Liberals don’t seem to understand that Conservatives don’t like killing either, but they realize that there is no cheap and painless way to free people from truly racist and evil people. Sometimes the word “evil” is appropriate. I seem to recall that during WWII, the liberals of the day suggested we build a big wall, and ignore the problems of Europe because we had our own problems in America. They won’t admit it, but they had no problem with Hitler. It was a “civil war” isolated to Europe. Gee, just because the Nazis and extremist Muslims both advocate wiping out all other races and cultures… yeah, there’s no reason to compare them. Let’s just call our democratically elected administration Nazis, because they actually DO obey the rule of law, they won’t restrict our freedom of speech to say such hateful things. The liberals aren’t smart enough to understand that we weren’t invading Iraq to attack Iraqis, but attacking Islamic fundamentalists who support terror and terrorism.
Of course, in Rosie’s defense, she claims that she is just “exploring” her thoughts and “educating” herself on the 9-11 bombings, as she posts unfounded accusations based on Internet conspiracy theories that a 4th grader would find suspicious. She equates Christians on the right, and militant terrorists fundamentalist Muslims who proclaim the desire to kill all Americans. But, she’s a liberal, so no one can criticize her (and a member of another protected class or two). When Ann Coulter tells a joke, she receives death threats. If I had to choose between Ann Coulter (on the right), and Rosie (somewhere left of Neverland), at least Ann is attractive and intelligent. Oops! There I go again, being sexist. Just like a white guy!
I’ve invented a new term for “white guys”. We aren’t all the same shade of pasty white, after all. We are racially considered “Caucasians”, so I propose we all be called “Caucs”. Don’t call us “whitey” or “the man” because that just confuses us, call us all a bunch of big racist “caucs” and that should get our attention as we drink our white milk and eat our mayonnaise sandwiches on white bread (with the crusts cut off).
So, what’s up with the double standard? Example: “Jessie Jackson Calls New York Hymie Town” gets excused, while “Don Imus Calls Rutgers Players Nappy-Headed Hos” becomes major news. I’m not trying to compare the two comments. Jackson made a hateful, intentional slur, while Imus made a stupid comment during a comedy sketch without thinking. Sure, both comments were stupid, but despite making stupid comments himself, Jackson (with perennial candidate Sharpton) considers Imus’ comments deserving of a national referendum on hate speech. Come on. I don’t listen to Imus, because he’s a Democrat apologist who has a track record of saying stupid things. I hate to say it, but is it right for Jackson to be a spokesperson here? Isn’t that the pot calling the kettle black? (I don’t think that was racist, but it sounds racist.)
Imus or his cast have called Colin Powell a “weasel,” New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson a “fat sissy” and referred to Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell of Colorado, an American Indian, as “the guy from `F Troop.'” He and his colleagues also called the New York Knicks a group of “chest-thumping pimps.”
Imus himself now acknowledges that there is a new climate of political correctness: “Here’s what I’ve learned: that you can’t make fun of everybody…” There are protected classes that you cannot question. Rosie may have the freedom to make hateful proclamations on her television show (because she’s a gay liberal?), but if a white guy (“a big cauc”) makes a stupid comment, liberals are up in arms and ready to run him out of town on a rail. We can dismiss the fact that conservative politicians are able to accept Imus’ apology while the very Democrats he promoted on his show now condemn him, because conservative white guys are inherently racist anyway. Right? You can get away with shit as a liberal, that you couldn’t as a conservative. Liberals are not as forgiving and open-minded as they pretend to be. They enjoy saying mean-spirited things, hating people who are different from them politically, and they vote against certain ideas instead of developing and promoting a positive agenda of their own. The extreme right and left in this country chant the mantras that their leaders give them and follow them with blind faith. That applies equally to the fundamentalists who believe Pat Robertson and to the left-coast-tree-hugging-liberals who regurgitate lines from Al Gore’s movie or Bill Maher as they stand around the office water cooler. (Just keep saying to yourself things like, “I have many black friends. Really!” and “Bush stole the election” over and over and it will be okay.)
Even though it’s been said I’ve never seen a stereotype I didn’t repeat, what is so wrong with asking questions and trying to debate issues that people are really thinking about? Is it ok to say very hateful things about fat, balding, white guys (“big caucs”) you don’t like, yet wrong to simply ask questions about people and policies that involve “protected classes”? Are the people in these “protected classes” so fragile, that the debate will emotionally stunt them? I’m afraid it really gets down to the deep fears and racism that Democrats harbor, at least the intellectually-superior-sounding ones. They inherently don’t believe people are smart enough to make decisions, and they want the government (ideally all “progressive” liberals) to make decisions for them. They don’t want to raise people from the inner cities out of poverty, they want them to stay where they are, and give them free cheese. If they really cared about people, they wouldn’t try to keep them fat and happy, they’d try to get them educated and off their fat asses (there is an obesity epidemic, you know!) and integrated into our society so they have more opportunity to participate in national discussions. That is what they are really afraid of, that the protected classes will someday be equal to them, the white liberal intelligencia. Then they will be exposed as the know-nothings they are. Full of hot air and supposition and all the time fueling divisiveness between the “haves” and the “have-nots” so they can maintain their own power base, and promote their nonsensical agendas. (Of course, when the liberals lose, as they ultimately do, they in turn blame it on right-wing plots (by “evil white guys”) and multi-national corporate conspiracies (does Halliburton ring a bell?))
Another talk-show host, a white guy from Houston, made some comments that were decried as racist recently. Michael Berry asked the question many of us have also asked. If we fought the Indians for land in the past couple hundred years, and won, at what point should we stop apologizing and move on? Valid question. Not a racist question. One that someone would legitimately ask when they see Indians not integrating into society in some cases, and flaunting U.S. law by putting Casinos on their “sovereign” land. This is not the first country to displace indigenous peoples. That has happened throughout Europe and the Americas, and around the world. In most cases, they come to terms and move on. In fact, U.S. policy tries to promote diverse cultures and not wipe them out. The “we were here before you” argument isn’t a good one. It’s tired and needs to be retired. There is evidence that when the Indians migrated to the Americas from Asia, they displaced humans that settled here before them. At what point are we no longer responsible for what our ancestors did? (In many cases, our ancestors were still in Europe when slavery and Indian wars were going on.)
Oh sure, write-off Doctor Grouchy. He’s just a cantankerous old white guy (aka – a “big fat cauc”). Let’s say funny things about the white guys. All I know is it’s all shades of the same thing happening. Just like we shouldn’t discount a person or the value of what they have to say because of their race or creed or religion, we shouldn’t protect them either if they say stupid things “because” of their race, creed or religion. People in the majority, who as a race have not been oppressed for centuries, do not understand what the minority may be going through. Even I understand that I don’t understand what I can’t understand. We don’t yet live in a world that can easily be color-blind. We need to be sensitive to how words can hurt others. We must not be so quick to judge, label and call people that we don’t personally know names. After all, how can we really know what they were thinking when they did/said what they did/said? (Did I really just say that? Shocking!) At the same time, we must not be afraid to discuss some topics or call them off-limits because of political correctness. Political correctness is just us wanting to look good to others.
In a discussion, people may learn things that will change their point of view. What Rosie does is not a discussion, it is bullying and ignorant. What Imus did was not discussion, it was a stupid statement in a feeble attempt at humor. What Michael Berry said was intended to start a discussion on a topic that he probably didn’t understand very well. We need to be forgiving and understanding of all people, because they may have a perspective we don’t understand. That not only goes for the “protected” but for these people who do and say stupid things as well, as long as they are sincere and learn from their mistakes.
Enough of this. Why do we go on and on about stupid things that individuals do? Why are we obsessed by what some individual does, in a country of 300 million people? How significant is one person, or their comments. I think it can be harmful to spend so much time listening to gossip or worrying about what strangers do on some TV reality show or talk show. Aren’t there more important issues to discuss that will mean more to the future of this great nation? I am just one “big ol’ cauc”, but I am going to expend no further effort discussing what Don Imus or Rosie O’Donnell do or think. I can spend my time more productively. I’m going to turn on Fox News and see who the real father of Anna Nicole Smith’s baby is!
Whining & Bitching