Is Obama a “Magic Negro”?

posted at 1:43 pm on March 19, 2007 by Allahpundit

Indeed, says David Ehrenstein. For those new to this genre, the “Magic Negro” is a term used to describe an angelic black character who appears in movies to help a white hero in his time of trouble. Hollywood loves ‘em: “The Green Mile,” “The Legend of Bagger Vance,” pretty much anything with Morgan Freeman. Sometimes they have supernatural powers, but not always; sometimes their wisdom is childlike, but not always. Their hallmark is their absolute goodness, untainted by any of the flaws that trouble actual (white) human beings.

It’s the racist stereotype of blacks as simple and spiritual repackaged in a “positive” way for modern audiences. Ehrenstein says it reminds him of someone.

Obama’s fame right now has little to do with his political record or what he’s written in his two (count ‘em) books, or even what he’s actually said in those stem-winders. It’s the way he’s said it that counts the most. It’s his manner, which, as presidential hopeful Sen. Joe Biden ham-fistedly reminded us, is “articulate.” His tone is always genial, his voice warm and unthreatening, and he hasn’t called his opponents names (despite being baited by the media).

Like a comic-book superhero, Obama is there to help, out of the sheer goodness of a heart we need not know or understand. For as with all Magic Negroes, the less real he seems, the more desirable he becomes. If he were real, white America couldn’t project all its fantasies of curative black benevolence on him.

“But what about his admitted coke use?” you say. Ah, but that was a youthful transgression. Morgan Freeman’s character in “Shawshank” also committed a youthful transgression — murder, in fact — and that didn’t halt his beatification. So there’s a caveat: flaws are acceptable so long as they’re shed before maturity.

Kidding aside, Captain Ed is right to be irritated by the insinuation that whites who support Obama do so out of guilt and “positive” racism. I’d take him in a heartbeat over either Edwards or the Glacier, not because of his magical melanin-derived healing powers but because Edwards is a greasy jackass who panders to the left’s lowest common denominator and Hillary’s, well, Hillary. Ehrenstein would have been on firmer ground if he limited his critique to media coverage of Obama, where there’s some truth to what he says. The reason the “Magic Negro” meme has purchase in Hollywood has less to do with racism, I suspect, than sensitivity to the accusation of racism, for which they overcompensate by assigning the most cartoonishly noble and good-natured roles to black actors. That was part of the joke in having a black actor play God in that Sarah Silverman bit that got everyone so exercised. It’s not hard to imagine the media responding the same way, policing itself for unconscious racism so intently that it ends up here, with Obama seemingly capable of raising the dead if he just concentrated hard enough.

Exit question: Are there some youthful, politically unpopular character flaws that aren’t actually character flaws that even the Messiah won’t admit to?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Question, are you saying NOBODY will vote for Obama just because he’s black? That’d be just as insane as me sayin’ they would, yeah?

No. I’m saying that assuming that all white liberals will vote for Obama because he’s black (or at least a majority) isn’t based on any sort of factual evidence.

“just plain ignorant” Are you gonna tell me that the dems are NOT all about group politics?

I’m saying that to assume that ALL of X group of people are like Y is ignorant, ignorant until you can prove yourself right.

Good God, how many times must I say NOT ALL?

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 2:42 AM

Every single time you mention a group of people. If I hear you say something along the lines of “Republicans hate America,” I’ll call you an idiot until you say “some Republicans hate America,” and then I’ll ask you to give me some evidence. Every time you mention that X group believes/does Y without the words “some,” or “not all,” or “only a few” I’ll call you on it. Because if you don’t use those words it’s all assumption with no facts to back you up.

Nonfactor on March 20, 2007 at 3:01 AM

“…assuming all white liberals…all of X group” There it is again! TWICE! Am I typing in English? When did I say “I assume all white liberals will vote for Obama…?” I don’t even think he’s gonna win the primaries, how do I assume ALL white libs will vote for him? Hillary’s gonna win the primary. That’s an opinion, please forgive me for having one.

Just curious: Do you NEVER give just your opinion on anything? Ever? Have you NEVER written an opinion on here? Yes, you have. You assume I mean ALL libs (or at least a majority) will vote for Obama only for skin color, yet I said several times ‘not all’ and never did I say ‘a majority’, therefore you’re posting an opinion that’s not backed up by statistical facts. The only stastical facts I’ve claimed are 90 percent of the black vote goes to the dems and more whites on welfare. Are you telling me I don’t have the right to post an opinion, but you do? Freedom of speech, right? When did it become illegal to make a statement about those on the other side of the aisle? Have you NEVER said “Pubbies are war mongers, or gun nuts or bible thumpers, etc” without actually meaning all of them? You can try to “call me on it” all ya want, I don’t presume to shut you up, I invite the debate, but you think you can muzzle opinion … on an opinion website? Typical “liberal”. Free speech only for those who agree with you.

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 3:28 AM

crr6 on March 20, 2007 at 12:18 AM

I have no use for you, because you semi-quoted me, so yo wouldn’t have to reply to the entire comment that further addressed the issue about how Al Shaprton and Jesse Jackson and Obama is an apples and oranges comparison.

Bradky on March 20, 2007 at 1:20 AM

You’re delusional if you think my posts talk about injustices to whites, etc. etc. And it IS PEOPLE LIKE ME who want blacks to be treated as individuals, not as “black people”, but think what you want.

It is sad to watch the kind of comments you are making RW. Unless you are a democrat why do you care so much? Let it go. White people who can’t resist saying things like that

Say things like what?

The part I was referring to was when you said “Fo sho dog.” Mocking is an attempt at humor, usually a bad attempt as was proven in this instance.

Bradky nailed it pretty well.

Nonfactor on March 20, 2007 at 12:37 AM

What is your problem with me saying “fo sho dog” exactly? Why do you take exception to me mocking Obama’s fake “street” talk?

Bradky on March 20, 2007 at 1:20 AM

Earlier you talked about wanting blacks to be seen as individuals… which is what I and most of the “personal responsibility” Right feel anyway… but that in this 1:20 AM comment you start talking about the “black community” and demographics. That’s going back to the problem. I don’t think there should be a “black community”, I think they should be people. I’m not keeping them there, and neither are you. Talk to Bill Cosby for a minute.

I think where you may have misunderstood something is I’m not talking about Obama being the candidate for “black people”, I’m talking about him being the “black candidate” for Democrats to vote for him because he’s black… (Again, how many times have we heard libs say “it’s about time we had a black (or woman) president”… It’s about trying to prove “we’re so progressive that we’ll vote for them”, rather than saying “it’s about time we had a qualified candidate”, which is how it should be.

Unless of course you have any proof of this, but I haven’t seen even Joe Biden walk up to a black man and say “DY-NO-MITE!”

Nonfactor on March 20, 2007 at 2:05 AM

You may not have seen it, but stay tuned to YouTube… it’s a comin’.

RightWinged on March 20, 2007 at 3:31 AM

Hey RW, you’re right, they do say “We should have a black president.” Who cares about qualification, though? Oooops, did I say “they”? Uh oh, that must mean EVERY lib in America said that … and I personally *heard* every one of ‘em!

Here’s just one example of how white libs think: A coworker friend of mine was lookin’ thru an Us Weekly rag (cause that’s where they get their news) and saw a picture of Chris Tucker. She said “Where’s HE been?” I said “Probably jail.” She says “Oh, why’s it gotta be jail? Because he’s black?” I said “YOU said that, not me. I meant ’cause he’s a Hollywood actor.” She was thinking race, I was thinking occupation, but WE’RE the racists?

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 3:57 AM

Tony737 and RW:

Thanks for providing example after example of the things that prove my points.
In your world until black people drop on their knees and say “Why thank you master Tony and RW. We sure did have it wrong all these decades and you have shown us the light” neither of you will ever be satisfied. Wallowing in victimization as the poor aggrieved white guy that no one understands and has the constitutional right to offend because .. “well doggone it, we are Tony and RW and people like us to be as offensive and arrogant as possible.”
Believe me, you’d fit right in with some of the folks here in the bayous.

Bradky on March 20, 2007 at 7:25 AM

Call me a doubting Thomas, but I will wait to judge his ‘magic-ness’ until I see him turn water to malt liquor.

James on March 20, 2007 at 7:39 AM

Brad, c’mon man, “wallowing in victimization as the aggrieved white guy”? Where do you come up with this stuff? The WORST thing I said was that some white libs will vote for Obama out of guilt. Oh man, I really did it that time, huh? Call the Klan! We got us a new head dragon! Sheesh, get over yourself. I’m soooo aggreived! That’s called “projection”.

“until black people drop to their knees”? Can’t be anymore wrong than 180 degrees. Us eeeevil conservatives want NOBODY to be on their knees, we want EVERYBODY to be self reliant, self sufficient, and prosperous and we believe anybody can do that, it’s the left that wants blacks on their knees, dependant on them, it’s called plantation politics. Oh, I’m sorry, was that *arrogant* for me to say?

Offensive and arrogant? I was being polite and realistic, you’re being ultra sensitive and weak. Awe, are you *offended*? Gee, life is tough isn’t it? Offended by: “somebody might vote for so and so because of such and such”. Oh no! Not THAT! Anything but THAT! Somebody call the Thought Police!

Brad, if you’re my Air Force Brother than you’re gonna hafta cowboy up, get your head outta your butt and see the real world. Ooops, was that *offensive*? Stop imagining the world your grandparents lived in and come join us here in 2007.

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 10:32 AM

Here’s just one example of how white libs think: A coworker friend of mine was lookin’ thru an Us Weekly rag (cause that’s where they get their news) and saw a picture of Chris Tucker. She said “Where’s HE been?” I said “Probably jail.” She says “Oh, why’s it gotta be jail? Because he’s black?” I said “YOU said that, not me. I meant ’cause he’s a Hollywood actor.” She was thinking race, I was thinking occupation, but WE’RE the racists?

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 3:57 AM

I’m obviously out of it. Who are the “Hollywood actors” that are clogging our jails?

honora on March 20, 2007 at 12:07 PM

it’s the left that wants blacks on their knees, dependant on them

I expect you won’t give any proof that the entire “left” wants blacks on their knees, right?

Bottom line – you don’t know how anybody will vote until they vote and tell you why; so to say that any white liberals will vote for Obama simply because he’s black is an assumption not based on fact.

Nonfactor on March 20, 2007 at 12:08 PM

I’m obviously out of it. Who are the “Hollywood actors” that are clogging our jails?

honora on March 20, 2007 at 12:07 PM

It was either a racist joke or he isn’t funny.

Nonfactor on March 20, 2007 at 12:09 PM

Tony,
The problem is that you are presuming to speak for all republican/conservatives and claim your opinion is one as well as insinuating that only republican/conservative thought is the “way, the truth, the light”.

You said ““We see people as individuals, libs view everybody as a member of a sub-division.”
“All white libs get their news from US Weekly?”
Another blanket characterization – and where exactly do you get your news?

Does this mean that all republican/conservatives are this enlightened group of people with no bad apples? You draw a line between the two groups in two different posts – your words not mine.

Offensive and arrogant applies more to RW but condescending and disingenuous certainly apply to what you are saying. Your example from work is almost too laughable to comment on.(a) what part of your job description involves converting the masses to conservatism?(b) Please cite the study that ties white libs and their source of news to US News exclusively (c)this is the first time I’ve ever heard about your stereotype of Hollywood actors as jailbirds (d) Your co-worker probably got a good chuckle out of your tap dancing

Again the question you cannot answer “Why do you even care? The majority of blacks are not republicans. You don’t like “liberals” minding your business, why should they not expect the same from you?”

Bradky on March 20, 2007 at 12:20 PM

No, I don’t claim to speak for all Pubs, we’re not monolithic and neither are the Dems. But are you gonna tell me that there is no way that ANYBODY should be able to say something like “Pubs are for tax cuts, Dems are for universal health care”? Nobody can make ANY kind of general statement? Not all Pubs are against abortion, but enough of us are, so much so that I should be able to say it without hearing “You can’t say that! I know one who isn’t!” Not all Dems are against the war in Iraq, but enough are that I should be able to say it without you saying “That’s not true! I know of one who’s for it!” pppfffttt Get real. Just to bug you, I’m gonna start saying ALL this or ALL that.

My examples from my lib coworkers are right on. There’s a lot of them (big eeevil company) and they’re pretty consistant, all over the country (airline). Yes, ALL of them read Us Weekly (celebrity rag, not US News and World Report) and never pay attention to the real news. (Oh my gawd! He said “all”!) This is after 8 years of having daily discussions and debates. DAILY. Perhaps it’s not like that for you, YOU post on a political website. These people I’m talking about can’t find Iraq or N.Korea on a map, I’ve asked them to, they have no idea who Assad or Musharaaf are, I’ve asked them. But ask ‘em what Britney wore to the Oscar’s last year and they can tell ya what kinda underwear she had on, if any. They’re pretty consistant and they are a microcosm. All, yes ALL of my Pubbie buds follow the news closely and discuss it intently. ALL of my black Pubbie buds are the most interesting to talk to about race politics because they have a different outlook on it. They see the *pity* coming from white libs, the soft bigotry diguised as compassion, it’s condescending and they laugh at it. They also say it’s worse than overt racist hatred ’cause at least those kinda people KNOW it.

As for Hollywood actors in jail, check out the book “Celebrity Mugshots” … it’s histerically funny! Especially Nick Nolte, Zsa Zsa Gabor and Tim Allen.

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 1:11 PM

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 1:11 PM

I asked you three questions and you couldn’t answer one of them. I’m going to start referring to you as Slick Willy since you dodge questions so much.

I’m sure your employer is so thrilled that you spend so much of your time trying to talk up politics — that is very generous …. kind of like, well you know; welfare!

See ya round slick willie.

Bradky on March 20, 2007 at 1:19 PM

I’m responding to the relevent points you made. Which of your rhetorical questions did you want answered? Where do I get my news? From all around the world. I go on Lucianne which has news links from every source you can think of. Every major newspaper and TV station in the country and on the planet that has a web edition is there. Ok, maybe not EVERY single one of them EVERY single day. Happy now?

You don’t talk to your friends during break time? Sorry to hear that.

How many of your lib friends would rather talk about American Idol than the Nork’s half successful nuke test? How many would rather talk about Anna Nicole’s baby than Iran giving shape charge bombs to sunni militants in Iraq? How may would prefer discussing what was on “Access Hollywood” last night over what’s in the koran and how it effects our safety today? Be honest.

On the other hand, they DO like to talk about global warming and stuff like that, but they don’t wanna talk about what they don’t believe exists, like a war between Liberty and Dhimmitude.

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 1:38 PM

How many of your lib friends…

None of them. Does that mean that liberals don’t care about pop stuff like that? No. It means that the liberals I know don’t care about it.

Nobody can make ANY kind of general statement?

You shouldn’t make a general statement unless it is a truely general. I can say 1 + 1 is 2, but I can’t say all kids like teddy bears. Get it?

Nonfactor on March 20, 2007 at 1:48 PM

1 + 1 is 2 is a fact. All kids like teddy bears is true ENOUGH that it’s ok to say it, if you say “you *can’t* say that” then you’re taking away someone’s freedom of speech, which is wrong, even if you disagree with that person. Get it?

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 1:58 PM

You shouldn’t make a general statement unless it is a truely general. I can say 1 + 1 is 2, but I can’t say all kids like teddy bears. Get it?

I probably shouldn’t butt in, but I believe this is a fairly good indication of the problem.

One says, you can’t make general statements of “fact” unless they are absolutely true and you have evidence to back it up.

The other says, I am not making general statements of “fact”, I am stating an opinion that I believe based on my interactions with others, that other people may also hold that opinion so I do not need evidence to back it up”.

Its:

“You can’t say all kids like teddy bears” unless it is absolutely true and you have the evidence to back it up.

Versus:

I can say “I believe all kids like teddy bears”, which is an opinion and is an opinion that I believe others hold as well. As “opinion” it is, necessarily, not able to be proved by the use of evidence.

Fatal on March 20, 2007 at 2:05 PM

if you say “you *can’t* say that” then you’re taking away someone’s freedom of speech, which is wrong, even if you disagree with that person. Get it?

You can say it, but you can’t say it if you want to tell the truth. Just like you can’t make your ludicrous claims if you want to tell the truth. There is no such thing as “true ENOUGH;” something is true or false.

I can say “I believe all kids like teddy bears”, which is an opinion and is an opinion that I believe others hold as well. As “opinion” it is, necessarily, not able to be proved by the use of evidence.

Fatal on March 20, 2007 at 2:05 PM

Yes, you can say it, but it doesn’t make it true. Truthiness, much?

Nonfactor on March 20, 2007 at 2:44 PM

So it has to be 100 percent true in order for it to pass your lips? Ha! Like when you said NONE of your lib friends prefer pop news over real news? Is THAT 100 percent true? I doubt it. So you can’t say ANYTHING then. In a nation of 3,000,000,000 people, opinions are like snow flakes, no two are exactly alike. You must be facinating to chit chat with. Japanese tourists carry cameras around their necks at DisneyWorld. “YOU CAN’T SAY THAT!” Women like shoes and purses. “YOU CAN’T SAY THAT!” White Pubbies are intolerant. “YOU CAN’T … wait … ok, you can say THAT.”

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 3:00 PM

So it has to be 100 percent true in order for it to pass your lips? Ha! Like when you said NONE of your lib friends prefer pop news over real news? Is THAT 100 percent true?

Yes and yes.

I doubt it.

Doubt away.

In a nation of 3,000,000,000 people

I’m sure you meant 300,000,000.

“YOU CAN’T SAY THAT!” Women like shoes and purses. “YOU CAN’T SAY THAT!” White Pubbies are intolerant. “YOU CAN’T … wait … ok, you can say THAT.”

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 3:00 PM

No, you can say it, you just won’t be speaking the truth, you’ll be stating your (false) opinion.

Nonfactor on March 20, 2007 at 3:12 PM

White Pubbies are intolerant. “YOU CAN’T … wait … ok, you can say THAT.”

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 3:00 PM

Not one person in this thread has said all whites, majority of whites or all white Republicans are intolerant. What has been said is that there are a number of outspoken, intolerant whites who happen to be Republican but don’t constitute anywhere near a majority of Republicans — as a result these people do not make the Republican party an attractive consideration for non-whites.

Your incessant defense of your right to be offensive is a strong indicator that you are in this particular minority group.

Make sense slick? Good! Knew I’d get through. And I even conferred minority status on you so that your sense of victimization is complete. You are welcome.

Bradky on March 20, 2007 at 3:24 PM

“Yes and yes” – Talk about false and untrue. You’re contadicting yourself. You’ve painted yourself into a corner, you say you NEVER say anything that’s not 100 percent true … which itself is not 100 percent true, that’d be impossible. You’d hafta be a monk who took a vow of silence. You *never* say anything like “Golden retrievers love to swim”? Never? B.S.

“you meant 300,000,000.” Oooops, yes I did, thanks.

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 3:24 PM

Brad, I never said anybody on this thread said all white Pubs were intolerant.

My right to be offensive? Are you offended? What did I say that was offensive? That some people will vote based on race. That’s offensive? No, that’s true and if you’re offended by that than you’re overly sensitive and need to buck up.

My sense of victimization? Ha! I though you libs consider us to be in power because of our majority status? Fight the power! Stick it to the man! Haha you’re a comedian!

NOW who’s not answering who’s questions? I’ll condense them into one for ya: How many of your lib friends … assuming you HAVE any … prefer pop celebrity news over real news?

Intolerant whites? How do you know I’m white? I have black friends further to the right than me, would you know their race if they posted here? That’s pretty presumptious, no?

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 3:38 PM

oops dammit, wasn’t done yet.

How about your”people in the bayou”? Wasn’t that a general statement? Wouldn’t that be *offensive* to them? It’s probably true, there could be seriously overt racism there. A buddy ‘O mine from Shreveport says the whites there are openly racist towards him. I believe him. Did he mean EVERY SINGLE one of them? No, he was speaking generally. Why impose a fake rule that says ” You must add the words ,But Not All’ to every conversation?

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 3:45 PM

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 3:38 PM

Good grief! What job pays you to spend all day blogging and “witnessing” at break time?

Bradky on March 20, 2007 at 3:48 PM

Why impose a fake rule that says ” You must add the words ,But Not All’ to every conversation?

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 3:45 PM

Why demand that the rest of the world adapt to your way of writing instead of you learning to communicate more effectively?

Bradky on March 20, 2007 at 3:58 PM

Tony737 and RW:

Thanks for providing example after example of the things that prove my points.
In your world until black people drop on their knees and say “Why thank you master Tony and RW. We sure did have it wrong all these decades and you have shown us the light” neither of you will ever be satisfied. Wallowing in victimization as the poor aggrieved white guy that no one understands and has the constitutional right to offend because .. “well doggone it, we are Tony and RW and people like us to be as offensive and arrogant as possible.”
Believe me, you’d fit right in with some of the folks here in the bayous.

Bradky on March 20, 2007 at 7:25 AM

Who have I offended and how Bradky? Where did I say blacks owed me anything (I’m talking about your retarded “bow down/master” comments), where did I say I’m a victim? Honestly, I’m going to ask you a SERIOUS question, are you on any kind of mind altering drug (legal or otherwise)? You’re coming off as completely out of your mind.

I’ve repeatedly said that I want blacks to be individual, not “black”. You’ve someone taken that to mean that don’t want them to be individuals. Then YOU go on to speak of them as a “community” and a “demographic”, while still attacking me.

I can’t wait to hear you come back and tell me how I’ve offended black people again, and how I’m insisting that they bow to me and thank me and call me master. I can’t wait to hear it. What next, do you have a photo of me with a sheet over my head?

RightWinged on March 20, 2007 at 4:03 PM

RightWinged on March 20, 2007 at 4:03 PM

You have some serious reading comprehension problems that make dialog with you pointless.

Here’s your “I’m a victim hear me roar” card. Shoo go away now!

Bradky on March 20, 2007 at 4:08 PM

You have some serious reading comprehension problems that make dialog with you pointless.

Here’s your “I’m a victim hear me roar” card. Shoo go away now!

Bradky on March 20, 2007 at 4:08 PM

No bud, YOU HAVE THE READING COMPREHENSION PROBLEMS. I sitting her, f**king begging you to explain your allegations and you’re such a pussy you just repeat the same thing by saying I’m trying to be a victim. Did that get your attention… Again

Who have I offended and how Bradky? Where did I say blacks owed me anything (I’m talking about your retarded “bow down/master” comments), where did I say I’m a victim? Honestly, I’m going to ask you a SERIOUS question, are you on any kind of mind altering drug (legal or otherwise)? You’re coming off as completely out of your mind.

I’ve repeatedly said that I want blacks to be individual, not “black”. You’ve someone taken that to mean that don’t want them to be individuals. Then YOU go on to speak of them as a “community” and a “demographic”, while still attacking me.

I can’t wait to hear you come back and tell me how I’ve offended black people again, and how I’m insisting that they bow to me and thank me and call me master. I can’t wait to hear it. What next, do you have a photo of me with a sheet over my head?

RightWinged on March 20, 2007 at 4:03 PM

RightWinged on March 20, 2007 at 4:14 PM

“…spend all day blogging and witnessing”

What? Did you just say *ALL* day? Call the Thought Police! Brad “All day”!

Witnessing? Is that a religious term? Are you ASSUMING that I “witness” to my coworkers? See, it’s ok to *offend* a Christian, is that right?

Blogging? I don’t *blog* to my real world friends, people who HAVE real world friends know this.

“comunicate more effectively”? It seems to me you’re the one (one of the two) isn’t getting it. I’ve explained it how many times? And it’s still not sinking in. RW got it on the first post waaaay up tip there. Perhaps, you’re just hearing what you wanna hear.

And still no answer to my direct question, yet I’m “Slick Willie” cause I didn’t answer your rhetorical question, eh?

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 4:16 PM

I can say “I believe all kids like teddy bears”, which is an opinion and is an opinion that I believe others hold as well. As “opinion” it is, necessarily, not able to be proved by the use of evidence.

Fatal on March 20, 2007 at 2:05 PM

Yes, you can say it, but it doesn’t make it true. Truthiness, much?

Nonfactor on March 20, 2007 at 2:44 PM

What world do you live in where things like “opinions” somehow can be characterized as “true” or not?

In my opinion the “Family Guy” show sucks, does that have to be 100% true, do 100% of the people in the world have to agree that “Family Guy” sucks in order for my opinion to be valid?

Or, in my opinion, cooked armadillo tastes just like roast pork. Does that have to true to every person in the world in order for me to be allowed to express that opinion?

Of course not!

So it has to be 100 percent true in order for it to pass your lips?

Yes . . .

All you’ve done is shown yourself to be disingenious, a liar and a fraud, not worthy of even being acknowledged in the future.

Fatal on March 20, 2007 at 4:17 PM

**Bradky pats RW on the head**

Get up now my little pretty, you don’t need to beg.

***Then turns to Tony and explains patiently***
“It’s okay to collect your paycheck and waste the bosses time by blogging. But you need to be careful when you are witnessing for your political beliefs. Oh and did anyone ever tell you you look a lot like slick willie?”

Bradky on March 20, 2007 at 4:20 PM

Oooops … way up TOP … :-)

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 4:22 PM

**Bradky pats RW on the head**

Get up now my little pretty, you don’t need to beg.

***Then turns to Tony and explains patiently***
“It’s okay to collect your paycheck and waste the bosses time by blogging. But you need to be careful when you are witnessing for your political beliefs. Oh and did anyone ever tell you you look a lot like slick willie?”

Bradky on March 20, 2007 at 4:20 PM

So Bradky, you’re saying that you’re too much of a pussy or too stupid to support your allegations? Or that they were totall bullsh** in the first place?

Again:

Who have I offended and how Bradky? Where did I say blacks owed me anything (I’m talking about your retarded “bow down/master” comments), where did I say I’m a victim? Honestly, I’m going to ask you a SERIOUS question, are you on any kind of mind altering drug (legal or otherwise)? You’re coming off as completely out of your mind.

I’ve repeatedly said that I want blacks to be individual, not “black”. You’ve someone taken that to mean that don’t want them to be individuals. Then YOU go on to speak of them as a “community” and a “demographic”, while still attacking me.

I can’t wait to hear you come back and tell me how I’ve offended black people again, and how I’m insisting that they bow to me and thank me and call me master. I can’t wait to hear it. What next, do you have a photo of me with a sheet over my head?

RightWinged on March 20, 2007 at 4:03 PM

RightWinged on March 20, 2007 at 4:25 PM

Uh, Brad … scroll up.

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 4:25 PM

Hey Brad, I’m typing this on my Treo phone. I work at 40,000 feet. Maybe YOUR phone works at 40,000, but mine doesn’t. See whay happens when you ASSUME?

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 4:31 PM

In my opinion the “Family Guy” show sucks, does that have to be 100% true, do 100% of the people in the world have to agree that “Family Guy” sucks in order for my opinion to be valid?

This has nothing to do with what I was talking about. If you said “Family Guy sucks,” I’d take issue with the statement, but because you said “In my opinion ‘Family Guy’ sucks,” I don’t.

All you’ve done is shown yourself to be disingenious, a liar and a fraud, not worthy of even being acknowledged in the future.

Fatal on March 20, 2007 at 4:17 PM

You make ad hominem attacks on a straw man argument.

Nonfactor on March 20, 2007 at 4:32 PM

Grrrrr! see *WHAT* happens …! Damn these tiny keys!

Brad, are you at work? Are you off today? Are you assuming ALL jobs are the same? I can assure you, my job is quite different than most. I’m on my way there now, when the plane taxiis out, my phone is OFF. Therefore, your assumption is wrong, the way you were accusing me of assuming.

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 4:37 PM

Oh, and please don’t *assume* that I’m typing and driving at the same time, I’m in a hotel van. All hotel van drivers blast the heat too high. Oh no! I said ALL hotel van drivers! Call the U.N.! Call the Hague!

Non, still waitin’ for an answer and my time is runnin’ out. Have you EVER said ANYTHING like: Golden retrievers love to swim? Or: Canadians love hockey?

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 4:43 PM

WTF?

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 5:04 PM

Oh, and please don’t *assume* that I’m typing and driving at the same time, I’m in a hotel van. All hotel van drivers blast the heat too high. Oh no! I said ALL hotel van drivers! Call the U.N.! Call the Hague!

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 4:43 PM

I always knew you were a driverist Tony!

RightWinged on March 20, 2007 at 5:18 PM

“Clinton didn’t grow up in what you view is the “traditional black experience,” but he still managed to identify with black people nationwide.”

So much camaraderie between those who employ victimization for political purposes.

Connie on March 20, 2007 at 6:36 PM

Tony737 on March 20, 2007 at 4:31 PM

At least I know now why I can’t get the flight attendants on SW to bring me a friggin bag of chips and bottle of water. You are whispering sweet nothings to RW via your Treo Phone and working on your great American manifesto.

Bradky on March 20, 2007 at 11:04 PM

So again Bradky, what you’re saying is you can’t stay away, but you also can’t support your allegations, so you’re just going to continue making retarded jokes?

Again (in reference to your SPECIFIC allegations):

Who have I offended and how Bradky? Where did I say blacks owed me anything (I’m talking about your retarded “bow down/master” comments), where did I say I’m a victim? Honestly, I’m going to ask you a SERIOUS question, are you on any kind of mind altering drug (legal or otherwise)? You’re coming off as completely out of your mind.

I’ve repeatedly said that I want blacks to be individual, not “black”. You’ve someone taken that to mean that don’t want them to be individuals. Then YOU go on to speak of them as a “community” and a “demographic”, while still attacking me.

I can’t wait to hear you come back and tell me how I’ve offended black people again, and how I’m insisting that they bow to me and thank me and call me master. I can’t wait to hear it. What next, do you have a photo of me with a sheet over my head?

RightWinged on March 20, 2007 at 4:03 PM

RightWinged on March 20, 2007 at 11:19 PM

RightWinged on March 20, 2007 at 11:19 PM

Just how many times have you checked in to this thread looking for my post, dude? Too bad there isn’t a twelve step program for people addicted to blogging and hoping someone… anyone will come to their blog and post a comment.

Hint for ya RW: No one is commenting because your command of the English language is embarrassing. You have proven you cannot grasp the context of articles and posts you say you read and then expect people to take your conclusions seriously.

You and Tony seem to have a relationship – ask him for help. He can tutor you while in-flight, from his Treo.

And just to save you time – this will be my last visit to this particular thread.

Bradky on March 20, 2007 at 11:38 PM

Just how many times have you checked in to this thread looking for my post, dude? Too bad there isn’t a twelve step program for people addicted to blogging and hoping someone… anyone will come to their blog and post a comment.

Hint for ya RW: No one is commenting because your command of the English language is embarrassing. You have proven you cannot grasp the context of articles and posts you say you read and then expect people to take your conclusions seriously.

You and Tony seem to have a relationship – ask him for help. He can tutor you while in-flight, from his Treo.

And just to save you time – this will be my last visit to this particular thread.

Bradky on March 20, 2007 at 11:38 PM

Of course it’s your last visit, because you’re a weak minded pussy who refuses to support your claims. What the hell is wrong with you? How many times can I simply ask you to support your claims? Why don’t you just admit that you’re insane and/or on mind altering drugs and don’t know why you made the allegations in the first place? Otherwise, it should be pretty easy to answer my very specific questions that are in reaction to your specific comments.

And what are you talking about, this isn’t “blogging”, this is commenting on a blog…

Unless you’re being a childish douche bag and trying to “get” me by mocking my blog, which you’ll notice I HAVEN’T POSTED ON IN 2 MONTHS!!! Admittedly it’s partly because of some server/host issues which I’m not in a hurry to resolve because I hardly ever had time to blog there anyway.

But what does that have to do with commenting here, and asking you to support your claims? Oh that’s right, again, you’re an idiot and know that you can’t support your claims, so you’re diverting and dodging in every way you can.

(Bradky, please don’t mistake this comment as an attempt to get you to comment on 2 month + old posts at my rarely used in the past blog. I know it’s tempting to think that I’m commenting at Hot Air, on posts pushed off the front page, looking for commenters to comment at my blog… you know, because that makes sense at all… But I promise, that’s not the case)

One more time:

Who have I offended and how Bradky? Where did I say blacks owed me anything (I’m talking about your retarded “bow down/master” comments), where did I say I’m a victim? Honestly, I’m going to ask you a SERIOUS question, are you on any kind of mind altering drug (legal or otherwise)? You’re coming off as completely out of your mind.

I’ve repeatedly said that I want blacks to be individual, not “black”. You’ve someone taken that to mean that don’t want them to be individuals. Then YOU go on to speak of them as a “community” and a “demographic”, while still attacking me.

I can’t wait to hear you come back and tell me how I’ve offended black people again, and how I’m insisting that they bow to me and thank me and call me master. I can’t wait to hear it. What next, do you have a photo of me with a sheet over my head?

RightWinged on March 20, 2007 at 4:03 PM

RightWinged on March 20, 2007 at 11:51 PM

Brad, if you’re still out there, I already told you my phone will NOT work at 40,000 feet. I wait ’til we land before I whisper sweet nothings to RW.

And why haven’t you answered my questions, Bradley? You insisted I answer your rhetoricals, now answer my directs. Oh, that’s right, you’re not here anymore. Cut & run, eh? I suspect you’re still reading this, as is Non, but he won’t answer my golden retriever question ’cause he knows it destroys his arguement so he ignores this thread. Easier to ignore it than to face it, sorta like Iran, huh?

Tony737 on March 21, 2007 at 1:24 AM

Comment pages: 1 2