…a Mafia wiseguy called “Joe the Plumber” is saying, “I’m gonna have t’get a new f*ckin'” nickname…”
PAD
319 comments on “And somewhere at this very moment…”
I Peter’s writing but I saw something and I took exception to it. And that’s what I wrote. People can justify until they’re blue in the face – if it doesn’t bother you… great.
Problem is, usually it’s not the person making the statement who makes the call on these things. At the very least, allow where it could be found offensive. Don’t dismiss it out of hand. Diminishing it by calling it oversensitive or ridiculous because you don’t share the same views, is just being a jerk.
I’m not the most politically correct person in this world, far from it. However, I’m not going to say what I felt was wrong, I’m certainly not going to f**king apologize. It’s the way it came across. If other people don’t feel that way good for them!
I’m looking through the thread and I’ve been called a bunch of stuff already, simply for having the temerity to voice an opinion. What’s even better is the justification that’s trotted out, the arguments being used as a counter, about the only thing missing from some of them (some, not all) are the words, “Some of my best friends are…” Although words to that effect have been used at times.
I’ve pulled out facts, put them before folks and somehow it’s getting ignored. Maybe it‘s easier to ignore the facts because they speak volumes for the validity of the argument. Maybe you just don’t like it!
Hëll! You can disagree with it too, that’s your right.
What I don’t appreciate is the response. Some people very clearly laid out their arguments, validly. I have no problem with that, others… well there’s just no room for discussion because you obviously can only see one side of things.
Meltdown? I don’t think so…
I wrote the guy an email, in private to address the issue and what I got back was not a comment that showed understanding, no it was something both diminishing and insulting. As far as wasting anyone’s time goes, blame your toastmaster here because he’s the guy who wanted to use this forum.
It was a cheap shot. Peter knows it. He’s the king of cheap shots. He’s a writer, he’s not a stupid guy, if anything he wants to position himself as looking very smart as evidenced by his snarky responses. It’s just funny to watch this because it makes the words he’s written on some other subjects ring very hollow.
Oh, big secret here… the last email I got was the line, “Next comes the part where you inform me you’re going to stop reading my work.”
That’s just laughable, in Peter’s world everything is about him. All right, all the time sums it up. Further, I’ll put what I wrote the guy out there. I wasn’t overly rude to him. I was questioning something he had done. I imagine the biggest double standard we have going here is; things are okay when PAD makes a joke but if it issues forth from someone else don’t like then it takes on another meaning.
Gosh! How dare I! No, I’m being stupid, ridiculous and oversensitive.
Hey, one man’s meat is another man’s poison.
Some of you just don’t get it and that’s the thing I find so amazing. The longer the discussion goes on, the more I get the feeling that was exactly the image the guy was going for but he got called on it. How dare anyone challenge him so!
I wrote one line: Thanks PAD for the Mafia reference, way to perpetuate a stereotype.
This is what I got back:
Right, right. Because after “The Godfather,” “Godfather Part II,” “Godfather Part III”, “Goodfellas,” “Married to the Mob,” “The Sopranos,” “Analyze This,” “Analyze That,” not to mention countless real life trials involving criminals with similar nicknames, the “stereotype” was this close to dying off. And then I make a joke and suddenly it gains new life.
The guy’s not stupid… if it was someone stupid it would be different. He knew exactly what I was calling him on and his response proves it. Then we get all Lord of the Flies around here? Guys, geez… I’m sorry for pìššìņg in your little kiddie pool here.
I Peter’s writing but I saw something and I took exception to it. And that’s what I wrote. People can justify until they’re blue in the face – if it doesn’t bother you… great.
Problem is, usually it’s not the person making the statement who makes the call on these things. At the very least, allow where it could be found offensive. Don’t dismiss it out of hand. Diminishing it by calling it oversensitive or ridiculous because you don’t share the same views, is just being a jerk.
I’m not the most politically correct person in this world, far from it. However, I’m not going to say what I felt was wrong, I’m certainly not going to f**king apologize. It’s the way it came across. If other people don’t feel that way good for them!
I’m looking through the thread and I’ve been called a bunch of stuff already, simply for having the temerity to voice an opinion. What’s even better is the justification that’s trotted out, the arguments being used as a counter, about the only thing missing from some of them (some, not all) are the words, “Some of my best friends are…” Although words to that effect have been used at times.
I’ve pulled out facts, put them before folks and somehow it’s getting ignored. Maybe it‘s easier to ignore the facts because they speak volumes for the validity of the argument. Maybe you just don’t like it!
Hëll! You can disagree with it too, that’s your right.
What I don’t appreciate is the response. Some people very clearly laid out their arguments, validly. I have no problem with that, others… well there’s just no room for discussion because you obviously can only see one side of things.
Meltdown? I don’t think so…
I wrote the guy an email, in private to address the issue and what I got back was not a comment that showed understanding, no it was something both diminishing and insulting. As far as wasting anyone’s time goes, blame your toastmaster here because he’s the guy who wanted to use this forum.
It was a cheap shot. Peter knows it. He’s the king of cheap shots. He’s a writer, he’s not a stupid guy, if anything he wants to position himself as looking very smart as evidenced by his snarky responses. It’s just funny to watch this because it makes the words he’s written on some other subjects ring very hollow.
Oh, big secret here… the last email I got was the line, “Next comes the part where you inform me you’re going to stop reading my work.”
That’s just laughable, in Peter’s world everything is about him. All right, all the time sums it up. Further, I’ll put what I wrote the guy out there. I wasn’t overly rude to him. I was questioning something he had done. I imagine the biggest double standard we have going here is; things are okay when PAD makes a joke but if it issues forth from someone else don’t like then it takes on another meaning.
Gosh! How dare I! No, I’m being stupid, ridiculous and oversensitive.
Hey, one man’s meat is another man’s poison.
Some of you just don’t get it and that’s the thing I find so amazing. The longer the discussion goes on, the more I get the feeling that was exactly the image the guy was going for but he got called on it. How dare anyone challenge him so!
I wrote one line: Thanks PAD for the Mafia reference, way to perpetuate a stereotype.
This is what I got back:
Right, right. Because after “The Godfather,” “Godfather Part II,” “Godfather Part III”, “Goodfellas,” “Married to the Mob,” “The Sopranos,” “Analyze This,” “Analyze That,” not to mention countless real life trials involving criminals with similar nicknames, the “stereotype” was this close to dying off. And then I make a joke and suddenly it gains new life.
The guy’s not stupid… if it was someone stupid it would be different. He knew exactly what I was calling him on and his response proves it. Then we get all Lord of the Flies around here? Guys, geez… I’m sorry for pìššìņg in your little kiddie pool here.
mister_pj
I’m not going to defend or criticize any of the other responses you got for your post, snarky or otherwise, by PAD or others.
“At the very least, allow where it could be found offensive. Don’t dismiss it out of hand. Diminishing it by calling it oversensitive or ridiculous because you don’t share the same views, is just being a jerk.”
No. disagreeing with your interpretation of the phrase wiseguy does not make me a jerk. Since I find your view of the term as a slur against Italians as a whole to be unjustified, it seems to me that you are being oversensitive in viewing it as such. Pointing that out also does not make me a jerk.
If the issue is your own subjective feeling with regrad to the term wiseguy, then you should own up to it as a subjective feeling, i.e. being sensitive about it. I could understand that, but would consider it being oversensitive.
“I’m not the most politically correct person in this world, far from it. However, I’m not going to say what I felt was wrong, I’m certainly not going to f**king apologize. It’s the way it came across. If other people don’t feel that way good for them!”
To say that somewhat was promoting prejudice is a very serious and offensive accusation. Most people don’t take kindly to it, especially if they had no intention to do so, and the accusation seems manipulative, which it often does. I’ll assume that in this case you had no ulterior motives.
“I’ve pulled out facts, put them before folks and somehow it’s getting ignored. Maybe it‘s easier to ignore the facts because they speak volumes for the validity of the argument. Maybe you just don’t like it!”
The only fact you presented is statistics suggesting that some Americans are unable to distinguish between the stereotypical image of the mafia wiseguy and that of Italians in general. I’m not sure that’s really true, but even if it were, I see no justification to discard the image of the wiseguy fromo popular culture or to criticize PAD for using this common term in an offhand comment.
“Right, right. Because after “The Godfather,” “Godfather Part II,” “Godfather Part III”, “Goodfellas,” “Married to the Mob,” “The Sopranos,” “Analyze This,” “Analyze That,” not to mention countless real life trials involving criminals with similar nicknames, the “stereotype” was this close to dying off. And then I make a joke and suddenly it gains new life.”
What you think quoting and requoting this sentence proves? I don’t know. We all know that mafia wiseguy is a stereotypical image that appears repeatedly in popular culture. What’s in dispute is whether its offensive toward Italians.
I wil defend Jerry Chandler. You made and invalid comparison between the wiseguy stereotype and the watermelon fried chicken stereotype. He explained why the comparison was invalid and you either didn’t understand or ignore or twist his response.
mister_pj
I’m not going to defend or criticize any of the other responses you got for your post, snarky or otherwise, by PAD or others.
“At the very least, allow where it could be found offensive. Don’t dismiss it out of hand. Diminishing it by calling it oversensitive or ridiculous because you don’t share the same views, is just being a jerk.”
No. disagreeing with your interpretation of the phrase wiseguy does not make me a jerk. Since I find your view of the term as a slur against Italians as a whole to be unjustified, it seems to me that you are being oversensitive in viewing it as such. Pointing that out also does not make me a jerk.
If the issue is your own subjective feeling with regrad to the term wiseguy, then you should own up to it as a subjective feeling, i.e. being sensitive about it. I could understand that, but would consider it being oversensitive.
“I’m not the most politically correct person in this world, far from it. However, I’m not going to say what I felt was wrong, I’m certainly not going to f**king apologize. It’s the way it came across. If other people don’t feel that way good for them!”
To say that somewhat was promoting prejudice is a very serious and offensive accusation. Most people don’t take kindly to it, especially if they had no intention to do so, and the accusation seems manipulative, which it often does. I’ll assume that in this case you had no ulterior motives.
“I’ve pulled out facts, put them before folks and somehow it’s getting ignored. Maybe it‘s easier to ignore the facts because they speak volumes for the validity of the argument. Maybe you just don’t like it!”
The only fact you presented is statistics suggesting that some Americans are unable to distinguish between the stereotypical image of the mafia wiseguy and that of Italians in general. I’m not sure that’s really true, but even if it were, I see no justification to discard the image of the wiseguy fromo popular culture or to criticize PAD for using this common term in an offhand comment.
“Right, right. Because after “The Godfather,” “Godfather Part II,” “Godfather Part III”, “Goodfellas,” “Married to the Mob,” “The Sopranos,” “Analyze This,” “Analyze That,” not to mention countless real life trials involving criminals with similar nicknames, the “stereotype” was this close to dying off. And then I make a joke and suddenly it gains new life.”
What you think quoting and requoting this sentence proves? I don’t know. We all know that mafia wiseguy is a stereotypical image that appears repeatedly in popular culture. What’s in dispute is whether its offensive toward Italians.
I wil defend Jerry Chandler. You made and invalid comparison between the wiseguy stereotype and the watermelon fried chicken stereotype. He explained why the comparison was invalid and you either didn’t understand or ignore or twist his response.
Problem is, usually it’s not the person making the statement who makes the call on these things.
Except pretty much everyone except you says you’re off base. They’ve made the call.
At the very least, allow where it could be found offensive.
The most benign statement can be found offensive by someone determine to find offense.
Don’t dismiss it out of hand. Diminishing it by calling it oversensitive or ridiculous because you don’t share the same views, is just being a jerk.
See, whereas I think that calling someone a jerk or a dìçk because they disagree with your sentiments is, in fact, being a jerk.
I’m not the most politically correct person in this world, far from it.
Not for want of trying.
However, I’m not going to say what I felt was wrong, I’m certainly not going to f**king apologize.
Show me where I asked you to do so.
It’s the way it came across. If other people don’t feel that way good for them!
Odd. The rest of your comments don’t seem to indicate a philosophy of “good for them.” For the most part they seem condemning, frustrated and petulant.
I’m looking through the thread and I’ve been called a bunch of stuff already, simply for having the temerity to voice an opinion.
Wrong. If you’ve been called “a bunch of stuff,” it’s because of the baseless opinion that you voiced, not that you voiced an opinion.
See, that’s where guys like you always go off the rails. You piss and moan that everyone’s being meeeeaan to you simply because you disagreed with me, as if everyone here marches in lockstep to the beat of my drum. Meanwhile half the board disagreed with my essay on McCainism. People respond here to the substance and quality of the opinion, and in this particular instance, yours lacked both.
What’s even better is the justification that’s trotted out, the arguments being used as a counter, about the only thing missing from some of them (some, not all) are the words, “Some of my best friends are…” Although words to that effect have been used at times.
Good move. Why try to counter what people are saying when you can make up stuff for them and counter that?
I’ve pulled out facts, put them before folks and somehow it’s getting ignored.
No, you’ve put out opinions that are being disputed. Unless you’re counting a Wikipedia entry as the be-all, end-all of facts.
What I don’t appreciate is the response. Some people very clearly laid out their arguments, validly. I have no problem with that, others… well there’s just no room for discussion because you obviously can only see one side of things.
Considering the intransigence you’ve displayed in this matter, I don’t think you’re the best one to lecture in this regard.
I wrote the guy an email,
“The guy?” Why not just call me “that one.”
in private to address the issue and what I got back was not a comment that showed understanding, no it was something both diminishing and insulting.
Darn, and here I was going for dismissive.
As far as wasting anyone’s time goes, blame your toastmaster here because he’s the guy who wanted to use this forum.
Right. Because I was interested to see what other people had to say. And they said it and you still refuse to accept it.
It was a cheap shot. Peter knows it. He’s the king of cheap shots.
No, that would be John McCain. I am, at most, the Duke of Cheap Shots.
He’s a writer, he’s not a stupid guy,
I dunno. I’m wasting time replying to you. That’s pretty stupid.
if anything he wants to position himself as looking very smart as evidenced by his snarky responses.
Wouldn’t they just make me look snarky rather than smart?
It’s just funny to watch this because it makes the words he’s written on some other subjects ring very hollow.
Such as?
Oh, big secret here… the last email I got was the line, “Next comes the part where you inform me you’re going to stop reading my work.”
That’s just laughable,
Thank you. I was going for a laugh.
in Peter’s world everything is about him.
Well…kind of.
All right, all the time sums it up. Further, I’ll put what I wrote the guy out there. I wasn’t overly rude to him.
Just moderately rude? Because that’s totally okay, then.
I was questioning something he had done.
No, you weren’t. Questioning would be, “Peter, do you think your comment could possibly be interpreted as anti-Italian?” That would have prompted a completely different answer, such as, “Good lord, I hope not! It was certainly not intended as such and I’d be chagrined if anyone took it that way.” What you said was argumentative, combative and rude.
I imagine the biggest double standard we have going here is; things are okay when PAD makes a joke but if it issues forth from someone else don’t like then it takes on another meaning.
Wrong. Bottom line is that everyone pointed out that nothing in my original post was remotely anti-Italian. If I had said, “Some Italian wiseguy” and you called me on it, I imagine many people would have agreed with you. But I didn’t, because I wasn’t thinking about it. So they didn’t. And you refuse to acknowledge it.
Guys, geez… I’m sorry for pìššìņg in your little kiddie pool here.
And here I thought you said you weren’t going to apologize. Thanks for that, I suppose.
PAD
He knew exactly what I was calling him on and his response proves it.
It would if you were both talking about the Italian people, but PAD wasn’t. In your desire to see what you wanted to see and take offense to it; you seemed to have missed the line just before the one you bolded.
… not to mention countless real life trials involving criminals with similar nicknames…
Again, the joke that started this…
And somewhere at this very moment…
…a Mafia wiseguy called “Joe the Plumber” is saying, “I’m gonna have t’get a new f*ckin'” nickname…”
PAD
… is about the fact that some mob guy out there may now have to get a new nickname because of some jerk who asked a question and was made a flavor of the week by the debates. It wasn’t about Italians as a whole despite your prior comments.
You want it to be about race or ethnicity so that you can justify your outrage and offended sensitivities, but the simple fact is that it wasn’t about race or ethnicity. Nothing you can say is going to change that and you’re just going to keep getting rolled eyes from most of the assembled readers here the more you jump up and down and try to claim that it is.
He knew exactly what I was calling him on and his response proves it.
It would if you were both talking about the Italian people, but PAD wasn’t. In your desire to see what you wanted to see and take offense to it; you seemed to have missed the line just before the one you bolded.
… not to mention countless real life trials involving criminals with similar nicknames…
Again, the joke that started this…
And somewhere at this very moment…
…a Mafia wiseguy called “Joe the Plumber” is saying, “I’m gonna have t’get a new f*ckin'” nickname…”
PAD
… is about the fact that some mob guy out there may now have to get a new nickname because of some jerk who asked a question and was made a flavor of the week by the debates. It wasn’t about Italians as a whole despite your prior comments.
You want it to be about race or ethnicity so that you can justify your outrage and offended sensitivities, but the simple fact is that it wasn’t about race or ethnicity. Nothing you can say is going to change that and you’re just going to keep getting rolled eyes from most of the assembled readers here the more you jump up and down and try to claim that it is.
mister pj: Problem is, usually it’s not the person making the statement who makes the call on these things. At the very least, allow where it could be found offensive. Don’t dismiss it out of hand.
Luigi Novi: And as people have pointed out here, no one here finds it offensive, primarily because Peter directed the focus of the comment at an occupation, and not an ethnicity. It is for this reason that the people here do not find it offensive, a point that I haven’t seen you counter. Why is that?
mister pj: Diminishing it by calling it oversensitive or ridiculous because you don’t share the same views, is just being a jerk.
Luigi Novi: If you’re allowed your opinion that it was offensive, or potentially offensive, why are the assembled people here on this blog not permited to opine that it isn’t, and that saying it is signifies oversensitivity?
If being dismissive is unacceptable to you, why do you speak dismissively of the counterarguments here, alluding to the “some of my best friends” cliché, while not addressing the fact that Peter never mentioned Italians, or any racial stereotype?
mister pj: I’ve pulled out facts, put them before folks and somehow it’s getting ignored.
Luigi Novi: Which “facts” have you pulled out? That Peter mentioned Italians? He didn’t. That you made analogies? People here found them false. Which facts are you referring to?
mister pj: I wrote the guy an email, in private to address the issue and what I got back was not a comment that showed understanding, no it was something both diminishing and insulting.
Luigi Novi: You call him a “dìçk”, and expect understanding? What brand of hypocrisy is this?
mister pj: Some of you just don’t get it and that’s the thing I find so amazing.
Luigi Novi: In other words, you can’t conceive of the possibility that you may be wrong, or that the others here simply don’t see things your way, since they’ve pointed out that Peter never mentioned Italians or stereotypes, and thus, this makes it “Lord of the Flies”.
mister pj: The guy’s not stupid… if it was someone stupid it would be different. He knew exactly what I was calling him on and his response proves it.
Luigi Novi: Yeah, you called him on perpetuating a stereotype, and his response indicates that he didn’t believe he did so, as did most of the others here. What’s your point?
Actually, Peter referred to the lock the stereotype he referred to has on the culture. There are exercises of stereotypes that deny the recipients’ accounts of what they’re going through, and Peter doesn’t seem to have crossed that line in practice or in responding to PJ’s criticism.
PJ gives Peter the slack to continue with “if it doesn’t bother you… great.” So actually he has yet to introduce any actionable criticism here.
Actually, Peter referred to the lock the stereotype he referred to has on the culture. There are exercises of stereotypes that deny the recipients’ accounts of what they’re going through, and Peter doesn’t seem to have crossed that line in practice or in responding to PJ’s criticism.
PJ gives Peter the slack to continue with “if it doesn’t bother you… great.” So actually he has yet to introduce any actionable criticism here.
mister pj: Problem is, usually it’s not the person making the statement who makes the call on these things. At the very least, allow where it could be found offensive. Don’t dismiss it out of hand. Luigi Novi: And as people have pointed out here, no one here finds it offensive, primarily because Peter directed the focus of the comment at an occupation, and not an ethnicity. It is for this reason that the people here do not find it offensive, a point that I haven’t seen you counter. Why is that?
I don’t know why, but it took reading Luigi’s post to cause the perfect analogy for this to come into the usually dormant organ I call my mind.
PJ, have you ever made a joke about the Klan? The KKK is, I feel safe in saying, pretty much a 100% white organization and they also bill themselves as a Christian organizations as well. Quite happily, the KKK has become a pop culture stereotype of ignorant hicks that are possibly inbred. Now would you think that everyone here was being irrationally over sensitive if you made a joke about the KKK and everyone dropped the hammer on you over making stereotypical and offensive jokes about all whites? Had circumstances of the campaign been different and opened the door for Peter to make a Klan joke above; would you be offended by his perpetuating a negative stereotype of all Christians?
Again, just as the KKK does not represent all whites and Christians in the world, the Mafia does not represent all Italians. And, again, the comment about a frustrated Mafia hitman having to look at the possibility of a nickname change wasn’t even derogatory in tone or intent.
Does that help make it anymore clear as to why everyone is scratching their heads over your reaction here?
mister pj: Problem is, usually it’s not the person making the statement who makes the call on these things. At the very least, allow where it could be found offensive. Don’t dismiss it out of hand. Luigi Novi: And as people have pointed out here, no one here finds it offensive, primarily because Peter directed the focus of the comment at an occupation, and not an ethnicity. It is for this reason that the people here do not find it offensive, a point that I haven’t seen you counter. Why is that?
I don’t know why, but it took reading Luigi’s post to cause the perfect analogy for this to come into the usually dormant organ I call my mind.
PJ, have you ever made a joke about the Klan? The KKK is, I feel safe in saying, pretty much a 100% white organization and they also bill themselves as a Christian organizations as well. Quite happily, the KKK has become a pop culture stereotype of ignorant hicks that are possibly inbred. Now would you think that everyone here was being irrationally over sensitive if you made a joke about the KKK and everyone dropped the hammer on you over making stereotypical and offensive jokes about all whites? Had circumstances of the campaign been different and opened the door for Peter to make a Klan joke above; would you be offended by his perpetuating a negative stereotype of all Christians?
Again, just as the KKK does not represent all whites and Christians in the world, the Mafia does not represent all Italians. And, again, the comment about a frustrated Mafia hitman having to look at the possibility of a nickname change wasn’t even derogatory in tone or intent.
Does that help make it anymore clear as to why everyone is scratching their heads over your reaction here?
mister “Incessant Whiner” pj
============================
Can we get back to talking about Joe the Dumber, who appeared on Huckleberry Hound’s television show this weekend?
mister “Incessant Whiner” pj
============================
Can we get back to talking about Joe the Dumber, who appeared on Huckleberry Hound’s television show this weekend?
Well, mister_pj, I suppose Luigi Novi could break out the “some of my best friends” line… Have you noticed that the person here who seems to have the best claim on any right to be offended, was amused instead? What’s that tell you about your position?
I’ve wasted enough time here. On this topic, at least, mister_pj is now shrouded.
Well, mister_pj, I suppose Luigi Novi could break out the “some of my best friends” line… Have you noticed that the person here who seems to have the best claim on any right to be offended, was amused instead? What’s that tell you about your position?
I’ve wasted enough time here. On this topic, at least, mister_pj is now shrouded.
Joe the Dumber thought he’s be a smartass and get on Obama’s video tape. When he did, and Obama was smart enough not to deny what was on tape, the Republicancers thought they’d make a big deal of an average guy standing up to a politician. With all that, there was no way that Joe the Dumber was going to escape checks on his background. Oops. Joe the Dumber isn’t exactly what he says he is, an independent. Also, he has blemishes on the cleanly shaved head of his.
Then he has the balls to say that it’s a shame yopu can’t speak to a politician these days.
He DID speak to the politician, then got to meet many more. But what he was trying to imply was that the Liberal Media was out to get him.
• 
I Peter’s writing but I saw something and I took exception to it. And that’s what I wrote. People can justify until they’re blue in the face – if it doesn’t bother you… great.
Problem is, usually it’s not the person making the statement who makes the call on these things. At the very least, allow where it could be found offensive. Don’t dismiss it out of hand. Diminishing it by calling it oversensitive or ridiculous because you don’t share the same views, is just being a jerk.
I’m not the most politically correct person in this world, far from it. However, I’m not going to say what I felt was wrong, I’m certainly not going to f**king apologize. It’s the way it came across. If other people don’t feel that way good for them!
I’m looking through the thread and I’ve been called a bunch of stuff already, simply for having the temerity to voice an opinion. What’s even better is the justification that’s trotted out, the arguments being used as a counter, about the only thing missing from some of them (some, not all) are the words, “Some of my best friends are…” Although words to that effect have been used at times.
I’ve pulled out facts, put them before folks and somehow it’s getting ignored. Maybe it‘s easier to ignore the facts because they speak volumes for the validity of the argument. Maybe you just don’t like it!
Hëll! You can disagree with it too, that’s your right.
What I don’t appreciate is the response. Some people very clearly laid out their arguments, validly. I have no problem with that, others… well there’s just no room for discussion because you obviously can only see one side of things.
Meltdown? I don’t think so…
I wrote the guy an email, in private to address the issue and what I got back was not a comment that showed understanding, no it was something both diminishing and insulting. As far as wasting anyone’s time goes, blame your toastmaster here because he’s the guy who wanted to use this forum.
It was a cheap shot. Peter knows it. He’s the king of cheap shots. He’s a writer, he’s not a stupid guy, if anything he wants to position himself as looking very smart as evidenced by his snarky responses. It’s just funny to watch this because it makes the words he’s written on some other subjects ring very hollow.
Oh, big secret here… the last email I got was the line, “Next comes the part where you inform me you’re going to stop reading my work.”
That’s just laughable, in Peter’s world everything is about him. All right, all the time sums it up. Further, I’ll put what I wrote the guy out there. I wasn’t overly rude to him. I was questioning something he had done. I imagine the biggest double standard we have going here is; things are okay when PAD makes a joke but if it issues forth from someone else don’t like then it takes on another meaning.
Gosh! How dare I! No, I’m being stupid, ridiculous and oversensitive.
Hey, one man’s meat is another man’s poison.
Some of you just don’t get it and that’s the thing I find so amazing. The longer the discussion goes on, the more I get the feeling that was exactly the image the guy was going for but he got called on it. How dare anyone challenge him so!
I wrote one line: Thanks PAD for the Mafia reference, way to perpetuate a stereotype.
This is what I got back:
Right, right. Because after “The Godfather,” “Godfather Part II,” “Godfather Part III”, “Goodfellas,” “Married to the Mob,” “The Sopranos,” “Analyze This,” “Analyze That,” not to mention countless real life trials involving criminals with similar nicknames, the “stereotype” was this close to dying off. And then I make a joke and suddenly it gains new life.
The guy’s not stupid… if it was someone stupid it would be different. He knew exactly what I was calling him on and his response proves it. Then we get all Lord of the Flies around here? Guys, geez… I’m sorry for pìššìņg in your little kiddie pool here.
I Peter’s writing but I saw something and I took exception to it. And that’s what I wrote. People can justify until they’re blue in the face – if it doesn’t bother you… great.
Problem is, usually it’s not the person making the statement who makes the call on these things. At the very least, allow where it could be found offensive. Don’t dismiss it out of hand. Diminishing it by calling it oversensitive or ridiculous because you don’t share the same views, is just being a jerk.
I’m not the most politically correct person in this world, far from it. However, I’m not going to say what I felt was wrong, I’m certainly not going to f**king apologize. It’s the way it came across. If other people don’t feel that way good for them!
I’m looking through the thread and I’ve been called a bunch of stuff already, simply for having the temerity to voice an opinion. What’s even better is the justification that’s trotted out, the arguments being used as a counter, about the only thing missing from some of them (some, not all) are the words, “Some of my best friends are…” Although words to that effect have been used at times.
I’ve pulled out facts, put them before folks and somehow it’s getting ignored. Maybe it‘s easier to ignore the facts because they speak volumes for the validity of the argument. Maybe you just don’t like it!
Hëll! You can disagree with it too, that’s your right.
What I don’t appreciate is the response. Some people very clearly laid out their arguments, validly. I have no problem with that, others… well there’s just no room for discussion because you obviously can only see one side of things.
Meltdown? I don’t think so…
I wrote the guy an email, in private to address the issue and what I got back was not a comment that showed understanding, no it was something both diminishing and insulting. As far as wasting anyone’s time goes, blame your toastmaster here because he’s the guy who wanted to use this forum.
It was a cheap shot. Peter knows it. He’s the king of cheap shots. He’s a writer, he’s not a stupid guy, if anything he wants to position himself as looking very smart as evidenced by his snarky responses. It’s just funny to watch this because it makes the words he’s written on some other subjects ring very hollow.
Oh, big secret here… the last email I got was the line, “Next comes the part where you inform me you’re going to stop reading my work.”
That’s just laughable, in Peter’s world everything is about him. All right, all the time sums it up. Further, I’ll put what I wrote the guy out there. I wasn’t overly rude to him. I was questioning something he had done. I imagine the biggest double standard we have going here is; things are okay when PAD makes a joke but if it issues forth from someone else don’t like then it takes on another meaning.
Gosh! How dare I! No, I’m being stupid, ridiculous and oversensitive.
Hey, one man’s meat is another man’s poison.
Some of you just don’t get it and that’s the thing I find so amazing. The longer the discussion goes on, the more I get the feeling that was exactly the image the guy was going for but he got called on it. How dare anyone challenge him so!
I wrote one line: Thanks PAD for the Mafia reference, way to perpetuate a stereotype.
This is what I got back:
Right, right. Because after “The Godfather,” “Godfather Part II,” “Godfather Part III”, “Goodfellas,” “Married to the Mob,” “The Sopranos,” “Analyze This,” “Analyze That,” not to mention countless real life trials involving criminals with similar nicknames, the “stereotype” was this close to dying off. And then I make a joke and suddenly it gains new life.
The guy’s not stupid… if it was someone stupid it would be different. He knew exactly what I was calling him on and his response proves it. Then we get all Lord of the Flies around here? Guys, geez… I’m sorry for pìššìņg in your little kiddie pool here.
mister_pj
I’m not going to defend or criticize any of the other responses you got for your post, snarky or otherwise, by PAD or others.
“At the very least, allow where it could be found offensive. Don’t dismiss it out of hand. Diminishing it by calling it oversensitive or ridiculous because you don’t share the same views, is just being a jerk.”
No. disagreeing with your interpretation of the phrase wiseguy does not make me a jerk. Since I find your view of the term as a slur against Italians as a whole to be unjustified, it seems to me that you are being oversensitive in viewing it as such. Pointing that out also does not make me a jerk.
If the issue is your own subjective feeling with regrad to the term wiseguy, then you should own up to it as a subjective feeling, i.e. being sensitive about it. I could understand that, but would consider it being oversensitive.
“I’m not the most politically correct person in this world, far from it. However, I’m not going to say what I felt was wrong, I’m certainly not going to f**king apologize. It’s the way it came across. If other people don’t feel that way good for them!”
To say that somewhat was promoting prejudice is a very serious and offensive accusation. Most people don’t take kindly to it, especially if they had no intention to do so, and the accusation seems manipulative, which it often does. I’ll assume that in this case you had no ulterior motives.
“I’ve pulled out facts, put them before folks and somehow it’s getting ignored. Maybe it‘s easier to ignore the facts because they speak volumes for the validity of the argument. Maybe you just don’t like it!”
The only fact you presented is statistics suggesting that some Americans are unable to distinguish between the stereotypical image of the mafia wiseguy and that of Italians in general. I’m not sure that’s really true, but even if it were, I see no justification to discard the image of the wiseguy fromo popular culture or to criticize PAD for using this common term in an offhand comment.
“Right, right. Because after “The Godfather,” “Godfather Part II,” “Godfather Part III”, “Goodfellas,” “Married to the Mob,” “The Sopranos,” “Analyze This,” “Analyze That,” not to mention countless real life trials involving criminals with similar nicknames, the “stereotype” was this close to dying off. And then I make a joke and suddenly it gains new life.”
What you think quoting and requoting this sentence proves? I don’t know. We all know that mafia wiseguy is a stereotypical image that appears repeatedly in popular culture. What’s in dispute is whether its offensive toward Italians.
I wil defend Jerry Chandler. You made and invalid comparison between the wiseguy stereotype and the watermelon fried chicken stereotype. He explained why the comparison was invalid and you either didn’t understand or ignore or twist his response.
mister_pj
I’m not going to defend or criticize any of the other responses you got for your post, snarky or otherwise, by PAD or others.
“At the very least, allow where it could be found offensive. Don’t dismiss it out of hand. Diminishing it by calling it oversensitive or ridiculous because you don’t share the same views, is just being a jerk.”
No. disagreeing with your interpretation of the phrase wiseguy does not make me a jerk. Since I find your view of the term as a slur against Italians as a whole to be unjustified, it seems to me that you are being oversensitive in viewing it as such. Pointing that out also does not make me a jerk.
If the issue is your own subjective feeling with regrad to the term wiseguy, then you should own up to it as a subjective feeling, i.e. being sensitive about it. I could understand that, but would consider it being oversensitive.
“I’m not the most politically correct person in this world, far from it. However, I’m not going to say what I felt was wrong, I’m certainly not going to f**king apologize. It’s the way it came across. If other people don’t feel that way good for them!”
To say that somewhat was promoting prejudice is a very serious and offensive accusation. Most people don’t take kindly to it, especially if they had no intention to do so, and the accusation seems manipulative, which it often does. I’ll assume that in this case you had no ulterior motives.
“I’ve pulled out facts, put them before folks and somehow it’s getting ignored. Maybe it‘s easier to ignore the facts because they speak volumes for the validity of the argument. Maybe you just don’t like it!”
The only fact you presented is statistics suggesting that some Americans are unable to distinguish between the stereotypical image of the mafia wiseguy and that of Italians in general. I’m not sure that’s really true, but even if it were, I see no justification to discard the image of the wiseguy fromo popular culture or to criticize PAD for using this common term in an offhand comment.
“Right, right. Because after “The Godfather,” “Godfather Part II,” “Godfather Part III”, “Goodfellas,” “Married to the Mob,” “The Sopranos,” “Analyze This,” “Analyze That,” not to mention countless real life trials involving criminals with similar nicknames, the “stereotype” was this close to dying off. And then I make a joke and suddenly it gains new life.”
What you think quoting and requoting this sentence proves? I don’t know. We all know that mafia wiseguy is a stereotypical image that appears repeatedly in popular culture. What’s in dispute is whether its offensive toward Italians.
I wil defend Jerry Chandler. You made and invalid comparison between the wiseguy stereotype and the watermelon fried chicken stereotype. He explained why the comparison was invalid and you either didn’t understand or ignore or twist his response.
Problem is, usually it’s not the person making the statement who makes the call on these things.
Except pretty much everyone except you says you’re off base. They’ve made the call.
At the very least, allow where it could be found offensive.
The most benign statement can be found offensive by someone determine to find offense.
Don’t dismiss it out of hand. Diminishing it by calling it oversensitive or ridiculous because you don’t share the same views, is just being a jerk.
See, whereas I think that calling someone a jerk or a dìçk because they disagree with your sentiments is, in fact, being a jerk.
I’m not the most politically correct person in this world, far from it.
Not for want of trying.
However, I’m not going to say what I felt was wrong, I’m certainly not going to f**king apologize.
Show me where I asked you to do so.
It’s the way it came across. If other people don’t feel that way good for them!
Odd. The rest of your comments don’t seem to indicate a philosophy of “good for them.” For the most part they seem condemning, frustrated and petulant.
I’m looking through the thread and I’ve been called a bunch of stuff already, simply for having the temerity to voice an opinion.
Wrong. If you’ve been called “a bunch of stuff,” it’s because of the baseless opinion that you voiced, not that you voiced an opinion.
See, that’s where guys like you always go off the rails. You piss and moan that everyone’s being meeeeaan to you simply because you disagreed with me, as if everyone here marches in lockstep to the beat of my drum. Meanwhile half the board disagreed with my essay on McCainism. People respond here to the substance and quality of the opinion, and in this particular instance, yours lacked both.
What’s even better is the justification that’s trotted out, the arguments being used as a counter, about the only thing missing from some of them (some, not all) are the words, “Some of my best friends are…” Although words to that effect have been used at times.
Good move. Why try to counter what people are saying when you can make up stuff for them and counter that?
I’ve pulled out facts, put them before folks and somehow it’s getting ignored.
No, you’ve put out opinions that are being disputed. Unless you’re counting a Wikipedia entry as the be-all, end-all of facts.
What I don’t appreciate is the response. Some people very clearly laid out their arguments, validly. I have no problem with that, others… well there’s just no room for discussion because you obviously can only see one side of things.
Considering the intransigence you’ve displayed in this matter, I don’t think you’re the best one to lecture in this regard.
I wrote the guy an email,
“The guy?” Why not just call me “that one.”
in private to address the issue and what I got back was not a comment that showed understanding, no it was something both diminishing and insulting.
Darn, and here I was going for dismissive.
As far as wasting anyone’s time goes, blame your toastmaster here because he’s the guy who wanted to use this forum.
Right. Because I was interested to see what other people had to say. And they said it and you still refuse to accept it.
It was a cheap shot. Peter knows it. He’s the king of cheap shots.
No, that would be John McCain. I am, at most, the Duke of Cheap Shots.
He’s a writer, he’s not a stupid guy,
I dunno. I’m wasting time replying to you. That’s pretty stupid.
if anything he wants to position himself as looking very smart as evidenced by his snarky responses.
Wouldn’t they just make me look snarky rather than smart?
It’s just funny to watch this because it makes the words he’s written on some other subjects ring very hollow.
Such as?
Oh, big secret here… the last email I got was the line, “Next comes the part where you inform me you’re going to stop reading my work.”
That’s just laughable,
Thank you. I was going for a laugh.
in Peter’s world everything is about him.
Well…kind of.
All right, all the time sums it up. Further, I’ll put what I wrote the guy out there. I wasn’t overly rude to him.
Just moderately rude? Because that’s totally okay, then.
I was questioning something he had done.
No, you weren’t. Questioning would be, “Peter, do you think your comment could possibly be interpreted as anti-Italian?” That would have prompted a completely different answer, such as, “Good lord, I hope not! It was certainly not intended as such and I’d be chagrined if anyone took it that way.” What you said was argumentative, combative and rude.
I imagine the biggest double standard we have going here is; things are okay when PAD makes a joke but if it issues forth from someone else don’t like then it takes on another meaning.
Wrong. Bottom line is that everyone pointed out that nothing in my original post was remotely anti-Italian. If I had said, “Some Italian wiseguy” and you called me on it, I imagine many people would have agreed with you. But I didn’t, because I wasn’t thinking about it. So they didn’t. And you refuse to acknowledge it.
Guys, geez… I’m sorry for pìššìņg in your little kiddie pool here.
And here I thought you said you weren’t going to apologize. Thanks for that, I suppose.
PAD
He knew exactly what I was calling him on and his response proves it.
It would if you were both talking about the Italian people, but PAD wasn’t. In your desire to see what you wanted to see and take offense to it; you seemed to have missed the line just before the one you bolded.
… not to mention countless real life trials involving criminals with similar nicknames…
Again, the joke that started this…
And somewhere at this very moment…
…a Mafia wiseguy called “Joe the Plumber” is saying, “I’m gonna have t’get a new f*ckin'” nickname…”
PAD
… is about the fact that some mob guy out there may now have to get a new nickname because of some jerk who asked a question and was made a flavor of the week by the debates. It wasn’t about Italians as a whole despite your prior comments.
You want it to be about race or ethnicity so that you can justify your outrage and offended sensitivities, but the simple fact is that it wasn’t about race or ethnicity. Nothing you can say is going to change that and you’re just going to keep getting rolled eyes from most of the assembled readers here the more you jump up and down and try to claim that it is.
He knew exactly what I was calling him on and his response proves it.
It would if you were both talking about the Italian people, but PAD wasn’t. In your desire to see what you wanted to see and take offense to it; you seemed to have missed the line just before the one you bolded.
… not to mention countless real life trials involving criminals with similar nicknames…
Again, the joke that started this…
And somewhere at this very moment…
…a Mafia wiseguy called “Joe the Plumber” is saying, “I’m gonna have t’get a new f*ckin'” nickname…”
PAD
… is about the fact that some mob guy out there may now have to get a new nickname because of some jerk who asked a question and was made a flavor of the week by the debates. It wasn’t about Italians as a whole despite your prior comments.
You want it to be about race or ethnicity so that you can justify your outrage and offended sensitivities, but the simple fact is that it wasn’t about race or ethnicity. Nothing you can say is going to change that and you’re just going to keep getting rolled eyes from most of the assembled readers here the more you jump up and down and try to claim that it is.
mister pj: Problem is, usually it’s not the person making the statement who makes the call on these things. At the very least, allow where it could be found offensive. Don’t dismiss it out of hand.
Luigi Novi: And as people have pointed out here, no one here finds it offensive, primarily because Peter directed the focus of the comment at an occupation, and not an ethnicity. It is for this reason that the people here do not find it offensive, a point that I haven’t seen you counter. Why is that?
mister pj: Diminishing it by calling it oversensitive or ridiculous because you don’t share the same views, is just being a jerk.
Luigi Novi: If you’re allowed your opinion that it was offensive, or potentially offensive, why are the assembled people here on this blog not permited to opine that it isn’t, and that saying it is signifies oversensitivity?
If being dismissive is unacceptable to you, why do you speak dismissively of the counterarguments here, alluding to the “some of my best friends” cliché, while not addressing the fact that Peter never mentioned Italians, or any racial stereotype?
mister pj: I’ve pulled out facts, put them before folks and somehow it’s getting ignored.
Luigi Novi: Which “facts” have you pulled out? That Peter mentioned Italians? He didn’t. That you made analogies? People here found them false. Which facts are you referring to?
mister pj: I wrote the guy an email, in private to address the issue and what I got back was not a comment that showed understanding, no it was something both diminishing and insulting.
Luigi Novi: You call him a “dìçk”, and expect understanding? What brand of hypocrisy is this?
mister pj: Some of you just don’t get it and that’s the thing I find so amazing.
Luigi Novi: In other words, you can’t conceive of the possibility that you may be wrong, or that the others here simply don’t see things your way, since they’ve pointed out that Peter never mentioned Italians or stereotypes, and thus, this makes it “Lord of the Flies”.
mister pj: The guy’s not stupid… if it was someone stupid it would be different. He knew exactly what I was calling him on and his response proves it.
Luigi Novi: Yeah, you called him on perpetuating a stereotype, and his response indicates that he didn’t believe he did so, as did most of the others here. What’s your point?
Actually, Peter referred to the lock the stereotype he referred to has on the culture. There are exercises of stereotypes that deny the recipients’ accounts of what they’re going through, and Peter doesn’t seem to have crossed that line in practice or in responding to PJ’s criticism.
PJ gives Peter the slack to continue with “if it doesn’t bother you… great.” So actually he has yet to introduce any actionable criticism here.
Actually, Peter referred to the lock the stereotype he referred to has on the culture. There are exercises of stereotypes that deny the recipients’ accounts of what they’re going through, and Peter doesn’t seem to have crossed that line in practice or in responding to PJ’s criticism.
PJ gives Peter the slack to continue with “if it doesn’t bother you… great.” So actually he has yet to introduce any actionable criticism here.
mister pj: Problem is, usually it’s not the person making the statement who makes the call on these things. At the very least, allow where it could be found offensive. Don’t dismiss it out of hand.
Luigi Novi: And as people have pointed out here, no one here finds it offensive, primarily because Peter directed the focus of the comment at an occupation, and not an ethnicity. It is for this reason that the people here do not find it offensive, a point that I haven’t seen you counter. Why is that?
I don’t know why, but it took reading Luigi’s post to cause the perfect analogy for this to come into the usually dormant organ I call my mind.
PJ, have you ever made a joke about the Klan? The KKK is, I feel safe in saying, pretty much a 100% white organization and they also bill themselves as a Christian organizations as well. Quite happily, the KKK has become a pop culture stereotype of ignorant hicks that are possibly inbred. Now would you think that everyone here was being irrationally over sensitive if you made a joke about the KKK and everyone dropped the hammer on you over making stereotypical and offensive jokes about all whites? Had circumstances of the campaign been different and opened the door for Peter to make a Klan joke above; would you be offended by his perpetuating a negative stereotype of all Christians?
Again, just as the KKK does not represent all whites and Christians in the world, the Mafia does not represent all Italians. And, again, the comment about a frustrated Mafia hitman having to look at the possibility of a nickname change wasn’t even derogatory in tone or intent.
Does that help make it anymore clear as to why everyone is scratching their heads over your reaction here?
mister pj: Problem is, usually it’s not the person making the statement who makes the call on these things. At the very least, allow where it could be found offensive. Don’t dismiss it out of hand.
Luigi Novi: And as people have pointed out here, no one here finds it offensive, primarily because Peter directed the focus of the comment at an occupation, and not an ethnicity. It is for this reason that the people here do not find it offensive, a point that I haven’t seen you counter. Why is that?
I don’t know why, but it took reading Luigi’s post to cause the perfect analogy for this to come into the usually dormant organ I call my mind.
PJ, have you ever made a joke about the Klan? The KKK is, I feel safe in saying, pretty much a 100% white organization and they also bill themselves as a Christian organizations as well. Quite happily, the KKK has become a pop culture stereotype of ignorant hicks that are possibly inbred. Now would you think that everyone here was being irrationally over sensitive if you made a joke about the KKK and everyone dropped the hammer on you over making stereotypical and offensive jokes about all whites? Had circumstances of the campaign been different and opened the door for Peter to make a Klan joke above; would you be offended by his perpetuating a negative stereotype of all Christians?
Again, just as the KKK does not represent all whites and Christians in the world, the Mafia does not represent all Italians. And, again, the comment about a frustrated Mafia hitman having to look at the possibility of a nickname change wasn’t even derogatory in tone or intent.
Does that help make it anymore clear as to why everyone is scratching their heads over your reaction here?
mister “Incessant Whiner” pj
============================
Can we get back to talking about Joe the Dumber, who appeared on Huckleberry Hound’s television show this weekend?
mister “Incessant Whiner” pj
============================
Can we get back to talking about Joe the Dumber, who appeared on Huckleberry Hound’s television show this weekend?
Well, mister_pj, I suppose Luigi Novi could break out the “some of my best friends” line… Have you noticed that the person here who seems to have the best claim on any right to be offended, was amused instead? What’s that tell you about your position?
I’ve wasted enough time here. On this topic, at least, mister_pj is now shrouded.
Well, mister_pj, I suppose Luigi Novi could break out the “some of my best friends” line… Have you noticed that the person here who seems to have the best claim on any right to be offended, was amused instead? What’s that tell you about your position?
I’ve wasted enough time here. On this topic, at least, mister_pj is now shrouded.
Joe the Dumber thought he’s be a smartass and get on Obama’s video tape. When he did, and Obama was smart enough not to deny what was on tape, the Republicancers thought they’d make a big deal of an average guy standing up to a politician. With all that, there was no way that Joe the Dumber was going to escape checks on his background. Oops. Joe the Dumber isn’t exactly what he says he is, an independent. Also, he has blemishes on the cleanly shaved head of his.
Then he has the balls to say that it’s a shame yopu can’t speak to a politician these days.
He DID speak to the politician, then got to meet many more. But what he was trying to imply was that the Liberal Media was out to get him.
Classic funny….
Classic funny….