Crackpipe Ray Nagin Lambastes Fed Govt.-NOLA Still A Mess!

The BBQ Pit
81

Oh my goodness. You are telling me that that man stood there, in front of Fox, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC,BBC and whoever else was there that day and spouted his racist crapola and because I don’t own a 12-volume biography of Saint Ray, you’re calling my cite into question? What the fuck.

You have a feeling I don’t know too much about Mayor Nagin? I totally agree, you are 100 % correct. I know what he has presented to me first-hand by way of broadcast television. Do I care what others have said in judging him? I do not. Do I think he is to blame for the current situation down in NOLA? Absolutely not. I am addressing that direct quote that he spoke, in public and very very aware of the news media present.

I don’t need to know any more about the man. He told me everything I need to know about him, and continues to do so every time he opens up his yap on the televison. One of two things must be true- you get to pick. Either we all watched him yammer on about Chocolate City, and more recently about that “hole in the ground”, or we did not.

He thinks that Ground Zero is that hole up in NYC that still needs to be cleaned up? Oh really.

Fuck that narrowminded hateful racist cocksucker useless prick of a Mayor. Try that on for size, ok? I was there on Sept. 11th, and 12, at Ground Zero. That “hole” he has such contempt for? It was awash in a snowstorm, thick drifts of human beings who were crushed, imploded and shot out in a gray-white mist of blood, brains, unborn children, human waste, sheet rock, thousands of gallons of water compressed suddenly with no where to go and false ceiling tiles. And there he sits, just as cocky as you please, telling folks how we need to think about that hold in the ground up there. And he wonders how people can regard him with disrespect. :dubious:

Fuck him. He can have his Chocolate City back. I hope that it becomes everything he badly wants it to be. I just pray he has the balls to travel to New York City, stand at the intersection of West Side Highway and Vesey street and utter the same ignorant shit he uttered from the safety of his home town.

A real man would have the spine to do it. If, of course, he believes what he says. If he does, then he’s gotta show it. If he doesn’t, then why in the world would you defend him?

Oh, and I don’t watch Fox News, so I can guarantee to you that I didn’t see him on it. :slight_smile: And, before your brain explodes because you think I’m going after him because he’s an African-American male in a position of power, think again. I’m going after him because he is exactly the worst kind of person to be leading people in a time of profound crisis. A media-whoring hand-wringing finger-pointer.

Race irrelevant, the Mayor down there might have taken a page or two from how the Mayor in NYC on 9/11 handled things. With focus, caring, and professionalism.

That is his problem. He’s not a professional. He’s just your garden variety clown. And I think that is a tragedy, and the people in the City of New Orleans deserve so much better- now more than ever. They are deserving of someone of whateverfuckingrace you want, who can step up, ask for the parties in power to sit down, get out the checkbooks, prioritize and get moving.

His incapacity to lead is an insult.

82

And might I express my thanks to you, for supporting my thesis in it’s entirety. Well done !! :slight_smile:

83

And just what do petroleum refineries have to do with excusing unpreparedness for a natural disaster?

84

I was responding to a quote from someone who suggested that Louisiana should have to shoulder the entire cost of rebuilding because it wasn’t prepared for a natural disaster. I was pointing out that Louisiana has paid into the national economy far more over the years than it will be getting paid out in disaster relief.

How exactly does one prepare for massive engineering failures of structures that were supposedly designed to withstand the storm that was encountered? The city should have better prepared to evacuate its citizens without transportation, but that wouldn’t have saved their homes. The city and state should be quicker and more creative with rebuilding, but the ENTIRE INFRASTRUCTURE of a major American city must be rebuilt… water, sewer, electric, EVERYTHING.

85

You weren’t quite close enough.

86

I think The King of Soup would be insulted at the implication that he is a white, 20-something video game addict.

87

What a horrible thing to say.

88

This is so funny. King of Soup, do you come up with this, or do people say it all the time, and I’ve just never seen it? Man, I love this. It’s my new favorite saying.

89

Um, no. I’m saying that you calling his Chocolate City statement “hateful racism” tells me that your definition of hateful needs some serious refinement.

Did he stick his foot in his mouth? Yes. Was he pandering to his constituents? Yes. Was he spouting hate? No. He was doing what politicians always do. He just did it in a stupid way. Whipping yourself up into a frenzy over what amounts to politically incorrect gladhanding really really really makes you look like an idiot.

In a 30 second soundbyte, yes. And this doesn’t make you silly looking? Okay.

You have a little foam on your lip. Might want to dab it off. Yup, right there. There you go.

90

Your thesis is that Nagin is a hateful racist doody-head, not a politician with a penchant for making stupid statements. I know, I know, these two things look awfully similar. But trust me when I say they are different. If that wasn’t the case, Cheney would be the Grand Wizard Poobah of the KKK and Bush would be Hitler.

91

Nope, not really. Here. Let’s just, well…now, don’t go foaming at the mouth yourself, ok? Let’s just say that the white man who ran against Mayor Nagin in the last election stood there in public and said, " What we need to do is make this city a whole lot less chocolate and a whole lot more vanilla, and N’Awlins will be back before you know it". An awful thing to say, right? A racist, awful thing to say. No? You wouldn’t have a problem at all with that comment?

Oops, careful. Let’s not be talking out of both sides of our mouth. Do you have a problem with a white politician saying that or not? If so, fair enough. Then your last post is bullshit. If you don’t, then I wholeheartedly applaud your point of view.

Naw, not really. History is filled with politicians who have managed to negotiate very very charged and difficult waters without revealing their racist underpinnings. That’s not pandering. Pandering might well have been, " This city has been drained of many things, and the beautiful colors that made New Orleans what it was need to come back, for it is drawn and faded to this day. The jambalaya dished out was and is the metaphor for our city- all colors, all flavors, all tastes, blended together. So many have left, let them return". Or, words to that effect. That’s not what he said though, is it? You’re wrenching a muscle, trying to put a good spin on a very very tawdry comment. Why ?

How delightful, that you are not in the least bit upset. By my posts. Those “Crackpipe” comments sure wound you up. Stop pointing fingers eh, it’s tiresome. I’m not saying he is without redemption and I am surely not saying his professional background is not excellent. I am saying that he is woefully unfit to serve in public office. He isnt’ fond of Vanilla, and he doesn’t have much use for the victims of 9/11 cause they’re Yankees. Or, whatever the heck his reason is for saying what he said.

Wait- you seem to know a LOT about him. Do us the favor of explaining what the good Mayor really meant by that hole in the ground remark, and why it in fact is not insulting, is not worthy of examination or dissection and should be ignored in the face of all of the great things he’s done lately.

… well ? …

92

Nagin didn’t say anything like that, so why should I even respond to this? Here’s what he said:

Like I said before, it’s a stupid thing to say. Evoking God is stupid in its own right, but the racist implication (yes, it meets the definition of racism…big whoopty to do) is even more stupid. But it wasn’t hateful. He’s was clearly pandering to his constituents who are worried about being displaced by green, not white.

If you took the time to learn more about Nagin and his relationship to black New Orleaneans, you’d understand that if he has a reputation for anything it’s for being in the asscrack of Big Business. So his statement was his way of counteracting the impression that he’s only concerned about monied interests instead of the interests of the poor. It makes your claims about him being a anti-white racist laughable. Ask yourself why he got 84% of the white vote if that’s the case!

Yeah, so wound up that I posted a grand total of one post about it, asking (rather politely, I might add) for people to clarify why Nagin is apparently such a crackhead worthy of all of this villification. I guess you’re trying to do that, but you’re not doing too well. If all you have to cite is his statements about NY having a hole in the ground and the Chocolate City statement, then it’s clear the “crackpipish” assessment is a bit overkill.

Well, all those “vanillas” who voted for must be some self-hating retards, huh? Because clearly they–who presumably know more about him them you do Mr. I Know All I Need To Know Because I Watch Broadcast Television–don’t seem to think he’s unfit to hold office, and this was after their city got swept into Lake Ponchartrain on his watch.

And why am I not surprised that you’re now interpreting his hole in the ground remarks as vitriol against 9/11 victims? The foam just keeps on coming, doesn’t it?

I dunno. Seems to me he was essentially saying “Don’t ask me why the city is still fucked up only after a year post-Katrina when NY has had five years to put up a couple of buildings and still only has a hole in the ground to show for it.”

It wasn’t the nicest thing to say and it wasn’t the smartest thing to say. But I don’t think its an impeachable offense. I don’t see how it’s a slam against those Yankee 9/11 victims, either.

93

Nagin didn’t say anything like that, so why should I even respond to this? Here’s what he said:

Like I said before, it’s a stupid thing to say. Evoking God is stupid in its own right, but the racist implication (yes, it meets the definition of racism…big whoopty to do) is even more stupid. But it wasn’t hateful. He’s was clearly pandering to his constituents who are worried about being displaced by green, not white.

If you took the time to learn more about Nagin and his relationship to black New Orleaneans, you’d understand that if he has a reputation for anything it’s for being in the asscrack of Big Business. So his statement was his way of counteracting the impression that he’s only concerned about monied interests instead of the interests of the poor. It makes your claims about him being a anti-white racist laughable. Ask yourself why he got 84% of the white vote if that’s the case!

Yeah, so wound up that I posted a grand total of one post about it, asking (rather politely, I might add) for people to clarify why Nagin is apparently such a crackhead worthy of all of this villification. I guess you’re trying to do that, but you’re not doing too well. If all you have to cite is his statements about NY having a hole in the ground and the Chocolate City statement, then it’s clear the “crackpipish” assessment is a bit overkill.

Well, all those “vanillas” who voted for must be some self-hating retards, huh? Because clearly they–who presumably know more about him them you do Mr. I Know All I Need To Know Because I Watch Broadcast Television–don’t seem to think he’s unfit to hold office, and this was after their city got swept into Lake Ponchartrain on his watch.

And why am I not surprised that you’re now interpreting his hole in the ground remarks as vitriol against 9/11 victims? The foam just keeps on coming, doesn’t it?

I dunno. Seems to me he was essentially saying “Don’t ask me why the city is still fucked up only after a year post-Katrina when NY has had five years to put up a couple of buildings and still only has a hole in the ground to show for it.”

It wasn’t the nicest thing to say and it wasn’t the smartest thing to say. But I don’t think its an impeachable offense. I don’t see how it’s a slam against those Yankee 9/11 victims, either.

94

Just dropping in to share a little perspective courtesy of MSNBC news.

Follow this link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11101453 to an interactive on the scale of Katrina’s damage.

Warning - - it’s slow to load.

When it’s loaded, click ‘next’ to get to the part with the hurricane picture, then ‘next’ again to get to the picture of New Orleans with the flood outline.

Then go to the menu on the right that says “Choose a City”, click there, scroll up, and click “New York” to generate an overlay.

Let us know what you think.

FWIW, I don’t pretend to be trying to excuse the hurtful comments Mr. Nagin has made immediately after the storm and those more recently to 60 Minutes. I know a lot of New Orleanians who’d like to apologize for our goodwill ambassador…

95

peri, the forum rules expressly forbid wishing death on another poster. Consider yourself warned.

96

Wow. I seriously underestimated the zeal with which some people will fight for the inalienable right to slander a black man. Here’s a tip, gang: if the most important argument in your defense of an allegation is that it is a lie too stupid to be believed, check your pockets – your moral compass probably got left in your other suit.

When you make a false accusation that mirrors an established negative stereotype, two things happen: the stereotype makes the accusation seem more plausible, and the lie provides more anecdotal support for the stereotype. This mutual reinforcement strengthens racist attitudes and beliefs; in fact, it’s their main fuel source. Miller had a question that I thought was significant. He asked:

I don’t know about “automatic,” but if, in the absence of any evidence that it’s true in a particular case, you choose an insult that draws on racist stereotypes about a group to demean a specific member of that group, then yes. What’s more, I do not believe that I am the first person to tell you this, or that any normal adult could be honestly confused on the point. Does anyone think they can coast through life talking about lazy, shiftless blacks, grasping, hook-nosed Jews, lascivious Italians, cheap Scotsmen, drunken Irishmen, thieving Roma, illegal wetback Mexican-Americans, and claim that these are random, casually-chosen insults that just happen to accidentally mimic hateful ethnic stereotypes, and people will have to believe it? I suppose so.

I spent some time and effort describing exactly how crack use figured into the rich tapestry of false and poisonous stereotypes about blacks in the U.S. Miller’s reaction is really kind of sad:

Sad, because it demonstrates how desperately important it is not to understand this point, if one is going to continue defending “crackpipe” as a race-neutral appellation. It’s so simple a concept, repressing it must be hard. Cruelly, I’m about to explain it again. The War on Drugs was based largely on racist assumptions about blacks and drug crimes. Enforcement, predictably, was also racially skewed, directed disproportionately, almost exclusively, against black people. This generated a lot of arrest statistics which didn’t reflect the reality of drug crime in the U.S., but did a bang-up job of reinforcing the original racist assumptions. Soon, crack was seen exclusively as a black vice, and blacks as uniquely associated with and responsible for the crack problem, which itself was blown up to seem much bigger than it was/is. And that is the false and extremely damaging stereotype with which we’re contending. Many Americans are willing to believe that any black person chosen at random may use or have used crack. That’s why falsely accusing any black man of being a crack user, thoughtlessly or maliciously, is not just rhetoric. It both draws on and in turn supports and furthers a racist stereotype and that’s. Why. It is. Bigoted. And. Wrong.

Miller on Racial Epithets:

So the test for whether a term is racist is that it’s equally offensive to all races? Bigotry is a lot more egalitarian than I thought.

Miller on Meaning:

And the definition of the word “jungle” is “a tropical ecosystem” and that of “bunny” is “a cute little rabbit.” Voila! Another perfectly race-neutral phrase for us to try out!

Miller gets all Logical on My Ass:

In other news, there’s a non-racist way to use a rope. Therefore, nobody was ever lynched. Of course there are non-racist ways to use the word “crackpipe.” For example, if Miller said, “Pass me the crackpipe. I must post on the SDMB,” that would be fine. However, the fact that you can use a word in a nonracist way does not tell us that all uses of the word are not racist. I’ve explained why using it as the OP did both leans on and furthers racist attitudes about blacks.

The only interesting part about this is the insistence that short of the N-word, one should be able to say anything one wants without being accused of bigotry. Sorry, guys – there is no magic list of rules, so there are no loopholes.

Finally, Miller offers up the ultimate defense:

Look around at the stupid things people believe and then tell me, Miller, why do you think this? In this thread, it’s true, the lie got debunked pretty early (not by the OP or any of its defenders, by the way). But there are plenty of people who are perfectly willing to believe (or at least repeat) anything bad or scandalous they hear about politicians, or drugs, or black people, or anything at all. What makes this lie so special? What exempts it from what we know about people and gossip and racial prejudice? At best, the words “crackpipe Ray Nagin” become part of the background, something half-remembered but still part of our consciousness when we think about blacks and drugs.

I’m depressed about this. The fact that the appellation is a lie is not enough to get people to question it. The fact that the lie maligns someone is not enough to get people to denounce it. The fact that it relies on and furthers a vicious and false view of black people is not enough to get people to condemn it. They made it through the day without using the N-word – isn’t that enough?

The fact that the hypothetical standard “Please couch your defamatory lies about blacks in racially neutral terms” still wouldn’t set the bar quite low enough for everyone makes me feel that perhaps we should rethink what we’re doing here.

97

Well, fine, but if one of the chief people perpetuating the stereotypes IS the Mayor, he deserves all he gets. This article discussed the affairs of Dame Rumor, and Nagin went on national TV to repeat the most vicious and untrue ones, largely contrary to the truth and obviously not having performed the most basic investigative work:

Indeed, I remember the worst stories being invented and repeated largely by black interviewees. Subsequently, here in NY, I heard racist mutterings I haven’t heard since I grew up here in the 70’s, time of the drug epidemic, chain snatchings, teenage mothers, graffiti, and crime that drove middle-class people out of neighborhoods they’d been in for three generations: See? I told you, they just don’t have it togehter, they’ll turn on each other like starving dogs…

It was sad and everybody took it back after it was revealed the stories were faked, but I’ve never quite been able to forgive Nagin for his part in it. He injured the reputation of his city in a national forum right when it needed the goodwill of the rest of us. That is not a leader of the people.

98

I think it’s easy to point fingers at the black people involved, but only because they were the ones caught in the chaos of the disaster. I don’t find fault in the victims for believing the rumors of violence and repeating them to make a plea for help, but I do find fault with the people standing on the sidelines who believed the rumors and used those rumors as justification in letting thousands of mostly innocent people to suffer needlessly.

My impression was that the media got wind of a few unverified stories from panic-stricken people and treated these stories like proven fact, and then sprinkled heaping handfuls of sensationalization on them as they pressed for ratings. If anyone was to blame, I think it was the media for placing an inordinate amount of attention on looters and other criminals in the beginning stages of the disaster. That set a tone that made it easy for a public already predisposed to a certain bias to believe the most craziest things. The levees had broken, the streets were flooding, and where were the cameras? In Wal-mart, filming people stealing pairs of $15 shoes.

99

He believed his then chief of police, Eddie Compass, whose job the “basic investigative work” arguably was. To his credit, he subsequently pressured Compass in no uncertain terms to resign. Sure, neither one of them should have repeated unsubstantiated rumors through the media, but at the time they were under severe stress and *desperate *to highlight the urgency of the situation to get the federal government off its ass and into New Orleans to start evacuating people.

100

Some of those sideline responses were pretty fucked up:

Troops begin combat operations in New Orleans