The Methodist church is an offshoot of the Episcopalian church, so you sort of can be both.
Read for comprehension.
I stated a list of facts, then I stated what my opinion is based on those facts.
Your interpretation assumes that she isn’t acting in her own best interests. In my experience people tend to do things that benefit themselves. It might be a happy accident that she happened to benefit from her minority status, but even if it is she should have known better than to take advantage of the system. The odds that it was simply innocent are so astonishingly small in my opinion that it’s not even worth considering.
…and there’s the race card.
Got any actual proof for that racism accusation you are throwing out there?
Assuming she believed herself to have Native American heritage - and there’s no reason to assume otherwise - why should she have ‘known better’? She didn’t do anything wrong.
How about “It’s my opinion based on facts”? You seem to like that one.
FACT: Obama is an African-American.
FACT: Many Americans are biased against African-Americans.
My opinion, based on the above facts: Obama suffers from many Americans being biased against him.
Irrefutable proof, by your standards.
Do you think “proof” and “opinion” are synonyms? You must, since that’s the only way your post makes sense.
I think it’s reasonable to observe facts and then form an opinion based on them. When new facts emerge you might change your opinion. Is this not reasonable? What better method is it that you prefer?
By the way, I think a lot of people would agree with the hypothetical opinion about Obama that you posted.
You’re the one who seems to confuse “proof” with “opinion.” In the above-quoted post, you’re demanding that someone provide “proof” that someone else is racist. Absent a confession (and I doubt you would accept that), what proof could there possibly be that someone else is racist? I’m merely mocking your demand that someone prove that another person is racist.
You stated a mix of facts and insinuations, cobbled together by a loudmouth local talk show host in a pathetic effort to play both the race card and the truthfulness card simultaneously. You may note that it backfired.
To repeat, you ought to know better.
I’m being called a racist. You would have me accept this without pushing back and demanding proof of the claim? Simply because everyone knows racists never admit it? So I should just accept it?
Really?
I stated a list of facts. None are in dispute.
You really have a fixation on Howie Carr. You seem to be unable to discuss anything regarding MA politics without dwelling on him.
You’re entitled to your opinion of yourself. So are other people entitled to their opinions of you.
If I were going to form an opinion about someone, especially one as damning as calling them a racist, I’d have some reasoning to back it up. I guess I’m just a decent human being like that.
What would constitute “proof” in your view of what would make someone who denies it a racist?
Three posters called me a racist. (YogSosoth first, then miss elizabeth and sachertorte agreeing with him to varying degrees.)
Let’s see what argument they can make to back up their claim.
I’m certainly not going to help them do it. I’m not even going to give them the pleasure of denying it. It’s as beneath me to deny it as it should be beneath them to make the baseless accusation in the first place.
Wait. What?
My post refuted the statement that “it is racism,” because that is inaccurate. Scott Brown wasn’t being outright racist in the sense that ‘non-whites are bad.’ Calling attention to Warren in a “she doesn’t look Native American” is kind of racist. It isn’t racist in the traditional sense, but it is kind of racist in that he judged her based on how she looks.
While we’re all up in Debaser’s grill, I thought I would add this little nugget.
Shrill - Used by Republican males to indicate that the subject is not a Republican, is female, and has spoken in a public forum. Audiologists are currently studying inner ear structure and unique DNA basis of Republican males which result in this syndrome.
Fair enough. I did state “to varying degrees” since you said “kind of”. But the original post that started the accusations of racism was clearly directed at me. He was quoting me and directed it at “you guys” meaning me and I guess anyone else who agrees with me regarding Warren.
If you were just talking about Scott Brown and not me that’s fine. But it wasn’t clear from your post.
I only reported the one initial post to the mods for insults.
So I’m a sexist too?
Off the top of my head:
Shrill female republican:
Anne Coulter
Non shrill female republican:
Sarah Palin
Shrill female democrat:
Elizabeth Warren
Non Shrill female democrat:
Margery Eagan
Sorry to disappoint your Republican stereotypes, but it’s possible to be shrill on both sides of the aisle.