Askia -- What the Hell?

Funnily, even though you started the thread, Contrapuntal, I don’t feel you personally lured me for what’s turned into a minor Pitting and as you put it, slap-fighting. But, hey… I feel the way I feel.

How about if other people let it go, I’ll stop defending my idea? Until I’m given some specifics why this idea is logistically or psychologically untenable, I’ll stick to my theories, thanks.

I have little basis for blaming YOU for collusion, which I don’t. But I can still have it both ways. I was Pitted in a Pit thread that wasn’t meant to attack me personally by fools who thought they could take a swipe at me in a pile-on.

I don’t believe that, I never said that, and thinking my statements amount to that is crass mischaracterization.

I swear to God, this is what I do get sick of: people not acknowledging what I’ve consistently said before and putting their own spin on things and putting these words in my mouth. You have done this, Contra.

George Bush doesn’t hate my people: in fact, he loves him some rich black conservatives. But he is demonstrably indifferent to poor black Democrats and nonvoters. My suspicion is those people are a specific demographic that simply do not activate his Presidential radar. He does NOT do things to help them in their best interest. Point of fact: he is rescinding a pay act that would enable workers in the area to be paid a prevailing wage of $9 an hour. Which means with all the billions federal aid being pumped in the region, poor workers would be paid the least for their labor that gets much of the actual re-building done. This is just so typical of the kind of crap this man pulls it’s a wonder I’m not frothing at the mouth more. So it is not about race exclusively: it’s class and politics and race combined.

It’s not that he would deliberately pass up an opportunity to help them, it’s that he’s so long written off this specific demographic as being politically useful to him that it would never occur to him that in Chinese (so I’m told), the word for “crisis” is the same as “opportunity.” He’s just not that savvy. Further, he’s surrounded himself with people who would never tell him otherwise: how else the fuck did a horse judge with a no crisis management experience get put in charge of FEMA?

On preview, holmes gets me.

That to me is a distinction without a difference. For the president and his team to turn a blind eye to the plight of US citizens = not doing anything.

See my comments above. Would he pass up the opportunity to bolster his support by a huge amount? Would he let such a “politician’s fantasy phot op” go by?

That analogy doesn’t really work for me. If it can be shown that doctors in a triage situation as enormous as Katrina stepped over blacks to get to whites … maybe. Otherwise, granting that what you say is true, it doesn’t apply. This is rapid response, first response kind of stuff here. What, specifically, would have been done differently if they were poor whites? (Hint : Avoid any and all references to “letter drops.” :slight_smile: )

Askia claims it isn’t racism. If you would like to debate something along the lines of “The poor response to Katrina by the federal government can be explained, in whole or in part, by racism on the part of the powers that be,” that might best be done in another thread.

No, no, what you have discovered is the blatant racism of our neighbors to the north! Their arrival on September 6 HAPPENED A FULL WEEK AFTER THE HURRICANE! Monday (August 29)! Tuesday! (Sept 6) Monday! Following Tuesday! The proof is right there, are you fucking blind? It has to be because the Canadians don’t feel like helping black people!

Seriously, it’s not even hard to demonstrate how stupid your statements are anymore. Don’t you even read what you’re citing?

They arrived back in Vancouver, Canada on September 6th, nitwit.

You give yourself far, far too much credit. I don’t even know who you are, much less have any lingering grudge left over from “last year” or any other time. As far as I recall, the only other discussion I’ve had with you happened just this week in a Cafe Society thread where you held forth at great length on your ridiculous theory of how blacks couldn’t be racist. I’ve disagreed with your statements in this thread because of their content, and I didn’t even get around to mocking you until you responded to a specific request for facts from me and others with the stupidest post I’ve ever seen on these boards: “Monday. Thursday”. That’s when you became a poster deserving of ridicule, and you got it. Your insane idea that the relief effort shouldn’t concentrate on anything inconsequential like, oh I dunno, actually rescuing people, but should instead focus it’s resources on dropping leaflets from planes and boating big screen TVs broadcasting public services announcements around the city (We are not at war with Eastasia. We have never been at war with Eastasia) just made the party more entertaining. Even now, you’ve all but admitted that you’re wrong, but you won’t admit it to people who are “ambushing” you. That’s childish behavior son. Grow up a little and have the stones to flat out admit “You know what? I didn’t think this through, dropping leaflets probably isn’t the best idea after all. I still hold the opinion that the government’s response was slow because the majority of the victims were black, but I admit that this is only an opinion and I have no facts to back it up.” You’d be amazed how liberating it can be to finally act like an adult. Stiff-necked pride that refuses to admit your mistakes even when they are as glaring as they are in this thread makes you look like a fool.

That’s you. I don’t see it as black and white as that, because it isn’t. Say I see a known prostitute with a guy and she’s screaming. I walk pass, maybe he’s her pimp, or her dealer; either way, not my problem. I get a little further down, the block and she screams a little louder or some guy taps my shoulder and says, she’s really in trouble. I look again and this time I react and go to her aid.

Had she been a housewife or a nun, I would have paid more attention. Her plight may have caught my eye sooner.

Not a great analogy, but I think that’s similar to what may have happened.

Because he or his handlers didn’t think his “people” would care. Now that his spinners realize they’ve underestimated the American people, you see more and more photo-ops.

[qoute]That analogy doesn’t really work for me. If it can be shown that doctors in a triage situation as enormous as Katrina stepped over blacks to get to whites … maybe. Otherwise, granting that what you say is true, it doesn’t apply. This is rapid response, first response kind of stuff here. What, specifically, would have been done differently if they were poor whites? (Hint : Avoid any and all references to “letter drops.” :slight_smile: )
[/quote]

I was trying to show that racism isn’t always the stepping over of blacks in favour of whites, but the subtle different treatment of people; causing dely in treatment. Not deliberate, not with malice; but making different decisions anyway.

There’s a couple of issues here. First response, the media coverage, the governments response all down the line. I don’t think Askia saying they could’ve pulled those people out quicker (maybe he is and I’ll let him clarify), but that the attention would have been.

My biggest beef is with the media’s portrayal of the people in NO. What I would’ve liked to see sooner was the President telling the American people that the people in NO weren’t the looters, rapists and criminals that the press was protraying them as. IMO he did a great service, when he called them Americans and not refugees; I wish he had done that sooner.

I’m just trying to give as complete a response as I can.

Hey, good point. I misread the article, sorry about that, I got this one wrong.

However, from reading their webpage, it looks like their service in LA began on September 1st (that’s when their online diary starts), the same day that you are berating the feds for “starting” (which is crazy, aid was on it’s way and arriving days before that), relief efforts. In fact, I would venture to guess that the Canadians were a part of the federal response that you are so down on. You can’t have it both ways, which is it? If you’re going to praise the Canadians for responding by Thursday, you can’t criticize the Feds for doing the exact same thing.

Weirddave. We had words last year.

Just to recap what I actually said in that thread, Weirddave: I never said, “Blacks can’t be racist,” and I resent the mischaracterization. I said “a belief in your race’s innate superiority is racism”, and most (not all) racism is people with lighter skin against people with darker skin (implying that the reverse can happen), and that everyone is prejudiced, discriminatory and bigoted to some degree but that doesn’t always prove racism, and is often, in fact classism, and that you can’t accurately call the hatred of an racist oppressor “racism” as if that’s an equitable thing, and that the Nation of Islam is the only black organization I know of that had racist doctrines equivalent to white supremacy. I fail to see what’s so controversial, inaccurate or upsetting in those statements.

Re: the Canadians: The Candians were deployed August 31. The next day they’d flown 2,200 miles and were *on the ground * evacuating people by boat and conducting door to door attic searches while the Feds were airdropping supplies. But if Canadians could be deployed in a single day’s time, why couldn’t the Feds in our own nation get there faster, too?

I’ll take your word for it, obviously it didn’t make an impression on me. There is not much on these boards I take personally, not even being called Posty Weber (Can I be Ralph Malph instead? Please?).

We’ve beaten this horse into glue so I’m not going to spend much time on it but I think I can sum it up in a few quick sentences: What’s wrong about racism is the underlying attitude, the irrational hatred, the inclination to treat people differently simply because of the color of their skin, and it MUST be condemned in the strongest terms possible in all of it’s myriad forms. Not hiring someone because of their color, attacking someone because of their color, robbing someone because of their color or moving to another table because people of a color you don’t like sat down next to you are all examples of racism and until they are seen as such and condemned equally by society, we will still have all of the problems and trappings of racism that exist today. Societal position, historical conflict, class, etc…these all have fuck all to do with racism, and attempting to justify black on white or even black on black racism while saying that white on black racism is somehow “worse” perpetrates the problem. It’s all wrong. Every. Single. Bit. Of. It. PERIOD.

I think that I understand your confusion here, you don’t understand what the word “deploy” means. A unit deploys on the day it leaves it’s base. The Vancouver S&R unit deployed on August 31, and arrived on site and began operations on Sept 1st, just like a lot of American relief efforts deployed on the 29, 30 or 31st. That doesn’t mean they were in the field operating effectively that same day, just that that is the day they left for duty.

This always happens when people read what they want to read. I never said white and Asian racism was worse, I said they occured the most.

Racism is a belief, not an action. As racism theory goes, black or white, I find most of their claims laughable.

But for the record, discrimination, bigotry and *hate crime * based on a belief in white supremacy and white privilege are indeed frequently worse, happen more often and are far more widespread than anything Jews, Mexicans, Asians, Native Americans, aborigines, Indians, Arabs and blacks were ever able to do in return.

I count four military families among my extended family and friends. I think I proved I knew what deployed meant when I wrote that they left on the 31st and were on the ground the next day. You missed my point: Canadians were able to help Americans 2,200 miles away before Feds were.

If you are talking historically in this country, of course. I doubt anyone would try and refute that claim, I certainly wouldn’t. As to what excuse that offers for racism today, my answer remains the same. None, nada, zip, zero, zilch.

GAH! Jesus! It’s like trying to catch smoke! Every time I think you are starting to discuss things using logic, you post something like this. Your criticism in this thread and others has been that there wasn’t significant Federal aid for New Orleans before Thursday and that this is a bad thing. Yet right here, in this paragraph above, that I just quoted, you admit that the Canadian unit that you are talking about wasn’t on the ground in the area administering aid until that same day, Thursday, yet somehow this is a good thing and counts as responding “before the(sic) Feds were”. That’s utter bollicking wank. It makes no sense at all.

Translastion: The Canadians had farther to go, yet they arrived at the same time as the feds, who were closer. That bothers Askia, why did it take the feds who were in their own country as long to arrive, as the Canadians?

Did the Candians take the situation more seriously and leave sooner? Was the situation so bad, that the feds, despite being closer, couldn’t get into NO any earlier?

I think that’s what Askia’s asking…sorry for speaking for you Askia.

Essentially, yes. Not so much the fact that they were (presumably) farther but they are another allied neighbor across the border. I can see why they’d need four days to get there but not before our own Feds. I don’t get it.

Glad for your imput, holmes.

That’s because you don’t seem to understand a damn thing about logistics. Are any of your many buddies in the armed services in supply? You might want to ask them about your ideas. The fact that they came from Canada doesn’t matter, U.S. and Canadian disaster response teams are as completely integrated as it’s possible to be, they train together all the time. The Canadian teams arrived at the same time as the bulk of the American ones, about as soon as anyone outside the immediate area can reasonably be expected to respond to such a disaster in force. That still doesn’t change the fact that you are praising the Canadian response and criticizing the American response in spite of the fact that they are exactly the same in this instance. National disaster planning calls for local authorities to hold the line and provide aid in the time between the disaster and when national resources can be marshaled. That is something that the state of Louisiana and the mayor of New Orleans failed spectacularly at. (Hell, you yourself linked to an article detailing how the state of Louisiana blocked critical aid supplies in this time period, preventing them from reaching the Superdome. How the fuck can you blame that on Bush?)

Because a knee-jerk reaction like “Blame Bush” doesn’t require any critical thinking skills, which Askia apparently lacks.

U.S. and Canadian disaster response teams are as completely integrated as it’s possible to be?” That’s either a bald-faced lie or completely inaccurate exaggeration.

If all it took was ONE DAY for people from another country to show up, why did it take FEMA four? Why, if according you – some troops were deployed on August 29, 30 and the 31st did they still show up on Thursday? If four days is a reasonable response time for people outside the immediate vicinity, why was FEMA the President Bush on the ground in Florida within hours of Hurricane Charley last year?

Mayor Ray Nagin and Governor Blanco are on my hit list, too, believe me. But through their efforts 80% of people did evacuate, even though much more could have been done to provide for those housed in the Superdome and Convention Center. The Federal government failed in rescuing and evacuating the remaining 20% with the expertise, resources, manpower and equipment at their disposal. MONDAY. THURSDAY. :smiley: A horse judge for FEMA director! No communication with the flood victims for 96 hours. And people wonder why they descended into panic and looting.

Updike. Use of trendy White House spin doctored rhyming terms like “Blame Game” as a retort against legitimate criticism requires even less reasoning than you accuse me of.

[QUOTE=AskiaUpdike. Use of trendy White House spin doctored rhyming terms like “Blame Game” as a retort against legitimate criticism requires even less reasoning than you accuse me of.[/QUOTE]

Meh, drop me a flyer and maybe we’ll talk. :rolleyes:

In a thread originally titled “George Bush Hates Blacks,” later amended to “George Bush Doesn’t care for Blacks” you make this statement–

And I am putting words in your mouth and grossly mischaracterizing your position by saying he is indifferent to blacks? Bullshit and double bullshit.

Holmes claims racism, you emphatically refute racism, yet he “gets” you, and I grossly mischaracterize you. Grossly. As in not even close. Nothing I said comes close to what you said. Bullshit and double bullshit.

It’s not bullshit. You say you understand but your examples prove you don’t.

'Let’s say that in private, whenever a topic concerning your people comes up he says “Who gives a shit? It’s just a bunch of black people.” ’ Is not my idea of indifference to poor black Democrats, Contrapunctal. That’s such an openly hostile and overtly bigoted thing for a President to say repeatedly (even in private) it’s just wrong if you credit me with thinking that.

I credit Bush with knowing the difference and being sympathetic to a concern of the conservative black middle/upper class (like – I dunno inheritance laws and college tuition tax breaks) and knowing but not caring about a concern of the black poor or working class (something like the aforementioned rescinding of the $9.00/h wage pay act in the Louisiana/Mississippi area.)

Also, writing he doesn’t like you? In italics gives your question a sort of breathless incredulity about what I believe that it makes me think your sympathy is bullshit, in all honesty.

Re: holmes and racism.

holmes said, “I was trying to show that racism isn’t always the stepping over of blacks in favour of whites, but the subtle different treatment of people; causing dely in treatment. Not deliberate, not with malice; but making different decisions anyway.”

I personally would characterize that more at discrimination than actual racism, although racism may very well be the cause of that. But we’re otherwise in agreement, yeah.