Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Toad on February 09, 2007, 08:57:32 AM
-
Edwards is quoted as saying (here (http://newsbusters.org/node/10721))
"Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but that kind of intolerant language will not be permitted from anyone on my campaign, whether it's intended as satire, humor or anything else," Edwards added, saying he believed of Marcotte and McEwan that "it was never their intention to malign anyone's faith."
But he didn't fire the bloggers so, help me out here, isn't he permitting that kind of intolerant language from two people on his campaign?
Oh... he means he'll permit it once but NEXT time...
-
I hope he keeps them. It just show what the left and J.E. are really like. They have real contempt for the rest of us. It's up to them to tell us what is best.
-
much to do about nothing! IMO
-
Marcotte and McEwan are a product of our liberal educational system, and they are not alone, be afraid, be very afraid.
-
Hey look everyone..
Toad found the next non-story.
-
Hey look everyone!! MT found a way to post without rebutting a single part of what he objected to! Again.
Puts it in perspective doesn't it MT. Perhaps posting something besides bleating about the situation could show an actual debate about it or even disprove it. Otherwise you are just putting up meaningless "text bites" (tm) like Hap has been doing that add nothing to the discussion.
-
Every cowpie the lefties roll in is a "non-story".
Gotcha.
I wonder what MT's reaction would be if a blogger hired by a Pub uttered a racist remark. Would that be a non-story?
-
I always thought a reasonable list of rules for debate would be a good sticky. Not that it would be used to pull any post ( that weren't violating forum rules), but just to quickly point out that someone was just making noise and not actually debating a point.
Here's a good starting point
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
I think MT's post would fall under
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/personal-attack.html
as most here do.
-
It did make me wonder if Edwards is a little slow or something though.
Blogger:
"Q: What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit? A: You’d have to justify your misogyny with another ancient mythology."
Edwards:
They gave me their word they, under no circumstances, intended to denigrate any church or anybody's religion
-
Did you note that these quotes were made before they were hired?
-
We need a yawning smiley right about here-->.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Did you note that these quotes were made before they were hired?
so they had a change a mind after they were hired? They were for it before they were against it? sounds like a democrat.
-
Edwards is a non contender in my opinion. Who cares what he says or does really.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Hey look everyone!! MT found a way to post without rebutting a single part of what he objected to! Again.
Puts it in perspective doesn't it MT. Perhaps posting something besides bleating about the situation could show an actual debate about it or even disprove it. Otherwise you are just putting up meaningless "text bites" (tm) like Hap has been doing that add nothing to the discussion.
Irony?
I think so.
But lets play for just a minute...
1. Bloggers make sarcastic statements about catholics.
2. Much time passes.
3. Bloggers are hired by democratic candidate.
4. Catholic group digs up old statements and gets offended by them... (I wonder why?)
5. Democratic candidate says yep those things won't happen any more.
6. And they don't.
did I miss something?
-
Yes, I think the looming question is if it was a racist statement would they still be working for Edwards, and are there two standards- one for racial bigotry and one for religious bigotry? Why two standards?
That wasn't on your list and I think its an interesting question.
-
Yer undoubtedly right MT.
They had a huge sea-change in the way they think the instant they got hired.
The both have made a pilgrimage to Rome to seek the Pope's blessing and advice as they enter this new phase of their lives. At least that's what I heard.
I guess a politician hiring reformed KKK white supremacist bloggers would be OK as long as they haven't worn the sheet for 48 hours prior to hiring, right?
Gotta love this place.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Did you note that these quotes were made before they were hired?
Wow.. thanks for the heads up.
Now I see that "Q: What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit? A: You’d have to justify your misogyny with another ancient mythology."
really isn't "intended to denigrate any church or anybody's religion".
It's all in the timing! Why didn't I see that?
Denigration is a timing thing. Gotcha.
-
Originally posted by rpm
We need a yawning smiley right about here-->. (http://forum.ge/html/emoticons/yawn.gif)
-
Do you think people act differently at work than at home? Do you think they should be expected to?
You want to hold an employee responsible for actions taken prior to being hired and when said actions were taken in a PERSONAL blog. If you found out a married teacher sent a love letter to someone other than his spouse a year before he was hired, yet he had been an exemplary employee, you would fire him?
Really?
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Irony?
I think so.
But lets play for just a minute...
1. Bloggers make sarcastic statements about catholics.
2. Much time passes.
3. Bloggers are hired by democratic candidate.
4. Catholic group digs up old statements and gets offended by them... (I wonder why?)
5. Democratic candidate says yep those things won't happen any more.
6. And they don't.
did I miss something?
Yes you did miss something. I suppose the first thing you missed was actually posting anything of substance earlier which was why I responded to your earlier post.
The second thing is that people are responsible for their writings and should expect to be taken to task for them when they are hired to write. I suppose you would think it's perfectly OK for someone like a blogger for the KKK to be hired by the NAACP. You wouldn't find that to be questionable now would you? If that's not to your liking how about reversing the career chronology of my example.
The next thing would be to take to task the person who actually hired the blogger without having done any background research on who they were hiring to represent them. I suppose you could think of it as doing their homework.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Do you think people act differently at work than at home? Do you think they should be expected to?
You want to hold an employee responsible for actions taken prior to being hired and when said actions were taken in a PERSONAL blog. If you found out a married teacher sent a love letter to someone other than his spouse a year before he was hired, yet he had been an exemplary employee, you would fire him?
Really?
So as long as the bigotry is on a personal site and in the past its OK?
-
Originally posted by Toad
Wow.. thanks for the heads up.
Now I see that "Q: What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit? A: You’d have to justify your misogyny with another ancient mythology."
really isn't "intended to denigrate any church or anybody's religion".
It's all in the timing! Why didn't I see that?
Denigration is a timing thing. Gotcha.
Funny.. but
Your original post said "Oh... he means he'll permit it once but NEXT time..."
He didn't permit it at all. It happened BEFORE he hired them and he didn't know about it until this BS came out in the press. He NEVER permitted his EMPLOYEES to say those things.
-
Hmmmm.....Republican congressman is caught sending dirty e-mails to an underage intern. No sexual contact ever took place.....but Democrats, and their supporters on these bbs, are outraged....OUTRAGED that is!
Republican congressman from Mississippi makes complimentary remarks at the funeral of an elderly congressman who made "racist" remarks a half century ago....and is vilified by Democrats, and their supporters on these bbs, who are outraged....OUTRAGED I say!
A democratic congressman hires two twit-brained bloggers who made offensive statements about the Christian religion....and Democrats and their supporters on these bbs, being somewhat less than outraged, defend the action by saying that these statements were made BEFORE they were hired and therefore, for some reason, should not count against them.
That seems fair.
-
Oh yea.. fair is fair. I remember clearly the outrage from the conservative BBS'ers about those topics... Oh yes I remember it well.
-
First time I seen this thead I glanced and I swear it said ...
"Edwards has Boogers"
My Bad.
Mac
-
It's depressing to think that the election isn't until next November. :(
I'll tell ya'll something funny about Japan. They have a "Campaign Season" that begins about 3 weeks before an election. No campaigning or speeches before that. No huge political rallies or conventions. Candidates have less than a month to annoy everyone.
-
Are there two standards of bigotry - one for racial bigotry and one for religious bigotry? Obviously the bloggers are religious bigots. Is that acceptable to Edwards? Would racial bigotry be acceptable? Why religious bigotry and not racial bigotry?
IMO, its far from a "non-story." It gives some insight into Edward's character, I think. Its like the playstation all over again- logically inconsistent.
-
Originally posted by Rolex
It's depressing to think that the election isn't until next November. :(
I'll tell ya'll something funny about Japan. They have a "Campaign Season" that begins about 3 weeks before an election. No campaigning or speeches before that. No huge political rallies or conventions. Candidates have less than a month to annoy everyone.
No chit... too early and now I REALLY miss all the Tampon Commercials.
:huh
Mac
-
As Lewis Black said " I wish the Democrats and Republicans would take the 2008 election off." After the last year and a half I can't take it anymore.
I tend to agree. Think.....all we could get for Presidential Candidates for the last 2 Presidential elections was Gore vs. Bush.....and Kerry vs. Bush.
I'm at a loss anyone else? I mean is this the best we could do?
It's like no one of mental substance wants the job anymore.
Lewis Black "Its time for a dead President." 'I think Reagans time has come again." "No one but no one would screw with us."
Ya know....that wouldn't be a bad idea...last 15 years of the same old Politics......and lack of any action of consequence....Dead just might be better then we've had recently. :aok
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Oh yea.. fair is fair. I remember clearly the outrage from the conservative BBS'ers about those topics... Oh yes I remember it well.
Here you go (http://forums.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=188768&highlight=foley)
Amongst the many calls from many posters for Foley to be prosecuted, this is just one of mine.
Who is downplaying it? What I see is folks saying prosecute him to the full extent of the law.
That's how I feel about it.
Is yer memory starting to fail?
-
The other fair solution from Lewis Black involves parachuting the monkey out of a plane to pick the Prez.
That would be even better than the Japanese political season idea.
-
I found this on NewsBusters
---
Gordon Peterson: "A word on the pitfalls of the blogosphere, a couple of young women working on the John Edwards campaign have, on their personal blogs, a history of taking shots at conservative Christians and Catholics. One of them said the Catholic Church's ban on artificial birth control, for example, forced women to give birth to more tithing Catholics. Bill Donohue, conservative president of Catholic League, says he's going to take out newspaper ads now attacking Edwards as anti-Catholics. Edwards says the remark offended him. ... As of Friday, he hadn't fired the bloggers. Mark?"
Mark Shields: "He had not fired the bloggers, and I hesitate to come down on the same side as Bill Donohue, who himself has been more than intemperate on more than one occasion, but I think here he's right. I mean, the stuff that they wrote on there was graphic, pornographic. I mean, one of the quotes was, 'What if the Virgin Mary,' a central figure in Christianity, 'had taken Plan B,' morning after pill, 'after the Lord filled her with hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit?' Now, if she had written similarly about a Jewish person, an Islamic person, a gay or a lesbian, she would be banished to the outer darkness."
----
From http://newsbusters.org/node/10753
Keeping this type of bigotry on a campaign is just wrong. I believe it will end Edward's campaign. He should've fired them immediately. Far from being a "non-story", I don't think this will ever go away and that other Democrat candidates will use it against him.
Its indefensible. Religious bigotry is no more tolerable than racial bigotry.
-
Toad you believe that the Monkeys from the Wizard of Oz came from North Korea?
I didn't know that until Mr Black informed me on HBO!