I did.
Your question was based on the faulty assumption that I think the Imperial Japanese, Nazis and Islamic Governments were atheist… I corrected that for you by agreeing with you that they are not. This makes your question moot.
I’ll spell it out for you. I don’t think my point that Atheist leaning governments have bad track record is exactly what Phil was trying to say. It’s just something I felt like posting because his quote got me thinking.
Happy now?
Does he also want to give Black people Polio? We didn’t have a Polio vaccine back then either.
Does he want to take the internet away from Black people? It didn’t exist them either.
Saying black people were better off before the welfare state and war on poverty doesn’t mean you should infer that every other unrelated development since then should also be lumped in with what he said.
I am surprised this needs to be explained to people.
Wait a minute. So the tagline for this silly program is “Faith, Family, and Ducks”? Wouldn’t that give the average dork a clue about these people, their fans, and their opinions and attitudes?
I guess it was ok with A&E to make millions of bucks off these ducks as long as nobody said too directly what they all thought anyway.
gooney goo goo
It’d be nice to have some context for that statement. Unlike with the homosexuality remarks, the question asked isn’t included. The article just presents it in a sidebar block of text headed “Phil On Growing Up in Pre-Civil-Rights-Era Louisiana”.
If the question was just “What was it like growing up in pre-Civil Rights Era Louisiana?”, and he replied with his honest recollections, I fail to see how that amounts to a wish to roll back the clock to Jim Crow, or racism.
Evidently, his only interaction with black folks was walking to the fields with them, hoing cotton, and walking back. That he feels this is enough to decide that black folks in general were happy enough in that era is naive and foolish, but that’s all it is.
I don’t believe this. Part of the “welfare state” is social security. I think it’s quite fair to say that poverty rates among the elderly have gone down since the advent of Social Security. It’s also fair to say the the elderly are healthier than ever thanks to another “welfare state” notion, Medicare. I’d also say that having the safety net available has helped all ethnic groups. Saying that the safety net hurts blacks or that they need to be taught the value of work is both incorrect and condescending.
I’m surprised that you don’t understand that the “welfare state” and “war on poverty” began with specific Federal legislation. I’m surprised that you could even find anything to defend about a statement that says that black people were better off in the 1950s than now.
I actually agree with you on this aspect of what he posted. Re-reading that repeatedly I see how it could certainly be interpreted that way. But it’s not the way I first read it.
Compare with this: “When I was in World War II, I never saw a shot fired. Not once. The soldiers in my unit and I, we all never fired our rifles.”
You could read this that he means WWII vets are all overstating how difficult the fighting was. But a more charitable reading would simply be his amazement that he didn’t see something that was A.) Common for most and B.) Bad and something to be avoided.
I read his post the same way. “I know Jim Crow was a bad time, but amazingly, I never saw anything bad first hand. I was fortunate.”
It’s a charitable interpretation, I admit. But I’m inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt since I enjoy watching him on the show and like the guy. He’s got a black grandson, BTW that Willie adopted.
But the civil rights act angle? That’s just completely random. I have no idea where people are getting that from. I guess some people don’t hear anything but dog whistles.
I don’t really give a shit about this story either way. My goat has been gotten by the response, and the cries of “free speech”! Look, lady, the First Amendment is a check on the government, not a cable network.
I did think the suspension seemed a bit sudden and even excessive, but the NAACP has also been complaining about the Jim Crow stuff. That, to me, is much worse than anything he said about gays.
Possibly. I don’t think anyone is particularly surprised that he believes this stuff. A lot of people are surprised that he was dumb enough to rant about it in a magazine with national circulation. And so what? Is surprise a predicate for offense?
Are you suggesting that I should assume anyone who claims to be Christian is a racist, xenophobic, homophobic jerk? Because if so I’m down for that.
Of course you don’t. Let’s save that debate for another thread, shall we?
I can’t let this go, though:
I never said anything about “need to be taught the value of work” so please refrain from putting words in my mouth.
Eh, I’m out.
I don’t watch the show and I wasted yesterday talking about this idiot. I don’t want to repeat the experience.
Also, the “proof” I can offer in regards to the comment are not up to the standards of GD, but, though anecdotes != data, I can assure you that having been around people like this for much of my life, there’s little doubt in my mind what he was saying.
Echos of “Our niggers were happy 'till them outside agitators showed up!”?
CMC
That’s the curious thing to me. He doesn’t even make any references to “black folks in general.” Every statement that he makes on the subject (that is reported, at least) claims to be a direct observation: "I never, with my eyes, saw" and “*I never heard *”. It strikes me as unusually careful given his apparently rambling elsewhere in the interview. I suppose we can conclude that he’s implying that racism was not a hugely serious problem where he lived, but that’s speculative. (I find the notion that this is either racist or is advocating repealing the civil rights acts to be downright bizarre).
The major point, of course, is that it’s just more hypocrisy for A&E to turn a blind eye to the “values” that the program offers, as long as they’re making good money on it.
“I guess it was ok with A&E to make millions of bucks off these ducks as long as nobody said too directly what they all thought anyway.”
Pretty much.
I didn’t say that you did, but that is a very common conservative talking point.
What “values”? There’s never been anything in the show about homosexuals or black people.
what values? duhhhh. Faith and family? If you see a tagline for a show about faith and family, what sort of “values” do you think they’re going to promote?
edit: here’s a clue. It’s not going to be wild sex and drugs and rock and roll.
I don’t think it necessarily follows that it’s going to be “hating negroes and queers”.
I’ve never seen the show, but I don’t necessarily think that, either, and didn’t say that. Go back and read my first post in this thread. My whole point is about the hypocrisy of it all.