when did you last see your father?
By ATWadmin On December 11th, 2008Listening to the usual diatribe on the Today programme, this morning being one extremely wet (and bent) ex-policeman named Brian Paddick nodding along mostly in agreement with some young black actor Femi Oyeniran who had risen above the norm by having a job and using words with more than one syllable. The subject of the discussion was knife crime, stop-and-search and the usefulness of that particular tactic in limiting the numbers of young men who carried and used knives.
The young actor was impressive, and more than a bit surprising in his statement that he not only applauded stop-and-search tactics, he believed that there should be more searches, but better targeted. He also stated that to the average young black man, the police were taken as just another annoyance, because of the belief that most young blacks were into drugs and/or knives; which belief, incidentally, he believed was widely correct.
But the kicker in the commentary came when the subject of role-models came up, with Mr. Oyeniran stating that there were very few black role models to whom the majority of black men could aspire or emulate, naming David Lammy M.P. as but one. Brian Paddick however stated that, in his view, the role models on most inner-city estates were the drug dealers; those who had the gold jewellery and big car ‘bling’.
Now apart from the use of that truly dreadful term ‘bling’ which I assume covers the tasteless displays of necklaces, rings on the wearers’ necks and wrists, and, in the case of cars; contra-rotating spinning wheel trims, I would query the ethos and thinking behind the search for a role-model. This is the type of glitz which these youngsters aspire to, partly because this is what they see as a direct result of criminal behaviour, but partly because of a total lack of family life for the vast majority of this large sub-culture which we have imported from the West Indies and sub-Saharan Africa.
My role model was my father. He might not have been the best father ever born, but he had certain things going for him. He was born and brought up on a Northern Irish farm, came to England to meet and marry my mother; volunteered for service in the British Army the day after the Second World War commenced. The only knife my Dad carried for six-odd years was a bayonet slotted on the end of a rifle! On demob, he came back to Newcastle, and helped bring his children up according to his rules, which were possibly harsh, but never varied; if you stepped out of line, you got clobbered! He had one woman in his life, namely my mother, and never varied in his support for her. He was given a health ultimatum, changed his job and way of life, and commenced upon a new career in middle age. In many things I disagreed with my Dad, from politics to sport, but one thing you could rely on, he never changed, never varied. He was a rock in what was a hard place, and I miss him greatly, even some nearly thirty years after his death. He didn’t need gold jewellery, he didn’t need a flash car; people knew that with him you got exactly what saw on the label, a man who was strong enough to flatten an unruly drunk as well as being a father who brought his family into adulthood to become responsible British subjects.
That is the single difference between people of my generation and that following, and the majority of the generation of young black men under discussion. I had a father and a mother who brought us up to a certain code; the vast majority of young blacks seem at least to this observer have possibly a mother in their lives, but hardly ever a father-figure, because most disappear shortly after either conception or birth of their offspring; and this is their greatest loss!
The problem of the disappearing father is a social problem, and its effect on kids hardly differs between black and white. It is pointless, stupid and ugly to bring race into what is a universal human problem.
That said, nice to read that great account of your dad, Mike. He sounds like a sound man (and very like my father, if perhaps somewhat gentler!). I’d like to hear more.
There are of course still fathers around like him, and in fact there are probably more committed and active fathers around now than there were in his day. But there are also more of the other type you mention unfortunately.
One quibble: would I be right is saying he was not born in Northern Ireland, as that political mistake has yet to be made at the time of his birth?
BTW may I also point out to the philistines on this site that you took your title from a Pre-Raphaelite painting. It (the painting) was also taken as a model for a tableau in Madame Tussauds, if I am not mistaken.
Noel,
1. My father was indeed born in Northern Ireland, which has for a very long time been part of the Union!
2 The title did emanate from the famous William Frederick Yeames painting, but I would not call the many readers of ATW philistines for not readily recognising the link.
3. It was not a racist comment singling out young black men during my post, this was what the piece on the radio was all about, as I can also point to this from a black commentator for a second viewpoint.
Noel
In your typically liberal way, you are typically wrong.
Yes, fatherless children are a social problem, but they are a far larger problem for blacks than whites, despite the various liberal policies that encourage poor whites to follow the same path.
Democrat Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan first raised this isuue in the 60′s and 70′s, such was his concern over the 30% illegitimacy rate amongst blacks in the US, and the link this had to crime, poverty and imprisonment.
That figure of 30% in the 60′s is now 70% today, and I am sure you do not need a lesson in how to read a newspaper on a daily basis in order to see the catastrophic effect this has had on young blacks in the US and UK.
I recommend you read "No Mans Land" by Shaun Bailey, a yougish black man raised on a London estate who became a social worker and is now a prospective MP for the wicked Conservative party.
In his opinion, as one who has lived in, and escaped from, the hell that liberal ideology has consigned young blacks (particularly males without father figures) most liberals should be lined up and shot for crimes committed against black humanity.
One of those crimes is yours; pretending that a particular social pathologhy is spread across all cultures and all races becasue we are all the same.
We are not, and if you wish to continue to see young black males veer off the path toward harm, self harm and imprisonment, keep repeating the mantra of liberalism until the poor sods are 100% fatherless and prisons are full of broken young men none of whom have fathers, as opposed to the "mere" 80% today.
When are you liberals going to wake up to the pain, destruction and damage you cause to those you so condescendgingly purport to care about?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Patrick_Moynihan
>>fatherless children are a social problem, but they are a far larger problem for blacks than whites,<<
as it is for teenagers compared to older couples
and for city dwellers compared to country folk
and for those without much cash compared to the wealthy.
But you draw the line along racial lines. Why?
And your – not very convincing – concern for blacks in Britain would also suggest that you think something should be done, or at least that my acknowledgement that the problem is a black one would be worth something!
What it would be worth or how it would help them you unfortunately don’t say.
What’s the benefit of acknowledging that "we are not all the same", which is just a racial claim and which you don’t substantiate?
Is this all a moral build up to some form of legal or administrative apartheid or even expulsion? All in their best interests of course?
>>one who has lived in, and escaped from, the hell that liberal ideology has consigned young blacks (<<
It always amuses me to read how conservatives, who otherwise never shut up about indiviual responsibility and who scorn all social context, suddenly come on real strong about collective guilt and individual mitigating circumstance as soon as there is a "liberal" to blame!
Noel
As this post was not about rural dwellers, the poor or the young, but specifically a young black man talking about a specific black problem, then in answer to your question as to why it should be answered along racial lines is surely some sort of a joke on your otherwise not unintelligent behalf?
I am surprised this needs pointing out to you. As you are aware, this issue of fatherless black males is raised continuosly by black social commentators who care about young blacks, as opposed to black race hustlers who care about the continuation of a racial divide to keep their self apponted jobs, aka Jesse Jackson et al.
Shaun Bailey is one such concerned man in the UK. In the US that mantle is taken on by men such as Thomas Sowell, Larry Elder, Bill Cosby, etc etc. liberals tend to disregard their concern, because they are "Uncle Toms" or simply "Conservatives" and therefore unworthy of discourse.
You question my "not very convincing" concern about blacks in Britain, and in so doing show not only a smug case of liberal prejudice, but a refusal to admit that those not of a liberal disposition could possibly be concerned about anything other than making money from the poor in between denigrating all those not of indigenous white stock.
Your arrogance and prejudice is astonishing.
You ask why acknowledging the problem to be a black one has any bearing.
The answer, self evidently I would suggest, is that in order to solve a problem, you first have to recognise, and recognise honestly, what the problem is.
Your final paragraph, regarding your amusement about Conservatives who never shut up about individual resposibility pre-supposes two areas that have no application to me, but once again, never let your prejudice get in the way of facts.
I do care about blacks in the UK as it happens. It breaks my heart to see the happy smiling faces of cherubic 6 year old black boys turn into a 16 year old scowling, swaggering exterior demeanour, all the while they are screaming in pain and frustration inside.
I don’t hate blacks, I don’t even hate liberals who made the blacks into what they now overwhelmingly are, but I would like to see every liberal removed from every position of power in this country, before they destroy it totally.
No doubt you think it paranoid to claim liberals (actually the hard left, who liberals cannot see through) have deliberately used blacks to destabilise society. Allow me to give you the following quote by a Mr Chris Mullard, author of "Black Britain" and a lecturer in education at The University of London:
“Already we have started to rebel, to kick out against our jailers…As more black Britons leave school disgruntled, as more black Britons discard their yoke of humility, the ultimate confrontation will become clearer…Blacks will fight with pressure, leaflets, campaigns, demonstrations, fists and scorching resentment which, when peaceful means fail, will explode into street fighting, urban guerrilla warfare, looting, burning and rioting.”
You liberals need to understand that you have been duped by the hard left. Fatherless children are easy prey to Communist revolutionaries such as Mr Mullard, all the more so if they are told every day that all their tribulations are the fault of the white establishment, a point made ceaselessly by the Mr Mullards of this world.
Wake up Noel.
It is peculiar to the black population worldwide (there are always exceptions to the rule) but their policy is for the man to ‘beget’ and ‘begone’. Sad really.
Noel: Having never been to Madame Tussauds
I am one such philistine. Beautiful painting, I have now looked it up on Wiki.
On topic: the prison population in the States is overwhelming black and it is a well known and accepted fact that gang membership – often leading to prison – walks hand-in-hand with fatherless homes.
The welfare solution to poverty in the States largely encouraged fatherless homes because money was available to woman without husbands in the home.
Another unintended consequence of liberal social engineering and a very tragic one for many.
Mike: It sounds like your father had endurance and perseverance, old fashion virtues, values that I aspire to.
A failure in their own community of black males to accept parental responsibility has been an ongoing problem and one which many black educators and social commentators have noted and campaigned against. While there are various factors (people in poverty of any race tend to experience similar issues) it is undeniable that it has hit particularly hard in black communities here in the U.S. and contributes to the epic problems facing the black community.
I do not accept the argument that some might make that this is a result of racial inferiority, but it is certainly a result of a disturbing attitude among young black males that certainly has not improved with the adoption of gansta and rap culture which actually promotes the very things that plague their communities (violence, crime, demeaning women, drugs and promiscuous sex).
Mike – I think Noel was suggesting your father may have been born before the partition (ie before Northern Ireland came into being).
Mahons
I note that Noel has dropped out of arguing with nasty old right wingers who confront him with reality, but note you have dropped in. Congratulations!
You appear to suggest that blacks are afflicted with various patholigies – notably violence, crime, promiscuity, drugs (abuse/dealing?) and "demeaning women" by which of course you mean no doubt THE demeaning of women rather than demeaning women themselves (who exactly are they demeaning – if you get da meaning?). But as a successful lawyer, or at the very least, a lawyer, no doubt you understand the importance of grammatical terminology. Bill Clinton certainly did,
I am rather thinking of introducing you to an acquaintance of mine, not a friend mark you, he is a tad to the right for me, he tends to think of blacks in terms of violence, crime, promiscuity, drugs (abuse/dealing?) and "demeaning women" which I tend to think of as the result of liberal engineering rather than pre-disposed racial traits.
Would you like his email address?
I actually live in what our Boy Mayor calls a "vibrant" neighborhood. "Vibrant" apparently means that a certain level of street crime, including murder, is tolerated by civic authority and the residents.
There have always been fatherless homes. But as long as the percentage is in the single digits, the rest of the community steps up to help the single mother. When the numbers go higher, chaos results.
I’m told by a friend who works in the trenches of social work that the damage is done by the time boys reach age 3. They’re immersed in a culture of fathers who only show up when the welfare check arrives, and a culture which terms mothers as "bitches and hos."
Things may be changing in the US. Welfare reform time limits on benefits have given single mothers the kick in the pants they needed to get out, get educated, and get jobs. And when they discover the pride of earning a paycheck, rather than just being given money and a house, they blossom. The problem is that these women now want responsible men as mates, and there aren’t enough responsible men to go around.
Black men have long dated white women, but it has always been much more rare for black women to date white men. The shortage of "good" black men is changing that social more. What effect that will have on black culture is yet to be seen.
It took 30 years of bad welfare policies to get the black community into the current state. It might take another 30, or more, to restore the black family.
Paul – Since I presume you have so few friends it is generous of you to offer to share one, but I must respectfully decline your offer.
Mahons
You state:
"People of poverty in any race experience similar issues."
Yet again, my dear fellow, I must draw your attention to the importance of the "Dictatorship Of Grammar."
Do you mean by this absurd statement that rich 100 metre sprinters are unaware of their paternal parenthood, whilst 10,000 metre runners are, or indeed are not, and subsequently find themselves in a different boat entirely, which incidentally east coast and West coast Africans appear to find a rather alien olympic environment?
And yes, I have had a few.
Nonetheless, answer my points you liberal bastards.
Paul – Perhaps if you e-mail your friend he can help you. That is what friends are for.
Mahons
It is of course a rather presumptious purview to presume your pretanatural prejudice that Classical Liberals such as myself have such few pals in this modern world that we would feel the need the need to scatter such scarce commidities toward those who have little appreciation of such altruistic action.
Dear God, please let a liberal answer a valid argument without lowering himself (or herself of course!) to such inanities as those espoused by Mahons, or Noel.
Seriously, you destroyers of all that is decent and moral, make a point rather than ducking and diving.
Paul – I’ve made my point clearly, but I can’t make you understand it.
Listen chaps, I’ll say it only once more.
This post was about the disadvantages young black males have in life by dint of not having a father figure.
Noel claims it is racist to raise this fact, despite it being an ongoing discussion amongst genuinely caring blacks in the US and UK.
Mahons chips in with a few badly thought and badly expressed opinions, NONE of which are helpful to the plight of children, because that is all the majority of black criminals are in this country, children, and as such the product of the overarching political ideology that formed them, which is LIBERALISM.
Ignore the problem, and make snide comments toward those who draw attention to the underlying reasons for the problem in the first place.
How very, very liberal.
Paul – only once more? Come on, show some perseverance.
Patty,
"it is a well known and accepted fact that gang membership – often leading to prison – walks hand-in-hand with fatherless homes."
Delinquency of all kinds is correlated with fatherless homes, but then sickness of all kinds is correlated with being around doctors and in a hospital. That doesn’t mean that the cure to all ills is to do away with hospitals and doctors. Correlation is not causation.
Some other inconvenient facts are that this correlation only shows up when the *biological* father is absent because he leaves the home – i.e. it doesn’t matter if there is a stepfather around or not. Plus, it doesn’t show up if the father is absent because he dies (which they tended to do rather often through most of recorded history).
That and other results suggests this is largely or entirely genetic. Certainly those who want to link it to race would find it difficult to argue otherwise ( well let’s face it, they would find it difficult to argue anything, because most of them are knuckledraggers.). It is also just as plausible that homes are more likely to break up because the children are difficult, as the other way round.
A very interesting debate.
Paul, do you agree that there are structural features at the source of poverty within black communities?
Mahons
When you made your observations of black patholigies, you may as well have been on a BNP website.
It is all very well to accuse them of this, but you have no answer to it.
Indeed, you refuse to accept that the reason they have become like this is because of the credo of white LIBERALISM.
What a get out clause. No understanding of the initiation, no solution as to the consequences, but any one who has an understanding is a racist.
So tell me Mahons, and whilst I’m at it Noel, Colm Frank, Dawkins, and all the others I hold responsible for the depravity that has engulfed the West, why do blacks have this particular problem?
Is it a black thing, a cultural thing, a liberal propagandised thing, anything you would care to dwell on?
Have you read Thomas Sowell, Larry Elder etc etc?
Or are you little liberal pods, thinking the thoughts you have been programmed to think, whilst the country you inhabit decays before your eyes?
Just for fucking once, you tell me why you think it is. We "rightists" tell you all the time.
You tell me, and while you’re at it, what is your solution, apart from more of the liberal same.
Really. Tell me.
There you again Mahons, snide comments, when what I really want is a genuine debate about a very serious subjct
Pinky
I am not sure what you mean by "structural features" within the poverty endemic amongst black families.
All I know about blacks in the USA is that they were taken there by force, subjected to gross injustices during the era of slavery and the subsequent Jim Crow years.
When they became, on paper at least, equals to the white man, they still needed help, but help is not what they got.
What they got was liberalism via the democaratic party, and distrust from the republicans.
When I talk of liberalism, I mean welfare dependancy and the patronising liberal attitude that "they" cannot elevate themselves without "our" help.
Thomas Sowell (yes he is black in case you were unaware) talks of deliberate disenmpowerement of blacks at an early age in his book "Inside American Education" where he raises the issue of successful black schools being a rarity in the inner cities, and being IGNORED by the liberal powers that be, who knew that a successful, empowered black community would also mean the end of the Democrat party.
The fact that so called educated lliberals have fallen for a thoroughly indecent and immoral ruse that was designed to keep, for political reasons, blacks who must surely have suffereed enough, mired in poverty and dependant on Liberal largesse in return for voting democrat, is an obscenity.
Paul: They aren’t going to honestly discuss the issue because they don’t know enough about it, and don’t care to inquire or research it.
Snide comments are effective as a drive-by approach to argumentation; they are superficial, of course…but that doesn’t bother the one making the comments.
They are comfortable in their pre-fab liberal reality and really don’t wish to rethink issues that they were happily spoon-fed years ago.
Paul,
Interesting response.
But could you answer my question?
Do you agree that there are structural features at the source of poverty within black communities?
(Structural and institutional features over which the black community have little or no control! )
Paul – See, I knew you didn’t really mean "only once more."
Violence, crime, drugs and other issues do plague black communities, the statistics are there, but I don’t see this problem as a pathology as it appears you do. Such issues are common to areas of white poverty as well. However there is a disproportionate impact on the black community which is certainly not helped by the glorification of criminals and the tolerance of misbehavior, or as the post noted the absence of father figures.
A combination of factors, including racisim, have contributed to the situation. Among the factors are some misguided social programs that instead of alleviating the problem, helped to perpetuate it.
I prefer Sowell to Elders. He has always been an interesting voice even if I don’t always agree with him. With William F. Buckley gone, he is one of the few remaining lights of National Review.
As for the depravity of the West being attributed to myself, I can only claim to have been at it a short while. Anything before 1964 you’ll have to find someone else to blame, and I was only on Earth for roughly half that year.
As for a solution, there are certainly no quick answers, and there is much to do. Approaching the topic without misplaced anger, bias or naivete is a start.
I would suggest to you Paul that while foul language has its place, and I consider myself an artist in the use of it, this site is not one of those places. Surely that is a lesson any good father would teach.
Patty,
Why don’t YOU try discussing the issue instead of making a donkey out of yourself, jumping in from the side-lines with nothing intelligent to say; trying to insult people who make ‘snide comments,’ by making your own snide comments.
Let’s have your intelligent contribution to the debate-ANY debate.
Pinky: "Why don’t YOU try discussing the issue instead of making a donkey out of yourself, jumping in from the side-lines with nothing intelligent to say; trying to insult people who make ‘snide comments,’ by making your own snide comments."
Now that’s the pot calling the kettle black! LOL
Mahons
I think that blacks in America and Britain should be taught less about being black, and more about maths, English, French, Physics etc, etc.
They could then equal the white statistics amongst the successful middle classes.
Do you not agree with this?
if you do not, why not. (Admitting that they are of no use in the "new oppressed proletariat" revolution would be a start)
And if you do, do you not realise that you have rejected liberal educational ideology and adopted a "conservative" ideology instead?
Patty – By all means jump in, your stupidity will convince Mr. Weston to join the NAACP.
Frank: "That and other results suggests this is largely or entirely genetic. Certainly those who want to link it to race would find it difficult to argue otherwise ( well let’s face it, they would find it difficult to argue anything, because most of them are knuckledraggers.). It is also just as plausible that homes are more likely to break up because the children are difficult, as the other way round."
I read Clarence Thompson bio – he was raised in as hard scrable environment and attributes his success, and personal discipline to this man.
The black family in the 1960′s was much more cohesive than it is now. I have heard the "fatherless" statistics and the rise can be linked directly to the welfare state created (by liberal do-gooders). Women received benefits per fatherless child and many families broke up because the black man could not find employment, and the govt. would give child support if he were not around.
In the case of healthy life skills, education and a mother and father (or facsimile, like grandparents) creates children with good habits who don’t join gangs. There is no gene that compels one into prison.
I don’t think there is any evidence that it is nature, not nurture. Genetic, not social.
this man = his grandfather
Mahons: You are an artist with the ad hominem.
Careful you start to become a parody of yourself.
Mahons: meant to write:
Be careful that you don’t become a parody of yourself!
Paul – Frankly all students could benefit from better emphasis on fundamentals such as English, Science, History, Math and Foreign languages (We Yanks call it math not maths).
You are presuming some sort of revolutionary advocacy or liberal education agenda upon me (and no doubt anyone who doesn’t agree with you) that simply isn’t there.
But equal education is only one factor. We are improving in some areas and failing in others when it comes to race, but overall we are making progress.
You are all dancing on the head of a pin.
Nearly three million children were evacuated from the major cities across the UK in 1939.
Not only did they leave fathers behind but whole families were broken up and scattered around the countryside for years.
Did this lead to the delinquency of a new generation
of young people? No, not one bit.
Just Google ‘Evacuees’ and read all the stories about the trials and tribulations of this generation, esp. on the recent re-union of all those caught up in it on the recent BBC prog.
So it is patently absurd for Mike Cunningham to equate his white parental upbringing with those problems among black families.
The disparity between the two racial groups is enormous.
"I think that blacks in America and Britain should be taught less about being black, and more about maths, English, French, Physics etc, etc.
They could then equal the white statistics amongst the successful middle classes.
Do you not agree with this?"
Not really. Why don’t we have more whites put into sprinting classes then they could achieve success rates equal to those of black sprinters? Can that work?
Patty – you came in with a personal attack and then complain about being attacked. Priceless.
Who did I personally attack, Mahons? You? I was explaining to Paul Weston how the "snide comment" style of argumentation worked at ATW because he seemed to be getting a little worked up over it.
I don’t like to see people tied up in knots over nothing – and through away sarcasm ranks as "nothing" in my eyes.
Bernard and Allan: both comments very interesting. (seriously) I have nothing to add to them at the moment.
through away = throw away.
Your last paragraph was wonderfully patronising Mahons, but you must understand that foul language is the preserve of we Brits. We are taught from an early age, via the Uber-Liberal BBC, that without a significant input of F****s per paragraph, we will never attain a salary of 6 million quid a year in order to abuse the license paying public.
Although we only appear to be a few months apart in age, I appreciate your paternal advice, and will fucking desist as of now.
You do, finally, make an argument, which appears to consist of "misplaced social programs" which I would argue are A: inspired by liberalism and B: not misplaced in the least, and you are a dupe if you have fallen for them, let alone having no argument for what to do next.
I shudder to think what you would have done if you were a German battalion commander, watching the landing craft approaching the beaches of Normandy….
Pinky, I do not believe i have had the pleasure of crossing swords with you before, and look forward to it with great anticipation.
I gather you are disinclined to approach the subject of black disadvantage from the point of view that reality requires, in order that you may favour a more dialectic approach to the issue at hand.
As such, you reveal yourself to be a Communist, or at least a Marxist, in which case I will find it very hard to argue with you.
You ask why? Because i am a moral person. Lenin pointed out that morality was ANYTHING which advanced the cause of communism, so you will forgive me for resisting my initial naive intention of arguing with you as a rational, compassionate human being.
I would ask you one question, which if you answer honestly could lead to further verbosity:
Do you think blacks are deliberately kept down, in order to further the future marxist revolution on the backs of the newly oppressed?
Now, THAT was brilliant, Paul! I don’t expect Mahons or Pinky to have any answer, however.
Mahons
You stated:
"You are presuming some sort of revolutionary advocacy or liberal education agenda upon me (and no doubt anyone who doesn’t agree with you) that simply isn’t there."
Leaving aside the nonsensical sentance that I’m sure you would not make if you were concluding a multi million dollar deal that you lawyer types appear to do as part of your job description, you could not be more wrong.
If you wish to argue about the liberal ideology endemic in state education today, then read the following books:
"The Closing Of The American Mind" Allan Bloom
"Brainwashed" Ben Shapiro
"Illiberal Education" Dinesh D’Souza
"The Great betrayal" Brian Cox
The Conspiracy of Ignorance" Martin L Gross
"The Cloning of The American Mind" B K Eakman.
"Inside American Education" Thomas Sowell.
Assuming you read these, indeed absorb these, we can converse along the lines of the one sentance you threw in the ring.
Until then, I suggest that perhaps you restrain yourself.
Pinky, I do not believe i have had the pleasure of crossing swords with you before, and look forward to it with great anticipation.
‘I gather you are disinclined to approach the subject of black disadvantage from the point of view that reality requires, in order that you may favour a more dialectic approach to the issue at hand.
As such, you reveal yourself to be a Communist, or at least a Marxist, in which case I will find it very hard to argue with you.’
Paul, will you answer the question I posed to you, or not?
Do you agree that there are structural features at the source of poverty within black communities?
(Structural and institutional features over which the black community have little or no control
Pinky: If I may make one observation of your very unique style of argumentation..
You tend to ask questions. And then become very insistent that the question or questions be answered before you will engage in any debate.
I don’t know if you have noticed, but this makes for a one-sided debate. You probably don’t intend this but often it seems as if you wish to "trap" the other person with your questions.
Wouldn’t a more open approach be more illuminating?
Bernard
I hate to disagree with you (I really do!) but the evacuees of wartime London were not rehoused in welfare dependant single mothers homes in Totleigh-Upon-Wold.
If they had been, the well spoken young chap chap from Fulham may well have ended up as Northern chav, full of violence, bitter, and chips.
Pinky
I really would like to answer you, but am rather in the dark as to how to!
Could you perhaps give me an example of what exactly these structural and institutional features are?
Seriously.
Patty – as if you would understand.
‘You tend to ask questions. And then become very insistent that the question or questions be answered before you will engage in any debate.
I don’t know if you have noticed, but this makes for a one-sided debate. You probably don’t intend this but often it seems as if you wish to "trap" the other person with your questions.
Wouldn’t a more open approach be more illuminating?’
I disagree with you Patty. Asking questions is a way of narrowing in on certain aspects of the debate, maybe even finding some common ground from which to launch a debate.
Rather than say, jumping in off the side-lines with nothing valuable to say at all, expect maybe poke with a stick and make people angry so that they will pay you the much needed attention that your ‘arguments’ fail to get you! But enough about you!
I wonder will Paul answer my question.
Paul – A German Battalion Commander in the Second World War would more likely have your point of view on racial matters than mine, at least publically.
As for paternal advice, if offered it was unintended, no doubt like the actual paternity from which you came.
Mahons: You have a future in fortune cookies.
Paul -
What an odd reply. You haven’t had a few early jars this evening by any chance?
The subject of the post was absentee fathers. (or non-existent ones).
Both happened in Britain in the two world wars, esp. the first, but it did not lead to family delinquency as witnessed today.
‘Both happened in Britain in the two world wars, esp. the first, but it did not lead to family delinquency as witnessed today.’
Bernard, it is a good point. Do you think that maybe it was because there were good family structures/extended family members/ neoghbours etc., available to help rear the children?
Paul Weston
Calm down, first of all. To answer your question, it’s a poverty thing.
Mahons
You appear to have no argument to the points I raised other than calling me a Nazi, followed by an astonishing slur on my parenthood!
Although your vicious, slanderous response leaves me unsure how to respond, I would say the following:
Both my grandfathers fought in the First World War, two uncles in the second, one of whom lost a leg in a spitfire, and both my parents, including the unintended father (you disgraceful little man Mahons) were wartime evacuees.
Uncle Dicky (he of the one leg left behind in a spitfire over France) and I got along famously, along with all the rest of my immediate family who sacrificed a great deal in their fight against Nazism, especially along political lines. It is only a shame he is not alive today to take you to task over your monsterous allegation about "racial matters"
As to my parenthood, well words fail me, they really do.
I demand an immediate retraction and an apology, failing which I shall contact David Vance and ask him to remove you as quickly as possible from a site that up until now has been merely boisterous, but you managed to tip into the obscene and slanderous.
Bernard
Both my parents were evacuated during the war, both went to large houses in Yorkshire run along very autoritarian and paternal lines, by women AND men who were too old for service.
Hence my point, they were still exposed to male guidance.
And no, I have not had a few, I have had a lot!
Paul – e-mail him at your earliest convenience, if having made a number of jokes, you can’t take one.
Pinky
Please give an example of what you mean, and I will be glad to answer it.
I was not reared on dialectilism, so please be patient.
Mahons
You consider the following to be a joke?
"As for paternal advice, if offered it was unintended, no doubt like the actual paternity from which you came."
I consider such a remark incomprehensively offensive. Do you honestly think it not, and do you honestly think you have done nothing but lower yourself in the eyes of all decent people on this site?
You clearly think not, so I will have to contact David Vance.
If I find your real name and address you can expect to be hearing from my Solicitor.
Paul: I’m not in any way saying that you should NOT be offended by Mahons, but my experience at ATW has been that free speech trumps being offended.
(as long as the free speech is not practiced in a troll-like fashion. And I’m not referring to the writer named "Troll" although others might feel that that would have been appropriate in this instance.)
Paul: You’re going to call your solicitor?
I hope you are drinking and not serious. This is so over-the-top.
So after YOU urging him on all throughout the thread, and helping, encouraging and making suggestions in the condesecending name-calling Paul engaged in through-out this whole thread, it is NOW over the top Patty.
There’s a word for you Patty, but I am too polite to write it.
Paul – by all means contact him (or her). Explain that you want to sue someone whom you wrote was a bastard for responding in kind (though with more wit).
Paul
mahons is one of the good guys. His comment is part of the bench-clearing brawl charm of the place.
I hear what you’re saying, but not in the same way.
Pinky: "So after YOU urging him on all throughout the thread, and helping, encouraging and making suggestions in the condesecending name-calling Paul engaged in through-out this whole thread, it is NOW over the top Patty."
earth to Pinky:
Debating a topic (even if one causes offense, or is offended) and calling a solicitor are two different, distinct things.
I believe in free speech. And yes, I think you often badger with questions rather than engage in debate, and I think that
Mahons should drop the ad hominem habit — but that doesn’t mean that I’m not going to defend your right to do so.
Calling a solicitor? Trying to shut someone up? That’s just way out of line.
David Vance
Dear David
This is a copy of an internal email I have just sent to you.
On page two of a recent article entitled "When Did You Last See Your Father" Mahons intimated that I was at best a member of the Wermacht, at worse a Nazi, which I consider to be a false representation of my political views, indeed the diametric opposite of all I hold dear, and could therefore be deemed to be libellous.
He followed this up with a quite extraordinary attack on my parentage:
"As for paternal advice, if offered it was unintended, no doubt like the actual paternity from which you came."
This goes much further than robust dialogue, and I would ask that you give Mahons an official warning over such obscene conduct, failing which I shall press you for contact details in order that I may seek redress through the courts.
Yours Sincerely
Paul Weston
Oh wow
Paul
Wrong move.
Over and out.
–
Back in
A substantial number of pregnancies are unintended, including those involving married couples. How this small comment could be seen as "obscene" or hurtful or defamatory in any way is beyond me, and, I suspect, beyond most thinking people. It doesn’t pass any plausible test.
Paul Weston -
Mahons is a fine chap. It’s easy to misconstrue something on a thread and not take it how it was meant.
The subject in hand – well said. You speak the truth.
Paul: What is your position on free speech?
Do you think that freedom of speech includes the freedom to offend?
In fact, wouldn’t you agree that the only time free speech really matters is when it possibly offends someone?
Patty
Yes I believe in Freedom of speech, even if it offends.
However, If i was standing in a bar, right now with Mahons, he would not be standing.
Alas, I cannot hit him (being called a Nazi is legally libellous, but I would not deck him for it) but casting aspersions upon a man’s parentage whilst hiding behind the cover of an anonymous blog is the action of a coward and a weasel and certainly not a man.
As such, perhaps I can get him legally, although I would drop everything for just one, clean punch….
Paul seems to have become very angry and annoyed here tonight because he has not had the responses to his arguments that he would want. He isn’t interested in genuine debate. He names several people here (including me) all of whom he doesn’t know from Aadam, accuses us all of personally destroying the lives of millions of children , calling us ‘bastards’ too, and then reacts ludicrously when Mahons responds with a similar degree of personalisation.
Advice for you Paul when here on ATW – Hit back with wit not writs.
I refer to my comments of long ago — this time yesterday about my problems with English libel/slander law. ( which I think the Irish have inherited as well )
I can understand how Paul got upset, though I think that I and most others would have shrugged such a comment off
But its the sign of a deeply flawed system that someone could even think about suing over a nothing like this.
There is much to admire about English law, but the libel and slander part of it has terrible flaws.
And having said that, Paul would be laughed out of court if he tried to waste anyone’s time with this. Even in the lawsuit-happy English libel courts.
Pete Moore
You said:
"Mahons is a fine chap. It’s easy to misconstrue something on a thread and not take it how it was meant."
Mahons said:
"As for paternal advice, if offered it was unintended, no doubt like the actual paternity from which you came."
In my book, anyone capable of making such a remark cannot possibly be construed as "a fine chap."
Really, how can anybody possibly think so?
I can shout, swear, insult and patronise with the best them, but i would never, NEVER make such a cowardly, obscene and disgusting remark as that.
Insult me, but don’t insult my father you piece of dirt Mahons, you had better hope we never meet face to face.
- Hit back with wit not writs.
LOL Colm, brilliant line.
Paul: There was a case many years ago in which the ACLU defended a racist’s group (I believe it was the KKK) right to speak. I was outraged at the time, and I didn’t understand the reasoning behind the ACLU’s defense of this despicable hateful organization.
I understand now. The ACLU was defending a classic liberal value, freedom of speech. Even if such speech offends.
TImes have changed; the ACLU now litigates against religious symbols on public property. And the classic liberal – as Alan Bloom points out in the book you reference "The Closing of the American Mind" has been replaced by liberals comfortable with political correctness and the shutting down of diverse views on campus and elsewhere.
Colm: Where have you been???? Don’t ever be AWOL again.
Paul – We agree I would not be standing, I would be sitting on a barstool.
I’d happily buy you a drink and explain to you the error of your ways. However, to land a successful blow …if the Weston honor still demands same, I would suggest that you aim for my middle head, of the three heads you no doubt would be seeing in your current intoxicated condition. Only then could you be certain of inflicting physical discomfort upon my person. Just don’t spill my beer. That is a crime for which I could never forgive.
Colm
I hit back with rational argument, which Mahons failed to counter, hence his descent into abusing my family.
Check his comments, no argument, just cowardly and obscene abuse.
wit not writ… in a nutshell.
Paul – We agree I would not be standing, I would be sitting on a barstool.
Or drunk under the table, by some fine Irish girl.
Pinky – Where else would one find them?
LOL
LOL
Well…….. anyway!
I got a giggle out of this thread. Paul Weston does have a point I think.
People have said rough things to me here and elsewhere. I know if we were face to face they would not dare – in a thouasand years – repeat those slurs. Are they cowards? YES they are.
That said, Paul, thowing a hissy fit only brings more jibes your way.
The following made me laugh quite a bit……
Paul: "I demand an immediate retraction and an apology, failing which I shall contact David Vance and ask him to remove you as quickly as possible"
Mahons: "Paul – e-mail him at your earliest convenience"
Paul
Don’t forget that you named several of us here and called us ‘Liberal Bastards’ and held us personally responsible for destroying the lives of millions. That is hardly rational argument. You got angry with Mahons purely becasue he did not share the same attitude as you towards the cause of delinquency in young black men. You got his back up and he responded in kind. As to his comment about your parentage, it should not be taken seriously for the simple reason that he is not making a serious accusation. How could he be, when he does not know you or your family at all. When such an accusation is made by someone who believes it is true and intends it to be taken that way, then is a serious matter. Mahons however, uttered it simply to wind up someone he doesn’t know at all, and he succeeded.
Is anyone planning on suing Paul? Perhaps a class action lawsuit is in order!
Anyone here licensed to practice law in England?
Patty,
"In the case of healthy life skills, education and a mother and father (or facsimile, like grandparents) creates children with good habits who don’t join gangs. There is no gene that compels one into prison."
Never said there was. Nor is there any upbringing that compels one into prison.
"I don’t think there is any evidence that it is nature, not nurture. Genetic, not social."
There is plenty of evidence for both. It is just that there is no evidence – and I mean zero – that the nurture part that has any long term effect is coming from the parents. Bernard has already given you two examples of absentee fatherhood not leading to delinquency. There are any number of others.
Look at any child in the street – who do they dress like and who they act like? Their parents? Come off it. Any child who showed up at school imitating his father would be bullied by his peers, sent to special tuition by his teachers, and if he did it at home he would be disciplined by his father for impertinence. Children spend most of their childhood being told NOT to act like their parents – don’t play with matches, don’t smoke, don’t drink whisky, don’t drive the car.
"I have heard the "fatherless" statistics and the rise can be linked directly to the welfare state created (by liberal do-gooders). "
I have also heard conservatives argue that births to single mothers can be attributed to this, as can the involvement of a string of stepfathers. The trouble is when you argue that welfare money is an incentive to everyone but the biological father, it starts to sound like horseshit.
We’re also supposed to believe that the UK ‘liberal’ education is crap, and yet in 2007 it was ranked something like 10th globally by a US metric. We’re supposed to scratch our heads about the gap between black and white educational achievement, and ignore that a similar gap has opened up recently between that of men and women (women are ahead). We’re supposed to believe that to attribute poor outcomes to poverty is ‘marxist’ – yet controlling for SES makes many other correlations vanish, and a recent study shows that the EEG scans of poor children aged 9 to 10 resemble those of stroke victims. Oh and normal function can be restored by playing stimulating games, which conservatives tell us will turn them into zombies.
Ach Petr, wise up would you? You bogtrotter you!
Is anyone planning on suing Paul? Perhaps a class action lawsuit is in order!
LOL Oh jaysus! LOL
I want to sue Paul and to collect punitive damages. Big time. I love my punitive damages. Though I think thats mostly an American thing.
Get Jacoby & Meyers on the phone,stat
Hi All,
Been busy all day and have just caught up with this thread.
Just a few points.
1. Being called a Nazi, a Commie, a whatever is not nice and unpleasant when one’s views are diametrically opposite – but I think the mature response is indeed wit, not writ.
2. I don’t like references to one’s family on ATW and am sure that Mahons, as an esteemed contributor here, did not mean to cause hurt in that way. I hope he will make that clear. I will damn a person’s politics but believe the family must remain outside the debate arena.
3. Tough and opposing viewpoints are fine by me. Just try and keep a sense of perspective on things folks, I value you all and do not like to see rows and unpleasantness (Unless of course I start them in which case what could be more mature
)
I ask all to think of the Season we are in and be kind to each other whilst tough on the arguments.
Deal?
Pinky – Stick it!!
Although I think Paul is over reacting, if he’s offended he’s offended. I don’t think he deserves to be ridiculed. Although, as I said, I did laugh quite a lot while reading this thread.
Deal, David.
Re point 1. – You can call me a Commie anytime! lol
Maybe we need an ATW court – made up of say a panel of the 3 wisest fairest and most honest regulars (naturally I would be amongst them). The panel would try offenders if someone complained about a comment, with some imaginative forms of punishment – a guilty ‘convict’ could be required to upload a picture of themselves naked before being allowed to comment again for example
lol Colm.
I just looked at the title of this thread!
!!!!
Pinky -
This post is a bit like an Irish wedding…everybody talking, nobody listening.
You ask: "Do you think that maybe it was because there were good family structures/extended family members etc etc.
Answer: A good stable family IS, IS SOCIETY. It is what makes it united and durable.
That is why Christian Europe has been so successful in the past, but is now broken up and disintegrating by the inclusion (among other factors) of alien African & Asian sub-cultures.
David Vance
David
You state that Mahons, as……"as an esteemed contributor here, did not mean to cause hurt in that way. I hope he will make that clear. I will damn a person’s politics but believe the family must remain outside the debate arena."
Thankyou for that, and I am in full agreement.
Like you, I trust he will make such a view clear in the very near future.
David – Fair enough.
No slight was ever intended towards any person’s actual family member by me, as to be sure I have no actual knowledge of any of those people, let alone the various characters on this thread, whatever their names. The offended person, who had no qualms claiming others (including myself) were bastards, apparently takes issue with being mocked back. A point I think he misses.
Pinky
I just looked at the title of this thread!
!!!!
being a bit distracted, I had totally forgotten the title.
Oh well, it raises a smile.
As I said earlier, give me some guidance so I can answer your question.
A good stable family IS, IS SOCIETY. It is what makes it united and durable
Bernard, I agree with that.
But that is not to say, that traditional family structures i.e., man, woman and children are the only stable families. Or that White Europeans are the only stable families.
There are all creeds and kinds of good stable families.
Mahons
That does constitute an apology.
You can call me a bastard, a commie or a Nazi, which technically, may or may not be libellous. I do not really care
What you cannot say, legally or illegally is:
"As for paternal advice, if offered it was unintended, no doubt like the actual paternity from which you came."
Again, I demand an apology, not equivocation.
Paul,
Earlier in the thread you appeared to put me into some category of opinion on this matter.
I asked you the question, in a sincere attempt to discuss the issue, and for no other reason.
You see maybe I do not belong in the category you attempted to place me in. I am very much a moderate on this issue, because while I believe there are still existing structural and institutional issues confronting minorities, in the US and to a lesser extent the UK, I also think that a sense of personal responsibility for your family, how it behaves etc etc, is vital to the healthy existence of any family unit and indeed society.
Does that make any sense to you?
David Vance
David
If Mahons refuses to apologise, what is the next step?
If Mahons refuses to apologise, what is the next step?
Paul, we all have a pint?
Paul
The next step is to graciously drop the matter. You’ve made your point , acknowledged by David and accepted by Mahons. You won’t get anywhere by appearing to be inflexible and pompous about it.
Pinky
Yes it does.
Firstly, I apologise for jumping to conclusions.
Secondly, I agree that a sense of responsibility is vital for a healthy family, and as removed from the tentacles of the state as far as possible.
I assume you mean the institutional and structural issues that confront minorities are those in place from an early age, and difficult to escape from.
It is a truly desperate situation. To wean them off dependancy requires tough love, to leave them where they are, children in adults bodies in an adult world, is heart-rending.
‘To wean them off dependancy requires tough love,’
Please explain what you mean by dependency? And how you would wean anyone off dependency.
Colm
I suppose it does appear to be inflexible and pompous, but would it really be to much to ask Mahons just to say sorry?
Does he really think his remark was acceptable when I get the feeling that no one else here does?
Paul,
Wy can’t you just drop it?
Your use of vulgairty was extremely offensive to me, but you don’t see me going on about it.
Pinky
Single mothers, dependant on welfare are effectively married to the state, or to big brother (that is why the left favour it so, it gives them CONTROL not to mention votes)
They need to make a living wage and stop looking to their surrogate state husband to support them.
How you do it, how you wean them off it, I don’t know, but their children who are born into welfare dependancy have en even smaller chance of escaping the poverty and squalor they end up in.
If Mahons refuses to apologise, what is the next step?
A surgical nuclear strike?
So would it be fair to assume we can agree, that addressing poverty might be a good place to start?
A surgical nuclear strike?
LOL Petr- mind his pint!
David Vance
David
It appears that Mahons will not apologise for his outrageous remark, and I note you are not entirely about this.
If he apologises I will continue to read and make my small input to your site.
If he won’t then I shall not.
As Mahons has a far higher profile on ATW I suppose it will be me that goes.
Ah well, what the hell.
‘Single mothers, dependant on welfare are effectively married to the state, or to big brother (that is why the left favour it so, it gives them CONTROL not to mention votes)’
Paul,
I think it is a hideous thing to claim that anyone or group is sinister enough to do what you describe. Maybe it is misguided good intention?
Besides we all depend on the state in one way or another. Do you use roads? Footpaths? Water? Sewerage? Clean air?
Paul, you are painting yourself into a corner. I think you said you had a few jars before – probably you will have a different perspective on this tomorrow.
I agree with Frank. Don’t do it Paul, for the love of God don’t do it!
Paul
You seem like a stand up guy.
Let it go.
Stay or depart as you wish, but let this go.
Pinky -
Besides we all depend on the state in one way or another. Do you use roads? Footpaths? Water? Sewerage? Clean air?
Do you rely on the State for your bread and tins of beans? For your petrol? Your computer and carpet?
No?
So why ‘depend’ on the State for anything? The State isn’t capable of delivering anything efficiently for you.
Seen the state of the roads lately? Even with the tens of billions the State shakes down motorists for each year?
Footpaths? How the hell did humanity ever travel from one settlement to the next without the State?!!
Water? Why depend on the collective for your water when you rely on Tesco for your bread?
Madness.
Hi Paul,
Sorry about my lack of response, I was doing a live blog on Biased BBC.
I very much value your input here and hope you will stay.
Thanks David.
All Mahons has to do is to apologise.
All Hell has to do is freeze over.
I’m confused
Didn’t Paul Weston call people bastards and didn’t Mahons make a joke that effectivley called Paul a bastard?
How come one is ok and the other is a sueing matter?
Or have I missed something?
As usual, you didn’t miss a thing Aileen.
I don’t mean to offend anyone but this Paul/Mahons squabble brings to mind the Danish Mohammed Cartoon Brouhaha.
All that’s missing is a riot or two, and maybe an ATW flag burning.
>>Didn’t Paul Weston call people bastards and didn’t Mahons make a joke that effectivley called Paul a bastard?<<
LOL. Well spotted, Aileen!
Calling people “liberal bastards” is rude, crude and unnecessary, for which I apologise, chastened and sober.
Saying “…As for paternal advice, if offered it was unintended, no doubt like the actual paternity from which you came…." goes far further than rude or crude.
It is spiteful, cowardly, vicious, deeply unpleasant and meant to cause hurt and only hurt. A truly disgusting thing to say.
Anyone who sees some equivalence between “liberal bastards” and this, is living on a different moral planet to the one I inhabit.
Mahons and I have differing political viewpoints, which has led to acrimonious exchanges over the last couple of years.
But when my son died, Mahons offered his condolences, and when his twins were born I offered my congratulations.
That is why I find his remark so astonishing in its viciousness. If he had been a total stranger it would have been water off a ducks back. But he is not a total stranger.
If I felt there was anything to be gained by staying at ATW perhaps I could backtrack and claim that drink overtook my sensibilities.
But I see little point in conversing with people who seem to have so little sense of decency and morality, especially when much of what I write about is the moral bankrupty that afflicts the soft (for the moment) socialist West today.
David Vance would sort of like me to stay, but has not answered internal emails and is not prepared to push Mahons to apologise, which would not do much good anyway because Mahons, quite extraordinarily, feels he has nothing to apologise for, thereby exposing the true content of his liberal character.
So I take my leave from ATW, and will write of the continuing liberal murder of the West at sites where argument is argument and vicious abuse is recognised for what it is and dealt with accordingly.
So long, and thanks for all the barbs.
Oh Daphne, et tu brute?
Mahons -
Saying sorry is not the same as apologising, and saying either is a sign of strength, not weakness.
Remember the opprobrium heaped on the heads of Brand/Ross when they clammed up and sulked at having to say something that irked their self esteem.
"Never apologise, never explain" – A Rightworld Political mantra.
"Rightworld"?
Could give a number of examples the other way, but I don’t feel like it.
If mahons is right politically, then Troll is the next Dalai Lama.
I think Bernard has a point.
I made a comment some weeks back to which The Phantom took offense, although none was meant. I withdrew it and said sorry, which was an easy thing to do really. Also, it defused the whole affair instantly.
Some time later Phantom made a comment to me that I found offensive. Again, it was withdrawn and the matter put to rest.
I think Paul’s position is weakened by the fact that he was calling people "bastards", still I think it wouldn’t kill Mahons to say sorry. It’s just one tiny winy little word!
"If mahons is right politically"
Totally off topic but I think most Europeans would consider someone like Mahons as centre-right.
Correct, but to keep things from getting too confusing use of such labels might be kept to a minimum.
Even to many Europeans, an antiwar NY guy who voted for Obama does not bring the adjective "right" immediately to mind.
True!
While I like to see Paul contributing to ATW, I really think he is taking himself far too seriously here, and can only be faking any hurt felt from Mahons’ comment as it was obviously just a bit of steam.
If Paul can’t drink and comment without making a fool of himself by such things as threats of legal action, he should either stop drinking or stop commenting.
Interesting post.
Obama addressed the issue of absentee black fathers in the run up to the election. Specifically black fathers.
"CHICAGO — Addressing a packed congregation at one of the city’s largest black churches, Senator Barack Obama on Sunday invoked his own absent father to deliver a sharp message to African-American men, saying, “We need fathers to realize that responsibility does not end at conception.”"
“Too many fathers are M.I.A, too many fathers are AWOL, missing from too many lives and too many homes,” Mr. Obama said, to a chorus of approving murmurs from the audience. “They have abandoned their responsibilities, acting like boys instead of men. And the foundations of our families are weaker because of it.”
The speech was striking for its setting, and in how Mr. Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, directly addressed one of the most sensitive topics in the African-American community: whether absent fathers bore responsibility for some of the intractable problems afflicting black Americans.
Paul, I think your sense of "outrage" is fake and based on prior arguments. In fact, looking at the thread from the beginning, I think you came in, swinging, looking for a fight and you got one.
Note, I did not realize that you and Mahons had a history together, and when I originally explained "snide comments" to you I was trying to offer you cover in what looked like a fight of you against some perhaps unexpected hostility.
For you say that Mahon’s words caused you intense internal pain – that they somehow differ from your use of "liberal bastards" – reminds me of the phony Muslim outrage at the Danish cartoons.
The fact that you claim to be fighting the bankruptcy of Western civilization while trying to close down Mahon’s free speech by threatening to sue him in court because you do not like him, because you are supposedly offended – offends me!
You need to reread "The Closing of the American Mind" and take a good look in the mirror.
The source for that is here
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/16/us/politics/15cnd-obama.html
and as noted by the NYT it’s a lot easier for a black man to speak out on the topic than a white fella.
Alison
I remember those remarks, which were important and I think very well received by most black people. As are some of the similar comments made over the years by Bill Cosby the (thinking) humorist / comedian.
Obama’s remarks didn’t please Jesse Jackson though, and led to his vulgar remarks in the TV studio
Welcome, BTW. Assume you’re long back home?
–
I’m going to let the Paul thing die. Wish everyone well, but damn, life is short enough as it is.
I actually agreed with Jackson on that.
"I want to cut his nuts off" he said, "He’s talking down to black people"
And he was too. Jackson got it right and his remarks were funny, not vulgar.
Obama wasn’t talking down, he was talking straight. And I think most black people, especially women, just loved to hear such talk.
And the local black community, led by Jesse Jr. came close to cutting Jesse Sr ‘s nuts off for saying that.
"came close to cutting Jesse Sr ‘s nuts off"
Such vulgarity Phantom!
)
I disagree.
Bad image, I know
And I guess Jesse Jr has other things to worry about now.
This thing will unravel a lot more, as people squeal on each other. I’m hearing a lot of talk about Rahm Emanuel these days.
I don’t follow. What does he have to worry about now?
There are reports that someone offered to pay the Gov if Jesse Jr got the US Senate seat vacated by Obama. ( Supposedly Jesse Jr was "Candidate Number 5 " )
Which Jesse Jr. denies
Lets see Paul, my review of your comments indicates insults of me professionally, morally, intellectually, and grammatically. You wrote that I am among the destroyers of all that is decent and moral, lumped me in with the depraved, claimed I was a liberal pod, a liberal bastard, snide and a dupe (dropping a few unneccessary f bombs into the mix).
I am sorry that you have taken my joking reply as a serious matter. It was not intended that way, it was intended to respond comically to your over the top attacks. It may very well have been rude, crude and offensive, but it was a joke. It holds no more validity than a joke that someone lives on a different planet.
I am sorry that you are upset, even though I think you are wrong and overreacting. However, one never know a the place someone else is in, and it would actually bother me if some feud continues over all this.
What I will do is suggest we end this argument, and I will agree to offer a symbolic handshake to end it.
Ok Phantom. I did hear something about that now that you say it.
There’s a whole lot of dealings that the Jackson family has been involved,in.
A boycott of Anheuser Busch by Jesse Sr. was quickly ended, and soon thereafter one of the other sons got a franchise to distribute Budweiser beer. He is now very rich.
The Jacksons could teach poor Blagojevich how the dirty politics game is played. They’ve become rich doing this sort of thing, and he’s going to the pen.
Mahons
Accepted.
Noel:
You have a point.
Good man.
Cheers for a good weekend.
Paul
Glad that things have resolved themselves and I’m not trying to revive them but I think that we must live in different worlds re the bastart comments.
Calling someone a bastard is stark. There are different ways of expressing it. Instead of assertion by implication and makeing you make the inference.
A bit like the chant "whose your father referee" – ie, you’re a bastard
or "the crown raised questions about the referees parentage" i.e. he’s a bastard (inference again)
Mahons strikes me as someone who like me loves words and their various uses.
He took the stated bastard comment and batted it back,
The difference to me wasn’t in scale of visciousness or intention to wound but in elequonece and in making you make the inference.
Mahons was basically just amusing himself returning your serve in his own prefered style IMO :0)