Better Conservatives? Where?! (A response to Coffeecat)

Oh, and I just noticed. Fluke was making an argument about catholicism as a Catholic to her Church which is against birth control. As a Catholic, offended at a fellow Catholic’s argument about Catholicism, I expressed my displeasure.

According to your criteria, you should not have criticized my comments.

This is ridiculous of course. You have every right. It is stupid to suggest that my comments were one dimensionally Catholic.

Similarly, there are a lot of other things going on with Kanye and the commentators. Refusing to comment, as if it were one dimensionally about blackness is similarly flawed. You got politics, celebrity, individuality, free speech, socioeconomic status, etc etc all mixed up in the fray.

To say this is about blackness is to be overly focused on race to the exclusion of all else. This is not quite, but suspiciously close to racism.

WALDORF: He's a credit to his race.

STATLER: What race is that?

WALDORF: The One hundred yard dash.

I think the Uncle Tom thing is strongly implied.

As I said, I’m not trying to make you comment. Your reasons for being unwilling to do so are more interesting.

I already said that I have no problem with the broader message, as I took it, that the commentators were trying to relate with their criticism of Kanye (the entire commentary, not just the quoted sentences). I only won’t comment on the appropriateness of the specific word usage you quoted.

But you commented on my specific word usage.

Because it was charged with sexism. There specific words were charged with racism.

Yes, and it wasn’t in a context or from a place I feel unqualified to discuss, unlike the specific quotes about Kanye.

Are you Catholic?

And yet, mothers raise sons, fathers raise daughters, and interracial couples raise mixed-race children, not just stating their opinions, but enforcing them on their different-from-them kids, and usually they muddle along well enough to get by.

Oh, and I just happened to see the Sam Harris thread where you said that Sam might think he is smarter than he is yadda yadda and that this is common failing of successful men, “especially white men.”

As if Sam Harriss’ race has anything to do or any bearing whatsoever on a critique of his arguments.

You called me out recently for a subjectively sexist comment I made six years back. As we’ve discussed things i’ve Felt that you are very much overly focused on race, and gender, and assign privileges an knowledge to people based on their identity. At the same time you seem to have no problem saying disparaging things about people (Sam Harris) based not on the content of his speech, but on the color of his skin.

I don’t Know what to call this besides racism. It’s not Nazi, or white supremacist racism. I guess it is this fashionable socially acceptable racism that seems to be catching on under the guise of identity politics, intersectionalism, etc.

Racism is racism.

Septimus:

I think I am not going to take the quiz at this time.

I hate Trump. I think his apology for white supremacidts at Charlottesville was basically the worst thing said by a President in recent history, possibly ever.

It’s hard to comment on Trump’s cabinet, because it keeps changing. I Read Fear, and the most horrifying thing was that it turns out Bannon was the smartest, most conscientious and honest man in the whole group.

It’s hard to figure out the Putin thing. Trump loves people that say nice things about him. Sometimes he is mean to people who are his friends and nice to his enemies. The Woodward book left me feeling that Woodward doesn’t think that Trump or anyone associated with him thinks there was collusion, but I don’t know.

It’s actually hard to come up with bad things about Republicans because Trump is eclipsing everything to such a degree that the rest of the Republicans can do evil freely thanks to Trump stealth mode. The tarrifs are terrible asinine and stupid. He should not have made fun of blade. Is that enough

I’m Not gonna pick on Democrat’s here. I’d rather they self-identify than have me say something bad, and have the debate me about how it’s actually not.

No, but you already explained in detail several pages ago (over several thoughtful posts) why you called Fluke a “brazen slut”, and it had nothing to do with Catholicism.

Feel free to quote the post you’re talking about, and I’d be happy to explain what I meant, if you’d like to know.

You said, think about the worst on our side.

The worst on our side has, as the pinnacle of power, a blog.

The worst on your side is president.

You are defending him, right now, right here in this thread. Explain how that is not support.

No. Of course not.

But you did not know that 6 years ago or until you asked.

Right – I wanted to know why, which is why I asked. I had suspicions, but I didn’t know for sure until I asked and you explained it.

Post #49 from that thead if you would like to find it for context.

I believe you were rather critical 6 years ago, before then, and you never really asked me what I meant, irrc correctly I volunteered it, and you never determined whether I was Catholic, I volunteered that.

I think it’s pretty straight forward – in my opinion and experience, very successful people are more likely to think that being smart in one field means they are smart in every field, and this is even more common in very successful white men, who, on average, face the fewest obstacles on the way to success.

You were asked multiple times what you meant 6 years ago, without an answer, and when I asked you in this thread what you meant, you explained it.