Once again rush limbaugh shows how ignorant and racist he is.......

[SilverTrain]

Please note, I'm not making a general categorization about the stupidity of just the Carolinas, I'm applying that generalization to all 50 States.[snip]

Hmm. Really?

In any event,

1. I don't wish to get caught up in derailing the thread any further. So, I'm off this tangent.

2. I consider the mlb a friend, so my feeling is if we want to quarrel over this minutiae, we can do it over a bottle of Tempranillo behind closed doors (or, on a scenic patio at sunset, perhaps).

3. For the record, I'm not a South Carolinian, but I do understand (and share) many valid criticisms of that state, its politicians, and its residents. That said, I retain my disdain for tarring the lot with one brush.

4. I know I've been guilty of the aforementioned, and surely will so be again.

 

[maxcok]

Not in the net.

Oh thank god, I'm so relieved. :biggrin2:

Ya know ST, I've reread El Bear's initial post three times now searching for your characterization, but I just don't see anything remotely approaching this:

Wholesale indiscriminate trashing of the entirety of one of the 50 states in the Union by virtue of an anecdote or two, rendered second (third?) hand a gazillion miles away?

Are you possibly associating his description of the Fresnoid as stereotypical of South Carolinians? As we're all friends, my suggestion is that you and I fly down to Buenos Aires to view the scene of the crime and discuss this over several bottles of tempranillo and an array of savory tapas, all on your dime. :wink:

 

[SilverTrain]

Oh thank god, I'm so relieved. :biggrin2:

Ya know ST, I've reread El Bear's initial post three times now searching for your characterization, but I just don't see anything remotely approaching this:
Are you possibly associating his description of the Fresnoid as stereotypical of South Carolinians? As we're all friends, my suggestion is that you and I fly down to Buenos Aires to view the scene of the crime and discuss this over several bottles of tempranillo and an array of savory tapas, all on your dime. :wink:

Christ, man! Are you hopping into the net now like some sort of crusading dolphin?

I'm moving on, but if you want to keep beating the drum, I'll be out drinking.:drunk:

 

[maxcok]

Christ, man! Are you hopping into the net now like some sort of crusading dolphin?

I'm moving on, but if you want to keep beating the drum, I'll be out drinking.:drunk:

No, just suggesting there may be some holes in the net, imho.

Enjoy your bender. As for me, I'll be (halfheartedly) taking in the SOTU and downing a shot every time I hear the words "bipartisan" or "civility". :wink:

 

[SilverTrain]

No, just suggesting there may be some holes in the net, imho.

Enjoy your bender. As for me, I'll be (halfheartedly) taking in the SOTU and downing a shot every time I hear the words "bipartisan" or "civility". :wink:

Have fun. Do you have a designated driver? :wink:

 

[maxcok]

Have fun. Do you have a designated driver? :wink:

I took the wheels off the couch.

 

[hypoc8]

You see, that's the problem. It's not about you and your concerns. It's about the concerns of millions of other people, African Americans especially and those who empathize with them, including AA South Carolinians, who are deeply offended by the Stars and Bars flying on the Capitol grounds. Your utter disregard for their feelings and easy dismissal of their concerns confirms the typical attitude of most white SC residents. Yet you took such offense at having your state "stereotyped" by posters in this thread? Seems kind of ironic now, don't it? Not to mention hypocritical.

If that little "piece of cloth" is so unimportant and symbolizes nothing of great meaning, why not just remove it and end the controversy? The state has lost hundreds of conventions and tournaments from NAACP and NCAA boycotts worth millions in revenue. I predict eventually the flag will come down when folks like you and the backward fools running your state finally figure out how hard it's hitting the pocketbook. It's sad though that ultimately money will be the deciding factor over moral human concerns and respect for others' sensibilities.

Most South Carolina Governor Candidates Stand Firm ​

p.s. On a personal level, people with your attitude annoy the fuck out of me, because you're exactly the sort I have to defend against all the time. "No, really, Southerners are not all ignorant rednecks". Thanks for making my job that much harder. I gave you the benefit of the doubt in my prior post. Thanks for proving me wrong.​

Wow, that didn't take long, and with the typical knee-jerk reaction.

I'm not going to get into this "flag = symbol of slavery" and the "civil war was about slavery" debate crap that everyone wants to get into. It does seem kind of ironic that these very same people that are "so offended" by the flag don't seem to have any problem with the slavery monument that is located on the same grounds. In fact you never hear anything about it, I wonder why that is? Do you think that maybe this could offend white people of the state of SC? What about their feelings? Hypocritical eh?

As far as the boycott goes, so be it. If the NAACP wants to stomp their feet, huff & puff and take their ball and go elsewhere, well that's their choice. They wanted the flag off the dome and they got what they wanted and they still aren't happy.

It amazes me that you cannot go through a thread without calling someone names because you don't agree with their opinions or beliefs. I have the right to express my opinion just as you do and if you don't agree with it fine, but why you resort to calling people things like "backwards fools" is beyond me. I guess it makes you feel better about yourself.

 

[maxcok]

Wow, that didn't take long, and with the typical knee-jerk reaction.

Knee-jerk? That's ironic.

I'm not going to get into this "flag = symbol of slavery" and the "civil war was about slavery" debate crap that everyone wants to get into.

I don't think anyone's suggested having that "debate crap" except you. I think the history is generally well understood by anyone who has an educated and unbiased view. So can we safely assume you are of the opinion the Civil War was not fought over slavery? Very telling.

It does seem kind of ironic that these very same people that are "so offended" by the flag don't seem to have any problem with the slavery monument that is located on the same grounds. In fact you never hear anything about it, I wonder why that is? Do you think that maybe this could offend white people of the state of SC? What about their feelings? Hypocritical eh?

Why don't you enlighten us. Do tell us all about this "slavery monument" and exactly why as a white person you find it so offensive. I must say, I find it hard to find equal sympathy for the descendants of slaves and the descendants of slave owners. Not to mention that only a tiny fraction of the white folks who want that flag there actually ARE descended from slave owners. The rest are just exercising their "white Southern pride". Not to mention the Stars and Bars has historically been used as a symbol to intimidate and insult African Americans for the 150 years since the War -- as the marching standard for groups like the KKK, for just one example. (Incidentally, you clearly have no understanding of "irony".)

As far as the boycott goes, so be it. If the NAACP wants to stomp their feet, huff & puff and take their ball and go elsewhere, well that's their choice. They wanted the flag off the dome and they got what they wanted and they still aren't happy.

As I pointed out in my prior posts, you're hurting yourselves far more than you're hurting the NAACP or the NCAA. They're spending their money elsewhere, you're the losers, and life goes on. It's unfortunate that a majority of your state legislature is too dumb and/or too racist to see that. It's also unfortunate that it took so long and required so much effort, embarassment, and economic boycotts to get the flag off the Capitol dome in the first place.

It amazes me that you cannot go through a thread without calling someone names because you don't agree with their opinions or beliefs. I have the right to express my opinion just as you do and if you don't agree with it fine, but why you resort to calling people things like "backwards fools" is beyond me. I guess it makes you feel better about yourself.

Yes, you're free to express your opinion, and I'm free to express mine. See how that works? At any rate, you're twisting my words. I didn't call you any names. I said, "I predict eventually the flag will come down when folks like you and the backward fools running your state finally figure out how hard it's hitting the pocketbook." However, if you wish to include yourself among the "backward fools", that's entirely your prerogative.


Footnote: Hey ST, I hope you don't regret coming to the defense of this racist asshole. Oh shit, I called him a name, godammit!

 

[hypoc8]

Knee-jerk? That's ironic.

I don't think anyone's suggested having that "debate crap" except you. I think the history is generally well understood by anyone who has an educated and unbiased view. So can we safely assume you are of the opinion the Civil War was not fought over slavery? Very telling.

No, it wasn't! Lincoln himself said that if he could find a way to preserve the Union without freeing the slaves he would have done it. Don't believe everything you read in the history books, he wasn't the "great savior" that he's made out to be.

Why don't you enlighten us. Do tell us all about this "slavery monument" and exactly why as a white person you find it so offensive. I must say, I find it hard to find equal sympathy for the descendants of slaves and the descendants of slave owners. Not to mention that only a tiny fraction of the white folks who want that flag there actually ARE descended from slave owners. The rest are just exercising their "white Southern pride". Not to mention the Stars and Bars has historically been used as a symbol to intimidate and insult African Americans for the 150 years since the War -- as the marching standard for groups like the KKK, for just one example. (Incidentally, you clearly have no understanding of "irony".)

What the hell is "white Southern pride" suppose to be? As far as groups using the flag such as the KKK, skin heads and the like, maybe you need to take your offense up with them, I myself dislike them too. Yes its been 150 years and you would think by now we could move forward but no groups like the NAACP, KKK, Neo-Nazis, skin heads and the news media keep the shit pot stirred.


As I pointed out in my prior posts, you're hurting yourselves far more than you're hurting the NAACP or the NCAA. They're spending their money elsewhere, you're the losers, and life goes on. It's unfortunate that a majority of your state legislature is too dumb and/or too racist to see that. It's also unfortunate that it took so long and required so much effort, embarassment, and economic boycotts to get the flag off the Capitol dome in the first place.

You're entitled to your opinion sir.

Yes, you're free to express your opinion, and I'm free to express mine. See how that works? At any rate, you're twisting my words. I didn't call you any names. I said, "I predict eventually the flag will come down when folks like you and the backward fools running your state finally figure out how hard it's hitting the pocketbook." However, if you wish to include yourself among the "backward fools", that's entirely your prerogative.

I didn't twist anything, I never said you called me anything. I said you resort to calling people names when you don't agree with their opinions or beliefs. Right there it is in the above paragraph.

Footnote: Hey ST, I hope you don't regret coming to the defense of this racist asshole. Oh shit, I called him a name, godammit!

Racist asshole? Your opinion again, and I don't need your defense or anyone elses for that matter. I can take care of myself thank you.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

No, it wasn't! Lincoln himself said that if he could find a way to preserve the Union without freeing the slaves he would have done it. Don't believe everything you read in the history books, he wasn't the "great savior" that he's made out to be.

Don't get it twisted... even though Lincoln may have said this, the main reason why the South went against the North in the Civil War had everything to do with slavery. The South made huge profits off of slave labor and they wanted to retain it by all means necessary... which is why some states seceded. The Confederate Flag is the symbol they created to declare their "freedom" and embraces all of the ideologies that came with it. That includes slavery. That cannot be denied or written out of our nation's history.

As far as groups using the flag such as the KKK, skin heads and the like, maybe you need to take your offense up with them, I myself dislike them too. Yes its been 150 years and you would think by now we could move forward but no groups like the NAACP, KKK, Neo-Nazis, skin heads and the news media keep the shit pot stirred.

That's very disingenuous of you to include the NAACP in this list. If we go down the historical timelines of each organization, you're not going to find many instances of violence or civil intimidation within the NAACP. When an actual civil rights organization finds something to be in question which challenges the ideology of human equality, they have every right to voice their concerns. That's not called "stirring the pot", insisting that they're intentionally trying to agitate people. Civil inequality is still alive and well in this country. We just can't ignore it in some facetious way to live in a "colorblind society".

I said you resort to calling people names when you don't agree with their opinions or beliefs. Right there it is in the above paragraph.

OK, let's get real here and pay attention to the underlaying context of any Political debate.
I'm a little put off about people using the name calling argument because there isn't one person on this board who has posted in this section that isn't guilty. Even when someone is referring to their opponent as a "liberal" or a "conservative" as their core reason for disagreeing with them, that is a form of name calling. You're projecting a label on someone, and due to that label you make judgement calls. WE ALL HAVE DONE IT. We just accept those terms because they're so commonplace in Political debate these days. But it's clearly obvious when a right-winged ideologue looks at someone from the left and says, "You're a liberal," they don't mean that to be a compliment or some kind of constructive critique to the people they're trying to connect with and vice versa. Also, we have too many people who are claiming to be "in the middle" or part of a third party who think the only way someone can have this position is to only show what's wrong with the other two sides instead of what each side brings to the table that has the potential to actually work. They are also just as guilty as the rest as they add fuel to the fire. But I digress...

"Liberal" and "Conservative" have also become handy placeholders for other derogatory words that would get most people banned from this board, and I'm not going to go into any specifics here because we as adults should know what that means. As long as people use their convoluted beliefs about the First Amendment to mean absolute freedom of speech without reprimand and continue to cryptically formulate statements that isolate or unfairly target the innocent, political discussions will never get any less vicious or more peaceful.

Words to think about from the supposed "intolerant, bitter, angry black man with no life, who's also a socialist, a leech on the government, an anti-heterosexual, and an enemy to white people."

 

[maxcok]

Don't believe everything you read in the history books, . . .

Okay then, maybe I'll just select out the parts that conform to my ideology and ignore the parts I don't like.
Or just make it up. Like you.

What the hell is "white Southern pride" suppose to be?

You know exactly what it means. Don't play stupid.

You're entitled to your opinion sir.

Thank you, good Sir.

I didn't twist anything, I never said you called me anything. I said you resort to calling people names when you don't agree with their opinions or beliefs. Right there it is in the above paragraph.

Yes, there it is, and your disingenuous accusation that I called you a name was quite clear, as clear and disingenuous as you now backpedalling from that statement. At any rate, I have now resorted to calling you a name, one which in my opinion you've earned, so it's a moot point.

Racist asshole? Your opinion again, and I don't need your defense or anyone elses for that matter.

Why would I defend you? You're exactly the sort of cretin I said I have to defend the South against.

I can take care of myself thank you.

Good. I'll just let what you said in your posts speak for you then. Also quite clear. I have no further comment.

 

[hypoc8]

Don't get it twisted... even though Lincoln may have said this, the main reason why the South went against the North in the Civil War had everything to do with slavery. The South made huge profits off of slave labor and they wanted to retain it by all means necessary... which is why some states seceded. The Confederate Flag is the symbol they created to declare their "freedom" and embraces all of the ideologies that came with it. That includes slavery. That cannot be denied or written out of our nation's history."

I'm not getting anything twisted VB.

Prior to the war the South imported almost all of its manufactured goods from either the North or Europe and in turn they bought cotton from the South. Most of these manufactured items were cheaper to purchase from Europe and when the South began to buy more and more manufactured goods from Europe the Northern Industrialists became angry and started levying stiff import taxes on just about everything coming from Europe. They did however refuse to put same taxes on imported cotton from the Orient. So while the prices for European goods rose, the Souths cotton prices remained the same and this gave them a lot less buying power. To make things worse for the South the Rothschilds who owned most of the weaving factories in England refused to buy any more American cotton. So basically what you had was legalized plunder in which Federal law was used to enrich one group at the expense of another. This was the reason for wanting to leave the Union.

Even after the war started Lincoln still had no intention of freeing the slaves it was a non-issue at the time. In the beginning of the war, the South won almost all the battles, and had they got the support that the European bankers promised them they very well would have won the war. One of the reason being Lincoln was having a terrible time getting the Northern men to fight. People in the North had started referring to the war as the "rich mans war and the poor mans fight". Lincoln found that the preservation of the Union wasn't incentive enough for the Northern men to fight this war. This is when Lincoln being backed into the corner had a change of heart for fear of losing the war and imposed emancipation on the South.

Now that the war had been converted from an economic to a moral issue this stirred the emotions of the Northern men and they began to fight and England and France didn't want to take sides against a country that was perceived to be taking a moral stand in trying to destroy slavery. So they abandoned the South thus crippling it and as they say the rest is history.

 

[maxcok]

So can we safely assume you are of the opinion the Civil War was not fought over slavery?

Don't believe everything you read in the history books, . . . .

Okay then, maybe I'll just select out the parts that conform to my ideology and ignore the parts I don't like.

Such as:

I'm not getting anything twisted VB.

Prior to the war the South imported almost all of its manufactured goods from either the North or Europe and in turn they bought cotton from the South. Most of these manufactured items were cheaper to purchase from Europe and when the South began to buy more and more manufactured goods from Europe the Northern Industrialists became angry and started levying stiff import taxes on just about everything coming from Europe. They did however refuse to put same taxes on imported cotton from the Orient. So while the prices for European goods rose, the Souths cotton prices remained the same and this gave them a lot less buying power. To make things worse for the South the Rothschilds who owned most of the weaving factories in England refused to buy any more American cotton. So basically what you had was legalized plunder in which Federal law was used to enrich one group at the expense of another. This was the reason for wanting to leave the Union.

Even after the war started Lincoln still had no intention of freeing the slaves it was a non-issue at the time. In the beginning of the war, the South won almost all the battles, and had they got the support that the European bankers promised them they very well would have won the war. One of the reason being Lincoln was having a terrible time getting the Northern men to fight. People in the North had started referring to the war as the "rich mans war and the poor mans fight". Lincoln found that the preservation of the Union wasn't incentive enough for the Northern men to fight this war. This is when Lincoln being backed into the corner had a change of heart for fear of losing the war and imposed emancipation on the South.

Now that the war had been converted from an economic to a moral issue this stirred the emotions of the Northern men and they began to fight and England and France didn't want to take sides against a country that was perceived to be taking a moral stand in trying to destroy slavery. So they abandoned the South thus crippling it and as they say the rest is history.

One thing I can't figure out in your history lesson and economic analysis - who picked the cotton?

 

[bobuloo200]

the civil war was infact fought over slavery. the south seceded because they thought lincon was an abolitionist. Lincon, did not however want the freedom of the slaves, just the prevention of slavery into new territories, but the south believed he would free all the slaves, so when he won, they seceded from the union.

 

[hypoc8]

the civil war was infact fought over slavery. the south seceded because they thought lincon was an abolitionist. Lincon, did not however want the freedom of the slaves, just the prevention of slavery into new territories, but the south believed he would free all the slaves, so when he won, they seceded from the union.

Believe what you want, think what you will.

 

[bobuloo200]

Believe what you want, think what you will.

I will thank you. Its true tho, lincon had no intention of freeing the slaves, in fact the emancipation proclamation was simply a political ploy to weaken the south, its obvious because it had no effect on the slave states in the union (border states). although the North was fighting to unite the country and was not fighting against slavery, its critical to note that the reason the south seceded were ultimately because of slavery. They feared that Lincon would be against state rights, and they threatened him that if he ran they would secede.

 

[maxcok]

I'm not going to get into this "flag = symbol of slavery" and the "civil war was about slavery" debate crap that everyone wants to get into. It does seem kind of ironic that these very same people that are "so offended" by the flag don't seem to have any problem with the slavery monument that is located on the same grounds. .

(Incidentally, you clearly have no understanding of "irony".)

Believe what you want, think what you will.

See, that's a perfect example of irony. Doubly so. Understand now? No?? I didn't think so.

 

[D_stryhtfg]

Of COURSE Rush Limbaugh is an ignorant racist! I mean, look at his fanbase. That's what they crave.

Yeah....Rush is a racist. Nevermind the fact that his right-hand man is...wait for it......BLACK!

And I am part of Rush's fanbase...am I a racist?

Here's a tip to you and all of the other misguided Rush haters out there:

When you make baseless, sweeping generalizations like you did above, it shows who is really ignorant. What I find racist is when someone explains that their grandmother is a "typical white person who if she sees somebody on the street that she doesn’t know, there’s a reaction that’s been bred into her".

THAT is a racist statement.

 

[D_stryhtfg]

I will thank you. Its true tho, Lincoln had no intention of freeing the slaves

Truth.

He wanted to keep the Union together...freeing the slaves was just a happy side effect.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

Yeah....Rush is a racist. Nevermind the fact that his right-hand man is...wait for it......BLACK!

Wow, he has ONE on his staff! What a rebel for civil rights... NOT!!!
Please spare us the "token black syndrome" here. Limbaugh has made several racial comments in his career as as right-winged, political shock jock. This cannot be disputed, and to defend it is ridiculous. The fact that Limbaugh has one black man (or even a thousand) black men on his staff means nothing.

Case in point, I know plenty of racist white people who at one time "hired blacks". They were called slaves. Sarcasm very much intended here.

And I am part of Rush's fanbase...am I a racist?

That remains to be seen. But if you'd like to answer your own question, feel free to do so.

Here's a tip to you and all of the other misguided Rush haters out there:
When you make baseless, sweeping generalizations like you did above, it shows who is really ignorant. What I find racist is when someone explains that their grandmother is a "typical white person who if she sees somebody on the street that she doesn’t know, there’s a reaction that’s been bred into her". THAT is a racist statement.

You should follow your own advice. Or did you forget what you said to me about the phony New Black Panthers scandal dreamed up by Faux News back in July of 2010? Here, let me remind you. However, just in case you avoid clicking on the link, you stated that "it always comes down to race with 'the left'". Sounds like a sweeping generalization to me...

...which makes your next bout of generalizing just that much more ironic. Same month, different thread. Remember when you blamed the NAACP for fueling racism? I'm sure you didn't, so you can click there too if you dare.

Care to withdraw or reword your statement? I mean, you don't want people to start calling you a hypocrite now, do ya? Just something to think about from "an intolerant, bitter, angry black man with no life, who's also a socialist, a leech on the government, an anti-heterosexual, and an enemy to white people".

Wow, that's still making me laugh! LOL!!!