My stance is that publicly labeling a person as racist is a big mistake if they are not a racist. The mistake grows as it is repeated and is even worse when people in authority positions set an example by participating.

My stance is that consistency with the emotional appeals of racism is correct. Racism is serious. Label a person's writing as racial objectionable is serious. Labeling a person as a racist is serious. Latent hypocrisy in this regard is destructive, with the potential for malignancy.

You can read my posts, obviously. You may want to review them before asking more questions like this as the message I bring in response is the same one I have been posting on about.

I dare you, anyone, to genuinely challenge the ideas in my posts, rather than keep asking questions.

Glad that's cleared up, then. Bruce posted stuff that's inarguably racist. No mistakes were made. I guess we're done.

It's okay, Spank, we're just typing words on the internet. None of this counts. Life is meaningless.

Okay, then you're just as racist as he. Guess we're done.

lol. Quote me.

I don't have to waste my time. If you're ignoring context so am I. You've posted many of Bruce's posts. You said they're racist. My guess is you've posted way more racist content than Bruce, so you're a bigger racist.

The appropriate response to the simple-minded approach of ignoring context is is offense and mockery.

I see CarrynWater still FailnLogic.

The hits just keep on coming!

Although given Chez, Foldn's, and Spanks posts, it's no surprise to me that someone of Bruce's intellect appears God like to them.

It ain't just me, bro.

And we've all examined the context. We've read the entirety of the threads where Bruce was posting racist ****. And that **** is still racist. Furthermore, no one has been able to explain any "context" that makes that **** not racist. We have only assertions of "Context, though!" that are unsupported by any actual context, and assertions of "Contrarian, though!" despite nothing about Bruce's posting being consistent with being a contrarian.

BTW, you're not ignoring "context" when you call me a racist. You're ignoring content. I guess it's little wonder that you seem to have no idea what "context" means, esp. since you seem to be using the word to mean, "The opinion I have in my head that Bruce is a nice guy who's good at math and therefore can't say anything racist."

Context is context. Sure, mine was more egregious, much easier for anyone to recognize and reject, but it almost as mysterious to me how you can't see the context behind Bruce's posts. He was simply defending Thomas Jefferson, et al. It's really that simple. He "reposted" many of their arguments for not immediately ending slavery, as well as the French philosopher de Tocqville, and he examined those from our point of view and theirs.

It's a simple-minded approach to ignore that context. It leads to people seriously believing guys like Jefferson are pond scum.

Jefferson was a pretty awful person by some measures. I'm not sure how many points he gets for being a founding father versus how many we have to take away for raping slaves. I'll leave that up to David.

No silly Wookie, I'm not ignoring content... that makes no sense. You posted it, by you're own judgement it was racist. Ergo...

Bruce has said many of his posts were racist, but claimed they were not all his views. That he was generating discussion, examining the issues from all angles. This is the best way to get to the bottom of issues, to understand why, say a person from +250 years ago who did really great things isn't pond scum for doing many of the same things we would have done if in his shoes at the time.

Oh hey look, a lie!!

And man, educated? Did you get a B. A. Baracus in Jibber and Jabber and then do your post-grad work at Chester. O. Longneck's School of HeadSanding?

Being raped is only unpleasant if you never know anything different. The problem is if you only get raped as an adult and have come to know a non-rapey life. Start em off as kids and there is no issue, really. And if you are going to get raped, you can't do better than America's greatest president. At least you're not getting raped by Millard Fillmore or zombie Lincoln.

Great! We agree the posts were racist.

So what the **** does that have to do with this situation, where Bruce is clearly a racist?

Here is a yahoo answer on 'did jefferson rape a slave?':

The hilarious thing is that every time another forum saw Bruce's posts, they were grossed out. The ONLY folks who try and argue Bruce wasn't racist are SMP regs, racists, and Spank, who continues to dig deeper and deeper holes simply because he will never admit he ****ed up with Silver Man.

Even if you granted that false accusations of racism are the horrible thing some of you suggest- that still wouldn't mean dick here, because anybody with a hint of a clue can see Bruce was 100% unambiguously racist.

There were a lot of advantages to being racist in the 19th century. For example, it made it much easier to decide which of your children to raise as heirs to your estate and which to cast into chattel slavery forever.

I'd have no problem thinking he was pond scum if he raped his slaves, btw, as long as we're using the definition of rape from +250 years ago, what was culturally accepted then. Our views on women have changed quite a bit since then. I don't know why you would expect anyone then to operate by our better morality.

Did Thomas Jefferson compare Mexicans to cockroaches? Did George Washington assert that blacks only riot because Al Sharpton tells them to, not because they're justifiably pissed off? And why are we not allowed to conclude that a slave raper was pond scum? Sure, Jefferson had his reasons, but we don't have to conclude that because he had reasons, it's OK.

This is nothing new, JJ.

Holy ****. So as long as raping girls is culturally accepted at the time it's okay? So you'd support men in Pakistan raping girls as punishment because, well hey, it's what is culturally accepted!

I posted that yahoo answer thinking no one around here would agree with it. I should have known some racist piece of **** would have taken it up.

Wow, add some religion in the mockery to the bigot menu. Are you saying we worship false idols?

By this 'logic' you worship shallow partisan mockers who make half-formed opinions about people, publish them and then stick to them for weak political and emotional reasons. What kind of deity is that?

This is a common tactic, once one of you has run out of ways to defend your wrong-headed attacks, just throw like six more twisted attacks at us and try to overwhelm.

In short, he did not compare Mexicans to cockroaches. Plenty of people are of the opinion their are instigators that play on race, they are often wrong but probably right sometimes too. See above for my take on slave rape.