Great. ;-) We're actually talking about some stuff now. Okay...

Let's start with Wesley.

"You seem to have an amazing talent for knowing the unknowable."

I don't KNOW for certain what GfS's motives are, Wesley, but I suspect, based on hundreds and hundreds of posts I've read already by Gfs, that his dislike of Michelle and Barack Obama is based on their political position, not their racial profile.

And I have seen no evidence that he is prejudiced against Black people in general...just against politicians he doesn't like.

I'm not saying that all his motives are "noble", I'm just saying that there is no solid basis for calling him a "bigot". Note, Wesley that you are extrapolating my various statements all to some ridiculous extreme...therefore you appear to think you can read my mind. ;-) No, I do not think everyone has absolutely noble motives. Matter of fact, I think many people here are out to hurt other people whom they disagree with, and that's why they say the mean things they say. It was mean of GfS to compare Michelle Obama to a chimp, and it's mean of other people to slap him with the "racist" or "bigot" tag for doing it.

"And is there anyone you would not defend?"

I'll defend anyone when they're attacked in an inappropriate manner. I just defended Michelle Obama AND GfS on that basis. I'll defend you on that basis when you are unfairly attacked. However, I will not defend you when you attack someone else unfairly. Clear?

****

John P - Righto. I follow your reasoning.

"I said it made a comparison that is a common racial slur and recommended that it acknowledge that."

Fine. I have no problem with that, but it doesn't necessarily guarantee that you will get such acknowlegement. I also indicated to GfS that I thought there was no basis for insulting Michelle Obama in such a fashion.

"it is, demonstrably, bigoted against homosexuals"

I've read a lot of stuff GfS has posted about homosexuals, and I honestly do not believe he is a bigot in regards to homosexuals. You believe he is. Okay, we have a different opinion about that then.

"What do you think should happen when people make overtly bigoted comments?"

I think we should take issue with the comment itself, and present an alternative view of our own. I do not think we should yell "bigot" at the other person, because then it's not a debate anymore, it's a verbal street fight, and that accoplishes nothing.

I took issue with the comment, and because I respect GfS (after long online acquaintance), I simply said "She looks fine to me." What I was thereby saying to Gfs was: "You have no basis for saying that about Michelle Obama." Good enough. He can respond to that if he wants to, but we've still got a discussion, don't we, rather than a verbal street fight?

Public shaming, John, is something people love to do to others, but I don't think there's a very healthy instinct behind it. It has been used too often by sadists and oppressors of all sorts to intimidate and destroy those they dislike...or just for their own satisfaction...and you know what it stirs in the heart of the one so shamed? It stirs a deep desire for revenge upon the one doing the shaming. I don't recommend it. What I do recommend is that one oppose a view one considers wrongful with reasoned arguments that make clear the wrongfullness and error of that view. In other words, don't attack the person...attack the foundation of the person's argument.

There is absolutely no foundation for comparing Michelle Obama to a gorilla, in my opinion, and that is what I would focus on.

*****

Ebbie - "Little Hawk, let's see if I understand: If I make a comment about a political figure I don't like or respect but in so doing I display a characteristic of that person that is commonly used by bigots, my comment is not bigoted?"

It might be. Or it might not be. That depends on a whole bunch of different possibilities about YOU and what you're thinking at the time you make the comment. You may actually intend bigotry or you may not. How do we know for sure? To simply leap to the conclusion that you ARE intending bigotry and are therefore "a bigot" is to do what's convenient for the person leaping to the conclusion...but the conclusion may or may not be a correct one. You might simply be attacking the individual...but not the generic group of people the individual is a member of.

And my impression of GfS, based on long acquaintance, is that GfS does not attack Black people on the basis of race.

"If the politician is Black or a Jew or Hispanic and instead of showing the back room I draw him or her as a caricature of that person's race, is that not racist or bigotry?"

It might be. Is drawing someone as an ape a caricature of the person's race? How so? Or is it simply a caricature of the person? It could be either. Are you saying that it has to be bigotry whenever it's about a Black, a Jew or a Hispanic...but it isn't bigotry when it's about a White person who belongs to no "visible minority"? How so? Is it impossible to be bigoted against the White majority? Or are we all just reacting to current popular political trends instead of thinking indepently and assessing situations intelligently and on their own merits? Are minority people themselves capable of bigotry? Evidence suggests that they are. Everyone is capable of bigotry...but why are only certain types of bigotry deemed worthy of recognition in the present milieu? And is that fair or objective?


"Incidentally Hitler's government and press routinely showed the Jew as being less than human, but since they usually depicted only ONE person at a time you couldn't call it bigoted, could you now."

Ha! ;-D You could have saved yourself the trouble of typing that, Ebbie. You know as well as I do that the Nazi administration attacked all the Jews as a group. They attacked everyone who was a Jew, merely because they were Jews. That is definitely bigotry, there's no doubt about it, and you know it.

I have no reason whatsoever at this point to believe that GfS attacks Blacks as a group, merely because they are Black. He has a political bone to pick with the Obamas.