Dr. Laura's "N word" Rant

[JakeStarkey]

In other words, Spoonman, you have no defense. Got that. You will start using some "strong" language next to "prove" your point. Moron.

 

[Spoonman]

and once you're done reading the thread, read the first amendment.

Do you mean the part that prohibits on infringing on the freedom of speech? Just which part do you want me to read?

No one infringed on her freedom. She said what she wanted. What you want is no accountability.

So now in typical beeding heart liberal fashion you are putting limitations on what free speech is? Excuse me if I don't goose step along with you.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Go read the 1st Amendment. No infringed on her right to say what she wanted. You are suggesting the 1st Amendment somehow protects her in her private job. It does not.

 

[Spoonman]

In other words, Spoonman, you have no defense. Got that. You will start using some "strong" language next to "prove" your point. Moron.

Hmmm? What strong language did I use? Would name calling , moron be considered strong language. You fail at your own game.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nope, the word compentently describes your argumentative ability.

 

[Spoonman]

Go read the 1st Amendment. No infringed on her right to say what she wanted. You are suggesting the 1st Amendment somehow protects her in her private job. It does not.

Wrong again. But you libs always make bad assumptions. Like I said, in repressed societieswe are restricted to what we can say. Even out illustrious forefathers enacted the Alien and Sedition Acts when things got a little heated.

 

[Spoonman]

Nope, the word compentently describes your argumentative ability.

And Like I said you fail at your own game.

 

[Sheldon]

awesome.

More PC victimization going on. What is that, like the fiftieth time this thread? Whiny babies that cry because they have to live in a society with norms and customs, and the poor babies don't get to call black people ******* without being scorned.

 

[Spoonman]

awesome.

More PC victimization going on. What is that, like the fiftieth time this thread? Whiny babies that cry because they have to live in a society with norms and customs, and the poor babies don't get to call black people ******* without being scorned.

I am, aren't I.

 

[Middleman]

No, it is the point. And you are comfotable trying to censor her first amendmant right to make a point. She did nothing wrong.

The first amendment doesn't guarantee a citizen of a job as a radio advise show. If the public doesn't like what a radio host says, their job may be in jeopardy.

That's the way it is in most communist countries too. Nazi Germany was another great one for repression. In a muslim state they will behead you for saying the perceived wrong thing.

And, in capitalistic countries, sponsors are required to keep a radio show afloat. 2 major sponsors withdrew after Dr Laura's rant. Would you suggest that the government force them to sponsor a show they don't want to sponsor?

 

[Spoonman]

The first amendment doesn't guarantee a citizen of a job as a radio advise show. If the public doesn't like what a radio host says, their job may be in jeopardy.

That's the way it is in most communist countries too. Nazi Germany was another great one for repression. In a muslim state they will behead you for saying the perceived wrong thing.

And, in capitalistic countries, sponsors are required to keep a radio show afloat. 2 major sponsors withdrew after Dr Laura's rant. Would you suggest that the government force them to sponsor a show they don't want to sponsor?

Of course not. Washington is run by corporate sponsors. They no exactly how the game is played. They buck the lobbyists they lose a sponsor. No wonder America is failing.

 

[Middleman]

That's the way it is in most communist countries too. Nazi Germany was another great one for repression. In a muslim state they will behead you for saying the perceived wrong thing.

And, in capitalistic countries, sponsors are required to keep a radio show afloat. 2 major sponsors withdrew after Dr Laura's rant. Would you suggest that the government force them to sponsor a show they don't want to sponsor?

Of course not. Washington is run by corporate sponsors. They no exactly how the game is played. They buck the lobbyists they lose a sponsor. No wonder America is failing.

There is nothing new under the sun. Yes, people in power like to run things. But our system is pretty good. BTW, Dr Laura is living the good life and is not starving in the street. She has nothing to whine about, she is a rich woman, not a poor victim in a prison camp somewhere.

 

[CurveLight]

awesome.

More PC victimization going on. What is that, like the fiftieth time this thread? Whiny babies that cry because they have to live in a society with norms and customs, and the poor babies don't get to call black people ******* without being scorned.

It's hilarious you PC fucks have to straight up lie to try and stay afloat in this thread. Why don't you show where anyone in this thread has said they want to call black people "*******" in the way you pretend.

 

[Spoonman]

awesome.

More PC victimization going on. What is that, like the fiftieth time this thread? Whiny babies that cry because they have to live in a society with norms and customs, and the poor babies don't get to call black people ******* without being scorned.

It's hilarious you PC fucks have to straight up lie to try and stay afloat in this thread. Why don't you show where anyone in this thread has said they want to call black people "*******" in the way you pretend.

I'd rep you but I already reached my rep limit for the day. But I'll be sure to get you tomorrow. It's amazing how they squirm and twist and try to take things out of proportion. I, like Dr Laura, have been accused of a ton of things I didn't say or do. Those who argue against opression seem to try to oppress the most. I've got Jake Starkey who is complaining about name calling, calling names. Their hypocricy is astounding.

 

[Spoonman]

And, in capitalistic countries, sponsors are required to keep a radio show afloat. 2 major sponsors withdrew after Dr Laura's rant. Would you suggest that the government force them to sponsor a show they don't want to sponsor?

Of course not. Washington is run by corporate sponsors. They no exactly how the game is played. They buck the lobbyists they lose a sponsor. No wonder America is failing.

There is nothing new under the sun. Yes, people in power like to run things. But our system is pretty good. BTW, Dr Laura is living the good life and is not starving in the street. She has nothing to whine about, she is a rich woman, not a poor victim in a prison camp somewhere.

Yes and no change we can believe in. Obama after being critical of the damages lobbyists have caused in Washington has embraced them wholeheartedly since being elected. You may want corporations dictating what you can do, say, read or believe. But I do not. I guess I'm just not that progressive.

 

[CurveLight]

I'm still waiting for Sky or Jake to answer the question about when they use the word as a term of endearment. Is that internalized oppression? It's amazing how you have ignored that question. Well, not really. I expected it to be dodged.

 

[Spoonman]

I'm still waiting for Sky or Jake to answer the question about when they use the word as a term of endearment. Is that internalized oppression? It's amazing how you have ignored that question. Well, not really. I expected it to be dodged.

If a liberal answers a question it is usually with another question or a derogatory remark.

 

[Ravi]

But did she actually call anyone a ******? I'm not seeing that she did.

No she didn't. But she argued with the caller, claiming that Whites using the N word must be okay, since Blacks use it, totally ignoring the social reality that there is a difference.

So we can use cracker and honky and they can't? If we are all so equal, why the different rules governing what one group can or can not do. All that does is continue to perpetuate racial differences.

Yes. If you are using a word to demean someone it is a demeaning word. It really is that simple.

 

[Foxfyre]

No she didn't. But she argued with the caller, claiming that Whites using the N word must be okay, since Blacks use it, totally ignoring the social reality that there is a difference.

So we can use cracker and honky and they can't? If we are all so equal, why the different rules governing what one group can or can not do. All that does is continue to perpetuate racial differences.

Yes. If you are using a word to demean someone it is a demeaning word. It really is that simple.

You and I are absolutely on the same page here. Words intended to hurt can hurt regardless of what the words are.

But I have asked and have yet to get an answer:

If black people can use the 'n' word in a way that is not intended to hurt or demean, why can't white people do the same? Dr. Laura's whole point is that the word has no ability to demean or hurt unless it is used to demean or hurt. And why should black people have a word they can use but white people can't. Would it be acceptable for white people to have a word that black people could not use?

From the dance scene in "An Officer and a Gentleman"

As Sid and Lynette dance, Zack and Paula have some punch at the refreshment table.

ZACK
Hey, what kind of name is Pokrifki?

PAULA
Polish. What kind of name is Mayo?

ZACK
Italian. My mom was Irish. I got her
ears. But the rest is all wop.

PAULA
Where are you from, Mayo the Wop?

ZACK
Everywhere and nowhere, Paula the
Polack.

Wop and Polack can be used as offensive terms. Here they are not. Should such terms be offensive in all and every context? Or when used non offensively, are they just words?

If the 'n' word is to be the highlighted and worst offensive term in the world, then nobody should use it for anything. But if it can be placed in non offensive context in the black community. . . . .

And again I feel need to add the disclaimer: I personally don't use the 'n' word as an insult or stereotype or term of endearment. And I am uncomfortable with ALL people, black and white who do.

 

[CurveLight]

I'm still waiting for Sky or Jake to answer the question about when they use the word as a term of endearment. Is that internalized oppression? It's amazing how you have ignored that question. Well, not really. I expected it to be dodged.

If a liberal answers a question it is usually with another question or a derogatory remark.

Not cool. A binary approach is usually a unilateral fail and if I had to choose between a lib or a neocon I would choose debating the lib.