U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-16-2014, 02:35 PM
 
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
1,240 posts, read 1,534,162 times
Reputation: 1503

Advertisements

Charles Barkley is fat himself.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-16-2014, 02:41 PM
 
Location: La Mesa Aka The Table
7,185 posts, read 7,520,266 times
Reputation: 7979
Fat women need love too!
I'm a equal opportunity lover
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2014, 02:59 PM
 
1,009 posts, read 1,849,686 times
Reputation: 1423
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiehaskell View Post
Once again you are trying to look back at history to make a "who's had it worse" comparison. That is irrelevant. Bullies usually try to justify their actions in this matter.
I'm the one making a "who's had it worse" comparison? The entire premise of this thread, the one you have (inappropriately) going on in the Real Estate forum, and at least two other threads you have started in "Current Events" are all thinly-veiled attempts to try and justify the actions of Donald Sterling. For some reason, you have a "thing" for Sterling. As a result, you are looking at Jay-Z's medallion, Shaq's insults, and Charles Barkley's comments about "big women" in San Antonio as equivalencies to Donald Sterling's comments.

Numerous posters in all of the threads you have started have deftly explained to you why these are all false equivalencies. One of the first respondents on your Real Estate thread explained to you that racial discrimination is a legal issue, so "morally" wanting to only rent to certain races is completely irrelevant. Donald Sterling can "morally" dislike blacks and not invite them to his home if he chooses. If this "morality" crosses over into the denial of housing then he has broken the law on the basis of being a racist, plain and simple.

I have already refuted the racist notion of Jay-Z's "Five Percenter" medallion. He was wearing Mardi Gras beads around his neck the last Brooklyn playoff home game so I don't think he puts too much thought into what his accessories are. I also don't think Clarence 13X would have approved of Jay Z, his wife, and much of the company Jay Z keeps, in any event.

What kind of punishment are you itching for on the behalf of Shaq and Barkley? A lifetime ban like Sterling received? Do you think Barkley has gotten a much longer leash than Sterling because he is black? I give you Charles Barkley and raise you Howard Stern! Has there been anyone in the history of American telecommunications given a longer leash than Howard Stern? How many millions of dollars has he been fined by the FCC? Yet, he is still on the air (SiriusXM). As long as Howard Stern has followers and can make money, he will have a job based on the shocking things he says. You evoked Don Imus earlier. Maybe you are a teenager but Don Imus was around a loooooong time before he made his "Nappy Headed Hos" remark. Don Imus was no Fox News Talking Point reciter and his freedom of speech was supported by many friends of all creeds and colors.

Yet, out of all of the things Imus has said in his career, why was the Nappy Headed Hos remark the one that took him down? It was his justification:

"That phrase [nappy-headed ho] didn't originate in the White Community. That phrase originated in the Black community. Young Black women all through that society are demeaned and disparaged and disrespected by their own Black men, and they are called that name in Black hip-hop."

Whoops, wrong answer! Up until he tried to deflect blame Imus had support from comedians both black and white for his comments. As I have said on numerous threads on City-Data, until folks stop using the "well other folks did it too" defense then these folks will be permanently relegated to sanctions. "Somebody else hit her first, other people say the N-word too, and I'm not the only one who steals" cannot be used as a defense in the court of law and not ironically, as a justification in larger society.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2014, 03:01 PM
 
790 posts, read 954,940 times
Reputation: 1004
I laughed out loud at "National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2014, 03:19 PM
 
Location: Back in the gym...Yo Adrian!
9,371 posts, read 17,494,909 times
Reputation: 18346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steelers10 View Post
I'm the one making a "who's had it worse" comparison? The entire premise of this thread, the one you have (inappropriately) going on in the Real Estate forum, and at least two other threads you have started in "Current Events" are all thinly-veiled attempts to try and justify the actions of Donald Sterling. For some reason, you have a "thing" for Sterling. As a result, you are looking at Jay-Z's medallion, Shaq's insults, and Charles Barkley's comments about "big women" in San Antonio as equivalencies to Donald Sterling's comments.

Numerous posters in all of the threads you have started have deftly explained to you why these are all false equivalencies. One of the first respondents on your Real Estate thread explained to you that racial discrimination is a legal issue, so "morally" wanting to only rent to certain races is completely irrelevant. Donald Sterling can "morally" dislike blacks and not invite them to his home if he chooses. If this "morality" crosses over into the denial of housing then he has broken the law on the basis of being a racist, plain and simple.

I have already refuted the racist notion of Jay-Z's "Five Percenter" medallion. He was wearing Mardi Gras beads around his neck the last Brooklyn playoff home game so I don't think he puts too much thought into what his accessories are. I also don't think Clarence 13X would have approved of Jay Z, his wife, and much of the company Jay Z keeps, in any event.

What kind of punishment are you itching for on the behalf of Shaq and Barkley? A lifetime ban like Sterling received? Do you think Barkley has gotten a much longer leash than Sterling because he is black? I give you Charles Barkley and raise you Howard Stern! Has there been anyone in the history of American telecommunications given a longer leash than Howard Stern? How many millions of dollars has he been fined by the FCC? Yet, he is still on the air (SiriusXM). As long as Howard Stern has followers and can make money, he will have a job based on the shocking things he says. You evoked Don Imus earlier. Maybe you are a teenager but Don Imus was around a loooooong time before he made his "Nappy Headed Hos" remark. Don Imus was no Fox News Talking Point reciter and his freedom of speech was supported by many friends of all creeds and colors.

Yet, out of all of the things Imus has said in his career, why was the Nappy Headed Hos remark the one that took him down? It was his justification:

"That phrase [nappy-headed ho] didn't originate in the White Community. That phrase originated in the Black community. Young Black women all through that society are demeaned and disparaged and disrespected by their own Black men, and they are called that name in Black hip-hop."

Whoops, wrong answer! Up until he tried to deflect blame Imus had support from comedians both black and white for his comments. As I have said on numerous threads on City-Data, until folks stop using the "well other folks did it too" defense then these folks will be permanently relegated to sanctions. "Somebody else hit her first, other people say the N-word too, and I'm not the only one who steals" cannot be used as a defense in the court of law and not ironically, as a justification in larger society.
The difference with Imus is that he was hired by NBC to say these sort of edgy and controversial things. They knew what they were getting and allowed it for years. It wasn't until all of these watch groups popped up and people like Sharpton demanded boycotts and lawsuits that he Imus was used as a scapegoat and fired. Of course he was going to defend himself, but NBC was fine with all of his previous remarks regarding race, gender, homosexuality etc., and hired him to perform that sort of material. It wasn't until they buckled under pressure from sponsors and special interest groups that they decided to throw Imus to the wolves and ultimately under the bus.

Joke is on them though, MSNBC does so poorly in ratings now even Obama makes jokes about them, and they are his biggest fan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2014, 05:22 PM
 
1,399 posts, read 1,081,377 times
Reputation: 2052
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiehaskell View Post
I believe it's Kenny's turn now.
Kenny is a class act all the way. I dont think he'd let his mouth get away from him like that.

I personally didnt find Barkley's comment all that offensive. Shaq making fun of someone with a facial deformity via twitter was low class. Just MO though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2014, 07:23 PM
 
Location: Southern New Jersey
240 posts, read 338,865 times
Reputation: 309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steelers10 View Post
I'm the one making a "who's had it worse" comparison? The entire premise of this thread, the one you have (inappropriately) going on in the Real Estate forum, and at least two other threads you have started in "Current Events" are all thinly-veiled attempts to try and justify the actions of Donald Sterling. For some reason, you have a "thing" for Sterling. As a result, you are looking at Jay-Z's medallion, Shaq's insults, and Charles Barkley's comments about "big women" in San Antonio as equivalencies to Donald Sterling's comments.

Numerous posters in all of the threads you have started have deftly explained to you why these are all false equivalencies. One of the first respondents on your Real Estate thread explained to you that racial discrimination is a legal issue, so "morally" wanting to only rent to certain races is completely irrelevant. Donald Sterling can "morally" dislike blacks and not invite them to his home if he chooses. If this "morality" crosses over into the denial of housing then he has broken the law on the basis of being a racist, plain and simple.

I have already refuted the racist notion of Jay-Z's "Five Percenter" medallion. He was wearing Mardi Gras beads around his neck the last Brooklyn playoff home game so I don't think he puts too much thought into what his accessories are. I also don't think Clarence 13X would have approved of Jay Z, his wife, and much of the company Jay Z keeps, in any event.

What kind of punishment are you itching for on the behalf of Shaq and Barkley? A lifetime ban like Sterling received? Do you think Barkley has gotten a much longer leash than Sterling because he is black? I give you Charles Barkley and raise you Howard Stern! Has there been anyone in the history of American telecommunications given a longer leash than Howard Stern? How many millions of dollars has he been fined by the FCC? Yet, he is still on the air (SiriusXM). As long as Howard Stern has followers and can make money, he will have a job based on the shocking things he says. You evoked Don Imus earlier. Maybe you are a teenager but Don Imus was around a loooooong time before he made his "Nappy Headed Hos" remark. Don Imus was no Fox News Talking Point reciter and his freedom of speech was supported by many friends of all creeds and colors.

Yet, out of all of the things Imus has said in his career, why was the Nappy Headed Hos remark the one that took him down? It was his justification:

"That phrase [nappy-headed ho] didn't originate in the White Community. That phrase originated in the Black community. Young Black women all through that society are demeaned and disparaged and disrespected by their own Black men, and they are called that name in Black hip-hop."

Whoops, wrong answer! Up until he tried to deflect blame Imus had support from comedians both black and white for his comments. As I have said on numerous threads on City-Data, until folks stop using the "well other folks did it too" defense then these folks will be permanently relegated to sanctions. "Somebody else hit her first, other people say the N-word too, and I'm not the only one who steals" cannot be used as a defense in the court of law and not ironically, as a justification in larger society.
This post is 100% on point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2014, 08:56 PM
 
Location: Oceania
8,623 posts, read 5,896,758 times
Reputation: 8318
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiehaskell View Post
I believe this thread confirms your point. If someone says the n word 30 years ago, the country goes into a panic, demands vengence and blood in the streets. Our country cries and the president speaks out.

Someone makes fun of fat white women...95% of the country joins in and millions of new fat jokes are created. You could call it collective fat joke brain storming. Someone could even propose fat joke Friday as a national holiday.

What a set of conclusions...

N-word is worse than saying what it stands for - sort of like putting an animated Las Vegas neon sign over yourself to let everyone know you said it. And it would be worse now than 30 years ago.

Most of the women in San Antonio aren't white; I visit quite frequently.

This thread makes my head hurt.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2014, 10:16 PM
 
11,389 posts, read 6,435,973 times
Reputation: 6141
Quote:
Originally Posted by cali2jersey View Post
This post is 100% on point.
Possibly, but if someone can't get their point a across in a paragraph or two my eyes start glaze over. Post don't preach, .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2014, 10:27 PM
 
11,389 posts, read 6,435,973 times
Reputation: 6141
Quote:
Originally Posted by armory View Post
What a set of conclusions...

N-word is worse than saying what it stands for - sort of like putting an animated Las Vegas neon sign over yourself to let everyone know you said it. And it would be worse now than 30 years ago.

Most of the women in San Antonio aren't white; I visit quite frequently.

This thread makes my head hurt.
Well yeah I don't care for people using "n word" so much to mask the word they are talking about. When someone says "n word" doesn't the actual word they are referring to register in their mind? So what's the big deal about making that thought vocal? I doubt the sound of a word being vocalized ever hurt anyone so why do we try so hard to cover it up? I wonder if people will still say "n word" in 100 years?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top