Election Shows Racism Has Not Gone Away
To the Readers' Forum:
As if we didn't have enough stupidity, rubbish, and nonsense before, all this drivel about being proud and ''beyond racism.''
When nearly 100 percent of blacks voted for O., we have not ''gone beyond racism.'' When vast numbers of whites voted for O. only because of his race, we have not gone beyond racism. Racism is alive and well, people. No one wants to end it, just shift the targets.
This man is not a saint or philosopher. He is a crooked Chicago Democrat. And he is beholden to other crooked Democrats, ACORN, unions, homosexuals, black racial hate extremists, and ''now respected'' older but never wiser sociopathic terrorist murdering baby boomer radicals.
If you are not among those groups, you are about to learn what discrimination and hate crimes are.
Norman P. Carlson
Busti
|
troglodyte
|
|
|---|---|
|
12-06-08 9:02 AM
|
Just out of curiosity, if you are a moderate and for Obama, with his pervasive, life-long affiliations with black extremists and white radicals who advocated massive or total white genocide, then what would it take to be a liberal or a radical? Advocating total human extermination?
|
|
KevinOfJamestownNY
|
|
|
12-06-08 3:36 AM
|
Anyway, if I may squeeze a comment in here, edgewise ...... Hammond: Regarding the MP3 song, "In the Year 2525" by Zager and Evans, kevin_of_jamestown_ny at yahoo dot com.
|
|
troglodyte
|
|
|
12-05-08 10:12 PM
|
You liberals, in your megalomania, insist on the right to make all the definitions and declare the intent and label the thoughts of all. You define hate and outrage, liberal and moderate. You define racism and tolerance. 1984 Newspeak - every word a lie. And what is the relevance of personal emotions? Am I being judged for thought crimes? (Of course I am. That's what liberals do.) By the way, is it really out of line to hate people who contemplated the most massive act of genocide in all history, dwarfing even the Communists? Maybe you should try it.
|
|
Denali
|
|
|
12-05-08 9:49 PM
|
like I said, you have hate in your heart and that is what makes you who you are. you said I don't know your heart, but you just used the word "hate" again! you mean to tell me that none of your posts reek of hate? get real. and, as i just told you, i am not a liberal. i know what you are all about sir. i have not been living underneath a rock in this town. continue to preach your hatred toward others who do not believe in your ideology. you will only have one judge in the end. good luck to you.
|
|
troglodyte
|
|
|
12-05-08 8:57 PM
|
Conservatives always have hate - bad. Liberals have outrage - good. Reason 345 to hate liberals. You know nothing about my "heart" so stick to issues and dump the personal.
|
|
Denali
|
|
|
12-05-08 1:05 PM
|
Ok, troglodyte, I apologize for calling you a racist. It may have been a little harsh for someone I do not know and base only on an internet post. For that, I apologize. I have, however, learned more about you from this blog process and, my friend, you really have some deep-seeded hate in your heart for people who do not believe in your ideology. That is plain and simple with the repeated name insults tossed at me and your udder disdain for liberals and our President-elect. And, I am a moderate democrat, not a liberal, as you have labled me. I will pray for your man, because you truly have loads and loads of hate in your heart. It may not be racism, but it is just as bad. I'm done with this nonsense.
|
|
troglodyte
|
|
|
12-05-08 8:59 AM
|
And another thing Denali, if you or anyone else hasn't had letters published, it isn't because I've been sneaking around putting pressure on the P-J or its advertisers or any other back stabbing, cowardly tricks. I haven't. Neither has any other conservative I know of. I personally think many of the letters should be excluded for empirically false statements and more for elementary errors of logic. But I have said nothing, done nothing.
|
|
troglodyte
|
|
|
12-05-08 8:33 AM
|
You are one beat behind the music, Denali.You started it. When I call a spade a spade, it is name calling. When you hurl baseless, gratuitous, childish, personal insults, it doesn't count. But you can't tell the difference because emotion makes you stupid. I know no one sees their own faults, but this blog business really brings it home. You are a liberal and saying so isn't name calling. I'm no more racist, and very likely less, than any of you libs, so calling me a racists is name calling, never mind all the purely personal insults from people who don't even know me. Yes, the moron part is name calling. Dammit, I'm entitled.
|
|
Denali
|
|
|
12-05-08 7:10 AM
|
Again troglodyte, you resort to name calling and labels....by calling me an "it", a "presumptuous liberal moron", "Hypocrite liar", "scum", "liar", and a "blowhard". HOW DO YOU GET AWAY WITH LABELING PEOPLE LIKE THIS? You have got some real hate in your heart, sir. You need some counseling. I think my original email has shown just what kind of person you are as others can judge you, not me.
|
|
KevinOfJamestownNY
|
|
|
12-05-08 6:46 AM
|
One last comment, or two, for this letter: I have concluded, logically, that Norman IS anti-Obama ... and that troglodyte IS anti-Liberal. Also, I would like to remind some people that it was, is, and probably will always be the Liberals who fought, fight, and probably will always fight for our freedoms, specifically referring to our freedom of speech!!!
|
|
KevinOfJamestownNY
|
|
|
12-05-08 5:44 AM
|
Denali: I, logically of course, interpreted the reference to Obama as "O." as being a contrast to "V" (the movie about Rep[tiles]) ... if the reference to Obama had been "Barack O.", then I might have interpreted/concluded otherwise. Yes, Obama will be our President for the next "8" years ... and some people do need to get used to it ...... or move somewhere else!!!
|
|
KevinOfJamestownNY
|
|
|
12-05-08 5:19 AM
|
Realize that I'm referring only to this letter ... and I'm surely not going to check ALL the rest of the letters/comments which have been published/posted ...... I may have all kinds of time on my hands ... but not THAT much time!
|
|
KevinOfJamestownNY
|
|
|
12-05-08 4:45 AM
|
troglodyte: In plain English (???), in my opinion, your letter was racial based upon the fact that it was caused "...partly or entirely because of race", but your letter did not logically justify the labelling of you as a racist ...... just a misrepresenter of facts.
|
|
KevinOfJamestownNY
|
|
|
12-05-08 4:28 AM
|
troglodyte: Anything that is based upon race is racial ...... just as anything based upon gender is ... uh ... genderal (not a word but didn't want to excite the censorship software ... or word-cleaning software) ...... the same principle applies to many things. So, to your "Is or is not..." questions, even though they weren't directed to me, my answer is "IS racist", solely, and logically, based upon the common reason of "...partly or entirely because of race". I agree that racism does, in fact, exist, as I've already commented. Some people incorrectly conclude one is a racist merely because one is capable of recognizing racism ... and such a conclusion is not logical ...... some people also read between the lines ... a logical thing to do but not necessarily something which leads to logical conclusions. Did this comment make any sense to anyone other than me as I was creating it?!?
|
|
KevinOfJamestownNY
|
|
|
12-05-08 3:39 AM
|
Denali: I'm not quite sure what the PJ's criteria is for publishing letters to the editor. I've submitted four since becoming a website user and have had two published ...... the first one was short and simple, and not political (it was about punishments and crimes) ... the second one, published just recently, is entitled "Pandora's Box?" ...... maybe you can figure out their criteria ... my analysis is inconclusive, at this time.
|
|
KevinOfJamestownNY
|
|
|
12-05-08 3:29 AM
|
Hammond: I'll have to get back to you with a usable e-mail address.
|
|
KevinOfJamestownNY
|
|
|
12-05-08 3:22 AM
|
In the first of this string of my comments (in my comment to troglodyte), I defended as right protecting ourselves, including our egos and our lives, because such behavior is "self-preservation", the most basic human instinct. Protecting our income/wealth is just as right ... but ONLY when such behavior is in the interest of "self-preservation" and NOT when such behavior is because of "greed" (the root of all evil ... an EXCESSIVE human desire ... NOT a human instinct)!!! I know, I came back sooner than the warning implied ... but I just had to ... it's like an addiction ...... anyway, I had to see if the HINTs were taken ... and, lo and behold, they may very well have been ... "Pandora's Box?" has been posted!!! I'm off ...... again ...... for now!!!
|
|
KevinOfJamestownNY
|
|
|
12-05-08 3:20 AM
|
If the profits resulting from smaller bonuses to high-wage earners are fairly distributed to the low-wage earners, the low-wage earners (we, the little guys and gals, the people) will be able to afford to pay the associated taxes, as well as for the food in our bellies, the roofs over our heads, the clothes on our backs, etc. ... and, maybe, even to go golfing, yachting, wining-n-dining, etc. ...... now, does that sound like a bummer deal or what ... just think about it (instead of fantasizing about such things as we now do) ... I know, we'll be content with mere putt-putt golfing, canoeing, and being able to put food in our bellies ... because that's just the way we, the poor people, are!?!
|
|
KevinOfJamestownNY
|
|
|
12-05-08 3:17 AM
|
The super-high wages of the rich people are abusive of the poor people who actually generate the income through their labors ... that is the very reason why the abuses must be stopped, which will result in a lower average wage for high-wage earners and, if the profits are fairly distributed to the low-wage earners, a higher average wage for low-wage earners, thus somewhat closing the gap between the rich and the poor, and moving us forward toward income/wealth equality ... and a new and improved United States of America! Note that this IS attainable through "voluntary" payment of fair wages TO ALL and that government redistribution by spreading the wealth through taxation or whatever other means is not necessary if the abuses are "voluntarily" stopped by the abusers!!!
|
|
KevinOfJamestownNY
|
|
|
12-05-08 3:16 AM
|
Brent1: Very good points! The recently included wages of those "many" low-wage earners (the poor people) have been enough to lower the average wage; the super-high wages of the rich people have widened the gap between the rich and the poor.
|
|
KevinOfJamestownNY
|
|
|
12-05-08 3:15 AM
|
Monkeyboy: The middle class is shrinking not just because of its movement upward but also because of its movement downward (the failure of inclusion I alluded to in my previous comment to Marine). The horrible thing is that the oligarchic Rep administrations of the last 30 years have facilitated such movements, where the rich just keep getting richer and the poor just keep getting poorer ...... there is no downward movement (financial demotion) for failure of the rich ... and there is surely no upward movement (financial promotion) for success of the poor ...... in fact, there appears to be upward movement (financial promotion) for failure of the rich ... and that is absolutely horrible ...... hmm ... smells fishy to me!!!
|
|
KevinOfJamestownNY
|
|
|
12-05-08 3:13 AM
|
Marine: What wealth am I expected to spread ... the wealth I do not even have as a result of the income I do not even receive in fair exchange for my labors ...... talk about unreasonable expectations??? "...the middle class has shrunk...the number of rich and millionaires has increased..." ... but you don't even mention anything about "...the number of poor and those living in poverty..." ...... hmm ... could that be because inclusion of such would debunk your own statements ... sounds funny, like the Reps???
|
|
KevinOfJamestownNY
|
|
|
12-05-08 3:11 AM
|
For those who choose to twist statements and assign labels to things, my attitude can be correctly and justifiably called "disgustful"!!!
|
|
KevinOfJamestownNY
|
|
|
12-05-08 3:10 AM
|
Yah, Capitalism (which has been characterized by a tendency toward the concentration of wealth, the growth of large corporations, etc. that has led to economic inequality, which has been dealt with usually by increased government action and control) has really been a good thing! Yah, the biggest superpower in the world ... deserving of a whole lot of respect ... from both within and abroad ...... talk about unreasonable expectations ...... maybe I'll recover after the Reps are out o' here ... I didn't have this attitude during the Democratic Clinton administration, the only real reprieve we, the people, have had during the last 30 years ... I attribute my attitude to the Reps Reagan, DaddyBush, and DubyaBush.
|
|
KevinOfJamestownNY
|
|
|
12-05-08 3:07 AM
|
Communism is absolutely wrong ... period ... because of its achievement by "dictatorial" means and because of its emphasis on the requirements of the state "rather than on individual liberties"! Socialism, of which there are many forms, may very well be better because ALL members of society or the community SHARE in the work and the products. Socialism must not be all that bad considering the fact that the oligarchic US government has resorted to such (specifically referring to bailouts for the rich ... and against the poor) ...... oh, I understand ... Socialism is absolutely wrong when used to "spread the wealth" but absolutely right when used to "spread the losses" ... I get it ...... talk about hypocrisy!!!
|