• 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!

Palin Blasts Emanuel for Calling Dem Idea 'Retarded'

misterman said:
Maybe, maybe not, but it might help the rest of us reduce the sense of otherness. As they say, would you call a child with cancer a "cancer child"?



As long as you reveal it, it should be okay - sometimes.
Click to expand...

Not if we were talking about Ben who has cancer. Nevertheless, if we are talking in the academy, as is the case with even teaching professionals how to educate correctly-will in fact use such language when describing the abstract notion of a certain child/person who is diagnosed as such. For instance, "The LD child typically has problems doing ______". Rick Lavoie, a person usually hailed in the community for his insights, could be in fact attacked for saying LD child-not because the "LD child" may or may not actually have the characteristics that Rick is describing (since we are a diverse group), but because of it being the disability being considered instead of the child in the language distinction. Sometimes the politically correct tendencies confuse the purpose of its supposed progressivism.

Furthermore, I am not one to bash people for their disabilities, but I certainly appreciate, or even embrace such humor that many find offensive. Ironically, because of the intense atmosphere, I feel far more human in being able to laugh at the community, laugh at my own disability, and the tendency to be hyper-sensitive. The politically correct atmosphere can deliver us from absolutely awful situations, but likewise, it can also reinforce the awful situations and make minorities feel quite a bit more different from everyone else than perhaps is intended.
 
Last edited:
Fiddytree said:
Not if we were talking about Ben who has cancer. Nevertheless, if we are talking in the academy, as is the case with even teaching professionals how to educate correctly-will in fact use such language when describing the abstract notion of a certain child/person who is diagnosed as such. For instance, "The LD child typically has problems doing ______".
Click to expand...

Sure, that's not so bad, in the abstract. Still would you say "the cancer child typically has problems doing ______" either?

Furthermore, I am not one to bash people for their disabilities, but I certainly appreciate, or even embrace such humor that many find offensive. Ironically, because of the intense atmosphere, I feel far more human in being able to laugh at the community, laugh at my own disability, and the tendency to be hyper-sensitive. The politically correct atmosphere can deliver us from absolutely awful situations, but likewise, it can also reinforce the awful situations and make minorities feel quite a bit more different from everyone else than perhaps is intended.
Click to expand...

I agree completely on that.
 
I'm sure I would find myself doing it quite often, not to make a point of it, but because of its sheer innocence. What is regretful is that because of this developing language distinction, there is this belief that those who are not using it are somehow less than genuine, less than well-meaning, and less than effective. I do not believe that to be true in the slightest.

Again, I have known families who have dealt with people who literally would say "MR child" while referring specifically to a child they know and/or teach. Truly it is insulting not to be able to ask for their names, to try to remember their names, and instead refer to the child, even in the presence of the parent, as strictly their disability. Nevertheless, there is also a reluctance to accept the possibility, or perhaps even a really great probability, that the people in question, until someone told them about such a distinction, would have never even thought of it. Until the last several years, I have been utterly ignorant of such a development in linguistics, and personally, have felt no real need to advocate it. This is to admit that a personal experience is limited in validity, but at the same time, one has to wonder just how important adding the word "with" is to improving one's self-identity. I think there are a great deal of moments where who we are, or what we were born with will come apparent without linguistics, and such distinctions may have little use in interpreting them. If I have a sibling who is unable to live by themselves for the foreseeable future, because of the sense that they are not developmentally capable of doing so responsibly, will these language distinctions really take away that sting of figuring out that your life is quite a bit different from others?
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
There is no way nice of saying no matter what term you use nobody wants to be compared to a mentally challenged person.
 
misterman said:
Good point. We were talking about how exactly to use it properly though. Splitting some hairs.

And of course, cancers aren't people. Cancer is bad, and doesn't feel belittled when you say so.
Click to expand...
The people who get told they are a cancer on society have feelings. Some if them get told that based on shaky rationale. Insults get hurled so easily in this uncivil age.
 
MyOwnDrum said:
This is dumb. We can't even use the word 'retarded' to describe a mentally retarded person anymore because people use it as slang. Now Palin has to go and make a big to do over one of her political opponents using the term 'retarded' idiomatically to describe what he thought was a dumb (which originally meant 'mute') So, I guess the word retarded is totally out of bounds and offensive?
Click to expand...

You can still use any word that you want to, if you don't care whether or not you offend someone. I just used 'retarded' in another thread. If there are any Sarah Palins reading, feel free to flame me for it.
 
mikhail said:
There is no way nice of saying no matter what term you use nobody wants to be compared to a mentally challenged person.
Click to expand...

Right, and mentally challenged people don't want to be compared to anyone else in an insulting way. So don't do it.
 
MyOwnDrum said:
The people who get told they are a cancer on society have feelings.
Click to expand...

Well, that's true, but maybe they are. ;) This thread isn't about how insults are bad, it's how some hurt the innocent as well as those they are used against.
 
misterman said:
Well, that's true, but maybe they are. ;) This thread isn't about how insults are bad, it's how some hurt the innocent as well as those they are used against.
Click to expand...

But name calling, based on ones personal, subjective worldview, is really an immature and insensitive way of dealing with ones frustrations or anger.
 
MyOwnDrum said:
But name calling, based on ones personal, subjective worldview, is really an immature and insensitive way of dealing with ones frustrations or anger.
Click to expand...

Sometimes. And sometimes it is an appropriate way of helping someone understand the impact of their own immature, insensitive insults.
 
this thread is also about all the incompetents in this administration surrounding our poor perplexed president

the la times this afternoon---devastating

President Obama Day 386: What's happened to him? | Top of the Ticket | Los Angeles Times)

obama, day 386, what happened, asks the times

andrew malcom's answer---CHICAGO

so true, so extremely true

but that THE TIMES would say IT

wow!

now, the times goes on to point out---EVERYONE's STARTING TO SAY IT

that can only be because it's UNDENIABLE

as IN YOUR FACE as, well, CHICAGO

the most CORRUPT politics in the nation

we're talking RAHM, here:

"the famously irascible Mr Emanuel treats cabinet principals like minions. 'I am not sure the president realises how much he is humiliating some of the big figures he spent so much trouble recruiting into his cabinet,' says the head of a presidential advisory board who visits the Oval Office frequently."

this is the FINANCIAL TIMES talking

HUFFINGTON is onto the exact same story

as was DOUG WILDER yesterday (in POLITICO)

wow!

that's pretty sea changey

and this summation, this sorry little story about a president's souring, CAN be all wound up in one wicked word: CHICAGO

ouch!
 
Last edited:
misterman said:
Sometimes. And sometimes it is an appropriate way of helping someone understand the impact of their own immature, insensitive insults.
Click to expand...

It's much easier to justify ones actions and deeds, rather than engaging in honest self analysis, that's very true.
 
MyOwnDrum said:
It's much easier to justify ones actions and deeds, rather than engaging in honest self analysis, that's very true.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's entirely true. Witness the various twisted rationalizations for using "retarded" or posting mocking insults and pictures on this very thread.
 
The Prof said:
then, on the other hand (literally), we've got press secty gibbs MOCKING mrs palin by scribbling notes on his left hand and waving it around for the press corps to see

minutes earlier, obama's at the same podium prescribing the moving past of petty politics

do you think it's leaderly-like and visionary for the white house to resort to teasing and taunting its political opponents?

including some of those who don't even hold office?

you see, some people keep their eyes on the big picture stuff

others can't tell the difference

petty put downs and paltry aspersions take the place of policy

the president's team is pathetic
Click to expand...


as compared to conservative pundents who cant miss an opportunity to put down the president, the democrats, the any f****** thing they dont like.

and yes, the mocking of palin should be fine because hey, ITS SATIRE RIGHT!!! and hey, who the f*** needs to write "raise american spirit" on their hands? If something is important to you, do you need to note it?
 
leadership is held to different standards than "pundents"

most americans don't look to the white house for their satire, especially in times like these
 
Is this thread still going? Man, we've onto the Gibbs thing now....this is so two weeks ago. :lamo:
 
did you all see this?

Rahm Emanuel takes heat over Dana Milbank column - Glenn Thrush - POLITICO.com

what a rat

it appears rahm the ram whispered to dana milbank a bunch of stuff about obama not taking his chief of staff's advice, about how right rahm's been, about how messed up are valerie jarrett and robert gibbs...

unbelievable

how would milbank KNOW what rahm SAID to obama?

LOL!

not too hard to make THAT connection

i'm not sure how many of you all appreciate the workings of rahm

he's chief of staff, he's legislative LIASON between white house and congress

he's responsible, therefore, for the implementation in house and senate of the white house's priorities

which, based on what went down during obama's year, would pretty much come down to health care

health care is rahm's baby, as president pieface's chief of staff

for THAT reason, FIRST OFF, he must go

he's been a flat out failure

and he's personally a pig, that's apparent

oh well

party on, progressives

hope you're happy
 
Please take a remedial English composition course.

The Prof said:
did you all see this?

Rahm Emanuel takes heat over Dana Milbank column - Glenn Thrush - POLITICO.com

what a rat

it appears rahm the ram whispered to dana milbank a bunch of stuff about obama not taking his chief of staff's advice, about how right rahm's been, about how messed up are valerie jarrett and robert gibbs...

unbelievable

how would milbank KNOW what rahm SAID to obama?

LOL!

not too hard to make THAT connection

i'm not sure how many of you all appreciate the workings of rahm

he's chief of staff, he's legislative LIASON between white house and congress

he's responsible, therefore, for the implementation in house and senate of the white house's priorities

which, based on what went down during obama's year, would pretty much come down to health care

health care is rahm's baby, as president pieface's chief of staff

for THAT reason, FIRST OFF, he must go

he's been a flat out failure

and he's personally a pig, that's apparent

oh well

party on, progressives

hope you're happy
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom