Overreaction to Paula Deen?

Citation needed. I see quite a bit of right-wing paranoia about that, but in any serious commentary the accusation is that the right don't care about the poor and that supporters of Obama simply feared that his being black (skinned of course, since if black is about genetics and culture then he's actually more white than black) would help racists oppose him.

As far as Paula Deen goes, xs650 had it right when he pointed out that she should have been dropped because of her actions over her diabetes and this was really just finishing her off. For those who don't know, Paula Deen didn't publicly acknowledge her diabetes until 2 years after she'd been diagnosed and only did so cynically as part of being a paid spokesperson for a diabetes medication. That began her marginalization and led to the puppetry with her son's show. She's so cynical, she may have been afraid that any full apology would lead to her losing the racist market.

 

Maybe it's part of the war on women.

 

I think her corporate sponsors moved on to something else.

The question lingers which is the Public Lie and Private truth.

Words are cheap, actions matter.

Paula needs to reach out to the B community and make real contributions. Adoption? Charity foundation to help minority children attend universities. NAACP Corporate sponsor. Talking circuit but she is such a poor public speaker. PR Press Release centered around her activities. ETC

America loves a Come Back Story !

Can Paula change? Can she see all people regardless of color as equals? If she can show she has changed, the world is her oyster.

 

congrats of a sort are in order.
Through over 100 posts and a specific answer to your question by me, you remain willfully ignorant.

Second, a hollow apology, no matter how extravagant the PR campaign, does not erase PD's present racism.

 

All you have to do is watch Chris Matthews on MSNBC.

BTW: Republicans aren't paranoid about it. They're just sick and tired of getting lectured about race from a group of people that are to their core racist.

It's like being lecture on gun control from an administration that allowed and assisted thousands of assault weapons to cross and recross our border to Mexican drug cartels.

Or being condemned for torture because we poured water on 3 or 4 terrorists faces to get information. While Obama et. al. Indiscriminately drones them, any nearby innocents and America citizens without due process.

Or being accused of destroying our freedoms, I.e. Patriot Act, then when Prog's take over office they lobby congress for increased license to spy on American's, get turned down and go ahead and do it anyway.

It's not paranoia, it disgust at the two faced, double standard, lying hypocrisy of the Progressive movement.

 

Your a hypocrite if you don't condemn the same racist language which Barack Obama used in his book "Dreams." On page 229 he uses the term "Cracker" and the term "House Nigger" in reference to his Grandfather.

Have a nice day my Progressive yet hypocritical friend. . .

 

No.

YOU dwell on her utterings from 30 years ago, because it fits your desire to rehabilitate her standing. I keep pointing out that it is her current racism that is the problem, and I posted for your benefit (and apparent inability to use Google) specifics. Which you then happily ignore and keep posting the idiotic statement that to your knowledge ...

This is going to surprise you, but if you persist in ignoring reality; if you stick your head in the sand and cover your ears when facts you do not like are presented, you will in fact remain ignorant.

Well, at least you can remain true to yourself, and continue to say "to my knowledge ..."
The downside is remaining a fool.

 

^ The hypocrisy that drips from this thread is getting so deep I need waders. LoL!

 

I think "How" and "When" we are using any terminology does play a huge part in it's acceptance or condemnation. Context of chronological time and INTENT behind the use of any terminology or language does make a difference. As I admitted in my earlier post, I'm blissfully ignorant of this whole "Paula Deen" situation, and although I could google it and make myself aware of the specifics....I don't care. Didn't care about Paula Deen before this happened...don't care now.
However, I would say there is a degree of self righteous ridiculousness in regards to the degree of reaction. Even reading this thread. We don't even type or say the word Nigger....it's the "N" word.
Absolutely no doubt, no argument,- that today, yesterday, 10 years ago, 100 years ago the term "Nigger" was a negative, highly derogatory term. In some applications one would say it was a term used to try to inflict an evil amount of damage to the image of individuals and an entire race.
But language is a reflection of humanity for good and bad. And it's not static...ever. We give words their power, I think in modern music, and in very specific situations, there are times when the term Nigger is used, with no intent to harm. Therefore the language has evolved or adapted.

It upsets me, when we retroactively try to deny our own history, or inflict todays evolved political correctness on the past. Such as Libraries banning Mark Twain and Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Fin because of the inclusion of the term "Nigger".

Does that mean I deny the hurtful, sometimes evil use of the term Nigger? No. Does that mean I want to casually redefine it so it becomes an acceptable term today on all levels? No.

However, I do think we need to allow for recognition of the intent behind the usage of any term- because it isn't static. I also think as far as works of literature or art, we need to respect the historical realities of the time. I don't like the removal or denial of usage because TODAY we've evolved beyond it. If somebody is writing about a character or a time period where any particular term would of commonly been used? If it's accurate as to the description of the time? To deny it's usage based on today's sensibilities is a form of IMO dangerous retroactive censorship.

Nigger...is part of our language. It's part of our history. What it means..how it is used, how it is accepted or condemned is always in flux and changing. I'm not going to condemn someone for usage of the term Nigger, without knowledge or thought as to historical and contemporary context and maybe most importantly the INTENT behind the usage.

 

While I have scanned the 6+ pages in this thread I have not read each and every word of every post so my apologies if I say something that has already been covered.

I think that she has been let go from Food Network and all of the other endorsement deals as much for how she responded to this when it first came out as to the scandal itself. Had she just made a simple statement that what she did was unacceptable and that she was sorry I think that she would have weathered the storm worse for wear but largely intact. Of course there would have been a lot of flowery language but it would come down to I was wrong and I am sorry. Her video explanations were just terrible and made a bad situation worse.

 

This thread is about PD, not you Chuckie. Fwiw though, I have no reason to consider you a racist.

Inform yourself about PD so that your opinions are not ignorant drivel; stop ignoring information you "ask" for when it does not fit your preconceptions.

 

Citation still needed. You'll have to get me some quotes to back up your accusation of accustations of racism. If I want news, I read between the lines of news reports and if I want to laugh at the ridiculousness of jumped-up shock-jocks I watch the Daily Show. (I hate journalism more than I hate politics and I like satire.)

Blanket accusation.

Firstly, besides the waste of money, I don't see why you're so upset about it if you believe the modifying gun control laws would have no effect on supply.

Secondly, a bungled undercover operation undertaken under current gun laws in order to identify supply chains is very different matter to having a policy on stricter gun control. Maybe if the laws were changed there wouldn't be such an issue and they wouldn't have done it.

I find it sad that you see no difference between torture and killing.

All of those Democrat politicians are hypocrites because they who voted against the Patriot Act but then, oh, wait, they all voted for it.

Obviously you've been missing all of the Progressives (what is the actual definition of a Progressive, by the way, because I have a feeling people are using it to label every one who's not a conservative?) who actually support personal freedom (that doesn't kill and harm lots of other people) and hate a large number of the laws enacted recently that help governments avoid the brave domestic policies that would actually allow them to stop supporting oppressive foreign governments and therefore dramatically reduce the number of people who hate them. You know, like promoting renewable energy, energy efficiency, urban planning, public transit, tougher fuel economy standards, carbon taxation and comprehensive recycling. And of course the big one for the USA, which would be actually to start publicly berating Israel when it does something with which the USA doesn't agree.

For a start, there's really no "Progressive movement". There are campaign groups focused on different policies and there are Progressives. It's not like the "Tea Party" that was specifically created and funded to mobilize and use people to support a particular policy approach.

You connected Obama to it all but he's a centrist, the ultimate in pragmatic politicians, as political observers have been saying since long before he was elected.

Finally, it is paranoia if you think that something is happening and it really isn't and you still haven't provided me with any evidence that's it's happening. And "it's happening" doesn't mean "someone said something" and especially not "a journalist said something", because people say stuff for money or because they're stupid or insane, it means that there's some widely held viewpoint.

PS Who here has accused you of racism because don't like Obama?

 

The short answer is your comparing apples to oranges

 

Very nice post, but in this last sentence I'll guess you mean "Who here has accused you of racism because you do not like Obama policies unrelated to racism?"