Subscribe to The Curmudgeon!

Google Groups
Subscribe to The Curmudgeon
Visit this group

Tuesday, July 13, 2010

Naggers (It's A South Park Reference)

For those of you who don't know, Jesse Jackson claims that Cavs' owner Dan Gilbert's public sentiments re: LeBron are akin to a slave master's reaction to a runaway slave. Seriously, Reverend? You really lose credibility when you say shit like that. Just because someone is a dick to a black dude doesn't mean he's being racist. Gilbert threw an impetuous tantrum because he lost the entire economy of downtown Cleveland! If LeBron had been white, I'm pretty confident Gilbert would've been just as pissed... Yeah, right! Like a white guy would be that good at basketball...


  1. Well said. I'd say 'Duh', but unfortunately, in the real world I guess it's not that obvious...

  2. Yeah, pretty annoying. When Jesse Jackson says stuff like that, it incites ACTUAL racists (i.e. - white people in the South) to say things like, "Black people always make it about race," thus making themselves feel better about their retarded outlook. The good news is, I think this case IS as clear as you thought, because I saw an interview with Jackson last night, and even he seemed to be backpedaling...

  3. Wait, you mentioned that people were starting to sound anti-Semetic when they were complaining about Israel's attack on the flotilla bringing aid to Gaza. Isn't this the same situation? I'm not saying that Jesse Jackson is right (he's not) but let's put this in perspective. The truth is, when you touch on a sensitive issue, you're bound to get explosive reactions.

  4. I also don't think it's particularly accurate to characterize someone as a 'slave' when they're being paid tens of millions of dollars.

    I think Dan Gilbert did have good reason to be angry with the way LeBron handled the whole debacle, but not for any of the reasons he wrote in that letter.

    Gilbert's reactions make him seem like an immature whiner, certainly. But not a racist.

  5. Yvonne, disproportionately criticizing one nation whose primary distinguishing characteristic is that its religion is Judaism for behavior that is far less incendiary than what the majority of other nations do is antisemitic. Throwing a tantrum because your biggest source of profit skips town is not racist.

  6. Okay, I was thinking about it and it's not the same. HOWEVER, I still don't think that people criticizing Netanyahu and Israel for attacking an unarmed flotilla carrying aid to Gaza is being anti-Semetic. I think that people are angry at a country and its leader for murdering activists that were trying to bring supplies to a group of people who are being punished for being alive.

    Unless people specifically said terrible things about Jewish people as a whole, which I did not hear, then I can't agree that the media was wrong about how it reacted. If you have an example of someone saying something terrible about Jewish people, then I will admit I was wrong.

  7. I'm sure I can actually find you stuff if you want...and if you REALLY want, I'll try to put some time into it. BUT, the main point is, Gaza is run by HAMAS, a clear terrorist organization who refuses to acknowledge Israel's right to exist and has openly called for the death of Jews and Israelis. ANY OTHER COUNTRY whose neighbor's government's official policy was remotely analogous to that would undoubtedly board a ship that refused to stop for inspection. Whether the individual soldiers who boarded the boat acted appropriately or not is unclear given conflicting reports, but I am fully open to the very likely possibility that they used excessive force, and should be punished accordingly if so. I absolutely want them to be punished if they murdered innocent, unarmed people. But, for the world to express such disproportionate outrage toward the entire of country of Israel over the actions of a handful of soldiers can, in my opinion, only be explained by an underlying antisemitic sentiment that has pretty clearly existed throughout history...