Look-a-like thread for LeBron

[District-Husky]

Interesting. So it appears we use terms when they are uncommon and common descriptions or perceptions. So, I was making a joke and I see no one jumped on my sexism! You guys are really funny and your macho banter makes me wish I was a dude so I might be good at it. Also, it appears we need a game, eh? Or some babysheep to get pissed off at. For what it's worth, my ten year old watches b.ball alone, with no one's opinion influencing him, and he tells me LeBron is a big show off who loves himself too much! I know this because I bought him a LeBron shatter tee for Christmas and it is not the type of player he wants to emulate.

Whoa - who let a woman into this thread?!?!?!

 

[District-Husky]

Daddy Chocolate - go buy this partially black and use it. And remember, no matter how much you think YouTube sucker punch videos represent the world, nobody raises his hand to me for any reason. Ever. I don't get in street fights with animals. I defend myself, only when necessary, but then absolutely.

Dude - I just raised my hand at you.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

Daddy Chocolate - go buy this partially black and use it. And remember, no matter how much you think YouTube sucker punch videos represent the world, nobody raises his hand to me for any reason. Ever. I don't get in street fights with animals. I defend myself, only when necessary, but then absolutely.

http://nokautimg4.pl/p-7c-6e-7c6e250bcb84fabe2f3d0957e55a7d8c500x500/vulcanite-anal-.jpg

OK, now we've got an articulation about ONE difference between a white and a black .

The key thing that Prezidint fails to acknowledge is that skin color is an undeniable factor in US society. Those who don't possess the majority skin color and its cultural assumptions aren't afforded the opportunity to "opt out" of the discussion. As a member of the white kids club, I get to read this thread with a combination of offense, laughter, bewilderment, futility, and so on. But then, I get to say, "OK, break time is over," and turn off the channel, pretty much without a second thought. Heck, I could even get a weapon and smugly imagine that I'm insulated against somebody calling me to task for assumptions that are just part of the package that white folks don't even have to strap on each day, but instead carry without a clue. In a closed circle, sure, the comic effect of the word "black" bumps it up. But on an open board, where's the surprise when somebody says, "Hold on a moment?" The pre-gun "I wasn't talking to you" protest just doesn't apply. Consider using this as an opportunity to grow in political 'consciousness,' not 'political correctness,' rather than, in effect, saying, "Screw that. I've got a gun."

Big props for the flow chart, and shout-outs for equal opportunity offensiveness.

Finally, mittens do allow each finger to cuddle up with one another; some people are into that.

If I have only one thread to read today, I guess it might as well be this one.

. . . give peace a chance.

 

[BlueMAB]

But then when I think of dook I think of the phrase 'big doofy white guys', which is interesting because I think most doofy guys are white.

I agree, but then I think about Mandledove and how perfectly doofy describes him.

 

[BlueMAB]

If you want to help bring an end to racism, stop confusing white people by making the argument it's better to call a black man a "" than "black".

 

[jleves]

nobody raises his hand to me for any reason. Ever. I don't get in street fights with animals. I defend myself, only when necessary, but then absolutely.

So who wins in a cage fight - Prez or STBill?

 

[mets1090]

So who wins in a cage fight - Prez or STBill?

Hollow points can't penetrate a 6'6 250 pound frame

 

[Prezidint]

Dude - I just raised my hand at you.

 

[Prezidint]

I agree, but then I think about Mandledove and how perfectly doofy describes him.

Mandledove, being black, is better described as "bloofy." Few black men are goofy. Most are smooth. But see the "hide your kids, hide your wife" guy.

 

[Prezidint]

Heck, I could even get a weapon and smugly imagine that I'm insulated against somebody calling me to task for assumptions that are just part of the package that white folks don't even have to strap on each day, but instead carry without a clue.

This is the thought process that a person develops growing up in white, suburban America, where the threat of unprovoked violence is virtually non-existent. Calling me to task? Nobody has the right to confront me in public because they don't like something that I say that is not directed at them.

On the minority issue:
It's one of the great failings of white America that it thinks it knows what non-whites feel based on the idealistic simple mindedness that is learned from books, TV, and whatever other non-corporeal input they received while eating Mallowmars and drinking fresh, never frozen, orange juice (not orange drink) from a far away place.

Who gets bothered by me referencing LePrick as a big black ?

It wouldn't be the black dudes I was hanging out with. They'd be laughing and thinking the image was hilarious. It would be the professor. Or the social theorist. Or the angry black militant type. It wouldn't be the rank and file black Americans who have no issue with being black and who don't feel the need to try to control the words other people use.

I have no issues with race because I grew up in a mixed race area. Saying that somebody was black, or describing Jabbar as a giant black beanpole, or anything of that sort, would never have raised an eyebrow in my peer group because they were neither frightened suburban whites or angry men looking to pick fights.

 

[Dann]

 

[Prezidint]

That's Bloofy.

 

[District-Husky]

That's funny.

BTW - is that a Dead Kennedy's avatar?

 

[Prezidint]

That's funny.

BTW - is that a Dead Kennedy's avatar?

You're in the right genre, but not the DKs.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

Calling me to task? Nobody has the right to confront me in public because they don't like something that I say that is not directed at them.

An understandable if misguided bit of cherry-picking here. I'm OK with your selecting what to quote from my post, but you remain curiously silent on the sentences that followed, which drew a distinction between publicly made comments not directed at someone but perhaps overheard, and comments made on a message board. Of course others have standing for confronting you on a message board. Your subsequent leap to armed defense is just macho posturing -- spicy, but with zero nutritional value. To adopt your logic and tone, I can't see anything but a black claim being made by a white (with a gun, just in case white skin and anonymous cover aren't enough protection).

 

[Prezidint]

An understandable if misguided bit of cherry-picking here. I'm OK with your selecting what to quote from my post, but you remain curiously silent on the sentences that followed.

I wasn't sure what your post was attempting to convey.
While verbosity and complex syntax do not always result in enigmatic meaning, in your case they often do.
Your writing style reminds me of a good friend in law school who was an English major. He had just spent 4 years working very hard to make his sentences complex, floral, and otherwise distinct from, if not, sadly, better than his peers, and it was quite a shock for him to be told that he needed to write much more directly and simply.

So then Hans.

I'll answer whatever question you have, but can you make the query lucid to a simpleton like me?

BTW - there is no macho posturing. I'm not a macho guy. I'm not interested in macho things, like getting in fights out in public. That's why I carry a gun. A gun prevents virtually all that macho silliness that young men who are full of beans and testosterone tend to seek.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

I wasn't sure what your post was attempting to convey.
While verbosity and complex syntax do not always result in enigmatic meaning, in your case they often do.
Your writing style reminds me of a good friend in law school who was an English major. He had just spent 4 years working very hard to make his sentences complex, floral, and otherwise distinct from, if not, sadly, better than his peers, and it was quite a shock for him to be told that he needed to write much more directly and simply.

So then Hans.

I'll answer whatever question you have, but can you make the query lucid to a simpleton like me?

BTW - there is no macho posturing. I'm not a macho guy. I'm not interested in macho things, like getting in fights out in public. That's why I carry a gun. A gun prevents virtually all that macho silliness that young men who are full of beans and testosterone tend to seek.

If you are out in public and make a comment to friends that is overheard, and the comment offends someone to whom it was not directed, your gun gives you protection. That seems a little extreme to me, but it's your mindset and apparently a legal right where you reside.

If you are on a basketball fans' semi-public message board and you make a comment that another board participant questions for its potential to inflame a sensitive subject, your bringing up the gun seems quite extreme and rises to the level of douchery.

Not a query, but you're not a simpleton.

 

[Prezidint]

If you are on a basketball fans' semi-public message board and you make a comment that another board participant questions for its potential to inflame a sensitive subject, your bringing up the gun seems quite extreme and rises to the level of douchery.

Ok. That was clear as day, and I understand.

Can I confirm that you are anti-gun rights? In other words, you believe, assuming that you're American, that I shouldn't have the right to carry a handgun on my person?

The only reason that I brought up the gun was in response to a young angry man who wrote that, were I to refer to a black man as black to his face, then I would be subject to having my nose "bone" driven through my brain cavity. I thought it presented a good teaching opportunity, both to the young angry man who believes that being assaulted and battered in a violent manner would be an appropriate response to taking offense at another's words, and to those reading this thread who have, perhaps, considered arming themselves but haven't yet, e-hem, pulled the trigger.

Point is this Hans. My statement was not meant as bravado. It was meant as a retort to the plainly leveled threat that, if I didn't mind my manners, be a good boy, and cower in public, then I would be beaten.

Of course, the threat was not existential from the perspective of the young angry man, but his sentiment represents the sentiment of many, who understand that a violent assault and battery can usually be plea bargained into a short jail sentence or "community service."

Those who are awake see that the general civil discourse in America is becoming more violent. And the ability of the criminal justice system to restrain that trend is waning.

My opinion is that, if you have children or a woman who depends on you for safety, you have a moral obligation to arm yourself.

The state has become less secure. Random violence has increased markedly. Female violence has increased. Economic deterioration has caused a general increase in tensions.

 

[District-Husky]

Ok. That was clear as day, and I understand.

Can I confirm that you are anti-gun rights? In other words, you believe, assuming that you're American, that I shouldn't have the right to carry a handgun on my person?

The only reason that I brought up the gun was in response to a young angry man who wrote that, were I to refer to a black man as black to his face, then I would be subject to having my nose "bone" driven through my brain cavity. I thought it presented a good teaching opportunity, both to the young angry man who believes that being assaulted and battered in a violent manner would be an appropriate response to taking offense at another's words, and to those reading this thread who have, perhaps, considered arming themselves but haven't yet, e-hem, pulled the trigger.

Point is this Hans. My statement was not meant as bravado. It was meant as a retort to the plainly leveled threat that, if I didn't mind my manners, be a good boy, and cower in public, then I would be beaten.

Of course, the threat was not existential from the perspective of the young angry man, but his sentiment represents the sentiment of many, who understand that a violent assault and battery can usually be plea bargained into a short jail sentence or "community service."

Those who are awake see that the general civil discourse in America is becoming more violent. And the ability of the criminal justice system to restrain that trend is waning.

My opinion is that, if you have children or a woman who depends on you for safety, you have a moral obligation to arm yourself.

The state has become less secure. Random violence has increased markedly. Female violence has increased. Economic deterioration has caused a general increase in tensions.

Actually, violence in America is in decline, and has been for quite some time. If you look at historical levels of violence, we are living in the safest time in human history (unless you're black and living in a ghetto in Detroit or St. Louis or New Orleans). Now - yes - the "news" will report every night a murder or rape or robbery - but that sensationalist reporting is not representative of the actual stats. There are lots of studies on this - here's a brief one from Scientific American:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-decline-of-violence

My own experience - I've lived in large cities in the northeast since 1993 - and I have never been the victim of a crime. And - I've lived in transitional areas of those cities (like the fringes of North Philadelphia and the fringes of Southeast DC). Are there crimes in these areas - sure. Are there violent crimes - sometimes. Are we living in a time of when the general discourse is becoming more violent? No - unless you're talking about politicians and sound bits for the "news."

All that said - if you want to carry a gun, that's your right (assuming your state allows conceal carry).

 

[Prezidint]

Actually, violence in America is in decline, and has been for quite some time.

The official statistics clearly support what you write. The official statistics, however, do not reflect the general move toward violent interaction that has occurred in the country for several reasons.

Start with this - girl walking home from school is accosted by several others and kicked and punched.

Will that show up on your chart under Aggravated Assault?

How about this one -

Crazy guy in tavern doesn't like guy talking to his girlfriend. Waits for the guy to go to juke box. He then picks up a frisbee-sized glass ashtray and splits the other guy's head open with it. Ends up pleaing out to simple assault and doing 6 months in jail.

Will that show up on your chart under Aggravated Assault?

The point I'm trying to make - and I grant that it's not compelling without more research (which I don't have the inclination to perform) is that reported crime statistics don't necessarily reflect the type of violence that I contend has increased in the U.S., dramatically - which is the kind where people are accosted in public over minor slights, and a physical confrontation ensues.

In an attempt to end my participation in the thread on a positive note, I hope that we murder Rutgers tonight, and I expect that we will.

 

[Rico444]

In an attempt to end my participation in the thread on a positive note, I hope that we murder Rutgers tonight, and I expect that we will.

I agree. I hope our big black douches beat the crap out of their big black douches.

 

[jfuchs91]

Prezidint, what if the "big black " that you pull your gun on is Gilbert Arenas?

 

[champs99and04]

I need a flow chart update

 

[UCDaveD]

FrankIvy rules!