So… what do you think?
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
I think it's an act of desperation by a man with few cards to play.
Posted by Annie (Member # 295) on :
Heh. My first reading of this thread title had me picturing Howard Dean playing with race cars.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
A democrat playing the race card is not news.
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
Posted by Zeugma (Member # 6636) on :
Methinks the neo-cons doth protest too much. Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
Agreed, Zeug. Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
Yup. Let's continue to bash Dean!
He's being underestimated by many in the conservative crowd, I think.
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
In the words of Jon Stewart marking this occasion, "You know, there's something stirring about the peaceful transfer of no power."
[ February 15, 2005, 03:47 PM: Message edited by: Lady Jane ]
Posted by David Bowles (Member # 1021) on :
In what way? So, like, we should just gloss over Dean's comments because neo-cons are majority white? Hell, Clinton's freaking staff was majority white (and I'd be willing to place bets on Dean's election campaign staff). Screw that. He's implying that Republicans are racist, and it is little more than a stupid ad hominem gag. Shows how little-minded Dean's politics are, especially juxtaposed with his "I hate Republicans" spiel.
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
ROFLMAO, Adam. Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
I'm not bashing Dean. The dems are out of power in the federal government in every way it is possible to be out of power and still have a party. I think Dean's trying to rally the base, and the race card is one of the few he has to play. It does look slightly idiotic considering the current Secretary of State, but he doesn't have many options. It's pathetic, but he has a long road ahead of him.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Wow, the head of the DNC made a joke about one of the major perceived weaknesses of the oppositon party. The real people who should be upset are Jay Leno's writers because Dean got to the joke before they did. I think people may be lacking perspective here.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:It does look slightly idiotic considering the current Secretary of State, but you can't blame Dean for that.
This is why tokenism works. I'm not saying that Rice is a token. I'm saying that the exact reason you listed above is why tokenism works on stupid people. The only people to whom Dean's statement would look idiotic would be those who think that if you have a black sec of state, you can't be an entrenched party of white people.
I like Dean because he is going to expect the American people to think. He doesn't dumb down to them, and that's fine. The guy is calling them like he sees them, and I think he has pretty good eyes.
[ February 15, 2005, 11:41 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
Was that directed at me? No one is foaming at the mouth - if a joke, it was a dumb one relying on stereotypes. If a joke meant half seriously in effort to unite the party, it was sad.
---
Irami:
[ February 15, 2005, 03:55 PM: Message edited by: Lady Jane ]
Posted by Zeugma (Member # 6636) on :
I just think it's hilarious (or hilariously chilling, depending on my mood) that Dean has received such a relentlessly negative treatment from all sides of the media for the past year. I mean, when he did so well leading up to the primaries, I figured he'd bear the brunt of being a frontrunner, with all the pros and cons it brings.... but wow! Every time I walked past a TV showing Fox News, for three solid months, all I heard was how psychotic and ultra-liberal and racist this guy from Vermont was, and what his latest psychotic/ultra-liberal/racist screw-up had been. It was unbelievable, the sheer amount of coverage he got!
And, like, was anyone even aware that ABC and Diane Sawyer ran a whole apology for that overblown "scream" thing? Of course not, because for one reason or another, Dean is the media's whipping boy, and nothing he does is ever right.
They must be very afraid of him, indeed.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:it was a dumb one relying on stereotypes.
Did you see the Republican National Convention? If you take out the minority votes, the Democrats got creamed. The republicans cleaned up the white vote.
[ February 15, 2005, 03:57 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by TheHumanTarget (Member # 7129) on :
All I have to say is "YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!! WHO WANTS HORS D'OEUVRES?!?!? YEAH!!
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
Let me be clear, kat, so that we don't mince words. I think that you expect that Americans are stupid, and you think that Dean is an idiot for not playing to the stupidity of the American people.
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
quote:And if enough outspoken Republicans have an attitude like that, Dean will succeed beyond your worst nightmares.
Have I ever said I'm a Republican? How do you know I think Dean succeeding would be a nightmare.
I do object to racist politics. Racism against whites is still racism.
Irami, you have publicly stated many times that we'd be surprised at how many people you dislike (I wouldn't), and you can't discuss any topic without mentioning the immorality of being white, male, and untortured by that fact. Don't trust your assumptions about me.
[ February 15, 2005, 04:01 PM: Message edited by: Lady Jane ]
Posted by Zeugma (Member # 6636) on :
Heh. My party isn't racist! It has a black friend!
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:I do object to racist politics. Racism against whites is still racism.
I don't object. I think it's about time race got put right out in the open and on the table because there are gaps, and the gaps are there for a reason.
[ February 15, 2005, 04:02 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by TheHumanTarget (Member # 7129) on :
I like Dean. He's just crazy enough to take seriously. I doubt that China or N. Korea would put themselves in a position where Dean could go after them. He's still not quite over that whole POW mishap...
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
Not politics about race, politics where the most relevant fact is someone's skin color, politics that doesn't take in the complexity of the world and reduces worth of policies to having a quarter of a room full of black friends.
Poly, if that was directed at me, it would be more effective if I claimed the Republican party.
[ February 15, 2005, 04:05 PM: Message edited by: Lady Jane ]
Posted by David Bowles (Member # 1021) on :
HT, you're confusing Dean with McCain.
Posted by Zeugma (Member # 6636) on :
Heh, I don't much care what label you choose to associate with, but I do find it amusing to think it's "idiotic" to question the colorblindness of the GOP simply because they have a handful of minority "friends". Posted by TheHumanTarget (Member # 7129) on :
David, I know. I'm just killing time. And they look so much alike Plus with people getting so worked up I wanted to see if anyone would take the bait...
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
[ February 15, 2005, 04:12 PM: Message edited by: sarcasticmuppet ]
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
You can't defend an attack on a party for the shade of it's membership by a lack of colorblindness.
No Adam, I didn't. I have made my feelings concerning his words in the quote quite clear, but I haven't discussed Dean as a person or Dean's politics at all. It is possible to agree with the mission of someone and disagree with how they set about accomplishing it.
[ February 15, 2005, 04:13 PM: Message edited by: Lady Jane ]
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
I think you can. I think he did. And I'm pretty sure it got a laugh from the audience who wanted to hear what he really thought, a full thread on Hatrack, and my continued support and confidence.
Posted by ostyinmi (Member # 7218) on :
What I find most appalling about this is if a prominent Republican had made such a statement, the press would be talking about his racial slurs and how evil he is for thinking of minorities in this fashion. A democrat saying the same thing is absolutely fine.
[ February 15, 2005, 04:16 PM: Message edited by: ostyinmi ]
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
I just don't think that's true. What are you comparing it to? Trent Lott's statement?
[ February 15, 2005, 04:16 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
I feel about Dean playing the race card the same way I feel about Bush playing the religion card - irritated. It was a cheap and lazy shot.
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
The funny thing is that the Dems don't exactly go out of their way to elevate minorities to high positions. Of the ten Democrats who declared their candiacy for President, two Black and neither stood a chance. People can say Rice and Powell were token, but I still didn't see any Black secretaries of state under Clinton or Carter. In fact, the only "minority" that I can remember being in any significant position of power in the Clinton White House was the Jewish Republican Secretary of Defense William Cohen. So the best as I can tell, White Democrats are using minorities to try to stay/get in power and they don't actually do anything for them.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
Dean will play the race card in lilly white Vermont. This is like Bush calling that gathering of rich people his base. They were both jokes that were true. You can judge accordingly.
quote:So the best as I can tell, White Democrats are using minorities to try to stay/get in power and they don't actually do anything for them.
So you are endorsing crony politics?
[ February 15, 2005, 04:20 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Zeugma (Member # 6636) on :
You know what? I don't think the media would be jumping over that at all.
Bush in 2000 at the posh Alfred Smith dinner:
quote:"This is an impressive crowd... the Haves...and the Have Mores. Some people call you the elite....I call you my base!"
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
Income level isn't an accurate predictor of political party - too many inexplicably Republican poor. Race and religion are much better predictors.
I'd condemn Bush just as much if he stood up and said, "If the Democrats were holding this meeting, they could schedule it on a Sunday morning without missing a soul."
(Addendum: Someone please aknowledge that was clever. I may never get to use it again.)
[ February 15, 2005, 04:26 PM: Message edited by: Lady Jane ]
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
As has been previously discussed the Al Smith Memorial Dinner (named after a prominent Democrat) is where both presidential candidates (Al Gore was there to) make fun of themselves. And as long as film is included in media, that sound bite recieved plenty of coverage.
Posted by Olorinate (Member # 1561) on :
No one seems to have brought up that it was a casually racist thing to say about the hotel staff.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
Have you seen hotel staff, especially in the midwest? It's like pretending that the overwhelming percentage of gardners in southern California aren't recent Mexican immigrants.
It's nice to see a white person who isn't okay with it and is not afraid to say it.
[ February 15, 2005, 08:51 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
quote: So you are endorsing crony politics?
The basis of why people vote for politicians is very often, "What have you done for me?" Blacks (a lot of them) seem to expect that Democrats will work for them specifically. Affirmative action aside, all I see is pandering every four years and a promise of a welfare check.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:The basis of why people vote for politicians is very often, "What have you done for me?"
Do you think that that's appropriate? Are we talking about "other" people?
It's kind of like Kat's first response about how Dean's mark was idiotic because it won't play to the stupid people. I'm not sure that politicians should play to the greedy or self-centered, especially in national office.
[ February 15, 2005, 04:33 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Zeugma (Member # 6636) on :
Look, y'all can nitpick to your heart's content about every little mistake you think Dean is making. I've followed the man's politics for over a year now, and I know that he isn't racist, that he isn't psychotic, that he isn't even ultra-liberal. He's a decent man with a sharp wit and an excellent grasp of reality, two things that should lead to easy victories over the current conservative movement.
And, now, he's finally been elected to a position from which the media can no longer stuff him into a tiny box and ignore him. I'm excited, and I haven't been excited about politics in a long time.
So nyah-nyah, my guy is intelligent, well-read, and isn't afraid to speak his mind. In complete sentences!
If y'all want to try to paint him as some sort of monster, you go on right ahead. I've got the truth on my side. Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
Irami: How do you plan on changing why people vote?
Z: I like Dean, think the quote was a dumb comment, and pity the hand he's been dealt for the job he has ahead of him. It is possible to do all three.
[ February 15, 2005, 04:34 PM: Message edited by: Lady Jane ]
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
I have a secret plan. Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
I don't think that's why people should vote, but it doesn't change the fact that that is what Democrats do to win the minority vote, they promise that'll fix everything that the Republicans did wrong and help minorities specifically. I'm not saying that most GOP politicians (and Democratic ones as well) don't do the same thing with pork barrel spending, but from my perspective it seems like Democratic party policy in regards to minorities.
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
quote:I don't think that's why people should vote, but it doesn't change the fact that that is what Democrats do to win the minority vote, they promise that'll fix everything that the Republicans did wrong and help minorities specifically. I'm not saying that most GOP politicians (and Democratic ones as well) don't do the same thing with pork barrel spending, but from my perspective it seems like Democratic party policy in regards to minorities.
You would be correct if you flipped that around, NFL.
Democrats win the minority vote because minority voters know darn well that the Republicans aren't going to do one darn thing to help them.
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
Bush rallying by religion: Bad governance, useful politics
Dean rallying by race: Bad governance, increasingly less useful politics
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
Ela, the Democrats don't and don't have to do anything to help them either. They've convinced everyone there's no where else for them to go.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:it doesn't change the fact that that is what Democrats do to win the minority vote
I'm not sure that's what Democrats do to win the minority vote. Bush thought that when he went in the Urban League talking about, "What have the Democrats done for me lately."
As a minority, I never expect to win by people acting merely out of self-interest. And as the Republican party is the one that seems to endorse self-interest, they scare me. I have the math against me. In a democracy, a sense of duty among the entire populace is the only hope for a minority, and maybe I'm talking in abstract terms but it is the belief in my capacity for Americans to feel a sense of duty that allows me to proudly call myself an American.
[ February 15, 2005, 04:48 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
quote:Ela, the Democrats don't and don't have to do anything to help them either.
That's because the Democrats have been thwarted in recent years by a Republican administration and Republican majorities in the House.
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
Your flag-waving is covering up your point, Irami. What?
Ela: The reasons why it hasn't succeeded are debatable. How hard have they tried?
[ February 15, 2005, 04:52 PM: Message edited by: Lady Jane ]
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
It wouldn't be a secret plan if I told you, now would it.
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
Ela, in that general regard Republicans really aren't going to do anything for minorities because Republicans don't do things for groups (although individuals might). Even with the policy on gay marriage (which I vehemently disagree with) Republicans aren't doing for religious conservatives, they're doing it because that's what the majority of the party tends to believe in.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:It's kind of like Kat's first response about how Dean's mark was idiotic because it won't play to the stupid people
I wish you could explain how you got that characterization out of "I think it's an act of desperation by a man with few cards to play."
I'm assuming you acted in good faith, mainly because of how easy it is to compare what Kat said to what you said. But it's a real strange kind of good faith.
Dagonee
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
Irami, is your plan so secret no one will ever know it happened?
Posted by ostyinmi (Member # 7218) on :
Ela, your argument of being Thwarted by republican control of the house does not stand. Clinton began his presidency with a Democratic House and Senate! Tell me what good he did?
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
The statement Kat made that has been bothering me is this one:
quote:The dems are out of power in the federal government in every way it is possible to be out of power and still have a party.
What exactly are you trying to say here, Kat? Do you think one of the two major parties in this country is going to disappear because they lost an election? Sounds almost as though you think we are heading toward a one-party system, though I suspect that's not what you meant.
[ February 15, 2005, 04:58 PM: Message edited by: Ela ]
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
I just meant they keep losing. They've lost control and are getting farther and farther behind.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
I was referring to the February 15, 2005 03:48 PM post, my mistake.
Kat, when you say behind, what do you mean? I don't know, once again, maybe it's because I'm a minority, but I think the worth of a party is richer than it's ability to get the majority of the people to agree.
[ February 15, 2005, 05:03 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
OK, then where did she say "it won't play to the stupid people"?
quote:I'm not bashing Dean. The dems are out of power in the federal government in every way it is possible to be out of power and still have a party. I think Dean's trying to rally the base, and the race card is one of the few he has to play. It does look slightly idiotic considering the current Secretary of State, but he doesn't have many options. It's pathetic, but he has a long road ahead of him.
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
quote: I don't know, once again, maybe it's because I'm a minority,
Why the false humility?
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
Dag,
quote:It does look slightly idiotic considering the current Secretary of State, but he doesn't have many options. It's pathetic, but he has a long road ahead of him.
Kat,
No, Kat, I actually think that being a minority has informed how I see majority-ruled democracy.
[ February 15, 2005, 05:07 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Where did she mention how it plays to stupid people?
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
quote:They've lost control and are getting farther and farther behind.
I grant you that the Democrats have lost control of the House and Senate, for now. But Kerry got 49% of the popular vote in the presidential election - not as far behind as you seem to think.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
How does his statement look idiotic considering the secretary of state?
[ February 15, 2005, 05:11 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
Ela: They continually lose more seats in the House than they gain, and this past election, they lost a dramatic number of seats in the Senate. If the point of being in government and serving your constintuents is getting things done, they are continually doing worse.
[ February 15, 2005, 05:13 PM: Message edited by: Lady Jane ]
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:How does his statement look idiotic considering the secretary of state?
Oh, so you're not talking about Kat's actual post, you're talking about your refutation/attack on her post.
Just checking.
Dagonee
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
If your constituents have it wrong, the point of government is the educate the people, there is a pull and a push, and anything short of that is political pandering. ____
Dag, I'm talking about her post, and I even highlighted the specific part of her post, and I told her why on the post speaking to tokenism.
[ February 15, 2005, 05:19 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
Are you falling back on your secret plan?
[ February 15, 2005, 05:17 PM: Message edited by: Lady Jane ]
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Continually? Last I checked, Democrats gained seats in 98. That's only 4 elections ago. Don't forget they held the advantage for decades before Gingrich's revolution; short term fluctuations aren't exactly bellwethers.
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
quote:Are you falling back on your secret plan?
I'd say, go for it, Irami. Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
Are we discussing SimCityAmerica? The hero saying "I have a plan." "What?" "It's secret." is quite the hoary Hollywood cliche.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
I was making an allusion to Nixon's secret plan to end Vietnam. Nixon's from Whittier, ane that's little bit east of Hollywood. I thought it was a more elegant answer than, "That's none of your business," while both responses are true.
[ February 15, 2005, 05:42 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
It looks like code for, "I don't know. I'll try to think of something later."
Ela: Great! So where's the much-vaunted defense of minorities?
[ February 15, 2005, 05:29 PM: Message edited by: Lady Jane ]
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
So what you meant was, "It's kind of like Kat's first response about how Dean's mark was idiotic for reasons I reacharacterized as 'it won't play to the stupid people.'"
Very cheap tactic, there Irami, using a disputed interpretation of a post as a reference to it.
I guess that duty thing doesn't extend to honest debate, huh?
Dagonee
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
This whole thread is about how looks don't matter with respect to the truth. In other words, it may not be important how my answer plays on Hatrack.
quote:So what you meant was, "It's kind of like Kat's first response about how Dean's mark was idiotic for reasons I reacharacterized as 'it won't play to the stupid people.'"
Why don't we just ask her? Kat, what did you mean when you said, "It does look slightly idiotic considering the current Secretary of State, but he doesn't have many options."
[ February 15, 2005, 05:31 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Irami, do you really think you can speak for all Black Americans? It bugs me sometimes, because my boyfriend of 5.5 years is also African American, and his family including his father have an entirely different perspective on race issues than you do. I'm trying to figure out why.
I realize that they came out of the Afro-Carribean experience which is somewhat different, but they have an interesting mix of socialism and libertarianism in their philosophies that is almost diametrically opposed from yours. In three generations, they've gone from immigrant truck driver, to a school principal with a Master's Degree who is a thesis shy of a PhD in History, to Steve, an engineer.
Why did they escalate up the social ladder so sucessfully so quickly, if there is such a racial bias in the system and a paradigm against their way of thinking?
(sorry this should have been way higher up the page about 3 or 4 of Irami's posts ago) AJ
[ February 15, 2005, 05:31 PM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
quote:Ela, in that general regard Republicans really aren't going to do anything for minorities because Republicans don't do things for groups
No? What about tax cuts for the rich?
quote:Even with the policy on gay marriage (which I vehemently disagree with) Republicans aren't doing for religious conservatives, they're doing it because that's what the majority of the party tends to believe in.
Are you sure? Posted by David Bowles (Member # 1021) on :
"No? What about tax cuts for the rich?"
I'm not rich and I got a tax cut. Why not say, "What about tax cuts for everyone including (gasp!) the rich?"
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:Irami, do you really think you can speak for all Black Americans? It bugs me sometimes, because my boyfriend of 5.5 years is also African American, and his family including his father have an entirely different perspective on race issues than you do. I'm trying to figure out why.
I speak for Irami, and I am black. Ela and NFL don't speak for all jews, but I imagine that being Jewish in America has informed their sense of America in a relevant way. I'm pretty sure they have said that at different times. Being a generation away from Jim Crow has informed how I look at Democracy, as I imagine being a generation away from the Holocaust has informed their sense of government and what people will agree to do. I can guess how, but I don't know. You should probably ask them. But instead of having a biased view, I'd say I have a richer view of the situation. And I'd say they have a richer view of the complexity of the problem.
The mccarthy hearings should have taught all Americans something about principle, but I don't know how good of students we are.
quote:Why did they escalate up the social ladder so sucessfully so quickly, if there is such a racial bias in the system and a paradigm against their way of thinking?
That's a good question and I don't have a very nice answer for it. And I'm also not sure that it's right. They bought in. It's not the same as selling out. "Selling out" has all of these ridiculous connotations. It's absurd. But there is a sense that I think that Harold Ford Jr. "bought in" in his support of the Ownership Society. This is grey area for me because I just don't know enough, and this idea isn't springing from my head fully formed like Athena.
quote:Why did they escalate up the social ladder so sucessfully so quickly, if there is such a racial bias in the system and a paradigm against their way of thinking?
It's controversial when you talk about escalation. It's a queer value system. I'm not so sure that being an engineer is that much better than being a truck driver, even if it pays more.
[ February 15, 2005, 05:55 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
David, the largest tax cuts went to the rich. According to Fact check.org:
quote:...the average [tax cut amount] is inflated by the fact that most of the money is going to a relatively few taxpayers at the top of the income scale, as seen from the following table distilled from a more extensive analysis by the Tax Policy Center...Taxpayers making more than $1 million a year get an average cut of nearly $113,000 this year. Such huge cuts at the top tend to pull up the numerical average [$1,586] that the President is fond of citing.
[ February 15, 2005, 05:54 PM: Message edited by: Ela ]
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Irami, Steve works for the State of Illinois as a civil engineer. If he doesn't do his job in the Public Trust correctly and ethically, 1,000s of people could die. He checks concrete consistency on some of the busiest roads and bridges in the country. Is he morally superior to his truck driver grandfather? Absolutely not.
Does his job require a high code of ethics? Absolutely. Does he work with his hands in reasonably hard labor despite his college degree? Actually yes. You should see the amounds of concrete and asphalt he has to physically haul from one place to another for testing.
Does he or any of his family feel as if they've "sold out". They would be horrified at the idea! That's what ticks me off. You ASSUME that he has "sold out" or "bought in" or some such crackpot notion ("buying in" just seems like you trying to be nice). When he hasn't. And some automatically assume he's sold out or bought in because he's dating me because I happen to look like a stereotypical white chick, no mater how much I might dispise my blond hair and blue eyes. Never mind that we actually get along quite well and both happen to be left-handed engineers. He has to be a sell-out. Don't you realize how insulting that is?
Let's get personal: how many white women vs. black women have you dated? Unless you date soley black women I don't think you've got room to talk.
AJ
[ February 15, 2005, 06:05 PM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Also, as has been repeatedly pointed out, unless you took advantage of some fairly esoteric tax cuts, all the tax cuts you received would probably have benefited you more in the plans the democrats tried to pass. So if you were voting your wallet DB, the way to vote in your case would have been Democrat in 2000.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:Does he or any of his family feel as if they've "sold out". They would be horrified at the idea! That's what ticks me off. You ASSUME that he has "sold out" or "bought in" or some such crackpot notion.
As I'm not a crack pot, and I put more than my share of qualifications around the statement, especially considering that I usually write none, I'm just going to call this an impasse and figure it out on my own dime.
quote:how many white women vs. black women have you dated? Unless you date soley black women I don't think you've got room to talk.
I like women. , and on occasion, women like me, God bless them. If you really think that I don't have room to talk about my distaste for the ownership society or cultural value systems that fall along racial lines because I like women, then I don't know. It seems that you are the one propogating a bad argument.
[ February 15, 2005, 06:22 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
Yes I am sure that a majority of the Republican party believes that gay marriage should be banned. The "rich" pay more taxes which makes it logical in a capitalist system that they would recieve higher tax cuts.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Irami, yes you tried to qualify it. But you still *said* it. And your bias is always dripping with scorn for it. So spare me please.
And yeah Steve's father the 2nd generation, is probably the most highly educated of the 3 generations. He's also been a sucessful black role model for lots of minority kids as a school principal. I'd actually love to see you and he converse, because he IS everything you claim you are trying to be.
AJ
Posted by Ben (Member # 6117) on :
Irami? did i just hear you right? did you just say you had a secret plan to fight inflation?
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
*sweats at the podium*
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
I thought he said invasion!
Posted by Olorinate (Member # 1561) on :
quote: Have you seen hotel staff, especially in the midwest? It's like pretending that the overwhelming percentage of gardners in southern California aren't recent Mexican immgrants.
It's nice to a white person who isn't okay with it and is not afraid to say it.
I don't think acknowledging a fact and using it in a tasteless joke are the same thing. It ignores one group entirely for the sake of poking fun at another group.
Let's say I'm making fun of lawyers for tailoring to a rich white clientele: "The last time that lawyer saw a Mexican was when he spilled coffee all over his desk!"
Sure, a lot of Mexicans work on cleaning crews, but the joke is still tasteless.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
I saw something different in Irami's post about "buying in" vs "selling out. I didn't see it as just another way of saying the same thing, I saw it as a refutation of the negitive connotations of "selling out", which to me is a great idea.
I think that most of us, regarless of race, have "bought in" to the current system, and that works well for us as a society. "Selling out" implies (at least5 to me) that minorities don;t ahve a vested interst in succedding in education, or social progression, which I find stupid...I don;t see those values as tied to any particular color, which is why the whole idea of " selling out" never made much sense to me.
As far as only dating people of your own race....where did that come from? Why would that make anyone anything other than a racist? I can see not being particularily attracted to people from other races...if it isn't your thing, then it isn't your thing. But to deliberatly exclude all others, solely on race? I don't get how that would make anyone proud.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
The real problem with this is that the media and the american people spend more time talking about politicians gaffes than they do about the issues. Why should we care if Dean, when preaching to the choir, made a joke that seems tasteless when it hits the press? Why should we care if Dean let out a scream at Pep Rally? Why should we care if his wife is the quinticensial hostess?
Why should we care if Bush can't pronounce "nuclear" correctly? Why should we care if Bush figited during the debates?
All of this supports a move toward image and away from the policies and actions that really matter. Its time we let the media know that we as voters want substance, not this pathetic drivel.
Posted by Avatar300 (Member # 5108) on :
quote:Irami, do you really think you can speak for all Black Americans? It bugs me sometimes, because my boyfriend of 5.5 years is also African American, and his family including his father have an entirely different perspective on race issues than you do. I'm trying to figure out why.
Because, as individuals, they are distinct from Irami in every detail but the one that should matter least. They may share a skin color, but that does not mean that they have to share anything else.
Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
quote: I like women. and on occasion, women like me, God bless them
Yes, God bless the poor women who like you. They obviously suffer from a mental disease, and should seek help immediately.
-
-
-
Yes, I know that was an ad hominem attack, taking a seemingly self-deprecating quote and turning it around in order to make a point that was mean and nasty. Those familiar with my character would vouch for the fact that I am usually polite, and refrain from saying nasty things. However, this guy has really pissed me off.
He says stupid, inane things and then when people (rightly) call him out on it, he makes it look like it is them who are guilty of the very thing that he is. Case in point:
quote:You ASSUME that he has "sold out" or "bought in" or some such crackpot notion ("buying in" just seems like you trying to be nice).
quote: As I'm not a crack pot, and I put more than my share of qualifications around the statement, especially considering that I usually write none, I'm just going to call this an impasse and figure it out on my own dime.
pssst . . . Irami . . . calling someone's notion "crackpot" isn't the same as calling the individual a "crackpot." Instead of answering the accusation, he turns it around. This isn't my only beef. He assumes that somehow his opinion on what a is good for a group is the only valid opinion, and if you disagree then obviously you don't care about his group. Didn't the president in his party once say "ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country"? But nooo, his idea of what makes a good party is one that believes in somehow "doing things" for its constituents. There is no free lunch in this world. The people who get ahead are the ones who do what AJ's friend did and suck it up and help themselves. But I digress into politics.
And what's this b.s. about "buying in"? What the hell is the problem with actually realizing that only you can better your situation, and actually doing something about it instead of complaining about how the other political party has it in for you? What a load of hogwash.
Again, sorry about the ad hominem attack. But there are too many things that Irami said that just get under my skin.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:I don't think acknowledging a fact and using it in a tasteless joke are the same thing. It ignores one group entirely for the sake of poking fun at another group.
I thought the joke was funny. Look, as I see it, anytime the republican party has to choose between helping minorities, not just ethnic minorities, but gays out of principle or catering to WASP fears, the party chooses WASP fears. A constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage is absurd, and I imagine that most conservatives with a sense of principle agree, but the Republican party will push it. Profiling Arab Americans is gross, but Conservatives get nervous about their kids being blown-up and the Republican party comes down on the WASP side. American WASPs are some self-satisfied cats for all the wrong reasons, and I'm glad Dean is getting tough with them.
The "black community" is at each other's throat trying to figure out what to do. I'm not just talking about Cosby, once again, I agree with Cosby's comments. I'm talking about the day to day roughing up we give ourselves. If you think I'm tough on white people on Hatrack, I'm at least as hard on black people in real life. Do not be fooled, the solid democratic voting block means that black people know that they don't want to become white republicans, but outside of that, 50 black Kerry voters will give you fifty different visions for the black people in America.
quote:Let's say I'm making fun of lawyers for tailoring to a rich white clientele: "The last time that lawyer saw a Mexican was when he spilled coffee all over his desk!"
If that's how to get the ball started on the lawyer to gardener ratio in southern california, then so be it. It's a fine joke with enough truth in it.
Dean is serious about the problems. For some reason, the guy has a lot of credibility.
quote:What the hell is the problem with actually realizing that only you can better your situation, and actually doing something about it instead of complaining about how the other political party has it in for you? What a load of hogwash.
I just don't know if it is that simple.
[ February 15, 2005, 09:21 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
The Dean Scream seemed to the uniformed viewer to convey a sense of instability. My first thought was that I didn't want him anywhere near America's nuclear arsenal. In private he may be a calm and collected man, but that wasn't the impression he gave. His comment on race wasn't just a joke, but a reflection of the Democratic attitude toward race relations.
Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
By the way, for the record, I have a great deal of respect for Howard Dean, though I disagree with his politics. I see him as neither ultra-liberal nor a nut case. In this particular situation, though, I thought his remarks was stupid, ignorant, and ill-advised. I also think the Democrat party, in general, takes the African-American vote for granted. I think there are many African-Americans who could plausibly think that the Republican Party could do more for them, and they aren't sell outs. Then again, I'm a poor white young guy, so please, feel free to ingest a hearty amount of salt as you read my words.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:I think there are many African-Americans who could plausibly think that the Republican Party could do more for them, and they aren't sell outs.
That's the question. Do I support the party that's going to do more for me, or do I support the party that's going to do the right thing?
Kwea,
quote:I think that most of us, regarless of race, have "bought in" to the current system, and that works well for us as a society.
I think it's kind of like a credit card debt. At first, it's just convenience, and you know it's bad but you don't worry about it, then it becomes essential, then you find yourself approving of, or making excuses for, all manners of evil to pay off the bill because you are a slave to it. This isn't my story because as you can imagine, I have one little credit card, and I pay off the bill, but I think this is the problem of "buying in."
I don't know. Like I said, this isn't something I've figured out.
[ February 15, 2005, 09:30 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
quote: I just don't know if it is that simple.
Of course it isn't that simple. Nothing in life is simple. But it is a heck of a lot better than complaining.
Listen. I'm a pull-yourself-up-by-the-bootstraps kind of guy. I guess that mentality comes from the fact that I had a very modest upbringing. We always had enough for our needs, mut not much else. I am putting myself through college on a combination of scholarships, financial aid, and loans, and I fully intend on working hard and making enough money to support my family. Any excess I will use to help my fellow man pull himself up by the bootstraps.
Nowhere in this scenario do I see government involvement. This is where I fundamentally disagree with most in the Democratic Party.
Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
quote: Do I support the party that's going to do more for me, or do I support the party that's going to do the right thing?
The latter. That's why, in general, I support the Republican Party. Because I believe they support doing the right thing.
IMO, the Democrat Party is more about "doing more" for people rather than providing them opportunities to help themselves.
Posted by Jay (Member # 5786) on :
<------ Anxiously awaiting Tom’s response……….
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
So in order for someone who is a minority to vote for the Republicans because they feel that's the right thing they must be "selling out" or have "bought in?"
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:e Dean Scream seemed to the uniformed viewer to convey a sense of instability. My first thought was that I didn't want him anywhere near America's nuclear arsenal. In private he may be a calm and collected man, but that wasn't the impression he gave.
If everyone who had ever screamed at a pep rally was unstable, then we'd need to lock up 99% of the population. The problem with the Dean Scream, is that it was picked up by the media and played out of context specifically to create the unstable image. That was my complaint, the media focuses on image over substance.
After reasoned consideration, do you really think that Dean's scream at that rally was an indication that he was unfit for a responsible job? If not, why was that your initial response and why did it become a voting issue?
When the media picks up something like this from Bush, the right wing pundits cry foul play. If its foul play when its done to a republican, its foul play when its done to a democrat.
quote:His comment on race wasn't just a joke, but a reflection of the Democratic attitude toward race relations.
And he was speaking to a group of democrats, so making a joke that played to democratic biases seems perfectly reasonable. Its certainly no worse (and probably not as bad) as GWs "Some people call you the elite, I call you my base".
Was this really even "playing the race card"? After all, he was only preaching to the choir when he made the statement. How can that be considered a play of any kind?
On the other hand, the comment Orrin Hatch made during the Alberto Gonzales hearing specifically calling people racist if they objected to Gonzales record on any item was "playing the race card" and should have offended everyone involved.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Well, then I retract my support of that statement.
I read it like this, although I don't think it was what you meant.
Selling out means that someone has betrayed core values of their race, at least in the usage I ave heard.(BTW, I lived in Detroit, although in the 'burbs....actually it was Utica, on 20 mile and Van Dyke) I heard it over and over again for years. A "sellout" is someone who has turned their back on their roots, and moved on to things that are not traditionally thought of as part of their heritage.
My problem with that is that a lot of the things that the black communities suffer from are a direct result of either refusing to participate in specific situations...such as education....or in being denied access to those programs by other people because of race. I don;t think that someone who works hard and betters themselves is selling out as much as he is buying into the American system....and the whole attitude that that is selling out, somehow betraying their communities, is counterproductive, both to individuals and to society as a whole.
I don;t think that ignorance is a cultural value that is in the best interest of Blacks, but over and over again I have heard the Black kids who do well in school labeled sellouts. I don;t think that there is anything wrong with wanting to live in a safe area with your family, but I hear people being called sellouts because their girlfriends are white, or they drive a nice car, or they have a house in a better neighborhood.
It is the attitude, that "success" doesn't belong in the 'hood that creates the desire to leave it all behind and not look back. Rather than celebrating the fact that they are successful doing something they like to do, the Black community calls them sellouts because they don't live in a tenement building on 8 mile road anymore.
If they were a little more accepting about success, even if it came from avenues other than sports and music, people might stick around and try to help out a bit more. But no one likes to be called names, and not many people will try to help those who are calling them those names.
Why is a Black man who goes on to become a Doctor (or a professional classic musician?) a sellout, while a rapper who makes millions bragging about having people killed for fun isn't?
And what does that say about that section of society?
I don't think that success is a White thing, not failure a Black one. I don't think that Education should be a White thing, or ignorance a Black one.
But I don't hear White people calling each other sellouts when they move on and try to improve their lives, either educationally or professionally. Maybe they are using different words, like uppity, or getting above themselves, but for the most part I don't hear anything at all, not compared to the things I use to hear from my Black friends in school.
Posted by Snowden (Member # 1660) on :
quote:So in order for someone who is a minority to vote for the Republicans because they feel that's the right thing they must be "selling out" or have "bought in?"
Considering that I don't know what "bought in" means, I don't know. "Selling out" may have been appropriate in another era, but it's absurd now.
quote:I don't think that someone who works hard and betters themselves is selling out as much as he is buying into the American system....and the whole attitude that that is selling out, somehow betraying their communities, is counterproductive, both to individuals and to society as a whole.
Buying into the American system. That's the thing. How is it that I'm American, yet it's not my system. It's not just about working hard and bettering yourself, it's about buying into what "better" entails. Who got to decide what "better" means? And what sense does it make?I imagine it's the same people who decided what it means to be in the American system.
[ February 15, 2005, 11:28 PM: Message edited by: Snowden ]
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
See, I don;t think it was any one group who made the rules, although it was primarily white males who founded it.
My point was that if the people who are seeking to "better" themselves (education, better jobs) are removed from the society they grew up in, by that societies choice of minimizing them, why is it any surprise they don't feel obligated to the people who treated them so?
Who is selling out who...the people who want to do better than their parents did, or the society that is so arrogant that it assumes anyone not sharing it's exact values is "selling out"? It seems to me that the society is selling them out by refusing to support their choices.
Or are you only "Black enough" if you conform to some arbitrary standard of "Blackness"?
I see this happening a lot, to be honest.
Fact of the matter is that Black people, just like any other group, are a very diverse group...not all of them come from the same place, and they all have different backgrounds, different standards.
Irami isn't any less Black for being a classically trained musician, despite what might have been said by people I know. I know a lot of Black people who are college educated, and have better jobs than I do....does that make them less Black? Did they sell out?
I am not trying to be rude, just trying to express (and not all that well, I fear) some of the things I am thinking about within the context of this discussion. It is a sensitive issue, but everyone is afraid to ask questions about this for fear of offending someone.
Kwea
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
quote:Considering that I don't know what "bought in" means, I don't know.
You don't know? You wrote it under the name Irami. Irami and Snowden are the same person. Yo don't know what you meant when you said that? Or were you hoping no one would notice you're switching identities in order to back yourself up?
Posted by ghost of dkw (Member # 4046) on :
kat, look at the post where he first used “bought in.” He said right from the beginning that he’s trying to figure out a concept that he’s not completely clear about. That’s not being disingenuous, it’s being open about thoughts that are still “in process” and not fully formed.
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
Hmm...okay.
It is a tremendously loaded and insulting phrase to toss off so casually when you don't know what you mean though.
It's like saying Dean is corrupt, and then claiming to be unsure what corrupt means when called on it.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:the comment Orrin Hatch made during the Alberto Gonzales hearing specifically calling people racist if they objected to Gonzales record on any item
Really? I'm assuming you meant his "Every Hispanic in America is watching" comment. If you didn't, please link the actual quote.
Proceeding as if that is the quote you meant, you take his statement way to far, especially with the "specifically" description. Did he really say "any" objection was racist?
Dagonee
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
Rabbit, sometimes people scream at pep rallies, but usually they don't appear to lose control over their mental faculties because it wasn't just his voice cracking, it was his facing going red and the uncontrollable rant. As far as why the media picked up on it so much, because they want ratings and clearly the media didn't have Dean in mind for who they wanted to get the nomination.
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
NFL, you've clearly been watching too much Fox. Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
From your point of view why would Fox even care who won the Democratic primary they should actually be the lone objective voice? And just so you know I was mainly watching MSNBC and CNN for coverage of the Democratic primary.
[ February 16, 2005, 01:17 PM: Message edited by: newfoundlogic ]
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
Ela, the eye-rolling smiley is not an element of polite discussion or disagreement.
I only use it when I'm trying to be rude. Were you trying to be rude?
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
No, I just think NFL has bought into the excessive news coverage of what I view as an insignificant event and given it way too much significance.
There is no evidence whatsoever that Dean is mentally unstable, as NFL seems to imply.
[ February 16, 2005, 01:27 PM: Message edited by: Ela ]
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
I like the second sentence of the above post. That addresses and refutes what NFL said, instead of just generally dismissing him.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
I logged in Snowden by mistake. I thought this was Ornery, and I got confused. I figure everyone who made it this far knows that Irami/Snowden is the same person so I didn't go out of my way to change it. You can see some sort of grand stratagem in it as you want, but I have bigger fish to fry than some alias game.
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
I'm glad you've given that up, then. It never really was a good idea.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
Given that up? That's like saying, "Katie, I'm glad you stopped stealing cars, it's really a shameful habit." I've only ever had two names on this forum. Snowden, and Irami, and I'm pretty sure that when I switched to my real name, I made a thread saying that, "Hey guys, Irami = Snowden."
[ February 16, 2005, 01:37 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
You don't remember Questioner? I do. You have done the fake alias thing to prove a point before.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
Yeah, I forgot about that. A woman asked me a question about birth control that I couldn't answer so I came to hatrack. I wanted people to address me like they would address a woman about birth control, because, you know, sometimes I have a problem showing my sensitive side and I imagined the counselors on hatrack would use better words, words and phrases that I could just steal. I didn't anticipate that they would lay into "Questioner" as much as they did, and when that happened, I fessed up in that same thread twenty some odd responses later, and started shaking my finger in people. because the responses I had gotten as Questioner were even more insensitive thatn my boorish instincts, making me glad that the real woman had come to me instead of hatrack. It was a lark, and as soon as it became something more, I put a stop to it.
[ February 16, 2005, 02:07 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
However you justify it in your head, you have played those games before. I'm glad you quit.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
So, I hear Howard Dean made a joke talking to the black caucus.
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
Ela, like I said I don't Dean necessarily is unstable, he may be an intelligent, calm, collected man in private. However, that was not the impression he made in a public speech and impressions made in public during an election have all too great of importance to expect the media to dismiss them. Since I am neither a registered Democrat nor do I live in state with open primaries I didn't have a real preference as to who got the nomination once I knew that Lieberman didn't stand a reasonable chance.
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
quote:I like the second sentence of the above post. That addresses and refutes what NFL said, instead of just generally dismissing him.
Yes, mother. Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Irami, I didn't know that you were Snowden.
No big deal though..at least not to me.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
I think Dean's joke was a little tasteless, and stupid for a politician to tell at a public event. Of course, it has an element of truth in it: Republicans routinely scrape up 10% or so among black voters. I think the Dean scream has been hyped and replayed so much it makes the conservatives who do so look ridiculous. On the Sean Hannity show he plays that sound-bite all the time, over and over again, then has a chuckle over it. Other conservatives bring it up anytime Dean is mentioned. It makes them sound vindictive and nasty--I mean, it was a year ago, and Dean lost the primary. Move on.
I totally agree with what Rabbit said. Image rules in American politics, and that should change.
quote: All of this supports a move toward image and away from the policies and actions that really matter. Its time we let the media know that we as voters want substance, not this pathetic drivel.
Rabbit
quote: I'm a pull-yourself-up-by-the-bootstraps kind of guy. I guess that mentality comes from the fact that I had a very modest upbringing. We always had enough for our needs, mut not much else. I am putting myself through college on a combination of scholarships, financial aid, and loans, and I fully intend on working hard and making enough money to support my family. Any excess I will use to help my fellow man pull himself up by the bootstraps.
Nowhere in this scenario do I see government involvement. This is where I fundamentally disagree with most in the Democratic Party.
Brian Hill. Brian, education however you get it is a good thing. But I have a question for you. Do any of the "scholarships, financial aid, and loans" programs you use involve the goverment? I'll bet they do.
So are only programs that help you positive? That last may seem harsh, but I have seen many people express that attitude before.
Of course people should try to help themselves to the best of their abilities. Some are more able than others, though. Many people have different needs, and I think the government has a role in helping them. Not exclusively the government, but a role.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
I forgot to add that I thought Irami was treated a little harshly in this thread, maninly about the "buy-in/sell-out" dealio. Dkw was correct in pointing out that Irami seemed unsure of the whole concept's validity. As many are, including me: I have mixed feelings about it. Minorities should cherish their own culture while trying to fit into the mainstream. Not easy.
Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
Very good point, Morbo. I am appreciative of the help the government has given me to pursue an education. I guess I was getting too carried away when I said that *nowhere* do I see the government involved in my plans for my future. I admit that my statement was more hyperbole than well thought out reason.
This brings up the issue of what is appropriate government involvement. I think there are several areas in which government programs are helpful, including help with my education. I believe that in a "perfect" world, there would be enough private money available to help me get myself through college, but such a world doesn't exist. However, if there was absolutely no help available at all from the government, I would still become educated. My belief still remains that our future is ultimately our own responsibility, as is the responsibility to help others.
Things are rarely black and white. That's why I am always modifying my statements with "mostly," "IMO," "in general," etc. So I will end this post with a statement I've already made.
quote: That's why, in general, I support the Republican Party. Because I believe they support doing the right thing.
IMO, the Democrat Party is more about "doing more" for people rather than providing them opportunities to help themselves.
I don't apologize for my comments to Irami, except for the ad hominem cheap shot. His whole take on this issue (and most issues) is offensive to me, for reasons I've already been over.
I am now returning to my regularly-scheduled lurking.
Posted by Olorinate (Member # 1561) on :
Dean's scream scored some him some points in my favor. I thought it was cool to see someone excited about politics, even if they're weren't cool while they were being excited about politics.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Plus with people getting so worked up I wanted to see if anyone would take the bait...
![[The Wave]](graemlins/thewave.gif)
, and on occasion, women like me, God bless them. If you really think that I don't have room to talk about my distaste for the ownership society or cultural value systems that fall along racial lines because I like women, then I don't know. It seems that you are the one propogating a bad argument.![[No No]](graemlins/nono.gif)
because the responses I had gotten as Questioner were even more insensitive thatn my boorish instincts, making me glad that the real woman had come to me instead of hatrack. It was a lark, and as soon as it became something more, I put a stop to it.