The Right Wingers are now the PC thugs

[Tmy]

Political Correctness has been tagged to the liberal media and government for years, but now with the big governmental and media shift to the right, PC has become a conservative thing.

Its PC to back Bush and Cheny

Its PC to be pro war.

We get PC terms like "Homicide Bomber" showing up.


Just look at this place. Ironically, Jedi Knight has become the most politcally correct poster on the board!

Head for the hills.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Tmy
Political Correctness has been tagged to the libral media and government for years, but now with the big governmental and media shitf to the right, PC has become a conservative thing.

Its PC to back Bush and Cheny

Its PC to be pro war.

We get PC terms like "Homicide Bomber" showing up.


Just look at this place. Ironically, Jedi Knight has become the most politcally correct poster on the board!

Head for the hills.

lol

JK

[Sundog]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


lol

JK

He's got a point, dude. ;)

[corplinx]

Originally posted by Tmy
We get PC terms like "Homicide Bomber" showing up.



Its interesting. In the arab media thy are referred to as martyrs. In the western media, they are referred to as suicide bombers. I think Fox was one of the first to tag them "homicide bombers". I think the term isnt very PC in any way. A "suicide bomber" sounds like someone killing themselves with a bomb. A "homicide bomber" kills others with a bomb. In short, no buzz phrase will truly encompass someone who blows themself up in order to kill his enemies. I guess calling them kamikazes would be a slight to the japanese culture.

[Advocate]

Originally posted by Tmy
Political Correctness has been tagged to the liberal media and government for years, but now with the big governmental and media shift to the right, PC has become a conservative thing.

Its PC to back Bush and Cheny

I don't think this is a PC thing at all. I suspect members of the same party as ANY President are going to support that President, and there will always be a greater support for a President when a war starts. I don't think this is any different than every other war for the past 200 years.

Its PC to be pro war.

Same thing. This happens with every war when it first starts. Its not a PC thing.

We get PC terms like "Homicide Bomber" showing up.

OK. Now this is a PC thing. I don't find it as annoying as some of the liberal PC expressions, but that could be because there or so many more of them, or just because of my own political views. But it is annoying nevertheless. However "suicide bomber" plays too much into the hands of the martyrdom crowd. Personally I think just saying "bomber" would be sufficient. Maybe even "terrorist bomber" if it was (as most are) an attack on civilian targets.

[Tmy]

Originally posted by corplinx


Its interesting. In the arab media thy are referred to as martyrs. In the western media, they are referred to as suicide bombers. I think Fox was one of the first to tag them "homicide bombers". I think the term isnt very PC in any way. A "suicide bomber" sounds like someone killing themselves with a bomb. A "homicide bomber" kills others with a bomb. In short, no buzz phrase will truly encompass someone who blows themself up in order to kill his enemies. I guess calling them kamikazes would be a slight to the japanese culture.

A homicide bomber would be someone who kills people with bombs. Like the Unibomer.

I would call the use of the term "Homicide Bomber" to be a PC term because its specifically created to replace a long standing common usage term because certain people want to make a political point. (For example its heavily used by the right leaning Fox News). Its really no different than JK's thread about "founding fathers" being replaced by "the framers".

I'd bet money that there is some memo flaoting around Fox News telling people to use Homicide Bomber rather than Suicide Bomber.

[WMT1]

Originally posted by Tmy
Political Correctness has been tagged to the libral media and government for years,

And with good reason.


but now with the big governmental and media shitf to the right, PC has become a conservative thing.

:rolleyes:

At most, conservatives are just joining in the fun more than they used to. Both sides are good at the pot/kettle game in this area, and neither has much on the other when it comes to freedom of expression. If you're liberal, you might want to give some thought to criticizing other liberals for all their PC nonsense before picking on anyone else.

[Dancing David]

If it was PC would we leftists be saying things like:
"Thier not to be called war heads , we now call them patriots."
or
"Thier not victims of domestic violence they are matriarchal terrorists."

Great post!

Peace
dancing david

[Tmy]

How do ya'll define what's "Politically Correct"?

Heres my test: If you can say term/statement outloud in your workplace, without having to look around to see whos listening for fear of reprisal, then its politically correct.

[WMT1]

Originally posted by Tmy
How do ya'll define what's "Politically Correct"?

It's not clear who you're asking, but for the record, it's generally those who insist on adherence to political correctness in the first place who define what qualifies, not those of us who see it all as a bunch of petty nonsense.

[tedly]

I recently re-read the very interesting "The Silent War" by John Pina Craven (Sorry, but I don't know haw to do italics for the title, and Pina should have a little ~ thing over it.) Craven was the Chief Scientist of the Navy's Special Projects Office.
p. 240
" As an inveterate liberal Democrat, I saw little prospect of a role in the Nixon administration, and I gave some thought to spending a year in academia." he does.

p 248 " My MIT year also provided new opportunities for shaping the nation's destiny at sea. To my surprise a letter from Republican senator Edward Brooke of Massachusetts offered me an appointment to the Defense Intelligence Agency Scientific Advisory Board. The Nixon administration, he said, had asked him as a condition of the appointment to verify my political "correctness" . The senator thought this innappropriate. Political affiliation should play no role in appointment to a committee so intimately involved in national security, he said, and he therefore hoped that I would understand why he had taken the liberty of vouching for me in advance to insure my appointment."

It would appear from this that the term was in use by the right back in the sixties. The book was published in 2000, so this could just be modern usage percolating back, but judging from the rest of his writing it seems unlikely. By the way as an aside, bully for Senator Brooke.

[jj]

The first posting here is absolutely right.

Instead of having to say "people", now we're not allowed to think, question, or debate, EXCEPT as we support our totalitarian government.

People like Jedi are complete, absolute enemies of the constitution, and want to create a new "PC" by hysterical shouting about imaginary "commies".

Thing is, they've mostly succeeded. Look at what we have for president, a president-by-fiat, unelected, put into place by coup.

[Advocate]

Originally posted by Tmy
How do ya'll define what's "Politically Correct"?

Heres my test: If you can say term/statement outloud in your workplace, without having to look around to see whos listening for fear of reprisal, then its politically correct.

By that definition, "peanut butter and jelly sandwich" is politically correct. But since it has no political content, how can it be said to be politically anything?

[WMT1]

Originally posted by jj
Instead of having to say "people", now we're not allowed to think, question, or debate, EXCEPT as we support our totalitarian government.

:rolleyes:

Well, as long as no one's resorting to hyperbole to make their points.


People like Jedi are complete, absolute enemies of the constitution, and want to create a new "PC" by hysterical shouting about imaginary "commies".

True, but then again, there aren't that many "people like Jedi" in the first place, even among conservatives. If you think otherwise, you may have more in common with him than you realize.


Look at what we have for president, a president-by-fiat, unelected, put into place by coup.

:rolleyes: again.

[Tmy]

Originally posted by Advocate


By that definition, "peanut butter and jelly sandwich" is politically correct. But since it has no political content, how can it be said to be politically anything?

Hey pal, its "peanut butter and jelly sand-wiccan". Get it straight!

[Michael Redman]

Let's call them murder/suicide bombers. That offend anyone?

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by jj
The first posting here is absolutely right.

Instead of having to say "people", now we're not allowed to think, question, or debate, EXCEPT as we support our totalitarian government.

People like Jedi are complete, absolute enemies of the constitution, and want to create a new "PC" by hysterical shouting about imaginary "commies".

Thing is, they've mostly succeeded. Look at what we have for president, a president-by-fiat, unelected, put into place by coup.

You're nuts.

JK

[jj]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight


You're nuts.

JK

In short, Jedi shows the old, moronic "I can call you what you called me" argument isn't dead yet.

[jj]

Originally posted by WMT1


:rolleyes:

Well, as long as no one's resorting to hyperbole to make their points.

The conservative apologist's definition of hyperbole: Anything strongly stated that substantially embarrasses their point.


True, but then again, there aren't that many "people like Jedi" in the first place, even among conservatives. If you think otherwise, you may have more in common with him than you realize.


I'l agree they aren't in the majority, but, lessee, one is president, one is vice president, one is attourney general, one is secretary of defense...

It's not the numbers that count.

[Richard G]

"PC" is a term that means bullsh*t. The American people are tired of bullsh*t, and are now calling things plainly, as they see them.

I call suicide bombers no good mother**cking *ock suckers. Does that offend anyone? Who gives a sh*t, thats what they are.


PC is out, truth is in.

[WMT1]

Originally posted by jj
Instead of having to say "people", now we're not allowed to think, question, or debate, EXCEPT as we support our totalitarian government.

Originally posted by WMT1
:rolleyes:
Well, as long as no one's resorting to hyperbole to make their points.

Originally posted by jj
The conservative apologist's definition of hyperbole: Anything strongly stated that substantially embarrasses their point.

Well, that's nice, but aside from the fact that your hyperbole was not in response to any point that I was making, I also can't find any point made by anyone in this thread that it "embarrassed". Moreover, I'm neither a conservative nor an "apologist" for them. And it should tell you something that this criticism is coming from someone who is not all that crazy about conservatives himself.

In any case, this libertarian's definition of "hyperbole" can be found in almost any dictionary, and you'd be hard pressed to make the case that it doesn't apply to your comments.

Found the following example on dictionary.com:

A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in I could sleep for a year or This book weighs a ton.

What's your definition?


People like Jedi are complete, absolute enemies of the constitution, and want to create a new "PC" by hysterical shouting about imaginary "commies".

True, but then again, there aren't that many "people like Jedi" in the first place, even among conservatives. If you think otherwise, you may have more in common with him than you realize.

I'l agree they aren't in the majority, but, lessee, one is president, one is vice president, one is attourney general, one is secretary of defense...

:confused:

One what? Are you seriously suggesting these are examples of the "people like Jedi" that you described? If so, you seem to be bending over backwards to justify my "hyperbole" characterization, rather than trying to distance yourself from it. And the more you resort to it, the closer you get to being as much of a clown for the left as JK is for the right.

[jj]

Originally posted by WMT1
One what? Are you seriously suggesting these are examples of the "people like Jedi" that you described? If so, you seem to be bending over backwards to justify my "hyperbole" characterization, rather than trying to distance yourself from it. And the more you resort to it, the closer you get to being as much of a clown for the left as JK is for the right.

First, I'm a Goldwater conservative.

Second, it is quite obvious from the fact it's "prayer day" today or one of these days, that they are at least somewhat like Jedi. The ways in which they demand that all be like them differs, but the similarity is in the "you must be like me", as I would expect you'd be well aware, and suspect you're avoiding.

Obviously they're not exactly like Jedi, they're smarter, even 'W'.

On the other hand, they show very little (unlike Jedi, for which I would say "none at all") respect for people who disagree with them, they do demonize people who disagree with them (just like Jedi) and they are determined to destroy the separation of church and state, a totalitiarian position, in spirit much like Jedi's demonization of woem and desire to have people who won't walk in his lockstep leave or be jailed for life. Yes, their standard for who isn't a "good american" is different than Jedi's, but that doesn't make them any less a radical reactionary. (And, no, that term is not an oxymoron)

I have no idea of your political leanings, but it's common practice nowadays to ascribe "hyperbole" to obvious, irrefutable facts. It's just another part of the 'Big Lie' technique.

[WMT1]

Originally posted by jj
First, I'm a Goldwater conservative.

Second, it is quite obvious from the fact it's "prayer day" today or one of these days, that they are at least somewhat like Jedi. The ways in which they demand that all be like them differs, but the similarity is in the "you must be like me", as I would expect you'd be well aware, and suspect you're avoiding.

Obviously they're not exactly like Jedi, they're smarter, even 'W'.

On the other hand, they show very little (unlike Jedi, for which I would say "none at all") respect for people who disagree with them, they do demonize people who disagree with them (just like Jedi) and they are determined to destroy the separation of church and state, a totalitiarian position, in spirit much like Jedi's demonization of woem and desire to have people who won't walk in his lockstep leave or be jailed for life. Yes, their standard for who isn't a "good american" is different than Jedi's, but that doesn't make them any less a radical reactionary. (And, no, that term is not an oxymoron)

I have no idea of your political leanings, but it's common practice nowadays to ascribe "hyperbole" to obvious, irrefutable facts. It's just another part of the 'Big Lie' technique.

Damn. So much to to pick apart. So little time. I'm sure I'll be able to get to it tomorrow.

In the meantime, are there any self-respecting skeptics out there who want to put their own credibility on the line by claiming nothing jj has posted in this thread qualifies as "hyperbole"?

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by jj


First, I'm a Goldwater conservative.

Second, it is quite obvious from the fact it's "prayer day" today or one of these days, that they are at least somewhat like Jedi. The ways in which they demand that all be like them differs, but the similarity is in the "you must be like me", as I would expect you'd be well aware, and suspect you're avoiding.

Obviously they're not exactly like Jedi, they're smarter, even 'W'.

On the other hand, they show very little (unlike Jedi, for which I would say "none at all") respect for people who disagree with them, they do demonize people who disagree with them (just like Jedi) and they are determined to destroy the separation of church and state, a totalitiarian position, in spirit much like Jedi's demonization of woem and desire to have people who won't walk in his lockstep leave or be jailed for life. Yes, their standard for who isn't a "good american" is different than Jedi's, but that doesn't make them any less a radical reactionary. (And, no, that term is not an oxymoron)

I have no idea of your political leanings, but it's common practice nowadays to ascribe "hyperbole" to obvious, irrefutable facts. It's just another part of the 'Big Lie' technique.

The "great lie" is the view passed onto unsuspecting Americans that there was ever a separation of church of state problem in the United States. Until the ACLU took "separation of church and state" from the Russian communist written constitution, America was functioning just fine and "government" was already separated from religion.

But when homosexual groups got together and saw that inside the bible there were passages that admonished their non-genetic sexual behavior, the bible became a "hate" document. You probably haven't heard that yet but it is coming. It is coming because Jedi knows everything Jedi wants to know. There are no secrets.

There will be a push soon to ban the Christian bible in this country and all of the west for that matter because of "hate" passages enclosed inside it. The "separation of church and state" commie propaganda is just the beginning of a much broader attack on organized free religious activity in the nation-state, the goal being to reduce Christianity into some form of "hate group".

So newby, before you go speaking about things you have no clue about, perhaps you should ask those that do...like the Dark Jedi Master.

JK

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by Jedi Knight

The "separation of church and state" commie propaganda is just the beginning of a much broader attack on organized free religious activity in the nation-state, the goal being to reduce Christianity into some form of "hate group".
JK
So JK how do you feel about some governments trying to control religion that is non-mainstream, lets see there was the town in SC that wanted to ban a Pagan bookstore, you claim that you are a defender of civil liberties.(And I tend to think that you are.)
So do american pagans have the same rights as american Xians?

I thought that the church state issue was much older than the gay rights movement and I thought that the ACLU was too, do you have any proof of your claims?

Peace
dancing David

[Baker]

Originally posted by Tmy


A homicide bomber would be someone who kills people with bombs. Like the Unibomer.

I would call the use of the term "Homicide Bomber" to be a PC term because its specifically created to replace a long standing common usage term because certain people want to make a political point. (For example its heavily used by the right leaning Fox News). Its really no different than JK's thread about "founding fathers" being replaced by "the framers".

I'd bet money that there is some memo flaoting around Fox News telling people to use Homicide Bomber rather than Suicide Bomber.

I don’t see how its PC you make it sound like a Suicide Bomber only harms himself but in fact his aim is to kill as many civilians as possible so the term Homicide Bomber is much more appropriate.

[shecky]

My, conservatives get rather defensive when accused of being PC.

My favorite PC phrase of late: freedom fries.

[shecky]

Originally posted by Baker


I don’t see how its PC you make it sound like a Suicide Bomber only harms himself but in fact his aim is to kill as many civilians as possible so the term Homicide Bomber is much more appropriate.

A bomber is someone who sets a bomb. A suicide bomber is someone who goes up while setting the bomb. I find "homicide bomber" to be a bit too hyperbolic in making a point. Thus PC.

[Baker]

Originally posted by shecky


A bomber is someone who sets a bomb. A suicide bomber is someone who goes up while setting the bomb. I find "homicide bomber" to be a bit too hyperbolic in making a point. Thus PC.

His aim is homicide even if he plans to take his own life in the process its still a homicide.
Which is why I believe that “homicide bomber” is more appropriate.

[shecky]

Originally posted by Baker


His aim is homicide even if he plans to take his own life in the process its still a homicide.
Which is why I believe that “homicide bomber” is more appropriate.

Isn't there a bit of redundancy in the phrase for the sake of hyperbole rather than clarity? In fact, it seems distinguishing between a “homicide bomber” as one intending to kill others with a bomb, and a "suicide bomber" as one intending to kill others with a bomb along with oneself would be more apropriate. Which still goes back to the redundancy thing even if it is more clear.

[RandFan]

Originally posted by Tmy
Political Correctness has been tagged to the liberal media and government for years, but now with the big governmental and media shift to the right, PC has become a conservative thing. Hi Tmy,

I don't know if it has actually become a PC thing, you may be right. Right or wrong you have a point though. I have said for some time that political winds have a way of shifting. That is the problem with PC it can come back to bite you in the ass.

I don't care for the term homicide bomber.

[More Evolved-er]

Hey all! Short-time lurker, first time poster

I myself think the term "homicide bomber" is fairly ridiculous, as well as a bit redundant... aren't ALL bombers out to commit homicide? "Suicide bomber" was meant to include those that intentionally killed themselves as well. After all, the weapons man on a B-2 could be considered a "homicide bomber".

On the other hand, they show very little (unlike Jedi, for which I would say "none at all") respect for people who disagree with them, they do demonize people who disagree with them (just like Jedi)

Sure, but come on... isn't that the nature of politics? Each side ridicules and demonizes the other. Although I will admit that conservatives, at least recently, have been worse in calling one's patriotism into question.

[pgwenthold]

Originally posted by shecky


Isn't there a bit of redundancy in the phrase for the sake of hyperbole rather than clarity? In fact, it seems distinguishing between a “homicide bomber” as one intending to kill others with a bomb, and a "suicide bomber" as one intending to kill others with a bomb along with oneself would be more apropriate. Which still goes back to the redundancy thing even if it is more clear.

No, it is important to distinguish these bombers from those bombers who _aren't_ trying to kill people.

Of course, you are exactly right.

[BillyTK]

Originally posted by More Evolved-er
Hey all! Short-time lurker, first time poster

I myself think the term "homicide bomber" is fairly ridiculous, as well as a bit redundant... aren't ALL bombers out to commit homicide? "Suicide bomber" was meant to include those that intentionally killed themselves as well. After all, the weapons man on a B-2 could be considered a "homicide bomber".
Ah, but the difference is suicide/homicide/people who want to kill others and are willing to die in the process bombers kill people who don't want to die, whereas B2 bombers kill people who do want to die, by virtue of the fact that they don't surrender or get out the way, unless it's coalition allies in which a new category of casualty is invoked. All good fun and games with the new Neo-Con PC... :D

I think we should just call 'em "homicidal psycho junglecats"!
Wondering if there's any fellow Calvin and Hobbes fans around...

[Tmy]

Even if Sucide Bomber is not the most accurate term, it is the most common and understood. SO its PC to introduce a new replacement. If I say "suicide bomber" we all get the roughly same mental image.

If I used the term "personslaughter" rather than "manslaughter" I'd eb assulated bya barrage of eye rolling emoticons.

[Supercharts]

Read "The New Thought Police" by Tammy Bruce. Great book that puts political dialog into perspective. Another is "The Meme Machine" by Susan Blackmore. It gives some substance to the idea of "Groupthink".

[WMT1]

Originally posted by jj
First, I'm a Goldwater conservative.

Well, if you're going to be conservative, that's probably one of the better kind.


Second, it is quite obvious from the fact it's "prayer day" today or one of these days, that they are at least somewhat like Jedi.

Not in the way you were characterizing "people like Jedi" earlier. Allow me to refresh your memory. You referred to them as "complete, absolute enemies of the constitution" and as people who "want to create a new 'PC' by hysterical shouting about imaginary 'commies'". Now, that might apply to JK, but if you think it accurately describes those you specifically identified ("one is president, one is vice president, one is attourney general, one is secretary of defense"), well, that would be some of the "hyperbole" I was talking about.


The ways in which they demand that all be like them differs,

Oops. There it is again.


but the similarity is in the "you must be like me",

And again.


as I would expect you'd be well aware, and suspect you're avoiding.

Nope. You're just coming across more and more like the JK you've been criticizing. Not only with the hyperbole, but he has also been known to deflect valid criticism by accusing his critics of "denial", which you seem to be doing here.


Obviously they're not exactly like Jedi, they're smarter, even 'W'.

I agree, but still ... ouch!


On the other hand, they show very little (unlike Jedi, for which I would say "none at all") respect for people who disagree with them, they do demonize people who disagree with them (just like Jedi)

Yes, just like Jedi, and just like many others, regardless of political persuasion. Hell, for that matter, just like you've been doing in this thread! For instance ...


and they are determined to destroy the separation of church and state, a totalitiarian position,

I'm not terribly comfortable with their lack of respect for the concept myself, but "determined to destroy"? Do I need to say the word yet again?


in spirit much like Jedi's demonization of woem and desire to have people who won't walk in his lockstep leave or be jailed for life.

Since I've seen his posts, it wouldn't particularly surprise me for Jedi to have the views you attribute to him. But because I've also seen yours, I've gotta take it with a much bigger boulder of salt than I might have otherwise. Starting to see the problem with your approach?


Yes, their standard for who isn't a "good american" is different than Jedi's, but that doesn't make them any less a radical reactionary.

Yeah, and guess what tends to characterize the rhetoric of radical reactionaries. Hint: it starts with an "h".


I have no idea of your political leanings,

Then you aren't paying attention.


but it's common practice nowadays to ascribe "hyperbole" to obvious, irrefutable facts.

Well, see, now you just seem to be willing to throw what's left of your credibility out the window. Aside from the fact that I've pointed out several examples of your hyperbole to back up the characterization (none of which you've specifically challenged), I also find it interesting that you ignored my request for you to provide your definition.

Moreover, what "obvious, irrefutable facts"? :confused:

(You apparently really just have no idea just how much like Jedi you sound.)


It's just another part of the 'Big Lie' technique.

:rolleyes: Like I was sayin'.