@lucky760

You mistake my hatred of Family Guy for some misplaced hatred of children. I never said I hate children. I am the oldest of 8 kids (the youngest currently being 9 years old). I grew up dealing with diaper changes, babysitting, getting thrown up on; and spite of that I'm a school teacher. I would have a difficult or impossible time getting by if I hated kids.

Now, to quell your pretentious assumptions, I will say that I hate Family Guy. I'm not going to repeat all the criticisms it's received over the years. I used to think it was a decent show, I even signed several petitions to bring it back on the air, but since they've come back on the air it's been a pretty steady downward spiral.

This clip is a perfect example. It's not inherently funny, it's just what kids do. When kids do it, it's annoying. When I watch someone else's kid do it, it's just as annoying. And when I watch it on TV, wait...I don't watch it on TV because it's fucking annoying!!!!!

Back me up cracked.
Back me up Tv Critic.
Back me up media critics and other cartoonists.

Finally, to quote Stewie from when he was on 'Kids Say the Darndest Things' with Bill Cosby "That's not funny! He's just saying what happens when you go skiing have kids!!!

>> ^quantumushroom:

NetRunner: Racists will latch onto it as justification for their prejudices, just like they might cling to quotes from Bill Cosby.

So are "racists" to blame whenever liberal moral relativism undermines traditional responsibility?
Bill Cosby's words and observations are as credible as they come, as he spent most of his life aiding Black causes monetarily and fighting for civil rights, because he is disgusted with needless Black failure.
Black illegitimacy is at 70%, a death knell for any community. "Racists" are not responsible for any Black man abandoning the mother and his children; he failed to STEP UP.
Where is liberalism in this equation? Justifying this wrong choice.


You also need an education in liberalism. I think Bill Cosby's words are just fine. People do need to take responsibility for their actions.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't also try correct for the prejudice and inequality in our society that is also presenting problems for the black community.

It isn't all one thing. Their problems aren't only caused by white bigotry. That doesn't mean white bigotry doesn't exist, or isn't a problem. Bill Cosby is just saying it ain't 100% of the reason why they have problems.

I can agree with Bill Cosby. I can't agree with the people who want to use what he said as an excuse to repeal anti-discrimination laws, or spread racial stereotypes.

NetRunner: Racists will latch onto it as justification for their prejudices, just like they might cling to quotes from Bill Cosby.


So are "racists" to blame whenever liberal moral relativism undermines traditional responsibility?

Bill Cosby's words and observations are as credible as they come, as he spent most of his life aiding Black causes monetarily and fighting for civil rights, because he is disgusted with needless Black failure.

Black illegitimacy is at 70%, a death knell for any community. "Racists" are not responsible for any Black man abandoning the mother and his children; he failed to STEP UP.

Where is liberalism in this equation? Justifying this wrong choice.

>> ^chilaxe:

"In other words, life isn't fair."
Right, that's what I'm arguing. But if Herman Cain was trained to think along the lines of your comment, he'd still be like all the kids he played with growing up: poor, uneducated, and blaming other people and refusing to adopt basic success strategies.

This is also why I'm saying "learn more about liberalism" -- you're doubling down on the idea that baked into my entire spiel above was some sort of resentment-induced self-destructive behavior.

Conservatives fall prey to that pretty easily, IMO. Most lash out at liberals in a pretty accusatory tone, saying their entire lives are being destroyed by taxes, regulation, the national debt and the Fed printing money. They like to talk about how rich they'd be, if only it weren't for taxes, or how it's just not worth it for them to work any harder, because taxes are higher on rich people. They say that any day now they might just "go Galt" and withhold their productivity to punish the creeping socialism that's invading their lives. They say unions are killing factories, immigrants are stealing their jobs, and the minimum wage is why people can't find work. It's not that they're not as creative as that liberal arts major, it's not that they're not as industrious as that Mexican immigrant, it's not that they should've paid more attention in class, it's liberals, immigrants, and government are to blame for all my problems in life.

What you're talking about isn't liberal, it's human nature. People generally wanna blame someone or something else for their problems, whether they're right or not.

What I mean by "life isn't fair" is that people are not always wrong when they feel that way. Some people are right to feel that way.

Just not the people whose biggest concern in life is a millionaire's surtax.

>> ^chilaxe:
Give poor disadvantaged people a break... encourage them to become success-oriented. The first step would be sincerely reading many business books.

Giving poor and disadvantaged people a break is the liberal position. Do what we can to equalize income, and improve the quality and pay of jobs at the bottom of the payscale.

Also, a free quality education, that teaches them not just facts and figures, but teaches them why what they're learning is important.

>> ^chilaxe:
On genes, I'm confused... is liberalism arguing that genetics substantially influence diversity in economic outcomes even to the point of diversity in the evolutionary history of ethnic groups, or is liberalism arguing what most liberal academics argue: we don't care if it's true and we'll break your faith in academia and liberal intellectualism by calling you the worst names in the language.

What, nigger? Oh, you must mean racist.

Let me try and explain. I'm saying liberals think life isn't fair. The real next step to being a liberal is to say "but it should be made as fair as humanly possible."

You believe racism still exists, right? Specifically, racial prejudice, conscious or unconscious, subtle and gross -- we still have that, right? And you also agree that that prejudice against your ethnicity will negatively impact the quality and number of opportunities made to you, right? You also agree that ethnicity isn't something you choose, or can change if you want to, right?

In a fair society, race shouldn't factor into the type and quality of opportunities people have in life. So for fairness's sake, we should try to discourage people from holding racial prejudice, because it's not fair to deny people an opportunity on the basis of their skin color.

In a market-driven society like ours, this means you should be hiring people based solely on their ability to do the job, not some unrelated characteristic (white, black, man, woman, gay, straight, etc.).

So the problem here is that while it's possible to make some sort of scientific observations about a link between ethnicity and intellectual capability, it's not really a question we should be terribly interested in as a society. And if someone does come up with some sort of empirical analysis validating one of those prejudices we're fighting against, it's morally wrong to then hand that kind of loaded gun over to the people who want to use that to justify denying opportunities to people on the basis of race.

In other words, that kind of study is rightfully controversial. The problem isn't the study itself, per se, it's how the wider world will use it. Racists will latch onto it as justification for their prejudices, just like they might cling to quotes from Bill Cosby.

None of that is a concern about the study of human genetics itself, it's a concern about the ways in which society might use that information.

>> ^schlub:

Last I heard, it was called "programming", not "hacking", still, interesting


Here in Silicon Valley, I often see the terms used somewhat interchangeably.

Sorry. I couldn't fit in the title that there was actually no Bill Cosby.>> ^TheGenk:

But where is Bill Cosby Wearing a Sweater of Bill Cosby Wearing a Sweater?
I am disapoint

But where is Bill Cosby Wearing a Sweater of Bill Cosby Wearing a Sweater?
I am disapoint

fat girls in small bathing suits with gaudy tattoos and dirty tomboy mouths are about as attractive as bill cosby in a sexy maid outfit eating jello pudding seductively. now if you'll excuse me, i have just had a cosby show fan art inspiration.

LOL! I wasn't at work! Where in the heck did that come from?! It's called context! There's social context (black friend knew me, knows I'm not a racist, knows what the intent was when I said it, I wasn't at work, I wasn't around others who might misinterpret it), and then there's the context of the joke, which you can discern that I'm actually poking fun of society often assuming the black guy did it. I'm smart enough to know I'd never make a joke like that at work. I also know it's a bad idea to for example play solitaire at work, too. Does that mean solitaire is an evil thing? OF COURSE NOT! The only thing you're pointing out is a joke like that heard out of context could be misinterpreted as racist because it involves race. I could see my joke being misinterpreted had my friend not known me. I wouldn't walk into a group of people who didn't know me and say the same joke! For that matter, I wouldn't walk up to a stranger and debate economic theory either. Doesn't make debating economic theory wrong! LOL...

Your point is ridiculous in this case. Racism was very often *fought* by comics using similar tactics. Are you suggesting Richard Pryor, Gene Wilder, Jon Stewart, Whoopi Goldberg, Robin Williams, Louis CK, Eddie Murphy, Bill Cosby, all of them are racists?! It's ridiculous. Jon Stewart, who is ethnically part Jewish, makes jokes relating to Jewish stereotypes, so that makes him anti-semitic?! Kevin Smith made an entire movie making fun of Catholicism, and he's catholic. That makes him a Catholic hater?! There's an entire section of culture that has been positive in this regard, and you don't see this?!

If you can't understand that, your brain can't understand context, and what is acceptable in various social situations. The joke I told to the people I told it to, when I told it made everyone laugh and offended no one, and that was entirely expected. In no way was it ever said or implied that blacks are inferior to whites whatsoever. It's therefore NOT RACIST!

You've never heard of a christian husband telling their wife to do something and then she did it simply because he told her to? Uhhhh, Michelle Bachmann is on record saying that her husband told her to become a tax lawyer, and she did it simply because he told her to. That's what Maher was railing about as sexist, and he's dead right about that. That's not as sexist as him telling her, "Go make me a sandwich!" But it is sexist that she had to do it simply because he told her to because he's the husband, and she's the wife. Unless of course, in their marriage, if she told him to go become a nurse, he also had to do it simply because she told him to. But once that happens, that's no longer "wives must be submissive to their husbands". That's "spouses must be submissive to each other". That's the difference.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

No, what counts is the intent of the joke.
A white guy walks into Harlem and starts cracking racist jokes and telling the offended African-Americans, "It's OK because my INTENTION isn't racist..." If you told your joke where I worked, you'd be hauled into the Human Resources department and either instantly fired, or put through a merry bout of "Sensitivity Training" under the threat of being fired. You know as well as I do that there is an entire industry based around the reality that racism is irrelevant of intention of the speaker. All that matters that a comment can be interpreted as racist by a passer-by. That's racism under the law, and if you walked into the HR department with a bunch of crap about "intention" as your only justification you'd get your @$$ tossed out the door - and justifiably so. Quite frankly, you should be thanking your lucky stars that the guy you cracked wise to, or anyone else else in earshot, decided not to make an issue of it or you'd be unemployed.
If you can't understand that, then I don't know what to tell you other than your brain lacks the ability to comprehend context.
I perfectly understand the archetecture of the excuses you have constructed around yourself. I simply reject them as factually incorrect, mentally simplistic, and culturally insensitive. If you can't understand that, then I don't know what to tell you other than your brain lacks the ability to comprehend.
That's the definition of a bigot - zero tolerance for the ideas of some others. That's not the same as a racist. Nice try diverting that one.
OK - for clarity... Maher is a bigot AND a racist AND a sexist AND whole bunch of other things. And being 'human' is never a justifiable excuse to satisfy Maher when he attacks people he hates. Humans do lots of stupid things. When they do, they are typically held accountable for it rather than getting a free pass.
If the bible says that wives must be submissive to their husbands, that's sexist!
Put simply, Paul's opinions about women are not "Christianity". He was a unique fellow, who also advocated remaining unmarried - and yet that was never christian doctrine. Regardless, as I said before, I've never once met this hypothetical Christian who tells his woman "go make me a sammich". The strawman is more rare than a fiscal conservative thought in Obama's brain. But as I said, roles assumed by couples are less 'sexism' and are more 'practical reality'.
I'm not sure you're aware of this, but people who agree with Maher tend to be the ones who go out of their way to see him live.
Fair enough. I stand corrected in regards to his audience being stacked purposefully. However, I maintain that it is stacked and Maher would be much more moderate in his crass behavior, bigotry, racism, and sexism if he had a more balanced audience that didn't consist of mostly ideologically sympathetic cheerleaders.
Finally, ANYONE to the left of you, you characterize as a neolib, lib, socialist, etc.
Untrue and hyperbole.
Your characterization of his guests isn't accurate in the slightest.
No - I'd say you simply find it uncomfortably accurate and therefore deny it.

>> ^bareboards2:

promote
You tell it sister.


Did she mention that African tribes were the sellers of other Africans who she would say were "kidnapped?" In fact, Africans are still being sold by Africans today--just America isn't buying them anymore.

I don't ask that first part to belittle her thoughts and expressions, I ask that first part to note the difference of the vast world hundreds of years ago.

And you know what's truly sad? I can respect this woman immensely (Even if I doubt she might understand the world isn't a static concept or that right or wrong isn't as easy as 1+1.) But the new culture trying to emerge in the African American society itself is scary and she would be disappointed. QM might use Oprah, Bill Cosby, and all the other role models as a flag piece for his own opinion, but that means little to the fatherless child who doesn't feel loved. Unfortunately, that's a lot of African Americans. These, I think, are worse than the past because self-corruption is by far worse than fighting other people's corruption. IMHO.

Time and time again, I see conservatives struggle to understand that their general worldview is completely subjective. You see it in Ayn Rand's 'Objectivism' which is anything but. You see it in the Christian right's 'Moral Relativism' which comes with so many subjective assumptions. You see it in right wing 'Libertarianism' which assumes that a very narrow and specific political-economic worldview IS liberty. You see it in scripture, which is taken as law and revealed truth.

I think these conservatives are unable to empathize with anything they cannot directly experience themselves. "I'm white and experience little to no negative consequences because of it. Therefore, all people must experience little to no negative consequences due to their race." Then they find a quote from Larry Elder or Bill Cosby that confirms this bias and think, "See? All those other black people are just a bunch of whiners."

I think this is how blankfist is able to see the words 'cracker' and 'nigger' as the same thing, despite the vast historical, social and political differences between the two words. It's the same way he and other conservatives are able to see scientific consensus on global climate change and corporate anti-science PR as equitable. Fair and Balanced (not to mention he's been submitting a lot of FOX NEWS over the past year.)

I also find it interesting that as much lip service as blankfist pays to anti-authoritarianism, he fails to see the authoritarianism of whites, of males and of rich people in this country. It's extra ironic when you consider that the government for which we both loathe is comprised primarily of rich white males. Put the pieces together, my cracker!

Conservatives just have too much psychological baggage when it comes to racism (sexism, homophobia or other types of bigotry). Just to get to square one would require hacking through a million acre jungle of psychology with a machete. It's the kind of thing that will never happen unless an individual conservative has the will to make it happen for him (or her ) self

In short, this conversation is futile.

I agree with Larry Elder that a 60% illegitimacy rate in the Black community is a far more serious problem than racism. (Right now, Whites' illegitimacy rate is 40%, also appalling).

http://videosift.com/video/Larry-Elder-on-the-Tavis-Smiley-Show

Elder has stats on the above video about Black crime. The Department of Justice also documents the racial makeup of crime.

I don't like it any more than you do, but facts is facts.


>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^quantumushroom:
Are you displeased by the facts? I don't blame you.
Bill Cosby said as much.

>> ^NetRunner:
>> ^quantumushroom:
Compared to other racial groups, a disproportionately high percentage of melanin-enhanced Americans engage in criminal behavior, perhaps due to a failed cultural model that rejects the values of education, marriage and respect for just laws.

That's racist.


Incidentally, there's a pretty big gap between what you said, and what Bill Cosby said.
What Bill Cosby said was basically "you need to do more as parents if you don't want your kids going to jail, it's not just white bigotry at fault".
What you said was promoting a stereotype about "melanin-enhancing Americans", and using Bill Cosby's comments as some sort of justification.
It's true that Cosby's comments imply that there's some truth to the stereotype, but the problem with stereotypes has nothing to do with whether they're true or not, it's about their prevalence causing people to prejudge others on the basis of a stereotype, even though none of them are true for 100% of the group they describe.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Are you displeased by the facts? I don't blame you.
Bill Cosby said as much.

>> ^NetRunner:
>> ^quantumushroom:
Compared to other racial groups, a disproportionately high percentage of melanin-enhanced Americans engage in criminal behavior, perhaps due to a failed cultural model that rejects the values of education, marriage and respect for just laws.

That's racist.



Bill Cosby is allowed to say that because... wait, that would be racist if I mention why... Erm, because he loves Jello Pudding.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Are you displeased by the facts? I don't blame you.
Bill Cosby said as much.

>> ^NetRunner:
>> ^quantumushroom:
Compared to other racial groups, a disproportionately high percentage of melanin-enhanced Americans engage in criminal behavior, perhaps due to a failed cultural model that rejects the values of education, marriage and respect for just laws.

That's racist.



Incidentally, there's a pretty big gap between what you said, and what Bill Cosby said.

What Bill Cosby said was basically "you need to do more as parents if you don't want your kids going to jail, it's not just white bigotry at fault".

What you said was promoting a stereotype about "melanin-enhancing Americans", and using Bill Cosby's comments as some sort of justification.

It's true that Cosby's comments imply that there's some truth to the stereotype, but the problem with stereotypes has nothing to do with whether they're true or not, it's about their prevalence causing people to prejudge others on the basis of a stereotype, even though none of them are true for 100% of the group they describe.

Are you displeased by the facts? I don't blame you.

Bill Cosby said as much.


>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^quantumushroom:
Compared to other racial groups, a disproportionately high percentage of melanin-enhanced Americans engage in criminal behavior, perhaps due to a failed cultural model that rejects the values of education, marriage and respect for just laws.

That's racist.