My Point Of View
Quote: AussieAgain, it is a cop out to refuse to email him and shows you aren't serious about wanting to test it. Maybe you will test it if it's put in your lap. You seem to expect him to go to the effort of posting it here but you won't even make the minimal effort to email him to ask. That says it all.
Oh, come ON. He lurks here, he posts here, he has his avatar, JerryLogan, monitor and scream at everything said here, and you think he's somehow unaware of exactly what those members of this forum are asking him to provide? Email or no email?
And as another poster has pointed out, the burden of proof is on the person making the utterly fantastical claim, not the person(s) who are skeptical of it.
Quote: DocSo I have been wondering: How can it be that two individuals who both clearly have the ability to engage in intelligent, polite discussions with me find it so difficult to EVER conduct similar conversations with each other? I understand that there are those people who just prefer to pick fights or taunt others, but it really seems strange to me that they can both be so reasonable for me to talk with (via postings) while they constantly have conflicts when interacting with each other or with other members of the forum.
See Jerry's immediate response to your post if you want to know the difference between him and me.
He is homophobic, bigoted, racist, and often extremely offensive. I am not. He takes deliberate, willful pleasure in annoying and antagonizing other people, not only on this forum, but by his own admission, in his workplace. I do not. He accompanies virtually all of his posts wherein he disagrees with someone with a personal attack/insult of some sort. I do not.
It should be noted that I have three times in the recent past offered--POLITELY--to make peace with Jerry, and told him that I would engage in civil conversation with him if he would do the same. He refused each time, and very nastily at that. I no longer respond directly to him, because it isn't worth the aggravation.
Quote: mkl654321Quote: Doc
He is homophobic, bigoted, racist, and often extremely offensive.
Why can you get away with name calling? What makes you so special and so different from Jerry?"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
Just thought I'd let you know I have listend to your podcasts and I like them.
I always like to hear people talking about vp.
Thanks
Quote: EvenBobWhy can you get away with name calling? What makes you so special and so different from Jerry?
Because calling Jerry "homophobic, bigoted, racist, and often extremely offensive" isn't name-calling; it's a simple statement of fact.
I doubt that anyone on this forum (even you, if you're in the mood to be objective) would disagree.
And what makes me different from Jerry? See my post addressing that very question. I may be the subject of his frankly kind of creepy obsessions, but I'm nothing like him. For one thing, I don't anger people just for the fun of it.
Quote: mkl654321Because calling Jerry "homophobic, bigoted, racist, and often extremely offensive" isn't name-calling; it's a simple statement of fact.
Thats exactly what I knew you'd say, because its what every name caller says. They can use the foulest epithets and think they can weasel out of it by saying its a 'fact'. Nice try.
>>I doubt that anyone on this forum (even you, if you're in the mood to be objective) would disagree.>>
Thats not the point. For somebody who says he's got a 190 IQ, you have all the subtlety of a blacksmith. Try and be clever, try and be imaginative. Blunt schoolyard bullying needs to be beneath you. I just insulted you 3 or 4 times and never called you one name. Its an artform.
Quote: mkl654321Oh, come ON. He lurks here, he posts here, he has his avatar, JerryLogan, monitor and scream at everything said here, and you think he's somehow unaware of exactly what those members of this forum are asking him to provide? Email or no email?
And as another poster has pointed out, the burden of proof is on the person making the utterly fantastical claim, not the person(s) who are skeptical of it.
Unless you have some sort of special power to see what the guy is doing 24/7 then you have no idea about whether he lurks here or not or how much time he spends monitoring the forum. I understand that in your little world 90hr weeks on this forum are common place but for the normal sub-190 iq (lol) person forums like these are nothing more than an interesting aside to their real world life. Given that the man in question has made a total of 9 posts he hardly seems a likely serial lurker so you'll have to find another nonsense argument to go with.
So once again, given that he clearly spends very little time thinking about this forum and the people who's full time jobs seem to be monitoring its content, I'd say that it is perfectly reasonable to suggest that anyone wanting to test his "evidence" send a short email to ask him for it. Someone has now done that so we will see what he comes back with. In the meantime see if you can work yourself into a lather about something that actually matters, preferably outside the virtual confines of this forum. It will do you the world of good.
Quote: AussieUnless you have some sort of special power to see what the guy is doing 24/7 then you have no idea about whether he lurks here or not or how much time he spends monitoring the forum. I understand that in your little world 90hr weeks on this forum are common place but for the normal sub-190 iq (lol) person forums like these are nothing more than an interesting aside to their real world life. Given that the man in question has made a total of 9 posts he hardly seems a likely serial lurker so you'll have to find another nonsense argument to go with.
So once again, given that he clearly spends very little time thinking about this forum and the people who's full time jobs seem to be monitoring its content, I'd say that it is perfectly reasonable to suggest that anyone wanting to test his "evidence" send a short email to ask him for it. Someone has now done that so we will see what he comes back with. In the meantime see if you can work yourself into a lather about something that actually matters, preferably outside the virtual confines of this forum. It will do you the world of good.
It's very easy to tell when a member has last visited the forum, whether or not he posted.
And your snide tone of voice does nothing to enhance the discussion. Personal remarks such as the ones you've made, above, have no relevance. I don't know if posts, and remarks in general, like the ones above are normal where you come from, but they're not very helpful here. I don't really care how much you post or don't, but you have nothing other than ignorance and idle speculation from which to make any such remarks about me.
In any case, I think I'll turn you off now, and await any response from JerryLoganRobSinger with bated breath.
Quote: EvenBobThats exactly what I knew you'd say, because its what every name caller says. They can use the foulest epithets and think they can weasel out of it by saying its a 'fact'. Nice try.
>>I doubt that anyone on this forum (even you, if you're in the mood to be objective) would disagree.>>
Thats not the point. For somebody who says he's got a 190 IQ, you have all the subtlety of a blacksmith. Try and be clever, try and be imaginative. Blunt schoolyard bullying needs to be beneath you. I just insulted you 3 or 4 times and never called you one name. Its an artform.
"Weasel out of it?" I just AFFIRMED it. I just REITERATED it.
And I don't need to be "clever" to describe Jerry. Ordinary, simple descriptions will do.
And hooray for you for insulting me 3 or 4 times without calling me one name. You are very clever. Of course, you have almost as much skill and practice at hurling insults as Jerry. I freely admit that I'm not nearly as good at that as either of you.
Quote: mkl654321"Weasel out of it?" I just AFFIRMED it. I just REITERATED it.
.
I can call somebody a f@@@@@g bas@@@d and give you 6 good reasons why he is. That doesn't excuse or nullify the name calling.
Quote: EvenBobI can call somebody a f@@@@@g bas@@@d and give you 6 good reasons why he is. That doesn't excuse or nullify the name calling.
Actually, it very much does. Hitler was a f@@@ing bas@@@d. Would you disagree? Would you say that it is wrong to say that about him?
In any case, I seek neither excuse nor nullification. I stand by what I said about Jerry.
Quote: mkl654321Actually, it very much does. Hitler was a f@@@ing bas@@@d. Would you disagree? Would you say that it is wrong to say that about him?
.
It doesn't matter if its true or not, name calling isn't allowed here, no matter what your excuse is.
Quote: EvenBobIt doesn't matter if its true or not, name calling isn't allowed here, no matter what your excuse is.
Whatever, Bob. I told you I make no excuses for what I said--I stand by it. Go ahead and continue to say otherwise if it gets you off.
Quote: mkl654321Because calling Jerry "homophobic, bigoted, racist, and often extremely offensive" isn't name-calling; it's a simple statement of fact. I doubt that anyone on this forum (even you, if you're in the mood to be objective) would disagree.
Least of all Logan.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: mkl654321Quote: Doc
He is homophobic, bigoted, racist, and often extremely offensive.
Why can you get away with name calling? What makes you so special and so different from Jerry?
Whooaa, Bob! The above is an accurate replication of your post here. I never, ever made the comment attributed to me in your post, and I take a bit of offense. And I don't think mkl ever made that kind of reply to me -- his replies to me have always been polite, at least in the points that were directed at me. For that matter, so have Jerry's replies to me, which was a major point of my earlier post.
I think, Bob, that you probably just made a mistake in trying to format your post, but that certainly didn't show up in this thread in a way I would have liked.
As a side note, I once raised the question of whether we would ever see a thread in which Jerry, Bob, and mkl ever agreed on anything. We have come close a few times, and I have seen times when Bob was disagreeing with both Jerry and mkl, but I don't think I have ever seen harmony reached. Wouldn't that be an amazing sight?
Quote: DocAs a side note, I once raised the question of whether we would ever see a thread in which Jerry, Bob, and mkl ever agreed on anything. We have come close a few times, and I have seen times when Bob was disagreeing with both Jerry and mkl, but I don't think I have ever seen harmony reached. Wouldn't that be an amazing sight?
You want a chaos rift to open up in the space-time continuum and the earth to spiral into it and be destroyed?
Quote: mkl654321Because calling Jerry "homophobic, bigoted, racist, and often extremely offensive" isn't name-calling; it's a simple statement of fact.
I doubt that anyone on this forum (even you, if you're in the mood to be objective) would disagree.
And what makes me different from Jerry? See my post addressing that very question. I may be the subject of his frankly kind of creepy obsessions, but I'm nothing like him. For one thing, I don't anger people just for the fun of it.
I guess you missed the part about where RS told the forum that I have a wife who was born in Mexico. Guess you must have been correcting some of those fresh men papers!
It's absolutely awful that you have to call me all kinds of names and insult me while you still have your foot in your mouth.
Quote: mkl654321Because calling Jerry "homophobic, bigoted, racist, and often extremely offensive" isn't name-calling; it's a simple statement of fact.
You force me to do this, but I'm calling your bluff, let's see your cards. I don't think Jerry would dispute the "homophobic" or "extremely offensive," (correct me if I'm wrong), so please concentrate on "bigoted" and "racist." Prove your case, apologize, or admit you broke rule #1. I invite you to submit your reply in the FSZ, just so you can answer without being encumbered by the rules.
Quote: WizardYou force me to do this, but I'm calling your bluff, let's see your cards. I don't think Jerry would dispute the "homophobic" or "extremely offensive," (correct me if I'm wrong), so please concentrate on "bigoted" and "racist." Prove your case, apologize, or admit you broke rule #1. I invite you to submit your reply in the FSZ, just so you can answer without being encumbered by the rules.
Homophobia is a proper subset of bigoted. IMO, only "racist" needs to be proven.
I knew several fellows in the Navy that brought back filipino women to be their wives. They were also self-proclaimed racists. They admitted that they married them because they would be subservient and so they could lord over them the fact that they 'saved' them from their 3rd world lifestyle. I am not saying that this is the case with JL, just pointing out the fact that his marriage to a mexican does not prove he is not a racist. Not only that, but she could be as white as Rush Limbaugh.
Quote: WizardYou force me to do this, but I'm calling your bluff, let's see your cards. I don't think Jerry would dispute the "homophobic" or "extremely offensive," (correct me if I'm wrong), so please concentrate on "bigoted" and "racist." Prove your case, apologize, or admit you broke rule #1. I invite you to submit your reply in the FSZ, just so you can answer without being encumbered by the rules.
BIGOT : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
— big·ot·ed \-gə-təd\ adjective
It would seem that per the above definition from Merriam-Webster online, to be racist is also to be bigoted. However, it would also seem that one can be bigoted without necessarily being racist, so the quote below from Jerry would seem to qualify as evidence of bigotry:
As I said, getting under the skin of liberal kool-aid drinkers is one of the more satisfying bonuses of the Christmas season, and watching atheists squirm at the mere mention of their underlying unhappiness and perpetual skepticism only adds to that joy.
From the "what is the difference between a liberal..." (FSZ). Jerry demonstrates his bigotry toward two groups in a single sentence (and as an English teacher, I have to give him good marks for economy of expression).
rac·ism noun \ˈrâ-ˌsi-zəm also -ˌshi-\
Definition of RACISM
1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2: racial prejudice or discrimination
Why would any US citizen want to go to one of those places to gamble when they've got it all over the US? What a waste of time, a waste of money, not to mention having to put up with constantly bad garlic breath in Asia and bad food in the UK? I've never been to any of those places, but I have neighbors from Taiwan, and whenever they come over and come inside they reek of bad, BAD breath. (From Macau thread)
I've always thought they were all the same. I watch them cook on the Food Channel and they all load up on crushed garlic. And I always thought that was the reason we never see a movie about Dracula chomping his way thru the Far East. (same thread)
These posts demonstrate a racist attitude toward Asians: an unwarranted broad generalization, and a derogatory comment about them as a race that is patently untrue (particularly, as a generalization).
I also remember Jerry recently commenting that the reason that a particular casino in the Far East was the largest in the world was that Asians have a gambling problem. I can't find that post, because there's so much of his offal to wade through. Perhaps someone else can help.
I won't supply examples of Jerry being "homophobic" or "extremely offensive", since you didn't ask me to, but those would be easy enough to produce.
Quote: JerryLoganI guess you missed the part about where RS told the forum that I have a wife who was born in Mexico. Guess you must have been correcting some of those fresh men papers!
It's absolutely awful that you have to call me all kinds of names and insult me while you still have your foot in your mouth.
If your wife is from Mexico, how does she feel about the way you talk about her homeland?
Quote: JerryLoganAnyone who goes to Mexico from the US for any reason and gets robbed, raped or killed gets exactly what they asked for. That POS country would have no effect on the civilized world if it were to be wiped off the face of the earth. Other than Obama losing temporary voters, farmers not having to worry about where they're all peeing out in the fields, and me trying to figure out who's gonna finish my landscaping for pennies on the dollar, ADIOS AMIGOS.
Quote: MathExtremistIf your wife is from Mexico, how does she feel about the way you talk about her homeland?
She hates it and going there to see what's left of her family. But I really do thank you for spending so much time and effort servicing these threads today with gargantuan, mkl-like rambling posts, when most people are doing something a bit more family-oriented. Clearly, you have something bothering you.
Quote: mkl654321... the quote below from Jerry would seem to qualify as evidence of bigotry:
As I said, getting under the skin of liberal kool-aid drinkers is one of the more satisfying bonuses of the Christmas season, and watching atheists squirm at the mere mention of their underlying unhappiness and perpetual skepticism only adds to that joy.
From the "what is the difference between a liberal..." (FSZ). Jerry demonstrates his bigotry toward two groups in a single sentence (and as an English teacher, I have to give him good marks for economy of expression).
rac·ism noun \ˈrâ-ˌsi-zəm also -ˌshi-\
Definition of RACISM
1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2: racial prejudice or discrimination
Which race is Jerry saying is inferior? Liberals and atheists are not a race.
Quote: mkl654321Why would any US citizen want to go to one of those places to gamble when they've got it all over the US? What a waste of time, a waste of money, not to mention having to put up with constantly bad garlic breath in Asia and bad food in the UK? I've never been to any of those places, but I have neighbors from Taiwan, and whenever they come over and come inside they reek of bad, BAD breath. (From Macau thread)
I've always thought they were all the same. I watch them cook on the Food Channel and they all load up on crushed garlic. And I always thought that was the reason we never see a movie about Dracula chomping his way thru the Far East. (same thread)
These posts demonstrate a racist attitude toward Asians: an unwarranted broad generalization, and a derogatory comment about them as a race that is patently untrue (particularly, as a generalization).
Saying Asians have bad breath I find to be not that bad. I've been to China five times, and I hope nobody would say I'm being racist to say that they love cooking, and their tastes are not as delicate as ours. Real Chinese food can be strong in both taste and smell. That begs the question, do they brush their teeth and rinse with an alcohol-based mouthwash afterward? I have not studied it, but I would suspect not at the same rates as in the U.S.. As one small bit of evidence, they have all kinds of dental problems in China, leading me to think they could stand to brush more frequently. Personally, I'm going to give Jerry a pass on that comment. To be honest, I thought the garlic/Dracula comment was funny, and said in jest. Your burden of evidence has a long ways to go.
Quote: mkl654321I also remember Jerry recently commenting that the reason that a particular casino in the Far East was the largest in the world was that Asians have a gambling problem. I can't find that post, because there's so much of his offal to wade through. Perhaps someone else can help.
I recall that comment. You don't have to find it. I will say myself that gambling is pervasive if China, much of it underground. Any high-limit room in Vegas or Atlantic City is going to be at least 50% Asian, which is much more than their population share. It was rather brash to make the "gambling problem" statement, but I wouldn't call it racist.
It is one thing to point out ways Asians are different and another to claim they are inferior. Is that the best you can do, or can you provide more Jerry quotes to back up your case?
Quote: WizardI recall that comment. You don't have to find it. I will say myself that gambling is pervasive if China, much of it underground. Any high-limit room in Vegas or Atlantic City is going to be at least 50% Asian, which is much more than their population share. It was rather brash to make the "gambling problem" statement, but I wouldn't call it racist.
It is one thing to point out ways Asians are different and another to claim they are inferior. Is that the best you can do, or can you provide more Jerry quotes to back up your case?
I consider the ridiculously blanket statement, "all Asians have a gambling problem" to be both racist AND stupid, but I can see how you might be inclined to let that one pass. Fortunately, there are much more egregious examples available; the following Jerry-spews are targeted at, respectively, "blackies", "spics", and "firewater-guzzling" Indians. I've never said that Jerry discriminates in his racism--EVERYBODY is a potential target.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/tables/3282-what-is-considered-long-term-in-craps/4/#post36433
What I'm wondering about is where is that big mouth racist Al Sharpton this time? He wastes no time jumping out of the gate with his biggoted protests whenever a black is in any way demeaned on purpose or by accident, yet now it seems his hands are tied just as much as his tongue. I mean, since so many blackies adopt those stupid Muslim names "in the name of Allah", if he speaks out on the firing then either those people will come gunning for him or the other ones will criticize him. Good to see he's in such a spot.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/tables/3282-what-is-considered-long-term-in-craps/4/#post36433
I though spick was spelled spic?? We use 'em to grease our axels.
Note: You'd think a trucking company big shot would know that an "axel" is a figure skating move, but I assure you, this is Jerry's post.
Also:
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/other-casinos/2048-free-cocktails-a-dying-call-at-non-vegas-casinos/4/#post20351
"Most Indians pass through life in a drunken stupor anyway. But the States won't prosecute them if either they get caught driving drunk or someone who was playing at a Tribal clip joint kills 3 people on their way home from guzzling firewater. There's a certain sentiment with these people, the same sentiment that allows them to get back at the stupid white man by cheating them at all their glittery casinos. "
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/other-casinos/2320-are-we-really-that-hooked-on-booze/#post20773
"They did that because they didn't like it that the place was expanding and becoming a decent resort, and all the Indians were always hanging around outside guzzling their firewater making it an eyesore for all the tourists. Now everyone can drink inside and Harrahs is happy. "
Then again, after the original OJ verdict, on another board I wrote "OJ won the trial in the jury selection," and everybody called me a racist. So maybe I'm a racist too, and just can't identify another racist. I would prefer the term be reserved for those who come right out and say one race is superior to another.
I'll give you one more chance to respond. I extend again the opportunity to either retract or apologize for the "racist" comment.
Wizard, it seems you are in the position of deciding whether some comments are offensively racist or not. Would you consider it appropriate to ask members of those specific groups (Puerto Ricans, Native Americans, black-Americans, etc.) whether they consider those to be racist comments? I know we have some in our society who insist on being so PC that any statement made by one ethnic group about another is racist, but it might be useful to consider the viewpoint. Not too long ago, I made a post in which I cited a famous work in literature that used "the N word" without any intent by the author of being offensive, but I suspect the same comment made in today's society would be considered racist by blacks and likely by many others.Quote: Wizard... However, those examples have some grounding in reality, and he takes off the rough edge with humor. I don't think they rise high enough to call him "racist." ...
Quote: DocWizard, it seems you are in the position of deciding whether some comments are offensively racist or not. Would you consider it appropriate to ask members of those specific groups (Puerto Ricans, Native Americans, black-Americans, etc.) whether they consider those to be racist comments? I know we have some in our society who insist on being so PC that any statement made by one ethnic group about another is racist, but it might be useful to consider the viewpoint. Not too long ago, I made a post in which I cited a famous work in literature that used "the N word" without any intent by the author of being offensive, but I suspect the same comment made in today's society would be considered racist by blacks and likely by many others.
You have to look at the context. You're probably referring to Mark Twain and Nigger Jim (just come out and say it). In his time it was not offensive, but today it is. Again, context is the key.
What comes to my mind is one of my favorite comedians, Lisa Lamanelli. If you took her out of context, she would seem incredibly racist. However, she pokes fun at everybody, especially herself, and does so with humor. I wouldn't put Jerry on her level, but I thought his vampire/garlic joke was funny, and was indicative of his intentions.
So nothing presented to me so far would lead me to say Jerry is a racist.
Quote: WizardThank you for those additional examples. However, those examples have some grounding in reality, and he takes off the rough edge with humor. I don't think they rise high enough to call him "racist."
Then again, after the original OJ verdict, on another board I wrote "OJ won the trial in the jury selection," and everybody called me a racist. So maybe I'm a racist too, and just can't identify another racist. I would prefer the term be reserved for those who come right out and say one race is superior to another.
I'll give you one more chance to respond. I extend again the opportunity to either retract or apologize for the "racist" comment.
What the---? Since when does racism w/humor make a person's remarks any less racist? Do you think that any "blackie", "spic", or "drunken Indian" would fail to find Jerry's remarks offensive? Do you think that his description of ALL Asians as compulsive gamblers who stank of garlic would be welcomed by Asians? For that matter, do you think ANY person--race, ethnicity, or color aside--would enjoy reading Jerry's offensive characterizations and expressions of contempt and hatred for others?
Jerry has indeed come right out and said that in his opinion, the white race is superior to all others, by making gross, untrue generalizations about other races' supposed unflattering characteristics. For example, Asians supposedly ALL smell of garlic--but white people often smell offensive to Asians because of THEIR diets. Whites may drink, but Indians are all "firewater-guzzling", according to Jerry. These remarks fit the dictionary definition of "racism", by any reasonable standard. I do concede that even as recently as thirty or forty years ago, Jerry's remarks would have been considered amusing everybodyphobia a la Archie Bunker. Since his personal standards of behavior obviously predate that period, perhaps he shouldn't be held to the standards of a more enlightened age.
So I am willing to concede that by a strict definition of the term, one that excludes all but utterly unequivocal and irredeemably offensive speech in making the evaluation, and giving carte blanche to any description, no matter how hypercritical or unflattering, of a racial/ethnic characteristic as long as that description is at least SOMEWHAT grounded in truth, that Jerry has not, by the posts I've quoted ALONE, demonstrated himself to be a "racist", using 1960s standards and a very lenient interpretation of what is unforgivably offensive and what isn't.
So using just the evidence of his posts, and not factoring in his grossly offensive and consistently nasty and abhorrent behavior demonstrated here in general, it may not be true that Jerry is a racist, by the strictest, most lenient definition of the term, one that uses standards of decades long past to define such behavior. Therefore, I amend my comments to say that Jerry MIGHT be a racist, but we don't know enough (YET) to say with ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY (99.999% confidence interval) that he IS one.
I also think he would enjoy taking the site down.
Frankly just blocking him does not offer any solution the only way to fix this would be just stop responding to him. If no one responded to him he would not be getting his fix and eventually move on. The Internet is a wonderful forum for people who are either afraid to express themselves in the real world or are at the stage where no one listens to them anymore.
Quote: WizardQuote: DocWhat comes to my mind is one of my favorite comedians, Lisa Lamanelli. If you took her out of context, she would seem incredibly racist. However, she pokes fun at everybody, especially herself, and does so with humor. I wouldn't put Jerry on her level, but I thought his vampire/garlic joke was funny, and was indicative of his intentions.
So nothing presented to me so far would lead me to say Jerry is a racist.
I guess you have to try to divine whether Jerry's possibly-offensive comments were intended as humor rather than simply expressions of bigotry and hatred, that is, if you consider humorous intent as excusing such comments. To me, making a "Polish joke" or a "nigger joke" is, at best, humor at someone's expense. It's in the same category as a "practical joke". Watch somebody slip on the banana peel you left in his path! Haw haw, guffaw guffaw, what fun! Doesn't he look ridiculous sprawled on the sidewalk!
To give a historical example, see Jerry's "Drunken Indian" comments--it is actually true that many Native American tribes have a lower tolerance for alcohol than white Europeans. Alcohol was therefore a very useful tool for the white culture to dominate the Indian--and still is. You, or Jerry, or I, might drive through Gallup or Window Rock and see a Native sprawled unconscious on the street with an empty wine bottle in his hand, or observe another reeling along the sidewalk. I suppose that after such a sight, a "joke"-reference to the "drunken Indian" might seem funny--it wouldn't to ME, but I can see how it might to others. But for a member of the tribe, that drunken Indian might symbolize the oppression and domination of his people by the white culture--and thus, be anything BUT "funny".
Humor purchased at someone else's expense isn't humor at all IMHO--it's cruelty. I see it all the time in bullying behavior by students in my school--one reason why I'm against it. It's manifest that Jerry positively delights in such humor. I think it's disgusting, but I have to acknowledge that my opinion isn't shared by everyone.
Quote: mkl654321Humor purchased at someone else's expense isn't humor at all IMHO--it's cruelty.
Ultimately, isn't all humor at somebody's expense?
Quote: mkl654321Therefore, I amend my comments to say that Jerry MIGHT be a racist, but we don't know enough (YET) to say with ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY (99.999% confidence interval) that he IS one.
Thats saying nothing. Hinting that he MIGHT be a racist is just as bad as calling him one. Nice try, though.
I feel like manure filled threads shouldn't be showing up with worthwhile threads in the "recent" view.
Keep em out of sight, which is where they belong.
Quote: EvenBobThats saying nothing. Hinting that he MIGHT be a racist is just as bad as calling him one. Nice try, though.
Wow, Bob, you're irony-proof.
Quote: WizardUltimately, isn't all humor at somebody's expense?
Much of it is, but by no means all of it. Plus, a gentle laugh at human foibles doesn't exactly equate to "all Asians stink, ha ha" or "all Indians are drunks, ha ha".
I agree that much of humor IS directed at the "butt" of a particular joke. Many sitcoms, particularly in the 80s and 90s, were based SOLELY on the "isn't this person a moron" joke, over and over and over. "Cheers" was a perfect example of this. While undoubtedly funny, every single joke was of that "ha ha, look at him/her" ilk. The shlub who was watching, slumped on a couch with a Budweiser in his hand, was supposed to feel better about himself by laughing at that foolish Cliff or Norm. However, there are plenty of sitcoms that focus on absurd SITUATIONS (as in, "sitcom"), such as "Seinfeld".
In the literary field, many great humorists such as Mark Twain, Peter Benchley, Erma Bombeck, Dave Barry, Patrick McManus, James Thurber, and P.J. O'Rourke, to name just a few, primarily focus/focused on the absurdity of life, the human comedy, and the human condition, rather than setting up someone just to make a mockery of him/her (I'm sure there are examples of each of the above writers doing just that, but that was not their primary tactic or style).
So I pretty much completely disagree that humor is always, and more importantly, that it is NECESSARILY, at someone else's expense.
Quote: WizardI recall that comment. You don't have to find it. I will say myself that gambling is pervasive if China, much of it underground. Any high-limit room in Vegas or Atlantic City is going to be at least 50% Asian, which is much more than their population share. It was rather brash to make the "gambling problem" statement, but I wouldn't call it racist.
Uh uh. Doesn't pass the "smell test". First of all, on a per capita basis, I doubt VERY MUCH that Americans gamble any less than Asians do. Gambling is "pervasive" in BOTH China and the U.S. The relative populations in high-limit rooms in Vegas and AC aren't relevant, since gamblers from BOTH nations show up there; to turn it around, if 3% of the gamblers in Macao were Americans, that wouldn't suggest that Americans are gambling-obsessed, even though Americans make up less than a ten-thousandth of one percent of the population of China.
If you want to talk about "population share", and assuming that a "high-roller" from ANY country would have the ability to travel to a gambling destination such as Vegas or AC, if Asians and Americans had an equal propensity to gamble, then the ratio you mention shouldn't be 50-50; it should be 6:1 in favor of Asians.
Regardless of the relative numbers, both the Chinese AND Americans gamble "pervasively", and to say that the Chinese gamble because they "have a gambling problem" is absolutely, unequivocally racist (aside from being total bullshit, of course).
Quote: mkl654321Wow, Bob, you're irony-proof.
But not BS proof.
Quote: mkl654321and to say that the Chinese gamble because they "have a gambling problem" is absolutely, unequivocally racist .
Every fricking thing is racist to you, bub. If I see 3 Black guys coming down the street and remark 'Here comes 3 Black guys', you would scream RACIST! If I'm robbed by a White guy and tell the police it was a White guy, you say nothing. If it was a Black guy and I tell the police as much, you scream RACIST! People like you are a major part of the problem and no part of the solution.
Quote: EvenBobBut not BS proof.
Actually, that, too. Sorry, Bob. Merry Christmas.
I think we must have an epidemic going on with mis-formatted posts. This is the second time in 24 hours 7 minutes in this very same thread that someone has made a post that attributed to me statements that I never made.Quote: mkl654321Quote: WizardQuote: DocWhat comes to my mind is one of my favorite comedians, Lisa Lamanelli. If you took her out of context, she would seem incredibly racist. However, she pokes fun at everybody, especially herself, and does so with humor. I wouldn't put Jerry on her level, but I thought his vampire/garlic joke was funny, and was indicative of his intentions.
So nothing presented to me so far would lead me to say Jerry is a racist.
I guess you have to ....
Quote: DocI think we must have an epidemic going on with mis-formatted posts. This is the second time in 24 hours 7 minutes in this very same thread that someone has made a post that attributed to me statements that I never made.
I'm aware there is a problem with that, and it is in the queue of problems to fix. Meanwhile, feel free to hand-edit quotes to make sure they are right. Personally, I don't quote more than one layer deep.
Quote: mkl654321The relative populations in high-limit rooms in Vegas and AC aren't relevant, since gamblers from BOTH nations show up there; to turn it around, if 3% of the gamblers in Macao were Americans, that wouldn't suggest that Americans are gambling-obsessed, even though Americans make up less than a ten-thousandth of one percent of the population of China.
You should look at the demographics of the area where the casino draws its customers. You also have to consider rates of wealth by race. It would take me all day to come up with a rough figure of how many Asians you should expect to see in a Vegas high-limit room if all races enjoyed gambling equally. Whatever that figure would be, I'm sure it would be less than the 50%+ you actually see.
I highly doubt that 3% of gamblers in Macao are American. I would doubt 0.3%.
Regarding the "racist" remark, given that you defended your case, and made a very flaccid retraction, I'll let you off with a warning this time, since its Christmas.
Quote: WizardYou should look at the demographics of the area where the casino draws its customers. You also have to consider rates of wealth by race. It would take me all day to come up with a rough figure of how many Asians you should expect to see in a Vegas high-limit room if all races enjoyed gambling equally. Whatever that figure would be, I'm sure it would be less than the 50%+ you actually see.
I highly doubt that 3% of gamblers in Macao are American. I would doubt 0.3%.
Regarding the "racist" remark, given that you defended your case, and made a very flaccid retraction, I'll let you off with a warning this time, since its Christmas.
My wish for WHATEVER holiday one celebrates (I choose Christmas) is that the Wizard can get back to being the Wizard instead of having to be the police force here... I remember just a short time ago when no policing was required beyond a simple word or two here and there.
Quote: RonCMy wish for WHATEVER holiday one celebrates (I choose Christmas) is that the Wizard can get back to being the Wizard instead of having to be the police force here... I remember just a short time ago when no policing was required beyond a simple word or two here and there.
Thank you! Going forward, I think I'm going to get tougher with the policing.
Quote: WizardThank you! Going forward, I think I'm going to get tougher with the policing.
Merry X Mas.
Hopefully we can get back to civil chatter.
And after walking the The California I now believe Polynesians have a penchant for gambling just by the percentage that I have to assume it's rampant.
