Black actors at the Oscars PART 2! WSJ Agrees with ME!

[Don Vito Corleone]

Well put, vi_edit. Honestly even if the WSJ as a whole did agree with AaronP I can't see how it would legitimize his statements - is there anything magical about the printed word that makes it any more legitimate than any individual's opinion?

 

[Ameesh]

its the editorial page retard, not the newspapers standing on the issue.

 

[clarkmo]

<< What he said was a minority group in his country not all members of that minority everywhere. He was specific for a reason. >>


Yeah, but you can't believe that if he goes to another country and runs into another gypsy band that he will be viewing them thru an unblemished lens, just as I, if I got on a plane in Paris, would still look twice and think differently about an Arabic appearance boarding the same plane.

<< Yes based on experience but pre-judging someone is not racism. >>

It's all in the definition I suppose.

<< The ICERD (International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination) defines racism as follows:
?Any distinction, exclusion, restriction, or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment, or exercise, on equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, or any other field of public life.? >>

 

[Texmaster]

<< Yeah, but you can't believe that if he goes to another country and runs into another gypsy band that he will be viewing them thru an unblemished lens, just as I, if I got on a plane in Paris, would still look twice and think differently about an Arabic appearance boarding the same plane. >>



Both incidents you describe are based on personal experiences. And no I don't think he would pre-judge a person of that ethnicity in another country. He might be cautious but that is not racism.



<< It's all in the definition I suppose.

<< The ICERD (International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination) defines racism as follows:
?Any distinction, exclusion, restriction, or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment, or exercise, on equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, or any other field of public life.? >>

>>



So if I don't like some people in a city because I don't like their "squash fest" which is a living part of their cultural town I am a racist? Come on.

 

[docmanhattan]

<< Well put, vi_edit. Honestly even if the WSJ as a whole did agree with AaronP I can't see how it would legitimize his statements - is there anything magical about the printed word that makes it any more legitimate than any individual's opinion? >>

How wouldn't an established newpapers editiorial that concurs with your opinion help your opinion seem more legitimate?

C'mon, you're telling me that a well respected newspaper is not a valid resource for citing that your idea is legitimate? That's just silly. While the printed page isn't "magical," it certainly isn't as trivial and meaningless as you're implying.

 

[NFS4]

<<

<< Well put, vi_edit. Honestly even if the WSJ as a whole did agree with AaronP I can't see how it would legitimize his statements - is there anything magical about the printed word that makes it any more legitimate than any individual's opinion? >>

How wouldn't an established newpapers editiorial that concurs with your opinion help your opinion seem more legitimate?

C'mon, you're telling me that a well respected newspaper is not a valid resource for citing that your idea is legitimate? That's just silly. While the printed page isn't "magical," it certainly isn't as trivial and meaningless as you're implying. >>


B/C it's from the OPINION Journal section. Who gives a crap what they say. I don't care what the WSJ said, after reading AaronP's last thread, it left a sour taste in my mouth as to how ignorant and obtuse people can be:disgust:

It's just an awards show you maggots, geez. GET OVER IT!!!!!

 

[vi edit]

Look at the big bold image at the top of that page...OPINION JOURNAL.

Opinions are like assholes, everyone's got one, and they all stink.

 

[ScottyB]

I only "pre-judge" people based on location. If I am in my home town or a safe part of the country I don't think twice about someones race. If I am in downtown Detroit/Flint/ any other city, you can bet I "pre-judge" people. BTW my best friend is a minority and I have black school friends, I am not racist.

 

[Lucky]

what he wrote is pretty sure. in our eagerness to forget the past we only further divide the battle lines in the present and the future.

 

[docmanhattan]

<< B/C it's from the OPINION Journal section. Who gives a crap what they say. I don't care what the WSJ said, after reading AaronP's last thread, it left a sour taste in my mouth as to how ignorant and obtuse people can be

It's just an awards show you maggots, geez. GET OVER IT!!!!! >>

Ah. so by your reasoning, who gives a crap what you say because it's just your opinion and your's isn't even echoed in a nationally syndicated newspaper. So sad.

As you've said before, if you don't like it and it leaves a sour taste in your mouth; then don't frickin'" read it.

 

[Pocatello]

I agree with NFS4, people get all burned up for nothing. The award is over, get over it.
If your favorite movies or actors didn't win, tough. Cary Grant, one of the greatest actor of all time, never won an Oscar until he got an honorary Oscar.
Let the winners enjoy their awards, I think they all deserved it, and those who didn't win, they were great, but there are many greater than them who had never won.

 

[NFS4]

<<

<< B/C it's from the OPINION Journal section. Who gives a crap what they say. I don't care what the WSJ said, after reading AaronP's last thread, it left a sour taste in my mouth as to how ignorant and obtuse people can be

It's just an awards show you maggots, geez. GET OVER IT!!!!! >>

Ah. so by your reasoning, who gives a crap what you say because it's just your opinion and your's isn't even echoed in a nationally syndicated newspaper. So sad.

As you've said before, if you don't like it and it leaves a sour taste in your mouth; then don't frickin'" read it. >>


Backing up your claims with thoughts from an OPINION section of a newspaper is not very credible IMHO. It'd be like me making a statement about politics and then using Bill Mahr, or Bill O'Reilley to prove that "my side" is right. It's foolish and unneeded.

The awards show is over, go bark up another tree.

 

[BlueApple]

AaronP: You didn't gain anything by this except more people bashing each other and name-calling. Good job, what a fine member of this forum you are.

 

[Texmaster]

<<

<<

<< B/C it's from the OPINION Journal section. Who gives a crap what they say. I don't care what the WSJ said, after reading AaronP's last thread, it left a sour taste in my mouth as to how ignorant and obtuse people can be

It's just an awards show you maggots, geez. GET OVER IT!!!!! >>

Ah. so by your reasoning, who gives a crap what you say because it's just your opinion and your's isn't even echoed in a nationally syndicated newspaper. So sad.

As you've said before, if you don't like it and it leaves a sour taste in your mouth; then don't frickin'" read it. >>


Backing up your claims with thoughts from an OPINION section of a newspaper is not very credible IMHO. It'd be like me making a statement about politics and then using Bill Mahr, or Bill O'Reilley to prove that "my side" is right. It's foolish and unneeded.

The awards show is over, go bark up another tree. >>



NSF4 I have seen you quote harware sites to make a point and its only their opinion as well and I dont see others doing this to you. Thats just hypocritical on your part.

BTW, even if the source is using their opinion if their logic follows FACTS (like O'Reilly) your point is mute.

 

[docmanhattan]

<< Look at the big bold image at the top of that page...OPINION JOURNAL.

Opinions are like assholes, everyone's got one, and they all stink. >>

Interesting. But we're not talking about the veracity of his opinion, but whether or not it's legitimate. In this thread, AaronP cited the WSJ as having the same opinion as he does. And the only thing that I've seen countered is that he's racist for saying that there might've been racial overtones to the Oscars and that the WSJ is nothing. Okay. Fine. Not the most riveting counters though.

Admittedly, I found race to be brought up a lot during the awards, but does that make the annoucers racist? No. It does indicate that it was on the mind of the media however. I think most people wouldn't have had a second thought except that it was acknowledged so much during the awards. Whatever, right? Hopefully now Hollywood can move on.

/shrug

 

[Lucky]

FACTS (like O'Reilly)

 

[Ameesh]

<<

<<

<< B/C it's from the OPINION Journal section. Who gives a crap what they say. I don't care what the WSJ said, after reading AaronP's last thread, it left a sour taste in my mouth as to how ignorant and obtuse people can be

It's just an awards show you maggots, geez. GET OVER IT!!!!! >>

Ah. so by your reasoning, who gives a crap what you say because it's just your opinion and your's isn't even echoed in a nationally syndicated newspaper. So sad.

As you've said before, if you don't like it and it leaves a sour taste in your mouth; then don't frickin'" read it. >>


Backing up your claims with thoughts from an OPINION section of a newspaper is not very credible IMHO. It'd be like me making a statement about politics and then using Bill Mahr, or Bill O'Reilley to prove that "my side" is right. It's foolish and unneeded.

The awards show is over, go bark up another tree. >>




AaronP uses more credible sources like Rush LImbaugh, Strom Thurmond and David Duke.

 

[Texmaster]

<< FACTS (like O'Reilly)

>>



Thats right baby. If you ever watch his show he always has a fact sheet study he is basing his conclusions on and when he doesn't he'll say so.

Not like Dan Rather

 

[NFS4]

<<

<<

<<

<< B/C it's from the OPINION Journal section. Who gives a crap what they say. I don't care what the WSJ said, after reading AaronP's last thread, it left a sour taste in my mouth as to how ignorant and obtuse people can be

It's just an awards show you maggots, geez. GET OVER IT!!!!! >>

Ah. so by your reasoning, who gives a crap what you say because it's just your opinion and your's isn't even echoed in a nationally syndicated newspaper. So sad.

As you've said before, if you don't like it and it leaves a sour taste in your mouth; then don't frickin'" read it. >>


Backing up your claims with thoughts from an OPINION section of a newspaper is not very credible IMHO. It'd be like me making a statement about politics and then using Bill Mahr, or Bill O'Reilley to prove that "my side" is right. It's foolish and unneeded.

The awards show is over, go bark up another tree. >>



NSF4 I have seen you quote harware sites to make a point and its only their opinion as well and I dont see others doing this to you. Thats just hypocritical on your part.

BTW, even if the source is using their opinion if their logic follows FACTS (like O'Reilly) your point is mute. >>



There's a difference. When I post news, I simply quote their article and say "look, so and so has posted a new article." Reviewing "most" pieces of hardware is about cold hard facts. Hardware and humans aren't the same thing. Humans live breathe and can respond. Hardware just sits there.

Also, if I quote a website, it is quoting FACT (product specs, performance, etc.), not opinion. Big difference.

 

[Texmaster]

<< AaronP uses more credible sources like ....and David Duke. >>



Ah, another Moron calling Aaronp a racist without a shred of evidence. Well done.

 

[docmanhattan]

<< There's a difference. When I post news, I simply quote their article and say "look, so and so has posted a new article." Reviewing a piece of hardware is about cold hard facts. Hardware and humans aren't the same thing. Humans live breathe and can respond. Hardware just sits there. >>

Humans just sit there. Just look at ATOT.

/cracks self up

 

[Texmaster]

<< NSF4 I have seen you quote harware sites to make a point and its only their opinion as well and I dont see others doing this to you. Thats just hypocritical on your part.

BTW, even if the source is using their opinion if their logic follows FACTS (like O'Reilly) your point is mute. >>



There's a difference. When I post news, I simply quote their article and say "look, so and so has posted a new article." Reviewing a piece of hardware is about cold hard facts. Hardware and humans aren't the same thing. Humans live breathe and can respond. Hardware just sits there.

Also, if I quote a website, it is quoting FACT (product specs, performance, etc.), not opinion. Big difference.[/i] >>



LOL I knew you would say that

So you have NEVER used a link to a hardware site to support an arguement you made? Not even once?

BTW hardware reviews are based on opinions and test done by others with specific equipement that not everyone uses. Its hardly fact.

 

[NFS4]

<<

<< NSF4 I have seen you quote harware sites to make a point and its only their opinion as well and I dont see others doing this to you. Thats just hypocritical on your part.

BTW, even if the source is using their opinion if their logic follows FACTS (like O'Reilly) your point is mute. >>



There's a difference. When I post news, I simply quote their article and say "look, so and so has posted a new article." Reviewing a piece of hardware is about cold hard facts. Hardware and humans aren't the same thing. Humans live breathe and can respond. Hardware just sits there.

Also, if I quote a website, it is quoting FACT (product specs, performance, etc.), not opinion. Big difference. >>



LOL I knew you would say that

So you have NEVER used a link to a hardware site to support an arguement you made? Not even once?

[/i] >>


Of course I've used a link to support an argument, but that's where the similarity ends.

1) I'm not linking to an article to suck up someone's OPINION. I'm linking to the hard evidence, that being benchmarks, press releases, specs, pictures, screenshots, etc.
2) Me linking to an article to back up my claim with opinion statements from another website are a rarety. i.e. if Tom's Hardware were to say that the Asus GF4 sucked a fat one.

 

[Pocatello]

I don't know AaronP, have never read any of his topic, don't know if he's a racist or not
But I have to say in general
You don't have to yell "Look everyone, I'm a racist, and I hate certain groups" to be labeled a racist ? From my experience, the worst racists aren't the one wearing the white robes or wearing swastika armbands, they are too subtle and smart for such things.

 

[Texmaster]

<< Of course I've used a link to support an argument, but that's where the similarity ends.

1) I'm not linking to an article to suck up someone's OPINION. I'm linking to the hard evidence, that being benchmarks, press releases, specs, pictures, screenshots, etc.
2) Me linking to an article to back up my claim with opinion statements from another website are a rarety. i.e. if Tom's Hardware were to say that the Asus GF4 sucked a fat one. >>



Like I said before, hardware reviews are based on opinions and test done by others with specific equipement that not everyone uses. Its hardly fact.

All I'm saying is taking the high road on an issue where you have done exactly what you claim to disapprove of be it a hardware or political forum is being hypotcritical.