# Fox News Host- "You can't trust Chinamen"



## Dot Com (Jul 10, 2014)

Bob Beckel Uses Racial Slur On Live Television


> "The Chinese are the single biggest threat to the national security of the US," he said. "They have been, they will be and they can wait, they're very patient. Do you know what we just did? As usual, *we bring them over here and we teach a bunch of Chinamen*-- er, Chinese people-- how to do computers and then they go back to China and hack into us."
> 
> The other 'Five' hosts gaped in disbelief.
> 
> ...


Does that cover Chinawomen as well?


----------



## hjmick (Jul 10, 2014)

Doesn't he take up for the Dems?


Perhaps he's been hitting the bottle again...


Dumbass thing to say if you ask me...


----------



## Mac1958 (Jul 10, 2014)

.

He's a liberal, so he's excused by the PC Police.

.


----------



## Warrior102 (Jul 10, 2014)

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIT3jUrNTX0"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIT3jUrNTX0[/ame]


----------



## hjmick (Jul 10, 2014)

Warrior102 said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIT3jUrNTX0




Another dumbass thing to say...


----------



## Stephanie (Jul 10, 2014)

oh boy oh boy oh brother


----------



## Mad Scientist (Jul 10, 2014)

Mac1958 said:


> .
> 
> He's a liberal, so he's excused by the PC Police.
> 
> .


Dot Com only knows what HuffPo posts.


----------



## LoneLaugher (Jul 10, 2014)

Mac1958 said:


> .
> 
> He's a liberal, so he's excused by the PC Police.
> 
> .



He's a liberal like Kirsten Powers is a liberal. 

And.....who excused him. He's an idiot.


----------



## blastoff (Jul 11, 2014)

Racial slurs from a libby.  How shocking!


----------



## R.D. (Jul 11, 2014)

hjmick said:


> Doesn't he take up for the Dems?
> 
> 
> Perhaps he's been hitting the bottle again...
> ...



How Dottie missed that makes me think she is hitting the bottle

He is their liberal mouthpiece ....REPRESENT!!


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 11, 2014)

Mac1958 said:


> .
> 
> He's a liberal, so he's excused by the PC Police.
> 
> .




Racism on the left isn't just condoned, it's de rigueur.


----------



## Dot Com (Jul 11, 2014)

I got nuthin' against Orientals other than the fact that you can never tell what they're thinking about. A smile can mean anything from- they like you going all the way to they want to put you in a bamboo cage  Michelle Malkin anyone?


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 11, 2014)

And here we see yet another example of a racist fucking douchebag from the far left. ^^^


----------



## Dot Com (Jul 11, 2014)

huh?

what does your username mean?


----------



## Stephanie (Jul 11, 2014)

whoa, did I just read where it was BOB Beckle a democrat political mouthpiece who said this?


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 11, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> huh?
> 
> what does your username mean?




It's a regional colloquialism you won't find on Google, so your ignorant, racist ass is out of luck (again).


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 11, 2014)

Stephanie said:


> whoa, did I just read where it was BOB Beckle a democrat political mouthpiece who said this?



Of course. Who else could get away with such a thing with his job intact?


----------



## R.D. (Jul 11, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> I got nuthin' against Orientals other than the fact that you can never tell what they're thinking about. A smile can mean anything from- they like you going all the way to they want to put you in a bamboo cage  Michelle Malkin anyone?



Double down on stupid 

Put down the glass already, it's still morning


----------



## longknife (Jul 11, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> Bob Beckel Uses Racial Slur On Live Television
> 
> 
> > "The Chinese are the single biggest threat to the national security of the US," he said. "They have been, they will be and they can wait, they're very patient. Do you know what we just did? As usual, *we bring them over here and we teach a bunch of Chinamen*-- er, Chinese people-- how to do computers and then they go back to China and hack into us."
> ...



Why would this surprise you?

Beckel is somewhere left of Marx and Lenin. And, like most Lefties he has to constantly check his mouth to keep from show what an outright racist he is.


----------



## Dot Com (Jul 11, 2014)

This had to be run by the former Repub political consultant (Ailes at Fox) He has to OK everything at that propaganda channel


----------



## crpravens82 (Jul 11, 2014)

How is Chinaman a slur?


----------



## Pogo (Jul 11, 2014)

crpravens82 said:


> How is Chinaman a slur?



It isn't a slur in itself -- it simply dates from an era when using it was usually _associated_ with a slur comment.  In the same way as, say, "darkie".  By itself there's no slur in the word, just historical association.  And of course it carries a certain Archie Bunkeresque ignorance of being too lazy to find the legitimate proper noun.  See also "Chinee" and "Portugee".

There's no slur in the Joe Biden video either.  A stupid way to express it but it has no value judgment.  Some wags here just have no clue.

But ....  "Chinaman", really?   What is this guy, 157 years old?  That's back there with referring to blacks as "Ethiopian".


----------



## mamooth (Jul 11, 2014)

People are surprised that a FOX News Democrat -- that is, a GOP shill -- said something dumb? He'll get a bonus in his FOX paycheck for that "slip".


----------



## Dot Com (Jul 11, 2014)

Unkotare said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> > huh?
> ...



O RLLY?

Urban Dictionary: Unkotare

Stop trolling the thread Karate Kid


----------



## Papageorgio (Jul 11, 2014)

Beckel is a leftwing Clinton lover. No suprise that he said this. What is really amusing is the left wing nuts just want to hang FOXNews. 

I have been saying liberals are racist, for a long time, Beckel is just more proof.


----------



## Dot Com (Jul 11, 2014)

Is he on the Fox News payroll?


----------



## Pogo (Jul 11, 2014)

Papageorgio said:


> Beckel is a leftwing Clinton lover. No suprise that he said this. What is really amusing is the left wing nuts just want to hang FOXNews.
> 
> I have been saying liberals are racist, for a long time, Beckel is just more proof.



In spite of the OP title, and the article title, both of which are erroneous, he didn't use a racial slur and he never said anything resembling "you can't trust Chinamen".

He did use the word "Chinamen", which if anything is an archaism.  The Fox Noise people around were the ones who reacted in PC fashion --- if the word was what they were reacting to, rather than the opinion about national security.  They never really said.

Btw -- What the fuck is "the soup"?

Anyway the thread title is bullshit, which is why it always pays to check the story out for oneself before one puts one's foot in one's mouth.


----------



## westwall (Jul 11, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> Bob Beckel Uses Racial Slur On Live Television
> 
> 
> > "The Chinese are the single biggest threat to the national security of the US," he said. "They have been, they will be and they can wait, they're very patient. Do you know what we just did? As usual, *we bring them over here and we teach a bunch of Chinamen*-- er, Chinese people-- how to do computers and then they go back to China and hack into us."
> ...







What's funny is he's the progressive voice on that particular show.   Just go's to show you, progressives are racist pigs!


----------



## Dot Com (Jul 11, 2014)

Why does Fox allow this stuff to be said on their shows? We know Roger Ailes (Fox Producer) is a control-freak and goes over everything w/ a fine-toothed comb.  He puts out daily talking-points ,for cryin' out loud, last I heard.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 11, 2014)

westwall said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> > Bob Beckel Uses Racial Slur On Live Television
> ...




Anybody wanna try to explain how that's racism?  As opposed to PC-policism?

Hello?

Get past this level one and you get to tackle Joe Biden.
Cookie?


----------



## Luddly Neddite (Jul 11, 2014)

crpravens82 said:


> How is Chinaman a slur?



Coming from fox, its just SSDD.

The rest of us live in the real world of the 21st century.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 11, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Dot Com said:
> ...




Really. Your little Google search won't find the meaning of the term as I'm using it. Accept your limitations and move on, racist douche.


----------



## Dot Com (Jul 11, 2014)

Unkotare said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



so your username is a secret known only to you.  How clever is that? I think you're lying  & it means what the Urban Dictionary says it means


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 11, 2014)

Papageorgio said:


> Beckel is a leftwing Clinton lover. No suprise that he said this. What is really amusing is the left wing nuts just want to hang FOXNews.
> 
> I have been saying liberals are racist, for a long time, Beckel is just more proof.





So is Dot Douche posting here. That little punk Guano is yet more. There is no end to it.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 11, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Dot Com said:
> ...




Known to many, many millions; but not you.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 11, 2014)

Pogo said:


> He did use the word "Chinamen", which if anything is an archaism.  The Fox Noise people around were the ones who reacted in PC fashion ---





Never ending hypocrisy from the left...


----------



## Dot Com (Jul 11, 2014)

back to topic people- Why Fox/GOP TV laughs stuff like this off


----------



## Pogo (Jul 11, 2014)

Unkotare said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > He did use the word "Chinamen", which if anything is an archaism.  The Fox Noise people around were the ones who reacted in PC fashion ---
> ...



No, that was from me.

Where's the "hypocrisy" in that post, o liquefied babbling brook of fecality?  Where's the mischaracterization?

Is "Chinaman" _not_ an archaic term then?
Did the Fox Noise people _not_ react in PC-itis grimaces?



Did you even watch the video?


----------



## westwall (Jul 11, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> Why does Fox allow this stuff to be said on their shows? We know Roger Ailes (Fox Producer) is a control-freak and goes over everything w/ a fine-toothed comb.  He puts out daily talking-points ,for cryin' out loud, last I heard.







For the same reason that it is said on MSNBC and CBS et al....


----------



## westwall (Jul 11, 2014)

Pogo said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Dot Com said:
> ...







Oh, I get it.  If a _conservative_ were to say that it's racist...but if a progressive says it it's A-OK.  Got it!  Your rules apply differently for people you like.


----------



## mamooth (Jul 11, 2014)

I think Beckel should be fired. FOX, of course, will disagree. The righties here too, I imagine. Fake Democrats are a precious thing to the right, to be cherished and paid well, not tossed aside lightly.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 11, 2014)

westwall said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...




No no, I asked for an _explanation_, not a speculation fallacy.

Sorry, no that is not an exit.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 11, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...




Yeah, you are so far out there on the left you can barely be seen (which is probably your best look, btw).


----------



## Pogo (Jul 11, 2014)

westwall said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> > Why does Fox allow this stuff to be said on their shows? We know Roger Ailes (Fox Producer) is a control-freak and goes over everything w/ a fine-toothed comb.  He puts out daily talking-points ,for cryin' out loud, last I heard.
> ...




It certainly works to keep ratings up.

Still wondering -- what does the one wag mean by "this will end up on 'the soup'"?


----------



## Pogo (Jul 11, 2014)

Unkotare said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



Sooooooooooooo ...... neither Westwall nor diarrhea-boy can answer their questions.
Stop the frickin' presses.

Hint #1: "the left" refers to a collective, i.e. multiple people.  My posts come from me, which is a singular.  Welcome to English.  Now see if you can figure out what "hypocrisy" means.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 11, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Where's the "hypocrisy" in that post...





It's in trying to play the apologist for a democrat - because he's a democrat - who used a term understood by all participants in the conversation, including Bobby himself, as inappropriate and likely to cause offense; using it with the _intention_ of causing offense. Out the other side of your face, far-left loons like you will invent, entirely out of nothing but imagination and ill-will, meanings and intentions to common, inoffensive terms when it suits your political needs to demonize and accuse the opposition in the hopes of silencing it. Everything and anything is a "code word" or a "dog whistle" whenever disingenuous dimwits like you and your ilk need it to be. However, when a clear and obvious offense is uttered you change your tune quicker than Two-Face can flip that coin. 

*That's* where the hypocrisy is, douche.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 11, 2014)

Unkotare said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Where's the "hypocrisy" in that post, o liquefied babbling brook of fecality? Where's the mischaracterization?
> ...



No, that's yet another speculation fallacy.

Wassamatta?  Dug yourself in a hole again?

Who the fuck is "Bobby"?


.....  Do you clowns just not comprehend what a speculation fallacy is?

>> HYPOTHESIS CONTRARY TO FACT
(also known as: counterfactual fallacy, speculative fallacy, "what if" fallacy, wouldchuck)

Description: Offering a poorly supported claim about what might have happened in the past or future, if (the hypothetical part) circumstances or conditions were different.  The fallacy also entails treating future hypothetical situations as if they are fact.

Logical Form:

If event X did happen, then event Y would have happened. (based only on speculation) <<


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 11, 2014)

Pogo said:


> My posts come from me, which is a singular.





And _you_ are a singular, far-left hypocrite douchebag. 


"Singular" also means a distinct example of something; especially something odd or strange. You are a singular, far-left hypocrite douchebag.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 11, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...




No, that's an answer to the question you were whining about.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 11, 2014)

Unkotare said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Sooooooooooooo ...... neither Westwall nor diarrhea-boy can answer their questions.
> ...



If I'm a 'singular' -- which "I" obviously is ------------ then how does my singular post become "from the left" -- which is obviously plural?
Is everyone on your planet some kind of Borg?  Or are you just too stupid to recognize a generalization fallacy?

And again --------- whence the "hypocrisy" in pointing out that _Chinaman_ is archaic?

Are you going for some kind of most-fallacies-in-the-fewest-words achievement award?


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 11, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...




I just explained to you what the word "singular" means, and I pointed out that you are a distinct example of the hypocritical attitude typical of the far-left. 

Once again, your tenuous grasp of the English language has left you looking like a fool.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 11, 2014)

Uh....... huh.


(this post approved by "the left".  Vote was 138,625,387 to 0)


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 11, 2014)

Pogo said:


> And again --------- whence the "hypocrisy" in pointing out that _Chinaman_ is archaic?





That's a straw man, see? _*That's*_ a fallacy. You keep trying to use the word "fallacy," but it doesn't seem as if you understand it at all. We have discussed your ignorance regarding logic before, and you don't appear to have improved at all.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 11, 2014)

Unkotare said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > And again --------- whence the "hypocrisy" in pointing out that _Chinaman_ is archaic?
> ...



"Hypocrisy" was YOUR term.  Waiting to hear some vague idea of where it derives from.
Or is it one of those suppository points?


----------



## Dot Com (Jul 11, 2014)

mamooth said:


> I think Beckel should be fired. FOX, of course, will disagree. The righties here too, I imagine. Fake Democrats are a precious thing to the right, to be cherished and paid well, not tossed aside lightly.


yep 


Pogo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



^ that


----------



## Katzndogz (Jul 11, 2014)

I was watching the Five when Beckle said that.  Everyone knew how it would be taken.   Buckle is such a flaming and disagreeable obama loving liberal I thought surely he would be excused.  He should go not so much for this but because his tongue is just too damn far up obama's ass.


----------



## Dot Com (Jul 11, 2014)

I was wondering when USMB's FAR Right Hyperbole Queen would show up. Hi Katzy 

As to the OP, as Pogo pointed-out, the guy is a  paid employee of Fox/GOP TV so...


----------



## Pogo (Jul 11, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> I was wondering when USMB's FAR Right Hyperbole Queen would show up. Hi Katzy
> 
> As to the OP, as Pogo pointed-out, the guy is a  paid employee of Fox/GOP TV so...



I didn't point that out, although as any other employee of Fox Noise I'm sure he's expected to be sensationalist, because that's where ratings come from.

I just wanted an explanation for how _Chinaman _is "racist".  Or "hypocrisy".  All I get in response is a lot of speculation fallacy stammering.  One guy ran away already.

But since Katz is here, question for her:
Should Bob Beckel be shot in the face, like you want to do with pot smokers?

-- what if he says it with a joint in his mouth?

-- now, what if the joint came from Markus Kaarma's stolen stash?


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 11, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Waiting to hear some vague idea of where it derives from.




No you're not, because I explained it to you in some detail. You quoted and responded to the post in which I did so, suggesting you read my explanation. Maybe the underlying problem is that you're just fucking stupid.


----------



## Slyhunter (Jul 11, 2014)

Unkotare said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> > huh?
> ...



um,


> Unkotare
> unkotare \ woon-ko-ta-re \ , noun;
> 
> Japanese. Roughly translated as dripping poop. This word is used to describe a pornographic genre commonly known as Scat.
> "Hey Bro checkout this sweet unkotare video I found... it is super kawaii-desu"


Urban Dictionary: Unkotare


----------



## whitehall (Jul 11, 2014)

It should be noted that Beckel is the token liberal and as such he needs to be outrageous in order to make up for his lack of intelligence.


----------



## Slyhunter (Jul 11, 2014)

whitehall said:


> It should be noted that Beckel is the token liberal and as such he needs to be outrageous in order to make up for his lack of intelligence.



Didn't he used to run Clinton's campaign?


----------



## Pogo (Jul 11, 2014)

Slyhunter said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Dot Com said:
> ...



Apparently "Santorum" was taken...


----------



## Pogo (Jul 11, 2014)

Slyhunter said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > It should be noted that Beckel is the token liberal and as such he needs to be outrageous in order to make up for his lack of intelligence.
> ...



That's James Carville.


----------



## Rozman (Jul 11, 2014)

Isn't it interesting that the fact that the "FOX" host is one of the biggest Liberals around was left out.


----------



## Warrior102 (Jul 11, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> As to the OP, as Pogo pointed-out, the guy is a  paid employee of Fox/GOP TV so...



What's Biden excuse nutsack


----------



## Pogo (Jul 11, 2014)

Warrior102 said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> > As to the OP, as Pogo pointed-out, the guy is a  paid employee of Fox/GOP TV so...
> ...



Excuse for what, Wanker?


----------



## Papageorgio (Jul 11, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> > Beckel is a leftwing Clinton lover. No suprise that he said this. What is really amusing is the left wing nuts just want to hang FOXNews.
> ...



I don't know what "the soup" is.


----------



## FJO (Jul 12, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> Bob Beckel Uses Racial Slur On Live Television
> 
> 
> > "The Chinese are the single biggest threat to the national security of the US," he said. "They have been, they will be and they can wait, they're very patient. Do you know what we just did? As usual, *we bring them over here and we teach a bunch of Chinamen*-- er, Chinese people-- how to do computers and then they go back to China and hack into us."
> ...



Don't Chinese students learn information technology in America?
Don't Chinese manufacturers violate copyrights?
Don't Chinese spies infiltrate and hack everything American?
Don't Chinese aspire to wreck American economy?
Don't Chinese people, by and large, hate and envy America?

Don't you display your politically correct stupidity (pardon the redundancy) by bashing Bob Beckel  for simply speaking the truth?

Don't you feel stupid for claiming that calling a MAN from CHINA a Chinaman is racist?

Don't you feel ashamed that you side with those who want to destroy your country?

Don't you ever bother to supply data to support your vacuous and silly and righteous arguments?

Don't you see the obvious in front of your eyes?


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 12, 2014)

FJO said:


> Don't Chinese people, by and large, hate and envy America?






No. Don't be ridiculous.


----------



## Katzndogz (Jul 12, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> > whitehall said:
> ...



Beckle was active in the Jimmy Carter campaign.


----------



## percysunshine (Jul 12, 2014)

The term 'Chinamen' is ... like ... over 100 years out of date as far as common usage goes.

All the people who would be offended by it are dead.

Carry on.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jul 12, 2014)

*liberal*  Fox News Host- "You can't trust Chinamen

fixed it for ya


----------



## Katzndogz (Jul 12, 2014)

Bob Beckle is going to be mighty surprised to find out that liberals have shifted him over to being a conservative.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jul 12, 2014)

Katzndogz said:


> Bob Beckle is going to be mighty surprised to find out that liberals have shifted him over to being a conservative.



the lefties get a little info 

that a fox news host is racist 

being the good sheeple they are 

they run with it assuming he is a rightie 

too funny 

--LOL


----------



## Dot Com (Jul 12, 2014)

Katzndogz said:


> Bob Beckle is going to be mighty surprised to find out that liberals have shifted him over to being a conservative.



He's a Fox/GOP TV employee but nice try


----------



## Katzndogz (Jul 12, 2014)

I hope he gets fired.  I'm sick of listening to his liberal drivel.  Every word that comes out of his mouth passes first through obama's alimentary canal.


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Jul 12, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> Bob Beckel Uses Racial Slur On Live Television
> 
> 
> > "The Chinese are the single biggest threat to the national security of the US," he said. "They have been, they will be and they can wait, they're very patient. Do you know what we just did? As usual, *we bring them over here and we teach a bunch of Chinamen*-- er, Chinese people-- how to do computers and then they go back to China and hack into us."
> ...



And? When he or anyone else actually fires a Chinese employee I'll get interested. This is called 1st Amendment protected speech though. So someone on Fox says something stupid, not exactly news.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jul 12, 2014)

Katzndogz said:


> I hope he gets fired.  I'm sick of listening to his liberal drivel.  Every word that comes out of his mouth passes first through obama's alimentary canal.



i dont we need folks like him poisoning the pond of liberalism


----------



## Dot Com (Jul 12, 2014)

Katzndogz said:


> I hope he gets fired.  I'm sick of listening to his liberal drivel.  Every word that comes out of his mouth passes first through obama's alimentary canal.



So you watch that show/Fox Katzy?  Figures.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 12, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > Bob Beckle is going to be mighty surprised to find out that liberals have shifted him over to being a conservative.
> ...




"Nice try" at what?


Despite what you've been ordered to believe by your DNC handlers, there are a number of liberals employed by that media outlet.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 12, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> *liberal*  Fox News Host- "You can't trust Chinamen
> 
> fixed it for ya



Um, not really, since nobody said anything like that anyway...



jon_berzerk said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > Bob Beckle is going to be mighty surprised to find out that liberals have shifted him over to being a conservative.
> ...



The Haiku poster reads

A bogus thread title

And assumes it's accurate

And runs with it

too funny


----------



## Pogo (Jul 12, 2014)

Pogo said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Dot Com said:
> ...



Whelp ---- never got an answer.  Nada. Zero. Bupkis. Squat.  The empty set.

Typical partisan wankitude... all bluster, no substance.  Innuendo and out the other.

Still reeling over the word [go's] too.  "Just go is to show"?  Bizarre.


----------



## Papageorgio (Jul 12, 2014)

mamooth said:


> I think Beckel should be fired. FOX, of course, will disagree. The righties here too, I imagine. Fake Democrats are a precious thing to the right, to be cherished and paid well, not tossed aside lightly.



He is human, he is going to mess up, I am sure you have said some pretty stupid things at work and so does everyone else. Beckel just happens to screw up on a bigger stage than you or I.

Biden has said some pretty racist things, I don't think he should be fired. It was a mistake and a poor choice of words.

Sent from my iPad using an Android.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 12, 2014)

Papageorgio said:


> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> > I think Beckel should be fired. FOX, of course, will disagree. The righties here too, I imagine. Fake Democrats are a precious thing to the right, to be cherished and paid well, not tossed aside lightly.
> ...




What has Biden said that was racist?


----------



## rightwinger (Jul 12, 2014)

I never trusted those chinamen


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 12, 2014)

Pogo said:


> ---- never got an answer.  ....





Yes you did. Lying won't improve your position now.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 12, 2014)

Unkotare said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



No, I got one of your lame speculation fallacies.  When you understand the difference, get back to me.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 12, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...




No, you didn't. You went out of your way - again - to demonstrate that you don't understand what the words you are trying to use actually mean. We have established that you don't know the first thing about logic, yet you keep trying to invoke it as if the mere mention (of something you don't understand) will somehow lend credibility to your block-headed ignorance. It won't.


----------



## Katzndogz (Jul 12, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> > I hope he gets fired.  I'm sick of listening to his liberal drivel.  Every word that comes out of his mouth passes first through obama's alimentary canal.
> ...



Every day.   I love they way the FOUR pick the bones of liberals.  Especially when Greg Gutfeld gets going on obama.   Bob Beckle is someone they can do without.   He only comes up with more liberal lies.   It's more entertaining when Juan Williams is the guest liberal.  He's always articulate and makes cogent arguments even when he's wrong.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 12, 2014)

>> _*Twelve Chinks and a Woman*_, first published in 1940, was Chase's third novel.
... The original version of the book that, as times changed, was unaccountably revised and republished, first as "Twelve Chinamen and a woman" (1950), and later as "The doll's bad news" (1970).

... The main justification for the change of title from "Chink" to "Chinaman" would be that the latter was actually the more common vulgar reference to "Chinese" at the time. <<​
(backstory)


----------



## Pogo (Jul 12, 2014)

Unkotare said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 12, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...


----------



## Dot Com (Jul 12, 2014)

Katzndogz said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> > Katzndogz said:
> ...



have at rw grl


----------



## Mojo2 (Jul 12, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> Bob Beckel Uses Racial Slur On Live Television
> 
> 
> > "The Chinese are the single biggest threat to the national security of the US," he said. "They have been, they will be and they can wait, they're very patient. Do you know what we just did? As usual, *we bring them over here and we teach a bunch of Chinamen*-- er, Chinese people-- how to do computers and then they go back to China and hack into us."
> ...



On a bus through Chinatown this one old Chinawoman belched out loud and with no more concern for propriety than if she'd yawned. 

No hand over the mouth to muffle the sound or a motion and expression giving the appearance of asking to be pardoned. No, this was a casual belch from a salt of the earth, hard-working Chinawoman.

Does my bringing this to light make me a bigot in your eyes?


----------



## Pogo (Jul 12, 2014)

Mojo2 said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> > Bob Beckel Uses Racial Slur On Live Television
> ...



It does make you ignorant, in that you would assume your own cultural standards must automatically apply to other cultures.


----------



## Dot Com (Jul 12, 2014)

Mojo2 said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> > Bob Beckel Uses Racial Slur On Live Television
> ...



I notice they are quite brazen whilst picking their noses in public as well. Just sayin...


----------



## boedicca (Jul 12, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> I got nuthin' against Orientals other than the fact that you can never tell what they're thinking about. A smile can mean anything from- they like you going all the way to they want to put you in a bamboo cage  Michelle Malkin anyone?




You really are a racist moron.


----------



## Stephanie (Jul 12, 2014)

You see how dishonest these people are?

Beckel isn't  A HOST on fox news

he's a political (guest) and mouthpiece for the Democrats


----------



## Pogo (Jul 12, 2014)

Stephanie said:


> You see how dishonest these people are?
> 
> Beckel isn't  A HOST on fox news
> 
> he's a political (guest) and mouthpiece for the Democrats



He also didn't say what the title says he said so... it's a wash.


----------



## Dot Com (Jul 12, 2014)

who is paying the guy to be there is the issue here my friends. GOP TV/Fox is.


----------



## Papageorgio (Jul 12, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> > mamooth said:
> ...




"You cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent.... I'm not joking." --Joe Biden 

"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man." --Joe Biden on Barack Obama


----------



## hjmick (Jul 12, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> who is paying the guy to be there is the issue here my friends. GOP TV/Fox is.




How is that the issue? Because you hate Fox?


----------



## Papageorgio (Jul 12, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> > You see how dishonest these people are?
> ...



You need to explain that to dot, she is the one pushing and creating what Bickel said.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.


----------



## hjmick (Jul 12, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> > You see how dishonest these people are?
> ...




Well, he did use the word "Chinamen" but quickly corrected himself saying "Chinese people..."


----------



## LoneLaugher (Jul 12, 2014)

USMB nutters trying. It's so cute. Always trying.


----------



## longknife (Jul 12, 2014)

Stephanie said:


> You see how dishonest these people are?
> 
> Beckel isn't  A HOST on fox news
> 
> he's a political (guest) and mouthpiece for the Democrats



Beckel is a *co-host* of The Five - of which he is ONE - a daily political opinion show.

He is known to be a loud-mouthed liberal who even has a Swear Jar he has to donate to when he loses it and used profanity.


----------



## longknife (Jul 12, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Stephanie said:
> 
> 
> > You see how dishonest these people are?
> ...



I watched the show and saw him shoot off his big mouth and say exactly what was in the OP!


----------



## longknife (Jul 12, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> who is paying the guy to be there is the issue here my friends. GOP TV/Fox is.



He was there the first day the show aired and is being paid by FoxNews to speak for liberals. When he takes off for some reason, they replace him with Juan Williams who is also an outright liberal but has a whole lot more class.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 12, 2014)

longknife said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Stephanie said:
> ...



Let's run that by again if the first time was too small....



> He also didn't say what the *title *says he said so... it's a wash



Use a magnifying glass if that's not sufficient...


----------



## Pogo (Jul 12, 2014)

Papageorgio said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Papageorgio said:
> ...



I know the quotes.

But what did he say that was *racist*?

You do understand what _racist_ means, do you not?


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Jul 12, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



Dishonest much? You and the other bed wetters would be screaming bloody murder if a republican said that.

As I recall the left had a fit cause some guy said niggardly, which is an actual word and has nothing to do with race at all.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 12, 2014)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Papageorgio said:
> ...



Speculation fallacy.  Which means --- bullshit.

Racism requires a value judgment, regardless who says it.  That definition doesn't change according to which wanker political party somebody belongs to -- this week.  There ain't no value judgment in the above quotes.

Take this thread.  Please.  If the title were accurate and Bob Beckel actually did say "you can't trust a Chinaman", there would have been a value judgment in the phrase "you can't trust".  THEN you'd have racism.

Some o' you wankers just seem to spew without thinking.  I actually had one clown on this board claim the audience demographics of Fox News viewership were "racist" because they showed that the audience is mostly white.  True story.  There are many heads up many asses in this department.  Far up.



RetiredGySgt said:


> As I recall the left had a fit cause some guy said niggardly, which is an actual word and has nothing to do with race at all.



Strawman.  More bullshit.  There was a teacher who got pressured for teaching niggardly (in this state as it happens) twelve years ago, but that had nothing to do with "the left".  Or with racism.  Or with me.


----------



## Papageorgio (Jul 12, 2014)

Pogo said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



Biden made a value judgement, that Obama was the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. 

The value judgement is the implication is the rest of the African-Americans are not articulate, bright, clean or a nice guy, Obama is the first and so is he the only one? Are the rest inarticulate, not bright, not clean, not nice guys? African Americans up to Obama were less than he was, the could not speak, the weren't smart and on and on. 

The 7-11 comment was stereotyping, which is also offensive. 


Sent from my iPad using an Android.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 12, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Racism requires a value judgment, regardless who says it.




And there was a "value judgment" associated with the term as used in this instance, coming as it did in the middle of a diatribe against 'the Chinese.' The fact that Bobby felt the need to correct himself, and the reaction of his fellow panelists, demonstrates an awareness of the inappropriateness of the term as understood by everyone there. This awareness is shared by every reasonable person who has viewed the clip since. Only shameless idiots and apologists like you even bother trying to defend it. 

The fact that a term may be out of date does not mean that it therefore cannot also be offensive, as the exchange in question clearly shows. You have been trying to suggest some mutual exclusivity in the hopes of salvaging  your futile attempts at defending racism because it happened to have come from a fellow far-left imbecile. It's not working for you. Your lack of understanding regarding matters of logic and your generally weak English language skills have failed you again. Trying to posture arrogantly while failing so miserably only makes you look more the fool, you blustering buffoon.


----------



## Dot Com (Jul 12, 2014)

diarrhea boi (Unkotare) is daving in this thread like its nobody's biz 

as to the OP, if the shoe fits...

carry on.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 12, 2014)

Papageorgio said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > RetiredGySgt said:
> ...



Well... no.  Obviously he didn't mean the first African American anywhere ever.  Your quote is taken out of its context.

The context was that he's analyzing the various Presidential candidates at the time (2007) so he's saying the first blah blah blah _*in a Presidential race*_.  Which could also be a swipe at Jesse Jackson or Carol Moseley-Braun, if he even thought of that -- which is unlikely; Biden's a no-filter guy who talks like the baseball fan he is, which is why that phrasing is so colloquial ("that's storybook, man").  But the point is, he isn't saying that black *people *are normally inarticulate or stupid -- which would have been racist; he's saying that black *Presidential candidates* had been up to then.  Context, m'boy.

Trying to squeeze racism out of these is pretty much doing what RetiredGySgt complained about with the teacher and the word "niggardly" -- contriving racism where none exists.



Papageorgio said:


> The 7-11 comment was stereotyping, which is also offensive.



Offensive to who?  You know that he was talking to an ethnic Indian supporter at the time, right?

The 7-11 comment as worded is just stupid.  It makes on sense on its face; obviously you can _walk into_ one without an Indian accent or without speaking at all.  What he was clumsily trying to say (again, context of the entire comment, which I believe was posted here earlier) was that Delaware was seeing an influx of Indian population.  That makes no value judgment about Indians.  If he had said Indians had taken over Dunkin' Donuts and 7-11s _because that's all they're capable of_, THEN you'd have a racist comment.  Merely noting that they're highly represented there doesn't say that.

He didn't mention motels; he didn't mention the doctor population.  Those are two more areas where Indians pop up in large numbers.  It isn't racist to note that; it _would _be racist to ascribe some kind of cause-and-effect on account of race.  That's not present here.

Nor is it in the word "Chinamen".


----------



## Pogo (Jul 12, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> diarrhea boi (Unkotare) is daving in this thread like its nobody's biz
> 
> as to the OP, if the shoe fits...
> 
> carry on.



He's still melting down because I called out his bullshit speculation fallacy.  Poor baby.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 12, 2014)

Unkotare said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Racism requires a value judgment, regardless who says it.
> ...



I did a weird thing and actually watched the video.  He's ranting about what Chinese hackers are doing -- he doesn't say they do it _because they're Chinese_.  Once again, you need some ascription to race _as a causal factor_ to constitute racism.  Merely noting what people are doing together with what country they come from doesn't make that case.  Matter of fact in the political context of the words, "the Chinese" isn't even a racial term but a nationalist one, the same as when we hear "_the Russians_ said today..." or "that won't sit well with _the Americans_".  Nobody thinks those are about races.



Unkotare said:


> The fact that Bobby felt the need to correct himself, and the reaction of his fellow panelists, demonstrates an awareness of the inappropriateness of the term as understood by everyone there. This awareness is shared by every reasonable person who has viewed the clip since. Only shameless idiots and apologists like you even bother trying to defend it.



"Bobby"?

I believe my "defense" consisted of -- "what is this guy, 157 years old?"  Which is the same reaction the Fox panelists expressed facially.  I don't think I've heard the term in at least 20 years.  You'll notice nobody on the TV panel declares it "racism"; they're reacting to an archaic vulgarity.



Unkotare said:


> The fact that a term may be out of date does not mean that it therefore cannot also be offensive, as the exchange in question clearly shows.



Of course not.  I'm just saying it isn't "racist".  Which I noted earlier, which you tried to counter with another lame speculation fallacy.  Like Sarge just did.



Unkotare said:


> You have been trying to suggest some mutual exclusivity in the hopes of salvaging  your futile attempts at defending racism because it happened to have come from a fellow far-left imbecile. It's not working for you. Your lack of understanding regarding matters of logic and your generally weak English language skills have failed you again. Trying to posture arrogantly while failing so miserably only makes you look more the fool, you blustering buffoon.



Speculation fallacy didn't work, he goes to ad hom.  Stop the frickin' presses.

I already demonstrated why racism isn't present; you continue to whine for being called out on a fallacy.  Sucks to be you.


----------



## Papageorgio (Jul 12, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



That is your opinion, I disagree.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 12, 2014)

Papageorgio said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Papageorgio said:
> ...



OK.  By all means, show where the value judgment is in either of those as a function of race.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 12, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> diarrhea boi (Unkotare) is ...





When an attempt at insult is so lame you feel the need to include an explanation, you ought not have bothered in the first place.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 12, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Biden's a no-filter guy who talks like the baseball fan he is...






"talks like the baseball fan he is" ???


??? Huh?


----------



## Papageorgio (Jul 12, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



Even in the context of black of Presidential candidates it was a slam on race. He didn't say all, candidates, he isolated black candidates. There is a value judgement on blacks running for President, not named Obama. You can justify and spin, however, it was insensitive and stupid and racist. 

The stereotyping is an insult, just as implying blacks all like chicken or watermelon, if you don't get that then, you just don't get it.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.


----------



## Dot Com (Jul 12, 2014)

Unkotare said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> > diarrhea boi (Unkotare) is ...
> ...



that was no "attempt". Glad to help


----------



## Synthaholic (Jul 12, 2014)

Mac1958 said:


> .
> 
> He's a liberal, so he's excused by the PC Police.
> 
> .


He's hardly a Liberal.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 12, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...





He said it in the context of a general tirade against 'the Chinese,' you disingenuous douche. He  makes a point of saying "they come over here" and "they can wait." This hackneyed generalization about 'the inscrutable Chinese who can wait thousands of years to git ya' is part of a well-worn racist essentialization of an entire people. At the end of his ill-considered rant he expressly gives the 'fuck you' sign "to China," not "to Chinese computer hackers." 

If you really "watched the video" you would have noted the reaction of his co-hosts as well as his own "oh shit, better try to take that back" realization that he had let himself go to far. If you had ever watched more than that one clip you'd know that Bobby regularly goes off on bigoted tangents - like so many emotional leftists. 

Your weak attempts to spin on Bobby's behalf are pathetically ineffective.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 12, 2014)

Synthaholic said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...



Oh no?


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 12, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Dot Com said:
> ...




It was an utter failure.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 12, 2014)

Pogo said:


> I'm just saying it isn't "racist".






And I pointed out that you are wrong.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 12, 2014)

Pogo said:


> you continue to whine for being called out on a fallacy.




No, you continue to use terms you don't understand.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Jul 12, 2014)

Unkotare said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > you continue to whine for being called out on a fallacy.
> ...



indeed


----------



## kaz (Jul 13, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> Fox News Host- "You can't trust Chinamen"



Dude, he's a Democrat, a lib.  He was Walter Mondale;'s campaign manager.

So Fox brings on libs, libs do things and that's on Fox?  That they put you people on the air to say your views?  LOL, what a douche.


----------



## kaz (Jul 13, 2014)

Synthaholic said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...



Walter Mondale's campaign manager?  This is how brain dead you people are, a liberal says something bigoted on Fox and you still blame Fox.


----------



## Synthaholic (Jul 13, 2014)

kaz said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > Mac1958 said:
> ...


You see anyone to the Left of Ted Cruz as a Liberal, so your opinions are dismissed.


----------



## kaz (Jul 13, 2014)

Synthaholic said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...



So seriously, Walter Mondale's campaign manager on Fox you see as representing the Right and not the Left.  It's on the Republicans, not the Democrats.  Walter Mondale's campaign manager.  And he's always on the side of Democrats.

You are so full of


----------



## Synthaholic (Jul 13, 2014)

kaz said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > kaz said:
> ...



See?  You are incapable of honest discussion.

You start out calling him a Liberal, then when called on it, you call him a Democrat, and pretend it's the identical thing.

You'll NEVER catch me being this dishonest - I would call Susan Collins a Republican, but I would never call her a conservative.


----------



## Slyhunter (Jul 13, 2014)

Synthaholic said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...



Again, name me one current Democrat that isn't a liberal.


----------



## longknife (Jul 13, 2014)

Another thread thoroughly trashed by liberal trolls.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 13, 2014)

Synthaholic said:


> You start out calling him a Liberal, then when called on it, you call him a Democrat, and pretend it's the identical thing....





He calls himself a liberal, and he IS a democrat. Your reality-altering powers have failed you.


----------



## kaz (Jul 13, 2014)

Synthaholic said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...


It is the same thing.  Authoritarian leftists call yourselves "liberal" even though you are not liberal, and you are "Democrat."



Synthaholic said:


> You'll NEVER catch me being this dishonest - I would call Susan Collins a Republican, but I would never call her a conservative.



LOL, I wouldn't call her a conservative either.  So let's play, he who would not be dishonest and tries to smear Fox based on the words of an authoritarian leftists "liberal" Democrat.  So give me an example of how Walter Mondale's campaign manager who calls himself a liberal and is a Democrat is not "liberal."  What are you talking about?


----------



## Pogo (Jul 13, 2014)

Papageorgio said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Papageorgio said:
> ...



Second point first: stereotyping that "blacks like chicken or watermelon" still doesn't make a value judgment.  Unless you're saying it's a bad thing to like watermelon, which is not present.  Noting that Indians populate 7-11s is the same thing -- is it a bad thing to populate 7-11?  From what do you infer that?

First point - so he limits the comment to black candidates -- so what?  Again, where is the value judgment?  The fact is at the time he's speaking the country had never elected a black candidate, and only had a couple that made a political dent at all.  Since he's talking about politics, he's talking about marketability.  That means an assessment of how the voting public might "buy".  It makes no comment on the nature of black people, no value judgment therein.

This knee-jerk reaction to just chant "racist" at nothing more than the mere _mention_ of race is counterproductive.  Get over it.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 13, 2014)

Unkotare said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



Beckel reacted; everybody reacted.  Nobody specifically spelled out exactly what they were reacting to but it's a safe guess it was the use of the word "Chinamen", which last saw the light of day before color TV came out.  The reaction is understandable.  They may well be reacting to the political ideas expressed as well, simultaneously.  Perhaps if anyone could figure out what "the soup" means we might have an indicator for what it's worth.

But he said nothing about a Chinese _*race*_.  No behaviours he posited were alleged to derive from racial roots.


Who the fuck is "Bobby"?  What are you, a fifteen year old reading Tiger Beat?


----------



## Pogo (Jul 13, 2014)

Slyhunter said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > kaz said:
> ...



Didn't we just do this in another thread?  Or was that somebody else?

A Liberal may be a Democrat, a Republican or like me have no party affiliation.  Ideologies are not parties.

An ideology is a philosophical belief.  It's firm and fixed.  A party is a machine to attain power.  It's mutable and will accomodate as much diversity of belief as it can get away with.  That's why you have, say, Susan Collins and Sarah Palin and Jon Huntsman and David Duke in the same party.  Doesn't make them the same ideology.


----------



## Papageorgio (Jul 13, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



It is a value judgement, the fact you don't think so doesn't change an thing, you can spin all you want, you can justify all you want. 


Sent from my iPad using an Android.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 13, 2014)

Papageorgio said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Papageorgio said:
> ...




The fact that you cannot demonstrate where the value judgment is kinda means it isn't there.

Again, knee-jerk spitting out the "racist" card for no more reason than that race was _mentioned _-- doesn't make it racism.

Is the name of the Washington NFL team "racist" just because it mentions a race?


----------



## JohnL.Burke (Jul 13, 2014)

mamooth said:


> I think Beckel should be fired. FOX, of course, will disagree. The righties here too, I imagine. Fake Democrats are a precious thing to the right, to be cherished and paid well, not tossed aside lightly.



 I really wish you would google Bob Beckel so you wouldn't sound so silly by calling him a fake democrat.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 13, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



You really are a dishonest piece of shit.

I've already explained to you that they were specifically "about a Chinese _*race*_," you idiot. The more you try and fail at playing the shameless apologist, the more of a disingenuous douchebag you make yourself look. 

That you haven't heard a particular term in a long time is irrelevant. That it may not be commonly used in decent public discourse is irrelevant. A smart gambler would bet the farm that ol' Bobby has used the term more than a few times since after "color TV came out." If a conservative pundit went on a political round-table on CNN and issued a diatribe against "coloreds" or "the negroes" you know damn well there would be a shit storm of biblical proportions, and rightly so. Some racist douchebags on this site try to use that term as often as possible because they obviously get a little racist thrill out of doing so. They demur their true intentions in a fashion not unlike how you are trying to play spinmaster for Bobby. He didn't ask for your 'help' and you would be failing him miserably this way if he had. It is rare to find a person as utterly lacking in character or reason as you.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 13, 2014)

Pogo said:


> The fact that you cannot demonstrate where the value judgment is kinda means it isn't there.





It has been demonstrated, idiot. The fact that you are trying to ignore it goes to show what a dishonest piece of shit you are.


----------



## Slyhunter (Jul 13, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...


But in the current list of politicians name me one Democrat who isn't a Liberal.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 13, 2014)

Slyhunter said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Slyhunter said:
> ...



Are you the same poster who asked me that the other day?  Because that's been asked and answered.  Seeing as how you didn't bother to read the post above I'm disinclined to repeat myself.


----------



## Papageorgio (Jul 13, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Papageorgio said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



He insinuated that  other African-American presidential candidates like Jesse Jackson, Shirley Chisholm, Carol Moseley Braun and Al Sharpton were inarticulate. He implied they weren't bright. He single them out because of race. He judged them as lesser candidates.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 13, 2014)

Unkotare said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



Who the fuck is "they"?  The pundit in question, whose name is Bob "not Bobby" Beckel, is a _singular entity_.  _They_ is plural.

DUH.

And get this, moron:
>> *Editing quotes.* You may selectively quote, provided that it does not change the context or meaning of the quote. When you comment on the quote, do it outside of the quote box. *Do not post inside of the quote box*. << (USMB sitewide rules)​



Unkotare said:


> That you haven't heard a particular term in a long time is irrelevant.



That it's been out of common parlance for several generations, however, is.  I am not on the panel.  Dumbass.



Unkotare said:


> That it may not be commonly used in decent public discourse is irrelevant.



It's absolutely relevant if one's goal is to honestly assess the reaction of the panel.  Which I understand is not your goal here because of that pesky H-word.



Unkotare said:


> A smart gambler would bet the farm that ol' Bobby has used the term more than a few times since after "color TV came out."



You might, but you're a blithering idiot.  A smart observer knows he or she doesn't have the background to judge that.  Again, we all understand that's not your goal here.



Unkotare said:


> If a conservative pundit went on a political round-table on CNN and issued a diatribe against "coloreds" or "the negroes" you know damn well there would be a shit storm of biblical proportions, and rightly so.



Another speculation fallacy, but it would depend on what the diatribe said.  If there were a value judgment therein on a racial basis, then it would deserve condemnation.  But on the basis of the term alone, no.  Not proven.  I remind you that in a recent year US Census forms were including "colored" as a choice to self-identify race.  It was put there because in some subcultures of some communities, that term is still a neutral for "black".  Possibly still is.  The word itself does not racism make.  And I'll put the same question to your wangly ass that I put to somebody else: is the name of the Washington NFL team "racist"-- by itself?



Unkotare said:


> Some racist douchebags on this site try to use that term as often as possible because they obviously get a little racist thrill out of doing so.



Abjectly irrelevant here.  Neither you nor I nor Bob "not Bobby" Beckel are among them.



Unkotare said:


> They demure their true intentions in a fashion not unlike how you are trying to play spinmaster for Bobby.



I don't think that word means what you think it means.  Are you trying to say _demur_?  I could edit it for you but that would be* AGAINST THE RULES*.  Me, I'm not "spinning" jack shit.  I know nothing about Bob Beckel save that "Bob" isn't "Bobby".  As is my custom I discuss the merits of the case, *based on what is or is not in the video*.  Not speculation fallacies or strawmen or any other kind of bullshit.  I leave that emotional basket weaving to unhinged trolls such as yourself.



Unkotare said:


> He didn't ask for your 'help' and you would be failing him miserably this way if he had. It is rare to find a person as utterly lacking in character or reason as you.



Like that.  Exactly.

That it?  Good.

Now LEAVE MY POSTS THE FUCK ALONE.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 13, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Who the fuck is "they"?  The pundit in question, whose name is Bob "not Bobby" Beckel, is a _singular entity_.  _They_ is plural.




"They" refers to the 'behaviors' (you really need to learn how to spell that word - or were you pretending to be British?) _you_ mentioned in _your_ post trying to play the apologist for big mouth Bobby. You won't be able to follow along if you don't improve your reading comprehension skills, idiot.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 13, 2014)

Pogo said:


> That it's been out of common parlance for several generations, however, is.





The frequency with which the term is used by racists like Bobby is assumption on your part, champ. Or are you claiming some strong familiarity with the racist crowd? In any case, the intent and result of offense does not rely on your assumption regarding the aforementioned, idiot.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 13, 2014)

Papageorgio said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Papageorgio said:
> ...



Yes, by elimination he did.  I agree with that, I said so earlier.  When he says "the first", he IS saying the previous ones were not blah blah blah, "marketable".  *That still doesn't attach to race.*

If one held that being articulate, good looking, whatever were traits that the black race does not possess, then it would be impossible for Barack O'bama, who is a black man, to possess them.  Obviously that's not what he was saying.  That _tells _you it's not based on race.  If you believe a race is inferior because of trait X, Y, Z, then you cannot trot out a member of that race who clearly possesses X, Y and Z.  It's a contradiction.  What the statement is saying is that here's the first black candidate _who will sell_.  Lots of wannabes come up from the minor leagues; they don't all make it to the Show.

And besides -- Al Sharpton IS inarticulate.  Gods help us if he ever got elected.  But he won't -- because he doesn't _sell_.

That's got nothing to do with his being black.  It has to do with him being a buffoon.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 13, 2014)

Pogo said:


> it would depend on what the diatribe said. ...





Remember when I called you a disingenuous douche? This is why.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 13, 2014)

Unkotare said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Who the fuck is "they"?  The pundit in question, whose name is Bob "not Bobby" Beckel, is a _singular entity_.  _They_ is plural.
> ...



Then no, the behaviours he posited were not about the Chinese race.

You're actually suggesting that this "Bobby" character was saying certain people come here, learn computers and go home to hack us, _*because they're genetically Chinese??*_

Wacko.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 13, 2014)

Unkotare said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > That it's been out of common parlance for several generations, however, is.
> ...



I do not purport to have any knowledge of how often the term is used by "Bobby", "Davy", "Mickey", "Peter", "Paul" or "Ringo", K?  I'm going by the one video we're supplied with.  Again, learn the fuck what a speculation fallacy is.  Dumbass.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 13, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...




They most certainly were, as I generously explained to you in a previous post. You seem to be laboring under the false impression that your mere denial carries any legitimacy. If you remain true to form, you will now carry on as if your denial is established fact. It's not. 

I'm sure Bobby can afford a better spinmaster than you. 

By the way, are you British?


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 13, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...




It's fun watching you try to prance around using terms you clearly do not understand. You seem to think it's aggrandizing, but you just make yourself look ever more the buffoon. 

You claim to be "going by" the video in the OP, but you don't seem to be able to understand it. Bobby sure as hell knew right away what he had done and why it was inappropriate, even for him.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 13, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Are you trying to say _demur_?





That _is_ what I meant to write. Thank you.


----------



## Dot Com (Jul 13, 2014)

ALL of us know that ULTIMATELY Fox is responsible for their employees.


----------



## kaz (Jul 13, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> ALL of us know that ULTIMATELY Fox is responsible for their employees.



When Fox puts Walter Mondale's campaign manager on the air to give the Democrat viewpoint, what the liberal says is on them.

So that's the standard you hold the liberal media to, right?  If they have a Republican on, and the Republican says something you don't like, you blame the liberal media who put them on?

LOL, maybe you do, maybe that's why you don't see anyone but liberals in the liberal media.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 13, 2014)

kaz said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> > ALL of us know that ULTIMATELY Fox is responsible for their employees.
> ...



There is no "liberal media".  Except to the redundancy extent that having a media (open discourse) is a Liberal idea.  But as far as BM (Big Media) there is no ideology.  BM isn't about ideology any more than Big Oil is about fuel efficiency.  It's about _making money_.  For itself.  And ideology don't pay no bills.  Profit does that.

We just did this a few minutes ago.  Somebody must have thrown the switch on the Parallel Universe.


----------



## Dot Com (Jul 13, 2014)

Pogo said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> > Dot Com said:
> ...



Do try to keep up kaz lol

As to the OP, Fox NEEDS to issue an apology!!!


----------



## kaz (Jul 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...



That wasn't the question and had nothing to do with the question.  Note you're the second liberal in the discussion who had to use the Republican party to show people who have different ideologies in the same party.  I know there are different ideologies in the Republican party.  They have socons, neocons, fiscal conservatives, libertarians, ...

The point is that Democrats are monolithic, you're authoritarian leftists who agree on every position.  You call yourselves liberals, progressives, moderates and like different words, but they are in the Democratic party a distinction without a difference.

So how do you guys disagree with Bill Beckel exactly who is on FoxNews agreeing with the Democrats in every discussion just like you do?  Put up some content.  You call yourselves liberals, but you're not, libertarians are liberals.  We believe in freedom, individuality and choice.  The people who call themselves liberals are rigidly intolerant and demand government force to impose their will.  There is nothing liberal about you.  Words mean nothing without the content to back them up.


----------



## kaz (Jul 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> kaz said:
> 
> 
> > Dot Com said:
> ...



Didn't we just have this discussion?

You, Synthahol, you're liberals.

The media is moderate.

You're all Democrats, so you agree on every position.  But you don't like the word with the media, and they don't like the word, so they are moderates.

That you agree on everything isn't relevant, that you like different words to describe yourself shows your diversity.


----------



## kaz (Jul 14, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > kaz said:
> ...



Apologize for what exactly?  You want Fox to apologize for allowing a liberal to embarrass you instead of covering up his bigotry like the liberal media would have done?


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Jul 14, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> I got nuthin' against Orientals other than the fact that you can never tell what they're thinking about. A smile can mean anything from- they like you going all the way to they want to put you in a bamboo cage  Michelle Malkin anyone?



Or maybe you're just dull witted and unperceptive, Scheiß Maus


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Jul 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> There is no "liberal media".  Except to the redundancy extent that having a media (open discourse) is a Liberal idea.



NOW there is some true fucking stupidity...

Look, you're a partisan hack, we get it. But the control of the MSM by the shameful democrats is well known and irrefutable. See, you don't acknowledge a political motive to Dan Rather forging documents to slander and libel Bush, because you agree with his motives. To anyone rational though, this was just another example of the fact that CBS is merely a propaganda outlet for the party.



> But as far as BM (Big Media) there is no ideology.  BM isn't about ideology any more than Big Oil is about fuel efficiency.  It's about _making money_.  For itself.  And ideology don't pay no bills.  Profit does that.



You of the left expect to control what information the public gets. America's own Goebbels, Edward Murrow, locked down television for the party in the 50's. The New York Times was already a mouthpiece for party goals. 

For decades. print and electronic media served the democratic party faithfully. The party decided what the nation would know.

But then Rush Limbaugh came along, followed by an easily accessible internet, and your stranglehold on information was broken.



> We just did this a few minutes ago.  Somebody must have thrown the switch on the Parallel Universe.



Denying that the  MSM is just a lackey for the party is no different than denying that water is wet - it merely reveals you to be stupid.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 14, 2014)

kaz said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Slyhunter said:
> ...



Oh androgynous self-back-patting poster please.  It's not even your question.  I can't remember who it was but somebody posed me the exact same question just a couple of days ago and I didn't wish to reinvent the wheel.

Your first paragraph is completely agreeing with my point; that political parties are machines designed to acquire power, and not houses of holy ideology.  They will bend and morph and stretch their own purported 'ideals' as far as they can in pursuit of that power.  Why is the Republican Party off limits to illustrate that?

OK, take an example from the other side, the Democratic Party that chugged along in its own intentionally blind bipolarity for a hundred years until the mid-20th century turning a blind eye to its ultraconservatve wing, the one populated by (Strom Thurmond, Trent Lott, Jesse Helms, David Duke et al), floating on a sea of duplicity for the sake of attaining and retaining power.  Once again as before -- one party, multiple ideologies.

Whichever.

The point was, "Liberal" doesn't mean left or right; it's in conflict with both.  Demagogues like Joe McCarthy and the whole "red scare" national groupthink exercise -- and four decades later Lee Atwater (his script obediently read by good-robot candidate George H.W. Bush) exhorted us to conflate the word "liberal" with "leftist".  If you take your cues from partisan hacks like Lee Atwater you're going to keep ending up in this kind of a rhetorical hole.

Oh wait, you're the same guy/gal/guess who just typed "liberal media" three times in a row in an attempt to get it to stick, so you're already in the hole....

Democrats are anything but "monolithic" (see above).  That's what Will Rogers meant when he said, "I belong to no organized political party; I am a Democrat".  Eighty years ago.  Had that not been based in truth it would never work as humor.

"How do you guys disagree with Bill Beckel exactly?"  Damned if I know; I don't follow Bob ("Bobby") Beckel (teen idol), and I keep looking around and standing in a mirror and while I may be slightly overweight I stil cannot be described as "you guys".  I don't know what the fuck his positions are, and unless he's running for some office that affects me, I don't care.  I hold my own positions to be self-evident.  That you can't take my points on their own is your failing, not mine.

You've gotta get over this crutch where you can only think in broad brush groupthink generalizations.  I am not a member of any organized or disorganized political party.  And that's intentional.  So your second-person plural pronouns are an glaring example of that crutch.  Continue speaking as if addressing some kind of monolith, and you'll be monolithically ignored as a crank.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 14, 2014)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > There is no "liberal media".  Except to the redundancy extent that having a media (open discourse) is a Liberal idea.
> ...



While comparing CBS with Lush Rimjob is a false comparison  (Rimjob is not and has never claimed to be a "news" source), it nevertheless illustrates my whole point.  Two different BM "ideologies", both making money?  That's because it's not about ideology and never was -- it's about money..... and always was.  Ideology makes zero money.  Think about it.

"until Rush Limbaugh came along", Pothead please.  You insult everybody from Bill Buckley to Charles Coughlin.  Do you have his poster on your bedroom ceiling too?  Does it have sticky spots on it?


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 14, 2014)

Enjoy the show as obvious liberals prance around on the far left until they are caught unable to defend their far-left positions and rank hypocrisy, at which point they start demanding that people suspend disbelief and accept that they are not really liberals after all so they can't be held accountable for their own political positions. 

The insecure lefty escape-hatch!


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 14, 2014)




----------



## Uncensored2008 (Jul 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> While comparing CBS with Lush Rimjob is a false comparison  (Rimjob is not and has never claimed to be a "news" source), it nevertheless illustrates my whole point.  Two different BM "ideologies", both making money?  That's because it's not about ideology and never was -- it's about money..... and always was.  Ideology makes zero money.  Think about it.
> 
> "until Rush Limbaugh came along", Pothead please.  You insult everybody from Bill Buckley to Charles Coughlin.  Do you have his poster on your bedroom ceiling too?  Does it have sticky spots on it?



While Buckley was a great man, he did not break the back of the leftist hold on information. There is no question that conservatives are vastly more intellectual than leftists, but even so, *National Review* lacked the popular appeal needed for the mainstream, it was too high-brow for the average person.

What Limbaugh did was design a show that appealed to working people. Because it was on the radio, it meant people could listen at their desks. He added humor and great skits to the political debate. It was brilliant in every way.

You hate him the way you do, precisely because he broke a wheel on the leftist media train. 

Limbaugh shook up the managed news of the MSN, but the Internet destroyed your complete lock on information. Your only hope is "net neutrality," to put a gag on content from sites that fail to tow the party line - in the name of "fairness," of course...


----------



## Pogo (Jul 14, 2014)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > While comparing CBS with Lush Rimjob is a false comparison  (Rimjob is not and has never claimed to be a "news" source), it nevertheless illustrates my whole point.  Two different BM "ideologies", both making money?  That's because it's not about ideology and never was -- it's about money..... and always was.  Ideology makes zero money.  Think about it.
> ...



Which all serves to buttress and confirm my very points about what BM is and why it's never going to dabble in ideology.  As already said repeatedly --- _ideology doesn't sell_. 

Bill Buckley's media presentation was all ideology, therefore, as you correctly note, it didn't 'sell'.  That's why it had to broadcast on PBS.  Duh??

Now that we agree cerebral doesn't sell soap, we can dismiss the wacko idea that our for-profit megalopoly media uses ideology to sell itself.  By mutual agreement.




Uncensored2008 said:


> What Limbaugh did was design a show that appealed to working people. Because it was on the radio, it meant people could listen at their desks.



Yeah we already have a term for that: "dumb down".

Once again, and again as already noted, a program consisting of rants not about policies but about the personal.  The intellectual banquet of Buckley abandoned in favor of emotional French fries.  "Slut! Slut! Slut" is not exactly a Buckleyesque tome.  But you know what it does --- it _sells_.   And that's why Lush Rimjob has a massive audience and Bill Buckley didn't.  QED.  Ideology doesn't sell; dumb-down does.  Duh.

And again, people were "listening at their desks" so to speak as far back as Charles Coughlin.  Who was also highly controversial conservative and who also therefore "sold".  BIG time.



Uncensored2008 said:


> He added humor and great skits to the political debate. It was brilliant in every way.



Because there's nothing funnier than slandering a female college student with "they're lined up around the block!!".  That's funny as a crutch.  Brilliant.



Uncensored2008 said:


> You hate him the way you do, precisely because he broke a wheel on the leftist media train.



I've never met him but I do hold what he does in contempt.  Because it's manipulative dishonesty, and he knows full well that what he's doing is stirring the shit "to make you mad" so that he can charge "confiscatory ad rates".  That's his description -- he's telling you straight out, and you're going  as you wank to his poster on your ceiling.

Sorry if that's graphic but I never did understand obsequious hero-worship.



Uncensored2008 said:


> Limbaugh shook up the managed news of the MSN, but the Internet destroyed your complete lock on information. Your only hope is "net neutrality," to put a gag on content from sites that fail to tow the party line - in the name of "fairness," of course...



The Fairness Doctrine not only no longer exists but could never have applied to the internet anyway per its own basis.  Challenge me on that and I will destroy you like I did in Rachel Carson.  Interesting juxtaposition though, as the repeal of the FD -- a policy that ensured that dialogue would prevail over monologue -- coincided with the rise of a misogynistic monologuist who screens his calls and never has guests, lest his monologue feel the hot breath of challenge on its neck.  How do you spell "opportunist"?


Puppets...


----------



## Slyhunter (Jul 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...


All Democrats are Liberals. That might've used to be different, and someday it may be different again, but today it's true.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Jul 14, 2014)

Slyhunter said:


> All Democrats are Liberals. That might've used to be different, and someday it may be different again, but today it's true.



Honestly, i don't know a single democrat who is a liberal.

I don't think the totalitarian democrats are even remotely compatible with the concepts and ideals of liberty.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 14, 2014)

Slyhunter said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Slyhunter said:
> ...



Bullshit.

Know any Democrats who support Affirmative Action?

Bob's your uncle.


----------



## hadit (Jul 14, 2014)

"The Five", the show on which the democrat uttered the slur, is not even a news show.  It's an talk show about the news.  The OP is misleading, to put it mildly.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 14, 2014)

hadit said:


> "The Five", the show on which the democrat uttered the slur, is not even a news show.  *It's an talk show about the news*.  The OP is misleading, to put it mildly.



That's what most of Fox Noise is, and exactly why it has the ratings it does.


----------



## kaz (Jul 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> You've gotta get over this crutch where you can only think in broad brush groupthink generalizations



"I" can only think in groupthink generalizations?  Dude, you just went through this whole rant without providing any example of anything, just your broad brush strokes.  Synthahol said Bill Beckel is a Democrat, not a liberal, you joined on his behalf.  I asked for specifics on what that means.  You have an answer or not?


----------



## MikeK (Jul 14, 2014)

This fellow Beckel is the type from whom such commentary flows quite naturally, so I don't see any reason for the notoriety.  It is in keeping with his personality and disposition and I'm sure he didn't mean anything malicious or offensive by it.  

We older, former street-corner types recognize this style of speech to be rather ordinary, animated, and at most inviting of like rejoinder from the subject of the comment.  So all this knee-jerk reaction to Beckel's beer-garden style of offhand observation is excessive and it encourages flavorless, boring speech habits.  

He said, _"Chinamen,_ which is what they were called back in the day when China was only a far-away place and the only Chinese who European/Americans ever saw were at the local laundry.  He didn't say, _"chink,"_ or _"gook"_ and there was nothing in his overall comment to suggest hostility toward or contempt for Chinese.  Beckel was simply being Beckel, which is why he is on that panel.  He is reminiscent of the guy five stools down in the 1950s gin mill who is expressing his opinion to all who might be interested.  Our option is to either buy him a beer or to ignore him.  And those of the PC generation who are intolerant of that non-PC generation and its now peculiar speech habits are invited in very specific terms to kiss our collective old ass.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 14, 2014)

MikeK said:


> there was nothing in his overall comment to suggest hostility toward or contempt for Chinese.




Yes there was, you lying sack of shit. Listen to the clip.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 14, 2014)

kaz said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > You've gotta get over this crutch where you can only think in broad brush groupthink generalizations
> ...



I sure don't.  I don't know jack squat about Bob (teen idol Bobby) Beckel and I it's not my yob to explain somebody else's point.  As noted before all of my views in here have been based on the video because that's all I have and frankly, all I need.  But I do know "Democrat" and "Liberal" are not synonyms.  And I think you do too.

And you're lying anyway - a quick peek at post 137 reveals YOU are the one who conflated _liberal_ with _Democrat_ within the same person, and Synth called you on the false equation.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 14, 2014)

Unkotare said:


> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> > there was nothing in his overall comment to suggest hostility toward or contempt for Chinese.
> ...



Riiiiiiiiiiiiight, because obviously what he's saying is that Chinese come here, learn computers and go back to hack back in _because their yellow peril genetics require them to_.

Wacko.


----------



## Slyhunter (Jul 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> > Pogo said:
> ...



affirmative action is liberal.


----------



## kaz (Jul 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> And you're lying anyway - a quick peek at post 137 reveals YOU are the one who conflated _liberal_ with _Democrat_ within the same person, and Synth called you on the false equation.



No shit, that's where we are.  Your reading skills could be improved.  Of course I said they are the same, what are you talking about?  I said they are the same, he said they are not, neither of you can explain the difference in terms of any policies, you can just spout hand waving BS.  What do Democrats support that liberals do not or vice versa and why don't either of you sheep ever argue those here, you know, it being a political message board and all.


----------



## MikeK (Jul 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > MikeK said:
> ...


Pogo,

What you see is why I have that nitwit, Unkotare, on Ignore.  

He is incapable of understanding and accepting the glowing fragment of truth in Beckel's comment, which was delivered in a style of ironic humor which is common to Beckel's generation and circle.  As I said, one has the option of buying Beckel a beer or ignoring his effort.  But I'm sure he meant nothing malicious by it, because if malice was his intention there are other paths he could have followed.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 14, 2014)

Slyhunter said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Slyhunter said:
> ...



Uh no grasshopper,  it's not.

To say "all men are created" is Liberal.  To start passing laws forcing it to be practiced via quotas, is leftist.  _There_ is your difference.  One is passivist; the other activist.

Which is kind of ironic since the guy who kick-started AA was Richard Nixon.  So much for the fallacy of absolute black-and-white political labels.


----------



## Pogo (Jul 14, 2014)

MikeK said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



I realise that; I have him on Ignore as well.  I just have this weakness for rhetorical low-hanging fruit.  He's still in hissyfit mode because he floated a fallacy and I called it out as such.


----------



## percysunshine (Jul 14, 2014)

Hey ... let's think outside the box.

Maybe Dan Snyder could change the name of his NFL football team to the 'Washington Redchinamen'.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 14, 2014)

Pogo said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > MikeK said:
> ...




This has already been explained to you, disingenuous douche. That  you keep pretending it hasn't strongly suggests that you are either incredibly stupid, incorrigibly dishonest, or both.


----------



## MarcATL (Jul 14, 2014)

mamooth said:


> I think Beckel should be fired. FOX, of course, will disagree. The righties here too, I imagine. Fake Democrats are a precious thing to the right, to be cherished and paid well, not tossed aside lightly.


I believe they should fire him too.

However, I haven't heard any protest from the viewers of the FOXNEWS, so it will be business as usual.



Stephanie said:


> You see how dishonest these people are?
> 
> *Beckel isn't  A HOST on fox news*
> 
> he's a political (guest) and mouthpiece for the Democrats


According to Wiki, Beckel is one of the 5 co-hosts of the show...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Five_(TV_program)

He's featured as the first host on the FOXNEWS "The Five" webpage.

Hosts | The Five | Fox News

Ya dummy.


----------



## Papageorgio (Jul 14, 2014)

MarcATL said:


> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> > I think Beckel should be fired. FOX, of course, will disagree. The righties here too, I imagine. Fake Democrats are a precious thing to the right, to be cherished and paid well, not tossed aside lightly.
> ...



I think he should keep his job, as insensitive as it was, he should apologize and like every other dim wit, it keeps them on display of how not to act. I have said this for both party's. 


Sent from my iPad using an Android.


----------



## Slyhunter (Jul 14, 2014)

MarcATL said:


> mamooth said:
> 
> 
> > I think Beckel should be fired. FOX, of course, will disagree. The righties here too, I imagine. Fake Democrats are a precious thing to the right, to be cherished and paid well, not tossed aside lightly.
> ...



Fire him for saying Chinamen? Damn I'm glad I don't work for you.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Jul 15, 2014)

Unkotare said:


> Pogo said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...




It's Pogo - both is a given..


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 17, 2014)

Nobody watches "The Five", so it really doesn't matter what they say over there. 

They had to put five of them on there so that no wingnut could say "Bob got lower ratings than Glen Beck!" (True, but you can sell commercials on it.) 

NOthing said there matches the Crazy Beck did every day.


----------



## Slyhunter (Jul 17, 2014)

JoeB131 said:


> Nobody watches "The Five", so it really doesn't matter what they say over there.
> 
> They had to put five of them on there so that no wingnut could say "Bob got lower ratings than Glen Beck!" (True, but you can sell commercials on it.)
> 
> NOthing said there matches the Crazy Beck did every day.



You stand corrected


> On October 3, 2011, after successful ratings and high popularity, Fox News announced that The Five would become the permanent 5p.m. series, as the program was previously announced to last only during the summer.[4]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Five_(TV_program)



> For the second Friday in a row, Fox News The Five was the highest-rated cable news show in the 25-54 demo, this time with 321K viewers. The Kelly File on Fox was #2 with 283K followed by The OReilly Factor with 258K. The Five also beat its CNN and MSNBC competition combined in the demo and total viewers.
> 
> In total viewers, The Five came in second place with 2.117M behind only Bill OReillys show, which had 2.160M. Megyn Kelly came in third with 1.953M.


Cable News Ratings | June 13, 2014 | Mediaite


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 17, 2014)

Joeblow is quick to comment without having the slightest fucking idea what he's talking about, as usual.


----------



## FJO (Jul 17, 2014)

JoeB131 said:


> Nobody watches "The Five", so it really doesn't matter what they say over there.
> 
> They had to put five of them on there so that no wingnut could say "Bob got lower ratings than Glen Beck!" (True, but you can sell commercials on it.)
> 
> NOthing said there matches the Crazy Beck did every day.



JoeB131, how does your foot taste?


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Jul 17, 2014)

FJO said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Nobody watches "The Five", so it really doesn't matter what they say over there.
> ...



Like shit.

I mean, he had to put his foot up his ass to get it in his mouth, so it tastes like shit....


----------

