Seems to me, that Kramer tried to defuse the hecklers but it went horribly in the wrong direction and got worse.
Originally posted by: pulse8
Originally posted by: Narmer
It's sad when people here try to mitigate this racial outburst. It's even worse when Blacks try to placate whites and start having sympathy for the racist, getting angry that the victims are hiring Gloria Alred and trying to divert the topic to what's appropriate to call whom.
Michael Richards is obviously racist anyway you look at it and that act that he performed on Letterman was nothing more than preaching to the congregation. Now the congregation sympathizes more with the aggressor than the victim.
Let's look at it two ways: IF Richards was correct and the individuals were heckling him, his vengeance quickly got out of hand and his true feeling were coming out. By the time he realized it (on stage) it was too late and he went into a sort of "sad role", which he's been ever since.
IF the individuals are correct than he is an outright racist who deserves no sympathy, except for the closeted racists and self-hating blacks on this board and around the country. If I can see right through his act, the only reason why others can't is simply because they don't want to.
As for people here wondering about the double-standard of the N-word, do a little history reasearch and you'll find two things. The first is that people of African descent have suffered greatly at the hands of Europeans and their descendents since the 1500s. The second thing is that individuals withing a community who shared a painful past get around some of that pain by making light of it. Nevertheless, individuals outside that community should not see it as an invitation. Hence, the double standard.
******, which was originally directed at the Irish, was re-directed against Blacks because of its proximity to Negro. What's odd is that before the 1500s, being black was one of the highest honors in the world, probably because most knowledge came from Africa and India and traveled to the rest of the world. Today, it's a byword for weakness, intellectual inferiority and so on. Perhaps it's a mother complex.
As for Mel Gibson, whether he is or isn't a racist, one has to remember that he endured over a year of attacks because of POTC. Stuff like that goes into your psyche and it eventually bubbled up when he was drunk.
That's such crap. The Jews were persecuted for centuries and nearly wiped out, but do you really think that we call each other beloved patriot as a result? No other ethnic group has resorted to calling themselves a racial epithet in order to communicate with each other. I'm not sure why the black culture started doing so, but it doesn't make much sense to me.
As for Mel Gibson, his father is an anti-Semite. I'm not surprised he is as well.
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: pulse8
Originally posted by: Narmer
It's sad when people here try to mitigate this racial outburst. It's even worse when Blacks try to placate whites and start having sympathy for the racist, getting angry that the victims are hiring Gloria Alred and trying to divert the topic to what's appropriate to call whom.
Michael Richards is obviously racist anyway you look at it and that act that he performed on Letterman was nothing more than preaching to the congregation. Now the congregation sympathizes more with the aggressor than the victim.
Let's look at it two ways: IF Richards was correct and the individuals were heckling him, his vengeance quickly got out of hand and his true feeling were coming out. By the time he realized it (on stage) it was too late and he went into a sort of "sad role", which he's been ever since.
IF the individuals are correct than he is an outright racist who deserves no sympathy, except for the closeted racists and self-hating blacks on this board and around the country. If I can see right through his act, the only reason why others can't is simply because they don't want to.
As for people here wondering about the double-standard of the N-word, do a little history reasearch and you'll find two things. The first is that people of African descent have suffered greatly at the hands of Europeans and their descendents since the 1500s. The second thing is that individuals withing a community who shared a painful past get around some of that pain by making light of it. Nevertheless, individuals outside that community should not see it as an invitation. Hence, the double standard.
******, which was originally directed at the Irish, was re-directed against Blacks because of its proximity to Negro. What's odd is that before the 1500s, being black was one of the highest honors in the world, probably because most knowledge came from Africa and India and traveled to the rest of the world. Today, it's a byword for weakness, intellectual inferiority and so on. Perhaps it's a mother complex.
As for Mel Gibson, whether he is or isn't a racist, one has to remember that he endured over a year of attacks because of POTC. Stuff like that goes into your psyche and it eventually bubbled up when he was drunk.
That's such crap. The Jews were persecuted for centuries and nearly wiped out, but do you really think that we call each other beloved patriot as a result? No other ethnic group has resorted to calling themselves a racial epithet in order to communicate with each other. I'm not sure why the black culture started doing so, but it doesn't make much sense to me.
As for Mel Gibson, his father is an anti-Semite. I'm not surprised he is as well.
I don't say others do it but they sure as hell make fun of each other over it. And if you think Jews are any different, look at Borat, or Springtime for Hitler, or the Broadway hit, Jewtown. Now, if a non-Jew did something like that, people would go ape-sh!t over it. Relax, there's nothing wrong with it. It's only a problem when those outside the community try to come in un-invited.
As for Jews not calling each other a name that others have called them, then you are short-sighted because the word Hebrew comes from the Egyptian word "hibri", which means wanderers, as in those with no home. If I remember correctly, the Jews and Egyptians did not get along too well. Today, Jews have no problem calling their language that. Do you?
Originally posted by: pulse8
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: pulse8
Originally posted by: Narmer
It's sad when people here try to mitigate this racial outburst. It's even worse when Blacks try to placate whites and start having sympathy for the racist, getting angry that the victims are hiring Gloria Alred and trying to divert the topic to what's appropriate to call whom.
Michael Richards is obviously racist anyway you look at it and that act that he performed on Letterman was nothing more than preaching to the congregation. Now the congregation sympathizes more with the aggressor than the victim.
Let's look at it two ways: IF Richards was correct and the individuals were heckling him, his vengeance quickly got out of hand and his true feeling were coming out. By the time he realized it (on stage) it was too late and he went into a sort of "sad role", which he's been ever since.
IF the individuals are correct than he is an outright racist who deserves no sympathy, except for the closeted racists and self-hating blacks on this board and around the country. If I can see right through his act, the only reason why others can't is simply because they don't want to.
As for people here wondering about the double-standard of the N-word, do a little history reasearch and you'll find two things. The first is that people of African descent have suffered greatly at the hands of Europeans and their descendents since the 1500s. The second thing is that individuals withing a community who shared a painful past get around some of that pain by making light of it. Nevertheless, individuals outside that community should not see it as an invitation. Hence, the double standard.
******, which was originally directed at the Irish, was re-directed against Blacks because of its proximity to Negro. What's odd is that before the 1500s, being black was one of the highest honors in the world, probably because most knowledge came from Africa and India and traveled to the rest of the world. Today, it's a byword for weakness, intellectual inferiority and so on. Perhaps it's a mother complex.
As for Mel Gibson, whether he is or isn't a racist, one has to remember that he endured over a year of attacks because of POTC. Stuff like that goes into your psyche and it eventually bubbled up when he was drunk.
That's such crap. The Jews were persecuted for centuries and nearly wiped out, but do you really think that we call each other beloved patriot as a result? No other ethnic group has resorted to calling themselves a racial epithet in order to communicate with each other. I'm not sure why the black culture started doing so, but it doesn't make much sense to me.
As for Mel Gibson, his father is an anti-Semite. I'm not surprised he is as well.
I don't say others do it but they sure as hell make fun of each other over it. And if you think Jews are any different, look at Borat, or Springtime for Hitler, or the Broadway hit, Jewtown. Now, if a non-Jew did something like that, people would go ape-sh!t over it. Relax, there's nothing wrong with it. It's only a problem when those outside the community try to come in un-invited.
As for Jews not calling each other a name that others have called them, then you are short-sighted because the word Hebrew comes from the Egyptian word "hibri", which means wanderers, as in those with no home. If I remember correctly, the Jews and Egyptians did not get along too well. Today, Jews have no problem calling their language that. Do you?
Borat, Springtime for Hitler and Jewtown are all of a different context. You can't compare those to using the "N" word. Also, calling someone a wanderer is hardly offensive regardless of the language.
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: pulse8
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: pulse8
Originally posted by: Narmer
It's sad when people here try to mitigate this racial outburst. It's even worse when Blacks try to placate whites and start having sympathy for the racist, getting angry that the victims are hiring Gloria Alred and trying to divert the topic to what's appropriate to call whom.
Michael Richards is obviously racist anyway you look at it and that act that he performed on Letterman was nothing more than preaching to the congregation. Now the congregation sympathizes more with the aggressor than the victim.
Let's look at it two ways: IF Richards was correct and the individuals were heckling him, his vengeance quickly got out of hand and his true feeling were coming out. By the time he realized it (on stage) it was too late and he went into a sort of "sad role", which he's been ever since.
IF the individuals are correct than he is an outright racist who deserves no sympathy, except for the closeted racists and self-hating blacks on this board and around the country. If I can see right through his act, the only reason why others can't is simply because they don't want to.
As for people here wondering about the double-standard of the N-word, do a little history reasearch and you'll find two things. The first is that people of African descent have suffered greatly at the hands of Europeans and their descendents since the 1500s. The second thing is that individuals withing a community who shared a painful past get around some of that pain by making light of it. Nevertheless, individuals outside that community should not see it as an invitation. Hence, the double standard.
******, which was originally directed at the Irish, was re-directed against Blacks because of its proximity to Negro. What's odd is that before the 1500s, being black was one of the highest honors in the world, probably because most knowledge came from Africa and India and traveled to the rest of the world. Today, it's a byword for weakness, intellectual inferiority and so on. Perhaps it's a mother complex.
As for Mel Gibson, whether he is or isn't a racist, one has to remember that he endured over a year of attacks because of POTC. Stuff like that goes into your psyche and it eventually bubbled up when he was drunk.
That's such crap. The Jews were persecuted for centuries and nearly wiped out, but do you really think that we call each other beloved patriot as a result? No other ethnic group has resorted to calling themselves a racial epithet in order to communicate with each other. I'm not sure why the black culture started doing so, but it doesn't make much sense to me.
As for Mel Gibson, his father is an anti-Semite. I'm not surprised he is as well.
I don't say others do it but they sure as hell make fun of each other over it. And if you think Jews are any different, look at Borat, or Springtime for Hitler, or the Broadway hit, Jewtown. Now, if a non-Jew did something like that, people would go ape-sh!t over it. Relax, there's nothing wrong with it. It's only a problem when those outside the community try to come in un-invited.
As for Jews not calling each other a name that others have called them, then you are short-sighted because the word Hebrew comes from the Egyptian word "hibri", which means wanderers, as in those with no home. If I remember correctly, the Jews and Egyptians did not get along too well. Today, Jews have no problem calling their language that. Do you?
Borat, Springtime for Hitler and Jewtown are all of a different context. You can't compare those to using the "N" word. Also, calling someone a wanderer is hardly offensive regardless of the language.
Well, this is 2006. I'm sure 4000 years ago it was a serious insult. Even 60 years ago, when the Jews had no home, it would be considered an insult as well. But today, the struggle and humiliation that the Jews endured is now seen as a testament of their strength rather than weakness. And the context may be different, but it's incredibly similar and I think you know that.
As for the N-word, were still in the depth of the transition from slavery to equal rights to respectability. Give it time. Besides, it's the younger generation (who don't know how degrading it is) that uses such derogatory words, not the older generation, who find it despicable. Don't assume that EVERY black individual uses that word.
Originally posted by: pulse8
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: pulse8
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: pulse8
Originally posted by: Narmer
It's sad when people here try to mitigate this racial outburst. It's even worse when Blacks try to placate whites and start having sympathy for the racist, getting angry that the victims are hiring Gloria Alred and trying to divert the topic to what's appropriate to call whom.
Michael Richards is obviously racist anyway you look at it and that act that he performed on Letterman was nothing more than preaching to the congregation. Now the congregation sympathizes more with the aggressor than the victim.
Let's look at it two ways: IF Richards was correct and the individuals were heckling him, his vengeance quickly got out of hand and his true feeling were coming out. By the time he realized it (on stage) it was too late and he went into a sort of "sad role", which he's been ever since.
IF the individuals are correct than he is an outright racist who deserves no sympathy, except for the closeted racists and self-hating blacks on this board and around the country. If I can see right through his act, the only reason why others can't is simply because they don't want to.
As for people here wondering about the double-standard of the N-word, do a little history reasearch and you'll find two things. The first is that people of African descent have suffered greatly at the hands of Europeans and their descendents since the 1500s. The second thing is that individuals withing a community who shared a painful past get around some of that pain by making light of it. Nevertheless, individuals outside that community should not see it as an invitation. Hence, the double standard.
******, which was originally directed at the Irish, was re-directed against Blacks because of its proximity to Negro. What's odd is that before the 1500s, being black was one of the highest honors in the world, probably because most knowledge came from Africa and India and traveled to the rest of the world. Today, it's a byword for weakness, intellectual inferiority and so on. Perhaps it's a mother complex.
As for Mel Gibson, whether he is or isn't a racist, one has to remember that he endured over a year of attacks because of POTC. Stuff like that goes into your psyche and it eventually bubbled up when he was drunk.
That's such crap. The Jews were persecuted for centuries and nearly wiped out, but do you really think that we call each other beloved patriot as a result? No other ethnic group has resorted to calling themselves a racial epithet in order to communicate with each other. I'm not sure why the black culture started doing so, but it doesn't make much sense to me.
As for Mel Gibson, his father is an anti-Semite. I'm not surprised he is as well.
I don't say others do it but they sure as hell make fun of each other over it. And if you think Jews are any different, look at Borat, or Springtime for Hitler, or the Broadway hit, Jewtown. Now, if a non-Jew did something like that, people would go ape-sh!t over it. Relax, there's nothing wrong with it. It's only a problem when those outside the community try to come in un-invited.
As for Jews not calling each other a name that others have called them, then you are short-sighted because the word Hebrew comes from the Egyptian word "hibri", which means wanderers, as in those with no home. If I remember correctly, the Jews and Egyptians did not get along too well. Today, Jews have no problem calling their language that. Do you?
Borat, Springtime for Hitler and Jewtown are all of a different context. You can't compare those to using the "N" word. Also, calling someone a wanderer is hardly offensive regardless of the language.
Well, this is 2006. I'm sure 4000 years ago it was a serious insult. Even 60 years ago, when the Jews had no home, it would be considered an insult as well. But today, the struggle and humiliation that the Jews endured is now seen as a testament of their strength rather than weakness. And the context may be different, but it's incredibly similar and I think you know that.
As for the N-word, were still in the depth of the transition from slavery to equal rights to respectability. Give it time. Besides, it's the younger generation (who don't know how degrading it is) that uses such derogatory words, not the older generation, who find it despicable. Don't assume that EVERY black individual uses that word.
Don't assume that every Jew finds Borat or the rest of your examples funny or appropriate. Anyway, I just don't buy that black culture's use of the "N" word is to make light of the word in order to ease their pain. As you say, it is the younger generation who use it because they don't know how degrading it is. I doubt they are ignorant to the severity of the word, but conscious of some national healing effort.
Originally posted by: Linux23
White closeted biggots are such cowards it's not even funny. How much do you want to bet that this piece of monkey sh!t wouldn't have ever thought about saying the N word if he were performing at a black comedy club, where the majority is black folk.
What a fvcking coward.
Originally posted by: Cattlegod
am i the only one who doesn't think this is a big deal at all? i mean, if you think it is a big deal, i contest that you are a retard.
i mean for christ's sake, they are just sound waves generated by the vibration of a human body part. anyone who thinks those words were anything but that is not mentally developed enough to comprehend.
Originally posted by: AsianriceX
This just in, the guys that heckled him are suing.
They're live on Fox News right now.
bleh.
Edit: Gist of the interview.
Two guys hire high-profile lawyer. They dance around questions about when they decided to sue and what dollar amount they want as damages.
According to them, they just want whatever the "retired judge" thinks is fair and that Michael Richards should be punished.
Originally posted by: Cattlegod
am i the only one who doesn't think this is a big deal at all? i mean, if you think it is a big deal, i contest that you are a retard.
i mean for christ's sake, they are just sound waves generated by the vibration of a human body part. anyone who thinks those words were anything but that is not mentally developed enough to comprehend.
Originally posted by: Thetech
Originally posted by: AsianriceX
This just in, the guys that heckled him are suing.
They're live on Fox News right now.
bleh.
Edit: Gist of the interview.
Two guys hire high-profile lawyer. They dance around questions about when they decided to sue and what dollar amount they want as damages.
According to them, they just want whatever the "retired judge" thinks is fair and that Michael Richards should be punished.
If anything they all should apoligize to each other. If you could sue everyone in life who called you a word that wasn't your name or you didn't like, everyone would be rich I know I would
No offense to everyone, but some of the comments posted in this thread show why we as people can't get along or get ahead in our relations to one another, as people.
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: Thetech
Originally posted by: AsianriceX
This just in, the guys that heckled him are suing.
They're live on Fox News right now.
bleh.
Edit: Gist of the interview.
Two guys hire high-profile lawyer. They dance around questions about when they decided to sue and what dollar amount they want as damages.
According to them, they just want whatever the "retired judge" thinks is fair and that Michael Richards should be punished.
If anything they all should apoligize to each other. If you could sue everyone in life who called you a word that wasn't your name or you didn't like, everyone would be rich I know I would
No offense to everyone, but some of the comments posted in this thread show why we as people can't get along or get ahead in our relations to one another, as people.
Did you know that if some Klansmen lit a burning cross deep in the woods and a person of African descent flew over it and saw it, he could press charges? How do you feel about that. Do you think the Klansmen have a right to burn crosses?