"Don Foreman" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 07:47:34 -0700, wrote:


The evolutionist view
suggests that we're all descended from monkeys.

No, it does not, nitwit.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/li...faq/cat02.html

OK, ya got me on evolution accuracy there and "monkey" does seem to be
the term that some find offensive here -- though all objectors in this
thread are, I think, caucasian liberals. There's a huge distance
between moral high ground politically-correct pretense and honest
no-bull**** tolerance.

Your gratuitous insult "nitwit" noted. That may reinforce your
argument for the thick and slow whose opinion you may endeavor to
shape.

Do you have non-white neighbors near you? Probably not since you
live off-grid remotely. Does Ed? Possibly, what say you Ed?

On my little cul-de-sac there are black, Korean, and Asian Indian families.
I live in one of the most ethnically diverse townships in the United States.
We're 55.8% white; London is 69.4% white. Our Asian Indian population is the
highest in the US by a factor of two: 17.3%. London's Indian population is
6.5%:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edison_...J#Demographics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_London

If I recall correctly, you live in Fridley, Minnesota: 88.65% white, 3.4%
black, 2.9% Asian.

None of which addresses the issue. I don't know how much time you've spent
in the NYC suburbs, but I've spent a lot of time in the upper Midwest,
including living there for eight years. The difference that's relevant here
is that the tolerance of racist expressions, both subtle and overt, is
vastly higher there than it is here. You probably don't even notice it
because you live in it.

As I said, that's characteristic of conservative communities. Slow to change
attitudes, generally inward-focused, they're the foot-draggers in racial and
ethnic integration in this country.

That's not to say that they're overtly racist or intolerant. There's a big
difference between being tolerant and being actively anti-discriminatory. My
community is active in that department, and the sensitivity and reaction to
racial slurs, ethnic "jokes," and discriminatory attitudes is quite high.

Gunner's racist "joke" would not be tolerated here.

--
Ed Huntress

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 01:46:02 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 07:47:34 -0700, wrote:


The evolutionist view
suggests that we're all descended from monkeys.

No, it does not, nitwit.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/li...faq/cat02.html

OK, ya got me on evolution accuracy there

Congrats. After a couple of days I figured you weren't up to admitting
the misconception.

and "monkey" does seem to be
the term that some find offensive here

It's a lot more than the word, but given that even Ed's patient
teaching couldn't make the trip through your skull, your position is
only good for mocking IMO.

-- though all objectors in this
thread are, I think, caucasian liberals.

As are the people defending the joke. So what?

There's a huge distance
between moral high ground politically-correct pretense and honest
no-bull**** tolerance.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say there, other than it's more
diversion.

Your gratuitous insult "nitwit" noted. That may reinforce your
argument for the thick and slow whose opinion you may endeavor to
shape.

I doubt that I shape any opinions. Is that how you see your own posts?
Do you have non-white neighbors near you?

In fact, I do, although "near" is a relative term in my neck of the
woods. But the nearness of minorities has nothing to do with the
discussion here other than making it easier to ridicule your silly
arguments.

Probably not since you
live off-grid remotely.

As I've already explained, your attempts to define being a few miles
from power lines as some kind of pejorative aren't helping your case.

Does Ed? Possibly, what say you Ed?

How hilarious do you intend to make this? Your point is what, that if
you know the most minorities, that it trumps your poor reasoning?

Wayne, you don't know jack **** about tolerance and diversity any more
than pilgrim proper superior Ed.

I know to put myself in the place of the butt of the joke, and then
ask myself how I'd view it.

Exactly my point.

LOL Your only "point" is to rationalize an ill-considered position.

Sharing the planet with others is not all about you
and your views. Tolerance involves acceptance of others whose views
and even values differ from yours.

I see. And we do that by defending bad jokes based on ignorance and
including a component that the butt of the joke is highly likely to
abhor for good reason?

You don't have to agree with them
nor do they have to agree with you, but peaceful co-existance requires
bidirectional tolerance and that probably does not mean tolerance as
you might define it.

Are you talking about tolerance for the joke writer? It's impossible
to tell.

How Bella will view things when she is 12, or 18, will undoubtedly be
quite different from what you or Ed might expect, because she is
growing up in London. There are probably prejudices and issues that
we Americans don't understand but skin color seems to be about
irrelevant there.

Bella is IRRELEVANT. No matter how much you elaborate on the subject
of her, she will still be irrelevant. Is that really so hard to grasp?
gently and enjoyably among diverse others.

Says the guy who needs a carry-permit to go on his "enjoyable" walks.

That is a juvenile attempt at distortion and spin of info I've shared.
I have disclosed that I enjoy my daily outdoor 3-mile walks (sans your
quotation marks) and that I'm a senior citizen licensed to carry a
pistol. Make of that what you might.

You say that you don't go anywhere without a "blade", and that you
carry sometimes due to combat experience. Yet your wife has a permit
as well, even though you claim to live in Mayberry or Sesame Street or
something. I'm sure it all makes sense to you somehow, hopefully
you'll explain it sincerely someday.

I may have considerably more
respect than you do for the intellect of readers of this NG.

That much may be true considering that you at least have more respect
for the racist and deadbeat posters.

Wayne

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:39:07 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:



If I recall correctly, you live in Fridley, Minnesota: 88.65% white, 3.4%
black, 2.9% Asian.

None of which addresses the issue. I don't know how much time you've spent
in the NYC suburbs

Very little

but I've spent a lot of time in the upper Midwest,
including living there for eight years.

Recently?

The difference that's relevant here
is that the tolerance of racist expressions, both subtle and overt, is
vastly higher there than it is here. You probably don't even notice it
because you live in it.

My perception is inferior or more limited because I live here while
you live there? Interesting perspective.

As I said, that's characteristic of conservative communities. Slow to change
attitudes, generally inward-focused, they're the foot-draggers in racial and
ethnic integration in this country.

"Upper midwest" is a rather large generality. Demographics and
attitudes in Fridley, MN aren't the same as those in rust-belt
southern Michigan and they're not the same now as they were even a
decade ago. 20 years ago computers were big here -- Univac, Control
Data, Honeywell and many smaller high-tech companies. Now medical
electronics is big -- Medtronics in Fridley, St. Jude, Boston
Scientific, and others. There are at least a dozen colleges and
universities in this metro area.

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:39:07 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Don Foreman" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 07:47:34 -0700, wrote:


The evolutionist view
suggests that we're all descended from monkeys.

No, it does not, nitwit.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/li...faq/cat02.html

OK, ya got me on evolution accuracy there and "monkey" does seem to be
the term that some find offensive here -- though all objectors in this
thread are, I think, caucasian liberals. There's a huge distance
between moral high ground politically-correct pretense and honest
no-bull**** tolerance.

Your gratuitous insult "nitwit" noted. That may reinforce your
argument for the thick and slow whose opinion you may endeavor to
shape.

Do you have non-white neighbors near you? Probably not since you
live off-grid remotely. Does Ed? Possibly, what say you Ed?

On my little cul-de-sac there are black, Korean, and Asian Indian families.
I live in one of the most ethnically diverse townships in the United States.
We're 55.8% white; London is 69.4% white. Our Asian Indian population is the
highest in the US by a factor of two: 17.3%. London's Indian population is
6.5%:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edison_...J#Demographics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_London

If I recall correctly, you live in Fridley, Minnesota: 88.65% white, 3.4%
black, 2.9% Asian.

Yabut those statistics' "perception" must be wrong. chuckle

None of which addresses the issue.

Exactly.

I don't know how much time you've spent
in the NYC suburbs, but I've spent a lot of time in the upper Midwest,
including living there for eight years. The difference that's relevant here
is that the tolerance of racist expressions, both subtle and overt, is
vastly higher there than it is here. You probably don't even notice it
because you live in it.

Took the words out of my mouth.

As I said, that's characteristic of conservative communities. Slow to change
attitudes, generally inward-focused, they're the foot-draggers in racial and
ethnic integration in this country.

That's not to say that they're overtly racist or intolerant. There's a big
difference between being tolerant and being actively anti-discriminatory. My
community is active in that department, and the sensitivity and reaction to
racial slurs, ethnic "jokes," and discriminatory attitudes is quite high.

Wish I could say the same about my area. Remember McCain supporting
Mecham's fulfillment of his promise to cancel the MLK holiday in AZ?
That crap went on into the 90s, and still goes over well with the
rednecks here. "We're not racists, we're just against holidays"
snorf An example of what passes for racial tolerance in my rural
area is one neighbor commenting on another ... "he's OK for a n*&&er".
As much as I like rural living, the higher percentage of jackasses is
lamentable.

Gunner's racist "joke" would not be tolerated here.

Again, wish I could say the same. I hear the N word in person several
times each year, and several more times in print on Usenet as in this
example.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.c...547e8bdece2d18
Every last one of them would deny being a racist on account of knowing
a minority etc. I liked Colbert's riff, a case where the picture
pretty much tells the whole joke.
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/wi...olbertAlan.png

Wayne

"Don Foreman" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:39:07 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:



If I recall correctly, you live in Fridley, Minnesota: 88.65% white, 3.4%
black, 2.9% Asian.

None of which addresses the issue. I don't know how much time you've spent
in the NYC suburbs

Very little

but I've spent a lot of time in the upper Midwest,
including living there for eight years.

Recently?

A week in August was the most recent. Every year, at least a couple of
weeks. Next year will be 40 years, not counting the years I lived in
Michigan or the many, many trips I took up there when I worked for _American
Machinist_, _Machine Shop Guide_, and _Machining_. Every year I'm in
Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin. The upper Midwest is my second home.


The difference that's relevant here
is that the tolerance of racist expressions, both subtle and overt, is
vastly higher there than it is here. You probably don't even notice it
because you live in it.

My perception is inferior or more limited because I live here while
you live there? Interesting perspective.

Your perception is in need of exposure to *this* environment, as well as
your own, in order to compare the two.


As I said, that's characteristic of conservative communities. Slow to
change
attitudes, generally inward-focused, they're the foot-draggers in racial
and
ethnic integration in this country.

"Upper midwest" is a rather large generality.

Not really. The conservative regions tend to share some key characteristics.

Demographics and
attitudes in Fridley, MN aren't the same as those in rust-belt
southern Michigan and they're not the same now as they were even a
decade ago. 20 years ago computers were big here -- Univac, Control
Data, Honeywell and many smaller high-tech companies. Now medical
electronics is big -- Medtronics in Fridley, St. Jude, Boston
Scientific, and others. There are at least a dozen colleges and
universities in this metro area.

You're reaching around for something, Don, but I don't know quite what it
is. The fact is that the attitudes towards racism are very different where
you are versus where I am. Witness the disagreements here by several people;
I'm sure that rangersucks, and Winston, and some others recognize that
"heartland conservative" attitude that you and Dan have expressed, and
further recognize how different it is from the common attitudes in socially
progressive areas like this one.

Something you said in an earlier message is a clue. You said "Tolerance
involves acceptance of others whose views and even values differ from yours.
You don't have to agree with them nor do they have to agree with you, but
peaceful co-existance requires bidirectional tolerance and that probably
does not mean tolerance as you might define it."

You see it as "peaceful co-existence" and "bidirectional tolerance."
Tolerance is not the only issue. Tolerance can be a grudging and passive
thing, and it often is among conservatives, even those who consider
themselves enlightened and cosmopolitan. Around here, I'm not sure what the
right words are to describe it, but it's closer to a vigilance and active
antipathy towards racist remarks as well as racist behavior. Several people
called Gunner out for his racist "joke"; you and Dan immediately started
looking for reasons it might not be racist at all. That's the difference.

There's a lot more to it and I'm sure there are better ways to describe it,
but I think the opinions expressed in this thread identify the issue pretty
well.

--
Ed Huntress

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:39:07 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Don Foreman" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 07:47:34 -0700, wrote:


The evolutionist view
suggests that we're all descended from monkeys.

No, it does not, nitwit.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/li...faq/cat02.html

OK, ya got me on evolution accuracy there and "monkey" does seem to be
the term that some find offensive here -- though all objectors in this
thread are, I think, caucasian liberals. There's a huge distance
between moral high ground politically-correct pretense and honest
no-bull**** tolerance.

Your gratuitous insult "nitwit" noted. That may reinforce your
argument for the thick and slow whose opinion you may endeavor to
shape.

Do you have non-white neighbors near you? Probably not since you
live off-grid remotely. Does Ed? Possibly, what say you Ed?

On my little cul-de-sac there are black, Korean, and Asian Indian
families.
I live in one of the most ethnically diverse townships in the United
States.
We're 55.8% white; London is 69.4% white. Our Asian Indian population is
the
highest in the US by a factor of two: 17.3%. London's Indian population is
6.5%:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edison_...J#Demographics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_London

If I recall correctly, you live in Fridley, Minnesota: 88.65% white, 3.4%
black, 2.9% Asian.

Yabut those statistics' "perception" must be wrong. chuckle

None of which addresses the issue.

Exactly.

I don't know how much time you've spent
in the NYC suburbs, but I've spent a lot of time in the upper Midwest,
including living there for eight years. The difference that's relevant
here
is that the tolerance of racist expressions, both subtle and overt, is
vastly higher there than it is here. You probably don't even notice it
because you live in it.

Took the words out of my mouth.

As I said, that's characteristic of conservative communities. Slow to
change
attitudes, generally inward-focused, they're the foot-draggers in racial
and
ethnic integration in this country.

That's not to say that they're overtly racist or intolerant. There's a big
difference between being tolerant and being actively anti-discriminatory.
My
community is active in that department, and the sensitivity and reaction
to
racial slurs, ethnic "jokes," and discriminatory attitudes is quite high.

Wish I could say the same about my area. Remember McCain supporting
Mecham's fulfillment of his promise to cancel the MLK holiday in AZ?
That crap went on into the 90s, and still goes over well with the
rednecks here. "We're not racists, we're just against holidays"
snorf An example of what passes for racial tolerance in my rural
area is one neighbor commenting on another ... "he's OK for a n*&&er".
As much as I like rural living, the higher percentage of jackasses is
lamentable.

It's one reason I can't get my wife to move. g


Gunner's racist "joke" would not be tolerated here.

Again, wish I could say the same. I hear the N word in person several
times each year, and several more times in print on Usenet as in this
example.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.c...547e8bdece2d18

Ooh, I missed that one. I don't read the compressor or the three-phase
threads. If I had seen that, I would have given it my standard reply:

"Eat **** and die, you stinking racist pig."

Every last one of them would deny being a racist on account of knowing
a minority etc. I liked Colbert's riff, a case where the picture
pretty much tells the whole joke.
http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/wi...olbertAlan.png

Wayne

Ed Huntress wrote:

(...)

I'm sure that rangersucks, and Winston, and some others recognize that
"heartland conservative" attitude that you and Dan have expressed, and
further recognize how different it is from the common attitudes in socially
progressive areas like this one.

Very occasionally, I speak with folks who transplanted from Oklahoma.
Once in a while they will make a racial remark that might have been
socially acceptable (among some groups) forty years ago.
I find it jarring and unpleasant, because demonizing people hurts everybody.

Sadly though, I can't hold up the San Francisco Bay Area as a shining example
of enlightened thought on the subject. Our prejudices are subtle.
You would never hear us use a racial epithet, yet racial segregation
is normal here. Walking the halls of some very famous companies,
you might go weeks before seeing an African or Mexican face in the sea
of Asian, East Indian and Caucasian faces.

We dislike older people, too. "Working while wrinkled" is cause for
dismissal here. Heaven help the older gay woman of color, because we won't.

I think it sad that we find our only reassurance in dividing and fighting
among ourselves, based on superficial criteria to the exclusion of
the more important concerns that would unite us.



--Winston



--

Congratulations Robert Piccinini and Steven A. Burd, WalMart Publicists of the Year!

"Winston" wrote in message
...
Ed Huntress wrote:

(...)

I'm sure that rangersucks, and Winston, and some others recognize that
"heartland conservative" attitude that you and Dan have expressed, and
further recognize how different it is from the common attitudes in
socially progressive areas like this one.

Very occasionally, I speak with folks who transplanted from Oklahoma.
Once in a while they will make a racial remark that might have been
socially acceptable (among some groups) forty years ago.
I find it jarring and unpleasant, because demonizing people hurts
everybody.

Sadly though, I can't hold up the San Francisco Bay Area as a shining
example
of enlightened thought on the subject. Our prejudices are subtle.
You would never hear us use a racial epithet, yet racial segregation
is normal here. Walking the halls of some very famous companies,
you might go weeks before seeing an African or Mexican face in the sea
of Asian, East Indian and Caucasian faces.

We dislike older people, too. "Working while wrinkled" is cause for
dismissal here. Heaven help the older gay woman of color, because we
won't.

I think it sad that we find our only reassurance in dividing and fighting
among ourselves, based on superficial criteria to the exclusion of
the more important concerns that would unite us.



--Winston

I don't think there's any place that's free of it, but there are wide
differences in what is socially acceptable.

--
Ed Huntress

On Dec 18, 7:36*pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:


The difference that's relevant here
is that the tolerance of racist expressions, both subtle and overt, is
vastly higher there than it is here. You probably don't even notice it
because you live in it.


One needs to remember that New Jersey and NYC have had race riots
about forty years ago. No exactly something that inspires the feeling
that area is a melting pot with no notice of race. Or that those
areas are socially progressive.


You're reaching around for something, Don, but I don't know quite what it
is. The fact is that the attitudes towards racism are very different where
you are versus where I am. Witness the disagreements here by several people;

Agreed. Some people see race everywhere. Some people see
individuals.


I'm sure that rangersucks, and Winston, and some others recognize that
"heartland conservative" attitude that you and Dan have expressed, and
further recognize how different it is from the common attitudes in socially
progressive areas like this one.

I spent over thirty five years in the Seattle area and only recently
moved. Are you saying that Seattle is a place of " heartland
conservative " attitudes? Before you answer consider that Obama got a
higher percentage of the popular vote in Washington State than in New
Jersey.

My impression is that New York City and the surrounding area is highly
segregated. You have neighborhoods that are considered to be Irish,
Jewish, Black, Italian, Chinese, Puerto rican, etc..


There's a lot more to it and I'm sure there are better ways to describe it,
but I think the opinions expressed in this thread identify the issue pretty
well.

--
Ed Huntress

wrote in message
...
On Dec 18, 7:36 pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:


The difference that's relevant here
is that the tolerance of racist expressions, both subtle and overt, is
vastly higher there than it is here. You probably don't even notice it
because you live in it.


One needs to remember that New Jersey and NYC have had race riots
about forty years ago.

And what would you know about it, Dan? You live in Mayberry, I think you
said? g?

No exactly something that inspires the feeling
that area is a melting pot with no notice of race. Or that those
areas are socially progressive.

And how would you recognize a place that's "socially progressive"?

You and Don are doing some kind of tag-team routine. Don says it's all
changed in 20 years, and you define a place by what happened 40 or 50 years
ago. You guys ought to get your stories straight. It looks like you're just
floundering for an excuse.


You're reaching around for something, Don, but I don't know quite what it
is. The fact is that the attitudes towards racism are very different where
you are versus where I am. Witness the disagreements here by several
people;

Agreed. Some people see race everywhere. Some people see
individuals.

My guess is that you don't see much race anywhere.

--
Ed Huntress

I'm sure that rangersucks, and Winston, and some others recognize that
"heartland conservative" attitude that you and Dan have expressed, and
further recognize how different it is from the common attitudes in
socially
progressive areas like this one.


I spent over thirty five years in the Seattle area and only recently
moved. Are you saying that Seattle is a place of " heartland
conservative " attitudes? Before you answer consider that Obama got a
higher percentage of the popular vote in Washington State than in New
Jersey.

I'm saying that YOUR attitudes are heartland conservative attitudes.

My impression is that New York City and the surrounding area is highly
segregated. You have neighborhoods that are considered to be Irish,
Jewish, Black, Italian, Chinese, Puerto rican, etc..

You don't know what you're talking about.

--
Ed Huntress

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 14:36:52 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Demographics and
attitudes in Fridley, MN aren't the same as those in rust-belt
southern Michigan and they're not the same now as they were even a
decade ago. 20 years ago computers were big here -- Univac, Control
Data, Honeywell and many smaller high-tech companies. Now medical
electronics is big -- Medtronics in Fridley, St. Jude, Boston
Scientific, and others. There are at least a dozen colleges and
universities in this metro area.

You're reaching around for something, Don, but I don't know quite what it
is. The fact is that the attitudes towards racism are very different where
you are versus where I am. Witness the disagreements here by several people;
I'm sure that rangersucks, and Winston, and some others recognize that
"heartland conservative" attitude that you and Dan have expressed, and
further recognize how different it is from the common attitudes in socially
progressive areas like this one.

Something you said in an earlier message is a clue. You said "Tolerance
involves acceptance of others whose views and even values differ from yours.
You don't have to agree with them nor do they have to agree with you, but
peaceful co-existance requires bidirectional tolerance and that probably
does not mean tolerance as you might define it."

You see it as "peaceful co-existence" and "bidirectional tolerance."
Tolerance is not the only issue. Tolerance can be a grudging and passive
thing, and it often is among conservatives, even those who consider
themselves enlightened and cosmopolitan. Around here, I'm not sure what the
right words are to describe it, but it's closer to a vigilance and active
antipathy towards racist remarks as well as racist behavior. Several people
called Gunner out for his racist "joke"; you and Dan immediately started
looking for reasons it might not be racist at all. That's the difference.

That actually makes sense. You're absolutely right that "vigilance
and active antipathy toward ..." does not describe attitudes here.

Ed Huntress wrote:
"Winston" wrote in message

(...)

I think it sad that we find our only reassurance in dividing and fighting
among ourselves, based on superficial criteria to the exclusion of
the more important concerns that would unite us.



--Winston

I don't think there's any place that's free of it, but there are wide
differences in what is socially acceptable.

Yes.

--Winston

"Don Foreman" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 14:36:52 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


Demographics and
attitudes in Fridley, MN aren't the same as those in rust-belt
southern Michigan and they're not the same now as they were even a
decade ago. 20 years ago computers were big here -- Univac, Control
Data, Honeywell and many smaller high-tech companies. Now medical
electronics is big -- Medtronics in Fridley, St. Jude, Boston
Scientific, and others. There are at least a dozen colleges and
universities in this metro area.

You're reaching around for something, Don, but I don't know quite what it
is. The fact is that the attitudes towards racism are very different where
you are versus where I am. Witness the disagreements here by several
people;
I'm sure that rangersucks, and Winston, and some others recognize that
"heartland conservative" attitude that you and Dan have expressed, and
further recognize how different it is from the common attitudes in
socially
progressive areas like this one.

Something you said in an earlier message is a clue. You said "Tolerance
involves acceptance of others whose views and even values differ from
yours.
You don't have to agree with them nor do they have to agree with you, but
peaceful co-existance requires bidirectional tolerance and that probably
does not mean tolerance as you might define it."

You see it as "peaceful co-existence" and "bidirectional tolerance."
Tolerance is not the only issue. Tolerance can be a grudging and passive
thing, and it often is among conservatives, even those who consider
themselves enlightened and cosmopolitan. Around here, I'm not sure what
the
right words are to describe it, but it's closer to a vigilance and active
antipathy towards racist remarks as well as racist behavior. Several
people
called Gunner out for his racist "joke"; you and Dan immediately started
looking for reasons it might not be racist at all. That's the difference.

That actually makes sense. You're absolutely right that "vigilance
and active antipathy toward ..." does not describe attitudes here.

"Actually" makes sense? Gee, thanks. g

Yes, that's one way to describe the difference, and it's been true of racial
issues since the 1960s. There were plenty of conservatives even then who
were by no means racists, but they were more or less passive about dealing
with it. And there's a high threshold for recognizing subtle and pernicious
racism in the conservative catechism that hangs on decade after decade. In
most of the country it's become impolitic to do so, so it hides behind a
feigned racial blindness.

Barry Goldwater, for example, a committed egalitarian, was one of the most
vehement opponents of the Civil Rights Act. The reason was first, that he
was a states' rights advocate who thought it was a state issue, and, second,
he was a Burkean gradualist in most things and felt that even racists would
eventually come around. He didn't think we needed a law to enforce it.

But in his later years he realized that racism was embedded in our culture
and that it was a self-perpetuating phenomenon that showed no signs of
changing in those parts of the country where the embedding was deep. He
became more of a realist about human nature in many ways. After he retired,
he said that opposing the Civil Rights Act was the biggest mistake he ever
made.

--
Ed Huntress

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:32:25 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

Gunner's racist "joke" would not be tolerated here
....where we are more tolerant than those in the conservative midwest.

Again, wish I could say the same. I hear the N word in person several
times each year, and several more times in print on Usenet as in this
example.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.c...547e8bdece2d18

Ooh, I missed that one. I don't read the compressor or the three-phase
threads. If I had seen that, I would have given it my standard reply:

"Eat **** and die, you stinking racist pig."

So anything that might be viewed as in any way pejorative to any
ethnic group, race, or ??? is regarded with zero tolerance, but the
foregoing profane invective is acceptable?

Just asking here, bear with me please.

Let's say, hypothetically of course, that a minority person budged in
front of you in the checkout line, barking your shins with his cart in
the process. Hypothetically, of course, since that would probably be
unthinkable in your civilized enlightened venue of exemplary
tolerance. But if it did happen, would it be acceptable to say
something like "Eat **** and die, stinking budger pig", using no term
with any racial or ethnic associations?

We wouldn't say anything nearly that impolite. We'd just shoot 'em.
(Kidding...) But then, no one of any color or ethnic persuasion in
Lake Wobegone would dream of budging in front of a neighbor because
that wouldn't be "Minnesota Nice".

I'm mostly tweaking here, Ed. I honestly don't care for, support or
defend any form of bigotry, and I think you know that I favor civil
discourse and conduct. It does seem to me that some self-righteous
champions sometimes do protesteth a bit much.

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 07:58:20 -0700, wrote:


Does Ed? Possibly, what say you Ed?

How hilarious do you intend to make this? Your point is what, that if
you know the most minorities, that it trumps your poor reasoning?

It was an honest question that Ed answered to my edification. I
imagined that Ed lived in a "whitebread" neighborhood so I was
surprised at the diversity he reported.

Are you talking about tolerance for the joke writer? It's impossible
to tell.

I think it's clear to most.

How Bella will view things when she is 12, or 18, will undoubtedly be
quite different from what you or Ed might expect, because she is
growing up in London. There are probably prejudices and issues that
we Americans don't understand but skin color seems to be about
irrelevant there.

Bella is IRRELEVANT. No matter how much you elaborate on the subject
of her, she will still be irrelevant. Is that really so hard to grasp?

Your prejudicial attitude is clearly grasped. Bella isn't IRRELEVANT
to me or to others who know her. You declare her as IRRELEVANT and
you may well declare me as IRRELEVANT while you pretend superior
tolerance. Dismissing any person as IRRELEVANT, particularly a high
talent little girl of color, displays nearly incredible and certainly
despicable arrogant bigotry.


You say that you don't go anywhere without a "blade", and that you
carry sometimes due to combat experience. Yet your wife has a permit
as well, even though you claim to live in Mayberry or Sesame Street or
something. I'm sure it all makes sense to you somehow, hopefully
you'll explain it sincerely someday.

I've tried several times to explain sincerely, apparently with no
success.

I may have considerably more
respect than you do for the intellect of readers of this NG.

That much may be true considering that you at least have more respect
for the racist and deadbeat posters.

Feeble puerile shot at spin and vilification.

I think the readers of this group are quite able to form their own
opinions. You clearly have some allies in your campaign against
Gunner, enjoy. He does tend to draw fire. Bon appetit!

"Don Foreman" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:32:25 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

Gunner's racist "joke" would not be tolerated here
...where we are more tolerant than those in the conservative midwest.

Again, wish I could say the same. I hear the N word in person several
times each year, and several more times in print on Usenet as in this
example.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.c...547e8bdece2d18

Ooh, I missed that one. I don't read the compressor or the three-phase
threads. If I had seen that, I would have given it my standard reply:

"Eat **** and die, you stinking racist pig."

So anything that might be viewed as in any way pejorative to any
ethnic group, race, or ??? is regarded with zero tolerance, but the
foregoing profane invective is acceptable?

Just asking here, bear with me please.

Let's say, hypothetically of course, that a minority person budged in
front of you in the checkout line, barking your shins with his cart in
the process. Hypothetically, of course, since that would probably be
unthinkable in your civilized enlightened venue of exemplary
tolerance. But if it did happen, would it be acceptable to say
something like "Eat **** and die, stinking budger pig", using no term
with any racial or ethnic associations?

We wouldn't say anything nearly that impolite. We'd just shoot 'em.
(Kidding...) But then, no one of any color or ethnic persuasion in
Lake Wobegone would dream of budging in front of a neighbor because
that wouldn't be "Minnesota Nice".

I'm mostly tweaking here, Ed. I honestly don't care for, support or
defend any form of bigotry, and I think you know that I favor civil
discourse and conduct. It does seem to me that some self-righteous
champions sometimes do protesteth a bit much.

Yeah, some do. But most don't protest enough. In the (probably apocryphal)
words of one of my favorite people, Edmund Burke: "All that is necessary for
the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

--
Ed Huntress

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 01:02:08 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 07:58:20 -0700, wrote:


Does Ed? Possibly, what say you Ed?

How hilarious do you intend to make this? Your point is what, that if
you know the most minorities, that it trumps your poor reasoning?

It was an honest question that Ed answered to my edification. I
imagined that Ed lived in a "whitebread" neighborhood so I was
surprised at the diversity he reported.

Why would you be surprised? He lives in Joisee for gawds sake, and you
live in Minnesota. The stats bear out what I already assumed. Although
I was wrong in thinking, based on all your embellishments about the
diversity of your neighborhood, that at least some of it must be true.
Yet it turns out that your area is pretty much exactly as diverse as
AZ as a whole, which ain't saying much.

Are you talking about tolerance for the joke writer? It's impossible
to tell.

I think it's clear to most.

How Bella will view things when she is 12, or 18, will undoubtedly be
quite different from what you or Ed might expect, because she is
growing up in London. There are probably prejudices and issues that
we Americans don't understand but skin color seems to be about
irrelevant there.

Bella is IRRELEVANT. No matter how much you elaborate on the subject
of her, she will still be irrelevant. Is that really so hard to grasp?

Your prejudicial attitude is clearly grasped. Bella isn't IRRELEVANT
to me or to others who know her. You declare her as IRRELEVANT and
you may well declare me as IRRELEVANT while you pretend superior
tolerance. Dismissing any person as IRRELEVANT, particularly a high
talent little girl of color, displays nearly incredible and certainly
despicable arrogant bigotry.

An entire paragraph based on your willful need to blatantly take a
simple statement out of context and build a wholly fictional narrative
around it. And yet you feign surprise that I don't rate your
intelligence or your motives very highly.

You say that you don't go anywhere without a "blade", and that you
carry sometimes due to combat experience. Yet your wife has a permit
as well, even though you claim to live in Mayberry or Sesame Street or
something. I'm sure it all makes sense to you somehow, hopefully
you'll explain it sincerely someday.

I've tried several times to explain sincerely, apparently with no
success.

The reason you weren't successful is that you're frequently insincere,
as your "despicable arrogant bigotry" comment above clearly
demonstrates.

Don Foreman, Oct 14/09 - "I won't be provoked to engage in puerile
bickersquabble".

LOL Look at you now, embracing a low road of transparently phony
bickersquabble.

I may have considerably more
respect than you do for the intellect of readers of this NG.

That much may be true considering that you at least have more respect
for the racist and deadbeat posters.

Feeble puerile shot at spin and vilification.

You've written dozens of posts criticizing me. Let's see links to even
10 where you've done as much to criticize racists or deadbeats.
Prediction: you can't do that because those posts don't exist. Face
it, it's a fact that you have low standards when it comes to anyone
who'll reinforce your opinions about guns.

I think the readers of this group are quite able to form their own
opinions. You clearly have some allies in your campaign against
Gunner, enjoy. He does tend to draw fire. Bon appetit!

Burp. I enjoyed the post about the MILITARY STAR card, the benefits of
which pretend-vet gummer will never enjoy.

Wayne

On Dec 19, 12:02*am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:

One needs to remember that New Jersey and NYC have had race riots
about forty years ago.

And what would you know about it, Dan? You live in Mayberry, I think you
said? g?

I do NOW.



No exactly something that inspires the feeling
that area is a melting pot with no notice of race. *Or that those
areas are socially progressive.

And how would you recognize a place that's "socially progressive"?

You are the one that used that term first. So I expect you have a
definition in your mind. But I would start with a place that did not
have neighborhoods that are close to having only one race living
there.

You and Don are doing some kind of tag-team routine. Don says it's all
changed in 20 years, and you define a place by what happened 40 or 50 years
ago. You guys ought to get your stories straight. It looks like you're just
floundering for an excuse.


An excuse for what?


You're reaching around for something, Don, but I don't know quite what it
is. The fact is that the attitudes towards racism are very different where
you are versus where I am. Witness the disagreements here by several
people;
Agreed. *Some people see race everywhere. *Some people see
individuals.

My guess is that you don't see much race anywhere.


I am saying that I see people first. They are not all the same
regardless of what race they are. For example I know whites that are
racists. Whites that are not. Once I had two blacks working for me
that were very different. One I had to talk with for about fifteen
minutes before he would relax. His first thought was always that I
was going to criticize him. He was an introvert, very conscious that
he had gotten the job to fill a racial quota, even though he was
qualified. It took me a long time to gain his confidence. The other
was an extrovert. Friendly with everyone all the time. Never had any
tension between us.
--
Ed Huntress

I'm sure that rangersucks, and Winston, and some others recognize that
"heartland conservative" attitude that you and Dan have expressed, and
further recognize how different it is from the common attitudes in
socially
progressive areas like this one.

I spent over thirty five years in the Seattle area and only recently
moved. *Are you saying that Seattle is a place of " heartland
conservative " attitudes? *Before you answer consider that Obama got a
higher percentage of the popular vote in Washington State than in New
Jersey.

I'm saying that YOUR attitudes are heartland conservative attitudes.

Then heartland conservative attitudes must mean that one judges people
by what they do and not what race they are.

But I thought your logic was that Don and I had always lived where
racial bias was so prevalent that we would not recognize that we were
actually subliminal racists.

My impression is that New York City and the surrounding area is highly
segregated. *You have neighborhoods *that are considered to be Irish,
Jewish, Black, Italian, Chinese, Puerto rican, etc..

You don't know what you're talking about.

Maybe but I have been in South Boston, South Philadelphia, Harlem,
North Boston, Hell's Kitchen, Manhatten's Chinatown, Plainfield NJ. I
have not been to East Harlem.
--
Ed Huntress

On 12/19/2009 9:14 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Yeah, some do. But most don't protest enough.

Gentlemen,

It is time to brush aside the clouds of discord floating over our little
newsgroup.
Let us consult the, or at least a, good book by Jeff Whitty with music
and lyrics by Robert Lopez and Jeff Marx.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbQiSVeQwVQ

Kevin Gallimore

axolotl wrote:
On 12/19/2009 9:14 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Yeah, some do. But most don't protest enough.

Gentlemen,

It is time to brush aside the clouds of discord floating over our
little newsgroup.
Let us consult the, or at least a, good book by Jeff Whitty with music
and lyrics by Robert Lopez and Jeff Marx.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbQiSVeQwVQ


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIlJ8...eature=related

--
John R. Carroll

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...
axolotl wrote:
On 12/19/2009 9:14 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Yeah, some do. But most don't protest enough.

Gentlemen,

It is time to brush aside the clouds of discord floating over our
little newsgroup.
Let us consult the, or at least a, good book by Jeff Whitty with music
and lyrics by Robert Lopez and Jeff Marx.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbQiSVeQwVQ


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIlJ8...eature=related


Jeez, I miss Tom Lehrer.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress wrote:
"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
...
axolotl wrote:
On 12/19/2009 9:14 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

Yeah, some do. But most don't protest enough.

Gentlemen,

It is time to brush aside the clouds of discord floating over our
little newsgroup.
Let us consult the, or at least a, good book by Jeff Whitty with
music and lyrics by Robert Lopez and Jeff Marx.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbQiSVeQwVQ


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIlJ8...eature=related


Jeez, I miss Tom Lehrer.

"In German and English, I know how to count down, und I'm learning Chinese"
says Werner Von Braun.

LOL


--
John R. Carroll

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 09:14:39 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


I'm mostly tweaking here, Ed. I honestly don't care for, support or
defend any form of bigotry, and I think you know that I favor civil
discourse and conduct. It does seem to me that some self-righteous
champions sometimes do protesteth a bit much.

Yeah, some do. But most don't protest enough. In the (probably apocryphal)
words of one of my favorite people, Edmund Burke: "All that is necessary for
the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

Think Hamlet.

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 08:08:21 -0700, wrote:



You've written dozens of posts criticizing me.

I've written many posts responding to your attacks and ridicule based
on two issues: our intent to be able to defend our senior selves from
predators and my non-support of your obsession with Gunner. I have
never gratuitously attacked you or anyone.

Let's see links to even
10 where you've done as much to criticize racists or deadbeats.
Prediction: you can't do that because those posts don't exist.

Correct. Your crusades, not mine. I don't care much for racists or
deadbeats but bleating on usenet won't have any corrective effect.
It's merely a forum abused to self-righteously clamor for attention.

Let's hear more about your recent small project on the lathe.

"Don Foreman" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 09:14:39 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


I'm mostly tweaking here, Ed. I honestly don't care for, support or
defend any form of bigotry, and I think you know that I favor civil
discourse and conduct. It does seem to me that some self-righteous
champions sometimes do protesteth a bit much.

Yeah, some do. But most don't protest enough. In the (probably apocryphal)
words of one of my favorite people, Edmund Burke: "All that is necessary
for
the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

Think Hamlet.

That was a very different reason for protesting too much.

--
Ed Huntress

wrote in message
...
On Dec 19, 12:02 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:

One needs to remember that New Jersey and NYC have had race riots
about forty years ago.

And what would you know about it, Dan? You live in Mayberry, I think you
said? g?


I do NOW.

So tell us what you know about the race riots in NJ, back in '67. You seem
to remember them. What do you remember? What has happened since? And how is
that relevant to the situation today?

No exactly something that inspires the feeling
that area is a melting pot with no notice of race. Or that those
areas are socially progressive.

And how would you recognize a place that's "socially progressive"?


You are the one that used that term first. So I expect you have a
definition in your mind.

I do. But you're the one who's suggesting that these areas are NOT socially
progressive. The question is, what are you talking about? Why do you think
they're not progressive? One would expect you to have an idea of what
"socially progressive" is if you're going to deny that they are. Right?

But I would start with a place that did not
have neighborhoods that are close to having only one race living
there.

And which ones would they be, Dan? We're talking about the suburbs,
remember.

You and Don are doing some kind of tag-team routine. Don says it's all
changed in 20 years, and you define a place by what happened 40 or 50
years
ago. You guys ought to get your stories straight. It looks like you're
just
floundering for an excuse.



An excuse for what?

The racist joke that you've been defending for an entire thread. Remember?


You're reaching around for something, Don, but I don't know quite what
it
is. The fact is that the attitudes towards racism are very different
where
you are versus where I am. Witness the disagreements here by several
people;
Agreed. Some people see race everywhere. Some people see
individuals.

My guess is that you don't see much race anywhere.


I am saying that I see people first. They are not all the same
regardless of what race they are. For example I know whites that are
racists. Whites that are not. Once I had two blacks working for me
that were very different. One I had to talk with for about fifteen
minutes before he would relax. His first thought was always that I
was going to criticize him. He was an introvert, very conscious that
he had gotten the job to fill a racial quota, even though he was
qualified. It took me a long time to gain his confidence. The other
was an extrovert. Friendly with everyone all the time. Never had any
tension between us.

Well, good for you, Dan. That's an admirable position, and you just may be
one of those rare conservatives who isn't hiding behind a feigned color
blindness to disguise what's really a passive and grudging "tolerance" that,
on the whole, has bogged down racial integration for generations.

It just could be. If it is, you're a rare type. Rare types to not produce
social changes, however. They're social outliers. And it may explain why,
unlike vast numbers of people on both sides who DO recognize a racist slur
when they see one, that you didn't recognize the racism inherent in Gunner's
"joke." If you don't see color and race first, you probably don't recognize
a racist joke...first.

I'm sure that rangersucks, and Winston, and some others recognize that
"heartland conservative" attitude that you and Dan have expressed, and
further recognize how different it is from the common attitudes in
socially
progressive areas like this one.

I spent over thirty five years in the Seattle area and only recently
moved. Are you saying that Seattle is a place of " heartland
conservative " attitudes? Before you answer consider that Obama got a
higher percentage of the popular vote in Washington State than in New
Jersey.

I'm saying that YOUR attitudes are heartland conservative attitudes.

Then heartland conservative attitudes must mean that one judges people
by what they do and not what race they are.

It means a collection of postures that produce something that amounts to a
high tolerance for subtle racism.

But I thought your logic was that Don and I had always lived where
racial bias was so prevalent that we would not recognize that we were
actually subliminal racists.

Forget your imagination of what my "logic" is. I said you have those
attitudes. I have no idea where you got them.


My impression is that New York City and the surrounding area is highly
segregated. You have neighborhoods that are considered to be Irish,
Jewish, Black, Italian, Chinese, Puerto rican, etc..

You don't know what you're talking about.


Maybe but I have been in South Boston, South Philadelphia, Harlem,
North Boston, Hell's Kitchen, Manhatten's Chinatown, Plainfield NJ. I
have not been to East Harlem.

That's what I mean that you don't know what you're talking about. None of
those areas is a suburb, except that Plainfield (three miles from where I'm
sitting now) is struggling to be one, as it recovers from being a caved-in
small manufacturing city. Walker Turner was there, for example. Like many
small Eastern cities that once had a manufacturing economy, it's a collapsed
community with nothing substantial to replace the lost manufacturing jobs.

The others are all urban. They're an entirely different thing, with their
own problems and their own cultures.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 01:50:44 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 08:08:21 -0700, wrote:



You've written dozens of posts criticizing me.

I've written many posts responding to your attacks and ridicule based
on two issues: our intent to be able to defend our senior selves from
predators and my non-support of your obsession with Gunner. I have
never gratuitously attacked you or anyone.


Thats the problem with the mentally ill, Don...if they think you are not
in their corner 100%.. they believe you are against them in everything
you do.

Dont let it bother you...Whine is obviously mentally ill, and from the
looks of it...has been for quite some time.

Im glad to take the heat, it saves you and other very nice people from
being savaged by the mentard.

Shrug

Gunner


"First Law of Leftist Debate
The more you present a leftist with factual evidence
that is counter to his preconceived world view and the
more difficult it becomes for him to refute it without
losing face the chance of him calling you a racist, bigot,
homophobe approaches infinity.

This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned
race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to
the subject." Grey Ghost

On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 01:50:44 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 08:08:21 -0700, wrote:



You've written dozens of posts criticizing me.

I've written many posts responding to your attacks and ridicule based
on two issues: our intent to be able to defend our senior selves from
predators

IOW, you don't like me making fun of your irrational fearfulness.
Here's a tip: this is supposed to be metalworking newsgroup. If you'd
quit posting the off-topic nonsense, then there won't be anything to
make fun of.

and my non-support of your obsession with Gunner.

Oh please. Anytime you want to step up and squeak half as much about
gummy's obsession with killing dems as you do about me mocking him,
you'll get an easier ride.

I have
never gratuitously attacked you or anyone.

Baloney. The main reason you read my posts is to find something to
criticize. Or were you BSing when you've repeatedly said that I have
nothing useful to say? And what about all that crap you made up based
on your transparently phony indignation yesterday? That was pathetic,
and denying that you make a habit of those tactics is worse.

Let's see links to even
10 where you've done as much to criticize racists or deadbeats.
Prediction: you can't do that because those posts don't exist.

Correct. Your crusades, not mine. I don't care much for racists or
deadbeats but bleating on usenet won't have any corrective effect.

A *fact* I've mentioned before - a single post stopped gummy from
posting his crap on SEJW. If you had the balls to speak up against the
low-lifes here, then your post could have been the one that did the
same for RCM, or stopped people like steveb from advertising their
ignorance. But if you ever found the will to speak up against these
idiots they'd turn on you in a heartbeat. Then who'd commiserate with
your fearfulness? Heck, you could be stuck with only people like Ed to
talk to instead of intellectuals with 156 IQs. snorf So here you are
pretending that you have high standards even though there's no
evidence for your position other than 70 year-old secondhand tales
about shark shooting. Thanks for that BTW, I just got another chuckle
out of it.

It's merely a forum abused to self-righteously clamor for attention.

Let's hear more about your recent small project on the lathe.

As it happens I thought I might soon post a photo of the entire
project as a whatisit since it's a strange one. Not sure I want to do
anything you ask though, or post anything metal-related in a primarily
political group.

Wayne

On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 08:38:19 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 01:50:44 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 08:08:21 -0700, wrote:



You've written dozens of posts criticizing me.

I've written many posts responding to your attacks and ridicule based
on two issues: our intent to be able to defend our senior selves from
predators

IOW, you don't like me making fun of your irrational fearfulness.

Timorously sniped under a pseudonym from an undisclosed remote
off-grid hide.

On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 12:26:25 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 08:38:19 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 01:50:44 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 08:08:21 -0700, wrote:



You've written dozens of posts criticizing me.

I've written many posts responding to your attacks and ridicule based
on two issues: our intent to be able to defend our senior selves from
predators

IOW, you don't like me making fun of your irrational fearfulness.

Timorously sniped under a pseudonym from an undisclosed remote
off-grid hide.

Is this where I'm supposed to correct you again, and you pretend not
to see it or believe it? Or is it where I'm supposed to, under the
credo of mighty RCM phony warrior boaster-posters, invite you to come
visit, and then write multiple colorful and increasingly detailed
descriptions of your end and burial? Homey don't play that, and you're
still a guy who advertises his need to carry a "blade" when going for
a walk in Mayberry. Between that and steveb needing a police scanner
to drive in LV, I can't decide which is funnier.

Wayne

On Dec 20, 9:38*am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:

So tell us what you know about the race riots in NJ, back in '67. You seem
to remember them. What do you remember? What has happened since? And how is
that relevant to the situation today?


I only remember what I read in the newspapers and saw on TV. But if
you think I was too young to remember, you are wrong. By 1967 I had
graduated from college, been in the Navy, work as an engineer for two
different companies, bought and sold two houses, worked in three
different states.



It just could be. If it is, you're a rare type. Rare types to not produce
social changes, however.

Never claimed that I was trying to produce social change. So what you
say here makes no difference to me.


Forget your imagination of what my "logic" is. I said you have those
attitudes. I have no idea where you got them.

In an earlier post you implied that Don and I did not have the
experience of living in an area that was not conservative. So
naturally that is what I was responding to. Now you change once
again.


My impression is that New York City and the surrounding area is highly
segregated. You have neighborhoods that are considered to be Irish,
Jewish, Black, Italian, Chinese, Puerto rican, etc..

You don't know what you're talking about.

Maybe but I have been in South Boston, South Philadelphia, Harlem,
North Boston, Hell's Kitchen, Manhatten's Chinatown, Plainfield NJ. *I
have not been to East Harlem.

That's what I mean that you don't know what you're talking about. None of
those areas is a suburb, except that Plainfield (three miles from where I'm
sitting now) is struggling to be one, as it recovers from being a caved-in
small manufacturing city. Walker Turner was there, for example. Like many
small Eastern cities that once had a manufacturing economy, it's a collapsed
community with nothing substantial to replace the lost manufacturing jobs..

The others are all urban. They're an entirely different thing, with their
own problems and their own cultures.

You did not say that only suburban areas counted. I thought you were
comparing the East as in New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Conn.
etc to the mid west. Can you explain why only suburbs count?
--
Ed Huntress

wrote in message
...
On Dec 20, 9:38 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:

So tell us what you know about the race riots in NJ, back in '67. You seem
to remember them. What do you remember? What has happened since? And how
is
that relevant to the situation today?


I only remember what I read in the newspapers and saw on TV. But if
you think I was too young to remember, you are wrong. By 1967 I had
graduated from college, been in the Navy, work as an engineer for two
different companies, bought and sold two houses, worked in three
different states.

I think no such thing, Dan. I had the impression you were around 70. But I
remember the riots well. I was within a cannon shot of Newark and a rifle
shot of Plainfield. You're making some kind of connection between what
happened and the political attitudes in NJ suburbs, but you haven't told us
what the connection is supposed to be. I'm curious about what you think it
is.

It just could be. If it is, you're a rare type. Rare types to not produce
social changes, however.

Never claimed that I was trying to produce social change. So what you
say here makes no difference to me.

The point is that you claimed that "most RCMers," and millions of other
people, won't recognize the racism in Gunner's "joke." As you said, "I mean
to say that everyone that comments about it is a biased sample. Those that
do not comment ( a much bigger number ) do not see a obvious racist intent
or at least an ineffective racist intent."

Supposedly you know what that "much bigger number" of people think. But now
you appear to be a very small sample yourself. That's why it's an issue.



Forget your imagination of what my "logic" is. I said you have those
attitudes. I have no idea where you got them.


In an earlier post you implied that Don and I did not have the
experience of living in an area that was not conservative.
So
naturally that is what I was responding to. Now you change once
again.

I did not. I said that Don lives in a conservative part of the country --
the upper Midwest. It isn't uniform, but there is a generally conservative
attitude in that part of the country that's recognizable. It's a lot
different from the conservatism of the deep South, or of old New England.

I said that you both have "heartland conservative" attitudes. Don said he
doesn't have much experience with my part of the country. That's all that
was said about it. I don't know *where* you live, nor does it matter in this
case.


My impression is that New York City and the surrounding area is highly
segregated. You have neighborhoods that are considered to be Irish,
Jewish, Black, Italian, Chinese, Puerto rican, etc..

You don't know what you're talking about.

Maybe but I have been in South Boston, South Philadelphia, Harlem,
North Boston, Hell's Kitchen, Manhatten's Chinatown, Plainfield NJ. I
have not been to East Harlem.

That's what I mean that you don't know what you're talking about. None of
those areas is a suburb, except that Plainfield (three miles from where
I'm
sitting now) is struggling to be one, as it recovers from being a caved-in
small manufacturing city. Walker Turner was there, for example. Like many
small Eastern cities that once had a manufacturing economy, it's a
collapsed
community with nothing substantial to replace the lost manufacturing jobs.

The others are all urban. They're an entirely different thing, with their
own problems and their own cultures.


You did not say that only suburban areas counted. I thought you were
comparing the East as in New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Conn.
etc to the mid west. Can you explain why only suburbs count?

I said to Don, "I don't know how much time you've spent in the NYC
suburbs...The difference that's relevant here is that the tolerance of
racist expressions, both subtle and overt, is vastly higher there than it is
here." That was the comparison. That's what we were talking about.

Regarding why old city enclaves don't count, they have an entirely different
culture. The places you listed are each unique; old ethnic neighborhoods,
run-down ghettos, and so on. They're interspersed with very liberal,
cosmopolitan neighborhoods. There is little to compare between those
attitudes and those where I live. It would be like comparing downtown
Detroit with Ann Arbor.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 17:53:51 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:



Regarding why old city enclaves don't count, they have an entirely different
culture. The places you listed are each unique; old ethnic neighborhoods,
run-down ghettos, and so on. They're interspersed with very liberal,
cosmopolitan neighborhoods. There is little to compare between those
attitudes and those where I live. It would be like comparing downtown
Detroit with Ann Arbor.

Thin ice, Ed. I was there in September for my 50th HS class reunion.
They're not that different.

On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 13:38:50 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 12:26:25 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 08:38:19 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 01:50:44 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 08:08:21 -0700, wrote:



You've written dozens of posts criticizing me.

I've written many posts responding to your attacks and ridicule based
on two issues: our intent to be able to defend our senior selves from
predators

IOW, you don't like me making fun of your irrational fearfulness.

Timorously sniped under a pseudonym from an undisclosed remote
off-grid hide.

Is this where I'm supposed to correct you again, and you pretend not
to see it or believe it? Or is it where I'm supposed to, under the
credo of mighty RCM phony warrior boaster-posters, invite you to come
visit, and then write multiple colorful and increasingly detailed
descriptions of your end and burial? Homey don't play that, and you're
still a guy who advertises his need to carry a "blade" when going for
a walk in Mayberry. Between that and steveb needing a police scanner
to drive in LV, I can't decide which is funnier.

Wayne

Timorously sniped using a pseudonym from an undisclosed remote
off-grid hide.

"Don Foreman" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 17:53:51 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:



Regarding why old city enclaves don't count, they have an entirely
different
culture. The places you listed are each unique; old ethnic neighborhoods,
run-down ghettos, and so on. They're interspersed with very liberal,
cosmopolitan neighborhoods. There is little to compare between those
attitudes and those where I live. It would be like comparing downtown
Detroit with Ann Arbor.

Thin ice, Ed. I was there in September for my 50th HS class reunion.
They're not that different.

You're saying that the cultural attitudes in Ann Arbor are "not that
different" from those in inner city Detroit? 'Must be a different Detroit.
Or somebody did something to the Ann Arbor that I used to know. g

But let's say I chose bad examples. Are you saying in general that the
attitudes in the kinds of places that Dan listed, such as South Philadelphia
(one of America's most decrepit places) and the suburbs like Edison, for
which you now know the demographics, are "not that different"?

If that's what you're saying, you're off base by miles.

--
Ed Huntress

On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 01:30:30 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 13:38:50 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 12:26:25 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 08:38:19 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 01:50:44 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 08:08:21 -0700, wrote:



You've written dozens of posts criticizing me.

I've written many posts responding to your attacks and ridicule based
on two issues: our intent to be able to defend our senior selves from
predators

IOW, you don't like me making fun of your irrational fearfulness.

Timorously sniped under a pseudonym from an undisclosed remote
off-grid hide.

Is this where I'm supposed to correct you again, and you pretend not
to see it or believe it? Or is it where I'm supposed to, under the
credo of mighty RCM phony warrior boaster-posters, invite you to come
visit, and then write multiple colorful and increasingly detailed
descriptions of your end and burial? Homey don't play that, and you're
still a guy who advertises his need to carry a "blade" when going for
a walk in Mayberry. Between that and steveb needing a police scanner
to drive in LV, I can't decide which is funnier.

Wayne

Timorously sniped using a pseudonym from an undisclosed remote
off-grid hide.


G

But he is funny to read at times.


Gunner


"First Law of Leftist Debate
The more you present a leftist with factual evidence
that is counter to his preconceived world view and the
more difficult it becomes for him to refute it without
losing face the chance of him calling you a racist, bigot,
homophobe approaches infinity.

This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned
race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to
the subject." Grey Ghost