Tuesday, November 23, 2010

X-Post: The guy at American Power is Not Entitled to His Own Facts

An American Niiiiihilist blog x-post

In a recent post over there at AmPow, Donalde launches into yet another attack on me and this blog, but once again does so against an enemy of his own imagination.

Unlike our friend over there, we will quote the words Donalde writes, rather than substitute in our own impressions and imaginings (all the better to demonize; Donalde couldn't do what he does if those who read his posts insisted that he provide solid evidence of his accusations (quotes, links), rather than telling them what he says his "enemy's" words are, and what they mean. I sometimes wonder whether he thinks they're too stupid to see what he sees if he doesn't feed this opinions and prejudices to them like pablum, or that he knows that they're smart enough to see through his bullshit, if he actually gives them all the facts.) Let's begin.
I wrote previously: "I think the folks at American Nihilist owe me an apology."

And I'm renewing the call.
The folks at American Nihilist don't owe Donalde a thing. Nothing I've written about him is less than honest, and even my opinions are backed with quotes and other supporting evidence. (While Donalde says his problem is with the blog as a whole, his hissy fit of the moment only names me and discusses my posts.)
And to be clear, I've been subject to enough racial slurs in my life to let a couple go. Indignities are part of living in a diverse society with real differences in race, class, and ideological persuasion.
I couldn't say what slurs Donalde has or has not been subject to, or how he's reacted. All I know for sure is that the supposed slur about which Donalde has been whining for the last few months, as said by this PaleScott guy, didn't seem to me to be a slur at all... (And believing that Donalde has been crying over a whole lotta nothing is the extent of my big bad RAAAAACIST crime...)
But when leftist go around calling people out as RAAAAACIST, I'd at least expect some consistency, honesty, and intellectual integrity. In the case of James Casper --- a.k.a. "Repsac3" --- that's obviously asking way too much.
Nonsense. I quoted the words Donalde wrote, and explained why I believe these ebonic pronouncements and photoshops posted on Donalde's blog portray bigoted stereotypes of black folks as uneducated drug abusers.
Some folks will remember that Repsac3 unveiled is bigoted race-centric view of the world during The Pale Scot controversy: "American Power: It's Come to This: Progressives Reduced to Racist Slurs Against American Power" The comments left at BJ Keefe's blog were so bad that BJ Keefe himself disowned them, while nevertheless hypocritically citing a First Amendment principle to allow such hatred to remain in his comment thread.
Anybody wonder why neither of those links quotes anything I said, or indeed shows any evidence at all of this supposed "bigoted, race-centric view of the world" that Donalde accuses me of having? It's simple. It only exists in Donalde's mind.

What I actually said was, I didn't think Pale Scot's comment was racist. Plain. Simple. Hard to misunderstand, unless one is being willfully obtuse. I don't believe it's RAAAAACIST to say that most folks with celtic given and surnames are more fair-skinned than this particular Donald Douglas is. Obviously Donalde disagrees, but as far as I'm concerned, there is nothing RAAAAACIST about talking about someone's skin color... ...not unless you in some way treat that person as less than you (less intelligent, less worthy, less attractive, ...) as a result of their skin color. If my name was Deshawn, it wouldn't be RAAAAACIST for someone to say I was mighty light-skinned for a guy with that name. It would be RAAAAACIST for them to say I couldn't shoot hoops or rap because of my fair skin.

BJ did think that Pale Scot's comment (just one comment, by the way) was in some way bigoted, and he did say so on his blog. Like Donalde, BJ is welcome to his opinion. I think they're both wrong. (For the record, there was nothing for BJ to "disown," because BJ didn't make the comment in the first place. Neither BJ or I subscribe to Donalde's odd theory of the distributive properties of blog comments. (In fact, I doubt many do, even on the conservative side of the aisle.) To us, (most of us, more'n'likely) the only person responsible for the words in a blog post or comment is the person who wrote them, and not everyone who's ever posted there or read the words in question. Personal responsibility, not collective guilt. BJ never "owned" Pale Scot's words in the first place, so he has nothing to "disown.")

Another thing BJ and I agree on, is that we do not moderate or censor our comment sections, even when we disagree with what a given commenter has to say. It's not exactly a first amendment argument, but we do believe that the best response to speech with which one does not agree is more speech, not removal. Donalde prefers to make disappear thoughts and ideas with which he does not agree, which is fine on his own blog (though I still think it cowardly), but pushy when he tries to dictate what other bloggers should do on theirs. (Donalde did want BJ to remove Pale Scot's comment, and only threw his hissyfit after BJ refused to do so.) Anyone who was offended or otherwise did not like Pale Scot's comment--including Donalde and BJ--was free to say so, right there at the same blog post where Pale Scot made his comment. To many bloggers, including BJ and I, that is a far superior way of addressing discontent, rather than moderating away those comments that we (or anyone else) disagrees with or finds distasteful. To me anyway, removing blog content is cowardly. Better to face one's accuser and argue head to head.
In any case, I shouldn't be returning to this subject, but as Repsac3 is a stalking asshat and a liar who maintains a stalking website, and who has been the ringleader in a campaign of harassment, including the publication of my workplace information, I don't mind taking the time every now and then to point out what a pure bigot and demonologist prick he is.
The thing of it is, Donalde never seems to do anything more than cast vague aspersions and call me names. He's never showed me telling a lie; he just says I'm a liar. My blog is a response to his, where folks who he's attacked are free to reply to him. My posts in particular are not all that different than what he does to other blogs and bloggers. I quote him, and then explain why I believe his post is wrong. I'm sorry he doesn't like it, but if he really thought it was wrong, he wouldn't do it, himself. (Something about dishing it out, but not being able to take it, comes to mind.) Not only did I never post his workplace information or harass him, I argued against such behavior. While Donalde is good at making up and posting these charges, he sucks at successfully making anyone who isn't easily led believe any of them. It's all words, and no substance.
The other day I posted on Dennis Prager, "American Power: The Liberal Leftist Mind Rejects Sad Facts" Harasser and hate-sponsor Reppy responded "American Power: An Aversion to Acknowledging Sad Facts". With regard to President Obama's endorsement of racist hip-hop mysogyny, RepRacist3 dismissed socal commentator Thomas Chatterton Williams as a "clown." (Chatterton is the author of Losing My Cool: How a Father's Love and 15,000 Books Beat Hip-Hop Culture..)

That's tyical of Repsac3, a progressive bigot who takes to attacking dignified, accomplished black men as "clowns." Clearly derogatory and offensive, this is what leftists love to do: infantilize and demean blacks, whipping them with epithets, keeping them down on the progressive plantation.

Again, note Donalde's definition of racism; Any less than respectful criticism of a man (or an belief held by a man) who is black. Not only is this definition bullshit on it's face, Donalde doesn't even hold to it under all circumstances. If the dignified, accomplished black man is Barack Obama (and whether or not one agrees with him politically, one cannot argue with a straight face that the Presidency is not a dignified and accomplished position), all bets are off, and photoshops of the man as a pimp or a drug dealer become perfectly acceptable.

I called Thomas Chatterton Williams a clown based on his position about Barack Obama's comment about musicians he's learning about, not based on his skin color or anything else about him. Race was never a factor, except to Donalde, who seems to see RAAAAACISM in any comment about black folks he respects (and not in similar comments about black--or any other shade--people that he doesn't respect.)

As I said above, it's ok to talk about a person's race. Doing so doesn't make one a racist. (To be a racist, you have to express the opinion that some races of people are better/worse than others, by virtue of race, alone. Just saying someone is white is fine. Saying someone is stupid because they're white, is not.) It's also ok to disagree with a person--no matter his or her color or gender or creed or sexual orientation--and to say so, even disrespectfully, without being a bigot. I'll grant you it can be a fine line--if you're going to call someone a name, you do have to pay some attention to the possibility of bigotry, even when that is not your intent (the NY Post Monkey cartoon was an example of that, in my humble opinion)--but the only folks to whom "clown" might be bigoted or offensive (as a class thing, I mean) are actual, hard-working clowns. (Calling a black man a clown is fine (at least as far as racism is concerned). Calling a black man a clown because he's black, isn't.) It's clear from Donalde's comments that he appears not to understand the difference... (...though honestly, I'm pretty sure he does understand that difference, and this is all feigned ignorance and manufactured outrage, because he has nothing else... Donalde's worst enemy sometimes, is that he's a lot smarter than he wants his readers to think he is.)
Reppy's racist ally in that regard is TBogg: (Cut of "Samuel F. Perkel Sambo Watermelon" logo, from a very long time ago.)
Sure... I could point out that TBogg posted that logo to illustrate his beliefs about the attitudes of a "Red State" blogger who discussed Rush Limbough taking Michael Steele behind the woodshed and birching him good (figuratively, one hopes), but all Donalde sees is the logo posted on TBogg's blog and--again employing that feigned ignorance--shouts RAAAAACISM!!

I could further point out that since TBogg posted that logo back in May 2009, Donald has reposted it on his own blog several times, seemingly always fully aware that context counts, and that it is possible to post a racist logo without being a racist yourself... ...but only if you're a conservative.

I could do all that, but it wouldn't matter. As far as Donalde is concerned, when a liberal posts a racist logo, it's because he's a racist. When a conservative posts that same logo, he's making a clever point that needs to be viewed and understood in context. Same logo, but different rules, depending...
And as for the facts, this is what Chatterton wrote --- in full context --- with regard to President Obama:

What's on President Obama's iPod? A wide range, he told Rolling Stone magazine last week, from the jazz of John Coltrane to the ballads of Maria Callas. And more: "My rap palate has greatly improved," Mr. Obama noted. "Jay-Z used to be sort of what predominated, but now I've got a little Nas and a little Lil Wayne and some other stuff, but I would not claim to be an expert."

Expert or not, that's the wrong message for the president to be sending black America.

Does Mr. Obama like Lil Wayne's "Lil Duffle Bag Boy"? In that song, the rapper implores young black men to "go and get their money" through round-the-clock drug hustling. And with Lil Wayne, it's not just an act: The rapper is currently serving a one-year term on Rikers Island after being caught in New York with drugs and guns stashed in his Louis Vuitton overnighter.

Lil Wayne is emblematic of a hip-hop culture that is ignorant, misogynistic, casually criminal and often violent. A self-described gangster, he is a modern-day minstrel who embodies the most virulent racist stereotypes that generations of blacks have fought to overcome. His music is a vigorous endorsement of the pathologies that still haunt and cripple far too many in the black underclass.
The president once spoke out for a strong black family. Indeed, Obama's speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention represented the finest traditions of black conservatism going back to Booker T. Washington. Now he's down with the minstrel-misogyny that continues to keep black youth in their place. And that racism of low expectations is enabled by leftists like James "Repsac3" Casper. These Kos-Kleagles apologize for the bigotry of their own ranks while constantly playing the race card to excoriate ideological enemies as bigots and "clowns."
As for Thomas Chatterton Williams (and what is it with Donalde calling him "Chatterton," btw??), I think I answered this argument just fine the first time Donalde reposted it:
The fact that Obama enjoys some of the music of rap stars that have written lyrics that one clown at the Wall Street Journal (or two clowns, if you count Donalde) believes to be "ignorant, misogynistic, casually criminal and often violent" -- and nowhere does it say that Obama likes songs with such lyrics in particular, just that he mentioned enjoying stars whose body of work includes such lyrics (Jay-Z, Lil Wayne, and Nas, to be specific)-- does not mean Obama is engaging in any "bigoted racist stereotyping," as Donalde believes. (I note here that even Thomas Chatterton Williams, the clown from the Wall Street Journal, himself says no such thing in his op-ed, instead suggesting that "The president is entitled to his friends and aesthetic tastes. But he undermines his own laudable message and example when he associates himself with a hip-hop culture that diminishes blacks.," a far cry from calling the President--and, by implication, every fan of Jay-Z, Nas, or Lil Wayne, black, white, and otherwise--a racist.)
Nowhere does Obama say he applauds the life these rappers have lead or the lyrics that Mr Williams (or Dr Douglas) finds so offensive. He doesn't even say he likes the tune of one of the songs Mr Williams and Dr Douglas are on about. So, while I understand what Mr Williams is saying, I believe his purity test for appropriate music for the President goes a little too far. Just as it's possible to enjoy and applaud the football talents of OJ Simpson and still believe he's a murderer, it's ok to have a little Lil Wayne on one's iPod without applauding or endorsing every act the man has ever committed... ...or any act the man has committed, save for creating the piece(s) of music one enjoys.

No, liking a song by Jay-Z doesn't in fact mean that one is "down with the minstrel-misogyny that continues to keep black youth in their place." All it means is the President likes the music. Donald is wrong. His "Kos-Kleagles" link clearly says the KKK is and pretty much always has been a right wing reactionary group, and at the post attached to his "playing the race card" link, several commenters acknowledge that talking about Charlie Rangel's civil rights history ISN'T a case of playing the race card to get preferential treatment based on his race. (Look for Donalde to attack his own links as "nihilist, socialist propaganda" in 3... 2... 1...) If Donalde and his "rule 5" friends limited themselves to softcore hotties and musicians who towed their conservative line, they'd be outta softcore hotties and music to listen to pretty quickly. It's ok to think Will Smith or Mel Gibson is a good actor AND completely wrong politically. Being a fan (or for that matter, a friend) doesn't mean being down with every word and deed a person has ever produced in his/her life. Real people don't submit the musical artists (or actors, or friends) they enjoy to sociopolitical litmus tests... They just don't.
These are bad people, progressive KKK henchmen. Repsac3's Twitter background provides an idea of the circle of secular demonologists this evil man follows --- and the hatred both he and they endorse.
I don't know, gang... Donalde makes some pretty big charges in his post, but from where I'm standing anyway, he fails to back them with anything more than his words, just like always... He hates liberals and anyone else who doesn't see the world as he does, he hates me, and that's pretty much all he's got, and all he's said in his post.

Anyone who wishes to provide concrete examples of my supposed hatred or my supposed racism is welcome to comment or post. I'm always willing to discuss whatever allegations you have, but more of this namecalling without backing substance of the type that Donalde regularly engages in will be dismissed as the poppycock it is. Nothing (except spam, and completely off-topic bullshit, if I'm in a mood) will be deleted; all will be addressed. So have at it....

A link from back when criticizing a distinguished, accomplished black man wasn't racism: American Power: Attacks on Obama Driven By Racism?

No comments:

Nerd Score (Do nerds score?)