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  
•       •       •

15987 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Oct 2012 at 3:58 AM (1 year 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
 
2012-10-10 12:41:27 AM

DrPainMD: My racist beliefs? Then, you must think that Chris Rock is a racist, too. BTW, how do you know I'm not black? Maybe I'm Chris Rock. Can't tell from my posts, as I've just agreed to things that he's said.


You're agreeing with your unsubstantiated interpretation of his alleged statements, ie, your beliefs. This isn't hard. Cite up, man, you've had over 12 hours to go to Google or YouTube and find the clip you're thinking of. Maybe you should check in at StormFront, if it's as good as you say I'm sure they have it archived.
 
2012-10-10 12:43:40 AM

propasaurus: DrPainMD: DataShade: DrPainMD: No, it doesn't make sense. Regardless of their occupations, they both were sincere when they said it.

Did you ever find a citation for the cornerstone of your argument?

Yes. About 50 posts up is another poster who remembers Rock saying it.

Nope. You're lying again.


See this post.
 
2012-10-10 12:46:27 AM

DrPainMD: It was a simple question and it has a simple, objective, answer. There aren't that many variables and the important ones wouldn't change if slavery had never occurred. We embraced the industrial revolution, had a patent system, and laws that protected private property, while Africa didn't. That, and pretty much that alone, explains the differences in standards of living between the US and Africa. Economist universally agree that slavery had a net negative effect on the economy of the south. It made a lot of money for the slave owners, but was devastating for the wages of unskilled and semi-skilled labor. And, if slavery built our economy, why didn't it also build Africa's? They had slavery long before we did.

BTW, what beliefs of mine are racist? I don't recall sharing any of my beliefs in this thread. All I did was ask a simple question. Show me anything I've said that has even the slightest hint of racism.



OK, so, basically: the fact that you think the first paragraph is objective fact and not a combination of: speculative, disputed, irrelevant, incorrect.

That's a set of beliefs, and it's all pretty racist.
 
2012-10-10 12:48:37 AM

lohphat: arsonik: 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*

Pretty much

And then he joins the party of Lincoln which defeated The South.

In San Francisco, we call these people "bottom".


Hey another San Franciscan!

/Unless you mean Santa Fe or something...
 
2012-10-10 12:49:11 AM

DrPainMD: That's not a logical fallacy. A logical fallacy is saying, for example, that if Person A says Statement X it's racist, but if Person B says Statement X it's not racist, based simply on whether or not each person is a liberal or a conservative.


So rather than look up what a phrase means - since you obviously don't know what a plurium interrogationum is - you fall back on your initial straw man argument. In order to prove you're not using logical fallacies, too.

Delicious.
 
2012-10-10 12:55:31 AM

DataShade: DrPainMD: That's not a logical fallacy. A logical fallacy is saying, for example, that if Person A says Statement X it's racist, but if Person B says Statement X it's not racist, based simply on whether or not each person is a liberal or a conservative.

So rather than look up what a phrase means - since you obviously don't know what a plurium interrogationum is - you fall back on your initial straw man argument. In order to prove you're not using logical fallacies, too.

Delicious.


Straw man?
You call it a straw man in the same post that you claim I don't know what a phrase means? That's funny.
 
2012-10-10 12:56:21 AM

DataShade: DrPainMD: It was a simple question and it has a simple, objective, answer. There aren't that many variables and the important ones wouldn't change if slavery had never occurred. We embraced the industrial revolution, had a patent system, and laws that protected private property, while Africa didn't. That, and pretty much that alone, explains the differences in standards of living between the US and Africa. Economist universally agree that slavery had a net negative effect on the economy of the south. It made a lot of money for the slave owners, but was devastating for the wages of unskilled and semi-skilled labor. And, if slavery built our economy, why didn't it also build Africa's? They had slavery long before we did.

BTW, what beliefs of mine are racist? I don't recall sharing any of my beliefs in this thread. All I did was ask a simple question. Show me anything I've said that has even the slightest hint of racism.


OK, so, basically: the fact that you think the first paragraph is objective fact and not a combination of: speculative, disputed, irrelevant, incorrect.

That's a set of beliefs, and it's all pretty racist.


How is it racist?
 
2012-10-10 01:12:16 AM

cygnusx13: Godscrack:

All that's missing is the pointy hood.


"It will not make us look taller. What it will make us look is pointier."
 
2012-10-10 01:59:35 AM

DrPainMD: the important ones wouldn't change if slavery had never occurred.


What's "important?" Obviously not the wholesale ruination of lives and culture. Racist: check.

We embraced the industrial revolution, had a patent system, and laws that protected private property, while Africa didn't.

You're comparing a country to a continent because you're unable or unwilling to provide specific examples. That's not just racist, but it's racist too.

That, and pretty much that alone, explains the differences in standards of living between the US and Africa.

Really? Nothing at all to do with the fact that European colonial mercantilism in Africa was alive and well and running strong long enough that it contributed to World War I? Or that France and Britain maintained de facto colonies until 19-goddamn-60? Let's set aside that you actually believed this when you were told, which implies that you were looking for a self-aggrandizing view of history and that you were looking for at least a nationally-supremacist viewpoint if not an explicitly racially-supremacist, how can any outside observer interpret your belief that your nation is better than another continent because of the blacks on that other continent being inferior as anything other than racism?

Economist universally agree that slavery had a net negative effect on the economy of the south. It made a lot of money for the slave owners, but was devastating for the wages of unskilled and semi-skilled labor.

Or, "rich white people hurt the long-term economic health of poor white people." Which means what, in the context of the brutal, centuries-long enslavement of another race? "Well, I'm just saying, it sucked for white people, too." No, you're saying "I'm a racist."


And, if slavery built our economy, why didn't it also build Africa's? They had slavery long before we did.

Oh god, really? First, who's "we?" America, the nation that didn't exist until 1790? Everybody had everything we didn't invent long before we did. Europe? Europe had slaves, going back as far as we have documentation.

The fact that you would present this question as if it were just a rhetorical flourish: "well, obviously it wasn't slavery that kickstarted America's economy, and obviously the blacks in Africa were alone in using slavery from the dawn of time," etc etc, is only possible if you're hopelessly ignorant of actual history and/or racist. The fact that you would persist in this belief when challenged is megalomaniacal and/or racist. And I'm being generous with the and/or, in order to draw distinction between a deliberate internal inclination toward racism, and an outward, empirical act that is racist but possibly naively so.


And there are like a thousand incorrect assumptions necessary to make your defense anything but a lie, all of which are the kinds of assumptions you can only make if you're inclined to believe that one race is objectively superior to another.

That's how it's racist.
 
2012-10-10 02:26:17 AM

DrPainMD: A logical fallacy is saying, for example, that if Person A says Statement X it's racist, but if Person B says Statement X it's not racist, based simply on whether or not each person is a liberal or a conservative.

Straw man?
You call it a straw man in the same post that you claim I don't know what a phrase means? That's funny.


Yes, that's a straw man. I shouldn't say "no one," because I'm sure there's one person somewhere who said it, but I'll say it anyways because maybe you'll finally cite something, even if it's something irrelevant.

No one has ever said what you provided as your example. Specifically, no one has ever alleged that it's OK for a liberal to say slavery is OK but not a conservative, based simply on their ideology.

That makes it a straw man. Also: would you mind giving the formal name of the logical fallacy your example supposedly embodies?
 
2012-10-10 02:43:00 AM

DataShade: DrPainMD: A logical fallacy is saying, for example, that if Person A says Statement X it's racist, but if Person B says Statement X it's not racist, based simply on whether or not each person is a liberal or a conservative.

Straw man?
You call it a straw man in the same post that you claim I don't know what a phrase means? That's funny.

Yes, that's a straw man. I shouldn't say "no one," because I'm sure there's one person somewhere who said it, but I'll say it anyways because maybe you'll finally cite something, even if it's something irrelevant.

No one has ever said what you provided as your example. Specifically, no one has ever alleged that it's OK for a liberal to say slavery is OK but not a conservative, based simply on their ideology.

That makes it a straw man. Also: would you mind giving the formal name of the logical fallacy your example supposedly embodies?


You (along with half the people posting here) have been saying it ever since my original post in this thread. That, by definition, makes it a straw man.
 
2012-10-10 02:45:43 AM

DataShade: And there are like a thousand incorrect assumptions necessary to make your defense anything but a lie, all of which are the kinds of assumptions you can only make if you're inclined to believe that one race is objectively superior to another.


Just like the guy who says, "if my wife loved me, she'd take it up the pooper. She doesn't, therefor she must not love me."
 
2012-10-10 02:58:34 AM

DrPainMD: You (along with half the people posting here) have been saying it ever since my original post in this thread. That, by definition, makes it a straw man.


I have said things like "a comedian known for saying offensive and shocking things who says an offensive and shocking thing is not something to be outraged over," to which you say "you only like him because he's liberal!"

You are attributing to your opponents statements which no one has made, beliefs which you cannot even reasonably demonstrate from context, and then attacking the rhetorical position you just invented and declaring victory.

You may be inventing the false rhetorical position because you are malicious, or you may be doing it because you have the reading comprehension skills of an eight year old, or you may be doing it because you are an incredibly sensitive person who draws strength and a sense of resolve from the feeling of being unfairly victimized for your beliefs.

I do not care why, but you should. All I care is that you are using a straw man argument, and that you are doing so not in an emotional defense of an important ideal, but in a slow, patient argument spanning two calendar days in defense of overt racism.
 
2012-10-10 03:01:07 AM

DrPainMD: Just like the guy who says, "if my wife loved me, she'd take it up the pooper. She doesn't, therefor she must not love me."



Allow me to repeat myself: I guess I can understand how someone as ignorant as you evolves to where you see all these people around you, struggling to understand the inchoate, incomprehensible, illogical nonsense you string together, and believe that you're the intelligent one, running circles around everyone else.
 
2012-10-10 03:06:41 AM

DataShade: The fact that you would present this question as if it were just a rhetorical flourish: "well, obviously it wasn't slavery that kickstarted America's economy, and obviously the blacks in Africa were alone in using slavery from the dawn of time," etc etc, is only possible if you're hopelessly ignorant of actual history and/or racist.


Name one economic historian who says that slavery had a significant impact on either Africa's or the US' economy. Just one, Mr. I-want-a-citation-for-everything-you-say.
 
2012-10-10 03:08:41 AM
Oh, and when did I say that Africa was alone in using slavery from the dawn of time? Again, you're having a conversation in your head and contributing to me things that you are making up.
 
2012-10-10 03:16:52 AM

DataShade: DrPainMD: You (along with half the people posting here) have been saying it ever since my original post in this thread. That, by definition, makes it a straw man.

I have said things like "a comedian known for saying offensive and shocking things who says an offensive and shocking thing is not something to be outraged over," to which you say "you only like him because he's liberal!"


I said that? When? Where? That's just something else that came out of that conversation you're having with yourself.

You are attributing to your opponents statements which no one has made,

For example...

beliefs which you cannot even reasonably demonstrate from context, and then attacking the rhetorical position you just invented and declaring victory.

You may be inventing the false rhetorical position because you are malicious, or you may be doing it because you have the reading comprehension skills of an eight year old, or you may be doing it because you are an incredibly sensitive person who draws strength and a sense of resolve from the feeling of being unfairly victimized for your beliefs.


Or, C) none of the above.

I do not care why, but you should. All I care is that you are using a straw man argument, and that you are doing so not in an emotional defense of an important ideal, but in a slow, patient argument spanning two calendar days in defense of overt racism.

There is no straw man. This entire thread, from the beginning (see the title of it) has been about a guy being racist for saying something that isn't racist. You better believe that Chris Rock is glad to have been born here... he's worth $70 million dollars; if he'd been born in Africa he'd be living in a plywood shack and slowly starving to death, if he's lucky, and he knows it.
 
2012-10-10 05:14:36 AM

DrPainMD: I said that? When? Where? That's just something else that came out of that conversation you're having with yourself.


You just ignored the point of what I was trying to say: that your entire argument is a strawman - to focus on a pedantic criticism of a paraphrased statement.


Or, C) none of the above.

You can't even count.

if he'd been born in Africa he'd be living in a plywood shack and slowly starving to death, if he's lucky, and he knows it.

And this is what you consider to be a non-racist comment?


If you're not a troll, you actually are an idiot, and I'm done with you. I'm not wasting time providing citations for someone who can't read.
 
2012-10-10 07:25:14 AM
Jebus, it used to be the dems in the south who were racist
and even fighting school integration.

Now we have a whole area of idiots who would vote this tool in to represent them.

sad, but not shocking I guess
 
2012-10-10 08:19:54 AM
didn't michelle bachmann make this claim, too - that black families were better off under slavery?
 
2012-10-10 12:20:37 PM

DrPainMD: DataShade: DrPainMD: You (along with half the people posting here) have been saying it ever since my original post in this thread. That, by definition, makes it a straw man.

I have said things like "a comedian known for saying offensive and shocking things who says an offensive and shocking thing is not something to be outraged over," to which you say "you only like him because he's liberal!"

I said that? When? Where? That's just something else that came out of that conversation you're having with yourself.

You are attributing to your opponents statements which no one has made,

For example...

beliefs which you cannot even reasonably demonstrate from context, and then attacking the rhetorical position you just invented and declaring victory.

You may be inventing the false rhetorical position because you are malicious, or you may be doing it because you have the reading comprehension skills of an eight year old, or you may be doing it because you are an incredibly sensitive person who draws strength and a sense of resolve from the feeling of being unfairly victimized for your beliefs.

Or, C) none of the above.

I do not care why, but you should. All I care is that you are using a straw man argument, and that you are doing so not in an emotional defense of an important ideal, but in a slow, patient argument spanning two calendar days in defense of overt racism.

There is no straw man. This entire thread, from the beginning (see the title of it) has been about a guy being racist for saying something that isn't racist. You better believe that Chris Rock is glad to have been born here... he's worth $70 million dollars; if he'd been born in Africa he'd be living in a plywood shack and slowly starving to death, if he's lucky, and he knows it.


Holy Fark!

/and that's why you are farkied as "Racist Mother Farker."
 
2012-10-10 06:55:39 PM
Pretty good, DrPainMD
You controlled a good amount of middle and late parts of the thread.
I hope to see your works again.
 
Displayed 22 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 »






Report