Houston1stWordOnTheMoon Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 If you're talking about me, that's fine. But you missed the point of my topic. It was based on the premise that his comments were not of an anti nature...against Jews. It had nothing to do with homosexuals. The only reason I defended my original post was b/c you bashed me for defending a gay basher and a crack-head, two things I didn't even mention in the post. I simply wanted to discuss if his Jewish comments were of an anti nature or not. That's it. Even though I've said that over and over, people still seem to miss that. I don't know if that's by choice or not. Dont worry about it. The gay stuff is a common tactic he uses when he has absolutely no idea about the topic at hand. Keep reading this forum and you will begin to see a distinct pattern. This guys comments didnt offend me, i have heard things that are very offensive about jewish people in my presence without the person speaking sucj garbage knowing that i am jewish. It can be very eye-opening to say the least Business wise, i happen to work with a lot of jews. Come to think of it, out of my team of 12, 7 members are jewish. Maybe we are taking over the world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevfiv Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 be clear, concise, and consistent and people will know what you are saying. exactly - and that can go for bigoted statements, too - just make sure it is clear that one's a bigot in this case, i don't think it was necessarily discriminatory, but rather of ineloquence and bad taste Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musicman Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 exactly - and that can go for bigoted statements, too - just make sure it is clear that one's a bigot in this case, i don't think it was necessarily discriminatory, but rather of ineloquence and bad taste lockmat was wondering why HE was misunderstood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sevfiv Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 lockmat was wondering why HE was misunderstood. oops - i misunderstood - what were we talking about? what was the question? where am i? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nmainguy Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 If you're talking about me, that's fine. But you missed the point of my topic. It was based on the premise that his comments were not of an anti nature...against Jews. It had nothing to do with homosexuals. The only reason I defended my original post was b/c you bashed me for defending a gay basher and a crack-head, two things I didn't even mention in the post. I simply wanted to discuss if his Jewish comments were of an anti nature or not. That's it. Even though I've said that over and over, people still seem to miss that. I don't know if that's by choice or not. I wasn't referring to you and I haven't missed the point of your topic. But you mention a man with a history that can't be ignored when it is perceived that once again he has made questionable public statements. BTW, I didn't bash you. I employed "hateful, insensitive sarcasm" according to the Church Lady . Now some people get "really tired of hearing about gay stuff in every single thread" when most threads mention nothing about gays. That person may have a problem he's not dealing with by making such a broad unsubstantiated statement and his continual attacks on myself and other gay forum members. But again, when you start a thread on a man like Richardson, you have to expect the whole package to be discussed. As for your question, "I mean, was he really speaking ill of Jews?" He definatly employed some of the stereotypes that have been historically used to demonize Jews but I think he's too stupid to even know what he was parroting. So regardless of whether or not he was speaking ill of Jews, it has been perceived as such and he has been suspended by his employer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 True, I agree. But my thing is, I don't even believe those statements were ANTI anything (the semitic comments). Maybe stereotypical, but not anti.Plus, it's just annoying how two-faced corporations are. B/c you know the only reason they take action is to save face. It could be the most acute comment on something and they blow it out of proportion, not even allowing the person in question to ask for forgiveness and be redeemed. They'd rather do something that makes it look like they're for the group/people/nation who were spoken of, when really they couldn't give a rip in reality. And then after it all, we get some fake apology from the defendant. Yeah, I hate it when someone tells me I am really good at what I do. It is almost embarrassing really. Maybe that is why the Jewish people cryin' over this are upset. They want to keep it on the DL. I can see where they might not want the "stereotypes" though. I know I don't mind being told I am good at my job, but I don't like it, when a guest of mine, might say that I am "One Slick Carsalesman !" Nope, don't like that at all, I prefer it when a customer says, " The guy that just knocked my head off." or "The guy that got a homerun off of me!" You know, the usual lingo when I make a "good deal" for someone. Well, I just sold another, so I have to go pack and get ready to go to Hawaii off that commission. See you guys later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted March 30, 2007 Author Share Posted March 30, 2007 I wasn't referring to you and I haven't missed the point of your topic. But you mention a man with a history that can't be ignored when it is perceived that once again he has made questionable public statements. BTW, I didn't bash you. I employed "hateful, insensitive sarcasm" according to the Church Lady . Now some people get "really tired of hearing about gay stuff in every single thread" when most threads mention nothing about gays. That person may have a problem he's not dealing with by making such a broad unsubstantiated statement and his continual attacks on myself and other gay forum members. But again, when you start a thread on a man like Richardson, you have to expect the whole package to be discussed.As for your question, "I mean, was he really speaking ill of Jews?" He definatly employed some of the stereotypes that have been historically used to demonize Jews but I think he's too stupid to even know what he was parroting. So regardless of whether or not he was speaking ill of Jews, it has been perceived as such and he has been suspended by his employer. Ok, cool. I knew I should have put a disclaimer in there just in case it wasn't me you were talkin about. My bad. And just for the record, I didn't know this guy had a past with bad remarks. This is the first I've heard of him. As for your statement, "...you have to expect the whole package to be discussed," I can dig it. I guess it's only natural for that to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nmainguy Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 Ok, cool. I knew I should have put a disclaimer in there just in case it wasn't me you were talkin about. My bad.And just for the record, I didn't know this guy had a past with bad remarks. This is the first I've heard of him. As for your statement, "...you have to expect the whole package to be discussed," I can dig it. I guess it's only natural for that to happen. Great. Glad we cleared that up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.