Dennis Prager complains "the Left has made it impossible to say the N-word any longer,"

[grego]

i'm seeing his words completely differently.

 

this appears to me as another example of two movies on one screen. what i'm seeing people say that he's saying is not what I see him saying. i'm not seeing him complaining that he can't use the word to call people the word, I see him saying that you can't say the word if you were, for example, quoting somebody- you have to stop and say 'n-word'. 

 

george carlin says it better

 

<mod edit video>

 

 

[TradeTheBeal!]

George Carlin is a comedian and Dennis Prager is a racist.  Critical distinction that should be obvious to everyone.

[Larry]

16 minutes ago, grego said:

this appears to me as another example of two movies on one screen. what i'm seeing people say that he's saying is not what I see him saying. i'm not seeing him complaining that he can't use the word to call people the word, I see him saying that you can't say the word if you were, for example, quoting somebody- you have to stop and say 'n-word'. 

 

Although, that's not quite the case, is it?  

 

I will point once again to Blazing Saddles.  I don;t see anybody complaining about that movie using that word.  (Except in the case of people trying to argue "Well, Mel Brooks used it.  So I should be able to call Barack Obama that word, and not have people look at me funny.")  

 

And, me?  I'd assert that the reason why Mel Brooks can use that word over and over again?  

 

Mel Brooks isn't using that word to insult blacks.  He's using it to insult whites.  Every person who uses that word in his movie, is an idiot hick who's being made fun of.  

 

And I think that makes a difference.  The intent behind the use.  

 

And yes, in a lot of cases, you use that word, and some people are going to jump to the wrong conclusion about your intent.  (And sometimes, they'll come to a conclusion that you think is wrong, and they're really correct.)  

 

8 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said:

George Carlin is a comedian and Dennis Prager is a racist.  Critical distinction that should be obvious to everyone.

 

Oh, had to jump in there with a simple, clear, one-line, statement of the point that I was busy typing a five-paragraph elaboration on, didn't you?

Edited February 14, 2020 by Larry

[CousinsCowgirl84]

1 hour ago, mistertim said:

 

Huh. And here I was thinking it was hundreds of years of slavery, racism, and segregation that made that word cost too much to say. But it was the left the whole time. Oh liberals, you crafty sons of ****es!

Well, I guess it was people “them” “the left” who stood up for themselves to point out the brutality of the word after being told to sit down or stand up, who made the word too expensive to say, not the bigotry it represents by itself.

 

So “the blame” for not being able to afford using the word is laid on the people who spoke up, not on individual morality and “goodness”.

 

 

Edited February 14, 2020 by CousinsCowgirl84

[grego]

25 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said:

George Carlin is a comedian and Dennis Prager is a racist.  Critical distinction that should be obvious to everyone.

 

there is a certain amount of license given to comedians, no doubt (I think there should be). I have no idea if prager is a racist, but i'm positive that presumption is coloring the view of the audience. 

 

in that clip, I hear him and carlin making the same point- the intent matters. I believe this is his point, because he says as much. he says it's despicable to call someone the word, which is different from using it to say "X called someone ….the n-word".

Edited February 14, 2020 by grego

[Spaceman Spiff]

[Llevron]

12 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

Well, I guess it was people “them” “the left” who stood up for themselves to point out the brutality of the word after being told to sit down or stand up, who made the word too expensive to say, not the bigotry it represents by itself.

 

So “the blame” for not being able to afford using the word is laid on the people who spoke up, not on individual morality and “goodness”.

 

1 hour ago, mistertim said:

 

Huh. And here I was thinking it was hundreds of years of slavery, racism, and segregation that made that word cost too much to say. But it was the left the whole time. Oh liberals, you crafty sons of ****es!

 

 

 

I like both of these answers, honestly. But your first one did kind of land funny @CousinsCowgirl84. Second one has me feeling where you are coming from much better tho

[Jumbo]

good ole grego

 

when he does post on racial issues he routinely tries to make sure there's minimal overstepping or exaggeration of the problem of racism

 

prioritization is a key matter imo----"the issue i'm focused on, whether the given example fits or not,  is that it should be, and needs to be, ok for white people to use that word in some situations and that people who are overly sensitive to its usage get in the way of that, and that is a real problem, too" 

 

 

minimize ("you guys see racism everywhere"), deflect (shift focus), reject ("nuh-uh")---in the end, it's more or less the same ole diatribe of "you must beware the baba yaga that is 'political correctness' for it will surely devour us"

 

while i was typing he went again, in the same fashion ---"i have no idea if he's a racist" he says....maybe that would be something to check out before posting on how you imagine his intentions...a lot of what he says would seem to be right up your alley...racism is greatly exaggerated and a lie perpetuated by "the left"

 

 

 

 

 

 

[tshile]

8 minutes ago, grego said:

in that clip, I hear him and carlin making the same point- the intent matters

 

Intent does matter. In fact, I've participated in multiple arguments about the general idea of intent of the speaker vs reception by the audience. I've always, and always will, take the side that the intent of the speaker is what matters. I think its absurd that a person may say something and have genuine sincere intent, but the audience hears it a different way and then a mob goes after the speaker (fired, ridiculed, assaulted, whatever.)  Especially right now when there's a subset of the social justice warriors that seems to live their day-to-day life seeing nothing but racism, sexism and bigotry; that's what they hear, that's what they see, no matter the actual context. To allow them to harm someone else because of their own shortcomings in their worldview is absurd. IE: The people claiming the reason Warren didn't get more speaking time in the last debate is because she's a woman... she's been a lead candidate in speaking time in majority, if not all the rest, of the debates. The entire argument is dumb.

 

But...

 

Intent is used much like 'It's my opinion, you have to respect it.' That is - people use this general idea of "that's not what I meant" to provide cover when, in reality, it is what they meant. It's up to each individual to determine that. There's no hard or fast rules on it. This is where one's critical thinking either shines or doesn't.

 

So when I hear this guy whining about how he can't use the n-word because of "the left", and that "it's the only word in the English language we can't use", what I hear is bull****. 

 

He knows damn well that the word causes emotional harm to certain people. He knows damn well that a mature adult understands that. And he's not so clueless as to not understand how that plays in the bigger picture of our society. He also knows this isn't a "the left" thing, and he also knows it's not "the only word" either.

 

There are thoughtful ways to make the argument he's pretending to make. He was not thoughtful. My critical thinking ability (or lack there of, if so) tells me what he was actually doing there. 

 

[Dan T.]

Prager has a point (though not the left bull****).  I don't know of him, though I assume he's some kind of Rush Limbaugh clone, so he is far from the best messenger for that point.

 

The word is the third rail of speech.  There is no other word in the English language so dangerous to use.  Its status as the absolute taboo has given it a strange destructive power. 

 

There was a case several years back locally where a DC government official was forced to resign after he used - not THE word - but the word "niggardly" in describing how he would have to manage a tight budget. The N-word is so fraught that he lost his job by using a word that SOUNDED like the N-word, even though the two words share no etymology.

 

~~~

 

Larry's example about "Blazing Saddles" is instructive.  Even though the word is used to MOCK those who would use it to disparage, networks still bleep it out.   

 

All that said, I'm not calling for the word to be freed.  It deserves extinction.  I'm just observing the phenomenon that has arisen in efforts to wipe away its existence.

 

Edit: tshile just above articulated much better my point about Prager being the wrong person to raise this issue.

 

Edited February 14, 2020 by Dan T.

[grego]

1 minute ago, tshile said:

 

 

There are thoughtful ways to make the argument he's pretending to make. He was not thoughtful. My critical thinking ability (or lack there of, if so) tells me what he was actually doing there. 

 

 

I think you hit on something. i'm looking at the claim on it's face (is it true, or is it false), not how it was made (thoughtfully or not), his political stances, or why he thinks the status quo surrounding the taboo on the word is as it is. (I agree that these other claims regarding blame are clearly up for debate).

 

 

[tshile]

5 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

  There is no other word in the English language so dangerous to use. 

I just don't know how true this is. There are other words.

Chink was used by an ESPN personality to describe an asian player in the NBA that was a hot topic. That person described a shortcoming of he's game as "A chink in the armor"

 

That's not the best example, but I think there are a few words that fall into that category. I'm open to the idea i'm wrong.

 

I actually thought of the same DC council example, but I thought of it more as my argument of intent vs reception. The problem there was the people who heard the word, didn't actually know what the word was 😂

 

(Also the problem that can always be asked: There's lots of words in our language, did you have to use that one?)

 

[Dan T.]

10 minutes ago, tshile said:

I just don't know how true this is. There are other words.

Chink was used by an ESPN personality to describe an asian player in the NBA that was a hot topic. That person described a shortcoming of he's game as "A chink in the armor"

 

That's not the best example, but I think there are a few words that fall into that category. I'm open to the idea i'm wrong.

 

 

Without belaboring the point, if a newspaper article was describing the incident you mention, it would not censor out "chink."  Or just about any other disparaging word.  But n-word would get blocked.  That's my point.  Not a judgement by any means, but an observation. 

Edited February 14, 2020 by Dan T.

[Larry]

15 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

Larry's example about "Blazing Saddles" is instructive.  Even though the word is used to MOCK those who would use it to disparage, networks still bleep it out.

 

They do?  

 

I used to say the movie would never be shown on television.  Because they'd habe to remove that word.  And if they did, then there's no movie left.  

 

And then they showed it on the network, and left that word in.  (And removed a lot of other words that I didn't know were bad words, till they removed them,)  

 

But now days, they remove it?  

 

Might be evidence that maybe times have changed.  

 

[grego]

41 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

good ole grego

 

 

 

I know you love me. it's valentines day, after all. 

[Dan T.]

10 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

They do?  

 

I used to say the movie would never be shown on television.  Because they'd habe to remove that word.  And if they did, then there's no movie left.  

 

And then they showed it on the network, and left that word in.  (And removed a lot of other words that I didn't know were bad words, till they removed them,)  

 

But now days, they remove it?  

 

Might be evidence that maybe times have changed.  

 

 

From IDMB

 

The standard cable and commercial broadcast versions omit racial slurs and some bad language. Extent of the editing is contingent on whether the TV-PG, or TV-14 version is being shown.

 

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071230/alternateversions

 

 

 

 

[Jumbo]

15 minutes ago, grego said:

 

I know you love me. it's valentines day, after all. 

 

i love everybody....love hurts

 

 

i still have the pm you sent me with a valentines day type question in it----it was many moons ago when i first kind of challenged you on this same sort of thing after seeing it a few times....i never answered your pm cuz it just came off poorly, but not ban-worthy at all

 

also at that time, btw, there was another mod with a similar view on the matter (and he had another issue with you if i remember) who was thinking of banning you from the tailgate and i suggested waiting awhile and then you stopped posting in here for the most part and so it went 

 

life's hard in the mean streets but everyday is still full of possibilities

[TradeTheBeal!]

To further illustrate my point...

 

My mother, whom I love dearly, is in her early 70s but due to some unfortunate consequences of her lifestyle and life choices is now essentially elderly...housebound, on 24 hour oxygen and showing signs of early-onset dementia.  Nevertheless, a wonderful person to converse with despite all of that.

 

BUT...if I were to visit her, as I did this Valentines Day morning with card and candy, and she were to look me in the eye and say, with all seriousness, something along the lines off “Dennis Prager and George Carlin are birds of a feather”, I would have her committed to the cheapest, dingiest nursing home I could find, and quickly.  

 

And do so with extreme prejudice and clear conscience as I know it was for the best.

 

Happy Valentine’s Day, Mom!

 

[grego]

11 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

 

i love everybody....love hurts

 

 

i still have the pm you sent me with a valentines day type question in it----it was many moons ago when i first kind of challenged you on this same sort of thing after seeing it a few times....i never answered your pm cuz it just came off poorly, but not ban-worthy at all

 

also at that time, btw, there was another mod with a similar view on the matter (and he had another issue with you if i remember) who was thinking of banning you from the tailgate and i suggested waiting awhile and then you stopped posting in here for the most part and so it went 

 

 

I honestly don't remember having an issue with any mod, or saying something that would have been remotely ban worthy, so i'm surprised to hear that. I really worry about the division and polarization in society today and, as a result, I've tried to make it a point to not contribute to it by being snarky, insulting or dismissive, but, rather, to try to understand where people are coming from. I've been rather unsuccessful in that endeavor, unfortunately, which has resulted in me reading and not posting so much. to hear that I was on the ban list is a but surprising given my propensity for self flagellation for being a jackass.

2 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said:

 

 

BUT...if I were to visit her, as I did this Valentines Day morning with card and candy, and she were to look me in the eye and say, with all seriousness, something along the lines off “Dennis Prager and George Carlin are birds of a feather”, I would have her committed to the cheapest, dingiest nursing home I could find, and quickly.  

 

 

 

sorry to hear about your mom. I can relate- my mom has early onset dementia that's been getting progressively worse for years. 

 

(I don't believe that prager and carlin are birds of a feather)

[Larry]

I just want to complain about not being able to discuss Lee A****er's Southern Strategy, because somebody decided to censor my language without any consideration of context.  

 

Clearly the work of extreme right wingers trying to impose their will on the national dialogue.  

 

I blame Dan Snyder.  

 

- - - - 

 

See?  Censoring words without consideration of context is stupid.  

Edited February 14, 2020 by Larry

[mistertim]

6 minutes ago, Larry said:

I just want to complain about not being able to discuss Lee A****er's Southern Strategy, because somebody decided to censor my language without any consideration of context.  

 

Clearly the work of extreme right wingers trying to impose their will on the national dialogue.  

 

I blame Dan Snyder.  

 

- - - - 

 

See?  Censoring words without consideration of context is stupid.  

 

No kidding. I can't even talk about my love of sal****er taffy in here without being censored.

 

Thanks, Obama. 

[Dan T.]

1 hour ago, Larry said:

I just want to complain about not being able to discuss Lee A****er's Southern Strategy, because somebody decided to censor my language without any consideration of context.  

 

Clearly the work of extreme right wingers trying to impose their will on the national dialogue.  

 

I blame Dan Snyder.  

 

- - - - 

 

See?  Censoring words without consideration of context is stupid.  

I agree whole-heartedly. In fact, the next time we meet the ****tails are on me. . . D’OH. 

[China]

5 hours ago, Jumbo said:

 

i love everybody....love hurts

 

 

No, that's VD.

[Kosher Ham]

Oh my. Are you suggesting that the swelling made Jumbo? 

[China]

What The? Dennis Prager Claims ‘There is No Secular Argument Against Adult Consensual Incest’

 

Right-wing commentator Dennis Prager peculiarly declared “there’s no secular argument against adult incest.”

 

About a month after Prager said there were “many nice slaveowners” living in the South before the Civil War, Jason Campbell flagged Prager on Tuesday when he argued that the Bible forbids men and women from wearing each others’ clothing. Prager concluded his show by claiming Leftism and the Bible are completely incompatible, then he went into a tangent where he said “none of you have a secular argument” against family incest.

 

Quote

There’s no secular argument against adult incest. Brother and sister want to make love, what’s your argument? That they’re going to produce mentally retarded offspring? That’s nonsense. It takes many generations of inbreeding to do that. There is no secular argument against adult consensual incest. There is a religious argument — sex cannot enter family life. It’s a big taboo.

 

See, people think we can live without the greatest source of wisdom and morality in the history of the world, the Bible. That’s what they think. Even some secular conservatives think that. They don’t realize that they’re living on the fumes of the Judeo-Christian value system. But if you ultimately extract those flowers from the soil that nurtured them, those flowers will wither and die. I don’t want to see that happen.

 

Click on the link for the full article