GB81 Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 It just hit me...my car is missing a hubcap... Should I head down to Boys Town and start rummaging through some footlockers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 but he didnt. What he said is not a racial or bigotted slur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GB81 Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 What if O'Reilly was at a chinatown function and said "they are probably outside cooking rice" I'd laugh really, really hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golgo-13 Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Originally posted by codeorama What if O'Reilly was at a chinatown function and said "they are probably outside cooking rice" Well first of all it would be different because cooking rice is not illegal, but stealing is. It's not like young black males are the only kids out there stealing hubcaps. I raised plenty of h@ll in 7th and 8th grade as I'm sure many of you did too, O'Reilly included. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Originally posted by Kilmer17 but he didnt. What he said is not a racial or bigotted slur. That's your opinion, and frankly it's my opinion too, but I don't know what you do for a living, (I work in a school system) but again, If I said that, I would without a shadow of a doubt be fired that same day, I personally have witnessed others fired for less. No one would care that I have spent countless hours and money from my own pocket supporting african american baseball players as well as white or hispanic players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 what a fag...I was starting to tolarate him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 To me it's something he should look himself in the mirror about. If his actions over the years are different from the remark he should be given the benefit of the doubt. Why was that the first thing that came to mind for him? Only he can answer that one. He would tend to give him a pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Originally posted by escholz Well first of all it would be different because cooking rice is not illegal, but stealing is. It's not like young black males are the only kids out there stealing hubcaps. I raised plenty of h@ll in 7th and 8th grade as I'm sure many of you did too, O'Reilly included. It has nothing to do with it being legal or not... And yes, I agree with your sentiment that all of us have raised hell at some time or another. Would you agree that it's possible to offend someone by saying something that you didn't think was offensive? It all depends on the person who is offended... none of us can speak for someone else. What offends you may not be offensive to me... and vice versa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 First of all, code, every analogy breaks down at some point, and when you're dealing with something as nuanced as peoples' racial sensitivities, analogizing simply isn't going to work. Secondly, the fundamental problem is that we're focused on sensitivities and offensiveness, which are all ill-defined and subjective. We've become so hypersensitive about certain things, and especially anything even suggesting race, that it's losing all meaning. I'd love for people to simply shrug off stupid comments like this rather than try to turn them into a scandal of some kind. Take an emotional step back from all of this and tell me honestly, doesn't this look a bit ridiculous? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Originally posted by redman First of all, code, every analogy breaks down at some point, and when you're dealing with something as nuanced as peoples' racial sensitivities, analogizing simply isn't going to work. Secondly, the fundamental problem is that we're focused on sensitivities and offensiveness, which are all ill-defined and subjective. We've become so hypersensitive about certain things, and especially anything even suggesting race, that it's losing all meaning. I'd love for people to simply shrug off stupid comments like this rather than try to turn them into a scandal of some kind. Take an emotional step back from all of this and tell me honestly, doesn't this look a bit ridiculous? I can agree with you 100%. I am only pointing out that deciding if something is offensive or not is in the eye of the beholder. It's not always a black and white issue (no pun intended) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Originally posted by fansince62 Hold him accountable. Just as I want to hold the left accountable for ignoring the security of this country in the service of wealth redistribution and other domestic social agendas. I want all the folks who have systematically undermined the defenses of this country to stand and shoulder responsibility. No matter how well intentioned...they are dangerous. Moreover, perhaps unintentionally, they will sell their country out in a heartbeat. Let's spread it all around fellas..... Fan, Does this include Ollie North, Ronald Reagan, Bush Sr. and Jr. too? They have all partaken in acts that ignore the security of this country. I guess though, it depends, on how you view those acts. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GB81 Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Susan Sarandon, Tim Robbins, Janeane Garofolo and all the other celebrities that have chimed in with their opinions did not put the country in danger. They are idiots, and I am in danger of becoming dumber as a result of listening to them...but they have a right to spout off about politics and the war to whomever chooses to listen. As to North, Reagan, etc... They have all partaken in acts that ignore the security of this country. That statement is really ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 GCB, Iran-Contra affair. I will give you the "shortened" Grolier's description of it, now you tell me...did arming Iran and later Nicaragua contras help the security of the US? As for Dubya, I made an unfair dig at him for going AWOL during his Texas Air National Guard days. He has more that made up for it though with this "war". From Grolier's Encyclopedia The tangled U.S. foreign-policy scandal known as the Iran-contra affair came to light in November 1986 when President Ronald REAGAN confirmed reports that the United States had secretly sold arms to Iran. He stated that the goal was to improve relations with Iran, not to obtain release of U.S. hostages held in the Middle East by terrorists (although he later acknowledged that the arrangement had in fact turned into an arms-for-hostages swap). Outcry against dealings with a hostile Iran was widespread. Later in November, Att. Gen. Edwin Meese discovered that some of the arms profits had been diverted to aid the Nicaraguan "contra" rebels--at a time when Congress had prohibited such aid. An independent special prosecutor, former federal judge Lawrence E. Walsh, was appointed to probe the activities of persons involved in the arms sale or contra aid or both, including marine Lt. Col. Oliver North of the National Security Council (NSC) staff. Reagan appointed a review board headed by former Republican senator John Tower. The Tower Commission's report in February 1987 criticized the president's passive management style. In a nationally televised address on March 4, Reagan accepted that judgment without serious disagreement. Select Congressional committees conducted joint televised hearings from May to August. They heard evidence that a few members of the NSC staff set Iran and Nicaragua policies and carried them out with secret private operatives, that the few officials who knew about these policies lied to CONGRESS and others, and that the contras received only a small part of the diverted money. Former national security advisor John Poindexter stated that he personally authorized the diversion of money and withheld that information from the president. William J. Casey, former director of the Central Intelligence Agency, who died in May 1987, was implicated in some testimony, but the extent of his involvement remained unclear. Special prosecutor Walsh continued his investigation. On Mar. 11, 1988, Poindexter's predecessor as national security advisor, Robert McFarlane, pleaded guilty to criminal charges of withholding information from Congress on secret aid to the contras. A year later McFarlane was fined $20,000 and given two years' probation. On Mar. 16, 1988, a federal grand jury indicted North, Poindexter, and two other persons on a number of charges including conspiracy to defraud the U.S. government. The trials were delayed by legal maneuvering that in part involved questions of releasing secret information. In May 1989 a jury convicted North of 3 of the 12 criminal counts he was ultimately tried on; in July the court fined him $150,000 and gave him a three-year suspended sentence. On Apr. 7, 1990, Poindexter was convicted on 5 counts of deceiving Congress and sentenced to 6 months in prison. Both the North and Poindexter convictions were subsequently set aside on the grounds that their immunized congressional testimony had been unfairly used against them. In July 1991, Alan D. Fiers, Jr., chief of CIA covert operations in Central America in 1984-86, admitted that he had lied to Congress concerning CIA involvement. Shortly thereafter, his CIA superior Clair E. George was indicted for perjury. George's first trial ended in a mistrial. In 1992 former defense secretary Caspar Weinberger was indicted on 5 counts of lying to Congress. On Dec. 24, 1992, President George BUSH pardoned all the principals charged in the scandal. Walsh's eventual report, released in 1994, scored Presidents Reagan and Bush for their roles in events related to the scandal but did not charge either with criminal wrongdoing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 that doesn't have a *amn thing to say about security. it's old news about diversion of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 edit... nevermind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GB81 Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 I'm familiar with the Iran Contra Affair. I was just pointing out that your blanket statement trivilized a very complex issue and grouped together several people whose actions aren't really related. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Originally posted by codeorama Tarhog, I totally agree with you, I wasn't saying that it's right or wrong, but I just know from my work place that there are certain things you don't say. I deal with racism several times a week. Because I'm a supervisor, I have to deal with accusations of inappropriate things said so frequently it's sickning. I have to moderate and decide what is inappropriate and what the intentions were. Like I said in my post, I can't believe that O'Reilly would be stupid enought to make a racial slur knowingly. But if he really said what he was accused of saying (if the story is even true), it was a stupid comment to make. That's all I meant. I know what you mean Code....I've gotten in the habit of hitting the 'quote' button even when my response isn't necessarily directed at anyone in particular (like your prior post)...sorry bout that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Originally posted by fansince62 that doesn't have a *amn thing to say about security. it's old news about diversion of money. fan, What part about secretly selling arms to Iran doesn't go against national security issues? For me, arming hostile nations (yeah yeah they were on our side then, or so intelligence thought) isn't a pleasant thought. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 And by the way, I apologize over dragging this into another topic. I still think O'Reilly's comments were harmless and most likely taken out of context. He is guilty of, IF ANYTHING, poor word choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckydevil Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Are we not allowed to make jokes anymore. Its really no big deal, if he really was a bigot, than he wouldnt have been there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Originally posted by Tarhog I know what you mean Code....I've gotten in the habit of hitting the 'quote' button even when my response isn't necessarily directed at anyone in particular (like your prior post)...sorry bout that No problem at all... I just didn't want anyone to misunderstand me...it's a touchy subject and I totally see both sides, while I don't like O'Reilly, I don't think he's dumb enough to have said that. But the subject rings close to home for me because I deal with it so much at work. Things that I don't find offensive are very offensive to others. Here's a great example that I was clueless about. One of my employees asked a student if they needed to be dropped off at the "shelter". All hell broke out when the child told the parent. The child and parent were staying at a homeless shelter and thought it was completely inappropriate for the bus driver to say that they lived at the "shelter" in front of all the other children, which resulted in the child getting teased. I had no Idea... The bus driver was just trying to drop the child off closer to their home rather than at the bus stop which would require them to walk. We took a ton of flak over something seemingly harmless. The comment was perceived by the parent to be racist.. saying that her child was a "homeless shelter child"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GB81 Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 That's absurd. A factual statement should not get you in trouble. If they reprimanded the bus driver in any way, he could easily sue and win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Originally posted by GGB81 That's absurd. A factual statement should not get you in trouble. If they reprimanded the bus driver in any way, he could easily sue and win. The bus driver had to take sensitivity training... I was in total shock that it was an issue at all, it amazed me... my only point is something harmless to one person is offensive to someone else... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Also, there was a history that had been there before I was hired. Evidently, the school had a similar problem in the past and everyone was previously instructed not to refer to the shelter as the "shelter", we were not even allowed to put that on our documents, we could only use the address... The bus stop was not in the immediate vacinity so that the children would not see them going to the shelter.. If you think about it, right now in Virginia, doctors offices and pharmacies are getting really weird about stuff like that too.. the Rite Aid drive through has a big sign that says "you may want to come inside for confidentiality" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GB81 Posted April 15, 2003 Share Posted April 15, 2003 Now I'm drivin' the bus... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.