• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Cain: Stewart Impression Shows 'Problem' With Black Conservatives, But Not Racist

I think those of you calling this man racist should watch his shenanigans and know that you are in fact, as much of a fool as he is. Most recent example? His impression and criticisms of Obama last night.
 
income, certainly that is none of our business. but education? Well, when you claim to be part of a group that you also claim is inherently smarter than another, you really should prove it.

You do realize that there is a difference between saying a group is "inherently" smarter and saying that there are more educated people within the population of a group? One suggests that the group is somehow by virtue of being part of that group more intelligent. The other is suggesting that more people in one group happen to have more education.

Nevermind the issue of attempting to equate "smarter" with "education" as some kind of synonymous statement. One can be smart while having little education, similarly one could have a great deal of education and yet still be rather dumb.

For having a conniption fit about someone making a comment concerning the educational level of various groups, being snippy back at them while misusing educated and “smarter” interchangeably and comparing something “inherent” to something that people participate in seems to not help your argument much.
 
One suggests that the group is somehow by virtue of being part of that group more intelligent. .

which is what liblady was implying.
 
perhaps when someone links a reasonable and informed study, I will.

And considering you're issue with a Pew study is that they followed relatively standard protocols with a scientific poll, in that they captured a random sample size that is significantly smaller than the extremely large sample size being discussed, it shows that you seem to be severely lacking in your knowledge and education regarding how scientific polls work. At least it has assured me I will never once see you reference a poll unless the sample size is somehow close to 1:1 since your misguided, supposedly highly educated, opinion seemingly requires such to be "respectable".

Oh wait, no I should use some common sense...

You require a poll to be in favor of what you say for it to be respectable.

Silly me, should've just used Occam's razor.
 
I think Mr. Cain is being way too charitable to Stewart because there is no doubt as I see it that this was totally Racist.

Wow, it's a good thing that very, very, very few people here take you seriously anyways.

Herman Cain is an idiot if he really wants all of our nations business to be done via cliff-notes. 3 or four pages isn't enough room, especially with the way legislation is formatted. He'd know that if he had even the slightest clue as to how our government runs.
 
which is what liblady was implying.

No, she was implying that its rather retarded to question the "mental acuity" of an entire segment of the population, especially when on average said segment of the population is more highly educated which suggests that at least a good portion of when would have a relatively keen intellect.

Of course, shocker of all shockers...you all get pissy over the notion that she said Liberals are more educated then republicans, yet completely gloss over a far less factual and far more questionable comment that liberals by and large all lack the mental acuity to even deal with "facts".

But right...right...forgot, hyper partisans...."must just attack the enemy...must ignore our own idiotic comments....race card is bad...wait race card is good but because liberals use race card because its bad".

:roll:
 
Stewarts a comedian. He was making a joke. The man's got zero to no history of racist tendencies. The most people are going off of is that Stewart used a voice that they claim is mocking black people, a voice Stewarts reportedly used when doing white people as well. The vast majority of these bull**** things....from Donovan McNabb is a media created QB to ****ing Herman Goddamnt Cain...are just that. Bull****. Not actual racism but created and manufactured feigned outrage over hyper sensitive, tit for tat, cry babies.
 
And considering you're issue with a Pew study is that they followed relatively standard protocols with a scientific poll, in that they captured a random sample size that is significantly smaller than the extremely large sample size being discussed, it shows that you seem to be severely lacking in your knowledge and education regarding how scientific polls work. At least it has assured me I will never once see you reference a poll unless the sample size is somehow close to 1:1 since your misguided, supposedly highly educated, opinion seemingly requires such to be "respectable".

Oh wait, no I should use some common sense...

You require a poll to be in favor of what you say for it to be respectable.

Silly me, should've just used Occam's razor.


anyone who has any "real" experience with "scientific" (a misnomer for sure) polls, knows that there are a plethora of ways to manipulate the sampling and or data to get the results you want.
 
Last edited:
No, she was implying that its rather retarded to question the "mental acuity" of an entire segment of the population, especially when on average said segment of the population is more highly educated which suggests that at least a good portion of when would have a relatively keen intellect.

Of course, shocker of all shockers...you all get pissy over the notion that she said Liberals are more educated then republicans, yet completely gloss over a far less factual and far more questionable comment that liberals by and large all lack the mental acuity to even deal with "facts".

But right...right...forgot, hyper partisans...."must just attack the enemy...must ignore our own idiotic comments....race card is bad...wait race card is good but because liberals use race card because its bad".

:roll:

bolded, sums up your entire agruement against me ;) next....
 
it's not my problem that you erroneously inferred such.

just as it's not my problem you don't have the integrity to admit your true rationale for making the statement.
 
i judge each instance on it's own merit, and i think it's pretty damned funny that those of you who deny that foodstamps with watermelon and obama's picture are not racist, but insist that mimicking a man who joked about making bills 3 pages long is racist.

I find it pretty damned funny that you're engaging in your own race card pulling feign outrage over a picture that gets posted up on this forum more by Liberals bitching, whining, and complaining about conservatives than it does by any conservative. A picture that frankly outside of one or two bat**** crazy racist conservatives I've never seen pushed by any significant amount of people on the right. A picture I've seen people on the right ROUTINELY critcize when it gets thrown out. But you of course stereotypically latch onto that and cry and whine and immedietely need to spin this around to "OMG I'M THE LIBERAL VICTIM!!!!!" by using ridiculous crap and hyperbole in attempting to act like there's even an honest sizable MINORITY let alone majority of Republicans that find such a thing "pretty damn funny".

I'm surprised you're getting so angry at some of the people in this thread, you don't act any differently.
 
Last edited:
You do realize that there is a difference between saying a group is "inherently" smarter and saying that there are more educated people within the population of a group? One suggests that the group is somehow by virtue of being part of that group more intelligent. The other is suggesting that more people in one group happen to have more education.

Nevermind the issue of attempting to equate "smarter" with "education" as some kind of synonymous statement. One can be smart while having little education, similarly one could have a great deal of education and yet still be rather dumb.

For having a conniption fit about someone making a comment concerning the educational level of various groups, being snippy back at them while misusing educated and “smarter” interchangeably and comparing something “inherent” to something that people participate in seems to not help your argument much.

I was unaware I had one of those. I thought we were discussing the topic.
 
anyone who has any "real" experience with "scientific" (a misnomer for sure) polls, knows that there are a plethora of ways to manipulate the sampling and or data to get the results you want.

Indeed there is, however you gave 0 analysis as to what "manipulation" went on in this particular poll. You just looked at it and immediately dismissed it because it happened to fall in line with the same standard method of the vast majority of scientific polls out there. You would perhaps have a point if you actually looked at it and found a way that it manipulated the sample...like showing a really large standard deviation, or pointing out some kind of specific flaw within how they gathered their sample, or a question that was highly ambiguous, etc. Instead you just went “OMG! They used less people then there are people in this country, ITS NOT GOOD!”

All that really showed, to be truthful, is that you weren’t honestly looking for any kind of proof because you knew before hand that there was no proof that you were going to accept. You can’t honestly record and recite the education level of every single person in the United States, and you were going to lambast any poll you didn’t like the results of as being manipulated, so there was no honest actual interest in getting “proof”, you just wanted to attack her and bash her point simply because it was HER point, not because of any factual truth or error regarding it, and that just gave you a cover. It was additionally apparent since you had no issue patting the very next poll on the back, even though it had similar issues as what you suggested was wrong with the first.
 
First off, who brought up racism in this thread first? A Liberal poster or a Republican/Conservative poster?

Second, where does one see anything about racism in the Daily Show skit? John Stewart was poking fun at what Herman Cain said speaking directly to his "3-page bill" comment. Said nothing about the literacy or intellect of a Black Conservative presidential candidate. But...

This is how the issue or race and race relations get so twisted up to such a degree people who want to have an open and honest dialog on the matter can't really speak out about it. A comedy pokes fun at a Black politician based on what he says, not what he does - never speaks negatively on his honesty, integrity, intellect - but the first change a Conservative news source gets to comment on the matter, what do they do? Plant the seed of racism into their storyline. And now EVERYBODY on either side of the political divide are speaking out on racial issues instead of focusing on the legitimacy of what Herman Cain proposed - short, 3-paged bills brought before either floor of Congress.

Get a grip, people!!! Focus!!! Take the partisan blinders of long enough to see the issue(s) for what they really are instead of what they're meant to be - distractions! Nothing more.
 
I was unaware I had one of those. I thought we were discussing the topic.

Really, I didn't realize Liblady's specific educational experience was the topic. My bad, I really need to go reread that OP, apparently my reading comprehension skills are lacking because I don't seem to remember anything in it that would justify demanding she reveal what degree's she has.

Admittedly, you were acting far more reserved in your questioning and complaining about her counter to a persons far more over the top statement that liberals do not have the mental acuity to deal with facts and I was somewhat lumping you in with others backing up your faux outrage over one statement while you ignored the other, but to state that you were just "discussing the topic" is rather disingenuous. At best you were discussing a divergent topic, one you helped to start by nitpicking her statement that was countering councils idiotic hyperbolic argument concerning the topic. A divergence I've now induldged in as well.

Shall we return to the topic so conservatives can get back to crying "WAAAAAAH RACISM"?
 
it's a knee-jerk defense mechanism. instilled by decades of accusations of being racist.

Those decades of accusations in turn stemming from decades of racism.
 
I find it pretty damned funny that you're engaging in your own race card pulling feign outrage over a picture that gets posted up on this forum more by Liberals bitching, whining, and complaining about conservatives than it does by any conservative. A picture that frankly outside of one or two bat**** crazy racist conservatives I've never seen pushed by any significant amount of people on the right. A picture I've seen people on the right ROUTINELY critcize when it gets thrown out. But you of course stereotypically latch onto that and cry and whine and immedietely need to spin this around to "OMG I'M THE LIBERAL VICTIM!!!!!" by using ridiculous crap and hyperbole in attempting to act like there's even an honest sizable MINORITY let alone majority of Republicans that find such a thing "pretty damn funny".

I'm surprised you're getting so angry at some of the people in this thread, you don't act any differently.


stewart might have gone too far, but i don't think that was his intent. frequently, it IS the intent of obama bashers, and i suspect you know this.
[/QUOTE]

i am angry at oscar, which should come as no surprise. i'm not feigning outrage, merely pointing out that the foodstamp thing WAS racist, as was the easter picture of watermelons on the WH lawn, and a mayor? resigned over this. what about the witch doctor image.......and the pictures of obama as a monkey. show him as a clown, i don't care........argue with his policies, i don't care. but please don't pretend that racism isn't alive and well and playing a part in politics.

i'm not one who thinks every opposition to obama is racist, i do however believe that some of it certainly is.
 
Indeed there is, however you gave 0 analysis as to what "manipulation" went on in this particular poll. You just looked at it and immediately dismissed it because it happened to fall in line with the same standard method of the vast majority of scientific polls out there. You would perhaps have a point if you actually looked at it and found a way that it manipulated the sample...like showing a really large standard deviation, or pointing out some kind of specific flaw within how they gathered their sample, or a question that was highly ambiguous, etc. Instead you just went “OMG! They used less people then there are people in this country, ITS NOT GOOD!”

All that really showed, to be truthful, is that you weren’t honestly looking for any kind of proof because you knew before hand that there was no proof that you were going to accept. You can’t honestly record and recite the education level of every single person in the United States, and you were going to lambast any poll you didn’t like the results of as being manipulated, so there was no honest actual interest in getting “proof”, you just wanted to attack her and bash her point simply because it was HER point, not because of any factual truth or error regarding it, and that just gave you a cover. It was additionally apparent since you had no issue patting the very next poll on the back, even though it had similar issues as what you suggested was wrong with the first.

did you read the article? they took 2,000 people of varying degrees of political lean and then artifically lumped them all into 4 broad categories. they even admitted that some of the people surveyed were not consistent in their philosophy.

and I patted no poll on the back. how you managed to infer that from my obviously mocking reply is beyond me.

I guess I should have specifically stated: see there, for every BS poll you can dig up to support your case, I can dig up one to support mine
 
Last edited:
what you are doing here is repeating, ad naseum, the same argument republicans have made for generations. repetition doesn't make it true. and personal insults certainly should be above moderators, especially since i was not responding to you.

They keep making the same argument because it's true! And what did you take away from my post that you considered a "personal insult"? I stated that I believed this tiny bit might be over your head and your response proved that statement to be true. It was not intended as an insult, but since pesky things like facts and the truth don't matter to your ilk, I can see why you would take it that way.
 
Really, I didn't realize Liblady's specific educational experience was the topic. My bad, I really need to go reread that OP, apparently my reading comprehension skills are lacking because I don't seem to remember anything in it that would justify demanding she reveal what degree's she has.

It become part of the topic when she claimed to be a part of a group she then also claimed is better educated than a group someone else is part of.
 

i am angry at oscar, which should come as no surprise[/QUOTE]


and what, other than call you on one specific statement and ask you how many degrees you have did I do, SPECIFICALLY to earn your anger?
 
It become part of the topic when she claimed to be a part of a group she then also claimed is better educated than a group someone else is part of.

kinda like the waterboy claiming to be a member of a championship team. credit by association. ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom