PDA

View Full Version : The Week in Blog: Post-Hillary Edition


Bloggingheads
05-10-2008, 06:10 PM

Wonderment
05-10-2008, 06:26 PM
http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/10875?in=00:17:13&out=17:45

Calling the National Council of the Raza the "National Council on Race" is in itself a racist comment. The NCLR is an advocacy group for USA Hispanics of all races and ethnicities. There are African Hispanics, Asian Hispanics, Jewish and Arab Hispanics and so on.

"Race" is not an issue and mistranslating the Association's name is despicably dishonest.

¡Viva la Raza!

graz
05-10-2008, 06:46 PM
http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/10875?in=00:17:13&out=17:45

Calling the National Council of the Raza the "National Council on Race" is in itself a racist comment. The NCLR is an advocacy group for USA Hispanics of all races and ethnicities. There are African Hispanics, Asian Hispanics, Jewish and Arab Hispanics and so on.

"Race" is not an issue and mistranslating the Association's name is despicably dishonest.

¡Viva la Raza!

No not dishonest... just a different version of the truth to be disseminated by Malkin, Conn, Mickey, etc...

The truth might set them free, but they aren't open to it.

Whatfur
05-10-2008, 07:35 PM
Soy afligido ese Soy a punto de pausa my poseer regla.
Pero está justo también fácil y apropiado.

Viva Le Graza!

Wonderment
05-10-2008, 07:44 PM
Whatfur,

Your statement in "Spanish" is incoherent gibberish. Do you have a point to make?

bjkeefe
05-10-2008, 07:45 PM
Great diavlog. Shoutout to Ari for knowing his stuff cold, shoutout to Conn for having the courtesy to listen to long passages without interrupting, shoutout to both for talking larger issues.

Also, another salute to Conn: This was the first time since he started working for the Heritage Foundation that I've heard him articulate his side's positions rather than just giving the talking points version, or sniping at the other side's positions or candidates. The debate over what it means to be a "judicial activist" was especially good in this regard.

And, another salute to Ari for stopping Conn in his tracks when Conn tried to slip in the word cult. Way to insist upon staying out of the gutter, Ari.

Nothing against Bill Scher, but I'd really like to see these guys paired up again. Maybe "This Week in Blog" could have a regular rotation between Bill and Ari on one side, and Conn and Amanda Carpenter on the other; e.g.,

Week 1: Bill/Conn
Week 2: Ari/Conn
Week 3: Bill/Amanda
Week 4: Ari/Amanda

Oh, and I did wonder if that icon of St. Ronnie was there as a poke in the eye. Thanks for mentioning the reason, Conn.

bjkeefe
05-10-2008, 07:47 PM
Wonderment:

Perhaps you could elaborate on what is meant by Raza?

bjkeefe
05-10-2008, 07:49 PM
Thanks for confirming that, Wonderment. I couldn't believe between my limited knowledge of Spanish and use of Babelfish that it made so little sense, either.

Bloggin' Noggin
05-10-2008, 07:59 PM
I have to thank Ari for calling Conn out here (http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/10875?in=00:46:32&out=00:46:46).
I've objected to Conn's Heritage persona rhetoric myself. A lot of people insisted on interpreting my objection as a defense of Obama, but Ari makes exactly the point I was trying to make. That this is an intelligent forum, and Conn's spin takes us for rubes (or for ditto-heads).

I agree with Brendan that Conn was better this time even before being called out. He recognized that he had an interlocutor he couldn't just ride rough-shod over.

Whatfur
05-10-2008, 08:06 PM
Sorry its been awhile... but as you had trouble translating La Raza I guess I would not come to you for interpretation but of course Brendan would like to...matter of fact if your boots need cleaning maybe you can shoot for a twofer.

graz
05-10-2008, 08:13 PM
Thanks for confirming that, Wonderment. I couldn't believe between my limited knowledge of Spanish and use of Babelfish that it made so little sense, either.

LOL. It was babelfish for me too.
But I didn't comment since Jethro... I mean Goober... asked me to respect a moratorium on cross-posting. But now that he couldn't refrain, I might also mention that his attempts at posting in English are just a degree better than his mangling of Spanish.

Viva la Graza... indeed.
I should be so lucky.

piscivorous
05-10-2008, 08:15 PM
Obama Changes His 'Unconditional' Position (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/10/us/politics/10mccain.html?partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all)
Susan E. Rice, a former State Department and National Security Council official who is a foreign policy adviser to the Democratic candidate, said that “for political purposes, Senator Obama’s opponents on the right have distorted and reframed” his views. Mr. McCain and his surrogates have repeatedly stated that Mr. Obama would be willing to meet “unconditionally” with Mr. Ahmadinejad. But Dr. Rice said that this was not the case for Iran or any other so-called “rogue” state. Mr. Obama believes “that engagement at the presidential level, at the appropriate time and with the appropriate preparation, can be used to leverage the change we need,” Dr. Rice said. “But nobody said he would initiate contacts at the presidential level; that requires due preparation and advance work.”. which sort of conflicts with YouTube Debate: Would You Meet with Iran/Syria/North Korea? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1dSPrb5w_k) Gee and just a day or two after their proxies shot up Beirut I might add.

deebee
05-10-2008, 08:18 PM
Kidney Stones: Platitudes about 'healing' and 'unity' from Obama supporters who relentlessly accuse white and black supporters of Clinton and McCain of racism, ignorance, bitterness and hate are insulting and condescending.
To expand on that, let's translate Obama's actual words into his Unity vision:

When Hillary gets frustrated, "her claws come out" (sexism?)
When McCain makes a gaff, he is "losing his bearings" (ageism?)
That's just a "typical white attitude" (racism?)
When things don't go their way, they "get bitter and cling to" well, you know - a host of things (classism?)
When does he let us hear what he actually thinks of Jews and Hispanics? They seem to be the only Democratic demographic group that he hasn't publicly opined upon. Guess that's yet to come.

Wonderment
05-10-2008, 08:21 PM
Perhaps you could elaborate on what is meant by Raza?

Con mucho gusto. Saying "la raza" is a racial term is like saying "you guys" is a sexist term that excludes women. "You guys" has evolved to connote males and females. For example, when the softball coach says to his all-girl team, "You guys did a great job," everyone now knows exactly what she means, although 50 years ago we would have been confused.

"Raza" simply does NOT mean "Race" in the National Council of La Raza name, and to translate it that way is an abuse of language. A good translation would be "National Council of the US Hispanic Community."

This is from the NCLR website:

Those familiar with the work of the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) know that we are the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the U.S., and that we are an American institution committed to strengthening this great nation by promoting the advancement of Latino families. Our mission is to create opportunities and open the door to the American Dream for Latino and other families....

...We have a Spanish term in our name, “La Raza” (meaning “the people” or “community”), which is often mistranslated.

Whatfur
05-10-2008, 08:31 PM
BJ what comes up when you babelfish Raza? Just wonderin

deebee
05-10-2008, 08:59 PM
Re: Ari's explanation of Obama's political ideology:

Maybe Ari should run for President because he explained Obama's positions a whole lot better than Obama ever has. I have watched almost all of the debates, and I often find it difficult to follow exactly what Barack is trying to say. His thought processes seem disjointed to me. This is of course not the case when he is giving a prepared speech or is on the stump, but he leaves me cold when he talks off the cuff either in debates or at a press conference.

Guess I could figure out exactly what he is for by checking his website, but why is he unable to clarify these matters verbally? We should have learned from the last almost-eight years that lucid communication is an extremely important job qualification. It just seems that Obama is more interested in lifting our souls or something than articulating concrete objectives. If press conferences and explanations bore him now, how will he deal with them later on is what I want to know.

bjkeefe
05-10-2008, 09:06 PM
Muchas gracias, Wonderment.

piscivorous
05-10-2008, 09:08 PM
Re: Ari's explanation of Obama's political ideology:

Maybe Ari should run for President because he explained Obama's positions a whole lot better than Obama ever has. I have watched almost all of the debates, and I often find it difficult to follow exactly what Barack is trying to say. His thought processes seem disjointed to me. This is of course not the case when he is giving a prepared speech or is on the stump, but he leaves me cold when he talks off the cuff either in debates or at a press conference.

Guess I could figure out exactly what he is for by checking his website, but why is he unable to clarify these matters verbally? We should have learned from the last almost-eight years that lucid communication is an extremely important job qualification. It just seems that Obama is more interested in lifting our souls or something than articulating concrete objectives. If press conferences and explanations bore him now, how will he deal with them later on is what I want to know.That is one of the things that initially drew my interest to Senator Obama. But after a time is seemed to just be all happy talk and kumbyay with little if any substance.

bjkeefe
05-10-2008, 09:12 PM
BJ what comes up when you babelfish Raza? Just wonderin

It's never fails to amaze me how obtuse you can be, Whatfur. And about the most picayune of points, too. I don't know what your problem is with the explanation that Wonderment offered.

It's a pity you can't ever rise above the level of bickering about inanities. We could use some conservative input in these forums, but of a sort somewhat more intelligent than you often display. The really sad thing is, I know you're capable of it. I just don't know why you can't be bothered.

piscivorous
05-10-2008, 09:22 PM
A literal translation of la raze is "the race." But having spent some time pursuing German and particularly Russian it is also true that a literal translation often misses the meaning. In Russian relying on a literal translation can have you conveying the exact opposite of what you mean or mumbling nonsense, which I suspect is much of the case with the rights infatuation here because the literal translation is such an easy and transparent talking point.

Whatfur
05-10-2008, 09:30 PM
Because Brendan, Wonderboy had it exactly backwards.

The "simplified" version is what you would have found in Babelfish.
I don't mind the contextual version he described either while whining about someone using the direct translation is just taking offense to take offense.

Is there not a Spanish word for "people"?
Is there not a Spanish word for "community"?

I'm pretty sure there is.

AemJeff
05-10-2008, 09:47 PM
Because Brendan, Wonderboy had it exactly backwards.

The "simplified" version is what you would have found in Babelfish.
I don't mind the contextual version he described either while whining about someone using the direct translation is just taking offense to take offense.

Is there not a Spanish word for "people"?
Is there not a Spanish word for "community"?

I'm pretty sure there is.

Fuckin-A! You hit the ball out of the park! Well, except, I guess, that there was no ball, and nobody was playing baseball, err...

What are you trying to say? The people who named La Raza didn't make an appropriate choice when they chose that name for their organization? They have a secret agenda which your clever parsing of Spanish has revealed? Why are you arguing idiomatic Spanish with a fluent speaker of the language? Because the literal version suits you better?

C'mon, Brendan's right. You're not stupid and the forum can always use another smart conservative. So why not show us stupid liberals how smart you really are and dazzle us with a little more logic and a little less bullshit?

graz
05-10-2008, 10:04 PM
I have to thank Ari for calling Conn out here (http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/10875?in=00:46:32&out=00:46:46).
I've objected to Conn's Heritage persona rhetoric myself. A lot of people insisted on interpreting my objection as a defense of Obama, but Ari makes exactly the point I was trying to make. That this is an intelligent forum, and Conn's spin takes us for rubes (or for ditto-heads).

I agree with Brendan that Conn was better this time even before being called out. He recognized that he had an interlocutor he couldn't just ride rough-shod over.

For what it's worth: Ari is really smart and an effective proponent for the progressive blogosphere. He also had the humility to concede when Conn made valid criticisms, or to push back on pure spin. He was also really a natural at this bhtv format... without hogging, talk-overs or ungracious interruptions. I vote for a return.

Whatfur
05-10-2008, 10:24 PM
I apologize, I originally just tried to make a joke at the expense of my good friend graz as I happened to remember that 'graza' meant 'quack'. You know ...the 'simplified' translation. And well...it just seemed appropriate. How was I to know that all the little girls around here would choose to hike up there partido vestidos and come running to his defense.

In the last diavlog, although my first post started out complimenting the lefty head, I proceeded to expound upon a fact within the diavlog that I personally found excruciatingly telling. Graz took this opportunity to similarily hike up his dress and come running to castigate me for not following the "Graz Rules" of blogging head commentary...while...funny...not offering any "smart" responses to my "intelligent" post.

So bottom line Jeff, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oYrOtdlPsc) you get what you give.

graz
05-10-2008, 10:37 PM
I apologize, I originally just tried to make a joke at the expense of my good friend graz as I happened to remember that 'graza' meant 'quack'. You know ...the 'simplified' translation. And well...it just seemed appropriate. How was I to know that all the little girls around here would choose to hike up there partido vestidos and come running to his defense.

In the last diavlog, although my first post started out complimenting the lefty head, I proceeded to expound upon a fact within the diavlog that I personally found excruciatingly telling. Graz took this opportunity to similarily hike up his dress and come running to castigate me for not following the "Graz Rules" of blogging head commentary...while...funny...not offering any "smart" responses to my "intelligent" post.

So bottom line Jeff, (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oYrOtdlPsc) you get what you give.
Since we have already had one reconciliation, this routine seems tired, and there is no make up sex.
Just take Jeff's advice: less bullshit and more meat. If instigating or derogatory comments will continue to be your refrain, I'll continue to take a pass. It's easy to think of yourself as right as well as "right", God forbid Wright - but humility... well that's something else altogether.

bjkeefe
05-10-2008, 10:47 PM
A literal translation of la raze is "the race." But having spent some time pursuing German and particularly Russian it is also true that a literal translation often misses the meaning. In Russian relying on a literal translation can have you conveying the exact opposite of what you mean or mumbling nonsense, which I suspect is much of the case with the rights infatuation here because the literal translation is such an easy and transparent talking point.

Reminds me of the old story (possibly apocryphal) of an early attempt to build a computer program to translate Russian and English text.

As a test, an English phrase was entered, translated to Russian, and translated back to English.

Input: The spirit was willing, but the flesh was weak.

Output: The wine was adequate, but the meat was spoiled.

Whatfur
05-10-2008, 10:56 PM
More flubdub from a self-righteous prig.

Sgt Schultz
05-11-2008, 12:59 AM
You can learn something new every day.
All you have to do is accept what a lefty says as a new fact.
Several lefties here have taught me that La Raza does not mean The Race.
Well, anyway, it doesn't really mean The Race.
I shall express my appreciation for their illumination -
I think it's mighty white of them to explain this stuff to me.
But how am I going to break the news to my Mexican (born in Mexico, naturalized American for 37 years) neighbor?
He thinks it means The Race and he thinks the people who chant La Raza think it means The Race.
Will you guys explain it to him?

bjkeefe
05-11-2008, 01:48 AM
Will you guys explain it to him?

We could do that, but as it happens, there's this new invention we have now called Teh Internets(tm) which is not a truck which is good because gas is expensive but is instead a series of tubes as a really smart Republican once explained and sometimes when these tubes are not too clogged you can click on these things called "links" and even find out information like this (http://www.nclr.org/section/about/mission) and this (http://www.nclr.org/content/viewpoints/detail/42500/).

d'Artagnan
05-11-2008, 01:50 AM
I'm a longtime bloggingheads junkie, but I've never bothered to register and post a comment... until now. Ari is that good and I wanted to weigh in and ask the Powers That Be to bring him back.

He's a natural and even made Conn sound more articulate that usual.

graz
05-11-2008, 02:00 AM
d'Artagnan:

Welcome. And a second to your request for more Ari.

Wonderment
05-11-2008, 02:26 AM
you can click on these things called "links" and even find out information like this and this.

Thanks, Brendan. I will spell it out (again) for those too busy, lazy or disinclined to click and for those predisposed to take Michelle Malkin's or Sgt. Schultz's neighbor's story at face value:

1. The Translation of Our Name: National Council of La Raza

Many people incorrectly translate our name, “La Raza,” as “the race.” While it is true that one meaning of “raza” in Spanish is indeed “race,” in Spanish, as in English and any other language, words can and do have multiple meanings. As noted in several online dictionaries, “La Raza” means “the people” or “the community.” Translating our name as “the race” is not only inaccurate, it is factually incorrect. “Hispanic” is an ethnicity, not a race. As anyone who has ever met a Dominican American, Mexican American, or Spanish American can attest, Hispanics can be and are members of any and all races.

The term “La Raza” has its origins in early 20th century Latin American literature and translates into English most closely as “the people,” or, according to some scholars, “the Hispanic people of the New World.” The term was coined by Mexican scholar José Vasconcelos to reflect the fact that the people of Latin America are a mixture of many of the world’s races, cultures, and religions. Mistranslating “La Raza” to mean “the race” implies that it is a term meant to exclude others. In fact, the full term coined by Vasconcelos, “La Raza Cósmica,” meaning the “cosmic people,” was developed to reflect not purity but the mixture inherent in the Hispanic people. This is an inclusive concept, meaning that Hispanics share with all other peoples of the world a common heritage and destiny.


¡Viva la Raza!

Whatfur
05-11-2008, 08:40 AM
First, I would like to start out with something we all can agree on. OMG how refreshing to have a discussion without Clinton interspersed.

Second, and probably another agreeable point. OMG a smart lefty that comes across like he actually grew up with a father in the home. ...a little aside that hit me while I was watching...There is not one of you regular lefty commenters here who comes close to conjuring up an impression in my mind like this gentleman. Shoot for that eh? And I will shoot for being more like Conn with Reagan looking over his shoulder.

Third, What the hell happened at the end!! Ari attempts to finally describe for us the things that Obama believes in and gets about 5 minutes to do so and Conn is 30 seconds into the rebuttal and the diavlog ENDS. How does that happen? Who is the editor of these things? Who decides that 13 minutes of Foley and GoldFarb is even worth the bandwidth...(because I saw it as the editor wanting to catch Michael on a bad day, using bad words, backing a bad point and leaving it there.. as he probably recovered to thoroughly stomp Robert and we were'nt allowed to see it.<<--Ok, Ok, maybe only in the comic book edition).

Fourth, Fifth, and more. May come later... but my beautiful wife just awoke from her princess-like slumber and she is more important to me than 4,5, and more ...and you all.

bjkeefe
05-11-2008, 09:56 AM
Another McCain lobbyist on the payroll. Well, not anymore (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/11/us/politics/11mccain.html):

The public relations executive whom Senator John McCain’s campaign had chosen to run the Republican National Convention this summer resigned his post on Saturday after a magazine reported that his firm had lobbied for the military junta that runs Myanmar.

[...]

Mr. Goodyear is the chief executive and a founding partner of the DCI Group, which has offices in Washington and Phoenix. He offered his resignation after Newsweek reported that his firm had been paid $348,000 in 2002 to represent the junta.

[...]

The appointment of Mr. Goodyear was sensitive for Mr. McCain. It came after the senator had been criticized by some Republican primary opponents for employing several lobbyists and former lobbyists to run his campaign. And he is preparing for the possibility of a general election campaign against Senator Barack Obama, an Illinois Democrat who has made a point of his independence from lobbyists.

How can we be sure that McCain really believes in American values if this is the sort of person he hires? How can we trust his judgment?

brucds
05-11-2008, 10:04 AM
Do you know what "hater" means in the "black community" usage referenced by the commenter you accuse of "taking off his hood?"

For the sake of concision, I'll quote the "urban dictionary", which is reasonably accurate in defining word usage and slang variants current among young African-Americans (and their innumerable imitators):

"Hater": A person that simply cannot be happy for another person's success. So rather than be happy they make a point of exposing a flaw in that person.

Hating, the result of being a hater, is not exactly jealousy. The hater doesnt really want to be the person he or she hates, rather the hater wants to knock somone else down a notch. (end clip)

As defined, that's a perfectly reasonable assessment of Glenn's self-contradictory knocks on Obama - and not even remotely akin to your insane attempts to draw parallels with lynching.

Knock off the crazy shit. You're polluting these threads. And you're obviously a "hater" not in the "urban" sense of someone who's being petty and bitchy, but in the sense of someone with truly malign motives, steeped in bile. Give it a rest. You have zero credibility. Actually, you've been digging yourself deep into the negatives. Do bloggingheads a favor and quit posting out of sheer pathology.

Whatfur
05-11-2008, 10:14 AM
Wow...you sure "knocked him down a notch".

cacimbo
05-11-2008, 11:24 AM
This was excellent. C. Carroll (whose point of view I tend to share) usually wins debate hands down versus B. Scher who tends to get hyped up, fails to present his opinion clearly and without relevent references. Melber definitely was the better in this debate. While he did not win all points he clearly presented better arguments on several topics. It would be great to see these two again and I would bet C. Carroll will be even better prepared now that he faces a real challenge.

JLF
05-11-2008, 11:27 AM
Also, another salute to Conn: This was the first time since he started working for the Heritage Foundation that I've heard him articulate his side's positions rather than just giving the talking points version, or sniping at the other side's positions candidates.

Amen! When Conn was responding conversationally to Ari I found myself actually listening to what they were saying instead of trying to recall the number of times I had heard Conn's talking points and from whom. Perhaps he has come to a realization that the majority of listeners on Bloggingheads.tv have heard them so many times that they have zero effectiveness, while nuanced discussion may cause one to pause and consider, at least briefly, the possibility of some merit in what he has to say.

JLF
05-11-2008, 11:30 AM
I vote for a return.

Yes, you can add my vote, too.

piscivorous
05-11-2008, 11:35 AM
I tend to agree that this was a much diavlog than Mr. Carrol's better matchings with Mr Scher. It was also clear that Mr. Carrol was not as prepared as Mr. Melber was on certain aspects of the topics discussed. I sort of think Mr. Carrol came prepared to debate at least common denominator level, sort of like the level the public schools teach at, as opposed to informed cognizant and structured arguments presented by Mr. Melber. I would defiantly like to see him back and if it is a pairing with Mr. Carrol so much the better.

bjkeefe
05-11-2008, 12:04 PM
Turns out lobbyist Doug Goodyear was McCain's second choice for the job of running the Republican convention. His first choice? Another lobbyist. How'd that go? Uh ... (http://www.samefacts.com/archives/john_mccain_/2008/05/judge_him_by_his_friends.php)

John McCain decided that he couldn't have Paul Manafort of the lobbying firm Davis, Manafort, and Freedman as chair of the Republican National Convention because the firm used to lobby for Ferdinand Marcos when Marcos was dictator of the Philippines.

[...]

Since McCain is so concerned about the implications about Barack Obama's character of the fact that he served on the board of a community foundation with someone who had been a Weatherman thirty years earlier, it seems fair to ask what we can learn about John McCain's character and judgment from the fact that he surrounds himself with people who take money from foreign tyrannies hostile to the United States?

graz
05-11-2008, 12:11 PM
QUOTE=Whatfur:

...Second, and probably another agreeable point. OMG a smart lefty that comes across like he actually grew up with a father in the home. ...a little aside that hit me while I was watching...There is not one of you regular lefty commenters here who comes close to conjuring up an impression in my mind like this gentleman. Shoot for that eh? And I will shoot for being more like Conn with Reagan looking over his shoulder.

Third, What the hell happened at the end!! Ari attempts to finally describe for us the things that Obama believes in and gets about 5 minutes to do so and Conn is 30 seconds into the rebuttal and the diavlog ENDS. How does that happen? Who is the editor of these things? Who decides that 13 minutes of Foley and GoldFarb is even worth the bandwidth...(because I saw it as the editor wanting to catch Michael on a bad day, using bad words, backing a bad point and leaving it there.. as he probably recovered to thoroughly stomp Robert and we were'nt allowed to see it.<<--Ok, Ok, maybe only in the comic book edition).

Fourth, Fifth, and more. May come later... but my beautiful wife just awoke from her princess-like slumber and she is more important to me than 4,5, and more ...and you all.[/QUOTE]

#2 - My Dad just called and I respectfully told him that I would call him back quickly after I dispatched with a pissant.

#3 - 4, 5... Son, my Dad would say, you need to start listening: Conn excused himself from the exchange because he was in a returning colleagues office. He called it.

This is a pattern with you son, you argue against points that aren't raised. Try editing out those stray thoughts you feel compelled to share.

You don't listen, read or write carefully and you are are wise-ass; too smart by half and not funny. Just insulting.
Except of course to that blow-up doll you call a wife.
I didn't know that they worked on self-inflating timers?

Addendum: P.J. O'Rourke just called, he want to sue for style infringement.

breadcrust
05-11-2008, 12:20 PM
Whatfur,

The fork has been lifted...if Obama loses Indiana by double digits (sound familiar?) and also loses NC (or wins by less than 5) then the fork can be inserted.

Where's your Obama-fork now? You're going to be predicting his imminent loss in the election all the way to what Conn (of Heritage, W.F. -- that guy on the right side) views as his nearly guaranteed victory. Then you'll go into a right-wing snit and clam up for two months. I will refer you to this comment when you begin commenting again in April of '09 under a different log-in.

Whatfur
05-11-2008, 12:52 PM
Graz,

Glad you chose to project my example on yourself because it was apt for you to do so.

Second, I think there are probably blow-up boyfriends also if you are feeling lonely, but in any case, I made the mistake once of actually thinking you were not a small as you demonstrated up to that point. You now have for the first time in my BH career proved me wrong. Kudos. Very classy. Your daddy must be proud.

Third, it is a little counter-intuitive if not confusing to continually respond to someone you feel does not think or write clearly. One might get the impression that either my points really hit home or you have some sort of self-esteem problem or more likely jealousy may be at work here. Remember how Al Franken's SNL character used to look in the mirror and ...I think you get it...try that.

Pretty funny stuff Graz. So now that you have been insulting while once again accusing others of the same while going totally off topic in doing so; I can only assume the "Graz rules" do not apply to Graz. "What are the odds".
What is Spanish for hypocrite?

And finally, back to a point, this vlog cut off Conn mid-sentence not when his co-worker returned...at least when I watched it it did. But I can understand it being difficult to see someone elses point when your dress is billowing up in your face.

Whatfur
05-11-2008, 01:05 PM
Whatfur,



Where's your Obama-fork now? You're going to be predicting his imminent loss in the election all the way to what Conn (of Heritage, W.F. -- that guy on the right side) views as his nearly guaranteed victory. Then you'll go into a right-wing snit and clam up for two months. I will refer you to this comment when you begin commenting again in April of '09 under a different log-in.


The fork as been stuck into Hillary. I gave the conditions, the conditions were not met so the 'else' condition applies. Pretty simple stuff. Lets see how your prediction pans out. Nice to see another little girl come out of the closet though. Teeth gnashing is not very becoming however. In any case welcome, another dozen or so of y'all and it will begin to even out.

Later... sun is shining, birds are singing and I have things to do.

Kind Regards

brucds
05-11-2008, 01:20 PM
While I'm sick of kidneystones serial and apparently compulsive inanities, especially when he's still mired in insane attack mode from diavlogs past and causes lost, I have to say I've enjoyed watching Whatfur make a complete fool of himself by losing the game even at the level of his best shot - adolescent insults.

deebee
05-11-2008, 01:43 PM
I feel that Glenn Loury is very brave to illuminate his support for Hillary Clinton when he had to know that he would be attacked for doing so.

I also appreciated his analysis of Jeremiah Wright's perspective. Combining that with other written articles about the relationship between Obama and Wright offered me a much clearer understanding of what transpired and where both were coming from.

Glenn Loury strikes me as heroic, objective and tolerant -- and he's his own man!

breadcrust
05-11-2008, 01:46 PM
"... the 'else' condition applies" implies there were only two possibilities: fork in Hillary or fork in Obama. There was a large range of outcomes in the votes in those two states, which means you've set up a false dichotomy. Keep trying.

I thought it was the gays who hung out in closets. Are these little girls also gay? When you write "teeth gnashing is not very becoming (sic) however," I assume you implied that I am a little girl and that I am gnashing my teeth. It doesn't make sense; my chosen candidate just won again and is broadly viewed as the favorite in the general. I'm sitting here calmly waiting for you and yours to lose. I'm smiling.

And don't refer to your "wife" or imply anything about your relationship going forward.

piscivorous
05-11-2008, 03:06 PM
Barack Obama, agent of change and slayer of politics of usual in Washington, requested an earmark in 2006 for $1 million taxpayer dollars for the hospital where his wife works. Said hospital, by the way, gave Michelle Obama a huge raise, according to a tax return released by the senator. The raise nearly tripled her income from the hospitals to $316,962 in 2005 from $121,910 in 2004. Not a bad return for the hospital (500%) for their investment. But I think I should call it as I see it and it looks much like the politics of usual that we're dealing with here and good old fashioned public corruption. Of course it is all well and good to hope and desire that Senator means what he says but as one who rose through the Chicago political machine, how likely is that. After all, this could be just coincidence.

themightypuck
05-11-2008, 07:59 PM
Well at least the off days don't have an ideological bent. Both Corn and Carroll seem subpar this week. It's all been said before about Hillary but one thing that irks me is how the Democratic Party creates these creatures called "superdelegates" and everyone thinks they have a duty to vote according to things like "popular vote" or "non-superdelegates won". This is nonsense. The superdelegates can do what they want and so long as Clinton thinks she can convince them to pledge for her, she should stay in the race. That said, at this point Clinton would need to be smoking a lot of the drugs only Ron Paul wants us to have in order to think she can convince the required number of superdelegates to pledge for her.

themightypuck
05-11-2008, 08:07 PM
The "trust his judgment" line is a classic. The right wing have never forgotten how they got fooled twice--shame on them with Warren and Souter. W was a safe bet, but if anyone is worried about McCain's judgment it is conservatives, who know their best bet (maybe their only bet for a while) is the SCOTUS.

piscivorous
05-11-2008, 08:50 PM
Politics like life is cyclical. The right has been in power, for along enough time now, that it has lost it's perspective to the seduction of power, spending like drunk sailors on shore leave, pursuing special interest politics and financial gain instead of providing solutions. If one believes in Mr. Kaus's Feiler Faster Thesis, and I am fairly convinced of it given the flow of events nowadays, the time in the wood shed will not be as long as one might imagine.

Sit back, relax and rejuvenate. Have some fun with this election. Given the sociopolitical environment it is likely that only divine intervention can cause the Democrats to lose but the Lord does work in mysterious ways or so I'm told. With the left once again presenting a presidential candidate from the far left how long can it be before a center right country gets a little peeved and takes some corrective action. Look at England less than 2 years of Prime Minister Brown, a lefty even by English standards, and the Tories just got their lunch handed to them.

thouartgob
05-12-2008, 12:19 AM
gave Michelle Obama a huge raise, according to a tax return released by the senator. The raise nearly tripled her income from the hospitals to $316,962 in 2005 from $121,910 in 2004

oohh a couple of hundred k wow that is a lot of influence mmm how much influence can having 100 of millions make mmm lets check Cindy's return. er uh.

This would be the classic case of goose trying to hold all the sauce.

thouartgob
05-12-2008, 12:26 AM
the question isn't is Obama the anti-christ but just how evil an anti-christ is he ??

Conn I blame you for this. If you hadn't tried to intimate that obama was some sort of Svengali or boogie man kidneystones wouldn't have been driven mad with thoughts of Obama becoming a fascist dictator on his way to trying to stop the Rapture. Damn you Conn Damn you !!! :-)

Happy Hominid
05-12-2008, 12:32 AM
He contrasts him to Reagan who took a ready-built movement and simply lead it to new heights.

I will contend that Obama most certainly does represent such a movement. It's neo-liberalism. I know some of my fellow Obama supporters will cringe at bringing up this particular "L" word but we might as well embrace it.

First of all, the Conservative movement is an abysmal failure. Very few want a continuation of the Bush Presidency, yet this is EXACTLY what McCain promises. There is no reason to fear the "tax and spend" label when the so-called conservatives have spent us down the drain while relieving Corporate giants of their legitimate duty to support that spending. Wars for oil (McCain admits it) are a terrible misuse of American power. The hatred of science and the attendant reduction in our prowess in this arena is devastating to our future.

Now, some Liberal notions have been shown not to work and we have to recognize this and distance the movement from the bad ideas of Liberalism. But Liberalism is a great notion, with many winning ideas and Obama leads that movement. All Obama needs to do is highlight the many failures of the Conservative movement people will flock back to Liberalism. To paraphrase the great Reagan - are you better off than you were 8 years ago? I would wager that at least 60% will say "not at all". And when the Conn's of the world cry out that we don't really KNOW what Obama will do with Iran, for instance, we can say - "we have a good idea and we DO KNOW what McCain would continue doing and we don't want to go there".

bjkeefe
05-12-2008, 12:49 AM
kidneystones:

I find nothing to be alarmed about regarding "Obama Day" or the overall effort to organize and build the campaign. I see this as a real grass-roots effort. To think that there is some hidden top-down force driving all this is the height of paranoia. And worrying about not being able to "get out?" That's beyond the tinfoil hat stage.

I am delighted to see that people have been able to come together to figure out a way to support a candidate, make their voices heard, and do so without having to let the DLC types, the fat-cat donors, or the MSM control their agenda. Are some people getting swept up in the excitement, just because they see their friends doing it? Sure, there's somewhat of a bandwagon effect at play here. But so what? The bandwagon is headed towards a place I want to go -- a political process that is more responsive to what the average American wants, and is less controlled by those inside the Beltway.

This will be my last post at this site for a while.

Wish I had a nickel for every time I'd heard that. I guess it all depends on what your definition of "a while" is, though.

[added] It appears that "a while" is about half an hour.

piscivorous
05-12-2008, 12:56 AM
Yea I can know that wound barley cover the piano lessons much less summer camp for the kids.

bjkeefe
05-12-2008, 12:59 AM
John:

Well said. Two points in response.

1. I am not at all unhappy to be referred to as a liberal. It's long past time for us to stop ducking this label -- it just gives the wingnuts power in using the word if we're afraid of it. If someone can stand up and say without fear or shame, "I'm proud to be a conservative," then we can do the same as liberals. If someone tries to claim being a liberal means you're in favor of "tax and spend" or some such nonsense, then we just reply "being a conservative means you're in favor of 100 years of war."

2. I don't like your formulation of "distancing ourselves" from failed policies or programs. I might be making too big a deal out of this, but I'd rather phrase it as "we tried some things that didn't work. Okay, nobody's perfect, and we've learned from our mistakes. Don't worry, we're not going to start up a new forced busing program or a new massive welfare program."

bjkeefe
05-12-2008, 01:02 AM
piscivorous:

I notice that you have failed in all of your responses to address the original point, but instead have merely attacked something else.

I take from this your implicit agreement that John McCain has a big problem with being surrounded by lobbyists.

Thank you.

bjkeefe
05-12-2008, 01:03 AM
deebee:

I quite agree. Even though I don't agree with everything Glenn says, he deserves a lot of respect for having thought out his views so carefully, and for not being afraid to state them.

bjkeefe
05-12-2008, 01:14 AM
Looks like yet another one bites the dust (http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/05/a_second_mccain_aide_resigns.php).

Happy Hominid
05-12-2008, 02:21 AM
I can live with that, Brendan. :)

hans gruber
05-12-2008, 02:42 AM
"Race" is not an issue and mistranslating the Association's name is despicably dishonest.

I think it's BS that "the race" really means "the people" as NCLR claims. But at least it's plausible. It is not, however, honest to claim that interpreting "the race" to mean "the race" is somehow dishonest--that's what it translates to! Of course, as noted, translation is a complex thing, so I definitely acknowledge the possibility that a more accurate translation is "the people." In a word, don't be such a hack. Don't overstate the case. Obviously the literal translation of "la raza" is "the race." It's not dishonest to say that. It maybe incomplete, and NCLR obviously is backpeddling a bit on their chosen name (wouldn't an American Hispanic organization be mindful of how their Spanish name would be translated?).

hans gruber
05-12-2008, 02:52 AM
A good translation would be "National Council of the US Hispanic Community."

As an American organization, shouldn't they have chosen a name which would have been translated better? I don't think you'd catch a German American organization being so sloppy! What they meant by "the race" is "the race." if you ask for my opinion. Of course, that hasn't gone over so well, and is actually pretty embarrasing. So now they are busy backtracking.

MeChA, interestingly, has a similar use of "la raza" in their motto. "Por La Raza todo, Fuera de La Raza nada." Which means, "For the race, everything. For those outside the race, nothing." It doesn't even make sense if you change "la raza" to "the community." But I guess that's what you think they meant too?

bjkeefe
05-12-2008, 03:15 AM
Hans:

This whole thing seems like an incredibly picayune thing to worry about. Big deal: a group that feels downtrodden has a slogan meant to rally others to their cause. Should we also be worried every time a politician speaks of his or her home state as "the great state of X" that there's an implication that the other 49 suck?

piscivorous
05-12-2008, 07:20 AM
Yea it is such a huge story that it will last what a few days? Guess I was wrong can't seem to really find much on it anywhere in the online MSM .Ted Rall (http://hubert.mycomicspage.com/tedrall/2008/05/10/)

bjkeefe
05-12-2008, 07:35 AM
You have a curious definition of the MSM, evidently.

The way most others define it, on the other hand ... (http://news.google.com/news?tab=wn&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&ncl=1211758259)

piscivorous
05-12-2008, 08:07 AM
Yep it's just all over from your link 1 - 26 of about 28 related articles.

bjkeefe
05-12-2008, 08:16 AM
So you're saying the MSM protects McCain. Quite right. I agree.

harkin
05-12-2008, 08:35 AM
Anyone who says that 'La Raza' does not mean 'the race' is being either ignorant or disingenuous. The first time a 'La Raza' demonstration marches through your town and you see signs saying 'Anglos Are The REAL Invaders!!', you'll see what a load of cr@p defenders of these racist, anti-american losers are selling to young latinos in CA.

And the funny thing is that if you bring up facts such as 85% of the outstanding murder warrants in LA naming illegals, then YOU are called a racist. Even worse, Latinos like me who see S CA being turned into a version of violent border towns are called 'self-hating' latinos. These people really have no shame.

I've seen these marches in Montebello, Riverside, Los Angeles and small towns in the central valley. The reconquista movement is alive and well.


Remember, anyone who cannot differentiate between legal and illegal immigration has joined the discussion from a position of fraud. They will do everything to play the race card when in reality it is being played daily by the side they defend.

piscivorous
05-12-2008, 08:46 AM
Keep stretching bj it only makes you look sillier and sillier. but I guess you may be right about the MSM protecting Senator McCain as even the Y Times are starting to support the message that things are getting better in Iraq Drive in Basra by Iraqi Army Makes Gains (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/12/world/middleeast/12basra.html). In less than a month from disaster to maybe it's a little better.

harkin
05-12-2008, 08:47 AM
Hans:
This whole thing seems like an incredibly picayune thing to worry about. Big deal: a group that feels downtrodden has a slogan meant to rally others to their cause. Should we also be worried every time a politician speaks of his or her home state as "the great state of X" that there's an implication that the other 49 suck?

Here is the true dishonesty of these people at work. First, deny that 'La Raza' has anything to do with race. Then, when shown that their explanations and obfuscations are a tissue of lies, say that it doesn't matter. 'Yes, you proved I'm full of merda (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/merda), big deal'

Yes, it certainly makes sense that if someone says they are a 'white supremist', then they are in no way saying the other races suck.....LOL!

The funny thing is that many of those who immigrate illegally are downtrodden-upon....by the government of Mexico! This same government teaches them in schools that CA, TX, AZ etc are really theirs and that if not for the USA, they'd be living in an hispanic paradise surrounded by wealth and plenty. This same governemnt also treats illegals (need we say, another group that 'feels downtrodden'?) coming from South and Central America as felons and deports/imprisons them with no hearing.

Viva La Raza!!

bjkeefe
05-12-2008, 08:52 AM
harkin:

Then, when shown that their explanations and obfuscations are a tissue of lies ...

The unsupported assertion to end all unsupported assertions.

Calm down. The scary brown people are not out to get you.

bjkeefe
05-12-2008, 08:54 AM
Way to change the subject again, Pisc. And just keep telling yourself the war is going well. I'm sure in another 100 years it might even be true.

piscivorous
05-12-2008, 09:08 AM
When even the shill for the left the NY Times notes progress there might you know actually be some.

P.S. I do believe that the Iraq will have a lot more to do with the general election than a lobbyist working for a campaign.

bjkeefe
05-12-2008, 09:18 AM
Your first statement is crackpottery.

I agree with your second.

piscivorous
05-12-2008, 09:29 AM
I must be doing a lot of cooking as you keep reminding me about my crockpotery. Ohhh! Crackpotery never mind.

piscivorous
05-12-2008, 09:54 AM
Companies sign on by dozens to help party gathering (http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/may/12/dnc-sponsorships-raise-questions-on-motivations/)

To date, the Democratic National Convention Host Committee has lined up 56 corporate sponsors.

A few have local ties, like Qwest, Molson Coors and Vail Resorts. Others are huge national corporations, such as Anheuser-Busch, Union Pacific and 3M.

It is not a phenomenon unique to the Democrats or Denver. A slew of corporate donors have lined up for the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis, and 20 of them also are sponsoring the DNC. Not bad nearly 3:1 in favor of the party of change.

Thus Spoke Elvis
05-12-2008, 11:56 AM
You're right. It is possible that the phrase "La Raza" can simply mean Hispanic community, rather than something more sinister. In trying to determine which interpretation is more likely, it is useful to consider the term's orgins (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Raza_C%C3%B3smica) as a rallying cry. It's also relevant to consider the NLCR was founded in the late 60s, a time when racial "power" movements were much more prominent. When I consider these factors, I'm inclined to believe the term has racist connotations.

On the other hand, even if a term originally had one meaning, this might change over time, and many or most people may not use the term in the same way as people in previous generations did. So while I think NLCR was likely founded on racist principles, this does not mean that everyone who has subsequently worked with the organization shares those principles.

graz
05-12-2008, 01:13 PM
You're right. It is possible that the phrase "La Raza" can simply mean Hispanic community, rather than something more sinister. In trying to determine which interpretation is more likely, it is useful to consider the term's orgins (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Raza_C%C3%B3smica) as a rallying cry. It's also relevant to consider the NLCR was founded in the late 60s, a time when racial "power" movements were much more prominent. When I consider these factors, I'm inclined to believe the term has racist connotations.
On the other hand, even if a term originally had one meaning, this might change over time, and many or most people may not use the term in the same way as people in previous generations did. So while I think NLCR was likely founded on racist principles, this does not mean that everyone who has subsequently worked with the organization shares those principles.

All your points are plausible and fair. And the knee-jerk reaction I engaged in (second post in thread) was to offset the Malkin's, Hewitt's, Conn's, etc.. to own the frame by which the organization is characterized.
Does race enter into the equation? Of course.
Does Conn, who lapsed into talking points mode at that point in the diavlog, care to employ fair treatment? Fat chance.

Whatfur
05-12-2008, 01:21 PM
Breadcrust,

Are you and Brucds the same person? Just wondering... as you both kind of come off as someones retarded little brother, you know the kids who are just allowed to hang around with one side acting kind because they can use you at times to their advantage but in reality both sides kind of laugh at you. Of course, Brucds is the retarded little brother who is also afflicted with Tourette Syndrome, which also adds to the hilarity.

In any case, as I have always tried to be extra kind to the mentally deficient I will try to explain to you why your response directed at me seemed a little befuddled. First, I was hardly alone in the feeling that NC was critical for Hillary... made more so by Obama's image problems heading into that contest. My point was simply that if Obama's image was so damaged by the Wright controversy etc. and it showed up in a loss in a state where at one time polls had him with a 20+pt advantage then it would have been a precursor to his demise...because it would have finally showed that the bad judgement of the teflon don was catching up to him. It didn't happen that way so...no fork for Obama. So, your argument that there could have been a "large number of outcomes" is a no brainer that hardly refutes the context I painted. I guess you were just a little confused.

Concerning, my "out of the closet" reference. Well, that colloquialism has a number of different connotations...you know, like "La Raza". My use of course simply inferred that you and the rest of the "little girls" were once hidden and now not so. Now of course, your immediate jumping to some homosexual conclusion might be something further respresentative of your psyche, so if there is something you would like to share with us at this time we will try to be as understanding as possible. In this same area you wanted to create a confluence of my "little girls" comment and the "teeth gnashing"...well...similarily these need to be understood separately. Let me know if you wish to have further understanding as to why and how.

Lastly, your statement:

"And don't refer to your "wife" or imply anything about your relationship going forward."

Kind of sounds like a threat. Was Graz not crass enough already with his blow-up doll reference? I mean how much more could you add? Might you accuse my wife of not only being a blow-up doll, but an ugly one at that? Yea! that would really "knock me down a notch".

Well, I hope this clears things up.

Kind Regards.

Wonderment
05-12-2008, 03:03 PM
'Yes, you proved I'm full of merda, big deal'

You haven't "proved" anything, and it's Mierda, not merda.

Yes, it certainly makes sense that if someone says they are a 'white supremist', then they are in no way saying the other races suck.....LOL!

Supremacist, not supremist.

The funny thing is that many of those who immigrate illegally are downtrodden-upon....by the government of Mexico! This same government teaches them in schools that CA, TX, AZ etc are really theirs and that if not for the USA, they'd be living in an hispanic paradise surrounded by wealth and plenty. This same governemnt also treats illegals (need we say, another group that 'feels downtrodden'?) coming from South and Central America as felons and deports/imprisons them with no hearing.

First of all,promoting undocumented immigration is antithetical to the mission of the National Council of the Raza. Second, the notion that "the government" teaches that CA, TX and AZ are not part of the USA is delusional. Your third statement seems also to suggest an anti-Mexican bigotry: You think undocumented Mexicans are treated differently by the government and courts than undocumented Guatemalans?

YouppiMontreal
05-12-2008, 03:12 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqKuwel6CVg

bjkeefe
05-12-2008, 03:50 PM
Youppi:

Please stop with the multiple postings. That video was not even worth watching once.

Also, there's no need to be a sore winner.

hans gruber
05-12-2008, 04:02 PM
You think undocumented Mexicans are treated differently by the government and courts than undocumented Guatemalans?

No, he is saying Mexico treats its illegals, from south of its border, that way.

piscivorous
05-12-2008, 04:06 PM
Actually I believe that Mexico has officially changed it's policy, a few weeks ago, to a more you are welcome here than let's beat the shit out of you, steal our money, lock you in jail for a while and then deport you. What that means in real terms who knows.

popcorn_karate
05-12-2008, 04:38 PM
Wonderment and BJ, you are stretching pretty far not to see the obvious racist roots and continued meaning of "La Raza".

I don't see a real threat from these pretty mainstream groups that incorporate that phrase into their name. but the meaning of "la raza" was explained to me by a mexican-american about 15 years ago while on a college campus, and it was rather explicitly racist. It was a phrase he didn't use much because he saw it as racist.was he totally mistaken? i suspect not. (he was also a complete liberal - like me)

I am sure there has been a lot of work over the last 30 years to try and erase the racist tint to the terminology. kinda like people that 40 years ago talked a lot about "states rights" were probably mostly racists, i think present day interest in the subject is largely really about states rights.

I guess I just see enough room here to have a real debate about it, rather than saying anyone that thinks "la raza" has some definite racial meaning is just a right wing nutter.

bjkeefe
05-12-2008, 04:48 PM
popcorn:

I don't know anything about the group besides what I read on their web site (their mission statement, and explanation of the term, in particular) and what Wonderment explained in his comments.

I'm happy to concede that it might have meant something at some point in the past. However, what I care about is today, and I'm more than a little sick of the xenophobic piling on that goes on here anytime something like this gets started. I lived in Los Angeles for ten years, and the problem is nowhere near as bad as some people make it out to be. I am inclined to think of the commenters here the same way I did certain white people in LA -- they hear someone speaking Spanish and they conclude that the apocalypse starts next week.

themightypuck
05-12-2008, 07:54 PM
Your analogy between England and the US is a poor one although I loved your post. Parliamentary democracies are a different beast. Remember Canada. The Conservative Party (nee the Progressive Conservative Party)--the party in power in Canada during the late Reagan early Bush 1 years--disappeared for a while. It died, reinvented itself and came back. The USA is way more conservative not so much ideologically (although they may be but that is another argument) but procedurally. There are rarely giant mandates and giant backlashes here. Both the DNC and the RNC know there is no other game in town.

piscivorous
05-12-2008, 08:26 PM
I would agree that the peeks and troughs of a parliamentarian system are greater than what you see in our representative democracy. But both systems are cyclic. there also seems to me to be a much larger middle that mitigates the amplitude of the swings, a feature that I happen to like about our system as opposed to the parliamentarian system. However these were not parliamentary elections they were local elections. Mayors, consul members, etc... Admittedly it is one data point but this is a shift at the at the layer of government below the level of parliament.

breadcrust
05-13-2008, 02:35 AM
Whatfur,

Some people develop a mental condition where they use profanity constantly. This is called coprolalia. Many people wrongly think this is called Tourette's syndrome. Tourette's syndrome is actually a group of disorders that only includes coprolalia 15% of the time. The condition can be aggravated (made worse) by stress.

My statement that you would be predicting Obama's loss until his election as president was not to imply that your fork statement was a prediction. It was just to predict your behavior.

You meant "implied" not "inferred."

"Out of the closet" almost always refers to gays (M or F) not girls. Ask your friends. If you don't believe your friends, then google [girls "out of the closet"] and be ready for a shock.

Winners don't gnash their teeth; losers do. I'm not complaining about your endless mistakes, I'm just pointing them out.

That thing about your "wife" wasn't a threat but an order. Because I have no way to compel you I'll modify it with "please."

334
05-13-2008, 04:21 PM
I think the point of the use of the term "La Raza" is significant since it gives a term to a group that is uplifting. Any other terms, such as "Latin American", "hispanic" or "mestizo" are horribly loaded, and any other terms don't give one unifying identity.

The problem with translating it as "the race" in this instance is that it's used to label it as a fringe group, because "race" has so many implications. What it really describes is a unique group with a unique identity that isn't described by what could be taken as a racist term of "the race", but as a culturally sensitive term (a racial, descriptive term, not a racist term) of "La Raza".

Whatfur
05-13-2008, 06:03 PM
Crusty the Clown,

You seem to be in conflict with yourself. You attempt to back up your statements with logical digression but in the end your conclusions are dynamically opposed. Let me guess... the retarded, little brother asked his big brother to help him with this response.

Do you not understand the hypocrisy of castigating me for my use "Tourette Syndrome" as opposed to "coprolalia" followed by arguing for exclusivity in the use of "out of the closet" based on "almost always"? Tell you what, Crusty, ask the next 10 people you meet what they associate with Tourette Syndrome followed by what they associate with "coprolalia"..."be ready for a shock".

Pretty much just proves 3 things. First, that you have discovered Wikipedia. Second, that you, oh so badly, tried to come up with something smart sounding to get that big, meany Whatfur with.... And finally, your big brother is pretty much an idiot also.

I know its not nice to make fun of the mentally retarded but I think it is ok when they are wearing big, floppy shoes, a red nose, and an asshat.

Now how about you just go away (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oYrOtdlPsc)?

Kind Regards

Big Wayne
05-13-2008, 06:51 PM
I think the point of the use of the term "La Raza" is significant since it gives a term to a group that is uplifting. Any other terms, such as "Latin American", "hispanic" or "mestizo" are horribly loaded, and any other terms don't give one unifying identity.

The problem with translating it as "the race" in this instance is that it's used to label it as a fringe group, because "race" has so many implications. What it really describes is a unique group with a unique identity that isn't described by what could be taken as a racist term of "the race", but as a culturally sensitive term (a racial, descriptive term, not a racist term) of "La Raza".

Well said.

The word "race" has many definitions. MSNBC even has a show, "Race to the White House." According to the cranks on the right, "race" always refers to a biologically distinct group, so I suppose MSNBC is racist.

Only a determined crank would insist (against all evidence) that "La Raza" translates into the precise English definition chosen by Michelle Malkin and her kind for use as a weapon against people they despise.

The wingnuts don't want to understand what the term means. They would much rather it mean something divisive that they can react to with feigned outrage. Basically, they want a club they can beat brown people with, and insisting the term means something it doesn't provides them with that club — or so they have convinced themselves in their echo chamber. Out here in reality they just look stupid.

In the grand scheme of things, it probably doesn't matter, because they would look stupid anyway, even if they learned Spanish and correctly understood the term.

And that's why we laugh at them.

bjkeefe
05-17-2008, 08:36 AM
Well worth a listen (http://onthemedia.org/transcripts/2008/05/16/04).