• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

I did not have this on my fuck 2025 bingo card.

Teach a man to fish, and he’ll sit in a boat all day drinking beer.

JFC, are there no editors left at that goddamn rag?

… pundit janitors mopping up after the gop

Come on, man.

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Compromise? There is no middle ground between a firefighter and an arsonist.

Roe is not about choice. It is about freedom.

We will not go quietly into the night; we will not vanish without a fight.

Jack Smith: “Why did you start campaigning in the middle of my investigation?!”

Bad people in a position to do bad things will do bad things because they are bad people. End of story.

In my day, never was longer.

Shallow, uninformed, and lacking identity

Tide comes in. Tide goes out. You can’t explain that.

Beware of advice from anyone for whom Democrats are “they” and not “we.”

I really should read my own blog.

“The defense has a certain level of trust in defendant that the government does not.”

Narcissists are always shocked to discover other people have agency.

Giving up is unforgivable.

It’s all just conspiracy shit beamed down from the mothership.

Today’s gop: why go just far enough when too far is right there?

He really is that stupid.

Trumpflation is an intolerable hardship for every American, and it’s Trump’s fault.

Come on, media. you have one job. start doing it.

Mobile Menu

  • Seattle Meet-up Post
  • 2025 Activism
  • Targeted Political Fundraising
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Civil Rights / Racial Justice / Kiss My Black Ass / Reanimating the Horse and then Beating It Again

Reanimating the Horse and then Beating It Again

by Imani Gandy (ABL)|  January 20, 20113:16 pm| 361 Comments

This post is in: Kiss My Black Ass

FacebookTweetEmail

I’m going to repost a comment I just wrote in John’s thread because — well — because I am.

I’ve written multiple posts about the racism among the diarists and commenters at FDL (before I started posting over here). Other commenters in this and yesterday’s thread have mentioned that they are offended by the language and dogwhistles at FDL. This is not an isolated incident. I’ve directed my criticism directly at Jane. She has been nonresponsive (while calling me one of John’s lackeys, of course, because heaven forbid I have any independent thought). Moreover, that type of language continues to appear on FDL.

At what point is one required to take responsibility for the offensive language that permeates one’s blog? It doesn’t matter to me that, like Kos, FDL is a teeming mass of personal diaries. They are still FDL diaries and are held to some sort of standard (as linked by Moderator Rayne) but not to the standard of “don’t use the word nigger” (THAT WORD) despite proclaiming that FDL doesn’t “use THAT word.” They do use that word; they just try to lessen the blow by slapping some asterisks in there.

Why is it my job to prove that the use of racially offensive language is pervasive enough to deem FDL racist? Why isn’t it her job to keep her diarists and commenters in line or, at the very least, fire her moderators and open up the blog to real debate?

Why is it that those who read FDL come over here to defend the use of that language, or to debate it? Because they don’t get that sort of debate over there because of the moderation of all contrary views. I imagine when they are confronted with someone who doesn’t agree with them (like the one commenter who got shouted down and called a member of the Word Police), it must be like a slap in the face to them.

It’s really not that hard to understand: Don’t say nigger. There are plenty of other word choices.

And to those who say “Well, don’t read FDL if you don’t like it,” I say “No. I will read it and I will call it out.” FDL isn’t some insignificant blog. And when the overlord of that blog continually appears on MSNBC and is one-note in her criticism of All Things Obama, while continuing to allow racially charged language and posts to appear on her blog, she is fomenting racism—not supporting or condoning—fomenting. She may not be racist, but at best, she doesn’t care that the use of that language is offensive. That, in and of itself, is offensive.

If I ever used the word “cunt” or even worse “white cunts” to describe white women, do you think John wouldn’t send me an email telling me to watch my mouth? Do you think John wouldn’t take down the post or change the language—change it, not just asterisk it? And if he didn’t, do you think that women and/or white women juicers would be wrong in their outrage?

The diarist told me to ask John whether or not John thought the diarist is racist. That is patently absurd. First, I didn’t call him racist (I said he used racist language) and second, WTF? “Go ask that white guy whether or not I’m racist. He’ll be the decider.” Really?

I’m ashamed at and embarrassed for some of you. We’re supposed to be liberals, goddamnit. What is so hard about not using the fucking term “house nigger”? I can’t believe some of you don’t see a problem with the language, and I’m shocked that some of you are actually defending it.

It truly is shameful.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « No One Ever Told Me That About Depeche Mode
Next Post: Death march »

Reader Interactions

361Comments

  1. 1.

    A L

    January 20, 2011 at 3:19 pm

    I’m ashamed at and embarrassed for some of you. We’re supposed to be liberals, goddamnit.

    Laffo, like in the long run you’re any better than right-wingers.

  2. 2.

    Trainrunner

    January 20, 2011 at 3:20 pm

    I have always been niggardly in my praise of FDL.

  3. 3.

    General Stuck

    January 20, 2011 at 3:26 pm

    @A L:

    Laffo, like in the long run you’re any better than right-wingers.

    Epically stupid comment. Way to go shameful, first fucking comment.

  4. 4.

    david mizner

    January 20, 2011 at 3:28 pm

    Could you mebbe provide a link to comments that include “nigger” and then we can maybe we can have real discussion instead of a ritual Hamsher-hate fest, which is like so 2010.

  5. 5.

    geg6

    January 20, 2011 at 3:28 pm

    Bravo, ABL, bravo.

    As I said in the previous thread, the diarist showed his true colors when he blames not getting a promotion on the African Americans he would have been supervising had he gotten the promotion. The fact that his boss told him that he had concerns with his ability to interact with the workforce tells me every thing I need to know about him.

    And I knew FDL had no problems with racism back when they showed Lieberman in blackface. That was, despite the despicability of Lieberman, despicable.

  6. 6.

    morzer

    January 20, 2011 at 3:28 pm

    @david mizner:

    We went through this in the previous thread on the topic, David.

  7. 7.

    Short Bus Bully

    January 20, 2011 at 3:30 pm

    Thank you ABL for laying the fucking smack down. That needed to be said. You are 100% correct. Calling out stupid shit like that is part and parcel of being a liberal.

  8. 8.

    Chyron HR

    January 20, 2011 at 3:30 pm

    @morzer:

    No! Provide them now! Hyperlinks are not an acceptable format in which to submit these links to Mr. Minzer also, too!

  9. 9.

    John W.

    January 20, 2011 at 3:30 pm

    I don’t like making assumptions. Cole, what would you do if ABL or a front page poster used patently offensive language?

    And should we hold FDL to that standard?

    I’d prefer to hold them to that standard while not meeting it myself, but we’re too fucking high on ourselves to be that hypocritical.

  10. 10.

    Allan

    January 20, 2011 at 3:31 pm

    @david mizner: Evidence already provided in the earlier threads to which this refers. Would you also like us to read them out loud to you?

  11. 11.

    Comrade Mary

    January 20, 2011 at 3:32 pm

    At what point is one required to take responsibility for the offensive language that permeates one’s blog? It doesn’t matter to me that, like Kos, FDL is a teeming mass of personal diaries. They are still FDL diaries and are held to some sort of standard (as linked by Moderator Rayne) but not to the standard of “don’t use the word nigger” (THAT WORD) despite proclaiming that FDL doesn’t “use THAT word.” They do use that word; they just try to lessen the blow by slapping some asterisks in there. …

    If I ever used the word “cunt” or even worse “white cunts” to describe white women, do you think John wouldn’t send me an email telling me to watch my mouth? Do you think John wouldn’t take down the post or change the language—change it, not just asterisk it? And if he didn’t, do you think that women and/or white women juicers would be wrong in their outrage?

    I once foolishly used the word “cunt” in anger to describe some political figure (not another commenter.) John deleted that right away, as he should have. But you and I are both using the word “cunt” now in a discussion about language, and that isn’t going to be deleted.

    There’s nothing magical about a sprinkle of asterisks to replace the innards of really harsh words like these. If John had just changed my post to “C**t”, that wouldn’t have made what I said any more acceptable.

    Language matters. Context matters. Moderation matters.

  12. 12.

    david mizner

    January 20, 2011 at 3:32 pm

    @morzer:

    Thanks.

    But on second thought, I don’t care.

  13. 13.

    freelancer

    January 20, 2011 at 3:32 pm

    I don’t abide bigots. FDL moderates their site much more stringently than others. Hamsher might not be a racist, but she’s tolerating open and blatant racism on a site that she owns. Forget her. As far as the moral of this story…Ban more people, get better moderators, or you own the asylum that is your readership. They’ve captured you. Next subject please.

  14. 14.

    Ija

    January 20, 2011 at 3:32 pm

    @geg6:

    Steve the diarist and D. Mason is the same guy? Or did Steve also has a story about being passed over for promotion because of black people? What are the odds?

  15. 15.

    Ryan

    January 20, 2011 at 3:32 pm

    All I did was say to my wife, “That piece of halibut was good enough for Jehovah!”

  16. 16.

    Comrade Mary

    January 20, 2011 at 3:33 pm

    FYWP.

    The second paragraph in my post above should have been shown as a quote from ABL, but I can’t get in to edit it. My contribution starts with “I once foolishly used the word “cunt” in anger to describe some political figure (not another commenter.)”

  17. 17.

    A L

    January 20, 2011 at 3:33 pm

    @General Stuck: And? How many times do your beliefs, whatever they may be, get co-opted by the right wing and used against you, and you sit there and take it? At least the right-wingers make no bones about what they’re up to.

    Instead, let’s complain about what some nothing website says as part of some nobody’s slapfight against it.

  18. 18.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 3:34 pm

    @John W.: as i stated in the comment section yesterday, the difference is that cole doesn’t moderate his comments. so if people disagree with the front pagers, they are free to say so. at FDL the moderators “disappear” comments.

  19. 19.

    david mizner

    January 20, 2011 at 3:34 pm

    @Allan:

    No, that’s okay. I came to my senses and realized that it’s idiotic to hold Hamsher responsible for comments. From what I can tell, FDL is might more liberal than most blogs in not banning people for offensive comments. That’s to it’s credit.

  20. 20.

    Comrade Colette Collaboratrice

    January 20, 2011 at 3:34 pm

    Damn right, ABL. As for that first asshole (and the inevitable flood of hysterical FDLers who will shortly stream into this thread, too): this kind of calling out and pushing back absolutely needs to happen, but unfortunately it draws all the flies to the house door.

  21. 21.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 3:34 pm

    Instead, let’s complain about what some nothing website says as part of some nobody’s slapfight against it.

    reading comprehension: you needs it.

  22. 22.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 3:36 pm

    From what I can tell, FDL is might more liberal than most blogs in not banning people for offensive comments. That’s to it’s credit.

    WRONG. FDL is heavily moderated. they may not ban offensive (i.e. racially charged) comments, but they ban all comments that don’t agree with their world view.

    come on, now.

  23. 23.

    morzer

    January 20, 2011 at 3:36 pm

    @david mizner:

    But on second thought, I don’t care.

    Well, there’s a surprise.

  24. 24.

    Allan

    January 20, 2011 at 3:37 pm

    @david mizner: That’s funny, you cared enough to accuse ABL of making baseless accusations, but run from the evidence on which she made those accusations.

    How passive-aggressive of you.

  25. 25.

    guster

    January 20, 2011 at 3:37 pm

    “At what point is one required to take responsibility for the offensive language that permeates one’s blog?”

    I honestly don’t know, but that’s a pretty good question, and it would’ve been nice to see it addressed.

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=nigger+site%3Aballoon-juice.com&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=

  26. 26.

    Ash Can

    January 20, 2011 at 3:37 pm

    The trouble with us whites throwing this kind of language around is that we have no context. We weren’t the ones who underwent hundreds of years of forced oppression that, even though outlawed, still hasn’t quite gone away. We’re not the ones disadvantaged, discriminated against, categorized, and losing hope. So when we use one of these words, we naturally don’t feel any of the baggage it carries.

    I’ve heard blacks use the word themselves. Fine, it’s their prerogative. I feel quite safe assuming that they have an understanding and insight into the word that I’ll never begin to have. I’m not a professional, so I won’t try doing it myself.

  27. 27.

    John Cole

    January 20, 2011 at 3:37 pm

    A.) I would and have gotten rid of the c-bomb when it appears. Although all hope is lost in this thread, it appears.

    B.) My only point is that I think it is unfair to lump everyone at FDL in the group. DDAY and TBOGG and Marci have nothing to do with this.

    On much of the rest of what ABL has said, I agree. I read the comments over there and a lot of the time it is reminiscent of the comments at NoQuarter.

  28. 28.

    Mattminus

    January 20, 2011 at 3:38 pm

    ‘If I ever used the word “cunt” or even worse “white cunts” to describe white women…’

    Well, you kind of just did , didn’t you?

    This is than what was said at FDL. They weren’t assaulting an individual with racist language. They were using a word to make a point.

    Just.

    Like.

    You.

    Did.

    Context matters.

  29. 29.

    A L

    January 20, 2011 at 3:38 pm

    @Angry Black Lady: Oh I forgot, this is definitely in the top 10 Most Important Things that anyone could be talking about right now.

  30. 30.

    david mizner

    January 20, 2011 at 3:38 pm

    @Allan:

    I didn’t accuse her of anything. I know it’s bit passe, I’m old school this way, but I believe in bloggers providing links to their assertions.

  31. 31.

    Dave

    January 20, 2011 at 3:39 pm

    I just can’t believe we have to have an argument about whether using a blatantly, horrifically offensive word is justifiable.

    Here’s a hint…it’s not. And if Jane wants to edit the comments, then she is implicitly taking responsibility for what remains. And even if she didn’t…it’s just wrong. How fucking difficult is that to comprehend?

  32. 32.

    Observer

    January 20, 2011 at 3:39 pm

    @Angry Black Lady: I still understand your point of view but nethertheless still think the original post (and generally posts/vents of that type) are things we need to avoid and move past.

    You never did answer my question from yesterday (and, granted, you may have just missed it): do you think *really* Jane herself is racist in a “white people are better than black people” way? Can we get a simple Yes/No please.

  33. 33.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 3:39 pm

    The real sadness of the defense of the term used is that it shows the lack of the tiny bit of imagination needed to come up with a way of describing the phenomenon in a way that isn’t facially offensive and racist. I dunno, “useful idiot?” If that doesn’t work, TRY SOMETHING ELSE – the benefit of the written medium is that you have time to find the exact right words to express what you mean.

    And just as a thought experiment, would people at FDL find it objectionable if the diarist had used the term “Sonderkommando” (which isn’t exactly the same thing, but close enough for demonstrative purposes, I think)? To ask the question is to answer it, so why is it some how ok to use “HN” but not to somehow refer to self-hating Jews?

  34. 34.

    Midnight Marauder

    January 20, 2011 at 3:39 pm

    @david mizner:

    From what I can tell, FDL is might more liberal than most blogs in not banning people for offensive comments.

    Because that’s the issue being discussed here?

  35. 35.

    joeyess

    January 20, 2011 at 3:40 pm

    I agree with ABL. The only person that I can think of that used the term effectively was Malcolm X and he did it for it’s shock value and that was in 1962!

    For what ever reason – I didn’t read the diary in question, btw – the diarist chose to use this term. Clumsily. It is, in my opinion, a lazy use of a valid metaphor constructed by a Nation of Islam Shock Trooper-turned-introspective and effective activist.

    Malcolm X probably didn’t invent the metaphor, but he perfected it’s phraseology and used it in the context of his time to reach an audience that was losing the battle for civil rights: Black and White Moderates. FWIW, Malcolm X used the terms “house negro/field negro” on television and in speeches to shake the rafters of a struggling Civil Rights Movement.

    Maybe I shouldn’t be talking about this, after all, I’m a 50 year old white guy from Iowa. What do I know?

    Anyway, I agree with ABL. The word is offensive. It’s racist. It shouldn’t be used, even with asterisks.

  36. 36.

    Allan

    January 20, 2011 at 3:40 pm

    @Mattminus: Umm, I missed the part where the FDLer’s original post was about the power and dangers of using offensive terms to make your argument.

    Context truly matters, which is why your attempt to slag ABL failed so spectacularly, but thanks for playing.

  37. 37.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 3:41 pm

    @Mattminus: oh stop it. it was racially charged example that i used ON PURPOSE to prove a point.

    I WILL REMIND ALL OF YOU THAT MY MOTHER IS WHITE.

    christ.

  38. 38.

    Midnight Marauder

    January 20, 2011 at 3:42 pm

    @John Cole:

    B.) My only point is that I think it is unfair to lump everyone at FDL in the group. DDAY and TBOGG and Marci have nothing to do with this.

    And the only point I see aimed back at this is, at what point do you decide you no longer want your name and person affiliated with a website that actively enables latent racism?

  39. 39.

    Loneoak

    January 20, 2011 at 3:42 pm

    @david mizner:

    Really? Which other widely read liberal blogs do ban people for offensive comments? Note that in this case, the offensive comments were not an instance of trolling, but rather a pigheaded use of, and subsequent defense of, racially explosive vocabulary to describe the President.

  40. 40.

    david mizner

    January 20, 2011 at 3:42 pm

    @morzer:

    Well, I realized we were talking about random blog comments.

  41. 41.

    Allan

    January 20, 2011 at 3:42 pm

    @david mizner: Seriously, you can’t scroll down the page to the previous diary without help? But keep up the passive-aggressive display, it’s really edifying for others to see how you do it.

  42. 42.

    morzer

    January 20, 2011 at 3:42 pm

    @david mizner:

    And then you tell us you don’t care when three of us point out that the evidence was readily available, if you were willing to actually read the thread where this all began. It’s really not too impressive, is it, David?

  43. 43.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 3:43 pm

    WRONG. FDL is heavily moderated. they may not ban offensive (i.e. racially charged) comments, but they ban all comments that don’t agree with their world view.

    To my way of thinking, this kind of moderation is worse than no moderation at all. Maybe it’s the attorney in me that recognizes that viewpoint neutral “censorship” is almost always more benign than viewpoint based.

  44. 44.

    aliasofwestgate

    January 20, 2011 at 3:43 pm

    @Mattminus:

    She wasn’t using it as an insult towards other people for one. In this case, you took the context completely wrong. The phrase in question of this entire round about argument is one that could have been described using more than a dozen other words or phrases that conveyed the whole point of them being lackeys without using the phrase in question, which is offensive on several levels.

    She used the c word to make a point, she wasn’t pointing the word toward ANYONE at all. She wouldn’t use the phrase to begin with. That’s just basic courtesy.

  45. 45.

    Bruce (formerly Steve S.)

    January 20, 2011 at 3:44 pm

    I’m going to repost a comment I just wrote in John’s thread because—well—because I am.

    Then I guess it’s okay if I repost one of mine.

    Unfair, yes, and other things. For instance, one would think that in a country where a potentially horrific terror attack against a King Day parade was just thwarted you wouldn’t want to waste a lot of time trolling the back pages of FDL for potentially insensitive racial remarks. It’s good to see that ABL’s sense of proportion is improving and she’s turned her sights (pardon the metaphor) on Rick Santorum.

    There’s racism that is probably accidental, perhaps negligent, and relegated to some blog somewhere. There’s institutional racism expressed openly by relatively powerful people. And there’s racism that seeks to murder large numbers of people. If our Rage-o-Meter starts at 10 for the first of these I don’t know where it’s supposed to go from there.

    All that said, one of my bedrock principles is that everybody has a right to be offended by whatever he or she finds offensive. My hope, though, is that we attempt to keep our sense of proportion. I mean, c’mon, somebody just tried to murder dozens of children at a celebration of Dr. King. Seriously, the FBI is saying this just happened. For real.

  46. 46.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 3:44 pm

    @Observer: i would love nothing more to be able to move past it. when we get to post-racial america, i’ll be happy to do so.

    and i’m not going to answer your YES/NO question because the point i’m making has nothing to do with whether Jane Hamsher thinks she’s better than black people.

  47. 47.

    Trinity

    January 20, 2011 at 3:44 pm

    Amen ABL. Amen.

  48. 48.

    Snaporaz

    January 20, 2011 at 3:44 pm

    Thank you ABL for your continuing spotlight on the real and crucial problems facing America today. I’m sure once we get this anonymous-racists-on-FDL fixed we can move on to those lesser problems like unemployment, health care, wall street, etc…

  49. 49.

    geg6

    January 20, 2011 at 3:45 pm

    @Observer:

    do you think really Jane herself is racist in a “white people are better than black people” way? Yes/No please.

    I’ll answer.

    Yes. Yes, I do. I’ve seen enough of FDL over the years to say yes. This is why I don’t go there unless it’s just TBogg’s place.

  50. 50.

    morzer

    January 20, 2011 at 3:45 pm

    @Mattminus:

    And you just quoted someone using the terms you disapprove of.

    I am shocked at your vile language, Matt, shocked.

  51. 51.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 3:45 pm

    @Bruce (formerly Steve S.): http://www.derailingfordummies.com/#moreimportantly

    that’s all i have to say in response to you.

  52. 52.

    John Cole

    January 20, 2011 at 3:45 pm

    If I ever used the word “cunt” or even worse “white cunts” to describe white women, do you think John wouldn’t send me an email telling me to watch my mouth? Do you think John wouldn’t take down the post or change the language—change it, not just asterisk it? And if he didn’t, do you think that women and/or white women juicers would be wrong in their outrage?

    BTW- how am I supposed to handle this?

    CATCH-22 much?

  53. 53.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 3:46 pm

    @Snaporaz: see the link in #51.

  54. 54.

    Comrade Mary

    January 20, 2011 at 3:46 pm

    @guster: Context. Look it up.

    @Mattminus: No, you don’t understand context either.

    Merely using a configuration of letters doesn’t cause people to burst into flame. Judiciously using certain words in a discussion about racist invective is probably OK with most people.

    Targeting a specific person, a specific group of people, or a specific group of people with one of those words, then deciding that just replacing the asterisks makes it all OK, can be stupid, hateful, racist and/or racially insensitive.

    Depending on context, of course.

  55. 55.

    Midnight Marauder

    January 20, 2011 at 3:46 pm

    @Mattminus:

    ‘If I ever used the word “cunt” or even worse “white cunts” to describe white women…’

    Well, you kind of just did , didn’t you?

    No, actually, she did not.

    Critical reading skills. Invest in them.

  56. 56.

    david mizner

    January 20, 2011 at 3:46 pm

    @Midnight Marauder:

    Isn’t it? Isn’t is this post only possible claim to import? That offensive comments by random poster reflects poorly on Hamsher?

    Surely we can’t merely be talking about random comments by anonymous posters, because surely we would all feel silly talking about such a frivolous topic.

    Hamsher derangement syndrome is the only thing keeping this rickety thread moving.

  57. 57.

    morzer

    January 20, 2011 at 3:47 pm

    @John Cole:

    Wise man post Tunch pictures in other thread and hope not to be noticed, kemosabe.

  58. 58.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 3:47 pm

    @Mattminus:

    At some level, I agree with you, context matters. Sadly for you, it cuts against your argument not for it. Just compare the construction of the points argued. One of them says “we used to call such people BLANK” and the other says “if that’s ok, would it also be ok to call people BLANK”. So yeah, context.

  59. 59.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 3:47 pm

    @John Cole: i didn’t mean it as a catch-22, but it’s the only word i could think of that women tend to view as offensive across-the-board.

    i obviously don’t think that white women are cunts.

    the FDL diarist obviously thinks that the Democrats are the equivalent of house niggers. there’s a difference.

  60. 60.

    Allan

    January 20, 2011 at 3:48 pm

    @Bruce (formerly Steve S.): ABL, I forget which “Derailing for Dummies” technique it is when someone slams you by suggesting that you may be right, but are, of course, wrong because you are focusing on the wrong issues. Because this is an excellent example of that technique right here.

    ETA: Thanks, see you already got this one.

  61. 61.

    Tsulagi

    January 20, 2011 at 3:48 pm

    The diarist told me to ask John whether or not John thought the diarist is racist… WTF? “Go ask that white guy whether or not I’m racist. He’ll be the decider.” Really?

    Okay, now that’s funny. Wrong, of course, but clueless stupid is always good comedy. Someone once also told my SO it would be best to get my opinion and decision. Didn’t even need a countdown, she went instant ballistic.

  62. 62.

    Ricky

    January 20, 2011 at 3:48 pm

    If people can’t call out diarists on astericked racial language, then for sure, people won’t/can’t call out the neo-cons who sway the public over time to think it’s okay and socially acceptable to be anti-Muslim. Gawd, the stupid hurts so much.

  63. 63.

    John Cole

    January 20, 2011 at 3:48 pm

    @guster: Point to one link where the word is used to DESCRIBE someone…

  64. 64.

    General Stuck

    January 20, 2011 at 3:49 pm

    @A L:

    And? How many times do your beliefs, whatever they may be, get co-opted by the right wing and used against you, and you sit there and take it? At least the right-wingers make no bones about what they’re up to.

    Instead, let’s complain about what some nothing website says as part of some nobody’s slapfight against it.

    And. We deal with the blogosphere here, and I agree that it is hardly only FDL, while it may be one of the more blatant. None of us are perfect, but the creeping stench of the left’s version of racist speech and framing, has been one of the big surprises for me to witness. At various times, especially the past year, when there has been pol stress usually during periods of vital legislation up for vote, it has turned over the ugly underbelly of the netroots, well beyond FDL. Even here on BJ during the Lame Duck.

    It needs to be called what it is when it happens, and again, none of us is perfect in the arena of race relations, most especially on the white side of the things. You , me, liberals in general, are not immune, and shouldn’t be for policing our own bullshit when it comes out. If not, then these things have a way of continuing to feed upon itself into all sorts of ugly shit.

  65. 65.

    Ryan

    January 20, 2011 at 3:49 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    i would love nothing more to be able to move past it. when we get to post-racial america, i’ll be happy to do so.

    What exactly would that look like?

  66. 66.

    Ash Can

    January 20, 2011 at 3:49 pm

    @Observer:

    do you think really Jane herself is racist in a “white people are better than black people” way?

    This question is a red herring, and is worse than pointless in that it obfuscates the real definition of, and problem with, racism. Racism is much more than a belief in superiority. It’s deeper and far more insidious than that. To confine it to something as blatant and easily recognizable as “white people are better than black people” perpetuates the excuse whites use that since they don’t feel as though they’re “better than” blacks they can’t possibly be racist.

  67. 67.

    Allan

    January 20, 2011 at 3:49 pm

    @david mizner: I thought you didn’t care.

  68. 68.

    John Cole

    January 20, 2011 at 3:49 pm

    @Angry Black Lady: I was just teasing. Don’t hit me.

  69. 69.

    joeyess

    January 20, 2011 at 3:50 pm

    @John Cole:

    BTW- how am I supposed to handle this?

    CATCH-22 much?

    This has gone from meta to meta-meta to meta-meta-meta.

  70. 70.

    morzer

    January 20, 2011 at 3:50 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    Hypotheticals aren’t statements of belief, which is why this isn’t a Catch-22.

  71. 71.

    Ija

    January 20, 2011 at 3:50 pm

    @Snaporaz:

    Oh get over yourself. I am so sick of this type of argument. Unless you are personally doing something to fix unemployment, health care, wall street, etc, where do you get off telling other people to shut up about other issues until those things are fixed? This is the most anodyne argument that always come up when the issues are minority or women’s rights. All of a sudden, hey, there are other issues more important, so shut up.

    Edit: God, being angry is messing up my grammar. Sorry people.

  72. 72.

    Comrade Mary

    January 20, 2011 at 3:50 pm

    @John Cole: Let me SHOUT here that you’ve behaved incredibly decently when this has happened.

    I used that word in an abusive way some months ago and you RIGHTFULLY deleted the comment. I didn’t get a pass for being a woman, either (although I think I’m free to use that word in private conversation) because using that word in that context in this forum is corrosive and wrong.

  73. 73.

    Observer

    January 20, 2011 at 3:51 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:
    Okay that’s fair and that’s my point exactly.

    On the one hand I don’t like the posts you brought to our attention from over at FDL.

    On the other hand, angry sounding posts charging a whole or subset of a community doesn’t help matters at all. Somerby is right and it’s a very very bad way of trying to change or convince someone and liberals do this all the time.

    We need to find another way to deal with this and effect change rather than throwing words like “racism” at people. Could you perhaps agree to that?

    Finding “another way” doesn’t mean that it’s “post-racial”.

  74. 74.

    guster

    January 20, 2011 at 3:51 pm

    @John Cole:

    https://balloon-juice.com/2010/10/21/juan-williams-should-have-been-fired-a-long-time-ago/#comment-2132678

    https://balloon-juice.com/2009/10/09/late-ot-thursday-night-menu/#comment-1394269

  75. 75.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 3:51 pm

    @david mizner: you may trivialize it all you wish, but to me it is not trivial. to others here, it is not trivial. to black people, it is not trivial. why don’t you move on to another thread while those of us who think this is an important issue try to have a civil discussion?

    i have shared this story with many black folks. the unified reaction has been along the lines of “WTF?!”

    if you don’t like the thread, scroll on by, pal.

  76. 76.

    morzer

    January 20, 2011 at 3:51 pm

    @John Cole:

    I’d still strongly advise Tunch pictures, kemosabe.

  77. 77.

    Shinobi

    January 20, 2011 at 3:52 pm

    Every time I read or hear “the N word” it is like someone slapped me in the face. I honestly don’t know how anyone, especially white people, can consider using it in anything but a conversation on why it is not a word we use anymore.

    Maybe it is exactly because of that reaction? For the shock value. “Oooo this person is so edgy, they said the N word.”

    Unlike the F word, it is not just a shocking sexual term that is offensive to some. It is actually the verbal embodiment of centuries of oppression and ingrained racism.

    Every time I hear it I am reminded of the racism of my parents, and the rest of my family. I can’t help but think in what ways they would have acted on that racism before it became a thing that we don’t talk about. I’m reminded of redlining and lynching, and slavery.

    I simply do not understand how someone can choose to incorporate that word into their vocabulary. And how people can just blithely accept its usage.

  78. 78.

    Sputnik

    January 20, 2011 at 3:52 pm

    Right on, ABL. I think there is a huge difference between a diary post on a site and a short comment at the end of an article. Even here, if someone says something particularly offensive, people (and often times the author of the post) will tell the commenter he or she is out of line.

    And if FDL was serious about not using “THAT word” then the mod would have either deleted the post or made the diarist change it. Changing some letters to asterisks doesn’t cut it.

  79. 79.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 3:52 pm

    @Observer: why are you so afraid of the word racism? THAT’S WHAT IT IS.

  80. 80.

    Observer

    January 20, 2011 at 3:52 pm

    @Ash Can: wasn’t attempting to define anything. just an example. Calm down.

  81. 81.

    Brachiator

    January 20, 2011 at 3:53 pm

    At what point is one required to take responsibility for the offensive language that permeates one’s blog?

    Racist language, of increasing intensity, is part of the political dialog. It has been ever since Obama was nominated, and took off when he got elected.

    Why should it be prohibited speech? And even if it were, given the refusal of many people to use more civil language, what would be the point of protesting it?

    I’m ashamed at and embarrassed for some of you. We’re supposed to be liberals, goddamnit. What is so hard about not using the fucking term “house nigger”?

    The First Amendment, perhaps.

    That said, I agree that blog moderators can set the tone and decide what level of language they want to allow. And as far as I am concerned, most people who use racial language are racists. But what someone finds offensive is not and should not be the only consideration. Some of the nastiest language that I’ve heard used about Obama has been clean and articulate. It didn’t need any added epithets to gets its vile message across.

  82. 82.

    Comrade Mary

    January 20, 2011 at 3:53 pm

    @guster: Show me where the bad man noticed those specific comments and put in asterisks to show his approval of meaning, if not specific allergenic letters.

  83. 83.

    aimai

    January 20, 2011 at 3:53 pm

    @Mattminus:

    But the problem is that they are appropriating an experience to which they are not entitled. And that, ultimately, is highly problematic and racially charged. Just like Sarah Palin’s use of the term “blood libel”–its meant to place the speaker (Palin) in the position of an historical victim of real acts which she never could/would have experienced. The commenter on the diary used a term which was ugly, awkward, and to an African American reader unnecessarily offensive and manipulative in order to put himself/his team/liberals in a momentarily favorable light. He didn’t mean to offend, but he did. Its not choosing his words more carefully, not appropriating someone elses’s suffering and historical experience to puff off his own, that’s the problem.

    aimai

  84. 84.

    Chuck

    January 20, 2011 at 3:53 pm

    ABL = WATB

  85. 85.

    Lysana

    January 20, 2011 at 3:54 pm

    Moments like this are when I start wondering how to turn in my white card. Way to defend and continue racism, my fellow Caucasians. And you dare to say you’re liberal.

  86. 86.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 3:55 pm

    @Ija: http://www.derailingfordummies.com/

    that link contains every response to every privileged derailing tactic you could ever need. it saves me hours in typing out responses to comments like that.

  87. 87.

    guster

    January 20, 2011 at 3:55 pm

    @Comrade Mary: Shall I also show you where John actually _is_ Jane? They’re genetically identical.

    My point is pretty simple:

    “At what point is one required to take responsibility for the offensive language that permeates one’s blog?”

    I honestly don’t know, but that’s a pretty good question.

  88. 88.

    Observer

    January 20, 2011 at 3:55 pm

    @Angry Black Lady: I’m not afraid of the word at all. The question is more, before I throw that at someone or a group, I want to be 100% sure. I doubt Jane thinks of herself as a racist so it’s unclear how throwing that at FDL is going to solve anything.

    The question is, do you think that the past 50 years of liberals throwing the word around has done our side any good at all and changed/moved anyone’s mind or behaviours? This is the Somerby argument. Is this about you venting or is this about moving/changing behaviours?

  89. 89.

    Marmot

    January 20, 2011 at 3:55 pm

    Thanks for finally cutting to the root of this.

    Why is it my job to prove that the use of racially offensive language is pervasive enough to deem FDL racist?

    Well, if that’s the accusation, it’s a serious one, and requires proof as part of intellectual honesty. But you’re exactly right about this:

    Why isn’t it her job to keep her diarists and commenters in line or, at the very least, fire her moderators and open up the blog to real debate? Why is it that those who read FDL come over here to defend the use of that language, or to debate it? Because they don’t get that sort of debate over there because of the moderation of all contrary views.

  90. 90.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 3:56 pm

    @Brachiator: THE FIRST AMENDMENT???!!

    ::head explodes::

  91. 91.

    Lysana

    January 20, 2011 at 3:56 pm

    @Observer:

    On the other hand, angry sounding posts charging a whole or subset of a community doesn’t help matters at all. Somerby is right and it’s a very very bad way of trying to change or convince someone and liberals do this all the time.

    Go look up “tone argument” and be ashamed of yourself.

  92. 92.

    grillo

    January 20, 2011 at 3:56 pm

    Recognizing that this thread is nominally about racism, ignore for a moment the racism.

    ABL makes a very straightforward assertion, which seems difficult to argue with.

    If your comments and diaries are a free for all, and you do nothing to moderate them, arguably, you are absolved of what goes on there.

    If you make some specific, written policy, then you own that policy, and its results.

    And, if your policy is ad hoc, or the enforcement of the policy is so inconsistent that your policy is effectively ad hoc, then you own the whole thing, because you are the editor, and you essentially select what is said, and what is not said.

    That seems correct. As to what that says regarding FDL, well read those comments, etc.

  93. 93.

    morzer

    January 20, 2011 at 3:56 pm

    @Lysana:

    Quite a few of us aren’t defending it. Please don’t assume all white people on here agree with a handful of moral imbeciles.

  94. 94.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 3:57 pm

    @david mizner:

    So she’s nutpicking here by objecting to the use of a term that pretty clearly offends a wide swath of people, and not just to the use, but the strident defense of that use?

    I don’t want to speak for ABL, but I think she’s most peeved by the fact that the above defense is, well, defended in the name of an open market of ideas on a website were views which oppose the party line are often squashed. Again, context.

    In a free-flowing discussion board where I was as equally able and allowed to argue that Obama is actually doing a pretty good job as you are to defend the use of questionable imagery in describing those who hold differing viewpoints, then sure, let’s have the discussion over when if ever the use of certain terms should or should not be used. But if it’s a one way ratchet, you begin to have at least the appearance of a racist problem even if in their heart of hearts, one does not actually exist.*

  95. 95.

    Ash Can

    January 20, 2011 at 3:57 pm

    @Observer: LOL! If you thought my comment wasn’t “calm,” I don’t know how you make it through any of the threads here without being overcome by the vapors.

  96. 96.

    morzer

    January 20, 2011 at 3:58 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    I think he meant to invoke his Fourth Amendment right against self-incrimination…..

  97. 97.

    Lysana

    January 20, 2011 at 3:58 pm

    @Brachiator:

    The First Amendment, perhaps.

    Oh, fuck you so very much. Racism is NOT protected speech. And fuck you again.

  98. 98.

    Pococurante

    January 20, 2011 at 3:58 pm

    Someone on the internet is wrong: Duty Calls.

    “What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they’ll be wrong forever!”

  99. 99.

    Lysana

    January 20, 2011 at 3:59 pm

    @morzer:

    Quite a few of us aren’t defending it. Please don’t assume all white people on here agree with a handful of moral imbeciles.

    I said I’m white in that very comment. Why is it that as soon as someone notes there are white people who make her ashamed of being white, her race gets turned brown?

    I’m also quite entitled to say I’m ashamed of the racism being supported here without having to say “but not everyone is.” You know you are; do you think you deserve a pat on the head and a cookie?

  100. 100.

    geg6

    January 20, 2011 at 3:59 pm

    @Snaporaz:

    You know what? Fuck you. Are you trying to tell me that racism, rampant and casual and from privileged white liberals is not a real and crucial problem in America today?

    I’m sure from your perch on high on top of the white privilege pedestal, it’s not.

  101. 101.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 4:00 pm

    @Marmot: I’ve presented evidence of the racist language at FDL. My question was why is it my job to prove that it is pervasive enough to draw the conclusion that FDL is racist.

    don’t talk to me about intellectual dishonesty as you sit here and defend the use of a term that is vile.

  102. 102.

    Observer

    January 20, 2011 at 4:00 pm

    @Ash Can: Touche. My bad. Your comment was calm but unnecessary. Fixed.

  103. 103.

    Nanette

    January 20, 2011 at 4:00 pm

    @Observer:

    I cannot speak for ABL, but I will answer you, after years of (admittedly intermittent) observation.

    Yes.

  104. 104.

    joeyess

    January 20, 2011 at 4:00 pm

    @morzer:

    I’d still strongly advise Tunch pictures, kemosabe.

    This is part of the problem. No one wants to discuss this in a rational way. Oh, look!! Tunch pictures!

    C’mon, discussion of these topics are critical. Critical in the sense that we get the discussion right and that our moral compasses are all pointing to true north.

    Tunch pics are fine. I love ’em. I know you’re trying to levitate the discussion, but it needs to be had.

  105. 105.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 4:01 pm

    @Pooh: Agreed.

  106. 106.

    morzer

    January 20, 2011 at 4:02 pm

    @Lysana:

    Now that’s silly. No-one said you were brown, or implied it under any reasonable construal of the comment you refer to. You, on the other hand, were busily rejecting your own membership of the white race, while suggesting that the rest of us were agreeing with racist remarks. Please, if you are going to be melodramatic and proclaim your superior virtue, don’t then get pouty if people call you out on it.

  107. 107.

    Felanius Kootea (formerly Salt and freshly ground black people)

    January 20, 2011 at 4:02 pm

    I posted this in the other now-dead thread but I think it still fits here:

    On a slightly different note, I despise Condoleezza Rice but decide to read her recent memoir. One section that is still rattling around my head is her reason for becoming a Republican rather than a Democrat: “I gave an answer that came directly from my experience with the many forms racism can take. ‘I would rather be ignored than patronized.’ … I hated identity politics and the self-satisfied people who assumed that they were free of prejudice when, in fact, they too could not see beyond color to the individual.”

    I still despise Condoleezza but I can see a certain weird logic to her decision. She states clearly in her memoir that she prefers blatant in-your-face racism to subtle, less-explicit forms of it because the former is easier to confront.

  108. 108.

    PhoenixRising

    January 20, 2011 at 4:03 pm

    You never did answer my question from yesterday (and, granted, you may have just missed it): do you think really Jane herself is racist in a “white people are better than black people” way? Can we get a simple Yes/No please.

    That’s weak sauce. Who thinks what about Jane thinks…who cares.

    FDL moderates based on viewpoint. Therefore they own the comment section.

    Don’t moderate (here), give a rating system to make the group do its own (Kos when I used it back in the day)–whatever, but having the ombudsman not realize that the term ‘house nigger’ is unacceptable and then defend it with asterisks? That’s weak too.

  109. 109.

    goatchowder

    January 20, 2011 at 4:04 pm

    Speaking of cunts, I have a great GreaseMonkey script for Firefox called “replace string”. It lets me replace any words in any website with whatever I want, automatically.

    I have it set to replace “Sarah Palin” with “useless cunt”. I have had it set for years to change “Joe Lieberman” to “asshole”, “Rush Limbaugh” to “crackhead”, and “Glenn Beck” to “closeted gay drama queen”, and “Dick Cheney” to “face shooter”, “John McCain” to “sore loser”, and “Lynne Cheney” to “waste of sperm”. And, of course, “tea party” to “testicle suckers”.

    Yeah, you could say it’s sexist/racist/homophobic/whatever, but it’s my screen and my computer, and I can’t stand reading about these fuckwits, so I’ll change their names to whatever offensive thing I want, thanks.

    The same goes for others too though. You could change whatever offensive words or pseudo-hidden offensive words to “some white racist motherfucker” or whatever. Doesn’t excuse them from BEING white racist motherfuckers, for example, but at least it could keep the blood pressure down.

    Yeah, I’m glad “that word” disappeared from polite discourse sometime after Richard Pryor returned from his trip to Africa and decided to stop using it. Even most black folks stopped using it, which made me very happy (I like seeing people assert their self-respect). That word was completely dead during a lot of the 1980s, and I thought permanently too. Then, fucking gangsta rap came out in the late 80s, brought the word back, and it seems like it’ll never go away now. I’d love to see it go away again.

    The most jarring thing I’ve ever heard, was a bunch of white kids in the suburbs of Texas of all places, calling each other that. I went, WTF? You’re rich, white, suburban punk kids, and you’re talking like you’re some kind of bad-ass bloods and crips in south-central LA? Seriously, you sound worse than racist, you sound like ridiculous and pathetic racists. Cut that shit out.

    I’d like to see black folks stop using that word, as Richard Pryor once wisely decided to do, and have it eliminated from all rap and comedy and hip-hop, and then the few whites still using it be completely shamed into stopping. It could be made extinct, and should.

  110. 110.

    Observer

    January 20, 2011 at 4:04 pm

    @Lysana: It’s not a tone argument.

    Generally speaking, it’s somewhat difficult to convince someone of something if you start out by accusing them of something they do not believe to be true.

    Did the Tea Partiers convince you that Obama is a socialist?

  111. 111.

    morzer

    January 20, 2011 at 4:04 pm

    @joeyess:

    I think you need to consider that Cole’s own comments weren’t too too serious, and regard a teasing rejoinder in that light. Or do you believe I think of him as “kemosabe” for real?

    Also too, look at the relevant threads and consider whether I have been trying to avoid the conversation.

    As for levitating the discussion – how, pray tell? Can I really be asked to lift BJ discussions by the power of my mind alone?

  112. 112.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 4:04 pm

    @John Cole: i might pinch you on the ass a little.

  113. 113.

    henqiguai

    January 20, 2011 at 4:05 pm

    @John Cole (#68):

    @Angry Black Lady: I was just teasing. Don’t hit me.

    Or, as a co-worker of mine puts it, “I’ll slap you and you’ll cry.” Yeah, she has the wherewithal to do it, too.

  114. 114.

    Jules

    January 20, 2011 at 4:05 pm

    Why anyone reads FDL anymore is beyond me.
    The moment Jane teamed up with Norquist she and the site were dead to me.
    And the fact that they moderate comments and diaries that disagree with Jane/FDL BUT do not make much of an effort to go after the bigots is reason enough to stop giving the site traffic.

    though really, I do think we should use Cunt more often.

  115. 115.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 4:05 pm

    @Brachiator: Hiding behind the first amendment? Are you Sarah Fucking Palin? Aside from the obliviousness of having no clue that the 1st doesn’t apply full stop (hint: find me state action), the problem isn’t just (or even, I think primarily) that such language is allowed, but that it’s allowed while other things (disagreements with leadership f.rex) aren’t.

    And before you tell me that’s not what happens, just assume for the moment that I’m correct in that assertion, and now think about how simultaneously allowing the use of “HN” as a pejorative for a group of actual people while not allowing criticism of Jane Hamsher makes FDL look.

  116. 116.

    SteveinSC

    January 20, 2011 at 4:05 pm

    How is being an “Uncle Tom” different from being a “House Negro?” And by the way, is it commonplace pop culture for Jews to go around calling each other Kike just for grins in word and song?

  117. 117.

    JPL

    January 20, 2011 at 4:05 pm

    I skipped John’s post because I knew it would become a flame war. ABL was right though. I love TBogg but he chooses to post on a site that allows racist comments. (why he doesn’t post here I don’t know) It’s his choice.
    The reason I like this site is because John controls racist comments.
    The problem with racist comments is that it stops free speech, it doesn’t encourage it. BTW when my now thirty something son who was a blue eyed blond came home in first grade he asked me what color he was. He was confused because there are few white and black folks. Think about it.

  118. 118.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 4:06 pm

    @goatchowder: i love a comment that begins “Speaking of cunts….”

    HA! (that’s a real “ha!” not a snarky “ha!”)

  119. 119.

    Ija

    January 20, 2011 at 4:07 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    This is such a perfect description of Snaporaz I’m convinced he/she uses the site for guidance.

    Don’t You Have More Important Issues To Think About. When you’re beginning to feel backed into a corner, you could do worse than to trot this one out. As with the best of all these techniques, this step operates on several levels. First of all, it communicates to the Marginalised Person™ that you think the entire debate is trivial and below consideration, indicating you entirely disregard their feelings and emotions. Secondly, you disown responsibility for your part in the debate and anything that you’ve said that may have been discriminatory or offensive.Finally, you reinforce your Privilege® by suggesting that it is Privileged People’s® job to set the agenda for the Marginalised Group™. After all, how could they possibly know what issues they should prioritise for themselves, they’re far too inferior and stupid! You, with your objective, rational Privileged® perspective, on the other hand, know exactly what is most important and it is definitely not confronting you with your own bigotry and ignorance!

  120. 120.

    david mizner

    January 20, 2011 at 4:07 pm

    @Pooh:

    I don’t think she’s nitpicking. I would agree that the term “housenigger” is offensive, as is Uncle Tom, which I believe Nader used.

    But racist comments aren’t exactly uncommon on progressive blogs, either are anti-gay, anti-Muslim, and even anti-Semitic comments — I’ve called out several myself — and it never occurred to me to hold the proprietors of blogs responsible.

    I just read through the original post and she identified one, perhaps two, offensive comments, and mistook a lot simply hostile anti-Obama comments for racist ones. And that’s par for the course. I’ve been told that calling Obama a tool of Wall Street, for example, is racist.

    So I take it in that context. I simply don’t buy her “WTF” outrage over this comment. I think she hates Hamsher.

  121. 121.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 4:08 pm

    @Lysana: eh, actually it kind of is, but as I point out briefly in 113, who cares? “Protected” means “legally allowed to say it”, being “allowed” doesn’t mean I’m not equally allowed to tell you to fuck right off if you think that language and/or attitude belongs in civilized discussion.

  122. 122.

    wmd

    January 20, 2011 at 4:08 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    That’s just not true. I had a day long argument with Jane and none of my comments were disappeared. Jane got to the point of telling me if I kept arguing with her she’d ban me. The mods settled her down, and my comments are there to this day. (Argument begins at linked comment).

    I have had comments disappear. I suggested that some ass hat was a good argument for 203rd trimester abortion. That got moderated out as promoting violence in spirit. Other comments have disappeared – when I’ve noted it it as been for vile name calling at other comments, not for substantive disagreement.

    Since I’ve made comments there supportive of Obama and democrats at times I’ve had vile epithets thrown at me. Mild ones get through (shill, Obamabot), vile ones (suppurating pustule formed from my sucking the necrotic penis of Rahm) get deleted.

    I’m not defending racist talk. I’m saying that the moderators don’t enforce a party line. The “community” there does that, through mild ad hominem attacks.

    The moderators could work to stop racially charged language and didn’t do so when they front paged that post.

  123. 123.

    wmd

    January 20, 2011 at 4:09 pm

    I’m amused – I just posted a comment – it is “awaiting moderation”

  124. 124.

    guster

    January 20, 2011 at 4:09 pm

    @SteveinSC: No, we only call each other kike for money.

  125. 125.

    Jager

    January 20, 2011 at 4:09 pm

    One night a group of our friends gathered at our house. One of Mrs J’s friends got a call from her sister, she stepped into the kitchen and the conversation got heated and ended with “Colleen, you are a stupid twat”! (she screamed it into the phone, nobody missed it) When she came back into the living room, one of my jackass buddies said,”So, your sister is a twat, huh”? Mrs J’s friend turned on him and said, “Look pal, I can call my sister a twat, but you can’t, got it”!

    Understand how it works, now?

  126. 126.

    stuckinred

    January 20, 2011 at 4:09 pm

    @Jules: Yep, that was THE day when I finally bailed.

  127. 127.

    sixers

    January 20, 2011 at 4:10 pm

    @John Cole:

    Hilarious. You defended her when she called out the right for the gifford shooting before there was any evidence to back it up(still isn’t). That seemed unfair as well. She’s an emotional poster which can make this site look foolish. In this case with FDL I would chalk it up to idiots moderating a forum and not exactly the most racist thing I’ve seen this week.

  128. 128.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 4:10 pm

    @PhoenixRising: This.

  129. 129.

    JWL

    January 20, 2011 at 4:11 pm

    “We’re supposed to be liberals, goddamnit”.

    One of the truly great aspects of Nixonland is Perlstein’s reminder just how obnoxious so much of the liberal rhetoric was during those years.

    My heritage is Irish (toy toy toy). Years ago the San Francisco Chronicle published an angry woman’s letter to the editor, in which she expressed outrage that the paper had used the term ‘paddy wagon’ in story. Her point was that it was a slur that denigrated Irish Americans (aka “God’s noble own”). I appreciated the laugh, because I thought she was just being silly, and making a mountain out of a molehill.

  130. 130.

    Ija

    January 20, 2011 at 4:11 pm

    @wmd: Did you use the S word?

  131. 131.

    Lawnguylander

    January 20, 2011 at 4:11 pm

    @Mattminus:

    This is than what was said at FDL. They weren’t assaulting an individual with racist language. They were using a word to make a point.

    No, as I’ve been pointing out, the diarist wasn’t insulting an individual, he was talking about all those people on the left who support the Democratic Party. A category of people that includes a lot of black people and he called them all “house niggers.” You think it’s OK to refer to all those black people that way?

    You know how it’s OK for Republicans to disrespect the flag and engage in all manner of behavior that liberals get called traitors for? IOKIYAR, we say. Some of you dickheads should just be honest and proclaim that when it comes it to racial slurs, IOKIYAWhiteLiberal. That way the debate will be over and ABL and others can move on to what you say are the important issues.

  132. 132.

    soonergrunt

    January 20, 2011 at 4:12 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    the difference is that cole doesn’t moderate his comments. so if people disagree with the front pagers, they are free to say so. at FDL the moderators “disappear” comments.

    Which, if I may continue the thought, is pretty half-assed. Either actually moderate or don’t. But if you’re going to moderate at all, you get to take ownership for everything posted, and you get to answer for it, because whatever is on the site is what was deemed acceptable by your moderators.

  133. 133.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 4:12 pm

    @Allan: i love derailing for dummies. i want to marry whomever took the time to compile it.

  134. 134.

    joeyess

    January 20, 2011 at 4:12 pm

    @morzer: I’m sorry. I wasn’t being mean. I just think this is a good and worthy discussion that needs to be had. I understand you are trying to lighten the mood and I appreciate that.

  135. 135.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 4:13 pm

    @Lawnguylander: thank you.

  136. 136.

    gwangung

    January 20, 2011 at 4:13 pm

    But racist comments aren’t exactly uncommon on progressive blogs, either are anti-gay, anti-Muslim, and even anti-Semitic comments—I’ve called out several myself—and it never occurred to me to hold the proprietors of blogs responsible.

    Well, doesn’t it depend on how “hands on” the proprietors are?

    And isn’t that exactly the point of ABL’s Angry Ranting?

    Please, don’t ignore that point. It’s an important and intrinsic one.

  137. 137.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 4:14 pm

    @sixers: if i was a man, i reckon you wouldn’t think i’m an emotional poster, would you? give me a break. i don’t need people to defend me. i’m quite capable of defending myself.

    ETA: “not exactly the most racist thing you’ve seen this week”? well tell me what is, and then i will write a special post just for you about that. in the meantime, won’t you permit me to write about what i find to be racist and worthy of note? i would appreciate it.

  138. 138.

    Observer

    January 20, 2011 at 4:15 pm

    @Lysana: It’s not a tone argument.

    Generally speaking, it’s somewhat difficult to convince someone of something if you start out by accusing them of something they do not believe to be true.

    Did the Tea Partiers convince you that Obama is a socialist?

  139. 139.

    Nina

    January 20, 2011 at 4:15 pm

    @A L: Ha Ha! Wut?? Srsly?

    ETA: @Lawnguylander: Thanks! Read this AL, it may help.

  140. 140.

    morzer

    January 20, 2011 at 4:15 pm

    @joeyess:

    *smiles*

    No offense taken.

    Damn, I sound like the Miami Dolphins again!

  141. 141.

    Marmot

    January 20, 2011 at 4:15 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    I’ve presented evidence of the racist language at FDL. My question was why is it my job to prove that it is pervasive enough to draw the conclusion that FDL is racist.

    don’t talk to me about intellectual dishonesty as you sit here and defend the use of a term that is vile.

    You misunderstand. I don’t defend the term at all.

    You asked whether accusations of racism require proof, I said yes. As to the rest of it, you’re right that FDL has responsibility over the stupid things their commenters say, since they heavily moderate comments already.

    Look, I’ve always thought you were quick to accuse, and you’ve now accused me of something. Will you please cool it?

  142. 142.

    gwangung

    January 20, 2011 at 4:16 pm

    @Lawnguylander:

    No, as I’ve been pointing out, the diarist wasn’t insulting an individual, he was talking about all those people on the left who support the Democratic Party. A category of people that includes a lot of black people and he called them all “house niggers.” You think it’s OK to refer to all those black people that way?

    Or was Mattimus defaulting to “white” when he thought of those on the left supporting the Democratic Party? I hope not, but…

  143. 143.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 4:16 pm

    soonergrunt: Again, this this this.

  144. 144.

    stuckinred

    January 20, 2011 at 4:16 pm

    @soonergrunt: They moderated this shit out of me last week when I launched incursion!

  145. 145.

    liberal

    January 20, 2011 at 4:17 pm

    @Brachiator:

    The First Amendment, perhaps.

    Strictly speaking, I thought the First referred to government censorship.

  146. 146.

    Bruce (formerly Steve S.)

    January 20, 2011 at 4:18 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    Very good, ABL. You’re more concerned with scoring points against the rival clique than facing the most consequential assault on a particular race and race relations in decades.

    This is a very serious question, ABL, though I don’t know if someone behaving in so manifestly unserious a way will address it; what do you think of the attempted mass murder at a King Day parade? The only thing posted about it here on BJ that I could find were a couple of items from Doug which contained little other than his characteristic snark, and the subsequent comment sections were relatively small. Do you have a comment on this recent event which was not a bunch of latte liberals trading “some of my best friends are negroes” over Trenta but was in fact an attempted mass murder aimed directly at the African-American community as a whole? Any thoughts? Granted, an overt declaration of war on an entire race is far less consequential than the comment section at FDL, but I genuinely want to know what you think.

    So when you want to share your thoughts on this I’ll be genuinely interested, and I promise not to respond with snotty, middle-schoolish taunts and misdirections.

  147. 147.

    joeyess

    January 20, 2011 at 4:19 pm

    @morzer: Ha!

  148. 148.

    Ija

    January 20, 2011 at 4:19 pm

    @Marmot:

    Look, I’ve always thought you were quick to accuse, and you’ve now accused me of something.

    Is that supposed to be QED? ABL accused you of something, therefore it’s proof positive that ABL is quick to accuse? What kind of logic is that? Logic where you are king of the world?

  149. 149.

    Brachiator

    January 20, 2011 at 4:21 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    THE FIRST AMENDMENT???!!

    Yeah. Sorry, if it is a problem for you.

    @Lysana:

    Oh, fuck you so very much. Racism is NOT protected speech. And fuck you again.

    Really? Got some citations on that?

    And you are all missing my point. I agree that there is racist speech. The problem is, the racists can’t let it go. And the racist speech is intensifying. It is sad, pathetic and nasty. But you are not going to stop it by asking these goons to play nice.

    And it is fine to ask or demand that people not use hateful speech. And some people can be held accountable, especially political figures. But again, I ask, if people don’t want to be civil, what are you going to do?

    And yes, the First Amendment applies to good liberals to. And is this the group that is for or against Huck Finn? It’s very hard to tell.

  150. 150.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 4:21 pm

    @Marmot: i apologize for misunderstanding. i may be confusing you with someone else from yesterday’s thread.

    and no, i won’t cool it because i don’t take kindly to the intellectual dishonesty charge.

  151. 151.

    morzer

    January 20, 2011 at 4:21 pm

    @Ija:

    Marmot’s been hangin’ out with matoko-chan a lot recently.

    Just sayin’.

  152. 152.

    Allan

    January 20, 2011 at 4:22 pm

    @david mizner: It was nice of you to come back and share with us what you have decided ABL should think and feel.

    Your privilege is showing.

  153. 153.

    morzer

    January 20, 2011 at 4:22 pm

    @joeyess:

    Believe me, we Dolphins fans are a very long-suffering bunch.

  154. 154.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 4:23 pm

    @Brachiator: these goons?! these goons are progressive liberals who are supposedly on our (my, anyway) side.

    i’m not raging against the use of racist language on free republic. i ‘m raging against its usage on FDL, the supposed bastion of liberalism on the intertrons.

  155. 155.

    Just Some Fuckhead

    January 20, 2011 at 4:23 pm

    “Aw you said a bad word!”

    You are all children.

  156. 156.

    Ija

    January 20, 2011 at 4:23 pm

    @Marmot:

    Will you please cool it?

    I believe that is called the “You’re being emotional” dodge in the Derailing For Dummies Handbook. Congratulations. Would you like to try other derailing tactics?

  157. 157.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 4:24 pm

    @Brachiator: if you think anything i’ve written implicates the first amendment, you don’t understand the first amendment. no need to apologize to me.

  158. 158.

    guster

    January 20, 2011 at 4:24 pm

    @Brachiator: The First Amendment. Oy. Does not apply to websites. Or newspapers. That’s why, when I want the Times to publish my poetry on the front page, and they say no, they’re not violating my rights.

  159. 159.

    Nanette

    January 20, 2011 at 4:26 pm

    @Bruce (formerly Steve S.):

    …in fact an attempted mass murder aimed directly at the African-American community as a whole? Any thoughts? Granted, an overt declaration of war on an entire race…

    You say all this as if it is a new thing that you’ve just discovered, or that has just manifested itself. Perhaps a brief reading of the history of Blacks in the U.S. from, say, 1600 something or so to the present might help?

    (and yes, of course I meant the Americas, Turtle Island, etc. This landmass.)

  160. 160.

    Ija

    January 20, 2011 at 4:26 pm

    @morzer:

    Hey, don’t knock matoko_chan. Turned out she was right about ED Kain and fetus = slaves thing. She throws out so many things you think all of it is bullshit, but she has her moments.

  161. 161.

    eemom

    January 20, 2011 at 4:27 pm

    @John Cole:

    My only point is that I think it is unfair to lump everyone at FDL in the group. DDAY and TBOGG and Marci have nothing to do with this.

    What an impressive feat of evasion.

    How about Jane Hamsher, the blog OWNER? That’s who ABL was — rightly — directing this to, not the other lackeys on her site.

    Does she own what gets posted on there or not?

    Especially when, as has been repeatedly pointed out, she absolutely DOES ban any substantive disagreement with her
    dogma — and anyone who says she doesn’t is either ignorant or lying. The mods do what they’re told.

  162. 162.

    Vescoe P. Spurnwick (formerly Milmont Glapper (formerly Brisbane Belff (formerly G. Nelson Buttnergle (formerly Mumphrey (formerly Renfrew Squeevil (formerly Mumphrey Oddison Yamm (formerly Mumphrey O. Yamm (formerly Mumphrey))))))))

    January 20, 2011 at 4:27 pm

    I hope this isn’t going to piss anybody off, but I’d like to post here what I wrote in the other thread, since I rather immodestly think it might be worth reading, and I don’t know if if will mow that the other one has gotten to 250 comments. So, here it is:

    I’ve lost track by now how many different fights are going on here; and I don’t really want to wade in and begin another one. But, ahh, what the hell.

    Here’s my take: as a white guy, I don’t get to say what black people are entitled to feel offended by. That’s just all there is to it. It isn’t up to me. If I wake up tomorrow, and the world has turned upside down and inside out, and my forebears are the the ones who had been enslaved for 250 years of this country’s history, and then further enslaved in all but name for another 100 years in a damned big chunk of this country, and beaten and lynched without another thought for all those years, and black people had been the oppressors, then, and only then, would I have some business choosing what’s offensive and what isn’t. But until that magical day should come to pass, then I don’t get to tell black people that this epithet isn’t offensive because blah blah blah, but that epithet is, and it’s all right to be upset about it.

    Now, I know that some people are going to feel put upon by this. They’re going to say, “I never oppressed any black people. I never owned slaves. I don’t even have a family history of slave ownership. Whay can’t I say x-y-z, if I don’t mean it to be offensive, if I don’t mean it as an attack? Chris Rock uses that word all the time!”

    And maybe they have a point, up to a point. And the point is: No, strictly speaking, it maybe isn’t fair that we white people can’t just say whatever the hell we feel like and not get yelled at if we don’t mean it in a bad way, if we really aren’t racists. But, guess what? The marginal unfairness of this situation hardly registers when held up aginst the unfairnesses black Americans have had to deal with for 400 years here, and the unfairnesses they still deal with here today. And, no, black people don’t face nearly the institutional disadvantages today that they had 50 years ago or 150 years ago or 250 years ago. But American society still shoves a whole hell of a lot more shit in their faces than it does in mine. So, all in all, as unfair as it might be that I can’t say That Word whenever I feel like it, even as Chris Rock can without anybody jumping all over him, well, I’m just going to have to deal with that.

    And until far more powerful group force feeds as much shit to white people collectively, as often and for as long a stretch of history, as white America has force fed shit to black Americans, then I think the least we can do is to respect black people when they say, “You know, that word offends me, and I wish you’d stop using it.”

    The answer to that is not, or should not be, “Well, I’m not a racist!” Or, “Well, why don’t you lighten up?” Or, “Well, people have been saying that forever. Why do you get all pissy about it now?” Or, “Well, I hear black people say that all the time! Why can’t I say it, too? This sucks! This isn’t fair!”

    Instead, when a black person says, “Hey, I find that word to be deeply hurtful,” why don’t we all try saying something along the lines of, “Oh, damn, I’m sorry. That was really thoughtless of me. I won’t use it any more. I hope you can forgive me.” And then, just don’t say or write it anymore.

  163. 163.

    Xboxershorts

    January 20, 2011 at 4:27 pm

    https://balloon-juice.com/2011/01/19/firedoglake-with-all-due-civility-go-fk-yourself/#comment-2381440

    1) Not all ignorance is intentional (like my Mom’s) or evil in nature (Like that I experienced from the Catholic Diocese of Rochester).

    And 2) My best efforts at mitigating ignorance make a difference in my own life, but little in the lives of others.

    I dig you ABL, you’re a righteous human being. And it hurts to see you spending lots of time and energy (both of which are finite) in pursuit of windmills to tilt at. You were spot on, of course. But how much longer and how much more time and energy will be spent pointing out the ignorance of many of those at FDL when we all know the shrillness of that forum will always appeal to the ignorant.

    To me, a recovering crack head (another long story), forgiveness has become, not a vehicle to exonerate the ignorant, but a release from the resentments that my obsessing mind used to justify killing myself in slow motion.

    Therefor, I forgive those who offend me, not to imply that what they’ve done is somehow, OK. But so that I can free myself to meet the next challenge, which is always just around the corner.

    God bless you all!

  164. 164.

    freelancer

    January 20, 2011 at 4:27 pm

    @Ija:

    That is an awesome “Clippy” impersonation.

  165. 165.

    Tonal Crow

    January 20, 2011 at 4:27 pm

    Ah, organizing more circular firing squads because some mopes — not frontpagers, just ordinary mopes — used inappropriate terms on FDL? And then implying that the blog’s owner is a racist because she didn’t sufficiently disavow the mopes’ blog entries?

    What tripe. And what a way to help the Republicans.

    ETA: And what a way to elevate trivia over many serious instances of continuing racism, such as, say, the War on DrugsBlack Men.

  166. 166.

    Marmot

    January 20, 2011 at 4:27 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:It’s fine. And I wasn’t saying you’d been dishonest, but that it’s dishonest for anyone to throw that charge without proof. We can argue about whether that one FDL example constitutes proof, but frankly I think your main point is better — that they already have responsibility for a lot of content because they heavily edit it already. Whew.

  167. 167.

    SteveinSC

    January 20, 2011 at 4:28 pm

    @guster:

    No, we only call each other kike for money.

    I don’t even do it for money. Speaking of that, maybe we could ask ABL if anyone she knows uses the N-word in word or song?

  168. 168.

    Shade Tail

    January 20, 2011 at 4:28 pm

    @Lysana:

    Oh, fuck you so very much. Racism is NOT protected speech. And fuck you again.

    Uh, not to belabor the obvious, but: *yes it is*. Here in the US, racists have every right to spout racist bullshit in public. Ditto for homophobia, anti-Semitism, and any other form of “I hate other people” speech you can think of. It *is* protected, whether we like it or not.

  169. 169.

    Bruce (formerly Steve S.)

    January 20, 2011 at 4:29 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    @Ija: http://www.derailingfordummies.com/

    that link contains every response to every privileged derailing tactic you could ever need. it saves me hours in typing out responses to comments like that.

    Indeed, it saves one from addressing legitimate questions and concerns, or any kind of self-reflection. Links are easy.

  170. 170.

    BGinCHI

    January 20, 2011 at 4:29 pm

    @guster: And they’re protecting us from your poetry.

    Can’t remember which amendment that is.

  171. 171.

    wmd

    January 20, 2011 at 4:30 pm

    @Ija:

    Probably the “P” word. It’s been approved.

    I just reviewed that thread from Halloween 2009. Lot of bad behavior of FDL comment community, with Jane’s anger feeding other’s rage.

  172. 172.

    morzer

    January 20, 2011 at 4:30 pm

    @Ija:

    Well, no, not really. Kain was just pointing out how someone with another viewpoint might feel that the analogy was justified. I’ll grant you that the logic was wretchedly poor and numerous questions were begged, but it hardly makes him a full-on wingnut and doctor-killer.

    Matoko-chan is a sad, deluded young lady, and I hope she finds some serious therapy with all possible speed.

  173. 173.

    Marmot

    January 20, 2011 at 4:31 pm

    @Ija: Well, the deal was that it was based on a misunderstanding.

  174. 174.

    morzer

    January 20, 2011 at 4:31 pm

    @Shade Tail:

    Sadly, yes. Contrast with Canada, where they do have hate speech laws.

  175. 175.

    Tim

    January 20, 2011 at 4:34 pm

    @morzer:

    Wise man post Tunch pictures in other thread and hope not to be noticed, kemosabe.

    Your use of the term “kemosabe” is vile, racist, and insensitive. You are a pig and should die. In a fire, as they say hereabouts… ;D

    Unless you are a Native American, of course. In which case it’s ok. Or something.

  176. 176.

    Wile E. Quixote

    January 20, 2011 at 4:34 pm

    @Mattminus:

    This is than what was said at FDL. They weren’t assaulting an individual with racist language. They were using a word to make a point.

    Oh, so what you’re saying is that if the diarist over at FDL had said “The Democratic party helped the rich jew all the money out of the middle class” that wouldn’t be using anti-semitic language, he’d just be making a point.

  177. 177.

    Mattminus

    January 20, 2011 at 4:34 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    And just like you don’t ever want to hear the dreaded “N-word”(except, of course, when you are using it), some people don’t ever want to hear the c-bomb. In both cases, people are using strong language to make a point. In neither case is anyone using that strong language to make a racist or misogynistic point.

    And your mother is white?!?!? I’m sure that diarists best friend is black.

    Who cares?

  178. 178.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 4:34 pm

    @Felanius Kootea (formerly Salt and freshly ground black people): that’s really interesting. thanks for sharing that.

  179. 179.

    D. Mason

    January 20, 2011 at 4:34 pm

    @Ija: I am in no way affiliated with Steve the diarist or FDL and infact ABL’s posting was my first encounter with the diary in question. I hope that clears up any questions.

  180. 180.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 4:35 pm

    @Bruce (formerly Steve S.): I mean how can you find time to comment on this blog when there are children starving in Africa America? Get your fucking priorities straight!

  181. 181.

    sixers

    January 20, 2011 at 4:35 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    I would classify Andrew Sullivan as emotional sometimes as well. He’s a man in case you don’t know. Sorry I didn’t feed into your victimization narrative. I know you don’t need defending but it is odd every other post of yours ends up having someone defend you or clarify your point. I’ll be gracious enough to let you pick what you post about next. Maybe something a little more hard hitting than blog comment moderating.

  182. 182.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 4:36 pm

    @Mattminus: i’m obviously not getting through to you, but you’re assessment is incorrect.

  183. 183.

    Midnight Marauder

    January 20, 2011 at 4:36 pm

    @Bruce (formerly Steve S.):

    This is a very serious question, ABL, though I don’t know if someone behaving in so manifestly unserious a way will address it; what do you think of the attempted mass murder at a King Day parade? The only thing posted about it here on BJ that I could find were a couple of items from Doug which contained little other than his characteristic snark, and the subsequent comment sections were relatively small. Do you have a comment on this recent event which was not a bunch of latte liberals trading “some of my best friends are negroes” over Trenta but was in fact an attempted mass murder aimed directly at the African-American community as a whole? Any thoughts? Granted, an overt declaration of war on an entire race is far less consequential than the comment section at FDL, but I genuinely want to know what you think.

    Stop. Stop it right there.

    We are talking about Spokane, Washington. Let’s go over the racial demographics for Spokane, shall we:

    White persons, percent, 2009 – Spokane County: 91.4% Washington: 83.8%
    __
    Black persons, percent, 2009 – Spokane County: 1.9% Washington: 3.9%

    Are you seriously trying to argue that only black people were at the parade that day? Because, if so, that is might white of you.

  184. 184.

    Frank Chow

    January 20, 2011 at 4:36 pm

    Rush Limbaugh is racist towards Chinese people!

  185. 185.

    eemom

    January 20, 2011 at 4:37 pm

    btw, just for a bit of irony relief — the C word IS a big no-no over at Lake Batshit. There was a huge inter-blog flame war some years back when TRex used it.

  186. 186.

    joeyess

    January 20, 2011 at 4:37 pm

    @morzer: Same goes for Chiefs fans.

  187. 187.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 4:38 pm

    @sixers: my victimization narrative? you truly are a jackass. what other people feel they need to say to defend or clarify my posts has absolutely nothing to do with me.

  188. 188.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 4:38 pm

    @Bruce (formerly Steve S.):
    Irony, you has it.

  189. 189.

    Bruce (formerly Steve S.)

    January 20, 2011 at 4:38 pm

    @Nanette:

    Since ABL taught me that links are easy, here’s one for you.

  190. 190.

    morzer

    January 20, 2011 at 4:40 pm

    @Tim:

    Blood libel.. or something.

    Anyway, I still want a shrubbery.

  191. 191.

    Andy K

    January 20, 2011 at 4:41 pm

    @Brachiator:

    The First Amendment, perhaps.

    Which is just fine (up to the point of fomenting violence) on a street corner. Blogposts, diaries at blogs and comments sections attached to those aren’t a street corner, however, but private “residences”. The owners of those residences my keep an open door policy, but they are also allowed to set the house rules regarding speech.

    That Ms. Hamsher either doesn’t have a set rules regarding offensive language- or does, but enforces those rules arbitrarily- is all on her shoulders. That she gets called out by anyone regarding offensive language on her bandwidth is also on her shoulders- she doesn’t have to allow it.

  192. 192.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 4:42 pm

    @Mattminus: 15 yards and loss of down for trying to pick up and run with the goal-posts. Didn’t you come in here saying that context matters, but now it doesn’t because ABL used language “some” find patently offensive?

  193. 193.

    Uncle Clarence Thomas

    January 20, 2011 at 4:42 pm

    .
    .
    Wikipedia –
    House Negro (also House Nigger) is a pejorative term for a black person, used to compare someone to a house slave of a slave owner from the historic period of legal slavery in the US. The term comes from a speech, Message to the Grass Roots, given by African American activist Malcolm X, where he explains that during slavery, there were two kinds of slaves: “house Negroes,” who worked in the master’s house and “field Negroes,” who performed the manual labor outside. He characterizes the house Negro as having a better life than the field Negro, and thus unwilling to leave the plantation, and potentially more likely to support existing power structures that favor whites over blacks. Malcolm X identified with the field Negro. The term is used against individuals[1][2], in critiques of attitudes within the African American community,[3] and as a borrowed term for critiquing parallel situations.[4]

    [edit]See also

    Uncle Tom

    .

    As I’m sure you all agree, Malcolm X’s term is insightful and useful as a concept.

    Another observation – While most balloonbaggers prefer to cut off debate and label critics of President Obama as racists, rather than address their specific criticisms, Ms. Axel Foley prefers to go further, and brand firebaggers as “crackers” with no parallel accusational cries of racism from her fellow balloonbaggers.

    I feel just as qualified to call out racism as ABL, and I do not see racism as a trait of firebaggers or balloonbaggers in general (no matter how much AxelFoley likes to show me her O-face on command). I see it as a trait of Republicans and the right, and especially of those who believe in the Christian God.
    .
    .

  194. 194.

    morzer

    January 20, 2011 at 4:42 pm

    @joeyess:

    We Dolphins have refined the no-huddle offense. We simply miss out the huddle bit.

  195. 195.

    Ija

    January 20, 2011 at 4:42 pm

    @Tonal Crow:

    And what a way to elevate trivia over many serious instances of continuing racism, such as, say, the War on DrugsBlack Men.

    And of course you can provide us all with links where YOU PERSONALLY have dissected and discussed this issue in detail. Because it’s not like you just brought that up to derail the conversation and shame other people, right? It’s the issue you are most passionate about.

  196. 196.

    wmd

    January 20, 2011 at 4:43 pm

    I’ll note I do make comments at FDL that are not part of the FDL party line to this day. They don’t disappear. I get called names for it. Occasionally a lurker will speak up and defend a non group think viewpoint.

    IMHO leaving them alone is a mistake, as they’ll just get more parochial and insular. Rational argument that both fits liberal values and subtly helps to disengage from group think is important, because most of the community would like to improve policy in ways the BJ community would approve of.

    I suspect the mods at FDL are aware of ABL’s calling them out. While there is some adulation of Jane in the moderator corps they also do exert some independence, and I hope they take the criticism to heart and police the racist crap.

  197. 197.

    sixers

    January 20, 2011 at 4:43 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    If I wasn’t a man would you still be calling me a jackass? Just kidding! I’m not trying to cover up your point with charges of sexism. That would be lame. People feeling the need to defend you has nothing to do with you but has everything to do with your sometimes shoddy and emotional writing.

  198. 198.

    freelancer

    January 20, 2011 at 4:44 pm

    Hey, don’t knock matoko_chan. Turned out she was right about ED Kain and fetus = slaves thing. She throws out so many things you think all of it is bullshit, but she has her moments.

    Yeah, and Rush Limbaugh is right when he mocks the Chinese President for not having a translator. Glenn Beck is onto the truth when he talks about oligarhy.

    I reserve the right to knock around that aphasiac, smug, condescending egotist at my leisure.

  199. 199.

    Ija

    January 20, 2011 at 4:44 pm

    @morzer:

    We’ll just agree to disagree on ED Kain and the abortion = slavery article. But I’m right :)

    On matoko_chan, maybe we are in agreement about the therapy thing.

  200. 200.

    morzer

    January 20, 2011 at 4:46 pm

    @Ija:

    All this rightness knocking around makes me wonder if ED Kain will end up being left by default….

  201. 201.

    Mnemosyne

    January 20, 2011 at 4:47 pm

    @Mattminus:

    And just like you don’t ever want to hear the dreaded “N-word”(except, of course, when you are using it), some people don’t ever want to hear the c-bomb. In both cases, people are using strong language to make a point. In neither case is anyone using that strong language to make a racist or misogynistic point.

    I love when men try to claim that “cunt” is not a misogynist term. Weird how no women seem to feel that way, but I guess we chicks are all overemotional and can’t look at the term objectively like you can, amirite?

  202. 202.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 4:47 pm

    @Uncle Clarence Thomas: No, no, the BJ company line is that FDL has STUPID criticisms of Obama, which are sometimes expressed in a a racist manner. For example, criticizing Obama for not getting the votes for things…that don’t have the votes because Joe Lieberman is Joe Lieberman and various blue dogs are blue doggy is…stupid. Calling people who point these facts out “uncle toms” or worse is racist. Hope (against all experience) that this helps.

  203. 203.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 4:47 pm

    @Mattminus: it is relevant because people were beginning to get outraged about my use of the term c#nt in reference to white people and that my mother is white and female is at least evidence that i don’t harbor ill-will towards all white people.

    but ok. you keep bobbing and weaving.

  204. 204.

    AAA Bonds

    January 20, 2011 at 4:47 pm

    Lord almighty, will y’all get the fuck over FDL?

    Blog posts about other blogs are the most boring shit ever. I don’t give a fuck what some loser’s FDL blog says, and I care even less what you personally think about it. The number one way Greenwald jumped from commentary into relevance? He stopped doing metablogging.

    Please return to at least quasi-content for your front page.

  205. 205.

    BGinCHI

    January 20, 2011 at 4:47 pm

    @Uncle Clarence Thomas: When the election for biggest dumbass on this blog happens, I’m voting for you.

  206. 206.

    Tonal Crow

    January 20, 2011 at 4:49 pm

    @Ija: Ah yes, “derailing”. I am in fact passionate about ending the War on Drugs — as you will no doubt notice if you peruse my postings here — for many reasons, one of the most important being that it’s used to penalize people for the “crime” of being nonwhite.

    And yes, everyone who’s promoting this trivia war should feel shame. The only profit in it will accrue to Republicans.

  207. 207.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 4:49 pm

    People feeling the need to defend you has nothing to do with you but has everything to do with your sometimes shoddy and emotional writing.

    i suggest you stop reading it, then.

  208. 208.

    Mnemosyne

    January 20, 2011 at 4:50 pm

    Ah, I see Uncle Clarence Thomas has shown up again to prove to all of us that there’s absolutely nothing racist about calling someone an “Uncle Tom” “house nigger.”

    Clearly no one is more qualified to lecture us about what is and isn’t racism than he is.

  209. 209.

    Mattminus

    January 20, 2011 at 4:50 pm

    @Pooh:

    Actually, I was saying that BECAUSE of the context it would be retarded to take offense in either case, because, you know, the actual meaning, in context, is not bigoted.

    I’m all for more speech, not less, even if it gets a little frisky.

    And, really, I think ABL is playing BS identity politics games because she just doesn’t like FDL.

  210. 210.

    Bruce (formerly Steve S.)

    January 20, 2011 at 4:50 pm

    @Midnight Marauder:

    Are you seriously trying to argue that only black people were at the parade that day?

    Gosh, I see your point. Similarly, the vicious assaults on the civil rights marches were not aimed at African-Americans since other races were also marching with them.

    What was I thinking, that an attempted bombing of the MLK parade might have racial overtones?

  211. 211.

    unclerameau

    January 20, 2011 at 4:50 pm

    Test

  212. 212.

    gwangung

    January 20, 2011 at 4:50 pm

    @sixers: ….which, in this case, is more precise than many people give it credit for (emotional, of course. Nothing wrong with emotional, particularly when it comes to your race.)

  213. 213.

    Brachiator

    January 20, 2011 at 4:50 pm

    @Pooh:

    the problem isn’t just (or even, I think primarily) that such language is allowed, but that it’s allowed while other things (disagreements with leadership f.rex) aren’t.

    Fair point.

    And before you tell me that’s not what happens, just assume for the moment that I’m correct in that assertion, and now think about how simultaneously allowing the use of “HN” as a pejorative for a group of actual people while not allowing criticism of Jane Hamsher makes FDL look.

    Makes FDL look like fools. Would you prefer that they not allow the use of “HN” and still not allow criticism of Jane Hamsher?

    @liberal:

    Strictly speaking, I thought the First referred to government censorship.

    Yep. You’re right. I probably should have said principles of free expression, which clearly comes with the right to tell people to STFU for good and righteous reasons.

  214. 214.

    Andre

    January 20, 2011 at 4:50 pm

    I think the whole “asterisks make it better!” thing can be summed up (like almost any situation) with a Firefly quote:

    Mal: “Petty?”
    …
    Inara: “I didn’t mean petty.”
    …
    Mal: “What did you mean?”
    …
    Inara: “Suo-shee?”
    …
    Mal: “…That’s Chinese for petty.”

  215. 215.

    Tom65

    January 20, 2011 at 4:52 pm

    A hundred-plus posts defending the use of the term “house nigger”. WTF is wrong with you people? Is it simple contrarianism (in which case, fuck off and die), or do you really think that this is acceptable language anywhere in the civilized world, to mention nothing of a putatively “progressive” blog that moderates its comments?

    Fucking hell, I need a shower.

  216. 216.

    freelancer

    January 20, 2011 at 4:52 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    and that my mother is white and female is at least evidence that i don’t harbor ill-will towards all white people.

    Can you prove that though, ABL? I mean even the president had a White mom and White grandparents, yet people of color maintain that he is full of rage and there has been speculation that he still has a deep-seated hatred of White People. Being half-white doesn’t let you off the hook from hating whitey and possible wanting to “kill” whitey.

  217. 217.

    AAA Bonds

    January 20, 2011 at 4:52 pm

    Here’s my request: replace this writer with someone who either 1) has something funny or interesting to say or 2) is capable of hiding content behind a jump so navigating the front page isn’t a chore anymore.

  218. 218.

    Tonal Crow

    January 20, 2011 at 4:53 pm

    @AAA Bonds:

    Lord almighty, will you people get the fuck over FDL?
    __
    Blog posts about other blogs are the most boring shit ever. I don’t give a fuck what some loser’s FDL blog says, and I care even less what you personally think about it….

    This. This a thousand times over.

  219. 219.

    Tuttle

    January 20, 2011 at 4:53 pm

    But you are not going to stop it by asking these goons to play nice.

    But we’re liberals god damnit! Addressing the symptom and not the cause is our modus fucking operandi.

    The answer is not “just don’t say the word”, the answer is “know what the fuck you are saying when you use the word”.

  220. 220.

    schnooten

    January 20, 2011 at 4:55 pm

    Use-mention distinction. Capiche?

  221. 221.

    Just Some Fuckhead

    January 20, 2011 at 4:56 pm

    @AAA Bonds: This!

  222. 222.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 4:58 pm

    @Brachiator:

    It’s an interesting discussion as to whether a more or less total free-for-all is better or worse than something with viewpoint neutral standards of decorum. I tend to think that a sensibly enforced version of the latter is far better for the purposes of internet discussion than the former. That is, if you are hoping for the conversation to be anything more than people blowing off steam by engaging in a text version of Castle Wolfenstein (and not that there’s anything wrong with that, but that’s what sports message boards are for)

  223. 223.

    Tim

    January 20, 2011 at 4:59 pm

    This is a stupid thread.

    But fun to read.

  224. 224.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 5:00 pm

    @Vescoe P. Spurnwick (formerly Milmont Glapper (formerly Brisbane Belff (formerly G. Nelson Buttnergle (formerly Mumphrey (formerly Renfrew Squeevil (formerly Mumphrey Oddison Yamm (formerly Mumphrey O. Yamm (formerly Mumphrey)))))))): thank you. just, thank you.
    @freelancer: well to complicate matters further, i’m adopted, so i’m “full black” (whatever that means) with a white jewish mom and scads of white jewish relatives. (all of whom i love, none of whom are cunts.)

  225. 225.

    Midnight Marauder

    January 20, 2011 at 5:00 pm

    @Bruce (formerly Steve S.):

    Gosh, I see your point. Similarly, the vicious assaults on the civil rights marches were not aimed at African-Americans since other races were also marching with them.

    Well, I am pretty sure that many white individuals were targeted and killed during the Civil Rights Era explicitly for being “nigger lovers,” so I’m not sure what point you are trying to make here.

    What was I thinking, that an attempted bombing of the MLK parade might have racial overtones?

    Of course, you were not arguing that the attempted bombing had “racial overtones.” You made a very specific charge in your previous comment, which I shall reproduce here once again:

    Do you have a comment on this recent event which was not a bunch of latte liberals trading “some of my best friends are negroes” over Trenta but was in fact an attempted mass murder aimed directly at the African-American community as a whole

    “Attempted mass murder aimed directly at the African-American community” is in no way equal to “an attempted bombing of the MLK parade might have racial overtones.” In no way.

    But it’s fascinating watching your create an entirely different line of argument than the one you initial unveiled.

  226. 226.

    Just Some Fuckhead

    January 20, 2011 at 5:00 pm

    @Tonal Crow:

    This. This a thousand times over.

    I’ll be goddamned if I can figure out why the people with a problem with FDL or GOS or whoever have to make it my problem here. Go there and tell THEM. You can even create your own diary and be just as important as that person that pissed you off. Jesus, this seems like basic common sense. And yet..

  227. 227.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 5:01 pm

    @Mattminus:

    Casually dropping “retarded” into this conversation like that turned your participation in this thread into performance art.

    And beyond that, if you’re actually equating the context of the two statements, you might be, uhm…

  228. 228.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 5:02 pm

    @AAA Bonds: here’s my request. fuck off and go read another thread.

  229. 229.

    Mattminus

    January 20, 2011 at 5:03 pm

    @Mnemosyne:

    Whhhhhhhaaaaaaaa?

    Do you think it was misogynistic in the context ABL was using it? Is ABL a misogynist?

  230. 230.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 5:05 pm

    Go there and tell THEM.

    i have.

    You can even create your own diary and be just as important as that person that pissed you off.

    why? so i can be tied to that cesspool? no.

  231. 231.

    freelancer

    January 20, 2011 at 5:05 pm

    i’m “full black” (whatever that means)

    New tag, please.

  232. 232.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 5:06 pm

    @Mattminus:

    SATSQ, no and no. Next please.

  233. 233.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 5:07 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    eh, you’ll only be tied to FDL until they delete your diary.

  234. 234.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 5:07 pm

    @Mattminus: of course it couldn’t be that identity politics is WHY i don’t like FDL, not some innate hatred of FDL that burst forth from my bowels out of nowhere.

  235. 235.

    Brachiator

    January 20, 2011 at 5:08 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    these goons?! these goons are progressive liberals who are supposedly on our (my, anyway) side. i’m not raging against the use of racist language on free republic. I ‘m raging against its usage on FDL, the supposed bastion of liberalism on the intertrons.

    And my point is that Obama’s election has made a lot of folks crazy with racial anxiety, and that this includes a lot of liberals as well as free republic types.

    I understand your wanting to hold these folks’ feet to the fire, even as I vehemently disagree with the self-defeating notion that good liberals can easily decide who can say what, let alone consistently impose any order on expression.

    @Uncle Clarence Thomas:

    As I’m sure you all agree, Malcolm X’s term is insightful and useful as a concept.

    Your bland citation of the Wiki reference indicates that you don’t really get the point of Malcolm’s critique.

    As an aside, while Malcolm X came up with a great metaphor, he was historically inaccurate.

  236. 236.

    rikyrah

    January 20, 2011 at 5:08 pm

    luv you, ABL. keep on keeping on. you write as you do, because if you didn’t, as my Aunt used to say – the rocks would cry out.

  237. 237.

    Lawnguylander

    January 20, 2011 at 5:08 pm

    @gwangung:

    I think that’s exactly what Mattimus was doing as was the FDL diarist, as was commenter Marmot in the last thread which I pointed out. I think if it had occurred to the diarist that the group of people he was referring to wasn’t exclusively white he never would have written that. That sort of assumption is rampant on liberal blogs but it takes a special kind of asshole to combine that kind of cluelessness with a vicious racial slur.

  238. 238.

    Ash Can

    January 20, 2011 at 5:10 pm

    OK, lemme get this straight. Everybody and his brother is jumping on ABL for calling out racist language? Really? Seriously?

    The anonymity of the Intertubes conceals the jumpers’ racial make-up from me, but I bet I can come up with a reasonable approximation. Here’s a tip, guys: When a white person says “This is no big deal” and a black person says “Oh yes it is,” guess what — IT IS.

  239. 239.

    Mattminus

    January 20, 2011 at 5:12 pm

    @Pooh:

    You’ve noticed?

    Anyway, I love “retarded”. They’ll take my “retarded” when they pull it from my cold dead lexicon.

  240. 240.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 5:12 pm

    I think also lost in the, ahem, context-free citation of Malcolm X is the qualitative point that neither UCT, nor the FDL diarist in question, is Malcolm X. Louis C.K. using (damnit, I can’t say “the N-word” here) certain language doesn’t make it ok for people who can’t walk that highwire to use the language.

  241. 241.

    HyperIon

    January 20, 2011 at 5:13 pm

    @A L:

    Oh I forgot, this is definitely in the top 10 Most Important Things that anyone could be talking about right now.

    Dude, if you think this blog is about the Top N Most Important Things, you need help!

  242. 242.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 5:14 pm

    I feel just as qualified to call out racism as ABL, and I do not see racism as a trait of firebaggers or balloonbaggers in general (no matter how much AxelFoley likes to show me her O-face on command). I see it as a trait of Republicans and the right, and especially of those who believe in the Christian God.

    aaaaaaand there you have it. there is no racism on the left because the left isn’t populated by right-wing christians.

    thank you.

    i’m done with this thread.

    peace.

  243. 243.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 5:14 pm

    @Mattminus: As you’ve been demonstrating all day. HEYOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

  244. 244.

    Bruce (formerly Steve S.)

    January 20, 2011 at 5:16 pm

    @Midnight Marauder:

    Your attempt at semantic misdirection notwithstanding, I’ll lay it out simply and without sarcasm this time.

    Of course there were white people at the MLK parade. Even a slavering moron knows that an attempted bombing of a MLK parade is not an attack on individuals, it is an attack on the very idea of the parade itself. The only other explanation is a random act of psychosis, but the sophistication of the device belies that.

    Oops, there might have been a bit of sarcasm in there. Oh well.

  245. 245.

    Mattminus

    January 20, 2011 at 5:17 pm

    @Lawnguylander:

    Waitafreakinminute……….

    There are liberals that aren’t white?

    I thought all the minorities were in that other party.
    Heh, live and learn. I’ll be changing my affiliation post-haste.

  246. 246.

    Allan

    January 20, 2011 at 5:18 pm

    @Lawnguylander: Well and succinctly put.

    ETA: 3rd C in succinctly. doh!

  247. 247.

    HyperIon

    January 20, 2011 at 5:19 pm

    @Pooh wrote:

    …the term “Sonderkommando”

    Pooh, I’ve missed you. (I think I saw you comment recently in the “Old commenters…where are they now?” thread.) I really used to enjoy your contributions.

    I read the wiki on Sonderkommando. Once again you have broadened my horizons. Thanks.

  248. 248.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 5:19 pm

    I feel just as qualified to call out racism as ABL, and I do not see racism as a trait of firebaggers or balloonbaggers in general (no matter how much AxelFoley likes to show me her O-face on command). I see it as a trait of Republicans and the right, and especially of those who believe in the Christian God.

    This might be the single dumbest thing I’ve read today.

  249. 249.

    El Tiburon

    January 20, 2011 at 5:20 pm

    So, you can type and say the word ‘cunt’ or ‘white cunts’ to illustrate your point. So can I type the word ‘nigger’ or similar to make my point?

    The British say ‘cunt’ like we say bitch or fuck. Can the British say ‘cunt’ but we can’t?

    Can an old, white male use the term ‘negro’ or ‘colored’ if that is the term he knows? Or does that make him racist? (I interviewed an older gentleman several years ago and he was talking about the 60s. He used the term ‘colored’. He is a very influential liberal politician, I don’t think he was racist at all.)

    I thought the original, offending commenter at FDL was using ‘house-n*****’ to make a point, not actually calling anyone a ‘house-n******’?

    In no way do I think the commentariat nor Front-pagers at FDL are racists nor use dogwhistles. I think it is offensive to suggest. They are as liberal if not more than the folks here and I don’t believe they think that way.

  250. 250.

    Lawnguylander

    January 20, 2011 at 5:21 pm

    @Mattminus:

    Yeah, there are. From now on act like ya know.

  251. 251.

    Nanette

    January 20, 2011 at 5:23 pm

    @Bruce (formerly Steve S.):

    Thank you, I will treasure it in the same spirit I do all his pronouncements.

  252. 252.

    Observer

    January 20, 2011 at 5:25 pm

    @Angry Black Lady: You see what happens when you raise an entire country to read a book with the term “Nigger Jim” in it a thousand times…I told you so.

  253. 253.

    HyperIon

    January 20, 2011 at 5:27 pm

    @Ija:

    This is the most anodyne argument

    assinine, perhaps?

  254. 254.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 5:27 pm

    @HyperIon: Thanks! I suppose I could be wrong, but replacing “HN” with a term which might have been pejoratively applied to the commentariat, and imagining their likely reaction in that, uhm, context, kind of gives the lie to the notion that “it’s ok, because he was just making a point.” I think we all understood the point he was making, and it’s a valid and somewhat reasonable point, but pairing the point with such language is either racist or stupid.

    The “racist” reading is obvious, but even if it wasn’t racist it was stupid because it was completely counterproductive WRT his apparent intent. Because guess what, we’re aren’t discussing whether or not the Democratic Party is really just a bunch of useful idiots for the corporatists or whomever. And this derailment is completely the fault of the diarist WHO HAD ALL THE TIME IN THE WORLD to choose appropriate language.

    Measure twice, cut once is really the broader takeaway here.

  255. 255.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 5:28 pm

    @Observer: having just spent the last three hours aghast while watching people defend their right to use the term because “they didn’t mean it,” “they are using it to make a point,” or because “they’re liberals,” i may be inclined to agree with you. :)

  256. 256.

    Allan

    January 20, 2011 at 5:28 pm

    @El Tiburon: I think what we’re saying is you can type whatever the fuck you want, within the limits of moderation on whichever forum you’ve chosen to type it.

    And other people will read the words you typed, and derive meaning from them, and intent, and implication, and they will type words expressing what they think about your words and how you put them together.

    If you keep typing that one, we’ll think you think it’s OK to type it.

    The rest of your comment is just more derailing unworthy of detailed response.

  257. 257.

    Midnight Marauder

    January 20, 2011 at 5:30 pm

    @Bruce (formerly Steve S.):

    Of course there were white people at the MLK parade. Even a slavering moron knows that an attempted bombing of a MLK parade is not an attack on individuals, it is an attack on the very idea of the parade itself. The only other explanation is a random act of psychosis, but the sophistication of the device belies that.

    And again, the very idea of the parade itself is solely and primarily confined to the “African American community?” Because that’s the issue between us here. You came in and essentially declared that a MLK Day parade is the realm of black Americans predominantly, and not just Americans of all races in general. You yourself create the delineation that an attempted bombing of a MLK Day parade is not “an attack on individuals,” but rather, an attack on the “African American community.”

    My point is that the attempted bombing represented an attack on a community that happens to include black Americans.

  258. 258.

    IM

    January 20, 2011 at 5:30 pm

    I still think this is nutpicking. A diary is bit more then a comment but not much.

    You can take a front page post to represent FDL or some other site, but not some diary.

  259. 259.

    Comrade Mary

    January 20, 2011 at 5:33 pm

    @El Tiburon:

    So, you can type and say the word ‘cunt’ or ‘white cunts’ to illustrate your point. So can I type the word ‘nigger’ or similar to make my point? … I thought the original, offending commenter at FDL was using ‘house-n*****’ to make a point, not actually calling anyone a ‘house-n******’?

    “Your point/my point” are pretty ambiguous terms.

    Typing out one of those words in full is a discussion of language and racism, or to allude to racism, where you have to use the word to identify it, is reasonable use in most people’s eyes. (Not all people.)

    Typing out one of those words in full to attack a specific person, persons, strawman or group of strawmen, or cluelessly adding asterisks in an effort to make an abusive term acceptable in polite company, is not reasonable in most people’s eyes.

    Context really does make a difference.

  260. 260.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 5:33 pm

    @El Tiburon:

    Context fucking matters. “Using it to make a point” elides far too many material differences to be useful analysis.

    As I mentioned way back in the dawn of this thread, “If you do this then you are/are just like X” is a far different “point” than “if you replaced ‘X’ with ‘Y’, do you still not think it’s offensive?”

    As to the rest of your point, you think it’s offensive to suggest someone is racist for using…a racial slur? You haven’t been mainlining too much RWNM by any chance have you, because that’s a nice bit of jujitsu.

    edit @comrade Mary: slow pony, me :(

  261. 261.

    DennisCA

    January 20, 2011 at 5:34 pm

    I follow both BJ and FDL as a lurker and generally don’t comment. The Hamsher/FDL hatred on this site is unbelievable. I notice the Hampsher Derangement Syndrone posts here always have the longest comment threads. Two days running and ABL paints progressives as dogwhistling racists and Jane’s site as a cesspool. Really sad.

  262. 262.

    Tom Hilton

    January 20, 2011 at 5:35 pm

    @Observer:

    You never did answer my question from yesterday (and, granted, you may have just missed it): do you think really Jane herself is racist in a “white people are better than black people” way? Can we get a simple Yes/No please.

    Racism takes many different forms. Trying to redefine racism as only its most blatant and egregious manifestation is a trick people use when they’re trying to gain plausible deniability for their own racist tendencies.

  263. 263.

    JPL

    January 20, 2011 at 5:35 pm

    @Vescoe P. Spurnwick (formerly Milmont Glapper (formerly Brisbane Belff (formerly G. Nelson Buttnergle (formerly Mumphrey (formerly Renfrew Squeevil (formerly Mumphrey Oddison Yamm (formerly Mumphrey O. Yamm (formerly Mumphrey)))))))): Nice.. Some (the invisible straw man) are to busy writing over each other to actually read what you wrote but I for one want to say good job.

  264. 264.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 5:36 pm

    @Tom Hilton: Right, I mean whoever said those strapping young bucks with T-bone steaks were black?

  265. 265.

    FeFiFo

    January 20, 2011 at 5:39 pm

    I don’t go to FDL and don’t watch MSNBC but if an author can’t make an argument that the President is beholden to corporate interests without calling him any variation on the Uncle Tom slur, then they’re a shitty author.

  266. 266.

    Observer

    January 20, 2011 at 5:40 pm

    @Tom Hilton: Trying to mind read someone you’ve probably never met is going to be a difficult chore in the best of circumstances. I’m going to excuse your backhanded namecalling bullshit this time but don’t go there again with me.

  267. 267.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 5:44 pm

    @FeFiFo: Thanks for putting that far more succinctly than I’ve managed to do so far.

  268. 268.

    Tom Hilton

    January 20, 2011 at 5:47 pm

    @Observer: If you actually believe the unstated premise of the question you asked ABL, then you’re buying into a common racist trope. And if that’s not what you meant, then maybe you should clarify.

    No mindreading there; just reading comprehension.

  269. 269.

    Pooh

    January 20, 2011 at 5:48 pm

    @Observer: And the always awesome “I’m offended that you think I said something offensive” pose appears once again.

    If the FDL types ITT were actively trying to prove the (oft-leveled around these parts) charge that they’ve adopted some of the more unsavory aspects of RW debate tactics to be correct, what would they be doing differently?

  270. 270.

    Uncle Clarence Thomas

    January 20, 2011 at 5:49 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:
    .
    .

    aaaaaaand there you have it. there is no racism on the left because the left isn’t populated by right-wing christians.

    Well, that was certainly a dishonest way to mischaracterize my words, which clearly stated “in general”… For example, in general, I don’t find you to be dishonest. This time, though – yes. See the difference?

    And yes, it happens to be the case that there is far less racism – even using your faulty definition – on the left than there is on the right. And as the proportion of right-wing christians increases, so does racism.

    BTW, thanks for not even trying to address or rebut my other salient points, especially with your dishonest mischaracterizations and straw men. In general, I understand that’s your usual M.O., and that is both fine for you as well as illustrative for us.
    .
    .

  271. 271.

    Observer

    January 20, 2011 at 5:50 pm

    @Angry Black Lady: I’ve always said “it’s important to know where you stand with people” and I guess now you know. For better or for worse. This wasn’t a pretty thread but now you know. That was important.

    In context, Condi Rice’s attitude isn’t really all that different from mine.

  272. 272.

    eco2geek

    January 20, 2011 at 5:52 pm

    I know I’m at the end of a lot of comments and I’m not going to read all of them, but…

    Why is it my job to prove that the use of racially offensive language is pervasive enough to deem FDL racist?

    Because you’re the one making the accusation.

    Why is it that those who read FDL come over here to defend the use of that language, or to debate it?

    I don’t read FDL. I do read BJ and its comments on a regular basis, and I don’t see many people coming over here to debate FDL’s use of language, and more specifically, that racist slur you mentioned.

    I’m not saying that people at FDL don’t use that language. Nor do I support the use of that kind of language. I am saying that those two charges you made need more evidence to be credible.

  273. 273.

    Observer

    January 20, 2011 at 5:52 pm

    @Pooh: If you’re trying to call me a racist just like Tom Hilton did in his smarmy little backhanded way then you need to stop yourself.

  274. 274.

    HyperIon

    January 20, 2011 at 5:52 pm

    @Shade Tail wrote:

    Uh, not to belabor the obvious, but: yes it is. Here in the US, racists have every right to spout racist bullshit in public. Ditto for homophobia, anti-Semitism, and any other form of “I hate other people” speech you can think of. It is protected, whether we like it or not.

    Thanks for stating the obvious (not being snarky here)….which is evidently NOT obvious to some. I thought only Sarah Palin had a strange view of what “free speech” is. Lysana makes two.

  275. 275.

    Mnemosyne

    January 20, 2011 at 5:53 pm

    @Mattminus:

    You’re arguing that ABL using the term “white cunt” to illustrate her point that using that term is offensive is exactly like that commenter using the term “house nigger” to refer to Democrats he doesn’t like.

    If we were actually going to have comparable cases here, ABL would have had to call, say, Sarah Palin a white c#nt for dodging any responsibility for the shooting in Arizona. You’re saying that that usage would not be misogynist just like calling Democrats “house niggers” wasn’t racist because, why, exactly?

    Here’s a quick and easy primer for you: if you use a racist term to insult someone, that’s racist. If you use a misogynistic term to insult someone, that’s misogynist. See how easy that is?

  276. 276.

    lamh32

    January 20, 2011 at 5:56 pm

    ABL,

    Girl, you go ahead and do what you do. From one sista to another, I agree with both your post on this subject.

    I know this comment may get lost in the large number, but I hope you see it.

    This thread and the one before it, are good examples of why when some white people tell us they want to have a conversation on race, we afr am, just roll our eyes, and don’t even want to start such a convesation, cause it just always seems as if they don’t really want a conversation on race they really just wanna talk around it, as a way to make themselves semm inquisitive, but in reality, they really don’t want to hear any grievances or examples of what we consider racism, especially since much of what we consider racism, many of them probably don’t even think about it.

    Talking about race is gonna be uncomfortable especially for white people, because like it or not, even if your “ancestors” did not own slaves, or did not personally kill “injuns”, the history of America is such that the vast majority of racist actions, deeds, and endeavors have been perpetrated by white people.

    So if ya’ll truly wanna have a real conversation on race then alot of things discussed will involved the actions of whites (majority) against minorities. White people are just gonna have to realize that. As I said in the Santorum thread, the thought of being called a racist (indirectly/directly) by association (even if that’s not what I’m doing) just seems to make alot of white people soo uncomfortable, that I just steer the conversation away from race, whenever/if ever it comes up when I talk to my white friends.

  277. 277.

    Mnemosyne

    January 20, 2011 at 6:04 pm

    @El Tiburon:

    So, you can type and say the word ‘cunt’ or ‘white cunts’ to illustrate your point. So can I type the word ‘nigger’ or similar to make my point?

    Making your point is not the same thing as illustrating your point. Funny how so many people on this thread who swear that saying “house nigger” is totally not racist just can’t seem to understand this basic element of the English language.

    The British say ‘cunt’ like we say bitch or fuck. Can the British say ‘cunt’ but we can’t?

    Yes. I know it burns you that people outside of your cultural context can use words that you can’t, but them’s the breaks. Start faking a cockney accent if you really can’t get through your day without calling your co-workers a bunch of cunts.

    I thought the original, offending commenter at FDL was using ‘house-n*****’ to make a point, not actually calling anyone a ‘house-n******’?

    He said that Democrats he disagreed with were “house niggers.” Saying, “Well, there’s this old term that used to be used, and I think it applies here to these people” is still saying it, no matter how many weasel words you inject between the people and the derogatory term you’re using to describe those people.

  278. 278.

    Omnes Omnibus

    January 20, 2011 at 6:05 pm

    @HyperIon: For all of the people talking about the First Amendment and Freedom of Speech here, I don’t see anyone saying that people do not have a right to make the most appalling statements of a racist, sexist, homophobic, etc., nature. They absolutely have that right. Others, however, can judge them on their speech and offer speech in return. In addition, a blog is not, despite appearances, a public forum. A blogger can do has he or she wishes as afar as allowing speech on his or her own blog. The caveat to that is, if one edits the speech for content, one tends to own the content.

  279. 279.

    Uncle Clarence Thomas

    January 20, 2011 at 6:09 pm

    @Pooh:
    .
    .

    No, no, the BJ company line is that FDL has STUPID criticisms of Obama, which are sometimes expressed in a a racist manner. For example, criticizing Obama for not getting the votes for things…that don’t have the votes because Joe Lieberman is Joe Lieberman and various blue dogs are blue doggy is…stupid. Calling people who point these facts out “uncle toms” or worse is racist. Hope (against all experience) that this helps.

    You are quite correct about the balloonbagger company line, but quite incorrect about the firebaggers. The firebaggers criticize President Obama mostly for lying, for not trying, and for pro-actively capitulating to the depraved Republicans and otherwise aligning his policies with theirs when he doesn’t have to. In short, they no longer trust him and no longer give him the benefit of the doubt. I do not believe these are stupid criticisms. If you review the balloonbagger anti-FDL comments in their entirety, the balloonbaggers have a definite inclination to dismiss all critics of President Obama as racists, I suppose since that’s the lazy and stupid tactic the center-right is most comfortable with. I wish it were not so. And did you know that some balloonbaggers are barely-in-the-closet racists and sometimes express themselves in a racist manner? But that doesn’t make it any kind of general truism about balloonbaggery, does it? I for one do not use this fact in my criticisms of the balloonbagger Obama idolatry.
    .
    .

  280. 280.

    Tonal Crow

    January 20, 2011 at 6:11 pm

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    A blogger can do has he or she wishes as afar as allowing speech on his or her own blog. The caveat to that is, if one edits the speech for content, one tends to own the content.

    And a caveat to that is that editing high-volume blogs is a labor-intensive process that is, consequently, usually done inconsistently. Therefore, one needs a good handle on moderation statistics to credibly use the results of moderation to attribute a particular motive to the blog’s owner.

  281. 281.

    Allan

    January 20, 2011 at 6:11 pm

    @Uncle Clarence Thomas: You can give the trolling a rest. Everyone else has moved on to a new thread. You should see the shit they’re saying about you in it.

  282. 282.

    Allan

    January 20, 2011 at 6:13 pm

    @Tonal Crow: Keep fucking that chicken. I’m sure she’ll eventually squawk out an apology for thinking that someone was being racist if you just bang it harder and longer.

  283. 283.

    Pangloss

    January 20, 2011 at 6:14 pm

    @Ija:

    Steve the diarist and D. Mason is the same guy? Or did Steve also has a story about being passed over for promotion because of black people? What are the odds?

    There’s a lot of people over there that could have written that diary.

  284. 284.

    Mnemosyne

    January 20, 2011 at 6:14 pm

    @El Tiburon:

    Also, the casualness with which the British treat the word “cunt” is greatly exaggerated, usually by British men (I know, such a shock). NME will say “fuck” in a headline, but they use “c**t” if they quote someone.

  285. 285.

    Pangloss

    January 20, 2011 at 6:14 pm

    @Ija:

    Steve the diarist and D. Mason is the same guy? Or did Steve also has a story about being passed over for promotion because of black people? What are the odds?

    There’s a lot of people over there that could have written that diary.

  286. 286.

    Pangloss

    January 20, 2011 at 6:15 pm

    @Ija:

    Steve the diarist and D. Mason is the same guy? Or did Steve also has a story about being passed over for promotion because of black people? What are the odds?

    There’s a lot of people over there that could have written that diary.

  287. 287.

    Tonal Crow

    January 20, 2011 at 6:16 pm

    @Allan: I’ve never been so impressed by a comment on a blog.

  288. 288.

    geemoney

    January 20, 2011 at 6:17 pm

    @Vescoe P. Spurnwick (formerly Milmont Glapper (formerly Brisbane Belff (formerly G. Nelson Buttnergle (formerly Mumphrey (formerly Renfrew Squeevil (formerly Mumphrey Oddison Yamm (formerly Mumphrey O. Yamm (formerly Mumphrey)))))))): That was a good comment, even if you never see this one, and I never see your reply. (I’m trying to up the meta-meta-meta-meta-ness which was referred to above).

  289. 289.

    Bruce (formerly Steve S.)

    January 20, 2011 at 6:18 pm

    @Midnight Marauder:

    My point is that the attempted bombing represented an attack on a community that happens to include black Americans.

    Hence, by the Law of Transitivity…

  290. 290.

    Paula

    January 20, 2011 at 6:23 pm

    Geez.

    ABL, you’ve got a better temperament than me to put up with all of this bullshit. It’s interesting how people think they are making so many “relevant” points that you, in your ignorance and naivete about race, have obviously never considered despite the fact that you’ve spent most of your life being an educated woman of color.

    In all honesty, to someone who’s been reading and thinking on these issues for a while, a lot of this “they didn’t mean it” and “you’re being oversensitive” arguments are predictable and overdone, which is why they’re quite easy to dismiss. It’s nice that ABL actually takes the time to explain it over and over, whereas I have pretty much taken the attitude that since no-one’s paying me, it’s not really my job to explain history and context every damn time someone says something ignorant.

  291. 291.

    HyperIon

    January 20, 2011 at 6:26 pm

    @Omnes Omnibus wrote:

    I don’t see anyone saying that people do not have a right to make the most appalling statements of a racist, sexist, homophobic, etc., nature.

    Lysana wrote (#97): Racism is NOT protected speech.

    You replied to my reply to Shade Tail who replied to Lysana.

  292. 292.

    Bryant

    January 20, 2011 at 6:26 pm

    John is there a pie filter available for front pagers because it is getting awfully tiring reading this sanctimonious shit day in and day out. We get it abl, liberals are evil racists.

  293. 293.

    Midnight Marauder

    January 20, 2011 at 6:30 pm

    @Bruce (formerly Steve S.):

    Hence, by the Law of Transitivity…

    Um, no. You fucking clown. Again, this is what you wrote:

    Do you have a comment on this recent event which was not a bunch of latte liberals trading “some of my best friends are negroes” over Trenta but was in fact an attempted mass murder aimed directly at the African-American community as a whole

    A community that includes black Americans does not equal “an attempted mass murder aimed directly at the African-American community as a whole.” Especially considering we are talking about Spokane.Fucking.Washington.

    It should not be this hard for you.

  294. 294.

    Omnes Omnibus

    January 20, 2011 at 6:31 pm

    @HyperIon: Ok, she(?) is wrong on that. Due to the sheer length of the thread, I hope that I may be forgiven for missing one comment. Can we change my remark to “Few would seriously argue that people do not have a right to make the most appalling statements of a racist, sexist, homophobic, etc., nature?” I think that will work.

  295. 295.

    Church Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 6:33 pm

    @guster:

    Isn’t there a commenter her with the handle The Sheriff is a N***er, or something approximating that? I don’t remember ABL, or John Cole for that matter, demanding that the commenter change the handle. Or banning it either. Why the double standard?

  296. 296.

    Allan

    January 20, 2011 at 6:34 pm

    @Tonal Crow: Aww! I’m touched. I was hoping it would be special for you.

  297. 297.

    Mnemosyne

    January 20, 2011 at 6:35 pm

    @Church Lady:

    Because it’s a quote.

    Please learn the various parts of speech comprising the English language before trying to post again.

  298. 298.

    Allan

    January 20, 2011 at 6:35 pm

    @Church Lady: Oh Jesus. Look what the cat dragged in, ate, then shat into the litter box.

  299. 299.

    PS

    January 20, 2011 at 6:37 pm

    I can’t let this go by without noting this definition of Protected speech from the Legal Dictionary:

    The right, guaranteed by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, to express beliefs and ideas without unwarranted government restriction.

    I am not the gu’mint. You are not the gu’mint. John Cole is not the gu’mint. And for absolutely certain FDL is not the gu’mint. Offensive speech is not the same thing as protected speech, and vice versa. In my house you cannot say various epithets that you might wish to say, and I can tell you not to. That is what … comprende?

  300. 300.

    Jane2

    January 20, 2011 at 6:45 pm

    Well said, ABL!

  301. 301.

    The Sheriff's A Ni-

    January 20, 2011 at 6:49 pm

    @Church Lady: Why am I completely unsurprised you didn’t recognize the quote?

    I guess if I wanted to be more in with the crowd here I could go with ‘The Sheriff Is Near’ but I kinda like this one better. Perfectly captures the reactions of the white and entitled to Obama’s Presidency.

  302. 302.

    Three-nineteen

    January 20, 2011 at 6:54 pm

    Wow – this is a lot to take in. I especially enjoyed the posters who told ABL to STFU about racist comments. It seems that racist comments are protected speech, but calling out racist comments isn’t.

  303. 303.

    Vescoe P. Spurnwick (formerly Milmont Glapper (formerly Brisbane Belff (formerly G. Nelson Buttnergle (formerly Mumphrey (formerly Renfrew Squeevil (formerly Mumphrey Oddison Yamm (formerly Mumphrey O. Yamm (formerly Mumphrey))))))))

    January 20, 2011 at 7:03 pm

    Wow. Almost 300 comments so far, and far too many of them are variations on “x y z isn’t really racist a racist thing to say,” or “Well, I heard so and so say x y z, and nobody was offended,” or “I say x y z, but that doesn’t mean I’m a racist!” or tortured examples of how somebody conceivably could say x y z, and it wouldn’t be racist, and who knows what all else. I don’t know if anybody could keep track of all the backs and forths on this thread.

    Forgive my conceit here, but let me try to make it easy for everybody: Nigger is offensive. House nigger is offensive. They just are. So are 6 or 8 other epithets. It doesn’t matter whether you want to offend; it doesn’t matter whether you’re a racist. If you’re white, it’s just better not to say them, and here’s another shocking fact: it won’t really hurt you much even if you don’t ever get to say those things. You’ll live through it. Trust me. If you think it’s unfair that black people can say them and you can’t, then just try to keep in mind the historical burden of oppression that black America has had to deal with. That gives them a special right to use that word as they choose to. And I would argue that even black Americans should maybe hold back unless they can wield it as deftly and devestatingly as somebody like Chris Rock or Dave Chappelle.

    Words like that are like weapons; it’s just better not to play around with them. And if you’re white, and you still want to fuck with them, then you’d damned well better be ready to deal with the harsh words that come your way. If you can’t deal with them, then keep your mouth shut. White people have the right to say the word. We don’t have the right to say it and not be thought assholes. That’s life. Deal with it.

  304. 304.

    rikyrah

    January 20, 2011 at 7:08 pm

    oh, and the thought..

    the mere thought..

    that anyone would even think to type the words

    ‘ go check with the White guy to see if it was REALLY racist’..

    to a Black person…

    as a Black person, let me tell you.

    fuck that shyt.

    ABL has been Black in America longer than 3 days.

    she knows what’s racist and what is not.

  305. 305.

    Midnight Marauder

    January 20, 2011 at 7:08 pm

    @Church Lady:

    Isn’t there a commenter her with the handle The Sheriff is a N***er, or something approximating that? I don’t remember ABL, or John Cole for that matter, demanding that the commenter change the handle. Or banning it either. Why the double standard?

    Blazing Saddles.

    You’re welcome.

  306. 306.

    John Cole

    January 20, 2011 at 7:10 pm

    @Vescoe P. Spurnwick (formerly Milmont Glapper (formerly Brisbane Belff (formerly G. Nelson Buttnergle (formerly Mumphrey (formerly Renfrew Squeevil (formerly Mumphrey Oddison Yamm (formerly Mumphrey O. Yamm (formerly Mumphrey)))))))): You know what I find offensive?

    Your idiotic handle that wraps three times around the page. Seriously. Change it, please.

    @Church Lady:You are beyond spoof.

  307. 307.

    Bruce (formerly Steve S.)

    January 20, 2011 at 7:11 pm

    @Midnight Marauder:

    Um, no. You fucking clown.

    Heh.

    It should not be this hard for you.

    You might want to tell the guy running the investigation:
    “The confluence of the holiday, the march. and the device is inescapable, but we are not at the point where we can draw any particular motive…I think the connection is virtually inescapable…”

    or this article:
    “Frank Harrill, the special agent in charge of the Spokane office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, confirmed late Wednesday that two recent protests by white supremacists in Coeur d’Alene will be part of the effort to identify those responsible for leaving the bomb…”

    Silly man, if only he’d looked up Spokane’s racial breakdown on Wikipedia he wouldn’t be wasting his time.

  308. 308.

    Midnight Marauder

    January 20, 2011 at 7:27 pm

    @Bruce (formerly Steve S.):

    “The confluence of the holiday, the march. and the device is inescapable, but we are not at the point where we can draw any particular motive…I think the connection is virtually inescapable…”

    Funny, I don’t see anything in that quote from “the guy running the investigation” that the attack and device were specifically “an attempted mass murder aimed directly at the African-American community as a whole.” That is present nowhere in the quote.

    “Frank Harrill, the special agent in charge of the Spokane office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, confirmed late Wednesday that two recent protests by white supremacists in Coeur d’Alene will be part of the effort to identify those responsible for leaving the bomb…”

    And white supremacists have NEVER targeted non-blacks for affiliating with black Americans in a peaceful, non-bigoted fashion, right? That is a thing that has never before happened in the history of this country, right?

    Remember, you made the argument that the attempted bombing represented an attack attempted mass murder on the “African-American community as a whole.” You made the comment that “an overt declaration of war on an entire race is far less consequential than the comment section at FDL,” implying once again that the only people targeted in the attack were black Americans, and not EVERYONE WHO HAPPENED TO BE IN ATTENDANCE AT THE PARADE CELEBRATING NONVIOLENCE, REGARDLESS OF THEIR RACE.

    Silly man, if only he’d looked up Spokane’s racial breakdown on Wikipedia he wouldn’t be wasting his time.

    Because a white supremacist who is making bombs that defy typical domestic complication definitely needs to look up the racial breakdown of the area they are most likely strongly familiar with. Yes, that is a very real thing to base an argument on.

  309. 309.

    Triassic Sands

    January 20, 2011 at 7:33 pm

    @Mnemosyne:

    “amirite?”

    No, you’re wrong. It’s one of the most offensive words in the English language, but men have to be willing to think of words in a context other than their own. What matters is that it is offensive to women. That should be reason enough not to use it. Of course, that doesn’t mean that every word that offends even a single person has to go (although that may be sufficient justification for not using that word in the presence of that person), but some words are obvious candidates for exclusion — they are generally offensive to large numbers of people.

    When a commenter proudly, defiantly announces he uses the word to describe Sarah Palin (someone I loathe), he just demonstrates what a cramped, insensitive world he inhabits. I’m sure Palin is offended by the word, but so is virtually every other woman. There are lots of words that can be used to accurately (and unflatteringly) describe Palin that aren’t inescapably sexist and offensive. Clinging to one’s “right” to use such a word is immature, at best.

  310. 310.

    Karen

    January 20, 2011 at 7:37 pm

    Several things and I’ll admit I’m replying to the post and not to the comments because 305 is a lot to go through…

    1. ABL I believe in the tribe rule. The tribe members get to use the word because they lived it. And I believe it with African Americans, Jews, GLBT people and every minority.

    2. You can tell if Jane Hamsher and her acolytes had a child date an African American they’d do whatever they could to break it up. She and her ilk are Limousine Liberals. Give to the poor. Volunteer at soup kitchens. But if one of those soup kitchens was to move to their neighborhood they’d be the first in line to petition to get rid of it.

    3. Unless it’s in a context of discussion of what not to say, unless you’re a tribe member, there is no need to use the N word or the C word.

    4. If someone has to use those words and the conditions are not as described as above, they’re racist, misogynistic, etc.

  311. 311.

    jmn

    January 20, 2011 at 7:37 pm

    You are right they do ban people that do not agree with them. I was banned about 3 years ago for disagreeing with Miss Jane.
    No different than when I was banned by the O’Reilly Factor for pointing out to Mr. O’Reilly that he made a mistake. I didn’t realize at the time that he probably deliberately lied.

  312. 312.

    Ecks

    January 20, 2011 at 7:38 pm

    Whatever happened to the good old days when you could refer to any women you ran into (y’know, waitresses, secretaries… in all the gal jobs) as “honey” or “sweetcheeks” and you wouldn’t get all those boring lectures about being sexist, or suggesting that you hate women (c’mon, everyone knows you love the babes!). How are we supposed to declare sexism over when people are all the time lecturing you just for giving someone a pat on the ass for doing a good job? Or for having a good ass? Aren’t women supposed to LIKE compliments? And they get so upset about this, when we still have war and hunger, and unwed mothers and stuff!

    Or, y’know, maybe we should stop using words and actions that trivialize whole groups, especially when the words you use exactly mirror the tactics that have been used for hundreds of years to keep those groups “in their place” (and no, just because you are wonderful and your mother loves you does not mean that this baggage all drops away the moment you open your perdy little mouth). It doesn’t take a whole lot to meet the minimum standard for non-douciness as a human being really. Don’t use sexist or racist words in sexually or racially loaded contexts, don’t bitch that you have to push a button to select English at the ATM, don’t whine about buildings looking uglier when they go and put wheelchair ramps in… this really isn’t hard stuff people.

  313. 313.

    Karen

    January 20, 2011 at 7:43 pm

    @Midnight Marauder:

    Blazing Saddles is one of my favorite movies. When I first saw it and in the 80s when it was on TV, the N word and curse words were the only censored words.

    Ten years later (I lived on Long Island) they censored the Yiddish word “schtupp” which means screw (this isn’t lovemaking).

    Ten years after that I’m visiting my parents and now the swear words that are being censored are in Spanish.

    I guess you know you’ve arrived when the general population have to be saved from dirty words in your language!

  314. 314.

    Ija

    January 20, 2011 at 7:46 pm

    @El Tiburon:

    They are as liberal if not more than the folks here and I don’t believe they think that way.

    Newsflash. Liberals can be racists too. Even the liberaller-than-thou ones. Shocking, I know.

  315. 315.

    Brachiator

    January 20, 2011 at 7:47 pm

    @lamh32:

    This thread and the one before it, are good examples of why when some white people tell us they want to have a conversation on race, we afr am, just roll our eyes, and don’t even want to start such a conversation, cause it just always seems as if they don’t really want a conversation on race they really just wanna talk around it, as a way to make themselves semm inquisitive, but in reality, they really don’t want to hear any grievances or examples of what we consider racism, especially since much of what we consider racism, many of them probably don’t even think about it.

    This is a powerful paragraph. Because here is the dilemma. A conversation is not the same thing as listening to grievances. And any conversation might become one sided if one side says, “here is a list of all the words you can never use, not just because they are painful, but because you just don’t have the ‘right’ to say them.”

    This is not to defend or excuse people who deliberately try to provoke, or who try to hide their racism behind a cry of free expression. And it does not mean that people should not listen.

    And this does not invalidate ABL calling out the other site for its insensitivity and all other kinds of bad faith.

    But having a conversation means everybody gets to talk. And everybody has to be willing to endure some discomfort.

  316. 316.

    Vescoe P. Spurnwick (formerly Milmont Glapper, Brisbane Belff, G. Nelson Buttnergle, Mumphrey, Renfrew Squeevil, Mumphrey Oddison Yamm, Mumphrey O. Yamm & Mumphrey))))))))

    January 20, 2011 at 7:53 pm

    @John Cole:

    You’ll pry my idiotic handle from my cold, dead hands.

  317. 317.

    Vescoe P. Spurnwick (formerly Milmont Glapper, Brisbane Belff, G. Nelson Buttnergle, Mumphrey, Renfrew Squeevil, Mumphrey Oddison Yamm, Mumphrey O. Yamm & Mumphrey)

    January 20, 2011 at 7:57 pm

    You’ll pry my idiotic handle from my cold, dead hands.

    I did shorten it, though; should only wrap around maybe twice, now…

  318. 318.

    Felanius Kootea (formerly Salt and freshly ground black people)

    January 20, 2011 at 7:59 pm

    @Brachiator: Is listening to grievances in the course of a conversation off limits if it gets you to dialogue eventually? She went on to say that she spares her white friends the discomfort by skirting around/avoiding issues of race. The grievances never get listed. Most black people I know in the US do that just to keep the peace. That part bothers me more than the part you highlighted and that’s to be expected.

  319. 319.

    Mnemosyne

    January 20, 2011 at 7:59 pm

    @Brachiator:

    But having a conversation means everybody gets to talk. And everybody has to be willing to endure some discomfort.

    Can you give an example of what you’re talking about? Because I’m pretty sure you’re not arguing that it was totally non-offensive to call centrist Democrats “house niggers” so therefore ABL shouldn’t have gotten so emotional about it.

  320. 320.

    TOP123

    January 20, 2011 at 7:59 pm

    Away from the desk most of the day, but just wanted to say, I love you ABL. I’m not the most regular commenter here, but I wanted to throw my $0.02 of support your way.

    Beyond that, I guess my take on the ‘liberals should defend free speech’ line of defence is, sure, you have the First Amendment right to say all sorts of things; but then, the Constitution doesn’t keep you from being a racist asshole for saying them. Sure, we should defend to the death their right to be a giant flaming racist schmuck, but that doesn’t mean we have to be nice about it… and as you said, it’s a liberal’s job to call this kind of thing out.

  321. 321.

    lllphd

    January 20, 2011 at 8:03 pm

    i’m a little late to this party, so forgive me if this (related, somewhat) topic has been raised.

    but i’m curious what folks thing about rep. steve cohen’s comments on the house floor yesterday, wherein he blasted the republicans for lying repeatedly about the healthcare bill, and then pointed out that this is precisely the strategy goebbels used.

    and i’m curious about the outrage about this. anderson cooper interviewed him, as did john king and i think jon karl, and they insisted that just using the word in the same sentence with republican was uncalled for. in my opinion, anyway, they missed the point of his statement – it’s about the LIES and the repetitions of the LIES, and it was that fact that raised the spector of goebbels; he wasn’t calling anyone a nazi.

    any thoughts?

    ABL, i luve u, girlfriend. what a hoot; makes my daily visits here such a treat.

  322. 322.

    Allan

    January 20, 2011 at 8:08 pm

    @lllphd:

    anderson cooper interviewed him, as did john king and i think jon karl, and they insisted that just using the word in the same sentence with republican was uncalled for.

    Better yet, let’s ask Rich Iott, and John Boehner who campaigned for him, if they think it’s inappropriate to use Republican and Nazi in the same sentence.

  323. 323.

    Paula

    January 20, 2011 at 8:10 pm

    @Felanius Kootea (formerly Salt and freshly ground black people):

    Well, you know, it’s another predictable assumption that people make about individuals who are part of a minority: that it’s “easy” for members of said minority to constantly call out instances of racism or sexism or classism and so they do it regardless of whether it’s defensible, i.e. the “oversensitive” line, or be accused of constantly “playing the victim”.

    I’ve been a wimp more times that I can count, so no, it ain’t easy to stand, non-anonymously, and call somebody out for stating something ignorant or offensive. Because you don’t want people to think you’re, ahem, an oversensitive, irrational person who just wants to stir the shit, as ABL is being accused of here. Because you want people to see you as an individual, and the moment you say something about, say, racism, you become only one out of group of people. It’s stupid, dehumanizing, often pointless, and yet women and people of color are forced into this position many times in their lives despite the fact that, as individuals, answering for the dignity of their “race” or “gender” should not be their responsibility.

    So, yes, by all means, let’s talk some more about who’s more “uncomfortable”.

  324. 324.

    Bruce (formerly Steve S.)

    January 20, 2011 at 8:11 pm

    @Midnight Marauder:

    Yes, I said all the things you said I said. Rather than get into a piss war over how to interpret FBI statements, let me ask you this: in the wake of the Tuscon shooting any number of BJ commenters, and at least one front pager, said some version of the following: “Shooting a politician is inherently a political act.” Do you agree with that statement? Let me try another one: “Regardless of Loughner’s proximate motivation the people who created this climate of hate bear responsibility.” Do you agree with that statement?

  325. 325.

    Mnemosyne

    January 20, 2011 at 8:17 pm

    Shorter Bruce (formerly Steve S.): Clearly ABL isn’t as black as I am if she doesn’t want to talk about what I want to talk about.

    You are black, right? Because otherwise you look like an enormous dickweed for insisting that you know what black people should be concerned about better than actual black people do.

  326. 326.

    lawsipan

    January 20, 2011 at 8:24 pm

    Y’know, I kinda get, having read a lot about how cognitive dissonance works, that someone would be pretty upset if I said to them “you’re a racist” or even “what you just said is racist”. Because we’ve all internalized the fact that racism is bad and we all want to think that we’re good people. So when someone points out that you’re doin’ a bad thing, it’s honest for you to want to defend yourself. May not agree with you, but I get that, intellectually.

    What I do not get is why on earth there are dozens of you in here defensively arguing with ABL about whether or not a poster at FDL calling the Democratic establishment “house niggers” is racist, and whether or not Jane Hamsher’s indirect toleration of that makes FDL have a race problem. She didn’t call you a racist, personally, and in fact I don’t think she called anybody a racist directly (would have to re-read the original post) and yet you’re still digging in and arguing with her about what the original poster’s intent was and whether or not this is a perfectly fine thing to call a coalition that’s made up of a LOT of non-white people. And on top of that you’re using every derailing tactic in the book to try to make this all about you, instead of trying to figure out where the original poster went wrong and why he went wrong, and whether or not Jane Hamsher bears responsibility for the inflammatory shit she leaves up on the site if she moderates the shit out of everything else.

    Let me lay it on the line: so far I’ve read that ABL is being oversensitive, that she’s emotional, that this is trivial and is no big deal and we’re not paying attention to because of it and that it can’t possibly be hurtful because somebody’s black friend somewhere said it wasn’t or because it’s Thursday or whatever. It all makes me cringe.

    If you consider yourself a progressive, might I suggest that you check the fuck out of your privilege and learn something instead of digging in defensively and insisting that you must be right about this? If a person of color is saying something is racially inflammatory, it fucking IS racially inflammatory. If your first instinct when a person of color says that something is hurtful or racist is to buckle down and get defensive about it, instead of apologizing for it (if you said it) and trying to figure out for yourself WHY it’s hurtful or racist, and then trying to amend your behavior (if you’re the one being called out) so that it never happens again, you might be experiencing privilege.

    Agreed, there’s a difference between “listening to grievances” and “having a conversation” but this conversation’s been HAD, man. Many thousands of times. That’s why that link ABL keeps posting to Derailing for Dummies EXISTS. Just accept the fact that you’re letting your bias show. It doesn’t mean you’re a bad person. It just means that you haven’t thought things out half as well as you think you have.

    I mean, Christ, we’re all supposed to be on the same team here (If you don’t consider yourself a lefty, you’re not excused, either, but if you do, it’s so much worse). If you can’t put aside your hurt fee fees that you’re not allowed to say the n-word when Chris Rock says it on TV all the time, then how do you cope with life’s other little resentments?

  327. 327.

    Bruce (formerly Steve S.)

    January 20, 2011 at 8:35 pm

    @Mnemosyne:

    Shorter Mnemosyne: you can have my pre-adolescent obsession with FDL when you pry it from my cold dead fingers.

  328. 328.

    Stillwater

    January 20, 2011 at 8:59 pm

    @lllphd: he wasn’t calling anyone a nazi.

    You know who also didn’t call anyone a Nazi?

  329. 329.

    Stillwater

    January 20, 2011 at 9:10 pm

    @Ija: Liberals can be racists too. Even the liberaller-than-thou ones. Shocking, I know.

    Karl Rove gave them a handy way out. If you’re pro-choice, then you’re a liberal. Even if you hate unions, progressive taxation and uppity minorities who’ve forgotten their place … you too can still be a liberal.

    ETA: OK, that might be a little too thick, but the general point is solid.

  330. 330.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 9:15 pm

    @lamh32: i saw it and thank you. i’ve gotten a lot of messages from black folks asking me why i bother.

    sometimes i wonder why, too. these threads reveal a lot of ugliness.

  331. 331.

    Bruce (formerly Steve S.)

    January 20, 2011 at 9:17 pm

    I mean, Christ, we’re all supposed to be on the same team here

    The “team here” is frequently the anti-FDL team and nothing more. ABL’s OP was an invocation to FDL to go fuck themselves, calling them an “open sore” (though, strangely, also “irrelevant”). This gained her much validation from the BJ commentariat, who then played a hilarious game of “I am so done with FDL” one-upmanship.

    It would be nice to discuss important issues without the childish and predictable anti-FDL bromides but it increasingly appears that this is not possible.

  332. 332.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 9:18 pm

    @Bryant: you clearly don’t get it. perhaps you should try hooked on phonics? do they have a blog?

  333. 333.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 9:21 pm

    @Bruce (formerly Steve S.): i came to the conclusion that they were irrelevant a couple of months ago when the poll came out showing that obama enjoys high approval ratings among democrats, thus rendering the constant and often disingenuous screeching from the lake entirely irrelevant.

    the “team here” is not anti-FDL, although it is not surprising that’s what you take away from my posts since your head is so far lodged up jane hamsher’s ass, you likely can see what she had for breakfast.

    now, if you write down a list of Important Issues, i’ll be sure to address them for you… when i have the time. in the meantime, your homework assignment is to read that derailing link i provided you many hours ago and to stop telling me what is important to me.

  334. 334.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 9:24 pm

    @Church Lady: dipshit, i don’t own this blog. i’m a guest by invitation.

    ETA: also, what JC said.

  335. 335.

    Stillwater

    January 20, 2011 at 9:29 pm

    @Angry Black Lady: i’ve gotten a lot of messages from black folks asking me why i bother.

    Well, just look at white folks! Isn’t that answer enough! Look, as a white person, surrounded by white folks all my life, I can say this: if any group needs an ‘I call bullshit’ moment more than us, you’ve got to help me figure out who it is.

  336. 336.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 10:05 pm

    @Felanius Kootea (formerly Salt and freshly ground black people): THIS. the assumption (from what i can gather) among black bloggers is to simply avoid the subject on non-black blogs. have you noticed that the few self-described black commenters here have said the equivalent of “preach” and then bolted?
    @Bruce (formerly Steve S.): how appropriate that should be the first comment after @lawsipan‘s spot-on post.

    i really cannot fathom that this has turned into another full day of “that’s racist/no it isn’t.”

  337. 337.

    Bruce (formerly Steve S.)

    January 20, 2011 at 10:12 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    i came to the conclusion that they were irrelevant a couple of months ago

    And you get so livid about “irrelevant” people, why?

    the “team here” is not anti-FDL, although it is not surprising that’s what you take away from my posts since

    Since you call them an “open sore”, “sewer”, that they should go fuck themselves? How silly for that to be my takeaway.

    your head is so far lodged up jane hamsher’s ass

    Nope, you’re not childish, not a bit.

    now, if you write down a list of Important Issues, i’ll be sure to address them for you

    There’s no need to write it down, we all know that race is one of the very top ones. After all, SOMEONE JUST TRIED TO BLOW UP THE MARTIN LUTHER KING DAY PARADE IN SPOKANE.

    [breathe, breathe, breathe] Okay, I’ve calmed down. Strike that last comment. By all means, go troll the back pages of FDL for more material because that’s what Balloon Juice definitely needs more of. Excuse me while I go pop some popcorn

  338. 338.

    Angry Black Lady

    January 20, 2011 at 10:22 pm

    And you get so livid about “irrelevant” people, why?

    i no longer get livid. neither of my posts are me at my “lividest.” my prior posts on FDL were livid, and then i came to the conclusion that they are irrelevant and that FDL is a lost cause.

    Since you call them an “open sore”, “sewer”, that they should go fuck themselves? How silly for that to be my takeaway.

    you said it.

    Nope, you’re not childish, not a bit.

    never claimed not to be.

    There’s no need to write it down, we all know that race is one of the very top ones. After all, SOMEONE JUST TRIED TO BLOW UP THE MARTIN LUTHER KING DAY PARADE IN SPOKANE.

    you really need to read this link:

    Don’t You Have More Important Issues To Think About
    When you’re beginning to feel backed into a corner, you could do worse than to trot this one out.

    As with the best of all these techniques, this step operates on several levels. First of all, it communicates to the Marginalised Person™ that you think the entire debate is trivial and below consideration, indicating you entirely disregard their feelings and emotions. Secondly, you disown responsibility for your part in the debate and anything that you’ve said that may have been discriminatory or offensive.

    Finally, you reinforce your Privilege® by suggesting that it is Privileged People’s® job to set the agenda for the Marginalised Group™. After all, how could they possibly know what issues they should prioritise for themselves, they’re far too inferior and stupid! You, with your objective, ractional Privileged® perspective, on the other hand, know exactly what is most important and it is definitely not confronting you with your own bigotry and ignorance!

  339. 339.

    Bob In Pacifica

    January 20, 2011 at 10:41 pm

    General advice: If you use a word that offends someone, don’t use it. If you don’t want to deal with people who say offensive language, avoid them. If you want to confront them, then confront them.

    I never read the diaries at FDL so I don’t know what’s going on there. I stop by there to read Emptywheel and the main blog a few times a week. I have not detected racism there, but everybody’s got different antennae and I can’t say I was looking for it there.

    I have trouble with lumping everyone in one group as something. Racism is a tool to divide and conquer. Don’t help your oppressor. An injury to one is an injury to all.

  340. 340.

    Jager

    January 20, 2011 at 10:45 pm

    @goatchowder: those kids are called “wiggers” and “wiggers” download and buy more black music than black kids do.

  341. 341.

    Tattoosydney

    January 20, 2011 at 10:54 pm

    @El Tiburon:

    The British say ‘cunt’ like we say bitch or fuck.

    Um. No, no they don’t.

  342. 342.

    micah616

    January 20, 2011 at 10:58 pm

    ABL, thank you for calling out the b.s.

    Here’s my thing: After +10 years of reading politics on the internet, why is it that that certain party Democrats didn’t become ‘house niggers” until we had a Black President?

    I mean, after years of doing whatever Raygun, Bush Sr, and W telling them what to do, why now, suddenly, are they “house niggers?”

    What possibly could have changed?

  343. 343.

    MGB

    January 20, 2011 at 11:01 pm

    ABL….preach it!

  344. 344.

    Mark S.

    January 20, 2011 at 11:06 pm

    @Angry Black Lady:

    Don’t You Have More Important Issues To Think About

    Ugh, I hate that one. We discuss a ton of inconsequential shit on this blog, such as people like Chunky Bobo and McMegan whom 99% of country couldn’t pick out of a lineup, but the only times people play the “More Important Issue” card is when the topic is either race or sexual assault.

  345. 345.

    Johannes

    January 21, 2011 at 12:04 am

    @Angry Black Lady: Yeah, my head exploded there too. OK, Civics for Cudlips: First Amendment means the *government* cannot regulate one’s speech based on disapproval of the content thereof. Not that I, we, all of sane society, can’t find your usage offensive. Yeesh.

  346. 346.

    El Tiburon

    January 21, 2011 at 12:28 am

    If I ever used the word “cunt” or even worse “white cunts” to describe white women

    Here is the thing: he wasn’t describing black people. He was using the term as a descriptor. Again, I am not defending or excusing anything, but I think the accusation is that he is running around calling people ‘house niggers’ aint it just ain’t so. Not by my reading anyway. But I’m just a white male of privilege so I must not get it.

  347. 347.

    El Tiburon

    January 21, 2011 at 12:32 am

    @Tattoosydney:
    Uh, yeah they do, or at least in not nearly as taboo as it is here.

  348. 348.

    jeff

    January 21, 2011 at 1:11 am

    Page me when Balloon Juice starts having posts by Bruce Dixon.

  349. 349.

    Ija

    January 21, 2011 at 1:11 am

    @Mark S.:

    Because women and minorities represent “special interest”. Which is bad and divides the Democratic party. But when they plead allegiance to working-class white men, that’s not special interest. No sir, that true leftism. If you don’t support policies that benefit working-class white men, you are not a leftist at all. You are either a neoliberal corporate tool, or beholden to “special interest” groups. Like that pesky women and minorities group. They are “special interest” groups, and don’t you dare forget that.

  350. 350.

    Tattoosydney

    January 21, 2011 at 1:26 am

    @El Tiburon:

    Uh, yeah they do, or at least in not nearly as taboo as it is here.

    I must know a very very different group of British people to the one you apparently do.

    I have about fifteen good friends (and probably another twenty five in my social circle) who are from England or Scotland, from a wide variety of locations and social/class backgrounds and I have never heard any of them use the word “cunt” as if it were anything but a significantly taboo word, and certainly not a word at the same level as “bitch”.

    /Edited to tidy up the British/English distinction.

  351. 351.

    Tattoosydney

    January 21, 2011 at 1:34 am

    @El Tiburon:

    If your point was merely that the British, and indeed every single English speaking country in the world, are less hung up on naughty words than Americans, then I would say, fuck, yes, you are correct. Almost everyone in the world has less hangups than the average American.

    But I think it goes too far to suggest that ‘cunt’ doesn’t hold the same position in those other countries as it does in American, that is, being one of the ultimate taboo words.

  352. 352.

    Uriel

    January 21, 2011 at 3:24 am

    @Mattminus:

    And your mother is white?? I’m sure that diarists best friend is black.

    Wow- what a very, very weak attempt at a point.

    Just to be clear- you do understand the difference between complex genetic relationships and convenient (and probably overstated) social affiliations, right?

    Or are you one of those people who didn’t suss out that when Obama mentioned his grandmother in that one speech, he was talking about the woman who was his- also white- mother’s mother? The mother who makes him only a “half-rican american” in the eyes of Rush Limbaugh? That by talking about her issues, he was discussing the issues present in his own family?

    I mean, are you really one of those people who can’t grasp how the inherent issues of self-identification, combined with the problem of attribution on the part of third parties of both races involved in this situation might just be a bit more complex than the guy who handily goes, “you know, I’ve just decided that that one guy I smoke cigarettes with during lunch break is totally one of my best friends, if only for the purposes of this argument?”

    ‘Cause if you are one of the latter- how very fucking sad for you.

    ETA- Just really fucking weak, man.

  353. 353.

    PanurgeATL

    January 21, 2011 at 3:34 am

    @Jager:

    Well, that’s easy, considering there are so many more of them…

  354. 354.

    YAFB

    January 21, 2011 at 3:56 am

    @Tattoosydney:

    Thank you. I was about to step up and try to correct this abiding misperception, not least to avoid the risk of embarrassment or shunning if anyone here who thinks “cunt” isn’t a severe taboo word in most sectors of British society were to visit these benighted isles.

    For anyone who wants one British informant’s take on it, we had a reasonable discussion about it (in the context of discussing “retard,” and transiently the word “nigger”) at the ‘Roast quite a while back.

    And schnooten‘s reference to the use-mention distinction is key to some of the discussion here, not least the red herring criticism of ABL’s mention of the word “cunt” upthread. The FDL writer used “House Nigger,” he didn’t just mention it.

    (I don’t expect this comment to be released from moderation for a while, if ever, because of the number of links in it. Never mind.)

  355. 355.

    Annamal

    January 21, 2011 at 4:20 am

    @ABL Just chiming in to say that I agree with everything you’ve written here and demand (or at least request) that all of the people trying to wriggle out of the argument using the old “much more serious things are happening in the world so why are you bothering with this argument” immediately go to the posts on *this* blog that do focus on those serious things and comment there.

  356. 356.

    JW

    January 21, 2011 at 6:19 am

    ABL,

    Seems to me that you could use a break.

    You could come visit Rose and me on the Southern Oregon Coast for a while, sleep on the couch, eat some good food, stroll the beach, look at the redwoods, maybe do some fishing on the Chetco. It would do you good.

    I think that you need – and probably deserve – a little vacation time.

  357. 357.

    Walter

    January 21, 2011 at 8:19 am

    With the election of a black president I find some white liberals as hateful and resentful as most white conservatives, the only difference is the white liberal has a loftier excuse for his ignorance.

  358. 358.

    lllphd

    January 21, 2011 at 8:47 am

    @Allan:

    ooh, excellent point! thanks!

  359. 359.

    brantl

    January 21, 2011 at 10:35 am

    @Mattminus: You really are an idiot, aren’t you? Would ABL’s putting those words in quotes have been enough of a cue for you? Probably not.

  360. 360.

    jshubbub

    January 23, 2011 at 2:52 pm

    @david mizner: So it’s now admirably liberal to allow openly racist language? Apparently, we liberals are expected to respond with a wink and a nod whenever someone lets loose with something despicable. When did “liberal” come to be the equivalent of an absence of common decency? The ideal of tolerance only goes so far before it becomes complicity.

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks

  1. So there’s been a shitstorm at Balloon Juice… « The Odd Blog says:
    January 20, 2011 at 6:13 pm

    […] (later redacted to “House n****r” at the behest of the FDL modbots). Linkage here, here and […]

Primary Sidebar

On The Road - lashonharangue - Along the Zambezi River [2 of 2] 8
Image by lashonharangue (7/8/25)

World Central Kitchen

Donate

Recent Comments

  • Steve LaBonne on Open Thread: The Dignity of Honest Work (Jul 8, 2025 @ 5:15pm)
  • WTFGhost on Open Thread: The Dignity of Honest Work (Jul 8, 2025 @ 5:13pm)
  • Lyrebird on Open Thread: The Dignity of Honest Work (Jul 8, 2025 @ 5:12pm)
  • Geminid on Sharing Is Caring Open Thread: Calls to Action (Jul 8, 2025 @ 5:11pm)
  • Martin on Sharing Is Caring Open Thread: Calls to Action (Jul 8, 2025 @ 5:08pm)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
No Kings Protests June 14 2025

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)
Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Social Media

Balloon Juice
WaterGirl
TaMara
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
DougJ NYT Pitchbot
mistermix

Keeping Track

Legal Challenges (Lawfare)
Republicans Fleeing Town Halls (TPM)
21 Letters (to Borrow or Steal)
Search Donations from a Brand

Feeling Defeated?  If We Give Up, It's Game Over

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!