I need a caption for this pic.
Saturday, February 21, 2015
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
@fieldnegro
***The views expressed on this site are the field's and the field's alone. They do not reflect the views of his employer, or any professional or legal organization with which he is affiliated.***
"..While most of what he writes is tongue-in-cheek, his space is a safe house for candid discussions about race, especially in the comments section, where people of all colors meet."
~~Daniel Rubin, "The Philadelphia Inquirer"~~
"Half a century after Little Rock, the Montgomery bus boycott and the tumultuous dawn of the modern civil rights era, the new face of the movement is Facebook, MySpace and some 150 black blogs united in an Internet alliance they call the
AfroSpear.
Older, familiar leaders such as Rev. Jesse Jackson, Rev. Al Sharpton and NAACP Chairman Julian Bond, are under challenge by a younger generation of bloggers known by such provocative screen names as Field Negro, thefreeslave
and African American Political Pundit. And many of the newest struggles are being waged online."
~Howard Witt-The Chicago Tribune~
I am a proud member!
TWEET ME
@fieldnegro
DISCLAIMER
*COMMENTS, LINKS, AND CUT AND PASTE ARTICLES, ARE NOT ALL ENDORSED BY THE PUBLISHER.
THIS BLOG claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to its respectful owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.
THIS BLOG claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to its respectful owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.
MORE DISCLAIMERS
***The views expressed on this site are the field's and the field's alone. They do not reflect the views of his employer, or any professional or legal organization with which he is affiliated.***
This is a commercial free blog.
Money is nice, but being able to speak my mind is better.
"Real talk: Daniel Rubin has a great little piece up wherein he chats with The Field Negro, the Philly-based blogger who sharply ponders all things black on a daily basis. (Seriously, if you’ve never checked in with TFN, you should: Its author, Wayne Bennett, is a fantastic read who can cut through bullshit like a hot knife through butter, which is a far grosser analogy than I wanted to make, but there you have it.)"
~Philebrity~
~Philebrity~
"One of the most precocious and hilarious Black political minds on the net. Ive been a long-time fan!" ~Asad Malik~
"..While most of what he writes is tongue-in-cheek, his space is a safe house for candid discussions about race, especially in the comments section, where people of all colors meet."
~~Daniel Rubin, "The Philadelphia Inquirer"~~
"To white people, Bennett's musings are like kitchen-table talk from a kitchen they may otherwise never set foot in. To African Americans, he is part of a growing army of black Internet amateurs who have taken up the work once reserved for ministers and professional activists: the work of setting a black agenda, shaping black opinion and calling attention to the state of the nation's racial affairs."
~~Richard Fausset, "L.A. Times"~~~
~~Richard Fausset, "L.A. Times"~~~
"That's why I love the blog "Field Negro" so much. Field, as he's known to his fans, has the sense of reality that it takes to call out the (CowPuckey) of blame beating by those who are in positions of power and their lackeys. Because of his handle and his unabashed way of writing about racial issues, Field is often cited as a "Black blogger." What he is, however, is a first-class detector of blame deflection and an excellent student of history. If you want to write about the past and future of repression there's really no other perspective to take - which is why everyone should read Field."
~Erik Hare, "The Twin Cities Daily Planet"~
~Erik Hare, "The Twin Cities Daily Planet"~
411 On The Field
- field negro
- Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
- Raised in the house, but field certified. Jamaica is the land of my birth, but I consider myself a citizen of the world. I currently practice law in the city of "brotherly love".
"Half a century after Little Rock, the Montgomery bus boycott and the tumultuous dawn of the modern civil rights era, the new face of the movement is Facebook, MySpace and some 150 black blogs united in an Internet alliance they call the
AfroSpear.
Older, familiar leaders such as Rev. Jesse Jackson, Rev. Al Sharpton and NAACP Chairman Julian Bond, are under challenge by a younger generation of bloggers known by such provocative screen names as Field Negro, thefreeslave
and African American Political Pundit. And many of the newest struggles are being waged online."
~Howard Witt-The Chicago Tribune~
"I had no idea, for example, of the extent of the African-American blogging world out there and its collective powers of dissemination.But now, after reading thousands of anguished, thoughtful comments posted on these blogs reflecting on issues of persistent racial discrimination in the nation's schools and courtrooms, what's clear to me is that there's a new, "virtual" civil rights movement out there on the Internet that can reach more people in a few hours than all the protest marches, sit-ins and boycotts of the 1950s and 60s put together."
~Chicago Tribune Reporter, Howard Witt~
IF YOU ARE BRAVE ENOUGH TO FLAUNT IT.
I am a proud member!
Blog Archive
-
▼
2015
(354)
-
▼
February
(28)
- CAPTION SATURDAY.
- The strange case of Brandon Tate Brown, and anothe...
- Sheila Butt has a W problem, and Billo has another...
- Smoking legal, and another lie from Bill.
- How Hollywood sees us.
- "American Denial".
- "Racism without racists"?
- Caption Saturday.
- I bet they love America in the no truth zone.
- Brian and Bill's big adventure.
- When racism takes over the environment.
- Mr Selfie has a problem with hip-hop, and a donut ...
- A "Celebrity Muslim" drops some wisdom.
- No money to protect us, and Idaho says no to a "ha...
- Caption Saturday.
- More news from "post racial" America.
- Is Mia Love a slave?
- Piyush has a problem, and when "community violence...
- Visual rape, and Brian lied but no one died.
- Still blaming the black guy, and six year old Negr...
- Lawrence needs a clue, and another American tragedy.
- CAPTION SATURDAY.
- Short memories. We did some burning of our own.
- The feds are looking at the boss of New Jersey, an...
- Employee of the year.
- The vaccine choice crusaders, and the dirty hands ...
- The snowball isn't loaded.
- So simple even a toddler can use it, and clueless ...
-
▼
February
(28)
53 comments:
"I should be president; 9/11 happened on my watch..."
No you shouldn't, it was my sponsors who pulled it off.
Obama: "Islam has been woven into the fabric of this country since its very founding. There is nothing Islamic about the Islamic State. We are not at war with ISIS or Islam"
Giuliani: "The fact this lying, incompetent, stupid piece of shit is President is the greatest abomination in American history"
"One of these days, you sumbitch, I'm going to smear you in front of the world. Just you wait!"
Giuliani: That guy is a secret jihadi!
And that guy and that guy and that guy over there ... Why won't anyone believe me about the secret jihadis?
Also the lizard people.
I'm going home to hide under my bed now.
Field, you might be interested in an update on that earlier story about the Colorado NAACP offices.
Turns out that they likely were not the target of white supremacists -- in fact, they probably weren't the target at all.
The bomber has been caught, and he apparently was trying to blow up his accountant over some financial dispute. The accountant's office is near to the NAACP office.
President Obama photo bombed by Giuliani.
FN-
your side bar should read:
Kanye...
Just stop it, man.
ARose took the high road. gag order and all...wonder what he doesn't want told? hmmmm...
it is not a Good look for menfolk to publicly verbally pummel the women in their lives. nor should menfolk jump into a heated convo between women...
Kanye is doing all of the above.
karma = something else. let's just hope when his Kardashian run is done...
he won't be determined to be a full fledged...
woman.
no shade at Bruce. just sayin'
to whoever asked where was FP a thread or two ago...
i am here. just quiet. i already said what He told me to say as it relates to the contrived h-ly war. don't really have time to beat a dead horse. + i got writer's block that won't stop. so rather than practice ignoring disrespect (it is inevitable over here) it seems more profitable, on all levels, to mind my business.
nahmean?
side note: WHY are folk acting like Geraldo Rivera has no point. the corporate hi jacked hip hop artform DOES contaminate the souls of Black and Brown people, in its present state. the degradation of said Black and Brown people = entertainment for the market that consumes the garbage today.
now...
take it back to its origins and hip hop would scare the snot out of these same folk...
LOL.
ask me how i know?
glad folk did;)
i have personally played X Clan for republicans that could not hide the fear they felt inside. it was all over their faces before they tried to take things back to the lighter/whiter more commercialized side of things.
lol!
let's integrate. but let's keep it at 100:)
Blessings and Shabbat Shalom all!
Guliani thought bubble: "911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 pizza 911 911 911"
@focusedpurpose
Kanye should just stop making public statements of any kind, forever. The guy has a planet-sized ego and a tendency to say things he hasn't thought through properly and will undoubtedly regret.
Or, I dunno, I guess he could keep opening his mouth and giving comedians endless material to mercilessly mock him with.
He'll probably go with the second option.
In a thought bubble for Rudy, "They told me I'd be president if I helped cover up the inside job".
Greetings and blessings to you, FP..... Great knowing all is well with you.
Obama is saying, "... and I don't want to embarrass anybody, but jet fuel can't melt steel beams."
Foolioni: Am I looking at the White side or the Black side?
"to whoever asked where was FP a thread or two ago...
i am here. just quiet. i already said what He told me to say as it relates to the contrived h-ly war. don't really have time to beat a dead horse. + i got writer's block that won't stop. so rather than practice ignoring disrespect (it is inevitable over here) it seems more profitable, on all levels, to mind my business."
___________
I am glad you are still here. I still hope that you will sometimes send a little spiritual insight our way with HIS Word. You make FN worthwhile whenever you show up.
PS. I hate it when you have writer's block.
"Foolioni: Am I looking at the White side or the Black side?"
The black side is whichever side Jay-Z and Beyoncé are standing on. That's how you tell.
I want to stop and frisk that Ni---r.
Pearl Harbor is near and this fucker plays golf.
Oh NO! How in the world did he get to be President. I was da Mayor in New York City during 911, I was a Fed. Prosecutor before this guy ever got elected to anything. What did that Kenyan ever do....???
This blog is an absolute piece if shit.
You know, but won't admit, Obama is a piece of crap, as a supposed President of the USA. The US military hates his guts.
The rest of the world agrees.
SHOW me some evidence from the world that shows me that they "respect" him, or his ho mammy.
@Anon 10:23 PM- i don't mind Ye speaking off the cuff. throw back thursday on a saturday:)
off the cuff just needs to make sense in the bigger picture. that's all. like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDMyArnIdzY
watch folks' faces when he off the cuff spit it out:) LOL! PURE comedy!!! that and Bush indicating Ye's call out was the worst part of his presidency. really, now? lol.
then watch them (the powers that be) get Ye together in public. note Ye telling the host to kill the "tv" madness, this is his life/the Real thing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cK02jPaargk
so...homie is alright by me. folk bomb rushing the stacks of cash find more than they bargained for and are able to tell folk about in a make it plain type of way.
know this. though if you watch back in the day videos, Ye been trying to let folk know, on the low.
my point: he and others that i Love just would do well to stop the girl fighting. not a Good look, on so many different levels.
add the color factor to the mix and it is messed up all the way around. pale women that identify as BW gets no Love, either;( folk will high tail it all the way White in a heart beat, while crying nonstop 'bout racism. bouncing on whole families to do so. this is what brought the heat on ARose to begin with. being loyal to a friend that was supposed to be a friend to other folk.
THIS is why i can't be bothered with the color separation. womenfolk are treated like collateral damage in the race war. routinely.
it is not about color for me. i got Love for souls in general. even if they don't have Love for me, 'cause that's what i am called to do.
@ Faith and Fairness- Blessings in Abundance to your whole house, sis. thank you for your kind, sweet words. you are an intelligent refreshing addition to the fields. never change:)
@ 11:08pm- ALL Praise and Glory be to Yah Almighty.
the mistakes alone are mine.
i hate writer's block as well. it feels like a spiritual blockage like heavy warfare really. though i am committed to pressing through:) when i mention writer's block, it is not an excuse...
just a declaration of what it is.
you know, when i come to FN, it feels like a game of double dutch from back in the day. sometimes those throwing the rope don't leave me a way to get in;(
so let me start with this:
SAP- i owe you an apology sir. i did not realize you were an elder when i snapped at you back in the day.
FN- it is not my place to come to your blog and wonder in such a bold manner when you will just tell the Truth and cut out the politics. please forgive me for doing just this in the past.
to anyone else i may have offended over here, i would like to ask forgiveness.
i don't have a caption for the pic, outside of:
i gots nothing.
lol.
dig deep enough...
the terrorists start to all blend together. THIS could be why folk are acting like there is no GIANT elephant in the room...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uyQr_Vc1f9s
folk have invaded other folks' lands and released prophecy...
just can't put the lid back on it.
those of US that are not 10, should know that the USA arms BOTH sides of a war...
then throw all the women connected to the madness under the bus. Fawn Hall did not fair quite as well as 'ole Ollie North, recall?
dig deep enough and no doubt, the CIA, USA and ISIS will be good 'ole buddies and pals. american citizens footing the bills for the madness. as is the case around the world...while folk begrudge poor Blacks their few crumbs. lol.
folk pretending otherwise...
make me tired.
+ committed to being quiet. until i am UNblocked:)
@Faith and Fairness-
i think Guiliani is relieved not to be potus.
it wouldn't matter who was in office, all this foulness would still be going down. it would just be difficult for a WM to call detractors racists. lol.
where are the contenders for the next election? shouldn't we be bombarded by now?
"SHOW me some evidence from the world that shows me that they "respect" him, or his ho mammy."
Show us some evidence ANYONE respects you.
I'm bloated
UNIVERSAL LAW:
KJV Psalm 12:1-8
1 Help, Sovereign; for the set apart man ceaseth; for the faithful fail from among the children of men.
2 They speak vanity every one with his neighbor: with flattering lips and with a double heart do they speak.
3 The Sovereign shall cut off all flattering lips, and the tongue that speaketh proud things:
4 Who have said, With our tongue will we prevail; our lips are our own: who is Sovereign over us?
5 For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the Sovereign: I will set him in safety from him that puffeth at him.
6 The words of the Sovereign are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O Sovereign, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
8 The wicked walk on every side, when the vilest men are exalted.
Lt. Johnson , get back on your meds. You seems a little out of control.
It's ok, Obama has been your prez for 6 years now and your country is doing just fine. In fact, I seem to remember a time just 6 years ago when your beloved USA was on the verge of collapse. But don't let me spoil your narrative with facts.
Carry on.
Doc, that was a pretty good caption.
FP, they were both wrong for publicly throwing shade the way they did. Not sure how u don't see that.
"This blog is an absolute piece if shit."
So fuck off then.
Quote: Josh
"To want to fundamentally transform something would be to explicitly imply that I wanted it transformed--custom molded and tailored--into something I could love, not a thing I do love.
But, sure, that's emotional immaturity. So much explanatory power you offer from your one-liner arrows atop the high horse. The arbiter of what's right/wrong at Field's. What would the folks do without you? "
O.K. Josh, let me try and explain it a different way.
Those folks who threw the communists out of Poland, (or Germany, or Lithuania, or Latvia, does;t matter).
I think we can all agree that they fundamentally changed Poland.
Did they do that because they loved Poland, Josh? Or did they throw the communists out because they hated Poland?
Giuliani:
That poor SOB, he's been taking the heat so bad! I feel so bad for him,
it's a crying shame!
focusedpurpose said...
it wouldn't matter who was in office, all this foulness would still be going down. it would just be difficult for a WM to call detractors racists. lol.
Yup.
"Did they do that because they loved Poland, Josh? Or did they throw the communists out because they hated Poland?"
First point I'd like to address is you and this habit of addressing shit I wrote in another post in a random post. I found this by chance, coming back to read more captions in hopes people provided funny captions rather than changing the topic.
Secondly, that's a false dichotomy. Let's go over a third possibility. They wanted to change communism. They hated communism! A love or hatred for Poland doesn't even have to enter the equation necessarily, because it wasn't Poland that was changed intentionally; that arose as a result of removing communism.
That would be like saying a person with cancer got rid of caner to fundamentally transform their body. No. They fought cancer to get rid of cancer. That their body transformed fundamentally into a more healthy organic vessel is the result of getting rid of the cancer. That person could have hated their body or loved their body prior to that; it makes no difference. They didn't love the caner and wanted to annihilate it.
If, for instance, an Obama-like figure was running for office during that time, his speech might go more like, "This communist regime must be thwarted! It poses a threat to our safety and freedom. Communism must be fundamentally transformed."
You see, you would only seek to fundamentally transform a thing that you wanted changed into something it's not. The answer is right there in the word: "Fundamentally," meaning to change its primary functions so that when you're done, Y =/= X any longer.
Obama didn't, to my knowledge, speak about fundamentally transforming the things about America he didn't like. He spoke about fundamentally transforming America.
Holy shit. Why the religious apologetics about it?
Must everyone love America or something? Must everyone be patriotic? People have the freedom to not love America and to want it changed into something they can love.
The Purple Cow said...
I think we can all agree that they fundamentally changed Poland.
These folks that threw the communists out...
Did they have to lie about it?
For Obama to transform America's healthcare, Obama was forced to intentionally and repeatedly lie about the typical American family saving $2500.
If Obama thought his transformation was the right thing to do, why lie so much?
Obama lied about it because Obama, unlike the people that threw the communists out, Obama knew his dreams of transformation weren't wanted.
More of those domestic terrorists Obama keeps speaking about?
Johnson warns Mall of America patrons
Washington (CNN)Shoppers at the Mall of America need to be "particularly careful" after a terror group singled out the Minnesota super-mall for attacks, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson says.
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/02/22/politics/jeh-johnson-mall-of-america/index.html
Oops, the Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson is not warning about domestic terrorists.
Quotes:Josh
”First point I'd like to address is you and this habit of addressing shit I wrote in another post in a random post. I found this by chance, coming back to read more captions in hopes people provided funny captions rather than changing the topic.”
It’s not my fault you live in the wring time zone.
**
”Secondly, that's a false dichotomy.”
No it isn’t, it wasn’t any kind of a dichotomy. I wasn;t offering up a dichotomy.
**
"They hated communism! A love or hatred for Poland doesn't even have to enter the equation necessarily, because it wasn't Poland that was changed intentionally; that arose as a result of removing communism."
So they hated communism but it never occurred to them that Poland would change of they got rid of it????
Does that make sense even to you?
**
"That would be like saying a person with cancer got rid of caner to fundamentally transform their body. No."
Errrrrr, yes.
From one that was dying of cancer to one that wasn't.
**
"That their body transformed fundamentally into a more healthy organic vessel is the result of getting rid of the cancer. That person could have hated their body or loved their body prior to that; it makes no difference. They didn't love the caner and wanted to annihilate it. "
So you agree then that if Obama wanted rid of the cancer of America's failing health policy which he hated, that doesn't necessarily mean that he hated America.
By your own logic.
**
"If, for instance, an Obama-like figure was running for office during that time, his speech might go more like, "This communist regime must be thwarted! It poses a threat to our safety and freedom. Communism must be fundamentally transformed."
Except of course that the Solidarnosc government said absolutely no such thing. Which means thymus have totally transformed Poland because they loved it.
**
"You see, you would only seek to fundamentally transform a thing that you wanted changed into something it's not."
Nonsense. You can fundamentally change something you love into something better.
**
”Obama didn't, to my knowledge, speak about fundamentally transforming the things about America he didn't like. He spoke about fundamentally transforming America.”
Agreed, but so what? That doesn’t necessarily mean that he didn’t love America.
**
”Must everyone love America or something? Must everyone be patriotic? People have the freedom to not love America and to want it changed into something they can love.”
I agree, patriotism is overrated, but that’s not relevant to this discussion.
"These folks that threw the communists out...
Did they have to lie about it?"
Poor old Bill.
The Purple Cow said...
"Did they have to lie about it?"
Poor old Bill.
It's obvious when I've backed you into a corner.
The "Poor old bill" gives it away.
For someone that insists Obama is a conservative, it sure is strange how you keep defending him. You have no problem bad mouthing white people you call conservative.
If Obama was white would you have the balls to call him out?
Ding Ding
"No it isn’t, it wasn’t any kind of a dichotomy. I wasn;t offering up a dichotomy."
You were offering only two possible choices, which were necessarily opposing, therefore that's the textbook definition of a dichotomy.
"So they hated communism but it never occurred to them that Poland would change of they got rid of it????
Does that make sense even to you?"
What does one necessarily have to do with the other? Sure, some probably thought, "Boy, we can really change Poland for the better if only we'd get rid of these commies." But that does not necessarily have
to be a desired outcome, as you are erroneously attempting to paint with your scenario.
It's like Christians who argue that the Ten Commandments presented the first piece of legislation for the
protection of animals, by arguing that keeping the Sabbath holy protected beasts of burden. But what they don't realize is that benefits arising as unintended consequences are exactly that, and you don't get to go back
and rewrite someone's intent based on the outcome.
"Errrrrr, yes.
From one that was dying of cancer to one that wasn't."
So, you fought cancer not to get rid of cancer but to instead transform you body? What, then? To lose weight? To soothe arthritic joints? To change your complexion? Don't be obtuse. It was to get rid of the cancer.
By getting rid of cancer, one's body is necessarily fundamentally transformed. But fundamentally transforming one's body in no way guarantees getting rid of cancer. I don't need to have been dying of cancer to grasp a basic logical concept.
But congrats on beating that shit, in all seriousness. Cancer is a motherfucker; took my aunt a few months ago. I root for everyone to eradicate that shit!
"So you agree then that if Obama wanted rid of the cancer of America's failing health policy which he hated, that doesn't necessarily mean that he hated America.
By your own logic."
I've said three damn times already, including in the opening remarks of my initial comment, that I don't believe Obama hates America.
What is it with you and these false dichotomies? You can't get out of your own way. Just because you don't love something doesn't mean you hate it. There is an incredibly broad range of emotions and states in between the two.
You are intentionally looking over the fact that we're not talking about someone who claimed only that certain systems and aspects needed to be fundamentally transformed; we're talking about someone who claimed the entire damn country needed to be fundamentally transformed. Stop it with the apologetics. It's really a suit you don't
wear well.
"Except of course that the Solidarnosc government said absolutely no such thing.
Which means thymus have totally transformed Poland because they loved it."
You expect I'm taking your word for this? We're going to have to dig up all the speeches and evaluate what was said and what wasn't. You seem far too obstinate to concede even the slightest point, so forgive me if I don't take you at your word that you know every word that was spoken by a foreign government years ago.
"Agreed, but so what? That doesn’t necessarily mean that he didn’t love America."
Sure. However, nor is the default position that he does!
"...but that’s not relevant to this discussion.
Apparently it's more relevant than what you're willing to give it credit, seeing as loving America is supposedly the default position, like a creationist arguing with me that "God" is the default position and thus I need
evidence in order to not believe.
Damn, I must get too happy with the and shit. That formatting is screwed up something fierce.
lol note to self: Putting "tags" in brackets causes the word to not be printed. <> = no-no unless basic command.
"For someone that insists Obama is a conservative, it sure is strange how you keep defending him."
When have I ever defended Obama?
Orwellian Obama:“Now let’s make two things clear: ISIL is not Islamic. No religion condones the killing of innocents, and the vast majority of ISIL’s victims have been Muslim.”
Confucian Rudy: A superior man, in regard to what he does not know, shows a cautious reserve. If names be not correct, language is not in accordance with the truth of things. If language be not in accordance with the truth of things, affairs cannot be carried on to success. When affairs cannot be carried on to success, proprieties and music do not flourish. When proprieties and music do not flourish, punishments will not be properly awarded. When punishments are not properly awarded, the people do not know how to move hand or foot. Therefore a superior man considers it necessary that the names he uses may be spoken appropriately, and also that what he speaks may be carried out appropriately. What the superior man requires is just that in his words there may be nothing incorrect.
"What does one necessarily have to do with the other? Sure, some probably thought, "Boy, we can really change Poland for the better if only we'd get rid of these commies." But that does not necessarily have
to be a desired outcome, as you are erroneously attempting to paint with your scenario."
This is clearly nonsense.
Poland had been under a communist system fro 50 years, give or take. You are asking us to believe that it may not have occurred to them that getting rid of communism would not fundamentally change the country.
Bollocks.
**
"You are intentionally looking over the fact that we're not talking about someone who claimed only that certain systems and aspects needed to be fundamentally transformed; we're talking about someone who claimed the entire damn country needed to be fundamentally transformed."
I'm overlooking nothing. He said he wanted to transform America because he loved America. If he didn't love America why would he have bothered? Surely if he didn't love America he could have continued to let America slide down the toilet?
**
"So, you fought cancer not to get rid of cancer but to instead transform you body?"
Now THAT IS a False dichotomy.
To get rid of cancer you have to totally transform your body.
**
"Stop it with the apologetics. It's really a suit you don't wear well. "
I'm apologising for no man. I see faults in your logic is all. Though I don't approve of Obama, or his conservative politics I don;t believe he has acted out of malice or a lack of love for his country. Obama is not a modern evil-conservative, he's an old-school 'heart's-in-the-right-place-but-totally-wrong-about-most-stuff conservative.
**
"You expect I'm taking your word for this? We're going to have to dig up all the speeches and evaluate what was said and what wasn't. You seem far too obstinate to concede even the slightest point, so forgive me if I don't take you at your word that you know every word that was spoken by a foreign government years ago."
Pathetic response. Everybody with even the vaguest grasp of modern European history knows that Solidarnosc was an anti-Communist organisation.
**
"Apparently it's more relevant than what you're willing to give it credit, seeing as loving America is supposedly the default position, like a creationist arguing with me that "God" is the default position and thus I need evidence in order to not believe."
Woah!
YOU claimed that Obama didn't love America because he wanted to fundamentally change it. Your default position is/was that wanting to fundamentally change something means you can't possibly love it.
"Poland had been under a communist system fro 50 years, give or take. You are asking us to believe that it may not have occurred to them that getting rid of communism would not fundamentally change the country.
Bollocks."
Are you pretending to be this dense or do you get so invested in your own self-worth when it comes to what you write that you cannot get out of your own way?
I'm leaning toward the latter, but I don't paint those as the only two options. Perhaps it's something else entirely, like a brain fart.
I'm not asking you to believe anything of the sort. I'm simply saying that logic dictates that love for Poland did not necessarily need be a reason to chase out the communists!
Is this such a difficult thing to understand? I'm not even saying it wasn't; I'm saying it doesn't necessarily have to be, which you seem to be suggesting it does.
"To get rid of cancer you have to totally transform your body."
"Get rid of cancer" being the issue; e.g. the reason for the fundamental change. Not change just to change, but change to get rid of cancer!
"Pathetic response"
You presented yourself as a fucking authority of every word ever spoken by an entire damn government over the course of decades, and my saying that I'm not taking your word for that position is "pathetic"? Holy shit, man. How self-important an asshole do you plan on being?
"Your default position is/was that wanting to fundamentally change something means you can't possibly love it."
"Can't possibly"? No. Though the evidence would suggest one probably doesn't love something which one wants to fundamentally transform.
Again, you're intentionally glossing over what the word means. To "fundamentally transform" something is to literally change the primary functionality of that thing. For instance, to fundamentally change a dog would result in something that is no longer a dog, or at least the dog you knew. That's what fucking "fundamental" means, and no apologetics in the world changes that, scooter. Get a hold of yourself, man.
Apply this to anything in your fucking life, dude.
Your home
Your spouse
Your children
Your pets
Your car
Your iPod
Your TV
If you love these things already, why in the fuck do you want to fundamentally transform them into something completely different?
"Fundamentally transform" does not mean fixing kinks and quirks and smoothing out rough edges.
And before you spew some more apologetics, we're not talking about a child that's sick, or a TV that's broken, or a room that doesn't function properly anymore, whereby it would be better to state that you want to fundamentally transform the exact problem(s) rather than the whole of a thing.
For instance, I love my car, but it was misfiring a while back. I didn't want it fundamentally transformed; I just wanted the broken part fixed. So, when the mechanic gave me the estimate, I did not say "Fundamentally transform this fucker" like I was on Pimp My Ride. I simply fixed what was needed.
If I were to say, "This car needs to be fundamentally transformed," one can assume I had a problem with the entire fucking car, not just the rims or paint job.
I'm amazed that Obama must be judged by these illogical, made-up-as-they-go standards and not at all on what the man actually says or does.
I don't believe he hates America. But I also see nothing to suggest he loved the America he became President of.
That's apparently such a smear that the radioactive barrels of illogical pandering must be emptied to drown out any and all basic criticisms.
As I read over this, I cannot believe that someone doesn't simply say, "Perhaps Obama misspoke there. I think he really did love America, yet his choice of wording was just poor in that instance. It happens."
Instead, the argument is trying to convince me that a person would honestly fundamentally change something which that person already loved -- that is to say, a person who loves X would completely change X to Y, which obviously ceases to be X, the thing which that person loved.
So, I love my girlfriend -- her black hair, her blue eyes, her porcelain skin, her rose red lips, her crooked smile, her intelligence, her sense of humor. So, fundamentally transform my baby into a blonde-haired, green-eyed, tan-skinned, clown-smile-having, dumb-as-rocks, humorless bitch which isn't even close to the girl I loved.
Makes perfect fucking sense, Purple Cow. You're way outta my league.
Evidently I'm just a racist or something who refuses to concede my inferior point to your intellectual superiority due to your skin color.
Maybe my views need to fundamentally change.
"Maybe my views need to fundamentally change."
Ya think?
Josh said...
So, I love my girlfriend -- her black hair, her blue eyes, her porcelain skin, her rose red lips, her crooked smile, her intelligence, her sense of humor. So, fundamentally transform my baby into a blonde-haired, green-eyed, tan-skinned, clown-smile-having, dumb-as-rocks, humorless bitch which isn't even close to the girl I loved.
3:45 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So that's what u think Obama is doing to America?
Did I say that? Have I said anything bad about Obama during these many exchanges? Have I attempted to suggest he has some nefarious motives or something?
TPC and I are debating what it is to fundamentally transform a thing, but more precisely whether or not one would fundamentally transform something they loved.
Ask the question to yourself and answer it honestly. I'm not even asking you to answer aloud; answer to yourself in quiet moments in private.
Think of someone or something you truly love. Think about the things you love about this something or someone. Now, ask yourself: "Would I fundamentally transform this thing I love?
And keep in mind: To fundamentally transform something is to completely that the thing into something different. The thing that undergoes fundamental change is no longer that thing; It has been transformed at a fundamental level.
Example: If you wanted to fundamentally transform your pet snake, you are necessarily attempting to change it into something that is no longer a snake.
Ask yourself if this is what you wish to do with a thing you love.
Or no longer your snake, I forgot to mention.
"Did I say that? Have I said anything bad about Obama during these many exchanges? Have I attempted to suggest he has some nefarious motives or something?"
No, you're too dumb to realize that's what you're implying by even taking up the topic.
"No, you're too dumb to realize that's what you're implying by even taking up the topic."
Your I'll-defend-Obama-to-the-death-because-he's-black nonsensical inferences notwithstanding, I'll actually concede that's a fair point. A wrong point, but fair.
In a contentious political climate, I fully expect that anything but calling Rudy a piece of shit and Obama the biggest America-lover to ever draw breath will be read directly as an attack against Obama and a defense of Guiliani's punk ass. Such is the climate. But since I'm not even remotely political, I sometimes forget that you partisans are whackier than Christian creationists arguing that the earth is only 6,000 years old.
So, fair point. These are things I should realize. I've seen more than enough to understand that you morons will reach for inferences across the entire fucking universe if it can help you make a self-serving point.
It must suck to be Rudy Giuliani. Obama is president and Rudy is NOT.
If you had told Giuliani ten years ago that this would happen, he would have laughed at you. Now, it's real and there's nothing Giuliani can do about it.
Simply... "look at this ninja" acting like he running thangs. He ain't shat...
Post a Comment