Caught on tape: Dem official says he's 'glad' Scalise got shot

originally posted by: veracity
a reply to: DBCowboy


Are you not reading the part where I specifically said that I am sure to differentiate the respectable republican from the deplorable ones?

When I can find some leftists that aren't celebrating violence, calling people they disagree with "racist", marginalizing the violence they create, then I will laud them as well.

a reply to: DBCowboy

They only call racist ...racist...but you want to paint with a broad brush...like you just did with me.

originally posted by: veracity
a reply to: DBCowboy

They only call racist ...racist...but you want to paint with a broad brush...like you just did with me.

You present a big canvas, I can only use a big brush.

originally posted by: veracity
a reply to: Grambler

Dems said this? Or 1 or 2 people and you are painting with a broad brush?

Refelect on your statement here. And then think think how that applies to your broad generalizations about the right being racist and the left noblely fighting them

a reply to: Grambler


I'm sorry if translation gets lost but I never said that. Please read my last post we're two (2) times I said that I am always sure to differentiate the respectable republicans from the deplorable. I don't know if you are cherry-picking my posts or ignoring what I say bc it doesn't fit your agenda but sorry you are missing my point. I also said one side is more racist meaning that the deplorables identify as republican which makes the right side more racist (racist that include our administration today do not help your case of claiming "we are not racist")

Sorry

Wait...Did this guy really try to explain what he said by saying there was missing context? What the hell kind of context could be missing that would make what he said "OK"?

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: projectvxn
So please, keep it up.

Both sides are full of hypocrites.

How can you say PC is BS and then call this atrocious? Seems contradictory to me. Are you against freedom of speech?

What does PC have to do with simple common decency. I'm sorry, but it is neither "PC" or "Non-PC" to talk like this. Sure -- there are P.O.S. people who lack common decency and do talk (and think) like this guy taled. However, those types of people should not be high-ups in a state's political machine and have any power in the state Democratic Party.

As a democrat, I don't want people like this guy anywhere near a position of power in the party, even at the state level.

a reply to: Box of Rain

OK, I will differ with you slightly. The man is entitled to his opinions, including the racist ones. It is perfectly possible to hold craptastic opinions like this and still do a perfectly professional job.

However, for a very long time now, the left has been busy telling us that their sh1t doesn't stink like everyone else's, and especially Republicans', does, so stuff like this, particularly when some deflect by pointing fingers and claiming Republicans are *still* "more racist," just makes them look like big, fat hypocrites.

It also illustrates why they lose elections these days. They aren't authentic, just judgmental d1cks.

a reply to: veracity

Intellectual liberals, or as some people call them "Limousine Liberals", can be equally racist as a red-neck rightwinger.

The racism is different, though. Many intellectual liberals still feel that minorities are inferior humans, although they excuse that inferred inferiority as something that was caused by society, as in..

"That inner-city minority may be a criminal and murderer, but it isn't his fault: it is the fault of the rest of society who created the socioeconomic conditions that led that poor helpless soul to a life of crime."

...But they still feel that the minority person is inferior to them. They still exhibit bigotry.

I'm a liberal-minded person, but I don't sit on my high tower like some other liberals treating minorities like some helpless invalids who can't function without constant care from the state.

a reply to: Box of Rain

The redneck is both racist and bigot, and the limo leftie is bigot that you speak of. I know what you talk of.

The real deplorable redneck gay bashing black hating racist usually always identify as republican which is why they get the bad rep.

Leftie limos are a thing...yes...but they are not as deplorable as the...deplorables. Most people judges and place themselves in ranks, not saying it's right, but it happens, some people judge more than others.

The deplorables display hate, racism and misery while doing it.

originally posted by: veracity
a reply to: Box of Rain

The redneck is both racist and bigot, and the limo leftie is bigot that you speak of. I know what you talk of.

The real deplorable redneck gay bashing black hating racist usually always identify as republican which is why they get the bad rep.

Leftie limos are a thing...yes...but they are not as deplorable as the...deplorables. Everyone judges and places themselves in ranks, not saying it's right, but everyone does that.

The deplorables display hate, racism and misery while doing that.

Yes....yess....let the hate flow through you. Your journey to the dark side is almost complete.

a reply to: Box of Rain

Who said anything about context?

It isn't what pc is about, it is about what anti-pc supporters uphold. I'm not sure that is the same as non-pc.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Box of Rain

Who said anything about context?

Phil Montag did (the person about whom the OP was written):

Montag, in an interview with the Omaha World-Herald, said his words were taken out of context and he was "horrified" by the shooting.
“I did not call for the congressman’s death,” Montag reportedly said.

Hence the reason I said in my post, "Wait...Did this guy really try to explain what he said by saying there was missing context? What the hell kind of context could be missing that would make what he said "OK"?

originally posted by: daskakik
It isn't what pc is about, it is about what anti-pc supporters uphold. I'm not sure that is the same as non-pc.

Correct. This is not at all relevant to being PC or not being PC. What Mr. Montag said is just plain old mean, cruel, cold, and sad.

I can't see how PC even fits into this situation or the discussion about it.

originally posted by: Box of Rain
Phil Montag did

Ok.

I can't see how PC even fits into this situation or the discussion about it.

I guess we can discuss what PC actually means.

What Mr. Montag said is just plain old mean, cruel, cold, and sad.

My understanding of PC is speaking in such a way as to not sound "plain old mean, cruel, cold, and sad".

a reply to: Krakatoa

This is not cool for a US politicians

He should know better

originally posted by: daskakik
My understanding of PC is speaking in such a way as to not sound "plain old mean, cruel, cold, and sad".

Not always. The definition of Poilitcal Correctness and PC speech goes beyond simply "not being mean, cruel, and cold-hearted towards another person." For an action to be "PC or not PC", it must also involve a person being intolerant to another person's (or group's) culture, race, class, etc.

Here are a few definitions of Political Correctness I found online. None of them ONLY describe acting in a mean-spirited or cruel manner, but go on to include (and necessarily so for the definition) the avoidance of language that seems to marginalize or insult a social group, race, culture, gender, sexual preference, etc. :


"The avoidance of language or actions that are seen as excluding, marginalizing, or insulting groups of people who are seen as disadvantaged or discriminated against, especially groups defined by sex or race."

"Conforming to a particular point of view concerned with promoting tolerance and avoiding offense in matters of race, class, gender, and sexual orientation."

"Conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend ideological sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated"

"The avoidance, often considered as taken to extremes, of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against."


Montag's statement was just inhumanely mean-spirited, cruel, and cold to a fellow human in general. He was just being cold-hearted, uncaring, and not feeling any sympathy for a fellow human who was in need. That does not reach the level of the definition of PC.

The bottom line Phil Montag's remarks was not socially or culturally offensive -- it was just being plain-old, cold, mean, and nasty to the personal suffering of another human. PC is irrelevant.

"But... but... what about the people on the right who say [insert offensive material here]."

Some far right wing nut in a trailer somewhere isn't quite the same as a party official saying he's glad someone from the other party got shot.

a reply to: daskakik

I have said it in other places, but I will say it here again.

PC has stopped being about me not trying to be a d1ck when I talk about things and has instead become about how what I said, not matter how I say it, not making anyone, anywhere feel bad. In other words, it is no longer about my intent but about the impact. At that point, I lose any control over what I say and everyone else gains it.

I could make an innocent remark about leftover fried chicken and watermelon for my lunch at work, and if I say it in the hearing of a black coworker or to a black coworker, I might be making a simple statement of fact as both things are very common American foods, but the because of the association of blacks with both of those foods, that coworker might choose to interpret my simple statement of what I am having for lunch as a racial thing and report me to HR.

This is why people who are anti-PC are anti-PC, not because we all want to just be mean.

a reply to: Box of Rain

Bottom line according to you.

Republicans are a group. He even pointed out that person's function was within that group that seemed to anger him.

I get it though, "this is different".

originally posted by: ketsuko
This is why people who are anti-PC are anti-PC, not because we all want to just be mean.

You don't speak for everyone. I've seen people who use anti-PC to say whatever they want and anyone who is offended needs to suck it up and get thicker skin.

I'm sure you have seen them too.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: ketsuko
This is why people who are anti-PC are anti-PC, not because we all want to just be mean.

You don't speak for everyone. I've seen people who use anti-PC to say whatever they want and anyone who is offended needs to suck it up and get thicker skin.

I'm sure you have seen them too.

It is the same thing only less eloquently put. It's a reaction to an externally imposed morality and that's all it can be called. From the people who loudly proclaim that they don't want anyone else's morality shoved down their throats, they do an awful lot of shoving. All PC is is a system of societal morality code imposed from without instead of relying on people to self-impose it. It relies on social shaming, something else the very same people who yell loudest for it often decry loudly and imperiosly - how dare you slut shame? how dare you shame the single mother? etc., etc. ...

It has been shifted from determining whether or not someone spoke words motivated by personal animus to whether or not the speaker hated hearing what was said. If you hated hearing what was said or even just think you will, it is now "hate" speech.

It is being applied by a bunch of moral Puritans with increasing zealotry.