Dumb Political Correctness

bystander said:
....He told me that one day the professor made a comment about blacks having a higher percentage of children out of wedlock than other races. .....the black students (mainly the girls; he said the black male students sat silently) objected to the statement. Not so much the facts of the statistic itself but instead they demanded to know why he said it at all. "What is the point of saying that to us? Are you trying to tell everyone that blacks have no morals?".....
Click to expand...

This should have been the start of the conversation, not the end of it
But never happens, does it?
 
Last edited:
Crockett said:
I think it ridiculous to believe liberal political leanings are a sign of mental illness/emotional weakness. That's not the same as saying "wise latina" is exhibiting sterling mental acumen.
Click to expand...


The idea goes something like this -- liberalism ignores facts, hates facts. Instead, it relies solely on emotional appeal. Logic and reason have no place (the use of logic and reason even has a new derogatory name now -- 'mansplaining"). Accordingly, liberal ideas fail in the face of facts, logic and reason. Their only response is emotional -- which is mostly name-calling. This is the root of why they call everyone they disagree with a Nazi. They have no rational response.

We just saw this with Hillary's campaign. Did she ever offer anything of substance? I say not. Her entire general campaign can be summed up with two words -- "Trump Bad." It's childlike, isn't it?

People, of course, get to believe whatever they want. The problem, in this context, is when they achieve political power. Then they affect the rest of us. That is when retarded liberal emotional development, which stops at the angry, spoiled children level, becomes a problem for everyone else. They wallow in rebelling against the normal responsibilities of adulthood. And then they demand a parental-type government to meet their needs -- cradle to grave.

But this ignores human nature. Liberals dismiss the ideas of free choice, of voluntary cooperation and of moral integrity. Perhaps worst of all, they do not allow for individual differences in talent, drive, personal appeal and work ethic. But human nature does not ignore these things. And it will always run counter to a Government that seeks to impose economic and social equality on its population. This type of system does not work over time. Never has. Enough citizens (the ones with talent, drive, personal appeal and work ethic) will not allow for it. They do not want to be wards of the state.
 
Joe Fan said:
The idea goes something like this -- liberalism ignores facts, hates facts. Instead, it relies solely on emotional appeal. Logic and reason have no place (the use of logic and reason even has a new derogatory name now -- 'mansplaining"). Accordingly, liberal ideas fail in the face of facts, logic and reason. Their only response is emotional -- which is mostly name-calling. This is the root of why they call everyone they disagree with a Nazi. They have no other response.
Click to expand...
Well ... trying to explain the other side's fact free emotional rants with a fact free emotional rant is something I wouldn't expect from those who profess allegiance to logic. This is as much fun as hearing Ted Cruz excoriate the "climate change alarmists" for "name calling" in identifying him and others as "climate change deniers."
 
Last edited:
Crockett said:
Well ... trying to explain the other side's fact free emotional rants with a fact free emotional rant is something I wouldn't expect from those who profess allegiance to logic. This is as much fun as hearing Ted Cruz excoriate the "climate change alarmists" for "name calling" in identifying him and others as "climate change deniers."
Click to expand...

The pages of this forum are littered with the supporting facts. Supplemented most every day.

iot-meets-big-data-the-opportunities-and-challenges-by-syed-hoda-of-parstream-22-638.jpg
 
Joe Fan said:
The idea goes something like this -- liberalism ignores facts, hates facts. Instead, it relies solely on emotional appeal. Logic and reason have no place (the use of logic and reason even has a new derogatory name now -- 'mansplaining"). Accordingly, liberal ideas fail in the face of facts, logic and reason. Their only response is emotional -- which is mostly name-calling. This is the root of why they call everyone they disagree with a Nazi. They have no rational response.

We just saw this with Hillary's campaign. Did she ever offer anything of substance? I say not. Her entire general campaign can be summed up with two words -- "Trump Bad." It's childlike, isn't it?

People, of course, get to believe whatever they want. The problem, in this context, is when they achieve political power. Then they affect the rest of us. That is when retarded liberal emotional development, which stops at the angry, spoiled children level, becomes a problem for everyone else. They wallow in rebelling against the normal responsibilities of adulthood. And then they demand a parental-type government to meet their needs -- cradle to grave.

But this ignores human nature. Liberals dismiss the ideas of free choice, of voluntary cooperation and of moral integrity. Perhaps worst of all, they do not allow for individual differences in talent, drive, personal appeal and work ethic. But human nature does not ignore these things. And it will always run counter to a Government that seeks to impose economic and social equality on its population. This type of system does not work over time. Never has. Enough citizens (the ones with talent, drive, personal appeal and work ethic) will not allow for it. They do not want to be wards of the state.
Click to expand...
I believe liberals have greater blind spots than conservatives. Conservatives may be less empathic on some matters but have less blind spots. The fact that liberals can't see this is self-evident.
 
I would hope the more reasonable leftists are dismayed by the utter mean spirited
Vileness that is spewing from the left daily. From the supposed celebrities to "pundits" to elected people to of course media.
It is astounding.
 
I will say this: I hate hypocrites. And liars. One in the same I guess on so many levels.

But one thing in particular that bugs me is how Liberals think they don't owe Trump a honeymoon because they claim the Republicans attacked Obama day one. Yet I remember very clearly that they attacked Bush the same way. There were hit pieces all over the internet about him in the general election run-up. There was no grace period. So when the Republicans did the same to Obama all they could believe was that it was due to racism.

The facts are that there are HUGE differences between the parties: abortion and gay rights to name a couple. And the stakes are VERY high when it comes to SCOTUS. So attacking the other side is INEVITABLE without a viable third option. Our two-party systems seems to eliminate any chance at all of true statesmanship.

Obama was attacked because he clearly was going to pursue initiatives (OBAMACARE) that were not immaterial to our way of life. That kind of massive change CLEARLY is debatable and you can't assume racism is the root of the opposition. It involved a thorny legal question surrounding the mandate to buy the insurance and it was incumbent upon SOMEBODY to ensure the legality of the change being proposed. They said it wasn't a tax but then Roberts saved them... ironically, he was a legal statesman. A man they attacked during his nomination process.

Unless I'm not remembeing that correctly. But the bottom-line is that Liberals treated Bush poorly from the get-go and we will get nothing less from them this time around.
 
Last edited:
Nationalism versus the truth.

America, love it or leave it.

Yeah, that can be PCness for sure. But there is a line in the sand on a few things like burning the flag or kneeling during the national anthem. Sure, you can do it. It's a free country but we don't have to like it. Is that being PC?
 
That guy seems to use a lot of double speak imo. Maybe I just couldn't follow it but for example the Jeb Bush Spanish speaking lines seemed quite inconsistent in its thought process to me. Probably just me being confused though.
 
The writer though it was off base for folks to be offended that Jeb Bush speaks Spanish at home. Who among the educated elite the discuss politics on Hornfans would disagree?
 
Joe Fan said:
Is this child abuse?
Should it be considered child abuse?
Click to expand...

Yes, it is.

Letting that kid dress up as a boy and getting her hair cut like a boy and calling her a boy is wrong. Any parent should do their damndest to steer their child down the road that God/Nature has chosen for them. Many a "tomboy" has grown to live a normal life as a woman, but not if the parents encourage them in the opposite direction.
 
That was what the referenced author was saying but I guess what was unclear to me was what was the article's author point - political vs patriotic - on that issue. Not to worry nor worth any more discussion, just the whole point seemed confusing to me, which as I age is not at all too uncommon in my reading. Guess part of it is I cannot grasp the PC crowd anymore anyway, using either word for the 'P', because to me it is idiotic to think anything but 'good for them' on the Spanish aspect.
 
I think the whole "English First!" first movement is much deeper than just the spoken word. Of course, there are those who just don't like 'em being here. I'm half-Cuban by the way so I had first hand knowledge of my relatives moving to the US and never learning how to speak English. And my Father came over in 1955 so he went through the proper channels and was not a beneficiary of the favored status Cuban refugees have enjoyed though others in my distant family did benefit.

I think the whole objection from folks on the right (some anyway) is based around the assumption of a deliberate infrastructure/patronage immigrant complex built up to support the anchor baby family along with those who came over without going through the proper channels. Then they become aggressive about their "Rights," and receive benefits while not assimilating (never learning English). Then the race card is used to ensure the beneficiaries of the patronage system remain good little kids and vote Democrat. So in my opinion that whole scenario (however real or vast it may be) is what drives the "English First!" crowd. There is a lot more to it than just speaking the native language. I think it's great to be bilingual. The Europeans can speak more than their own language and do so quite easily and its considered educated and worldly when they do it. Why not here?

Well, it's the "illegal immigration."

My quotes were a nod in the direction of PCness.

One thing I've always wondered about is why Liberals love the Mexican immigrants that form the basis of the "illegal immigration" debate so much. The demographics are polar opposites. Liberals (differentiated from Democrats) are secular/atheist, feminist and "highly educated" (quotes because it's kind of "so they say"). Is that the demographic coming from Mexico? Hardly (by the way, I went to Junior/Senior High in Laredo so I have been on the "front lines"). I have said this before and will submit it to you again; if the immigrants from Mexico were white then the Liberals would build the wall themselves.
 
Last edited:
I don't know if Democrats particularly love Mexicans. If somebody believes they are going to get legal then vote Democratic, they haven't been paying attention to the fact that most distrust and are uninterested in the political process. I'm all for deporting any undocumented immigrant committing a crime worse than a Class C misdemeanor. But if a child of illegal immigrants comes here at four, is well-educated by our system and poised to thrive and contribute, I want them to become citizens of the United States. I want immigrants to learn English (I even taught them on a volunteer basis) but want my own children to be conversant in one or more foreign languages.
 
Crockett said:
I don't know if Democrats particularly love Mexicans. If somebody believes they are going to get legal then vote Democratic, they haven't been paying attention to the fact that most distrust and are uninterested in the political process. I'm all for deporting any undocumented immigrant committing a crime worse than a Class C misdemeanor. But if a child of illegal immigrants comes here at four, is well-educated by our system and poised to thrive and contribute, I want them to become citizens of the United States. I want immigrants to learn English (I even taught them on a volunteer basis) but want my own children to be conversant in one or more foreign languages.
Click to expand...

My comment about Liberals loving them was sarcastic because I've seen and engaged the hard left type who hate Christians and male-centric ways of thinking. I'm just testing their emotional leanings.

I understand the compassion behind giving the DREAMERS a pathway to citizenship. I think from a practical standpoint though, any amnesty extended due to political pressure will only invite more. I believe that 100%. So if you can't control the border then you are only going to make the situation grow.
 
Crockett said:
The writer though it was off base for folks to be offended that Jeb Bush speaks Spanish at home.
Click to expand...

Did anyone really argue that? Frankly most of the stuff he pulls out in that argument are applicable to about 10 percent of the conservatives in this country. Most of it is just twisting arguments, making assumptions, and generally slandering and creating strawmen. I would have expected it from the Daily Kos.
 
ProdigalHorn said:
Frankly most of the stuff he pulls out in that argument are applicable to about 10 percent of the conservatives in this country. Most of it is just twisting arguments, making assumptions, and generally slandering and creating strawmen.
Click to expand...
I can agree with that. Substitute the word "liberal" where you wrote "conservatives" and you will see what I believe a valid viewpoint overlooked by most on this board.
 
What do you guys think about Dumb Patriotic Correctness?
Click to expand...

We have a serious problem where any reasonable criticisms of the military (see out of control spending) are being met with "why do you hate the troops?" Coming from a military family, I have noticed the loudest about "supporting" the troops tend to have no military ties whatsoever. I have also seen those on the right without military ties accuse a former marine of hating the troops for his questioning certain strategies by our military generals. I think the person just assumed that the former marine could not possibly have had military ties just because the former marine happened to be liberal. Anyway, yes, dumb patriotic correctness also exists.
 
As the reining leftist on this board, I confess to being among those who "misunderstand" the clovergendered. My deep well of sympathy isn't THAT deep.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top