Self-Righteousness on a Bumper Sticker
The second level of arrogance in that bumper sticker is the implicit assertion: “I’m not prejudiced. Only you are.” I never cease to be amazed at how many liberals are convinced that they are free of human frailties and weaknesses — including prejudice. You want to see liberal prejudice? Let it drop that you attend church — and watch how rapidly the assumption gets made that you are poorly educated, think the Earth is 6,000 years old, believe that every species was created in its current form, and support mandatory prayer in public schools. One of my professors in California — an otherwise properly liberal feminist who went to grad school when “female professor” was still something of a novelty — made the mistake of letting it drop in casual conversation with colleagues that she had started attending church. She soon found that admitting such a weird behavior was a source of amusement and even some razzing.
Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL), who compared Republican proposals for health care reform to the Holocaust? Look, we disagree about the best way to accomplish a noble goal — getting everyone insured — but this assumption that only Democrats care about suffering is so incredibly blind in its arrogance that I can’t even be angry at him. Mostly, I feel sorry for Grayson that he has been paying so little attention to alternative proposals.
I guess the ultimate expression of this liberal self-righteousness comes from Garrison Keillor, the host of NPR’s Prairie Home Companion. After the 2004 election, he proposed that “born-again Christians” should lose the right to vote. His latest exercise in self-righteousness is the following statement: “Republicans should be cut out of the health care system entirely and simply provided with aspirin and hand sanitizer. Thirty-two percent of the population identifies with the GOP, and if we cut off health care to them, we could probably pay off the deficit in short order.” I mean, if we don’t agree with him on exactly how to reform health care, then we deserve to die. I’m reminded of the Nazis’ T4 program, which was a bit more active in its methods, but motivated by the same certitude and with the same goal: mass extermination of those not fit to live.
I remember a time when I found the tone of Rev. Jerry Falwell and the Moral Majority just a bit too self-righteous. But compared to what liberalism has become in the last few years, Falwell doesn’t seem half so bad.
Sorry, Clayton, I love your work on guns, but this article is “stoopid.” Where’s your sense of humor? Why do you assume the slogan assumes the car owner has no prejudices? It only says, “don’t assume mine are the same as yours.” This, of course, could have multiple meanings, which is the whole point of the slogan. Your assumptions just show your prejudices – sort of proving the slogan’s point. The last thing we need to be doing is losing our sense of humor. That would make us liberals.
I googled the “For Limited Government? Then move to Somalia” bumper sticker, and this was one of the sites that came up. I love the “Don’t Assume I Share Your Prejudices” bumper sticker, and MUST HAVE ONE! If it annoys partisans, so much the better! That’s the sign of a great bumper sticker! I also like
“Don’t believe everything you think” and “Subvert the dominant paradigm.”
The bumper sticker is like a self parody. It begs for a clever funny version for the car parked next to it at the Student Union lot.
1. Patrick-Good point, but it is a good chance that Cramer is right and she doesn’t see herself as prejudiced in any way.
However, there is a possibility that someone will alert her to this article, since there is enough identifying info. And conservatives need to be building bridges with young people like that. Hey, she cannot help it if she has been in public education her whole life. As a matter of fact, she is probably still in an institute of liberal learning.
Bumper sticker – 1
Clayton Cramer – 0
Peace.
DS
1. Patrick,
I think I have to come down on Clayton’s side here… he’s citing the bumper sticker but the collective evidence proves his notion, I think… liberals, once they publicly self-identify as with the blue girl sticker, are even more resolved to believe bad things about conservatives… the presence of the two stickers on the same car, especially with the implied youth of the driver (‘blue girl’), are enough to convince me that she is indeed accusing conservatives of having what she believes are typical conservative prejudices, i.e. racism, classism etc.
It isn’t humorless to draw these conclusions from the sticker, merely realistic.
I’d like to know the stats in one area of college attendance– how many California kids come to university at, say, Texas A&M or Oklahoma State…?
My guess is that for every 100 Texas kids who go off to the people’s republic of Kalifornia to attend college, there is perhaps ONE going the other direction.. or none. If IDAHO draws their ire, Texas would be like another planet to them.
I agree with 1. Patrick. The bumper sticker doesn’t specify that it’s directed to Idahoans. It’s a generic statement. Is it arrogant? Not really.
Just think about it: “Don’t Assume That I Share Your Prejudices”. ‘I have prejudices, but they are not the same as yours’ That’s what I read. Besides the driver just wants to be funny and pique your sense of ‘cleverness’.
This may be one of those “you had to be there to get it” type of things and I will give the writer the benefit of the doubt that he is on target.
As a rule I find it true that people tend to see others more critically than themselves.
Just what gives this ‘Blue Woman’ the right to tell anyone what they may or may not assume? Who is she to judge? On another note, I would like to ask those vehicle owner’s whose cars display the “COEXIST” bumper sticker, if they are willing to “COEXIST” with those who believe it’s a bad thing that one baby in four is terminated by ‘choice’. Just asking. “IHS”
As a Maryland resident, I wonder if I can get a “red guy, blue state” sticker somewhere…
My prejudice is against people who clutter up the back of a car with bumper stickers. Fanatics and nutters all.
Better to keep your political views to yourself, you may be thought to be an idiot, but if you plaster it on your car, you prove it.
@8. Kerry:
Just what gives this ‘Blue Woman’ the right to tell anyone what they may or may not assume?
The first amendment gives her the right to express herself in public. She isn’t telling you what you may or may not assume. She is giving you fair warning.
Who is she to judge?
Who are you to judge? That’s the point of the bumper sticker, genius.
On another note, I would like to ask those vehicle owner’s whose cars display the “COEXIST” bumper sticker, if they are willing to “COEXIST” with those who believe it’s a bad thing that one baby in four is terminated by ‘choice’. Just asking. “IHS”
Personally I am quite willing to coexist with folks who think abortion is bad, so long as they are willing to coexist with those who disagree with them. We can agree to disagree, right?
Peace.
DS
A judicial commentary on the prejudgment of prejudice.
Bumper sticker – 1
Clayton Cramer – 0
I’ll have to second that one.
And with so many other great bumper stickers out there to cheer or laugh at…?
Go ahead and cut conservatives out of the government health care system. Most of the conservatives I know have insurance…comes with having a job!
Absolutely correct, Thom!!! You want insurance, go to work!!!
All that bumper ticker tells me is “This vehicle is driven by an arrogant self righteous crusader that is best avoided”.
#14 Thom – Nice one. How about, “Who’d pay for it?” Wouldn’t that make a good proposed amendment to the healthcare bill? Registered Republicans and Libertarians and Constitution Party people (What do they call themselves?) are excluded, but also don’t have to pay the taxes for it! What a furor would ensue!
I side with the author on this one. The sticker taken alone is possibly humorous. The two together send a different message… a Freudian slip, methinks. Context.
Hey,Clayton here’s your edit:
Don’t assume I share your prejudices against the second amendment and guns.
I fixed that for you.
Back in the early 80′s I saw a Volvo loaded with bumper stickers that had two that really caught my eye. On the left side the owner had a sticker that read “Save Soviet Jewry” and on the right “Nuclear Freeze Now!” as if one concern was unrelated to the other. This gave me an insight into the mentality of liberalism, even in its more benign 1980s version, then any article, conversation or book ever could. Liberalism has evolved into an incurable narcissistic socio-pathology. Most liberals are beyond hope as our usual trolls vivo and especially David S demonstrate on virtually every thread.
Mr. Cramer:
It’s a wonderful bumpersticker, since it beggars the question of WHY the bearer might not share the reader’s prejudices.
I would offer that she may already be exceeding her vehicle’s maximum gross vehicle weight rating by toting around prejudices of her very own.
She won’t share yours because there’s simply no room left for them.
I tell ya, these kids today…
# 8 Kerry, Excellent use of sarcasm by taking empty leftist platitudes and foisting little “blue girl” on her liberal petard. Anyone with the slightest bit of a sense of humor would appreciate it. Of course a “genius”, like the wonderful David S, might not get it.
In regard to the inane “coexist” bumper sticker, I have a question: who, in that symbolic line-up, has the most trouble coexisting? Think hard David S, I know what a stumper that question is.
Give Mr. Cramer a break here. It isn’t as though there isn’t already enough evidence of this attitude on display. It is prevalent in fact. What this kid probably doesn’t get is that some of us do appreciate the irony she is providing.Rolls eyes and moves on.
PC-ness: ostentatious display of inexistent enlightenment.
This is my (and a good) working description of this misery.
My favorite bumper sticker is “hate is not a family value”, beautiful as an expression of the hate of the fool who puts it on his car.
Face it, the vaunted free speech thing means nothing to these creatures.
Liberals are far and away the most bigoted people on the planet. They live in an echo chamber of NY Times/ MSM propaganda and draw stick figure caricatures of their opponents. Their hatred of Sarah Palin was based on her world view, her pro life credentials ( everyone on the coasts know the only good Down’s Syndrome baby is a dead one) and the fact she was an attractive married woman, not a politico-slut or disgusting hairy legged womyn.
If you want to see liberal bias in action, look at Hollywood portrayals of Christians, Southerners or the military. The amazing thing, in light of their self proclaimed genius how abysmally ignorant they are of anyone outside their group think enclaves. In the Cold War the Left despised America and sympathized with communist tyrants in Moscow, Bejing, Hanoi and Havana. Now they attach sainthood to the Palestinian “Hitlers in Headscarves” and other Muslim mad men. Anita Dunn salivating at the grave of the mass murderer Mao is disgusting to normal freedom loving Americans while leftists wonder what the uproar is over.
While resident dopes like David S and Vivo will scoff at the notion of quoting the Good Book (I admit to the same sort of prejudice; anyone who quotes from The NY Times or CBS is in my mind a shallow fool), allow me to label the left with the words of Proverbs 30 verse 12- “There is a generation that are pure in their own eyes and yet are not washed from their filthiness”
Whenever I see a particularly stupid/annoying bumper sticker, I recall a military tour in Germany in the 1970s. At the time some German drivers decorated the back of their autos with a cartoon yellow duck. I asked a fellow GI, who had spent his junior year of college as an exchange student in Germany, what was the significance of the duck decal. He explained that it was similar to a handicapped plate in the U.S., the German Government required mentally retarded drivers to display the duck on their vehicles as a warning to other drivers. He always had that subtle sense of humor.
I have to shake my head at Americans’ terror of being accused of prejudice – particularly the ridiculous ‘racist’ label. Has it occurred to anyone that the complete lack of racial prejudice in Idaho might have something to do with the comparative racial homogeneity there? That the higher incidence of racial prejudice in California correlates with the greater degree of ‘diversity’ there?
Sometimes ‘prejudices’ are just generalizations. Sometimes generalizations are valid. Mostly, they are based on experience – even if the only experience was gained in a classroom. Those friends of yours who adopted black babies are about to get some real-world experience. I sincerely hope they will be fortunate.
When it comes to stupid bumper stickers how about”mean people suck”
” All that bumper ticker tells me is ‘This vehicle is driven by an arrogant self righteous crusader that is best avoided.’ ” (#15) Ditto that.
Letting the occasional bumper sticker sentiment get under your skin for a minute or two is understandable. I recently saw– not once, but twice in the same morning– a sticker that proclaimed, “I think, therefore I am liberal.” Top that for utter arrogance! Very little can pierce or change such thick arrogance, however, so it’s probably best not to give it the honor of attention. Such prideful eyes will only see confirmation in what was meant to be a slight.
I was just thinking that I could not remember the last bumber sticker I ever had on one of my cars then I remembered…it was one of those timeless one.s from 1969 on my 1966 dodge which would unfortunately still possibly be relavent to some folks forty years later.. it was “stop the war”
DON’T ASSUME THE TROLLS THINK.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment
PS
: ) : ) : ))))
Come on, DS. Even you have to admit that preemptively informing the driver behind you that they have prejudices and that you don’t share them is ridiculously arrogant, self-absorbed, and yes, hateful. That it’s hateful without specific knowledge is the very definition of prejudice.
Since we have and more importantly she has no data on the driver behind her at any given time, but we do have data on the girl in the form of that sticker, the only thing we can say for certain is that this girl is prejudiced and is okay broadcasting it. I know the broadcasting is the point for a liberal, not the prejudice, but it’s still obviously there.
If you disagree, well, don’t you think that might be a sign of your own prejudice? Don’t worry, we can still coexist! I’m used to being judged based on my appearance and party affiliation.
I’ve always avoided Garrison Keillor’s material, but I do know that his rantings are for humor’s sake. The quotes are so over the top that they are clearly meant as parody of the political polarization we have today. The writer (and editors — hello?) need to lighten up a bit in order to see the obvious.
As far as the bumper sticker is concerned, I’ll side with the author and assume guilt until innocence is proven.
Here in L.A., there are still too many Obama bumper stickers, although their number is fast dwindling. I recently saw a brand-new car, sold in August or September, with an Obama/Biden sticker on it. Must have been applied to the car at least 8 months after the election. How pathetic is that — that someone should crave that “cool” identity so badly (not to mention wrongly)?
The first level of arrogance is that the assumption that anyone who lives in Idaho is likely to be prejudiced.
Really? You need to take a course in logic. The statement doesn’t have the word Idaho in it. The funny part is that that is your assumption, and she doesn’t necessarily share it. Seems like you were the perfect target for the bumper sticker. On a lighter note–dude, get out more or find a hobby.
Good article, but it has one major fault. You compare racial prejudice to religious prejudice. The obvious difference is that your religion is a conscious decision that you made somewhere in your life, akin to joining any special interest group. Nobody in the history of mankind got to choose his or her race.
Your second assumption, that the bearer of the bumper sticker is calling you prejudiced while insisting that she isn’t, is another bit of fallacious reasoning. There’s only a few words on the bumper sticker, and none of them say, “you are prejudiced and I am not”. If I were to say, “don’t assume I share your tastes” it would similarly not mean that I lack tastes while you have them. It’s hard to imagine how you got this gig. They don’t pay you, do they?
A whole article inspired by a bumper sticker?
Clayton, I gotta give you an ‘A’ for creativity.
Good article, but it has one major fault. You compare racial prejudice to religious prejudice. The obvious difference is that your religion is a conscious decision that you made somewhere in your life, akin to joining any special interest group. Nobody in the history of mankind got to choose his or her race.
Religion is a little more complex than that. In fact, religious prejudice can follow a few models, and one of them is essentialist, in which, for example, Islam takes on some elements of a racial categorization. Anyone with an Islamic name, therefore, becomes a target for intolerance whether or not they have actively chosen Islam as a religion. A similar effect happens with Judaism, with genocidal consequences. Its quite likely that a significant number of Jews weren’t practicing at all, but were still rounded up and murdered during Europe’s various pogroms.
it is the blue girl in a red state’s right to put the stickers on her car..
even it you don’t like it. If she reached out and smacked you and said that, then you could complain. Otherwise, it’s funny, and she probably gets a hard time from clear thinkers.
Idaho is nothing compared to Utah. That state is layer on layer of redredred!!! Plus, Idaho and utah don’t seem to have the problems the blue states have either, gangs, drugs, kids dropping out of school, welfare queens etc. Maybe being red has more benefits then the left wants to admit…of course the left is use to things like Chicago etc.. they would not know peace.
Having a political bumper sticker on yur car these days is like saying `please slash my tires and scratch my paint`….
Best bumper sticker I have ever seen in decades:
“I AM DRIVING THIS WAY TO ANNOY YOU!”
LMAO@ 40. whyyeseyec
SO TRUE! HAHAHAHAHAHA!
Hubby and I have never put a bumper sticker on any of our vehicles we’ve owned. To us it’s just ‘tacky’.
But, hey… to each his/her own.
Hoper the bumper stickered car doesn’t get keyed though.
lol
Whyyese–lol, if this had been written on a left or liberal site, you’d all be accusing the left of wanting to kill teabaggers. Bunch of pant-pissing authoritarian pansies
i put a “don’t tread on me” bumper sticker on both of my cars. and both the stickers have razor cuts thru them. is this how the left views property rights, and freedom of speech?
44. am2 prunejuice,
That’s because the leftists are a bunch of thugs who don’t appreciate property. Look at how they treated the National Mall for B00bambi’s inauguration day?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMrJE7J3fWU
-And, yet, when ‘teabaggers’ show up they leave the place clean and garbage put neatly in trash receptacles provided by the City.
Yep. The Leftist’s are such ‘earth’ lovin’, ‘goody-goody’ folks. lmfao
I would submit that the recent hullaballoo over Rush Limbaugh pretty much proves Mr. Cramer’s point about today’s liberals.
Prunjuice.
Maybe Obama’s secret Kenyan girlfriend did it. You need only imagine it to be so under the current paradigm for it to in fact have happened.
This may be why the trolls are in such a bad mood.
http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/pubs/Harris_Poll_2009_10_16.pdf
The second level of arrogance in that bumper sticker is the implicit assertion: “I’m not prejudiced. Only you are.” I never cease to be amazed at how many liberals are convinced that they are free of human frailties and weaknesses — including prejudice.
I always refer these liberals to pages 277-306 of my favorite work of hermeneutical phenomenology, Hans-Georg Gadamer’s “Truth and Method”, to the section entitled “Elements of a Theory of Hermeneutic Experience”, specifically section (B), “Prejudices as Conditions of Understanding”.
If that doesn’t work, I tell them to kiss my prejudiced *ss.
@45. Delia:
That’s because the leftists are a bunch of thugs who don’t appreciate property. Look at how they treated the National Mall for B00bambi’s inauguration day?
Certainly you recall that trash cans were removed, for security reasons. Right?
And, yet, when ‘teabaggers’ show up they leave the place clean and garbage put neatly in trash receptacles provided by the City.
Yet more evidence that there were at most 100,000 in attendance on 9/12. Events that draw a larger crowd than this overflow the capacity of the receptacles.
Yep. The Leftist’s are such ‘earth’ lovin’, ‘goody-goody’ folks. lmfao
Har har. Just keeping the sanitation workers employed, sweetie. Union solidarity…
Peace.
DS
47. Moho,
It was you. Please turn yourself into the though police.
Thank you.
Delia
Thought police:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Police
Re #1 Patrick. I think you’re over-thinking this. We may see the irony, but there is a whole sea of Americans who don’t.
Moho #34 and #36: I have to admire someone who isn’t too afraid to say what they think for fear of sounding stupid. Ditto for ‘blue girl’.
Delia:
For you [I for one don't assume that Rush shares my prejudices]:
Partial list of Limbaugh Racism:
–>Arguing during the 2008 campaign that no one is permitted to criticize Barack Obama: “You can’t criticize the little black man-child. You just can’t do it, ’cause it’s just not right. It’s not fair. He’s such a victim.”
–>“We are being told that we have to hope he succeeds, that we have to bend over, grab the ankles, bend over forward, backward, whichever, because his father was black, because this is the first black president.”
–>Reacting to a report of black students assaulting a white student on a bus (an incident that police determined was not racially motivated), Limbaugh brought in Barack Obama: “In Obama’s America, the white kids now get beat up with the black kids cheering, ‘right on, right on, right on.’”
–>On learning from a caller to his show that St. Louis was extending a light rail system into East St. Louis–a community of some 40,000 residents, almost all of whom are black (radio, 6/27/94): “They got a light rail system to East St. Louis where nobody goes?”
–>”Look it, let me put it to you this way. The NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons. There, I said it.” Limbaugh (10/14/09) admitted making this remark, but claimed it was a response to the actions of one player who was penalized for taunting an opponent. Limbaugh admitted that his language “makes it look racial, the way I chose to describe it. I could have perhaps chosen a different term.”
** Limbaugh praised former segregationist Sen. Strom Thurmond for calling a gay soldier “not normal”: “He’s not encumbered by being politically correct…. If you want to know what America used to be–and a lot of people wish it still were–then you listen to Strom Thurmond.” (TV show, 9/1/93, transcript archived on Nexis) In the America that “used to be,” Thurmond was one of the country’s leading racists, running for president in 1948 on the Dixiecrat ticket, with a platform that opposed federal anti-lynching laws and boasted the slogan, “Segregation Forever!”
** In 1992, on his now-defunct TV show, Limbaugh expressed his ire when Spike Lee urged that black schoolchildren get off from school to see his film Malcolm X: “Spike, if you’re going to do that, let’s complete the education experience. You should tell them that they should loot the theater, and then blow it up on their way out.”
Limbaugh admitted to Newsday’s Richard Gehr (10/8/90) that as a DJ in Pittsburgh in the 1970s he had once dismissed a black caller by saying, “Take that bone out of your nose and call me back.”
** Discussing a Chicago inner-city schoolteacher punished for using a math question that focused on the price of prostitution and cocaine habits, Limbaugh suggested that the teacher should be credited for “understanding the culture these kids come from.” The math question began: “Rufus is pimping three girls.” (TV show, 5/24/94; transcript archived on Nexis)
From experience, I know that empirical evidence has very little effect on your beliefs. So I’m actually looking forward to your rationalization of why none of this matters.
32. Sowell Disciple:
I’ve always avoided Garrison Keillor’s material, but I do know that his rantings are for humor’s sake. The quotes are so over the top that they are clearly meant as parody of the political polarization we have today. The writer (and editors — hello?) need to lighten up a bit in order to see the obvious.
This is the fun part. The political landscape has gotten so twisted that characters like Keillor, Jon Stewart (a comedian), Bill Maher (ditto), and so forth are considered political pundits. This allows them to ridicule their opponents with impunity. If anything they say is over the top, and people complain, all they need to respond with is “Hey, this is *comedy*! Lighten up!” The only thing Jon Stewart has gotten in trouble for the last few years was the Harry Truman was a war criminal comment, and his difficulties there stemmed from the fact that Truman was a Democrat, and is now beloved by the party’s old guard. If he’d said it about Reagan or the elder George Bush, he’d have been praised…if he said it about the younger George Bush he’d probably win a Nobel Peace Prize. This has led to a perverse version of the political debate, in which a quick wit and a sharp tongue are mistaken for political acumen; one of these clowns has actually gotten himself narrowly elected to the Senate.
David S. Moho [trolls in no particular order]:
We’re no strangers to love
You know the rules and so do I
A full commitment’s what I’m thinking of
You wouldn’t get this from any other guy
I just wanna tell you how I’m feeling
Gotta make you understand
Never gonna give you up, never gonna let you down
Never gonna run around and desert you
Never gonna make you cry, never gonna say goodbye
Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you
We’ve known each other for so long
Your heart’s been aching but you’re too shy to say it
Inside we both know what’s been going on
We know the game and we’re gonna play it
And if you ask me how I’m feeling
Don’t tell me you’re too blind to see
Never gonna give you up, never gonna let you down
Never gonna run around and desert you
Never gonna make you cry, never gonna say goodbye
Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you
Never gonna give you up, never gonna let you down
Never gonna run around and desert you
Never gonna make you cry, never gonna say goodbye
Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you
(Ooh give you up)
(Ooh give you up)
(Ooh) never gonna give, never gonna give (give you up)
(Ooh) never gonna give, never gonna give (give you up)
We’ve known each other for so long
Your heart’s been aching but you’re too shy to say it
Inside we both know what’s been going on
We know the game and we’re gonna play it
I just wanna tell you how I’m feeling
Gotta make you understand
You’ve been rick-rolled, biotches.
Partial list of Limbaugh Racism:
Wikiquote has the list–but oddly enough, no one seems to have found the audio or video to go with all those quotes. I wonder why?
54. DavidN
Good, sobering point you make. I agree with the exception of substituting “half wit” for “quick wit” in your final sentence.
How about taking a magic marker and adding the word “liberal” to that bumper sticker?
“Certainly you recall that trash cans were removed, for security reasons.”
Certainly a lack of nearby trash cans is license to litter. Right?
Obama forbid that people be expected to hold onto their trash or put it in a pocket until they find a trash can.
Klayton,
Wikiquote has the list–but oddly enough, no one seems to have found the audio or video to go with all those quotes. I wonder why?
I’m beginning to feel sorry for you. Here’s everything on the list, cited with date and source. From journalism to academia, that’s the maximum any writer or researcher need provide. After that, its incumbent on you to prove that your dismissal of the facts has some basis, i.e., that the citations are bogus. You won’t do that, you can’t do that. The only bright side that came out of this is that you didn’t mention your daughter’s name in your post. Thank god, she can still hide from the ignominy that follows your surname.
**Arguing during the 2008 campaign that no one is permitted to criticize Barack Obama: “You can’t criticize the little black man-child. You just can’t do it, ’cause it’s just not right. It’s not fair. He’s such a victim.” (Radio, 8/20/08; audio available at Media Matters, 8/20/08)
** “We are being told that we have to hope he succeeds, that we have to bend over, grab the ankles, bend over forward, backward, whichever, because his father was black, because this is the first black president.” (Hannity, 1/21/09, archived on Nexis; video available at Media Matters, 1/22/09)
** Reacting to a report of black students assaulting a white student on a bus (an incident that police determined was not racially motivated), Limbaugh brought in Barack Obama: “In Obama’s America, the white kids now get beat up with the black kids cheering, ‘right on, right on, right on.’” (Media Matters, 9/15/09)
** On learning from a caller to his show that St. Louis was extending a light rail system into East St. Louis–a community of some 40,000 residents, almost all of whom are black (radio, 6/27/94): “They got a light rail system to East St. Louis where nobody goes?”
** “Look it, let me put it to you this way. The NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons. There, I said it.” Limbaugh (10/14/09) admitted making this remark, but claimed it was a response to the actions of one player who was penalized for taunting an opponent. Limbaugh admitted that his language “makes it look racial, the way I chose to describe it. I could have perhaps chosen a different term.”
** Limbaugh praised former segregationist Sen. Strom Thurmond for calling a gay soldier “not normal”: “He’s not encumbered by being politically correct…. If you want to know what America used to be–and a lot of people wish it still were–then you listen to Strom Thurmond.” (TV show, 9/1/93, transcript archived on Nexis) In the America that “used to be,” Thurmond was one of the country’s leading racists, running for president in 1948 on the Dixiecrat ticket, with a platform that opposed federal anti-lynching laws and boasted the slogan, “Segregation Forever!”
** In 1992, on his now-defunct TV show, Limbaugh expressed his ire when Spike Lee urged that black schoolchildren get off from school to see his film Malcolm X: “Spike, if you’re going to do that, let’s complete the education experience. You should tell them that they should loot the theater, and then blow it up on their way out.” (TV show, 10/29/92; transcript archived on Nexis)
** Limbaugh admitted to Newsday’s Richard Gehr (10/8/90) that as a DJ in Pittsburgh in the 1970s he had once dismissed a black caller by saying, “Take that bone out of your nose and call me back.”
** “Have you ever noticed how all newspaper composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?” (Newsday, 10/8/90)
** Discussing a Chicago inner-city schoolteacher punished for using a math question that focused on the price of prostitution and cocaine habits, Limbaugh suggested that the teacher should be credited for “understanding the culture these kids come from.” The math question began: “Rufus is pimping three girls.” (TV show, 5/24/94; transcript archived on Nexis)
Minor quibble: Why is it a “noble goal” that everyone have health insurance? In a free market, you pays your money and you takes your chances. Of course in our semi-socialist state, folks get coverage at the ER without paying for it, so there’s a cost to everyone else for their not having health insurance, but that’s not an issue of nobility.
If anything they say is over the top, and people complain, all they need to respond with is “Hey, this is *comedy*! Lighten up!”
That’s exactly what Limbaugh said. Forgive me, for I do not have the brain implant that you all received at birth that enables you to claim an action is X when one person does it, and Y when another does it.
The bumper sticker is strictly her choice. Stupid, but her choice.
Not a thing wrong with Rush’s remarks, nothing i.e., “rufus is pimping three girls”…so?… you know Rufus? Maybe if you didn’t want to cover up hypothetical kids like Rufus, the crips and bloods would not have such a foothold in the Chicago hoods…you in particular always look for the wrong never the good. blahblahblah…
David S (11)
“We can agree to disagree, right?”
Ok, I agree that you should be fed to the bears at sunrise. You might disagree, but so what?
Your assumption is that all opinions are equally invalid, and that there is no such thing as right, wrong, or morality.
Sometimes it so happens that one opinion is better than another, or that they are mututally exclusive. You might have the opinion that I should not ever be able to possess a firearm, I might have the opposite opinion. However, only one of us can successfully act on their opinion! Either I am allowed to, or I am not.
Opinions and ideas have consequences and should be carefully considered.
My prejudices:
Bumper stickers are for morons.
I can’t stand intolerant people.
Life is too short to drink cheap beer.
If it’s trite, it’s probably right.
Beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes to the bone.
Life may not be perfect, but it sure as hell beats the alternative.
One does not discuss politics, religion, or money in polite company.
& others too numerous to mention.
I’m beginning to feel sorry for you. Here’s everything on the list, cited with date and source. From journalism to academia, that’s the maximum any writer or researcher need provide.
Hey, it’s a lot of work to go find links to those citations. How ’bout since you’re so hot to prove your point, you find ‘em for us?
What? You don’t want to do some work and have others get the benefits? Welcome to my world vis-a-vis the wealth-redistributin’ Federal government, *sshole.
PLUS!!!…I don’t care what Rush “says”. Vick killed living breathing animals with his bare hands, the football crowd welcomes him back.. It’s different standards for different skin colors,”what can you do for me”, and political parties. puke
Moho (36):
Your second assumption, that the bearer of the bumper sticker is calling you prejudiced while insisting that she isn’t, is another bit of fallacious reasoning. There’s only a few words on the bumper sticker, and none of them say, “you are prejudiced and I am not”.
Context, context, context. If it meant anything else than what Mr. Cramer suggests, then why put it in a bumper in the first place? Bumper stickers make statements of affiliation (or dis-affiliation). You don’t put on a bumper sticker for a candidate that you don’t care about one way or the other, you don’t put a sticker on for a resort that you have never gone or want to go to. The only reason to put that sticker on a bumper is to say “you are a prejudiced twit and I’m not.”
David S (49):
Yet more evidence that there were at most 100,000 in attendance on 9/12. Events that draw a larger crowd than this overflow the capacity of the receptacles.
Closer to a million. Receptacles are irrelevelent, as courteous people pack out their garbage when the receptacles are full. Why do you assume that everyone else is as rude as the Progressives are?
Moho (53):
Delia:
For you [I for one don't assume that Rush shares my prejudices]:
Partial list of Limbaugh Racism:
Every one of these is taken out of context. You cannot take Rush out of context, and you always have to watch out for satire. He quite often says one thing, meaning the exact opposite – and educated listeners know that he is speaking satirically.
Rush is also not afraid to call it likes he sees it. For instance, you quote
–>“We are being told that we have to hope he succeeds, that we have to bend over….” as if that is somehow a racist statement. If you would have listened to the context that – like the infamous “magic negro” quote and his comments about the black quarterback (whose name I forget) are actually about the Progressives and their racism. Just listen to the “drive-by media”, various Democrat politicians, and other Progressive public figures who decry any criticism of President Obama as racist. This is especially noticable when one can easily recollect them making the exact same criticism (or worse) of President Bush!
Hey, it’s a lot of work to go find links to those citations. How ’bout since you’re so hot to prove your point, you find ‘em for us?
Also, since we know your side has been caught peddling manufactured quotes, you have to now meet a higher standard. Otherwise it’s a valid assumption that you are back to your old ways of making it up. And considering the firestorms that have erupted over things Limbaugh has said over the years (like when he quoted and elaborated on McCain’s comments on Chelsea Clinton’s looks) you’d think those things you are claiming he said would have caused a ruckus when he said them, and be easily available now.
I mean, how hard would it be to collect them all and present them on a webpage or Youtube. You’d have the the one stop shopping URL to pound Limbaugh. The fact that such sites and Youtube recordings still haven’t surfaced says a lot about your side.
As for bumper stickers, I always liked the “Hate is not a family value”. Of course it’s not, because “hate a Leftist value”, as the trolls here demonstrate. And to make the “coexist” one more accurate, just have some red droplets coming off all the other letters but the C (and a flood coming from the Star of David.)
How ’bout since you’re so hot to prove your point, you find ‘em for us?
LOL. This is a perfect example of why you people fail so miserably in any one on one debate. If I offer a fact, and I cite it, I’ve done everything I need to do. In fact, if its false, you’ll completely destroy my point simply by looking it up and proving it. That’s the danger of providing false citations, and that’s why few people do it–the potential harm outweighs the benefit. Conversely, if you call it false without bothering to check up on the citation, then its a perfect indicator that you are arguing dishonestly. Moreover, its a dead give away that your position relies on an emotional attachment, rather than an empirical one.
As to your fiscal problems–hey dude, Somalia has a really enlightened immigration policy. I’m a bit tired of hearing you idiots complain about how rough you’ve got it here. Tell it to somebody who gives a sh^t.
#65 Porkov:
“Life is too short to drink cheap beer.”
This! Yes! This is wisdom!
If you take nothing else away from PJM today, burn Brother Porkov’s maxim into your soul.
Make mine an ice-cold Boddington’s, thanks.
You cannot take Rush out of context, and you always have to watch out for satire. He quite often says one thing, meaning the exact opposite – and educated listeners know that he is speaking satirically.
I’m still laughing about this. They say the same thing about God you know. Maybe one of the clerical officials that runs your religion…I mean political party…can come out and write an official declaration stating the definitive meaning of the great Rush’s statements. Perhaps he can also put to rest those five words on that very important bumper sticker that seem to be overshadowing everything else in Kliff K. Klaven’s life. I’m also looking forward to his projecting his own biases in attributing my joke about his name to some kind of racial thing. I love you guys! Don’t ever change. I haven’t had this much fun since I told my little brother that there was no Santa Claus!
Veni…
I just realized that it was Klaven asking for the citations in the first place! Ha! Apparently providing you with the citations is not enough, one must also go out and look them up for you. RIF, little dude, there are plenty of literacy programs in a neighborhood near you.
“Hey, it’s a lot of work to go find links to those citations. How ’bout since you’re so hot to prove your point, you find ‘em for us?
What? You don’t want to do some work and have others get the benefits? Welcome to my world vis-a-vis the wealth-redistributin’ Federal government, *sshole.”
Slow applause.
Number 76, you’re a perfect addition to Klaven’s little assemblage here. He will tell you that he is the first to condemn bigotry of any kind–as long as its not directed at one of his beloved political saints.
Relax Klaven, no need to hurry and delete that last comment at 76. now that I’ve drawn attention to it. I already took a screenshot of it…
Able minded folks…
‘Rick roll’ ‘em.
Not work the args.
Just sayin’
It’s like arguing with gnats.
One dies and another one takes its place.
BLeh.
Delia. Its obvious. You have no hope of winning an argument, so you have to resort to this stupid attempt at humor. I doubt even the mental midgets that frequent this place even find that lame crap, funny. Here’s a tip. I’m not an educated person, I know how to debate and how to argue my points from reading the paper everyday and seeking out information. I try to keep a balanced view. If I think something’s wrong because Bush did it, then I also think its wrong when Obama does it. These are all the anti-thesis of your movement, and indeed, why you can’t debate the issues with me. As I’ve said time and time again, it works for you fools, it makes the rest of the country laugh. You’re about as far away from affecting independents and the mainstream as one can imagine.
On topic:
One of my favorite bumper stickers is:
“I’m driving this way just to piss you off”
Off topic:
You can RickRoll a troll in reply shorthand:
“We’ve known each other for so long
Your heart’s been aching but you’re too shy to say it
Inside we both know what’s been going on
We know the game and we’re gonna play it
I just wanna tell you how I’m feeling
Gotta make you understand”
Also, replying to EACH OTHER about a subject and purposely OVERlooking a troll’s bullshit is VERY effective.
It render’s the troll null.
I’m beginning to feel sorry for you. Here’s everything on the list, cited with date and source. From journalism to academia, that’s the maximum any writer or researcher need provide.
Note that I said, “all those quotes.” Some of them I don’t doubt that he said–nor is there much reason to be ashamed of some of them. For example:
Back when I was an undergraduate, one of the required classes was American Multicultural Studies. The professor handed us a test to take that was supposed to make a point about how culturally biased intelligence tests were, with the implication that black kids would be geniuses on this test, and of course, we all did very poorly.
Some of the questions asked us what a “stable of lace” is (a pimp’s employees), what is the penalty for third offense “holding wood” (life in prison–because this means that you are receiving stolen property), and what is “mother’s day” (the day that welfare checks arrived). Now what was interesting wasn’t just that this professor (who was black) assumed that blackness was inextricably linked with crime and dependency–but that even many of the inner city black kids in our class hadn’t a clue what the answers were. Unlike their professor, who assumed that blackness and criminality were tied, they clearly didn’t buy into it.
Not surprisingly, the professor had a recurring problem with arrests for domestic violence. I think he was projecting his criminal tendencies onto the whole race.
I notice that you claim that there is audio and video for these quotes; make our lives easy. Give us the links to those clips.
He will tell you that he is the first to condemn bigotry of any kind–as long as its not directed at one of his beloved political saints.
Actually, he’s not. His books are more serious than his radio show, but I think even Limbaugh would tell you he’s an entertainer pursuing a cheap laugh and a big audience, not a deep thinker. Think of Libmaugh as the conservative equivalent of Keillor, who talks about disfranchising Christians, and exterminating Republicans by preventing them from having medical care.
I would like to ask those vehicle owner’s whose cars display the “COEXIST” bumper sticker, if they are willing to “COEXIST” with those who believe it’s a bad thing that one baby in four is terminated by ‘choice’.
The COEXIST bumper stickers (with the Islamic symbol for the C, the Star of David for the O, a cross for the T) really drive me crazy. There is one and only group that has a big problem with the idea of coexistence, and that’s Islamic fanaticism. Throughout the world today, every war being fought has Islamic fanaticism on one side–and an enormous range of beliefs (or non-beliefs) on the other side.
Those bumper stickers might have some merit if they were in places where Islamic fanaticism was widespread–but here, they are a statement of moral equivalency between mass murderers and victims. Not surprisingly, they are very popular with the “Blue Girl, Red State” bumper sticker crowd here.
What’s the concern? As a paid up conservative, I night get one of these myself, and stick it on my bumper with pride.
After all, intolerance, hypocrisy, ignorance, arrogance, moral confusion and fussy puritanism flourish by and large on the left, not on my side.
Back when I was an undergraduate, one of the required classes was American Multicultural Studies. The professor handed us a test to take that was supposed to make a point about how culturally biased intelligence tests were, with the implication that black kids would be geniuses on this test, and of course, we all did very poorly.
Apparently all of your evidence for your beliefs takes the form of unverifiable anecdote, much like the theme of this [useless] article today. You’ve finally broken my heart with your admission that you are incapable of using google. Not only do the citations have to be provided for you, the links themselves must be found because you are too inept to find them yourself. As I told one of your compatriots, questioning sources without actually making the effort to find them is the surest clue that the person you are arguing with has emotional, not empirical underpinnings for his beliefs. I don’t think MediaMatters is critical enough of Democrats, but they do a great job of monitoring this kind of thing. Here you go. Or do you need me to watch them for you too? There’s nothing funnier than watching a supposedly educated person dare you to make him look like a fool with information that is available to anyone. Idiot.
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200904140029
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200901220002
[because his father was black]
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200907220040
[the reparations thing...the most racist thing I can think of because it has absolutely no factual basis. Simply because he's black, his program must be reparations]
http://mediamatters.org/research/200701240010
http://mediamatters.org/research/200701240010
http://mediamatters.org/research/200803210012
Here’s another
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/06/obama_the_african_colonial.html
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200907240015
And many more.
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200909160012
http://mediamatters.org/research/200808200002
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200508180006
[calling Native Americans, Injuns]
Throughout the world today, every war being fought has Islamic fanaticism on one side–and an enormous range of beliefs (or non-beliefs) on the other side.
Are you really this ignorant? Its a specious remark to begin with, but the war in the Congo, has killed five million people in the last ten years and is arguably the most intense conflict going on today. Only ten percent of the population is Muslim, and they have almost no role in the conflict. Another one in Colombia. And as for Israel’s enourmous range of beliefs, even you aren’t dumb enough to think that. I used to think it was you suckering your hillbilly readership, but I can see now that it may be they who have the drop on you, with all the pathos that would imply.
The Moralizers (Christians) are dead!
Long live the Moralizers! (Commie-libs)
The more the commie-libs distance themselves from traditional morality the more they institute their own oppressive moral systems.
That’s called a fundamental misunderstanding of what morality is and how it works.
But they are only smart enough to cry “Revolution!” and “Rebellion!” Once that is done they sit down for some serious MTV.
I like taking the ‘coexist’ bumper stickers and slicing them – then overlaping them – so that they just say ‘exist’.
Its a specious remark to begin with, but the war in the Congo, has killed five million people in the last ten years and is arguably the most intense conflict going on today. Only ten percent of the population is Muslim, and they have almost no role in the conflict. Another one in Colombia.
Okay, you found two counterexamples. But the terrorism in Chechnya, in India, in the Philippines, in western China, in Afghanistan and Iraq, in the Sudan, in Sri Lanka, in Somalia, in Nigeria (admittedly of lower level than the others), in India, in Pakistan–are all Islamic terrorists on one side–and all sorts of beliefs on the other. Of course, being a liberal, you have to defend Islamic terrorism.
Apparently all of your evidence for your beliefs takes the form of unverifiable anecdote, much like the theme of this [useless] article today. You’ve finally broken my heart with your admission that you are incapable of using google. Not only do the citations have to be provided for you, the links themselves must be found because you are too inept to find them yourself. As I told one of your compatriots, questioning sources without actually making the effort to find them is the surest clue that the person you are arguing with has emotional, not empirical underpinnings for his beliefs. I don’t think MediaMatters is critical enough of Democrats, but they do a great job of monitoring this kind of thing. Here you go. Or do you need me to watch them for you too? There’s nothing funnier than watching a supposedly educated person dare you to make him look like a fool with information that is available to anyone. Idiot.
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200904140029
What you have demonstrated is an inability to read. The very first link you give me is clearly intended as a humorous attack on Obama. I don’t think that Limbaugh really believes that Obama doesn’t know that the pirates were black Muslim teenagers.
Just think about it: “Don’t Assume That I Share Your Prejudices”. ‘I have prejudices, but they are not the same as yours’ That’s what I read. Besides the driver just wants to be funny and pique your sense of ‘cleverness’.
Imagine if the bumper stickers on the car were, “Moral Majority and Proud Of It” and “I’m glad that I’m not a depraved sinner who deserves death like you.” Still clever and funny?
As to your fiscal problems–hey dude, Somalia has a really enlightened immigration policy. I’m a bit tired of hearing you idiots complain about how rough you’ve got it here. Tell it to somebody who gives a sh^t.
Ah, yes, the “Somalia” chestnut.
I prefer “Hong Kong”.
http://www.heritage.org/Index/Ranking.aspx
I don’t expect you to give a sh^t. What parasite has ever really cared for the health of its host?
LOL. This is a perfect example of why you people fail so miserably in any one on one debate.
It’s actually a perfect example of me not caring one way or the other, but just wanting to see you waste time looking up URLs. LOL.
The time for debate is past. We are now in the interim between “debate time” and “what comes next”.
@93. Clayton E. Cramer:
I hope you are not trying to be serious. You may have jumped the shark here.
The bumper sticker reads “Don’t Assume That I Share Your Prejudices”. And you seriously want to compare this to a sticker that proclaims a very specific and intolerant creed, and one that makes an explicitly intolerant, abusive and specific judgement about the reader.
The fact that you are comparing them, and asking if the latter are “clever and funny” shows how little you understand your subject matter. You have completely blown it on this one, and you would be better off owning it. The “don’t assume” sticker does not make an implicit or explicit judgement, but your examples clearly do. Telling someone you are proud to be a bigot, or asserting that they are depraved and deserving of death, is a very different thing from asking someone to think about their prejudices.
The bumper sticker you are criticizing has a neutral point of view. Your counter-examples have a self-righteous point of view. You can twist on this petard as long as you like, but this young lady pwned you without saying a word.
Peace.
DS
“found” two examples…lol
I didn’t find them. I ALREADY KNOW ABOUT THEM. The war in the Congo is the most serious conflict in the world today, it is far more severe than the conflict in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Israel-Palestine. My point, of course, was not to defend Islamic terrorism, an accusation which all of your type revert to when the absolute lack of logic in any of your arguments is revealed, my point was that you were simply wrong. As you often are. I think this is why you focus on anecdotes; you have no power to reason, nor any knowledge base.
It’s actually a perfect example of me not caring one way or the other, but just wanting to see you waste time looking up URLs. LOL.
Veni. I never waste my time. If I want to do something, I do it, and if done so, it’s never a waste. Some other axiom seems to govern your life. In any case, its true, you don’t care either way. You aren’t interested in facts or reason. And I’m afraid, for you, its still debate time. Just because you’re losing doesn’t mean you get to run away and go home.
Veni–> As far as the parasite thing, I’m not sure where the logic is here. By your own logic, we are all parasites and we are all hosts, depending on the issue and the infrastructure. I’m pretty sure you use roads, I’m pretty sure you rely on the police, I’m also pretty sure that a few of your older relatives are draining my tax dollars into their medicare and SSI [and I don't have any relatives on medicare or SSI]. Perhaps there was a racial component to your statement. I’d hate to make the assumption, but barring any reasonable factor in your imperial claim of yourself as “host” and I as “parasite”, its the only thing that would make sense, given the site you’re posting on. Please explain yourself.
What would be funny is to take some temporary tape and cover the word “DON’T”.
Can you imagine the horror of the Miss Smuggie when she discovers what she has been driving around with?
Mr. Cramer:
“Imagine if the bumper stickers on the car were, “Moral Majority and Proud Of It” and “I’m glad that I’m not a depraved sinner who deserves death like you.” Still clever and funny?”
Certainly probably more direct and truthful than your Blue Girl co-ed’s message, but that’s neither here nor there.
Take the long view of it.
One day Maureen Dowd, that “miserable toothache of a woman”(to steal The Anchoress’ immortal line), will retire and then die, lonely, bitter, and still unloved by any man.
And then “Blue Girl” or one of her ilk will be there waiting to step into MoDo’s ghastly faux tiger-skin(ish) pumps.
http://thesmartgirls.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/dowd1.jpg
Truly, a penance and a punishment that only the Divine could conceive of.
Who is this Soros troll? All Moho’s links are from Media Matters. Geez, get some diversity. Don’t you read anything else?
Nash. As I said, I don’t really like MediaMatters, but I appreciate the fact that they archive all of the racist crap that Limbaugh says everyday. So when you people dishonestly argue that Rush Limbaugh isn’t racist, there is an ample record showing that you’re wrong. However, that’s not your point anyway. You know, you’re wrong–that’s obvious from the fact that rather than comment on the content of those links, you want to criticize my reading habits. Its quite clear they’re far more diverse than any of you clowns.
DS, that last comment is simply high comedy. The bumper sticker does not have a neutral point of view. The bumper sticker accuses a stranger of prejudice without any specific knowledge whatsoever. You call that neutral because in your world view, everyone is prejudiced. It’s neutral because you agree with it. Just like democratic partisan initiatives are routinely “bipartisan”.
You also characterized the sticker as “asking someone to think about their prejudices”. False. The bumper sticker was not a question. It was a statement, and an imperative one at that. Ordinarily I’d give your characterization a pass (in the way that you rarely if ever extent to anyone else and certainly not Cramer on your most recent comment) because I understand what your point. However, the entire crux of the matter is that the bumper sticker was deliberately not a question. It was an accusation from a liberal to a faceless stranger that they are not prejudiced the way the faceless stranger is. Judgment rarely gets more explicit than that.
Her accusation is not specific, but liberal accusations rarely rise to the level of being specific. To deploy a specific charge is to be open to have it rebutted. To deploy a generalized charge that can never be substantiated or disproved, on the other hand, is the hallmark of the young liberal thinker.
As far as the parasite thing, I’m not sure where the logic is here. By your own logic, we are all parasites and we are all hosts, depending on the issue and the infrastructure.
Net it all out and there’s definitely some people paying in more than they get back out. That’s an opportunity cost, not just for those individuals, but for society overall.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sr168.pdf
You aren’t interested in facts or reason. And I’m afraid, for you, its still debate time. Just because you’re losing doesn’t mean you get to run away and go home.
Actually, it’s that I’m not that interested in Limbaugh. I listened to him a bit back in the early Clinton years, read a bit of one of his books and that’s about it. I do get a chuckle out of the things I read about him here and how he’s able to bug the crap out of people on the Left.
As for “debate”, that’s why the Founding Fathers didn’t turn our government into a debating society. The crucial moment in our government is the “vote”, not the “debate”.
Its quite clear they’re far more diverse than any of you clowns.
Yeah, the run the gamut from ultra-Left to ultra-ultra-Left.
I’m looking at one shelf of my bookcase and see:
“Marketing Management”
“Representation and Its Discontents”
“Eckermann’s Conversations with Goethe”
“Beyond Good and Evil”
“Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism”
“The Spirit in Man, Art and Literature”
“Saving The Text”
“The Iliad”
“Albert Camus: Notebooks 1942-1951″
“Statistics for Business and Economics”
“Burmese Days”
“Animal Farm”
All of which I’ve read all or most of.
Save your self-congratulations for places where it’s merited.
LennyB…everyone has prejudices you idiot. If anything, the bumper sticker asks people to examine their own prejudices in light of the comment. If there is nothing really abhorent about your prejudices–you don’t like men with beards, you prefer funny people to boring ones–then you can simply write this woman off. Reading anything more into this suggest that like Klavan, you have a guilty conscious.
By the way, I wasn’t defending Limbaugh as much as expressing skepticism about the collection of quotes all being accurate.
Limbaugh isn’t my cup of tea. I first began to dislike his mocking style because of something he said about Chelsea Clinton’s looks, while a picture of a dog appeared on the screen. She was (like many 13 year olds) kind of awkward and ungainly looking at the time, and in spite of Limbaugh’s claims that his staff decided to put up the dog picture, I found that difficult to believe, and difficult to accept.
I no longer pay much attention to claims of “racism” because it is now being used by the left to counter any objections to Democratic objectives–and the objections would be as strong and heartfelt if we had President John Kerry instead of Barack Obama.
#103 MoHo:
“So when you people dishonestly argue that Rush Limbaugh isn’t racist, there is an ample record showing that you’re wrong. ”
I can’t speak to what others assert, but I’m not arguing that Rush isn’t racist.
What the issue is is did he say what it was alleged he said.
That really is the only issue at hand.
Some folks apparently wanted to defame him by portraying him publicly as a racist, and despite all the alleged “evidence” archived at Media Matters and other compendiums of data, they decided,(as I understand it), to use quotes from Wikipedia that referenced a book that referenced the same Wikipedia entry.
Oooops!
I can only suggest that if you set out to assassinate someone’s character, you might want to load your rhetorical “assault weapon” with REAL ammo.
The bullets come out of the end that you’re pointing at your…
…oh, never mind.
Carry on!
Clayton, youre skepticism was unwarranted in the first place. The links have been provided, the citations would have been enough in the first place. If you were skeptical enough to voice it, then it was incumbent on you to provide proof. As you’ve been through the academic wringer, I’m sure none of this is news to you.
Bilgeman. All the citations were provided as well as links. There are literally dozens of media windows waiting for you at the links I posted. If your too afraid to look or listen, don’t come around blaming me for your pearl clutching authoritarianism.
Moho:
“All the citations were provided as well as links. There are literally dozens of media windows waiting for you at the links I posted. If your too afraid to look or listen, don’t come around blaming me for your pearl clutching authoritarianism.”
You seem to be under the impression that the burden is upon ME to prove that Limbaugh is a racist.
Since I really have very little, if any, interest in proving any such thing, it is not.
Now if you can prove that Limbaugh is a racist, and can source your allegations with more veracity than those who bruit themselves to be professional journalists at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, CNN and MSNBC, then maybe you should apply for employment there.
I reckon that they’ll have some job openings soon.
The fact of the matter is that even IF Limbaugh IS a racist…so what?
Many people believe that OJ Simpson murdered his wife and her boyfriend, but the evidence connecting him to the crime was all tainted by a policeman who perjured himself, and he walked,(rightly, IMO).
Robert F. Byrd was an Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. Running around wearing a bedsheet and burning crosses, babbling secret language and all the rest of that crew’s peculiar schtick, and he’s been a Democratic Senator since Christ was a corporal.
The more that folks try to make this into more than the narrow false allegation that it is really about, the worse things are going to get.
Because people will ask themselves why there’s apparently an unwritten law barring an alleged bigot from owning part of a football team, while there’s no law preventing a former member of a violent racist terror group from being seated in the US Senate.
The media did NOT use the sources that you supplied, although one presumes that they could have, they used the sources that they did.
Those quotes, as they have now admitted, can not be independently verified.
That’s it, hoss! That’s all she wrote, end of sentence, end of paragraph.
You want to persecute and harass Mr. Limbaugh to serve some purpose of your own, feel free, but this particular issue is over and done with.
I suspect that Idahoans are free from prejudices because they live in a state that is almost 100% white. They have the luxury of not having to have lived in areas with high minority populations like Memphis, Phoenix, Little Rock, and Philadelphia like I have. Before I moved out east from Phoenix I had almost no interaction with blacks and thus had not developed any prejudices or opinions about them at all. It didn’t take long for that to change once I had to interact with them in public and encountered their arrogance and was more exposed to their misogynistic sub-culture. I was also stunned at how many were openly hostile to whites. I was fortunate to have made a few black friends that were conservatives and didn’t fit the stereotypical behavior of the majority. Unfortunately they were the minority of the minority. I had the same experience in Memphis and Little Rock.
So, expose a few Idahoans to the worst side of minority culture and they might not be so free of prejudices.
“The media did not supply”…
Brilliant. According to your stringent media anlsyis right? Wherein you can’t name even one media source or what they claimed.
107. Clayton E. Cramer,
Good on you. I find it despicable when people joke about someone’s children no matter how unfortunate looking they are. Chelsea grew up to be beautiful and the 0bama girls are so adorable I want to give them a big hug.
Children of politicians should be left out of any/all discussions unless the tone is flattering or kind. I adore Chelsea Clinton to this day…she’s absolutely precious and she seems to have a firm head on her shoulders which is quite a feat when growing up in such a harsh limelight.
I wouldn’t wish politics on my worst enemy in this day and age.
Seriously.
Moho: “If anything, the bumper sticker asks people to examine their own prejudices in light of the comment.”
No!
The bumper sticker only informs an anonymous person in the vehicle behind that the driver ahead of them does not share the prejudices they have. Nowhere in this phrase does the driver admit that she is also prejudiced.
You can’t invent a different meaning for this simple language, it speaks for itself. If in your world view everyone is prejudiced, you are forced to admit that you believe the driver is too. Then we both must surely agree that she is the only one on the road who is also a hypocrite in addition to being herself prejudiced, for pointing out that in others which she does not admit in herself.
Why else would someone put such a sticker on their car?
I do have one prejudice, and it’s acquired over years of experience. Whenever I detect that someone is a liberal, I presume that they are also quite stupid. That’s not always true, but it is far more often than not. Hence the prejudice.
A tempest in a teapot.
#112 MoHo:
The original St. Louis Post-Dispatch column by Burwell that scotched Limbaugh’s deal,(with the Editor’s note explaining the non-verification of the attributed quotes updated appended:
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/columnists.nsf/bryanburwell/story/E196145D80764B2F86257648000EF26B?OpenDocument
Wikipedia’s entry on the source for Burwell’s attribution:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/101_People_Who_Are_Really_Screwing_America
The book which first makes the allegation that Burwell and Wikipedia cite was written by a Mr. Jack Huberman, who is apparently a Canadian moonbat living on Lon Guyland NY.
In light of the controversy HIS hatchet job has engendered, his HuffPo bio reads like a totally unintentional sick joke:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jack-huberman
excerpt:
“He was born and raised in Montreal and considers his Canadian-ness not only a point of pride and racial superiority but the basis of his extraordinarily acute understanding of American culture and politics.”
One BDS-stricken glazed-eye slobbering moonbat leading an entire legion of perenially indignant other hyperventilating moonbats right over a cliff like just so many lemmings.
Oh yeah, it’s a howler.
9. madanthony:
As a Maryland resident, I wonder if I can get a “red guy, blue state” sticker somewhere…
Try Carroll County or one of the western counties, I see good conservative bumper stickers ’round those parts quite often. The Eastern Shore also is pretty conservative, its the pesky BW Corridor that is heavily Blue.
As an important aside, thanks very much for providing the links to Media Matters, Moho. I have gotten very tired of providing links myself, so I really appreciate your work.
Blue girl is only taking up the progressive human’s burden to educate the poor, ignorant conservatives.
In one thread Moho pleads for us to consider Dunne’s quotes in context – in spite of the fact that a great deal of context was provided. In this one he mocks those who wish Rush’s quotes were given context when he had done nothing at the time to provide such context. Yes, I really am thankful for the links, but the contrast was striking. I clicked on the one about the three Somali teenagers. There was no racism at all. In context it was a very funny bit, mocking typical liberal racism of the white man’s burden variety. It’s not good for black people to internalize this kind of racism either.
What the Limbaugh quotes prove is that he has not been cowed into dishonesty about race in America. If Obama really wants to have an honest discussion about race he needs to include honest white guys – like Rush – who aren’t afraid to use humor, satire and hyperbole, and who are willing to talk about the elephants in the room. (We also need honest black guys, particularly ones who can talk about those elephants.) Let’s face it, if you are outraged at conservative racism and at white racism but aren’t outraged at liberal racism and at black racism, then you are going to have a hard time speaking honestly about racism in America.
Do you find Rush’s statements outrageous? That’s not remarkable. The issues he is adressing are outrageous.
I am against the rabid David Duke and Louis Farrakhan racism/bigotry where the thought is ‘all the X people are evil’. I am also against the condescending racism/bigotry exemplified by both liberals and conservatives where the thought is ‘all the X people are so primitive, it’s the Y human’s burden to help them’.
Yours,
Tom DeGisi
@104. LennyB:
The bumper sticker does not accuse anyone of anything. It does not claim that you are prejudiced – only you have done that.
The fact that you interpret this sticker as an accusation is a function of your own prejudices, which you have generously disclosed.
You are incorrect to claim that this bumper sticker judges anyone – in fact it is a call to withhold judgement.
Let me know if you need further explanation.
Peace.
DS
119. David S:
You can’t be serious. ‘Please don’t assume I share your prejudicies’ clearly implies that the person reading the bumper sticker is prejudiced.
I should note that any person who reads those words almost certainly is prejudiced. Human brains are so eager to recognize patterns that that all humans recognize patterns which are not there. We call such false pattern recognition ‘jumping to conclusions’, ‘superstition’ and ‘prejudice.
Yours,
Tom DeGisi
The auto had two bumper stickers.
“Blue Girl, Red State” clearly says “I’m not one of you. Your beliefs are not mine.”
In this light, it not far fetched at all to conclude that “Don’t Assume That I Share Your Prejudices” also means “Your prejudices are not mine.”
It is the default position of liberals that they are the more enlightened ones, the more tolerant ones, the more knowledgeable ones, the less prejudiced ones. This has been going on for over a half century. Were you to poll the left, most would consider themselves much less prejudiced than those on the right. I have NEVER come in contact with a liberal who considers himself or herself more prejudiced than a conservative. It is reasonable that the woman with the bumper stickers is of the opinion that she is much less prejudiced than those on the right. It would not surprise me to find out she did not consider herself prejudiced.
Here is an example of a liberal point of view>
From Moho. Such as liberals who froth at the mouth at the mention of Fox News, Glenn Beck, or Rush? Just wondering
From another era, here is the Folk Song Army. Smug feelings of superiority have been around for a long time.
A smug feeling of superiority is still rather common among liberals such as Moho and the woman with the bumperstickers. In effect, Moho is telling us we are stupid for perceiving that liberals perceive conservatives as being stupid, bigoted, prejudiced knuckle-draggers. BTW, I used to be a liberal, so I am VERY familiar with how they operate.
“You are incorrect to claim that this bumper sticker judges anyone – in fact it is a call to withhold judgement.
Let me know if you need further explanation.”
I do need further explanation. Please elaborate. How exactly, in terms a 3 year old could understand, does “don’t assume I share your prejudices” equal “a call to withhold judgement [sic]“?
I saw a nice bumper sticker today. It said “while we cannot prevent the world’s sorrows, we can choose to live in joy”. That is a nice non-judgmental thing to say. No liberal bumper sticker I have ever seen has been nice. And “don’t assume I share your prejudices” is proactively obnoxious, hypocritical, self-righteous thing to say. A marvel of concision.
Please DS. Elaborate. If you need help doing this, I thought of a presently non-existent sticker I might print up and send to you: “Think obtusely. Discuss specifically.”
Take the entire bumper in context:
“Blue Girl, Red State… Don’t Assume I share your prejudices.” Translation: Unlike most of you Idahoans, I’m liberal. I don’t HAVE your prejudices.
Only one set of prejudices is mentioned, “YOURS.”
Blue Girl conveniently leaves unanswered whether she does or does not have prejudices, but she clearly knows that the collective (Red state) “you” reading her bumper do.
Why not mention her own prejudices, saying something like, “We all have prejudices, but mine may not be yours”? Because her prejudices are not in question, only “yours” are. Mentioning other’s prejudices is not like mentioning other’s tastes or thoughts. These are neutral personal traits. Prejudices are negative traits we may all have, but strive to avoid. It’s not polite to call attention to them. Imagine I had a bumper sticker that read, “Red man, Blue state… Don’t assume I share your sins.” That would be self-righteous and arrogant. Blue Girl’s bumper comes across the same, as it also implies a judgement, a moral difference between Blue Girl and “you.”
In compelling others to reflect on their prejudices, while remaining silent on her own, she may well have smugly stated, “I will help you take that speck out of your eye,” while making no admission of the speck/log in her own eye.
@122. LennyB:
I do need further explanation. Please elaborate. How exactly, in terms a 3 year old could understand, does “don’t assume I share your prejudices” equal “a call to withhold judgement [sic]“?
“Don’t assume” is a call to withhold judgement. It asks you not to make an assumption about the girl’s prejudices or lack thereof. When you decide to interpret this as an obnoxious, hypocritical, self-righteous thing to say, you are displaying your own prejudice. You assume that the girl is trying to get a rise out of you, that she is being critical of you but not of herself, and that she thinks she is better than you. All of these are assumptions you have brought to the sticker.
If you truly take the bumper sticker on its own terms, it is a call to withhold judgement and respect diversity of thought.
Peace.
DS
David S., take on my argument.
@121. Gringo:
The auto had two bumper stickers.
Okay. I appreciate context as much as the next guy.
“Blue Girl, Red State” clearly says “I’m not one of you. Your beliefs are not mine.”
What it says is that the girl is a Democrat, in a state that is predominantly Republican. It says little about her beliefs – just her party affiliation.
In this light, it not far fetched at all to conclude that “Don’t Assume That I Share Your Prejudices” also means “Your prejudices are not mine.”
There is still nothing in this statement that is self-righteous. To say “your prejudices aren’t mine” makes no judgement other than to recognize difference.
It is the default position of liberals that they are the more enlightened ones, the more tolerant ones, the more knowledgeable ones, the less prejudiced ones. This has been going on for over a half century.
Now you have strayed into the more interesting arena – disclosing your own prejudices. This is exactly what the girl is getting at. I’m sure many conservatives are confident they are more enlightened, more tolerant, more knowledgeable and less prejudiced. I see them taking this “default position” all the time. Your characterization is essentially just recognizing the fact that everybody thinks their position is the best. I’d wager it’s been going on a lot more than a half century. There is nothing in the bumper sticker that makes a claim to superiority.
Were you to poll the left, most would consider themselves much less prejudiced than those on the right. I have NEVER come in contact with a liberal who considers himself or herself more prejudiced than a conservative. It is reasonable that the woman with the bumper stickers is of the opinion that she is much less prejudiced than those on the right. It would not surprise me to find out she did not consider herself prejudiced.
You bring more assumptions on board here. There is nothing in the sticker that indicates the girl believes herself to be less prejudiced, or not to have prejudices – just that hers are different from the prejudices of others. She doesn’t have to deny her own prejudices to make a point about the different prejudices we all have. I think it is safe to say that we all have prejudices.
Liberals may perceive conservatives as being stupid, bigoted, prejudiced knuckle-draggers – and similar perceptions are no doubt mirrored by conservatives. I know that self-described conservatives on this site have perceived me as being a stupid, bigoted, prejudiced knuckle-dragger, but again – these are assumptions that go well beyond the content of the bumper sticker.
I’m glad that this bumper sticker provoked an opportunity to consider prejudice, and the role it plays in our divisions and discourse. I think anybody taking it as an attack would do better to look in the mirror for the source of their angst.
Peace.
DS
DS, see my post 123 above.
You focus on the “don’t assume,” but ignore the “your prejudices” portion of the bumper sticker. You are correct when you say, “It asks you not to make an assumption about the girl’s prejudices OR LACK THEREOF.” (my emphasis). We are asked not assume about HER prejudices, yet she assumes the collective Idahoan conservative “you” IS prejudiced. That’s what’s so irritating about the bumper sticker: it mentions YOUR prejudices (i.e. assumes they really DO exist) while omits any mention of HER prejudices (implying they may or may NOT exist). Hence a moral difference is created, and the implication of judgement.
If I told you, “Excuse me, but I don’t share YOUR sinful life,” what would you think? I’m not saying I do or do not HAVE a sinful life (that is purposefully left ambiguous) but I am assuming that you do. Same goes for Blue Girl’s bumper sticker.
Both conservatives and liberals have their dark prejudices -unfortunately it’s human nature. Yet calling attention to “your” prejudices while keeping silent about “my” prejudices is moralistic and self-righteous. It’s purposefully accusatory, drawing attention to the “other side’s” faults while keeping her own faults hidden.
As I said above, she may well have smugly stated, “I will help you take that speck out of your eye,” while making no admission of the speck/board/log in her own eye.
DS, that was a ridiculous effort. “Don’t assume” does not “ask” anything, much less “to make an assumption about the girl’s prejudices or lack thereof”. “Don’t assume” is an imperative statement, and if you studied English as a first language and diagrammed any sentences in grade school, you will understand what I just said. Her statement is literally: [You] don’t assume. Subject, predicate. It asks nothing. Your case that she is asking the driver behind her to do anything is not supported by the facts. If it read: “Do you assume that I share your prejudices?”, different story. Still kind of obnoxious in tone and accusation, but different story. But it doesn’t say that, quite on purpose. And you’ll never admit that, because move-on.org does not pay you to concede points. You are after all merely answering the call.
On to my assumptions. “You assume that the girl is trying to get a rise out of you, that she is being critical of you but not of herself, and that she thinks she is better than you. All of these are assumptions you have brought to the sticker.” Wrong. I assume nothing other than that which is stated: she is telling me that I shouldn’t assume she shares my prejudices.
In counterpoint to your assertion, I don’t agree that she is being critical of me but not herself in saying that. I don’t agree that she thinks she is better than me. I don’t agree that I have brought assumption one.
Rather, all I know is this: it’s not likely she knows me (although I was in Idaho recently), but in the event I end up behind her car, she is telling me not to assume that she shares my prejudices. That is all I think the sticker means. And, I think that is obnoxious in that she doesn’t know me, hypocritical in that she assumes all behind her have prejudices that she doesn’t share (surely she cannot believe this is true), and self-righteous in putting it on a bumper sticker so that everyone knows that she is saying it.
It’s quite clear what you and her want it to mean. But you guys need to go back to the drawing board to get that point across. It’s hard doing it using few words to fit on a bumper sticker. But keep trying and it will start to come naturally.
It doesn’t say “Don’t assume that my prejudices are the same as yours.” That would be one way to express the neutrality/humility that DS disingenuously claims is being stated by the bumper sticker. The real message is “You’re prejudiced; I’m not; I am better than you.”
@128. LennyB:
If it read: “Do you assume that I share your prejudices?”, different story. Still kind of obnoxious in tone and accusation, but different story. But it doesn’t say that, quite on purpose. And you’ll never admit that, because move-on.org does not pay you to concede points. You are after all merely answering the call.
The imperative “don’t assume” is asking something of you. It’s not a question – it is a request. Asking you to refrain from making an assumption. Maybe if the sticker said “please” you wouldn’t take it so hard? “Please don’t assume I share your prejudices”?
I don’t agree that I have brought assumption one.
Great. Let’s test that.
I think that is obnoxious in that she doesn’t know me, hypocritical in that she assumes all behind her have prejudices that she doesn’t share (surely she cannot believe this is true), and self-righteous in putting it on a bumper sticker so that everyone knows that she is saying it.
I don’t see why she couldn’t believe that everyone behind her has prejudices she doesn’t share. I certainly believe that everyone behind me when I am driving has prejudices I don’t share. Big assumption on your part. It’s also not very clear how you come to the conclusion that a bumper sticker is “obnoxious” simply because it is not personalized for your sake. The message is universal – she doesn’t need to know you. The message is not hypocritical or self-righteous because it is value neutral. It doesn’t say that prejudice is good or bad – just that we all have different prejudices. Pretty simple, and not really controversial except in your fevered mind.
It’s quite clear what you and her want it to mean. But you guys need to go back to the drawing board to get that point across. It’s hard doing it using few words to fit on a bumper sticker. But keep trying and it will start to come naturally.
I don’t want it to mean anything more than it says. As you stated: “in the event I end up behind her car, she is telling me not to assume that she shares my prejudices. That is all I think the sticker means.”
Too bad you couldn’t just leave it at that.
Peace.
DS
Sorry DS. You can try to twist what an imperative statement is all you want. You can even ignore the definition of “imperative”. But you cannot twist punctuation. On a bumper sticker or in a book, questions have a question mark at the end. Her statement asks nothing. A please would have been nice, but it’s still an imperative. Sly to begin working the term “request” into your rationale. If it had actually said the word “please”, you could almost sell that.
You obviously missed the larger point, it was subtle I grant you, about the logic in her statement. By definition, some drivers must have prejudices she does share. Because the bumper sticker, if it’s correct, depends on everyone having prejudices — not on everyone having prejudices but her. And so it’s certainly not value neutral for her to believe that she shares no prejudice of any driver behind her. That, my peace-loving friend, is hypocrisy. I hardly expect a liberal who ends every post with “peace”, yet struggles as mightily as you do to patronize many posters, to understand hypocrisy.
“As I stated” indeed; the problem is you’re not quite satisfied with what I stated — you yourself bring the following to the bumper sticker: “If you truly take the bumper sticker on its own terms, it is a call to withhold judgement and respect diversity of thought.” It is most certainly not that, although I gather it is if you are the one reading it. The willful contradictions in your comments are quite revealing. You see, the main flaw in your reasoning here is not that it means what it says — it’s that you want people to read it with your assumptions. As I said, democratic initiatives are always “bipartisan”, and so on. Beware the person who believes they are objective, rather than continually strives toward being objective knowing they cannot attain it.
By the way, your interpretation is also quite incongruous with the other sticker: Blue girl, Red state. She is clearly seeking to distinguish herself from others in the immediate 500 miles or so, and she’s using her automobile as a billboard in order to do it.
“Let me know if you need further explanation.” “Too bad you couldn’t just leave it at that.” I think you’ll agree that this manner of diction is beneath someone who believes they are objective and above the fray, as you apparently do. But I mean you no ill in pointing this out. I also hold no such illusions about myself and encourage you to declare that you are in fact part of a team, and not an observer on the sidelines.