighty and impenatrable fortress, unphased by the rambling diatribes of those not acquainted with her.

Witness Caday's reliance on nothing more than false contention and even blatant lies and how his points crash like water against her rocky implacable face. The truth will out.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, March, 31, 2008 8:45 AM Scottie writes:

And Caday

Are you now contending that you've used about ten thousand words thus far and still haven't made your point? And that you are a teacher? And that in light of that, we should continue to take you seriously? Do you teach your students to think, or merely to rabidly repeat the ideas with which you indoctrinate them? Given your performance here, I would conclude the latter.

Either you have a point to make and lack the ability to convey it, or your point cannot withstand challenge and you lack the intellectual honesty to accept that the contention you've actually made is invalid. In either case, the lack resides with you, not with the members of this forum.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, March, 31, 2008 9:30 AM caday5 writes:

Scottie

Your only reply, since I posted, is that of insulting. Either I haven't made my point or you hate the point I am making. Considering responses, I am guessing the latter is true. I find that odd because my point is not polar opposite of yours. I am merely saying that whether we, not just you, have racist attitudes is not determined by others only; it is just not solely determined by ourselves. So why the contentious attitude?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, March, 31, 2008 9:45 AM wil writes:

yes scottie

he was black. And as I said, his anger was race specific and he admitted it, I had not done anything overt, I was guilty by association. As I said to Caday, if I am accused of racism, I will go back and assess my deeds and words, but if there is nothing there, I won't assume guilt simply because of who I am and what color my skin is....that is the lesson I learned from this guy, that there are some people who will be angry at you unrelated to any action on your part, some people who will hate you based on your being a part of the "oppressor race" and there is nothing you can do to please these people, so after this encounter, I realized that guilt ought to be associated with action, not simply existence. To go back to the political connection, Pastor Wright preaches that kind of generic anger, not tied to behavior, but the assumption of guilt based on race. And that is the definition of racism and is unacceptable.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, March, 31, 2008 10:46 AM Scottie writes:

Wil

One last follow up. If that same person accused you of racist behavior, how much credibility would you give the assertion knowing the views he held?

My point is simply that once he revealed himself as a racist with a chip on his shoulder, his assessment of you was so tainted that it would be hard to take any accusation by him seriously.

This sort of hysteria is what pervades the misguided rhetoric of Caday. Even though the assertion is coming from someone that has been completely discredited, we still have some obligation to take it seriously. Well, no we don't.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, March, 31, 2008 5:15 PM wil writes:

Scottie

Yes, had that person come to me with an accusation after this, their own statements had made them unreliable on that issue, so if they accused me of racism, I would no longer consider their accusation worth worrying about. But because I do not view all members of a race the same, had some unrelated person stated that I said something racist, I would consider it. But yes, that person has proven themselves unreliable.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, March, 31, 2008 6:29 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie

Rather than consider the source, which is what you are saying regarding someone with a chip on his shoulder, there is nothing wrong with listening. Perhaps there are rational reasons why people have chips on their shoulders. We are not obligated to accept everything, in fact, we are not obligated to listening. But once we refuse to listen, we are possibly forming opinions and making decisions with missing input.

The difference between us is that while we both think that self-assessment is valuable, you seem to think that it can be infallible. This is not acceptable from a Scriptural point of view because the Bible talks about how pervasive sin is in addition to how finite we are. In addition, if we are saved by faith, why should we be afraid of discovering sin?

It depends on our values. Do we value having a more positive opinion of ourselves or do we value making informed opinions?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, March, 31, 2008 6:54 PM Scottie writes:

Wil

Thank you for your participation here. Your candor is appreciated.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, March, 31, 2008 7:06 PM Scottie writes:

Now let's extrapolate a little

Just as Wil would no longer give credence to a claim of racism from his compatriot, and for the same reason using the same logic let's flesh out the point.

The following racemongering black people with chips on their shoulders and clearly racist attitudes should also be rightly disregarded whenever a charge of racism is proferred:

Al Sharpton
Jesse Jackson
Rev Wright
Kwese Mfume
Julian Bond
Any preacher/church offering African Liberation Theology.
Any longstanding member of such a church
Any person blaming their own failure to perform on racism
Anyone denigrating another for "Acting White"
Anyone throwing the epithets "Uncle Tom", "Oreo", or "Sellout"


EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, March, 31, 2008 7:10 PM Scottie writes:

Caday

You've been asked to leave...several times. Get a clue.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, March, 31, 2008 7:29 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie

Its a public forum, I already have a clue.

Again, what I am saying partially incorporates what you are saying, I am not saying something polar opposite. What is really bothering you?
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, March, 31, 2008 11:09 PM ch47 jockey writes:

Character and color

Some people will always judge others based on their race/religion, most of the people guilty of this are usually of the "progressive" stripe.
In my experiences I usually give anyone I meet the benefit of the doubt until their character and or behavior. There are jacka**'s in every race. As was stated before in a previous comment I cannot lump Clarence Thomas,Thomas Sowell in the same group as tupac or Stanley TOokie Williams. Their actions and views are so varied. To do so is to take a very simplified view of the world xenophoic at best. No one can truly know what resides in the mind of another person. But then again closed minds will rarely look beyond their own beliefs and fears of victimization or precieved victimization.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, April, 01, 2008 8:34 AM caday5 writes:

The Last Note Part I

Scottie,
Since this is my last note on this blog, I will close making a few points.

1. This is the most disappointing blog I've seen on Townhall. Why? I read the bio and I thought at last, someone who wants to reason things thru. Your behavior didn't match the bio.

2. Let me roughly quote Jesse Jackson: Listening should be unconditional, agreement should be conditional. Whites don't know the extent to which racism has hurt Blacks. In fact, Whites often don't know when they are showing racism. So listening should be unconditional. But just as our own self-assessment is fallible, so can the perceptions of others. But we won't know until we listen. This is our situation Scottie. All I am saying is that listening can help us, you and me, discover for ourselves.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, April, 01, 2008 8:45 AM caday5 writes:

Last Note Part 2

3. Now the military question. There are two ways by which people can push the military model on society. One is to advocate it explicitly. Did you do that? No. On that point I agree with you. But the second way is to treat others outside of the military the way you were treated in the military. Every time you either ordered me to do something or tried to berate me into doing something, such as leaving the blog, you attempted to push the military model here because you attempted to establish a hierarchal relationship between us. You forgot that I am not some private who is obligated to follow your orders. Had you respectfully asked that I leave, I would have been gone a long time ago. But I don't take orders from you. You are not my superior. I owe you no apology here. Rather, I will point out that you take your own behavior for granted while you take exception at the behavior of others. And a side note, if you listened to Blacks, they will tell you that upon returning home from WWII and Vietnam, they returned home to racism. Would they say the same today? We need to listen for the answer.

4. Finally, don't be afraid to admit your own sins. It merely means you are equal to others. You and I are equal. I certainly have the right, and am correct, for saying you are pushing the military model on society by the way you talked to me and about others. But then again, you sacrificed to serve in the military and I did not. See, we are equal because we both have strengths and weaknesses. And we are equal to the likes of Jesse Jackson, Rev Wright, Louis Farakan, and George Bush. If we are saved by grace, we have no need to prove ourselves. Rather, we might be rejecting God's grace by trying to prove ourselves.

Scottie, take care.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, April, 01, 2008 8:58 AM Scottie writes:

Chopperman

The self-defeating nature of the complaint itself is often lost. A vigorous charge of racism tends to tell us more about the accuser than about the reality of the charge. It's very declaration frequently indicates a closed minded bigot with the attendant chip on their shoulder as the source of the complaint in the fitst place.

It is a form of projection that shuts down any real possibility of discussion. Either you admit you are a racist, or your denial is proof that you are one and are in denial. I'm sick of this verbal ju-jitsu.

It's time for black folks to marginalize these purveyors of poison as whites have done to the likes of David Duke. Do racists exist? Yes. Do we give them any credibility anymore? No. In fact, racists are rightly shunned by whites. It's the black community that not only fails to shun them, it actually embraces and celebrates them. Witness the return of Rev Wright to thunderous applause.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, April, 01, 2008 11:14 AM Scottie writes:

I thought he'd never leave

Now let me clean up the bullsqueeze he's left all over the blog. Even Bessie can't produce as much horsesh*t as this idiot.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, April, 01, 2008 8:15 PM Sgt Relic writes:

Scottie

I like Franklin quotes since they are usually simple common sense statements that are still able to inform modern debate. Your recent visitor brings this one to mind.

"He that speaks much, is much mistaken." - Benj. Franklin

I have a new video clip posted, I hope you'll take a look.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, April, 02, 2008 6:55 PM Cynewulf writes:

Hey, Scottie,

another post on the Master Orator you might find of interest:

http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/blog/g/fa482427-fdbc-4677-94 cf-ad17c3f8c01f

Check it out when you get a chance.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 05, 2008 4:12 PM celtic-dragon writes:

Hey Scottie

I'm back! (finally) Nice to see you here. Looks like you stirred things up a little with this one :D

I have another one of my defense related stories at my "blawg", so drop by if you can.

I'll be able to come by regularly again, so I hope you post something new as well
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 05, 2008 8:13 PM Sheila writes:

I totally agree, Scottie

that racism in this country is on the left...and it's a sad thing we can't move on!

EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Saturday, April, 05, 2008 10:52 PM Sheila writes:

Btw, Scottie!

Just posted a new blog at One Eighty!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 06, 2008 12:52 PM Scottie writes:

Anna Marie!!

Good to see you back sweetheart. I'll be sure to drop by later today. Gotta go golf w/ Son #1 right now, but was so pleasantly surprised to see your post I couldn't wait to respond in some fashion. Welcome Back old friend!! :-)
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 06, 2008 6:37 PM wil writes:

hey scottie

Caday was over at my blog today to inform me that Europe has valid fears about America drifting towards fascism. I can't help myself, and I argued back but I think there may be no way to get through to him.

By the way, I don't know if I ever addressed it specifically because of the debate thread, but this was a great post I wholeheartedly agree with.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 06, 2008 11:45 PM Scottie writes:

Sheila

Thanks my dear. I aim to please.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Sunday, April, 06, 2008 11:49 PM Scottie writes:

Wil

I thank you most sincerely for your participation on this thread. Caday will continue his unhinged behavior as long as people here can't resist feeding the troll. I had never encountered this miscreant before, and witness the grief my ignorance wrought.

And thank you for the kind words about the article. It seems to have struck a long negelected and much needed nerve.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, April, 07, 2008 12:01 AM wil writes:

feed the troll

great way of putting it...its like punching a blanket, pointless and squishy and you don't accomplish much
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, April, 07, 2008 7:01 PM SquiddyPopPerkyJean writes:

Right On, White Brother!

See, and your race actually has nothing to do with it. I, like you, have had my series of rejection or working scummy jobs, etc. I NEVER got a pass on ANYTHING just for being a whitey. In fact, I was weeded out of a particular graduate program that interested me because they wanted more diversity.

You say some great things here!

"There is no monolithic body of black people; there is only an accumulation of many individuals that share pigmentation." YES.

Just like I have no automatic kinship with any other white person or English-American or whatever. People are people, dang it!!! I'm sick of this whole race issue deal perpetuated by blacks who sure have a MUCH better life in the USA than if they were in almost any African country!
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Monday, April, 07, 2008 7:31 PM wil writes:

Squiddy Pop

I had a friend in College who was here from Nigeria, who said almost the exact same thing. He said "American blacks have no idea how good they have it." He said that in Europe there may be less overt racial comments, but the ceiling on how high you can go is more solid, and in Nigeria, no matter who you are it is rough to make it.

Being neither Black or African and never having been to Europe I can't really do anything other than relay that one person who has reason to know absolutely agreed.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, April, 08, 2008 1:18 PM Sheila writes:

wil

Same thing is true in Brazil...
Here in our country, there is no black "glass ceiling" for achievement.

The left resents anyone who is black achieving greatness on their own merit. Look at all the accomplished conservative blacks here in the US who get no credit for their achievements from the MSM and the left, because they didn't achieve greatness by using the left's approach claiming victimhood.

Larry Elder is a brave man IMO. He is always castigating his brothers for playing the victim, and as a result is called every name in the book, including Uncle Tom...
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, April, 08, 2008 8:18 PM Scottie writes:

Squiddy!

Good to see you here at the Heartland, girl. Welcome. People are people. Wow, my entire article compressed into three words. Awesome. Stop by and see us more often.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Tuesday, April, 08, 2008 8:22 PM Scottie writes:

Sheila & Wil

An interesting statistic. More black Africans have emigrated to the US voluntarily than were ever brought here in chains. Nothing can reconcile that America is racist on the one hand with this fact on the other.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Wednesday, April, 09, 2008 10:14 PM clyde writes:

Scottie

This is my first visit to your place, good post,along with the ensuing argument. This caday is a real piece of work. did you know that HISTORY is the national sense of self-image? Check out Gunny G's blog for today if you get a chance,and read the 2:13 post by him/her. About fell off the chair with that one. I'm wondering,as you stated way back in the thread if this ain't LD as well. If this caday is SERIOUS about his/hers postings,this is ONE RABID moonbat.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, April, 10, 2008 8:30 AM caday5 writes:

Clyde

I will have to break the cease-fire to correct something you said. I never said "HISTORY is the national sense of self-image." I did say that I learned History from people who were sensitive to our nation's self-image and those who weren't. This is not the same as saying History is the national sense of self-image.

Obviously, those who are sensitive about their nation's self-image can have certain biases when writing history. That is the point of the statement.

I have said that patriotism can be defined as being sensitive to your nation's self-image though. So you can criticize that statement all you want.

It seems ironic that someone who is trying to correct a given definition of the word History is not accurate reporting the statement they are correcting.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, April, 10, 2008 8:37 AM Scottie writes:

Apparently Caday

Among the things you've learned, when you're not welcome isn't one of them. Take a hike.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, April, 10, 2008 8:49 AM Scottie writes:

Clyde

Welcome to the Heartland. Thanks for stopping by and adding to the conversation. I visit Gunny's site pretty regularly, but I don't waste my time with Caday's posts anymore; what's the point? He's a dishonest intellect, a rude self-centered provocateur, and utterly unworthy of engagement, as this thread demonstrates in abundance.

I think he is the rare exception to the genteral rule that one should not ignore one's problems. Withholding approbation from him is likely the best for all concerned in his particular case.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, April, 10, 2008 2:28 PM clyde writes:

Scottie

Thanks for the welcome. I NEVER take it personal what they may type about me or my "intellect". Just words on a screen,IMHO.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Thursday, April, 10, 2008 2:58 PM caday5 writes:

Scottie

You are giving a mixed message. You don't mind people talking about me, including yourself, but then you object to me responding.
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive
Friday, April, 11, 2008 8:52 AM Scottie writes:

With Apologies to Monty Python

Go away. We don't want to hear from you anymore. We don't respect you or your ideas. We have no regard for you here. Be on your way. Don't let the door hit you on the way out. Put your rudder to this port and n'er return. Off with you. You are persona non-grata here. Lathspath I name you, ill news is an ill guest. Go play in traffic. Take a long walk on a short pier. Shuffle off to Buffalo. How can we miss you if you never leave? Get lost. Make like a banana and split. Be a good horse turd and hit the trail. You are a DEAD PARROT!

(That's pretty unambiguous, yes?)
EmailItEmail It | Print It Print It |  Flag as OffensiveFlag as Offensive