If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Arkansas Republican defends slavery. This is NOT a repeat from last week   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 322
    More: Sick, Loy Mauch, Arkansas, Gene Mauch, Congressional Progressive Caucus, Carl Paladino, League of the South, premeditated murder, hot springs  
•       •       •

15991 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Oct 2012 at 3:58 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



322 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-09 06:35:54 AM  

MonkeyAngst: DrPainMD: From a link in TFA: Jon Hubbard, a Republican member of the Arkansas House of Representatives, has written a new book in which he says slavery was "a blessing" for African-Americans, among other questionable statements.

Why wasn't it questionable when Chris Rock said the exact same thing? I don't know this guy or anything he's said/written, but, in that case, how can he be condemned while Chris Rock isn't? And why are people quick to brand one person as evil for saying something, yet totally accept and agree with someone else who says the same thing?

What the hell? When did Chris Rock call slavery a blessing for African-Americans? I mean, I know you're a "black people do it, why can't white people?" troll, but still, I want to know where this is coming from.


They both said, basically, that if it wasn't for slavery, all the black people in the US would be starving in Africa. And let's face it... the worst in America live better than the vast majority in Africa. When Rock says it, people nod and say, "he's got a point," but this politician guy gets branded as being "pro-slavery" and a racist for saying the same thing.
 
2012-10-09 06:36:34 AM  

BoxOfBees: That said, slavery worked out pretty well for Epictetus. Most slaves in history, regardless of the mechanism of slavery, have not had it so good, but some have benefitted.

I could take a lot of heat for saying this, because it's incorrect to equate chattel slavery with contemporary working conditions, but...



Do you have any reason to suspect that this fellow, his colleagues, or any of his constituents, have anywhere near the grasp of history that you do? Or do you suspect, as one might, that these persons are instead hearkening back to the fabled days of white supremacy?
 
2012-10-09 06:38:07 AM  
I thought that the Republicans were the party of freedom, since Lincoln freed the slaves. I mean. . . Come on, you idiots, which is it?
 
2012-10-09 06:40:47 AM  

DrPainMD: When Rock says it, people nod and say, "he's got a point,"


i.imgur.com
 
2012-10-09 06:45:35 AM  

the ha ha guy: i.imgur.com


this is fark- we make shiat up as we go along- just like the bible was recorded.
 
2012-10-09 06:45:43 AM  
BTW, what the hell is a "black people do it, why can't white people?" troll?
 
2012-10-09 06:48:00 AM  

Ow My Balls: When Democrats go bad, they overspend a little on programs with good intentions. When Republicans go bad, they alienate rape victims, start unnecessary wars that cost us $1 to $2,000,000,000 per week for over a decade, allow Wall Street robber barons to destroy the economy, ...


Well. Democrats have been known to commit illegal acts without any reasonable explanation that includes "good intentions." Anwar al-Awlaki, while a terrorist sympathizer and agitator against US interests, was not charged with any crime or even suspected of bearing arms against America when he was executed without due process under order of President Obama, in furtherance of that war you mentioned, and various Democratic state attorney generals signed a settlement over robo-signing and other bank frauds that further insulated the architects of the whole Wall Street debacle from any punishment, even in a civil court.

So, I get what you mean; the Dems aren't racists and homophobes and misogynists, they may even be able to be shamed back into some semblance of good behavior, while the chances of Republican rehabilitation seem much smaller, but we're well past the point where the Dems are just hapless, accidental losers and the Republicans are a malignant tumor. They're both metastisizing and it's really depressing.
 
2012-10-09 06:49:26 AM  
For christ sake. Isn't there some way we can keep Democrats from registering as Republicans.
 
2012-10-09 06:53:19 AM  

the ha ha guy: DrPainMD: When Rock says it, people nod and say, "he's got a point,"

[i.imgur.com image 500x271]


Why would you need a citation? A citation for what? The fact that the average black person in the US has a much higher standard of living than the average African? How is that not common knowledge? OK, here's a list of countries ranked by per-capita GDP. Look at the bottom 50.

What is your opinion: do blacks in the US have it better here than they would have had if their ancestors were never brought over here (yes, I know that they never would have been born and a whole different group would be there, but that's outside the scope of the discussion)?
 
2012-10-09 06:55:51 AM  
i wish a could flag a thread for dumbassery
 
2012-10-09 06:58:27 AM  

DrPainMD: They both said, basically, that if it wasn't for slavery, all the black people in the US would be starving in Africa. And let's face it... the worst in America live better than the vast majority in Africa. When Rock says it, people nod and say, "he's got a point," but this politician guy gets branded as being "pro-slavery" and a racist for saying the same thing.


No no no no NO NO!

When Chris Rock says it they laugh, because he's a comedian - a jester, a CLOWN. When this dude says it he gets branded pro-slavery and a racist because he's offering apologia for slavery and he's in a position of power and authority, which is the pinch of something extra you need to add to simple bigotry or supremacist opinions to make those opinions racist.  Do you understand? Random joker making random joke = funny. Random guy with stereotypes of a specific race = bigotry. Random guy who believes there are scientific, religious, naturalistic justifications for his race to exert oppressive authority over another race = racism.

Sitting Senator writing a "scholarly tract" justifying slavery = political platform of racial supremacy = racism. 



This is not difficult. There is no excuse for a logical person with even a shred of intellectual honesty to not understand the difference, especially not after it has been explained.
 
2012-10-09 07:02:19 AM  
He must have moved there from South Carolina.
 
2012-10-09 07:04:03 AM  

fusillade762: Let's see...


Slavery was a blessing

Disobedient children should be executed

The big bang and evolution are straight from the pits of hell

A woman can't get pregnant unless she enjoys her rape

Dogfighting is OK because humans box

Climate change will not destroy us because God made a promise to Noah


Anything other nuggets of GOP wisdom I'm forgetting?


I may have to quote you extensively in the future, if you don't mind. The derp as you have listed it here is just too good.
 
2012-10-09 07:05:46 AM  

david_gaithersburg: For christ sake. Isn't there some way we can keep Democrats from registering as Republicans.


Don't hurt yourself stretching so hard. Take an aspirin, head on over to the National Review or Drudge Report and just hit refresh, one of your party leaders will be by shortly to provide you with an ideologically-approved repudiation of this duly-elected incumbent official who ran unopposed in his re-election primary, and who offered these deeply liberal campaign pledges:

I will continue to be a staunch supporter of our 2nd amendment rights as A member of the National Rifle Association and Gun Owners of America.
I will continue to lead with conservative values at the forefront of every Action and decision.
I will continue to always vote pro life.
 
2012-10-09 07:06:53 AM  

DataShade: DrPainMD: They both said, basically, that if it wasn't for slavery, all the black people in the US would be starving in Africa. And let's face it... the worst in America live better than the vast majority in Africa. When Rock says it, people nod and say, "he's got a point," but this politician guy gets branded as being "pro-slavery" and a racist for saying the same thing.

No no no no NO NO!

When Chris Rock says it they laugh, because he's a comedian - a jester, a CLOWN. When this dude says it he gets branded pro-slavery and a racist because he's offering apologia for slavery and he's in a position of power and authority, which is the pinch of something extra you need to add to simple bigotry or supremacist opinions to make those opinions racist.  Do you understand? Random joker making random joke = funny. Random guy with stereotypes of a specific race = bigotry. Random guy who believes there are scientific, religious, naturalistic justifications for his race to exert oppressive authority over another race = racism.

Sitting Senator writing a "scholarly tract" justifying slavery = political platform of racial supremacy = racism. 



This is not difficult. There is no excuse for a logical person with even a shred of intellectual honesty to not understand the difference, especially not after it has been explained.


Rock's occupation isn't the issue, and he was serious when he said it... it wasn't part of a gag.
 
2012-10-09 07:09:53 AM  

DrPainMD: What is your opinion: do blacks in the US have it better here than they would have had if their ancestors were never brought over here (yes, I know that they never would have been born and a whole different group would be there, but that's outside the scope of the discussion)?


That depends: in your hypothetical scenario, do we still have hundreds of years of European nations colonizing Africa, robbing its nations, murdering its citizens, and destablizing its governments and cultures?

Or are we to assume that the rapid growth of Europe (which has never had a dark age from internal influences, no no) could have proceeded apace from the 1500s to the 1970s without mercantilism and colonial imperialism?
 
2012-10-09 07:10:10 AM  

DataShade: DrPainMD: They both said, basically, that if it wasn't for slavery, all the black people in the US would be starving in Africa. And let's face it... the worst in America live better than the vast majority in Africa. When Rock says it, people nod and say, "he's got a point," but this politician guy gets branded as being "pro-slavery" and a racist for saying the same thing.

No no no no NO NO!

When Chris Rock says it they laugh, because he's a comedian - a jester, a CLOWN. When this dude says it he gets branded pro-slavery and a racist because he's offering apologia for slavery and he's in a position of power and authority, which is the pinch of something extra you need to add to simple bigotry or supremacist opinions to make those opinions racist.  Do you understand? Random joker making random joke = funny. Random guy with stereotypes of a specific race = bigotry. Random guy who believes there are scientific, religious, naturalistic justifications for his race to exert oppressive authority over another race = racism.

Sitting Senator writing a "scholarly tract" justifying slavery = political platform of racial supremacy = racism. 



This is not difficult. There is no excuse for a logical person with even a shred of intellectual honesty to not understand the difference, especially not after it has been explained.


Ok, I'll put the question to you: do blacks in the US have it better here than they would have had if their ancestors were never brought over here?

It's a simple question with a completely objective answer, and that answer is, "yes." If you agree, you are a racist apologist for slavery, and if you disagree, you are an idiot.
 
2012-10-09 07:13:04 AM  

DataShade: DrPainMD: What is your opinion: do blacks in the US have it better here than they would have had if their ancestors were never brought over here (yes, I know that they never would have been born and a whole different group would be there, but that's outside the scope of the discussion)?

That depends: in your hypothetical scenario, do we still have hundreds of years of European nations colonizing Africa, robbing its nations, murdering its citizens, and destablizing its governments and cultures?


That would be a safe assumption, yes.

Or are we to assume that the rapid growth of Europe (which has never had a dark age from internal influences, no no) could have proceeded apace from the 1500s to the 1970s without mercantilism and colonial imperialism?

They could still have imperialism without slavery, and certainly would have; I don't see the relevance.
 
2012-10-09 07:21:53 AM  

DrPainMD: Rock's occupation isn't the issue, and he was serious when he said it... it wasn't part of a gag.


It's not "the" issue, but it's "an" issue. One of the people in your equation is a man who tells funny lies to make people laugh and finds great success periodically goading his audience into anger or disgust (see Rock's bit re: Monica Lewinsky, or "who's the bigger liar," or "baking bread in her shoe," etc etc). He has no power or expertise outside of his craft, so not only is an off-color remark not seen as threatening, it's not seen as relevant.

If you're going to rely on this, you're going to need to provide a citation. I'm not wasting any more time debating someone who thinks a guy who tweets things like "Happy white peoples independence day the slaves weren't free but I'm sure they enjoyed fireworks" has some kind of grudging respect for the institution of slavery.
 
2012-10-09 07:23:26 AM  

DrPainMD: DataShade: DrPainMD: They both said, basically, that if it wasn't for slavery, all the black people in the US would be starving in Africa. And let's face it... the worst in America live better than the vast majority in Africa. When Rock says it, people nod and say, "he's got a point," but this politician guy gets branded as being "pro-slavery" and a racist for saying the same thing.

No no no no NO NO!

When Chris Rock says it they laugh, because he's a comedian - a jester, a CLOWN. When this dude says it he gets branded pro-slavery and a racist because he's offering apologia for slavery and he's in a position of power and authority, which is the pinch of something extra you need to add to simple bigotry or supremacist opinions to make those opinions racist.  Do you understand? Random joker making random joke = funny. Random guy with stereotypes of a specific race = bigotry. Random guy who believes there are scientific, religious, naturalistic justifications for his race to exert oppressive authority over another race = racism.

Sitting Senator writing a "scholarly tract" justifying slavery = political platform of racial supremacy = racism. 



This is not difficult. There is no excuse for a logical person with even a shred of intellectual honesty to not understand the difference, especially not after it has been explained.

Rock's occupation isn't the issue, and he was serious when he said it... it wasn't part of a gag.


Well, when Rock is in a position to vote on laws that affect millions of US citizens, maybe I'll care as much as I do about this idiot politician saying similar things. Until then, I don't really give that much a shiat what a comedian says about anything.

/that goes for liberal and conservative comedians
//are there conservative comedians?
///conservatives aren't all that funny
 
2012-10-09 07:25:39 AM  

DrPainMD: Ok, I'll put the question to you: do blacks in the US have it better here than they would have had if their ancestors were never brought over here?

It's a simple question with a completely objective answer, and that answer is, "yes." If you agree, you are a racist apologist for slavery, and if you disagree, you are an idiot.


The fact that you literally cannot conceive of any influences on African economics, government, culture, or history other than the influence of white people is, itself, a strong case for properly categorizing you as "racist."
 
2012-10-09 07:32:30 AM  

FlashHarry: Mauch, a first term legislator, wrote the letters starting in 2000. He has called Lincoln a "fake neurotic Northern war criminal" and said the 16th president committed "premeditated murder" on the Constitution. He called Lincoln and Civil War generals "Wehrmacht leaders" -- the name for the armed forces in Nazi Germany. He also praised his ancestors for standing up to "Northern aggression" and said the Confederate flag is "a symbol of Christian liberty vs. the new world order."

*Facepalm*

for the most correct, other than freeing the slaves(that was good thing) really I didnt rtfa but nothing in this current quote says he agrees with slavery.
 
2012-10-09 07:33:38 AM  
Mauch, a first term legislator

Teabagger.

Don't call them racist though.
 
2012-10-09 07:37:37 AM  

DrPainMD: They both said, basically, that if it wasn't for slavery, all the black people in the US would be starving in Africa. And let's face it... the worst in America live better than the vast majority in Africa. When Rock says it, people nod and say, "he's got a point," but this politician guy gets branded as being "pro-slavery" and a racist for saying the same thing


It's a rather odd argument, isn't it? For a start, the people who were enslaved are not the same people who are currently enjoying their iPhone 5s. It's like saying "The Holocaust was like totes worth it because Israel has these like really amazing beaches".

It also assumes that without slavery, no black people would have found their way to America. Bad sense of direction? We have lots of black and brown and yellow people in the UK, and none of them are the descendants of slaves here - though some, I grant you, are descendants of slaves elsewhere in the British Empire.
 
2012-10-09 07:40:04 AM  

DrPainMD: They could still have imperialism without slavery, and certainly would have; I don't see the relevance.


It's relevant because the entirety of the African slave trade took place along its continental borders, and that the pace of the Industrial Revolution matches the rise of the slave trade. You don't see the relevance because you don't want to consider that the entire success of white, western, enlightened, democratic nations was built on the backs of black slaves.

Your reticence doesn't negate historical correlations or their implications.
 
2012-10-09 07:44:30 AM  

DrPainMD: OK, here's a list of countries ranked by per-capita GDP.


Oh look. Israel is higher than Poland on all three measures.
 
2012-10-09 07:47:35 AM  

DataShade: DrPainMD: Rock's occupation isn't the issue, and he was serious when he said it... it wasn't part of a gag.

It's not "the" issue, but it's "an" issue. One of the people in your equation is a man who tells funny lies to make people laugh and finds great success periodically goading his audience into anger or disgust (see Rock's bit re: Monica Lewinsky, or "who's the bigger liar," or "baking bread in her shoe," etc etc). He has no power or expertise outside of his craft, so not only is an off-color remark not seen as threatening, it's not seen as relevant.


Again, he didn't say it as a joke; he said it as in, "thank god I was born here and not there."

If you're going to rely on this, you're going to need to provide a citation. I'm not wasting any more time debating someone who thinks a guy who tweets things like "Happy white peoples independence day the slaves weren't free but I'm sure they enjoyed fireworks" has some kind of grudging respect for the institution of slavery.

I wasn't discussing the guy's tweets. I was just pointing out a double-standard. And, really, it's not even a matter of opinion; it's totally and completely and objective fact; black people in the US have it much better than they do in Africa.
 
2012-10-09 07:48:41 AM  
There is no excuse for that sort of statement. It is plain stupidity and racism.
 
2012-10-09 07:50:53 AM  

DataShade: DrPainMD: They could still have imperialism without slavery, and certainly would have; I don't see the relevance.

It's relevant because the entirety of the African slave trade took place along its continental borders, and that the pace of the Industrial Revolution matches the rise of the slave trade. You don't see the relevance because you don't want to consider that the entire success of white, western, enlightened, democratic nations was built on the backs of black slaves.


You're saying the our standard of living wouldn't be what it is, and theirs wouldn't either, if slavery had never existed? Ok, now it's my turn. Good luck proving that one.

imgs.xkcd.com
 
2012-10-09 07:52:14 AM  

orbister: DrPainMD: They both said, basically, that if it wasn't for slavery, all the black people in the US would be starving in Africa. And let's face it... the worst in America live better than the vast majority in Africa. When Rock says it, people nod and say, "he's got a point," but this politician guy gets branded as being "pro-slavery" and a racist for saying the same thing

It's a rather odd argument, isn't it? For a start, the people who were enslaved are not the same people who are currently enjoying their iPhone 5s. It's like saying "The Holocaust was like totes worth it because Israel has these like really amazing beaches".

It also assumes that without slavery, no black people would have found their way to America.


It assumes nothing of the sort?

Bad sense of direction? We have lots of black and brown and yellow people in the UK, and none of them are the descendants of slaves here - though some, I grant you, are descendants of slaves elsewhere in the British Empire.
 
2012-10-09 07:53:09 AM  
sort.
 
2012-10-09 07:54:35 AM  
This is what Republicans actually believe.
 
2012-10-09 07:55:50 AM  

DataShade: DrPainMD: Ok, I'll put the question to you: do blacks in the US have it better here than they would have had if their ancestors were never brought over here?

It's a simple question with a completely objective answer, and that answer is, "yes." If you agree, you are a racist apologist for slavery, and if you disagree, you are an idiot.

The fact that you literally cannot conceive of any influences on African economics, government, culture, or history other than the influence of white people is, itself, a strong case for properly categorizing you as "racist."


When did I say that I cannot conceive of those things? I think you're having a separate conversation in your head... you think it's a conversation with me, but it's just you talking to yourself.
 
2012-10-09 07:59:25 AM  
But what about all the good things Hitler slavery did?
 
2012-10-09 08:01:45 AM  
No one, and I mean, no one in the country can hold a grudge like a Southerner. Also, these are the same people who turn to African Americans and say they should get over slavery because it was generations ago. But heaven forbid you tell them to do the same.

/Virginian
//currently in North Carolina
 
2012-10-09 08:09:44 AM  
Another pointless witch-hunt to keep you little wage slaves distracted from how little your current elected leaders are doing to stop your society's decline.

Here's the "smoking gun":

If slavery were so God-awful, why didn't Jesus or Paul condemn it, why was it in the Constitution and why wasn't there a war before 1861?

These are legitimate questions. I don't know the answer to any of them, except to say that ancient slavery generally involved captives taken in war, while chattel slavery generally involved agriculture with an eye toward getting rich.

As to the question of war before 1861, an in-depth view of the civil war suggests it was fought over remnants of the States' Rights question which had divided the nation from 1776-1789 as well.

Again, these people are just whipping you little cube-serfs into battle mode over a non-issue.
 
2012-10-09 08:10:11 AM  

DataShade: DrPainMD: Ok, I'll put the question to you: do blacks in the US have it better here than they would have had if their ancestors were never brought over here?

It's a simple question with a completely objective answer, and that answer is, "yes." If you agree, you are a racist apologist for slavery, and if you disagree, you are an idiot.

The fact that you literally cannot conceive of any influences on African economics, government, culture, or history other than the influence of white people is, itself, a strong case for properly categorizing you as "racist."


Hey, I'm not agreeing with the evil, conservative, Republican that black people are better off here than in Africa... I'm agreeing with the hip, liberal, African-American that black people are better off here than in Africa. And that's PC and acceptable, not racist.
 
2012-10-09 08:11:34 AM  

DrPainMD: And, really, it's not even a matter of opinion; it's totally and completely and objective fact; black people in the US have it much better than they do in Africa.


All of them?

You have a pretty cartoonish idea of what it's like in Africa.
 
2012-10-09 08:12:57 AM  
Of course, idiots like this don't hold a candle to the damage the Democrats have done to black people over the last 60 years.
 
2012-10-09 08:13:52 AM  
Expelling all Muslims sounds like a good idea to me
 
2012-10-09 08:13:58 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: DrPainMD: And, really, it's not even a matter of opinion; it's totally and completely and objective fact; black people in the US have it much better than they do in Africa.

All of them?

You have a pretty cartoonish idea of what it's like in Africa.


I'm dealing with too many idiots in this thread already. You'll have to save it for another day.
 
2012-10-09 08:14:27 AM  

DrPainMD: DataShade: DrPainMD: Ok, I'll put the question to you: do blacks in the US have it better here than they would have had if their ancestors were never brought over here?

It's a simple question with a completely objective answer, and that answer is, "yes." If you agree, you are a racist apologist for slavery, and if you disagree, you are an idiot.

The fact that you literally cannot conceive of any influences on African economics, government, culture, or history other than the influence of white people is, itself, a strong case for properly categorizing you as "racist."

Hey, I'm not agreeing with the evil, conservative, Republican that black people are better off here than in Africa... I'm agreeing with the hip, liberal, African-American that black people are better off here than in Africa. And that's PC and acceptable, not racist.


Why don't you own your half baked ideas instead of using a black comedian as cover?
 
2012-10-09 08:15:15 AM  

DrPainMD: HotWingConspiracy: DrPainMD: And, really, it's not even a matter of opinion; it's totally and completely and objective fact; black people in the US have it much better than they do in Africa.

All of them?

You have a pretty cartoonish idea of what it's like in Africa.

I'm dealing with too many idiots in this thread already. You'll have to save it for another day.


Just driving a truck through the holes in your shiat arguments. Feel free to put me on ignore though.
 
2012-10-09 08:19:25 AM  

DrPainMD: From a link in TFA: Jon Hubbard, a Republican member of the Arkansas House of Representatives, has written a new book in which he says slavery was "a blessing" for African-Americans, among other questionable statements.

Why wasn't it questionable when Chris Rock said the exact same thing? I don't know this guy or anything he's said/written, but, in that case, how can he be condemned while Chris Rock isn't? And why are people quick to brand one person as evil for saying something, yet totally accept and agree with someone else who says the same thing?


This has probably been covered already, but there is an important difference between Chris Rock and Jon Hubbard. One is an entertainer, who makes his living as a comedian, and has no real impact on the lives of everyday citizens outside of those who choose to watch his act. The other is an elected official, charged with representing the people of his constituency fairly, and his actions can and likely do impact the public in a variety of ways, whether an individual voted for him or not.

/Make sense?
 
2012-10-09 08:19:42 AM  

serpent_sky: Sgt Otter: We were getting angry emails about Clinton (usually shiat he never did, or "might" do) the day he got dial-up AOL.

My father was digging in on me after the debates, and he told me to watch that Obama 2016 movie. My final response was "don't make me change my e-mail again, like I had to in 2008." I haven't heard anything since. He was cutting and pasting full on lies from crazy-ass right-wing Web sites. I don't get it -- my father is otherwise intelligent and was born and raised in New York, not some uber-religious tiny town. I don't get it.


The lower part of Staten Island has a lot of those.
 
2012-10-09 08:19:54 AM  

fusillade762: If slavery is such a blessing maybe whitey should try it?


They did. The Roman used Europe as their slavery shopping mart. "Oh, look, they have a new Gaul selection this week." And when the Romans were done the Norse and the Moors stepped in doing a pretty nice job for themselves.

To say the least, "whitey" didn't like it.

propasaurus: I know it sounds hyperbolic but I sometimes think we're headed for a new civil war.


Nah. The Civil War happened because rich plantation owners were able to convince the Southern lower classes that the North wanted to take away their rights. (Even though the plantation owners were really worried about losing their way to keep themselves rich and in power. Slavery using today's dollar amount was a multi-billion dollar business.) ...oh, Fark, we are going to have another Civil War.
 
2012-10-09 08:23:13 AM  
Aarontology [TotalFark]

If slavery were so God-awful, why didn't Jesus or Paul condemn it, why was it in the Constitution and why wasn't there a war before 1861?

These are the actual beliefs of an actual elected official.


Fine. I'm bored.

1) Jesus had 12 guys with him. The different places they went to had armies. Up until the established "guys in charge" of the Jewish went up to the "guys in charge" of making laws and asked that Jesus be put to death, it was acceptable for different views to be preached about. As long as people still payed taxes. Going beyond that and trying to convince people to stop something that was backed by arrows, shields, and swords of an entire society that saw no problem with it was a little too dangerous.

2) War on slavery, or war in general. If it's #2, there was this thing called a revolutionary war. If #1, history books all over were proving in the 80s that there were other reasons that caused Lincoln to agree to war. In turn allowing him to put in his 2 cents and say "I want slavery stopped too."
 
2012-10-09 08:26:02 AM  

my_cats_breath_smells_like_cat_food: DrPainMD: From a link in TFA: Jon Hubbard, a Republican member of the Arkansas House of Representatives, has written a new book in which he says slavery was "a blessing" for African-Americans, among other questionable statements.

Why wasn't it questionable when Chris Rock said the exact same thing? I don't know this guy or anything he's said/written, but, in that case, how can he be condemned while Chris Rock isn't? And why are people quick to brand one person as evil for saying something, yet totally accept and agree with someone else who says the same thing?

This has probably been covered already, but there is an important difference between Chris Rock and Jon Hubbard. One is an entertainer, who makes his living as a comedian, and has no real impact on the lives of everyday citizens outside of those who choose to watch his act. The other is an elected official, charged with representing the people of his constituency fairly, and his actions can and likely do impact the public in a variety of ways, whether an individual voted for him or not.

/Make sense?


No, it doesn't make sense. Regardless of their occupations, they both were sincere when they said it.
 
2012-10-09 08:27:49 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: DrPainMD: HotWingConspiracy: DrPainMD: And, really, it's not even a matter of opinion; it's totally and completely and objective fact; black people in the US have it much better than they do in Africa.

All of them?

You have a pretty cartoonish idea of what it's like in Africa.

I'm dealing with too many idiots in this thread already. You'll have to save it for another day.

Just driving a truck through the holes in your shiat arguments. Feel free to put me on ignore though.


Really? My argument is that Chris Rock said the same thing. You drove a truck thru the holes in that? When?
 
2012-10-09 08:31:18 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: DrPainMD: DataShade: DrPainMD: Ok, I'll put the question to you: do blacks in the US have it better here than they would have had if their ancestors were never brought over here?

It's a simple question with a completely objective answer, and that answer is, "yes." If you agree, you are a racist apologist for slavery, and if you disagree, you are an idiot.

The fact that you literally cannot conceive of any influences on African economics, government, culture, or history other than the influence of white people is, itself, a strong case for properly categorizing you as "racist."

Hey, I'm not agreeing with the evil, conservative, Republican that black people are better off here than in Africa... I'm agreeing with the hip, liberal, African-American that black people are better off here than in Africa. And that's PC and acceptable, not racist.

Why don't you own your half baked ideas instead of using a black comedian as cover?


What idea? That they both said the same thing? Or that blacks in the US have a higher standard of living than those in Africa. Neither are my ideas... they are objective facts. Do you dispute them?
 
Displayed 50 of 322 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report