U.S. Politics, 10

[Shryke]

John Stewart goes on Larry King - calls out CNN for sucking and NPR for barring its employees from attending his rally.

John Stewart has inherited the soul of HL Mencken. He really is our most valuable political commenter.

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_4KYnIkdoC0s/Sv7J9YW1-8I/AAAAAAAAOHU/vmj6aKij8K4/s800/stewart-appalled.jpg

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

I like Commodore's conspiracy theory that NPR secretly can't wait to fire anyone who works for Fox.

So do I. After all, Eric Boehlert, a Media Matters columnist, just argued that NPR should use this as an opportunity to get rid of Liaison as well.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201010210014

And NPR itself already tried to pressure her to quite because they didn't like her affiliation with FoxNews:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29892.html

So yeah, I'd say Commodore's theory is about one Zapruder film away from being gospel.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

It's an honest admission of a bigoted point of view. You can be both honest and bigoted at the same time.

I'm really curious about labelling this as bigotry. So let me ask you this. Suppose a woman is walking through a relatively deserted parking garage at night, and her anxiety level rises because she sees another person walking towards her. She relaxes a bit when she can see that the other person is a female. Is she a bigot, or prejudiced?

How about if at the point she notices it's actually a man, she decides to walk towards a more well-lit area where there are more people. Is she a bigot, or prejudiced?

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

Thinking of Mencken made me look up his wikiquote page. This shit is a gold mine

- No government is ever really in favor of so-called civil rights. It always tries to whittle them down. They are preserved under all governments, insofar as they survive at all, by special classes of fanatics, often highly dubious.

- The chief difference between free capitalism and State socialism seems to be this: that under the former a man pursues his own advantage openly, frankly and honestly, whereas under the latter he does so hypocritically and under false pretenses.

[Trebla]

I think NPR was looking to fire him and this was the excuse. Apparently they have been after him for using their name when he goes on Fox to be the token liberal. The views he expresses on Fox are generally not the same as those he expresses on NPR. If they wanted to fire him for being just another media whore they should have just done that. I say NPR is not looking good right now in this light nor in the John Stewart rally. In trying to seem unbiased they have become, well, biased.

[Commodore]

John Stewart goes on Larry King - calls out CNN for sucking and NPR for barring its employees from attending his rally.

John Stewart has inherited the soul of HL Mencken. He really is our most valuable political commenter.

Stewart - speaking truth to those not in power.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

That is pretty much my reaction. While I think Fox is a joke, I really don't think that it reflects poorly on NPR to have Williams and Liaison going on there. At least not to the point that they would need to take this kind of action.

Liaison and Williams are both good, because they argue the liberal line without being caricatures. And Juan Williams just seems like a pretty approachable, genuine guy who you could imagine having beers with without having to constantly massage his ego. Unlike someone like Bill Kristol, for example.

[TrackerNeil]

But I'll take your example. I think it might sound bad because it's politically incorrect, but I don't think it's necessarily bigoted. Suppose an AfricaniAmerican said "I get nervous walking through an all-white neighborhood at night." Do you think that would make him a bigot? I don't. It's just an honest admission.

When someone makes a statement that is not necessarily bigoted, that means the statement can easily be interpreted as bigoted. When that someone is a public figure, he had better expect a firestorm to follow. And so it has.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

When someone makes a statement that is not necessarily bigoted, that means the statement can easily be interpreted as bigoted.

Of course. It depends on the context to determine which is correct. For example, regarding the African-American neighborhood hypothetic, is it a high-crime area in which even other African-Americans might be nervous to go? Or is it a low-crime area where the only thing making you nervous is the race of the inhabitants?

By the way, you didn't answer the question about whether an African-American is a bigot for being concerned about walking through an all-white neighborhood, or whether a woman is a bigot for being more concerned about men than women in deserted parking lots. What do you think?

When that someone is a public figure, he had better expect a firestorm to follow. And so it has.

I honestly think it's a good thing, because it's a debate that should be had.

[Ken Stone]

I'm really curious about labelling this as bigotry. So let me ask you this. Suppose a woman is walking through a relatively deserted parking garage at night, and her anxiety level rises because she sees another person walking towards her. She relaxes a bit when she can see that the other person is a female. Is she a bigot, or prejudiced?

How about if at the point she notices it's actually a man, she decides to walk towards a more well-lit area where there are more people. Is she a bigot, or prejudiced?

If she crossed the street based on his race or religion she's a bigot. If she did it because of gender you could maybe argue that she is sexist, although sexist is usually understood to mean the belief that one gender is inferior to another, which doesn't really make sense in your example.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

If she crossed the street based on his race or religion she's a bigot.

No argument there, but that obviously isn't the point. Gender is.

If she did it because of gender you could maybe argue that she is sexist, although sexist is usually understood to mean the belief that one gender is inferior to another, which doesn't really make sense in your example.

Aw, you ducked that. If the situation goes as I described, is she being being prejudiced or bigoted against males by assuming they present a greater danger in a parking garage than females?

[TerraPrime]

Aw, you ducked that. If the situation goes as I described, is she being being prejudiced or bigoted against males by assuming they present a greater danger in a parking garage than females?

Out of all possible men, what is the chance that one is a rapist, in the United States?

Out of all possible Muslims, what is the chance that one is a terrorist ready to act?

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Out of all possible men, what is the chance that one is a rapist, in the United States?

Out of all possible Muslims, what is the chance that one is a terrorist ready to act?

Q: Madam, would you have sex with that man for $5M?

A: For $5M? Yes.

Q: Would you have sex with him for $10?

A: Absolutely not. What do you think I am?

Q: We've already established that, now we're just haggling about the price.

Why is it so tough to get a straight answer out of you guys? Is she being bigoted or prejudiced against males? Yes, or no?

[TerraPrime]

Q: Madam, would you have sex with that man for $5M?

A: For $5M? Yes.

Q: Would you have sex with him for $10?

A: Absolutely not. What do you think I am?

Q: We've already established that, now we're just haggling about the price.

Why is it so tough to get a straight answer out of you guys? Is she being bigoted or prejudiced against males? Yes, or no?

The answer is obvious: No, she's not.

Then, you're going to ask us why.

Then, I would be explaining the relevance of prevalence.

Hence, the questions.

[Spastic Plastic]

Why is it so tough to get a straight answer out of you guys?

Whereas you, FLOW, certainly did not just answer a question with another question. A real straight answer, that one.

[Ken Stone]

Aw, you ducked that. If the situation goes as I described, is she being being prejudiced or bigoted against males by assuming they present a greater danger in a parking garage than females?

Words are words. They mean different things to different people. The crux of your argument seems to be is a women who avoids a male on a dark street because she is worried about her safety is as "bad" as a man who get's off a plane that has a muslim on it? The difference lies in the fact that a woman who avoids a man on a dark street probably has a father, a brother, male friends and coworkers. In the right circumstances she probably loves men, and maybe even is married to one. The same can't be said for someone who hates muslims. The difference is pretty clear.

[TrackerNeil]

By the way, you didn't answer the question about whether an African-American is a bigot for being concerned about walking through an all-white neighborhood, or whether a woman is a bigot for being more concerned about men than women in deserted parking lots. What do you think?

I don't hold against people the fears they experience all alone at 2am in a strange neighborhood. I do hold against people the fears they try to rationalize in their well-lit homes or in other areas of safety. Does that answer your question?

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Whereas you, FLOW, certainly did not just answer a question with another question of your own. A real straight answer, that one.

Given that I posed the question first, I think I'm entitled to an answer first. Plus, my question is simple opinion. TP asked two purely factual questions I'd assume he could find the answer to online himself.

I spend plenty of time around here swatting back questions from folks on the left. So I present a pretty straightforward hypothetical that can be answered yes or no, and you guys do everything but answer the question.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

I don't hold against people the fears they experience all alone at 2am in a strange neighborhood. I do hold against people the fears they try to rationalize in their well-lit homes or in other areas of safety. Does that answer your question?

No, it doesn't. There were two questions, both of which can be answered yes or no.

The thing is that people love tossing about accusations of bigotry and prejudice. I'm just trying to figure out how consistently they apply those principles, and the underlying logic.

[awesome possum]

I'm really curious about labelling this as bigotry. So let me ask you this. Suppose a woman is walking through a relatively deserted parking garage at night, and her anxiety level rises because she sees another person walking towards her. She relaxes a bit when she can see that the other person is a female. Is she a bigot, or prejudiced?

How about if at the point she notices it's actually a man, she decides to walk towards a more well-lit area where there are more people. Is she a bigot, or prejudiced?

She can be neither and simply have allowed a culture of fearmongering to have left it's indelible mark on her. Why else does that same scene occur in so many horror, thriller and mystery movies?

Stewart - speaking truth to those not in power.

I wonder who you stole that from...