‘Precious’ vs. ‘The Blind Side’: The System, Worked
by Mr. Wrestling IV“I don’t blame nobody. I just want to say when I was twelve, TWELVE, somebody hadda help me it not be like it is now…. Why no one put Carl in jail after I have baby by him when I am twelve?” — From “Precious,” Based on the Novel “Push,” by Sapphire.
From ABC’s 20/20 segment on “The Blind Side”:
Deborah Roberts: There are some black people who feel a little uneasy about the notion of the wealthy white family comes in to help the poor black kid…
Michael Oher: I don’t understand why people would feel that way because as long as somebody’s, uh, somebody’s helping somebody and taking, you know, somebody off the streets, I don’t care, you know, black or white, that shouldn’t be a problem.
Two powerful and very different movies dealing with the problem of neglected and abused children in America were honored at this year’s Golden Globe Awards. Precious is a very difficult and painful movie to watch, depicting the utter devastation wrought in the horrible life of Clareece Precious Jones, a fictional but utterly believable character with countless real-life counterparts, while The Blind Side is perhaps the prototypical feel-good movie of the year (and a crowd-pleasing $200-million blockbuster), dealing with the success story of the real-life Michael Oher, who was adopted by a middle class white family and went on to play college football and become an NFL star. But the two movies starkly show two distinctly different approaches to the problem.
Bluntly stated, Precious presents the liberal solution — let the government do it — and The Blind Side presents the conservative solution — do it yourself.
Precious, an illiterate, pregnant sixteen-year-old girl, trapped in a public school system that passes her along even though she has learned nothing, raped repeatedly by her father resulting in a mongoloid child at age 12 as well as her current pregnancy, beaten and humiliated her entire life by the sick beast who bore her, is the end product (sadly, one of thousands upon thousands) of one of the greatest liberal crimes of the 20th Century: Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society.
When the Johnson Administration expanded the AFDC program (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) in the early 1960s to include any household with children in which a male breadwinner was absent (theretofore it had been restricted to widows with children), the devastation it brought to inner-city family life was pervasive and undeniable. As Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen described it in A Patriot’s History of the United States, “The war on poverty managed to destroy black marriages and family formation at a faster rate than the most brutal slaveholder had ever dreamed.” (p. 688)
By creating an incentive for poor women to remain unmarried so that they could receive taxpayer-funded subsidies, and by further increasing the amount of aid for every additional child they birthed, government assistance from 1965 to 1975 nearly doubled the illegitimate birth rate among blacks from 28% to 49%, reaching a staggering 65% in 1989.
By making black men irrelevant to the support of the children they fathered, and attempting to replace their contribution to the family with a welfare check, liberal policies inflicted nearly permanent damage to the very people they sought to help. These policies have metastasized into a permanent underclass, dependent on subsistence level funding from taxpayer monies, and forever after terrorized by exploitative politicians tightening their grip on power by promising their payments would decrease or stop altogether if they did not continue to vote for them.
And so we get Precious. Trapped in an apartment with her government-subsidized mother, who allows her boyfriend (Precious’ own biological father) to do unspeakable things to her from infancy onward; lost in a school system that ignores her, and bound by her own ignorance, she escapes the horrors of her life by living in a fantasy world of pop culture dreams that flicker across her television, and she is utterly failed by every government system created to save her. The government monopoly on public schools fails to educate her; the Social Services Department fails to protect her; the welfare system fails to lift her out of poverty.
But if Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano was instead the secretary of Health and Human Services, undoubtedly she would say, “The system worked.” It certainly worked for Precious’ mother, who knows exactly how to work the system, as we see whenever she bats her eyes and plays the victim for the social workers who fall for her act and keep the checks coming.
And in fact, in Precious, the system does work in exactly the way it was designed. The system was created by liberals to make themselves feel good, not to bring any actual benefit or relief to victimized children like Precious. She and her countless counterparts are doomed by dangerously mistaken liberals who think:
“I will vote to create taxpayer-funded bureaucracies that will fix this problem by taking up a forced collection from all my fellow Americans, and I will never have to get my hands dirty or do something disgusting like open my home to her, or actually do anything to help her myself. I will let the government take care of her, and since I vote for Democrats who create these bureaucracies, I have helped her, and I am better than those selfish Republicans.”
And if you think that assessment of liberals is too harsh, just remember: these are the same people that define their goodness by their Prius and their mulchers, and the way they meticulously sort their trash into different colored bins. When you think you can save the planet just by carrying your reusable bag to Trader Joe’s, there’s really no need to do anything really difficult or icky like becoming a Big Brother or a foster parent or adopting a child.
Which brings us to those awful conservative Christian Republicans in The Blind Side. Michael Oher, one of thirteen children born to a drug-addicted mother living in public housing, whose life up to that point had probably been somewhat similar to Precious’, is walking down a freezing cold Memphis street in only a T-shirt when Leigh Anne Tuohy drives past him and says to her husband Sean, “Turn the car around.” His life is changed forever, by an awesome act of love and kindness from a private citizen.
The insane and utterly racist backlash from some quarters against The Blind Side seems to boil down to this: rich white people shouldn’t be adopting poor black kids. And as usual, this stupidity does not come from the right, but from the bigoted statists on the left, who want to protect the government mechanisms they have constructed to keep these problems out of their sights.
Left out of The Blind Side, apparently, were the long lines of black families that the Tuohys elbowed out of the way in order to get their white hands on Michael Oher. What sort of person could argue that Michael Oher — or Precious, for that matter — would be better off staying in the system if the alternative is to be taken care of by white people? And what kind of an idiot would think that a family would take on the responsibility of another human being and feed him, clothe him, pay for a tutor to help him learn, all just to get him to play football for their alma mater?
The best way to deal with this hateful nonsense is to dismiss it completely, as Leigh Anne Tuohy demonstrated, in her inimitable style, on 20/20:
Deborah Roberts: What do you say to people who say they feel a little offended that this white couple took this black kid in and tried to kind of mold him into what they wanted?
Leigh Anne Tuohy: No one has the guts to say that to my face. No one has ever said that to my face and if they did I would tell them don’t let the door hit you on the way out.
At the end of Precious, a bracing dedication comes up on the screen: For Precious Girls Everywhere. Perhaps the saddest fact in the comparison between these two films is that this might be one instance where the fictional character is more real than the true-life character. After all, there is only one Michael Oher, adopted and loved by Sean and Leigh Anne Tuohy, now the Baltimore Ravens’ left tackle.
But how many Precious girls and boys are still out there, trapped in a system that works only to keep them in it, waiting for a Leigh Anne Tuohy to say, “Turn the car around?”
Ed. Note: This post has been updated to repair a broken link.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
180 Comments
Hollywood's business is making fortunes off the blurring of the line, between fiction and fact, fantasy and reality. The liberals make it their business to exploit both.
The conservatives simply believe in picking your own azz up, and making something of yourself.
Too many, unfortunately. And until we work to bring real education and intact families back to poor areas, even a hundred Lee Anne's won't be enough.
You hit the nail on the head: the liberal view is selfishness; the conservative view is compassion. Not at all surprising that libs give so little to charity and so much to government causes.
"What sort of person could argue that Michael Oher — or Precious, for that matter — would be better off staying in the system if the alternative is to be taken care of by white people?"
The answer is simple. Anyone who's livelihood and political power are derived from convincing poor black people that "Whitey hate you. Whitey only gonna keep a brotha down. Gubmn't is gonna get even with Whitey for you."
Yeah I'm pointing my pasty white finger at you; Sharpton, Jackson, Obama and the rest. Shame on you.
I am a student of Larry Shweikart's (quoted above), and I JUST got out of class a few minutes ago. Loving it, and the University of Dayton as well.
Too bad his colleagues are a bunch of capitalism-hating morons, though.
individual effort x responsibility+ accountability= success…
Pretty simple, ain't it? Seems to be pretty much color bind, as well. Look at Oprah. For a former druggie/welfare recipient she's done pretty well. Guaranteed outcomes do not exist, other than in the febrile minds of liberals…
Great column. I only wish we'd get actual Liberals here instead of the occasional Liberal troll to actually try to defend the success vs failures of the government system.
Excellent article, well written with compassion for those trapped on the Welfare Plantation. What isn't pointed out is that welfare and liberal good intentions have managed to destroy a people strong and resilient enough to survive slavery and discrimination. Doesn't bode well for the rest of us under Obama's ministrations.
There are too many Preciouses and too few Tuohy's. How does this country ever solve this problem?
Just remember that the republicans haven't stopped the gravy train either….
Remember "compassionate conservatism"?
Cure liberalism.
Point taken. I used the term "mongoloid" because it was used in the movie, and should have used quotation marks. My apologies.
Only glaring mistake in this post is in the Blind side, the family that adopted Michael was clearly not middle-class, but rather upper class. Considering Sandra Bullock's character drove a brand new Mercedes Benz, and the family donated thousands of dollars to Ole Miss.
Mr WrestlingIV,
Great analysis, Great piece!
As a former special needs teacher, what I find offensive is the ever-shifting PC involved.
"Retarded" was the preferred term until "challenged" and "special needs". What will the next preferred term be? Children use terms of derision. When "child with Downs Syndrome" itself becomes a term of derision by other children, then the term will change to something else. People will write "PUH-leese don't refer to children with Down's Syndrome as "children with Down's Syndrome, refer to them as "fill in the blank".
The most offensive thing is that people think by changing terms they can sanitize a situation that will never change: children will refer to those differently at times by terms that we wish they wouldn't use.
This is very exciting, as I read these posts I realize that American's are waking up to the fascist left who have dominated the conversation for decades!
And I don't think that the writers "assessment of liberals is too harsh." (Maybe not harsh enough) This is exactly the conversation we should be having!
Can you provide any documents or studies or evidence that people on welfare or public assistance think "getting a government check is a career"? This sort of extreme oversimplication of poverty or welfare issues does sort of contribute to the perception that *some* conservatives are indifferent to those down on their luck. I think that the "gravy train" argument has been repeated so often, that it's accepted as gospel without any actual proof.
Here's an idea. If you want fewer people to be on the public dole, then trade these cuts off with eliminating the tax benefits businesses get for moving jobs overseas, and stop all this talk about eliminating a minimum wage that people can't live on.. There's no point in cutting off assistance to people if there are no jobs to be had to live on.
Progressives empower themselves by making others dependent on them (the government). Conservatives empower others by making them independent from the government.
You are absolutely right. The poor have been pawns for politicians forever.
No, they are wealthy. Upper quarter per cent. Easy. Owned about a hundred fast food restaurants. You can make a really good living with a couple. But So what?
Thank you for your er thoughtful essay, devastating but sadly true.
Agreed. What I want to know is exactly when some one from the GOP is going to stand up and yell "enough is enough!"
I'm waiting……
"…And as usual, this stupidity does not come from the right, but from the bigoted statists on the left, who want to protect the government mechanisms they have constructed to keep these problems out of their sights…"
That's almost right, but not quite. Liberals may not want to deal with the results of their skulduggery on a personal and/or daily basis, but they sure as heck don't want these 'problems' to become invisible. The real game is to secure all blacks as DemocRAT voters by painting Republicans as racists. Here's how it works: first, you give blacks something for free using tax dollars. Then, you wait for Republicans to howl about it. Finally, you tell blacks, see, Republicans are racists because they don't want blacks to have this free thing we DemocRATS gave you. You see? No discussion of the merits of the free thing, no talk about who is going to pay for it, just, DemocRATS are for it, vote for us, Republicans are against it, they are racists. The same, effective plan is followed with women and abortion, Hispanics and amnesty, and Homosexuals and gay marriage, among myriad other examples.
How to solve it? Easy, people like Michael Oher need to show that their gratitude and courage matches the size of their athletic ability by calling the DemocRATS who would rather he had stayed in the 'ghetto' what they really are: racists.
Yeah…talking in a fake black dialect really helps the GOP overcome the perception that they don't really care for African-Americans.
…while making them completely dependent on the corporations. Sort of a lateral move if you ask me.
Um, you do understand that there are numerically more white people on public assistance than any other group in this country. You would have to think that portraying welfare as being almost exclusively a black thing has a lot to do with the GOP's image problem with African-American voters. Less dog whistles would do volumes to help the GOP moving forward. In a weird way, GW Bush was very astute about that, and avoided a lot of the extreme rhetoric like what you employed. As a result, he polled better with African-Americans and Latinos in 2000 and 2004 than any Republican presidential candidate in a generation.
Respectually, BOTH films were rather paternalistic. Blind Side got criticized because the main character, Michael Oher, was relegated to a guest cameo in his own biopic.
Oh, yes…we live in an amazing meritocracy. Why GW Bush got wealthy through his own hard work, not because of family connections. Mitt Romney never ever ever took advantage of his dad's political connections to get a leg up. Yep. Up by their bootstraps.
Ironically, the whole purpose of this website seems to be for that exact thing. If you can say with a straight face that you don't dehumanize people who aren't conservative…..
Liberals could read this well written, thought provoking article 100 times, and they still wouldn't GET it. Never will. They can't grasp that though my daughter is eligible for SCHIP because of my disability, I do without other things in order to buy her a private health insurance plan instead.. My liberal friend actually told me, "but, it's free". Needless to say, we don't speak often.
Thank you for your service. I'm glad that you're a FORMER special needs teacher….Or do you not like the term "special needs". Calling you a retarded teacher might actually fit better.
So Joe Mama, that's the best you can do to tell all of us racist, white, "Republicans" just how good the liberal philosophy has been for America in general, and black Americans in particular?
I read both books the movies were based on. . .So far, all you've challenged is the language that states the basic premise ( which belies your charge that the article was unfocused) : Government has not helped the lot of black Americans. . .but individuals have.
That's the basic premise of conservatism. White Saviors is your word – - race wasn't even a focus of the article. The system was.
Race Card play: Denied. And you may plant your lips on my dark conservative posterior.
*MissQuinn*
President Obama has lambasted Black people for not doing enough to improve their own communities.
The difference is that unlike Republicans Obama's words are just rhetoric to distract the "easily led" from how he want to maintain the liberal re-enslavement of Black people. Hence, Obama will encourage Black kids in Washington, DC to get a quality education, but then kill the voucher program that enabled said kids to do just that.
No wonder even Black Democrats in DC are starting to openly criticize Obama:
http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0909/657267.html
"I saw "The Blind Side" and I didn't think much of the "white savoirs" theme of the movie…until I read this article beretting black people."
Just to be clear, I have never advocated putting berets on black people, or any other color people, for that matter. I decry all beretting as unfashionable and pretentious, and think that noone in our country should be beretted.
"Joe Mama", go back to school. Nothing you have to say will ever be taken seriously if that's how you express yourself. Your high-minded liberal anger and misspelled words discredit you completely.
Sincerely,
A public school teacher
Cowboy,
Precisely correct. My take on it is the Hollywood/Liberal line is that it does not matter what you are DOING, it only matters what you SAY.
Therefore theyr sort their trash, and we actually go out there and DO SOMETHING that matters.
Perhaps if you learned to articulate your thoughts, people would take you a bit more serious.
I don't know.
I like berets, especially on Che' and Fidel.
If we could only get Hugo and Achmedenijad to wear one, with a little gold star………………
I do agree with Mondo that the terms change with the wind. As a mother to a former child with a disability, and as a "former" special needs teacher, I can see both sides here. To be honest, the name calling needs to stop. When all is said and done, the child is a child is a child. Please don't be mean.
Reverse psychology. Give them what they want.
Tell liberal women we think they should get abortions so that they can't raise liberal children.
Tell the hispanics they have to become citizen's and pay our taxes.
Tell the homos they have to get married so that they can be sued by their spouse for abuse/non support/divorce.
Don't allow welfare recipients to work or go to school, tell them they have to recieve the benefit forever and we don't want their situation to improve.
Or a target.
You shouldn't point out his flaws in articulation. It's so "beretting."
/sarc off
Hmmm.
We have witnessed the same name change for Blacks over the past thirty years. What is it now, changed about six or seven times? Purely parsing words, and semantics does not change anything other than making the "special descriptive terms police" feel better about the venacular of the day.
/sarc off
Social Workers will not allow white famalies to adopt african-american children even if these children are older or have special needs. That is one of the reasons white families adopt over-seas.
Concise, excellent comparison. Some great lines throughout your piece, Mr. Wrestling – good job!
Finally B.H. takes an objective look at Precious.
I'm afraid these are the actual liberals. *sad face*
The Left is evil. And so what? Over a half-century of its horror created world and the overwhelming majority of Americans still see liberals as "compassionate" and conservatives as mean. I was born into this and will die with it still going full steam ahead. And no,there is no happy ending to this post.
"and think that noone in our country should be beretted."
I must disagree. Like it or not, Gen. Shinseki's order still stands and the beret is standard US Army headgear.
Race wasn't a focus of the article at all….
"Left out of The Blind Side, apparently, were the long lines of black families that the Tuohys elbowed out of the way in order to get their white hands on Michael Oher."
Yep. No black family would help Michael Oher…although before the Tuhoys, the movie shows a black man that takes in Michael for a short time and tries to get him into the school (unless that was just a cut to please liberals). Of course, that isn't cited in the article at all…the Tuhoys are. In defense of "Hack" Hogan or whoever wrote this, that man wasn't half as sexy as Sandra Bullock with her affected southern accent (I apologize…she actually did a good job of playing a Republican even though I would hope that she is likely too bright and talented to be one). And the passage I chose came before the "writer" cited a thinly veiled defense of slave owners! I'm sorry…it was a thinly veiled defense of slave owners only in comparison to a Democratic government. Apparently slavery…not as bad as taking welfare! Nothing to do with race.
And I would kiss your ass, MissQuinn. However, since you implied that you are a black Republican woman, I'm sure there are many people in the Republican party already standing in the long line. After all, Republicans love a self hating black person. Tell Thomas Shallows I said hello.
AN OUTSTANDING COMPARISON!!! THE LIBERAL WAY VS THE CONSERVATIVE WAY…. WHICH IS BETTER??? WE ALL KNOW THE TRUTH…. LIBERALS WANT CONTROL SO THEY BUILD THE MECHANISMS
TO KEEP THE POOR [SEE: BLACKS] ON THE PLANTATION… IT IS LIBERALS [SEE: DEMOCRATS] THAT FAIL THE PEOPLE, THAT HOLD THE PEOPLE DOWN, HOLD "THEIR" PEOPLE DOWN… ALL IN THE NAME OF POWER. THIS POST IS OUTSTANDING FOR SHINING THE LIGHT DIRECTLY ON THE HYPOCRISY OF THE LEFT AND THE DESTRUCTION THE DEMOCRATS PRODUCE….
I'm sorry…who's noone? Did you mean "none in our country"? But that doesn't sound right.
It's great that I'm criticized for spelling…in a sentence with a misspelled word! Gotta love that double standard. It sure keeps Connie going strong!
Oh yea, Kennedy and Obama never took advantage of their political connections? Fail!
Yeah, Joe. Your a looser.
Jack Kemp's 'compassionate Capitalism' was all about creating prosperity and opportunities. It wasn't welfare or the entitlement mentality.
First off, there are millions of jobs to be had out there. We know this because there are millions of illegal aliens crossing the border to get them. Which is also the proof you need that many suckling at the public teet are quite comfortable doing just that FOREVER. Why go out and get a job when the government will pay you to stay at home, eat and breed?
In my area, all menial labor is being perfomed by citizens of Mexico, while the underclass blacks and whites who fill our section 8 housing and trailer parks contribute nothing beyond crime, addiction and teenage pregnancy.
The problem isn't some complex intersection of underlying causes, but the simple rule of supply and demand: what you pay for, you get more of.
Have you ever actually come across anyone who ever used the word "whitey"? Frankly, the only times I've ever seen the word "whitey" used is when misguided people of the conservative persuasion fling it around while pretending to know how black people think and what they say.
Where do you stand on Pat Buchanan's assertion that America is a "country built entirely by white men"? Is Pat a "liberal"?
A half-century, eh?
So, in 1960, America was just peachy keen, and there were no problems for anyone? Sure you want to go there?
Hey, Titov! Who said it was a black dialect? You did, racist!
His assessment was brilliant.
We don't dehumanize people who aren't conservative. How's that for straight?
Exactly, Ed. Be suspicious of people who are suspicious of genuine kindness. They can't wrap their brains around it.
Your source, sir?
Bread and circuses……..
On New Year's Day, my relatives and I had a debate over the Blind Side. My aunt was not thrilled with the idea of a White family once again adopting a Black child. Before I caught myself, I blurted out "If you're concerned about Black orphans, why not adopt one yourself?"
That killed the discussion right there.
It also made me reflect how its the conservative Black relatives like my brother-in-law and his wife who actually are going through the hard work of adopting a Black girl. Too many of my more liberal Black relatives complain about the problem or point at easy scapegoats (e.g., White people) to feel less guilty about their in action.
So, you as well as some of my relatives vindicate Mr/ Wrestling's point that liberals complain about the epidemic of Black orphan but lack the guts and love to become adoptive parents themselves. In short, they want to pass the buck as usual.
Here you go….
http://www.sfweekly.com/2009-11-18/film/the-blind...
THAT DIDN'T TAKE LONG! WHO'S NEXT?
I graded a high school student's essay today in which the student wrote about Nelson Mandela's struggles to help "African-Americans." The author stated that Mandela was president of South Africa, but she probably didn't know what else to call the black people. I actually feel awkward typing "black people" because I know some people get offended, and I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, but if I'm white, and I need to specify someone's race (i.e.: apartheid in South Africa was bad because black people were treated unfairly) why can't I call people black? Or maybe I can. I don't know!
Liberals and their policies are racist in the extreme.
It's ALL about separating people into identity groups for political exploitation.
That would mean cutting off welfare from those that think getting a government check is a career. Good luck with that while democrats and liberals are in charge. You'd be attacking their voting base.
We'd be labeled monsters that want poor people to starve and freeze. Of course that's a lot of hysterical bullshit, but hysterical bullshit plays in liberal land.
Excellent perspective on the stark differences in approach (and results) between the statists, well-intentioned though some of them may be, and free-thinking, generous individuals who simply roll up their sleeves and do something. Thanks for the good read.
You weren't reading very carefully. The author was answering back to the racist critics of the movie who are outraged that white conservatives would actually take on the responsibility of caring for a black teenager and giving him a chance for a better life. It punctures their self-gratifying myth that white Republicans are uncaring racists. In their small minds, since no black families had yet stepped forward to help Michael, therefore nobody should. If the Tuohys had happened to be a black family, the author would probably have applauded the story in exactly the same way.
Disagree with Movie Bob on Precious. The social worker doesn't give her strength or inspiration; just a venue or forum for Precious to actually talk to her mother. After that, Precious says, "I never knew what you was until this very day." That's why Precious never stood up to her before.
Nurse John was more about Precious feeling normal and having 'girl-talk' like a normal 16 year old. The government can't give you that sense of normalcy.
The lesbian-archangel teacher is simply a dedicated teacher. It's been done to death in movies, but someone had to teach Precious to read. A mediocre public school education isn't exactly the government coming to the rescue.
In the end, Precious walking away with her 2 babies is powerful scene of self-determination and ethics.
George Carlin said it best: "They think that by changing the WORD they are changing the CONDITION". Calling a crippled person "handicapped" was good for a while. But then someone decided handicapped wasn't good enough, so now they're "handi-capable". Ol' George's take was that eventually you get from "retarded" to "minimally exceptional". I can see it now; teenagers in twenty years saying "Dude, you're so minimally exceptional".
See how it is?
See what you just wrote?
You are a teacher, yet society, conventional wisdom, and contolling the discourse and venacular has allowed "them", to control "US."
Personally, I won't be controlled, not dictated to. I prefer to call a spade a spade, and even using those few silly little words, people today find offensive. I find them ridiculous.
I come from a different place than most folks, a different culture. It is different in the west. I spend alot of time on the Rez, in Indian country. They still call themselves Indians, and I am their token cowboy. I have witnessed racism and bigotry first hand, and it is ugly.
There are white folks, and red, and yellow, and brown, and black. Those are what we are, not a bunch of hyphenated-Americans. At the end of the day, all we can strive to be, is better Human Beings.
"The Blind Side" is not designed to reassure any group. It's designed to tell a true story, about someone in a terrible situation who got a chance because SOMEBODY cared. They just happened to be white conservative Christians in this case. And that's what has the haters' panties in a bunch. They can't stand it when white conservative Christians puncture the myths about their supposed uncaring bigotry.
Let's face it, the Liberals agenda, is to keep those folks on the plantation, waiting at the mailbox for the gubment check. Everything will be allright now that Obama is in da House. Gonna get that free stuff from da Obama stash.
Until that mindset is changed, nothing will change.
I need to get away from this freakin' coast. There's not a cowboy or Waffle House for miles.
Fairly juvenile of your to call it a double-standard. The poster was making light of the fact that you misspelled berating and ended up using a different actual word, which happened to be a silly hat. So he comes across as a smart-ass, while your "double standard" comment makes you come across as whiny.
Now that was funny!
What do you teach? The Rez always needs good teachers,and good people, if you don't mind living in a third world type atmosphere, and it the wild, wild west. Drugs addiction, alcoholism and juvenille suicide are at epidemic levels.
But people will treat you nice, and say M'am, and hold the door for you, and there is always plenty of depression soup and fry bread.
Doesn't sound too nice though, does it? Why do people like me stay in places like this? Kids need guidance.
You are an amazing person. Thank you!
I got the joke the second time I read it! Nicely done sir! Great article and a great reply, thank you!
Your right. Romney never saved any companies and he never saved a Winter Olympics that looked like perhaps the last one ever. Lazy rich guy sitting at home doing nothing with what he's got. Your just jealous that you aren't as rich as him. Bush, well, I can kind of see your point if you throw in J.F.K. into the same painting.
Yes I have. Many times. Most of them black Hollywood or Comedians, but a few regular black folk.
What is this strange fascination with assigning superlative motives to everything you disagree with? I see this from liberals AND conservatives and frankly it's juvenile and counterproductive. Why must a movie you don't agree with need to be demonized? Is it not enough to dislike the film and say you dislike it? I am amazed at how many postings here seem to treat one film as evil (liberal/conservative) propaganda and the other as a shining (conservative/liberal) beacon of hope and joy. Can't they just be stories? One of them is based on a true story, yet it's continually derided here as being Conservative lie. The other is fiction but fairly accurately represents a very real and unfortunate situation.
I suppose we could say it in a fake Irish accent. Would that be more culturally sensitive?
Blacks need to stop hating whites as much as they believe whites hate them. Liberal whites need to stop presenting hand-outs to failed black inner cities instead of really cleaning up the mess.
That reminds me of the word "special" in school. At first it was one of those "feel good" terms. Now, we all know what that means and it isn't special to be special.
Now if only we could talk about this rationally at Huffpo. Instead all you'll get is childish name-calling and bad language.
PUH-leese refer to children with Down Syndrome as children with Down Syndrome. The term "mongoloid" is as offensive and outmoded as the term "retarded."
Even MORE ironically, both the original comment and your reply are gross generalizations. Granted lumping all liberals together and calling them racist is an asinine thing to say. Your reply is slightly less asinine, but still very much so. This site is a forum for anyone…ANYONE….with an opinion. the fact that you're here and able to post your comments proves that.
Exactly. It's like calling a blind person "vision-challenged"…COME ON. Does that make me vision UN-challenged? It's an exercise in counter-productivity. Rather than spending time teaching people with handicaps how to function, far too many people feel the PC need to be offended on their behalf and make sure everyone is using the latest PC terms. Calling a handicapped person "handi-capable" doesn't make them the tiniest bit less handicapped, it just makes you a PC nazi.
Terrific article, very thought-provoking. I haven't seen "Precious," but "The Blind Side" one I won't soon forget.
I actually think we do need to be in some of those other countries – if not us in Haiti, who? Chavez? He's getting all pissy about our military being there; probably jealous he can't take it for himself.
I might be taking my career in another direction, although now you've got me Googling "teaching on Indian reservations"! Certainly something to think about.
Oh, and I love being called ma'am! Around here, people -GROWN people who should know better- call 70 year old women "miss." I have to bite my tongue to keep from saying something when the person doing it is a kid – I think SOMEONE should tell this kid that's not okay! But it's what people do here – it's normal! And it's weird.
Regarding Chavez, he is done. His regime is crumbling around his ears. He just doesn't know it yet, and the MSM is not reporting one thing about it. He is nationalizing industries, and rationing electricity. if he survives the next year, without ending up like Che' Guvera with a bullet in his head, I'd be surprised.
You must be in Kaliforn-i- yah!
The irony here of course being that my comment ALSO had a typo.
I don't. I usually let those like yourself just be yourself. No need to dehumanize anyone, the sheer ugliness in your soul just comes out and does all the work.
Thank goodness I'm not – I don't think my state's doing quite so badly!
This reminds me of an incident when I was in 6th grade (I am 26 now so it left an impression on me). I was doing a report on I think the Democratic Republic of the Congo or whatever it was called then. Anyway I had to list the ethnicities of the country and in the text it said Negro so I put Negro on my list. One of the students in the class got upset with me for using that term. And I said something to the affect that well, that is what the book said the people were called. I don't remember the teacher saying anything really educated about it either, but this is the same teacher that didn't know that Greenland was a part of the Kingdom of Denmark and that Iceland was its own country. (and yes I know now that Greenland was its own country but still under the kingdom of denmark, but this teacher didn't know enough to explain this to me when it was part of a quiz. And she taught social studies)
You must be logged in to post a comment.