NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.nypost.com/seven/12092006/gossip/pagesix/rosie_to_asians__loosen_up_pagesix_.htm

Since I believe it is indicative of an attitude as obtuse as that displayed by Michael Richards towards blacks, I believe Rosie O'Donnell needs to apologize to whoever is the most objectionable representative of Chinese possible.

After all, Richards has to apologize to Al Sharpton, and Mel Gibson has to apologize to some Jewish guy, so I think it's only fair that we find the biggest and most vitriolic Chinese public relations person we can find and force Rosie O'Donnell to her knees and have her publicly admit her shame and regret over such an offensive remark.

Oh wait - she's not a Republican. Never mind.

Man, she ugly.

Trilby63;12061634']Man, she ugly.

It's ok. She doesn't like men, so there's no chance of me being asked to hit it.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/12092006/gossip/pagesix/rosie_to_asians__loosen_up_pagesix_.htm

Since I believe it is indicative of an attitude as obtuse as that displayed by Michael Richards towards blacks, I believe Rosie O'Donnell needs to apologize to whoever is the most objectionable representative of Chinese possible.

After all, Richards has to apologize to Al Sharpton, and Mel Gibson has to apologize to some Jewish guy, so I think it's only fair that we find the biggest and most vitriolic Chinese public relations person we can find and force Rosie O'Donnell to her knees and have her publicly admit her shame and regret over such an offensive remark.

Oh wait - she's not a Republican. Never mind.

So her humour is to make fun of Asians. nice....:rolleyes: Isn't she gay?

It's ok. She doesn't like men, so there's no chance of me being asked to hit it.

I'd hit it.

I'm not fussy.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Rosie O'Donnell is lesbian isn't she?
I'm sure she would find gay/lesbo jokes insulting.
Yet she thinks its fine to just say ignorant things about the Chinese language?
Fuck double-standards.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/12092006/gossip/pagesix/rosie_to_asians__loosen_up_pagesix_.htm

Since I believe it is indicative of an attitude as obtuse as that displayed by Michael Richards towards blacks, I believe Rosie O'Donnell needs to apologize to whoever is the most objectionable representative of Chinese possible.

After all, Richards has to apologize to Al Sharpton, and Mel Gibson has to apologize to some Jewish guy, so I think it's only fair that we find the biggest and most vitriolic Chinese public relations person we can find and force Rosie O'Donnell to her knees and have her publicly admit her shame and regret over such an offensive remark.

Oh wait - she's not a Republican. Never mind.

WTF does republican have to do with it? most of the people mad at Richards don't even know his party affiliation

Nice strawman though

Wtf Does What Party She Supports Or Voted For Have To Do With Anything?!?!?!?! You Fucking Americans Shit Me With Your Constant Dividing Of People Between Republic And Democratic Wake Up Its Basically The Same Thing You Retards!!!

Trilby63;12061634']Man, she ugly.

It's a she?

I agree with the origanal poster. If other people have to say sorry when they make racial comments she should too, even more so since she calls every possibly gay comment made by anyone.

Wtf Does What Party She Supports Or Voted For Have To Do With Anything?!?!?!?! You Fucking Americans Shit Me With Your Constant Dividing Of People Between Republic And Democratic Wake Up Its Basically The Same Thing You Retards!!!

Great. Now you're being racist against Americans and Retarded people. Go to your room and think about what you've done.

Wtf Does What Party She Supports Or Voted For Have To Do With Anything?!?!?!?! You Fucking Americans Shit Me With Your Constant Dividing Of People Between Republic And Democratic Wake Up Its Basically The Same Thing You Retards!!!

You know, if you dropped the aggression and the silly way you capitalise every word you people would consider you to be making a good point.

WTF does republican have to do with it? most of the people mad at Richards don't even know his party affiliation

Nice strawman though

Not a strawman here. Rosie is an official spokesperson for both the Democratic party and for gays and lesbians.

I'm sure she would be right on top of someone insulting gays by a similar parody of stereotyped speech.

Why should she get off?

WTF does republican have to do with it? most of the people mad at Richards don't even know his party affiliation

Nice strawman though
Eve online ought to go into business with Junii. They'd corner the market in no time.

It's a she?

Don't ask, don't tell. I don't think anyone wants to take credit for her looks.

Not a strawman here. Rosie is an official spokesperson for both the Democratic party and for gays and lesbians.

I'm sure she would be right on top of someone insulting gays by a similar parody of stereotyped speech.

Why should she get off?

Official spokesperson for the Democrats? Can you point out where and when she got that title?

I initially typed everything in caps but for some reason it converted it to only allowing capital letters at the start of words. She's a part of one of the parties so fucking what I'm sure that people in both parties fuck up sometimes FUCK!!! I'm sick of dealing with people who have no brain!

Not a strawman here. Rosie is an official spokesperson for both the Democratic party and for gays and lesbians.

I'm sure she would be right on top of someone insulting gays by a similar parody of stereotyped speech.

Why should she get off?

I dont think she should ... but Was richards even a republican?

For your OP to be anything but an unsupported claim you would have to show that the only difference is their party affiliation

But I think you just wanted to rant how the world is against republicans or something

Stumbled across this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuTspbPmV_g) and then this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTSX1NlQVCY).

*shakes head*

But it wasn't even funny.....
Ching chong ching chong? Come on, I made better asian jokes in 3rd grade.

I dont think she should ... but Was richards even a republican?

For your OP to be anything but an unsupported claim you would have to show that the only difference is their party affiliation

But I think you just wanted to rant how the world is against republicans or something

Do you see her apologizing in any case?

Nope, because she knows she doesn't have to. It's ok for her to do it, because she can never be accused of racism, for obvious reasons.

I think there's a difference between the word ****** and bastardizing Chinesse syllables. Granted, she wasn't very clever. It's only funny if it appears you're trying very hard to speak the language and failing pitifully.

In China it was like, 'Ching chong, ching-ching-chong, Danny DeVito!'

...how the fuck is that racism? it was an attempt to mimick an inflectional language that's not too far off the mark - it doesn't say *anything* about the speakers of that language being second class citizens or any such bullshit. whoever actually *did* care needs to lighten the fuck up. I'm sure over in china people make germanic-language noises, and I don't care. saying "chong chong chong" wouldn't be racism if *hitler* did it, it would just be a value-neutral immitation of another form of speach.

"We consider this a mockery of the Chinese language and, in effect, a perpetration of stereotypes of Asian-Americans as foreigners or second-class citizens. The use of the distorted phrases is insulting to the Chinese and Chinese-Americans, and gives the impression that they are a group that is substandard to English-speaking people."

unless I missed something, she doesn't say *any* of this shit. what do they want her to do - "chong chong chong, danny devito. actually, dear audience, inflectional langauges like chinese lend their speakers a greater sensitivity to pitch and produce proportionally more musical talents than non-inflecitonal languages." she was on a talk show, not a documentary. cut her some slack.

Do you see her apologizing in any case?

Nope, because she knows she doesn't have to. It's ok for her to do it, because she can never be accused of racism, for obvious reasons.

I don't see it as obvious at all. Specially with it being reported today ... I had not even had the chance to hear about it much less make a decision on it

Do you see her apologizing in any case?

Nope, because she knows she doesn't have to. It's ok for her to do it, because she can never be accused of racism, for obvious reasons.
Her uber-magical anti-racist-accusation powers don't seem to be working on you very well. What, you got a special helmet of Rosie protection or something?

I think there's a difference between the word ****** and bastardizing Chinesse syllables. Granted, she wasn't very clever. It's only funny if it appears you're trying very hard to speak the language and failing pitifully.

I find your name interesting. btw, the reason it wasn't clever is because she isnt a clever comedian or person.

I find your name interesting. btw, the reason it wasn't clever is because she isnt a clever comedian or person.

True

Hahaha, that was actually funny, reminds me of Krusty the clowns impersonation of a chinaman with huge bucked teeth

Hahaha, that was actually funny, reminds me of Krusty the clowns impersonation of a chinaman with huge bucked teeth

what when he made his shirt flap up and down?

Though I am repulsed by Rosie Odonnel herself, I find this ridiculous. Chinese is kind of a goofy sounding language. Nothing racist about that, it's just different and all kind of sounds the same to me and, apparantly, Rosie.

I think the 'WE'RE BEING DISCRIMINATED AGAINST!' crew jumped the gun on this one.

Mel Gibson came out and pretty much said: I fucking hate Jews. Kramer's spiel was just an idiot being an idiot, but this? This is just a big fat loud woman trying to be funny and failing miserably. Nothing criminal or offensive about that.

What was the Chinese prostitutes name? Chu Mi. *rimshot*

Oh wait - she's not a Republican. Never mind.

Wait, do we know that Michael Richards is a republican? Are we assuming that? Why is that? Because he made racist comments?

Did you just say that Republicans are racists?

Nice.

Saying '******' isn't racism unless they get offended and decide to make a big deal out of it. Which happened with Richards, who was forced to apologize and be chastized by the general public.

Rosie, in saying 'Ching-Ching-Chong', etc, wasn't necessarily being racist but if people were offended, she has no less right to go and say, "Loosen up!" when Richards is still being bitched at. She can't away with racist remarks just because she's a liberal dyke.

Sorry, Rosie.

So how is this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuTspbPmV_g) offensive?

Why should that warrant an apology?

Why do you say that she can't ever be accused of racism? What are the "obvious reasons"?

Are you claiming that Michael Richards is a republican? And how does party affiliation come into play?

And what the hell is the point of this thread?

http://www.nypost.com/seven/12092006/gossip/pagesix/rosie_to_asians__loosen_up_pagesix_.htm

Since I believe it is indicative of an attitude as obtuse as that displayed by Michael Richards towards blacks, I believe Rosie O'Donnell needs to apologize to whoever is the most objectionable representative of Chinese possible.

After all, Richards has to apologize to Al Sharpton, and Mel Gibson has to apologize to some Jewish guy, so I think it's only fair that we find the biggest and most vitriolic Chinese public relations person we can find and force Rosie O'Donnell to her knees and have her publicly admit her shame and regret over such an offensive remark.

Oh wait - she's not a Republican. Never mind.

Oh my God! Rosie O'Donal accused people in China of speaking Chinese? What a grotesque racist generalization! Doesn't she know what the national language of China is? I'm ashamed that she's become associated with liberal politics.

It appears that in China they do in fact speak Chinese. She officially did nothing wrong.

Oh wait - she's not a Republican. Never mind.
Neither are Michael Richards or Mel Gibson, probably.

Oh my God! Rosie O'Donal accused people in China of speaking Chinese? What a grotesque racist generalization! Doesn't she know what the national language of China is? I'm ashamed that she's become associated with liberal politics.

Yes, because we all know that Chinese sounds like "'Ching chong, ching-ching-chong, Danny DeVito!'". :rolleyes:

Of course, it seems like any has-been needs to make a stunt once in a while to become notable again.

What was the Chinese prostitutes name? Chu Mi. *rimshot*

Mike Hunt.

Chinese isn't the only language that sounds weird or has weird names.

Goddamn Rosie O'Donnell. I'm Chinese, though I really don't care, but then I see her face and it makes me angry...her goddamn face...

*sigh*

One, she didn't just say say 'ching chong, ching ching chong,' she actually gave a reasonable imitation of Mandarin (granted, it probably didn't sound a thing like it, but it clearly wasn't meant to be mocking).

Two, ineffectually imitating Mandarin is no different from ineffectually imitating French or German, not all Mandarin-speakers are ethnic Chinese, neither are all ethnic Chinese Mandarin-speakers.

Three, just shut up and stop being idiots.

You Fucking Americans Shit Me With Your Constant Dividing Of People Between Republic And Democratic Wake Up Its Basically The Same Thing You Retards!!! I'm sick of dealing with people who have no brain!
If you keep flaming on these forums, you won't be dealing with anyone here, brained or otherwise. Your post history indicates this isn't a new thing for you, so knock it off NOW, Ikfaldu.

~ Frisbeeteria ~
NationStates Game Moderator
The One-Stop Rules Shop

This is great! You guys are upset that she made insensitive comments about Chinese people, and you back that up with insensitive comments about her looks, and/or sexuality.

You amaze me with your maturity, you really do.

Two, ineffectually imitating Mandarin is no different from ineffectually imitating French or German, not all Mandarin-speakers are ethnic Chinese, neither are all ethnic Chinese Mandarin-speakers.
You have a point there. I mean you can mock French all you like ['Oui, oui. Sacre Bleue!'] but how dare you mock Chinese! Honestly, I wouldn't have done it on national television, but I have to admit that listening to Chinese I would only be able to define English words as being individual words. Chinese words sort of blur into each other from my ear. If this were a well-loved comedian nobody would've been bothered; but because she's an overweight lesbian then she's incredibly offensive. Oh, please.

The double standards in the media are amazing.

This is great! You guys are upset that she made insensitive comments about Chinese people, and you back that up with insensitive comments about her looks, and/or sexuality.

You amaze me with your maturity, you really do.

Not me (I win).

Two, ineffectually imitating Mandarin is no different from ineffectually imitating French or German,
Or Spanish. How many times do you hear stupid things like, "Where-o is the door-o, por favor-o?" And don't even get me started on Pepe LePeu and what passed for French in my beloved Looney Toon cartoons!

Not me (I win).

but then I see her face and it makes me angry...her goddamn face...

Really?

Or Spanish. How many times do you hear stupid things like, "Where-o is the door-o, por favor-o?" And don't even get me started on Pepe LePeu and what passed for French in my beloved Looney Toon cartoons!

I have never heard that...granted I live in an area with a high hispanic population so imatating spanish is not a funny thing, but even before that when I lived in Michigan you didn't hear people immatating spanish.

I have never heard that...granted I live in an area with a high hispanic population so imatating spanish is not a funny thing, but even before that when I lived in Michigan you didn't hear people immatating spanish.

Go watch some Hollywood movies if you want examples then :D

Let's see...The Mexican is full of such scenes.

I see it mostly in the media, sitcoms, movies etc.

Really?

Yep. Notice how I never criticized her face - I just said I get angry when I see it (possibly meaning that my thoughts aren't very linear, but I never explicitly stated it was her fault) - therefore, I win.

wow...rosie sure has gotten even fatter. I swear she's about 3 m&m's away from blowing up

This is great! You guys are upset that she made insensitive comments about Chinese people, and you back that up with insensitive comments about her looks, and/or sexuality.

You amaze me with your maturity, you really do.

I'm loving the hypocrisy. This thread is basically for people upset at not being able to call people "******" or "dyke" any more without suffering social consequences for it feigning outrage that a "big, fat, ugly dyke" acted like them (even though she didn't, her actions being very benign in comparison) and are afraid she might get away with it because very few people would actually believe Rosie is a racist (even if some people have asked for an apology) as apart from their homophobic, racist selves where the accusation is easily seen for the truth that it is.

Or Spanish. How many times do you hear stupid things like, "Where-o is the door-o, por favor-o?" And don't even get me started on Pepe LePeu and what passed for French in my beloved Looney Toon cartoons!

Or the Swedish Chef in the Muppets. OMGZWTF! I DEMAND RESTITUTION FROM JIM HENSON'S ESTATE FOR THIS AWFUL MISREPRESENTATION OF SWEDISH LANGUAGE!

Or, I could just loosen up, like Rosie tells me to. I think I'll listen to Rosie.

Its only not racist if its funny.
Is Rosie O'Donnell funny?

Or the Swedish Chef in the Muppets. OMGZWTF! I DEMAND RESTITUTION FROM JIM HENSON'S ESTATE FOR THIS AWFUL MISREPRESENTATION OF SWEDISH LANGUAGE! Wait...yordie yordie yordie isn't Swedish?

Or, I could just loosen up, like Rosie tells me to. I think I'll listen to Rosie.

Right, the big, fat, M&M popping dyke.

I agree with the origanal poster. If other people have to say sorry when they make racial comments she should too, even more so since she calls every possibly gay comment made by anyone.I agree with the 10th poster. If some people have to say they are sorry, we all need to apology.

*I'm sorry*

Wait...yordie yordie yordie isn't Swedish?

No, no, this is Swedish. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygksNwfEsFw)

Right, the big, fat, M&M popping dyke.

Whose face is apparently so awesome, it makes people angry just to look at it. Lucky bitch!

Trilby63;12061641']I'd hit it.

I'm not fussy.

Your outta your mind and should be put away. ;)

I'm loving the hypocrisy. This thread is basically for people upset at not being able to call people "******" or "dyke" any more without suffering social consequences for it feigning outrage that a "big, fat, ugly dyke" acted like them (even though she didn't, her actions being very benign in comparison) and are afraid she might get away with it because very few people would actually believe Rosie is a racist (even if some people have asked for an apology) as apart from their homophobic, racist selves where the accusation is easily seen for the truth that it is.

I agree ...

Not only that they attribute it to some left wing conspiracy that makes good right wingers apologize :rolleyes: Is Richards even "Right wing" hell I dont even know if Gibson is.

I'm loving the hypocrisy. This thread is basically for people upset at not being able to call people "******" or "dyke" any more without suffering social consequences for it feigning outrage that a "big, fat, ugly dyke" acted like them (even though she didn't, her actions being very benign in comparison) and are afraid she might get away with it because very few people would actually believe Rosie is a racist (even if some people have asked for an apology) as apart from their homophobic, racist selves where the accusation is easily seen for the truth that it is.

Think your reading way to much into what people are writing Fass. A little overboard don't you think?

I agree ...

Not only that they attribute it to some left wing conspiracy that makes good right wingers apologize :rolleyes: Is Richards even "Right wing" hell I dont even know if Gibson is.

I think what the points that people are trying to make is that left wingers tend to be the ones crying racist whilst they themselves seem to be immune to being a racist. Simple as that. Don't think you need to be a right winger to feel that way. Alot in the middle are scratching there heads half the time about being PC.

I think what the points that people are trying to make is that left wingers tend to be the ones crying racist whilst they themselves seem to be immune to being a racist. Simple as that. Don't think you need to be a right winger to feel that way. Alot in the middle are scratching there heads half the time about being PC.

And I have seen nothing in this story or any of the other name drops to show that their points are based in reality

I'm loving the hypocrisy. This thread is basically for people upset at not being able to call people "******" or "dyke" any more without suffering social consequences for it feigning outrage that a "big, fat, ugly dyke" acted like them (even though she didn't, her actions being very benign in comparison) and are afraid she might get away with it because very few people would actually believe Rosie is a racist (even if some people have asked for an apology) as apart from their homophobic, racist selves where the accusation is easily seen for the truth that it is.

This is about US tv. Technically you shouldn't care about it. Indeed, dismissing discussing this as insular would seem to be the order of the day.

And I have seen nothing in this story or any of the other name drops to show that their points are based in reality

Exactly the point really. It shows me that PC is way out of control. People jump on the slightest bit of racism. Could be Rosie be called a racist? Sure she can by what she said. As long as Chinese are upset about it then it is racism. I personally got called out by my cousins Chinese wife for talking in a Chinese accent. Was harmless joking around really. She said that was racist and got mad about it. Is that a overreacting way to look at it? Sure I think so but in todays PC world it is not ok to be white and say things about another race that could be at all considered by anyone of that race or any other race to be racist.
As far as the OP and the others coming down on Rosie. I think its a natural reaction by people to get pissed off and react negatively to this over PC world. As far as blaming the liberal left. The blame is where it should be. The reason is they have created the over PC world that we currently live in.

This is about US tv. Technically you shouldn't care about it. Indeed, dismissing discussing this as insular would seem to be the order of the day.

When it came to the thread of Pearl Harbor day someone I could have swore from Sweden said they could care less because it wasn't there country. Wonder why this one is so interesting?;)

Think your reading way to much into what people are writing Fass. A little overboard don't you think?

No, I think he hit the nail on the head.

Exactly the point really. It shows me that PC is way out of control. People jump on the slightest bit of racism. Could be Rosie be called a racist? Sure she can by what she said. As long as Chinese are upset about it then it is racism. I personally got called out by my cousins Chinese wife for talking in a Chinese accent. Was harmless joking around really. She said that was racist and got mad about it. Is that a overreacting way to look at it? Sure I think so but in todays PC world it is not ok to be white and say things about another race that could be at all considered by anyone of that race or any other race to be racist.
As far as the OP and the others coming down on Rosie. I think its a natural reaction by people to get pissed off and react negatively to this over PC world. As far as blaming the liberal left. The blame is where it should be. The reason is they have created the over PC world that we currently live in.

Sure ... in some areas

But were you around with the big hoopla over wanting to ban the "We hate solders group" on myspace

All good and fine for the right to blame "PC" on the left then they go on the warpath when someone speeks bad about the military?


Either way even with as much as I hate the idea of censorship (and the fact that we should be about respect not our word choice) I am not too terribly heart broken over a rather bad comedian geting an even worse rep over what appears to be a racist joke

Being in the public eye is her job, when she fuckes up at it like any other job there are consequences for upsetting the consumers.

As a Chinese person, I don't think we find that sort of thing particularly offensive. Certainly not on the degree of calling a black person a '******', for example. That said, the 'ching chong ching' thing is perhaps the most unfunny joke in the history of the universe, and only eight year olds find it amusing. It's even worse than the 'Chicken crossing the road' in standard format. Anyone who says it is not fit to be called a comedian, and should also be set on fire.

Anyone who says it is not fit to be called a comedian, and should also be set on fire.

For some reason this made me laugh. Beautiful. :D

"She's a comedian in addition to being a talk show co-host. I certainly hope that one day they will be able to grasp her humor."

This actually struck me as more racist than the actual "ching chong ching chong" thing....

And yes, i think she should be burned, but not because of that, although i can see why some people would take it as offensive... and an apology might help even if she doesnt think she did anything wrong....

Though I am curious: why did she pick on the chinese?

Though I am curious: why did she pick on the chinese?

I think they are supposed to be bad drivers

I think they are supposed to be bad drivers

Dude, that's gay.

Dude, that's gay.

Appologize to the homosexuals now.
Just kidding

Wow, Rosie sure made an ass out of herself. Meh she doesn't need to apologize, the fact that she just made an ass of herself on national television is good enough for me.

Wow, Rosie sure made an ass out of herself. Meh she doesn't need to apologize, the fact that she just made an ass of herself on national television is good enough for me.

Agreed I dont think the apologies are neither hear nor there. Unlike personal apologies they almost never ring true and seem silly

Agreed I dont think the apologies are neither hear nor there. Unlike personal apologies they almost never ring true and seem silly

True, when someone is forced to publicly apologize, it never rings true. It's more like "Well I'm sorry I got caught being an ass." kind of deal.

Oh my God! Rosie O'Donal accused people in China of speaking Chinese? What a grotesque racist generalization! Doesn't she know what the national language of China is? I'm ashamed that she's become associated with liberal politics.

It appears that in China they do in fact speak Chinese. She officially did nothing wrong.

thank you! "it perpetuates stereotypes of chinese as foreigners"...no, it doesn't, but even if it did imply that people who live in china do not live in america...erm, what exactly is the problem there?

*sigh*

One, she didn't just say say 'ching chong, ching ching chong,' she actually gave a reasonable imitation of Mandarin (granted, it probably didn't sound a thing like it, but it clearly wasn't meant to be mocking).

Two, ineffectually imitating Mandarin is no different from ineffectually imitating French or German, not all Mandarin-speakers are ethnic Chinese, neither are all ethnic Chinese Mandarin-speakers.

Three, just shut up and stop being idiots.

thank you. she could just as easily have immitated swedish or german. I propose we sue jim hinson. DAMN YOU ROSIE, YOU IMPLIED CHINESE PEOPLE LIVE IN CHINA AND SPEAK CHINESE! how horrid.

Or the Swedish Chef in the Muppets. OMGZWTF! I DEMAND RESTITUTION FROM JIM HENSON'S ESTATE FOR THIS AWFUL MISREPRESENTATION OF SWEDISH LANGUAGE!

Or, I could just loosen up, like Rosie tells me to. I think I'll listen to Rosie.

except he allready proposed that. drat.

As a Chinese person, I don't think we find that sort of thing particularly offensive.

thank you!! I agree, she's not terribly funny, but demanding an apology is just rediculous.

Though I am curious: why did she pick on the chinese?

it's traditionally "the other side of the world" and the language is much easier to imitate and have people get what you're trying to do than, say, russian. every time I attempt to fake russian morphemes they come out german. :(

--

I believe we have the grounds here for an international incident. when she refuses to apologise, red china will demand she be turned over for punishment. the US would probably send her right over, glad to be rid of her, but on the off chance they don't, we'll have WWIII on our hands. way to go, rosie.

Now if Rosie called Chinese people Gooks, then we'd have a problem.

personally i think she should apologise to starving people for eating all the pies.

according to the 'article' she's a comedien.

she needs to work on her act. that was lame.

personally i think she should apologise to starving people for eating all the pies.

according to the 'article' she's a comedien.

she needs to work on her act. that was lame.

I think I finally found a quote for my sig.

I think I finally found a quote for my sig.

w00t! got sigged! finally achieved what i see as the ultimate aim of an NSer.
yeh, i'm an attention seeker

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Rosie O'Donnell is lesbian isn't she?
I'm sure she would find gay/lesbo jokes insulting.
Yet she thinks its fine to just say ignorant things about the Chinese language?
Fuck double-standards.

For the honor of the Asians... I give you a Rosie Fat joke.

I guess it's a good thing she is a lesbian, because she'd end up killing every guy she met because she'd demand to be on top.

w00t! got sigged! finally achieved what i see as the ultimate aim of an NSer.
yeh, i'm an attention seeker

It was the pie thing.

It's ok. She doesn't like men, so there's no chance of me being asked to hit it.

Are you sure she's not just claiming to be a lesbian so she feels she has an excuse for men to refuse her?

Are you sure she's not just claiming to be a lesbian so she feels she has an excuse for men to refuse her?

http://images.usatoday.com/life/_photos/2006/04/06/rosie-odonnell.jpg

That's Rosie's wife, the blonde woman. So, for all of you crying "big, fat, ugly lesbian" she can still hit and lick better women than all of you. :)

personally i think she should apologise to starving people for eating all the pies.

according to the 'article' she's a comedien.

she needs to work on her act. that was lame.

I think I found a voice for my opinion on Rosie O'Donnell.

I'm loving the hypocrisy. This thread is basically for people upset at not being able to call people "******" or "dyke" any more without suffering social consequences for it feigning outrage that a "big, fat, ugly dyke" acted like them (even though she didn't, her actions being very benign in comparison) and are afraid she might get away with it because very few people would actually believe Rosie is a racist (even if some people have asked for an apology) as apart from their homophobic, racist selves where the accusation is easily seen for the truth that it is.Agreed!

Or the Swedish Chef in the Muppets. OMGZWTF! I DEMAND RESTITUTION FROM JIM HENSON'S ESTATE FOR THIS AWFUL MISREPRESENTATION OF SWEDISH LANGUAGE!Of course you realize that the Sweedish Chef was the ONLY Muppet on the show to have real hands.

sounds like discrimination to me...:mad: ;) :D

http://images.usatoday.com/life/_photos/2006/04/06/rosie-odonnell.jpg

That's Rosie's wife, the blonde woman. So, for all of you crying "big, fat, ugly lesbian" she can still hit and lick better women than all of you. :)

Nah, she's just fat, ugly and rich.

I don't give a damn that she's a lesbian, there's far more important things to concern myself with, like Chex-Mix. Delicious.

Nah, she's just fat, ugly and rich.

Which just makes her financially different from you, then.

http://images.usatoday.com/life/_photos/2006/04/06/rosie-odonnell.jpg

That's Rosie's wife, the blonde woman. So, for all of you crying "big, fat, ugly lesbian" she can still hit and lick better women than all of you. :)

:confused: I thought they got "divorced" a short while after their marriage.

I agree ...

Not only that they attribute it to some left wing conspiracy that makes good right wingers apologize :rolleyes: Is Richards even "Right wing" hell I dont even know if Gibson is.
dunno about Gibson, but Richards did apologise... several times... In public...

Which just makes her financially different from you, then.

Admittedly, yeah.

But she's not an alcoholic. Let's see her match me on that :D

I betcha I could drink her under the table!

Remember when you see a fat or ugly person with a really hot skinny person. They're either really good in bed, or they're rich.

:confused: I thought they got "divorced" a short while after their marriage.

No, they're still together, I believe. They got married when Gavin Newsom authorised gay couples to get married in San Franscisco, but those marriages were later voided by the California Supreme court, what with the US being hopelessly behind the times.

No, they're still together, I believe. They got married when Gavin Newsom authorised gay couples to get married in San Franscisco, but those marriages were later voided by the California Supreme court, what with the US being hopelessly behind the times.

So they're not even married anymore....

Ugly, fat, repulsive, irrevelant.

Now we can add outdated, racist and tasteless.

Ugly, fat, repulsive, irrevelant.

Now we can add outdated, racist and tasteless.

Was there a time when she was in date?

Admittedly, yeah.

But she's not an alcoholic. Let's see her match me on that :D

Vagitarianism among women beats all other substance abuse.

Was there a time when she was in date?

I think when she was in that abomination of an adaptation of "Harriet the Spy" people thought she was "in date."

No, they're still together, I believe. They got married when Gavin Newsom authorised gay couples to get married in San Franscisco, but those marriages were later voided by the California Supreme court, what with the US being hopelessly behind the times.

oh. I just thought I heard something about she filing for seperation from Rosie or something. Then again, it was one one of those "Entertainment Tonight" shows... so I wasn't paying much attention to it. :p

So they're not even married anymore....

Because the US being the homophobic society that it is, they never were.

Because the US being the homophobic society that it is, they never were.

So, you equate Bush and his administration to the people in the United States?

I think when she was in that abomination of an adaptation of "Harriet the Spy" people thought she was "in date."

She was never in-date.

I think when she was in that abomination of an adaptation of "Harriet the Spy" people thought she was "in date."

not that movie with Dan Aykroyd... Exit to Eden.

IMDB'ed... it's close enough... in the mid 90's.

Oh boohoo.

Get over it.

She was never in-date.

Like I said, people thought she was, but she was decidedly "the suck".

not that movie with Dan Aykroyd... Exit to Eden.

IMDB'ed... it's close enough... in the mid 90's.
Terrifying, repressed memories have been brought up.

http://images.usatoday.com/life/_photos/2006/04/06/rosie-odonnell.jpg

That's Rosie's wife, the blonde woman. So, for all of you crying "big, fat, ugly lesbian" she can still hit and lick better women than all of you. :)

That is so heteronormative.

Well done.

So, you equate Bush and his administration to the people in the United States?

Read the polls, sweetie.

That is so heteronormative.

No, it isn't.

Read the polls, sweetie.

Polls can be skewed or biased sunshine.

Polls can be skewed or biased sunshine.

With amendments passed on the other hand they paint a very clear picture, pumpkin.

No, it isn't.

Oh yes it is. Judging Rosie by the hetero standards of who she can - for want of a better word - pull.

Terrifying, repressed memories have been brought up.


I liked her in Fatal Instinct (http://imdb.com/title/tt0106873/).

With amendments passed on the other hand they paint a very clear picture, pumpkin.

States have a right to make those amendments, In case you have forgotten, states have also approved gay marriage poppin' fresh.

With amendments passed on the other hand they paint a very clear picture, pumpkin.

Terribly written amendments, I might add.

Ruined the benefits packages that corporations had set up for same-sex couples, drove a lot of program administrators nuts on the matter.

States have a right to make those amendments, In case you have forgotten,

How is that relevant to your attempt to deny that the US is a homophobic place? They still passed them, you know.

states have also approved gay marriage poppin' fresh.

The only one that has has not done so by a vote, schnookums, so that says nothing to the contrary of the polls and election results that expose the US public to be the rubes we all know they are.

Terribly written amendments, I might add.

Ruined the benefits packages that corporations had set up for same-sex couples, drove a lot of program administrators nuts on the matter.

Well, homophobes aren't exactly lauded for their diction or analytical capability, so that's just to be expected.

How is that relevant to your attempt to deny that the US is a homophobic place? They still passed them, you know.


In case you have forgotten, Bush Marriage amendment banning gay marriage has fell so badly it was worthy of a blooper reels of US Presidential failures. The Congress that voted it down by a wide margin were also the same people who were voted in by the people of the United States.

In case you have forgotten, Bush Marriage amendment banning gay marriage has fell so badly it was worthy of a blooper reels of US Presidential failures. The Congress that voted it down by a wide margin were also the same people who were voted in by the people of the United States.

And yet you have the polls that consistently show the homophobic sentiments of the US public and the amendments. By the by, the Senate didn't vote it down by a large margin at all - it actually got a majority the last time it was voted on (49 against 48), but not the two thirds needed for constitutional amendments, so don't try to claim untruths, please. It failed, yes, but not because it was "voted down," but because it didn't get enough votes.

And yet you have the polls that consistently show the homophobic sentiments of the US public and the amendments. By the by, the Congress didn't vote it down by a large margin at all - it actually got a majority the last time it was voted on (49 against 48), but not the two thirds needed for constitutional amendments, so don't try to claim untruths, please. It failed, yes, but not because it was "voted down," but because it didn't get enough votes.

Polls also said that Kerry would win in '04....

Might want to think about that.

Polls also said that Kerry would win in '04....

No, they didn't. He trailed Bush into the end.

Might want to think about that.

You might actually want to start getting a clue soon about what you're talking of? So far you've just either blatantly lied, or been deeply ignorant of the topic at hand.

I'm loving the hypocrisy. This thread is basically for people upset at not being able to call people "******" or "dyke" any more without suffering social consequences for it feigning outrage that a "big, fat, ugly dyke" acted like them (even though she didn't, her actions being very benign in comparison) and are afraid she might get away with it because very few people would actually believe Rosie is a racist (even if some people have asked for an apology) as apart from their homophobic, racist selves where the accusation is easily seen for the truth that it is.

actually i had no idea who she was before skimming through your exchanges on this thread apart from the fact that the OP thinks shes a 'liberal' or a 'lefty' or whatever (can't remember). basically she's fat and and, going on the evidence of this particular crack, a witless comedian. therefore i reserve the right to ridicule her on those grounds. that she is a lesbian and has a girlfriend had nothing to do with my original post and means nothing to me now.

No, they didn't. He trailed Bush into the end.



You might actually want to start getting a clue soon about what you're talking of? So far you've just either blatantly lied, or been deeply ignorant of the topic at hand.

and might I suggest that you stop generalizing.

Who honestly cares if someone says something "racist"?

People should be allowed to say whatever they want, no matter how smart, well informed, or completely idiotic it may be. As long as it isn't going to hurt anyone, like the whole yelling fire in a theatre situation, who cares?

Let her flab her mouth. She has every right to say what she said. These forced apologies actually make me sick to my stomach.

and might I suggest that you stop generalizing.

I've plenty of statistics and voting records and results to support my claims. All you've had so far have been falsities. I'm sorry that you'd like to live in denial as to the ugly attitudes of your compatriots, but that doesn't change the attitudes themselves or anything else for that matter.

I've plenty of statistics and voting records and results to support my claims. All you've had so far have been falsities. I'm sorry that you'd like to live in denial as to the ugly attitudes of your compatriots, but that doesn't change the attitudes themselves or anything else for that matter.

So you think that everyone in the United States is a homophobe?

So you think that everyone in the United States is a homophobe?

I think, and have facts to support it, that the US is a homophobic society. You need not question me on your strawmen.

If I was Rosie O Donnal I'd live in a box....

I think, and have facts to support it, that the US is a homophobic society. You need not question me on your strawmen.

You talk about these sources, and yet you haven't shown me any.

You talk about these sources, and yet you haven't shown me any.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050401-114205-2153r.htm
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/02/ballot.samesex.marriage/
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pages/results/ballot.measures/

Then again, to anyone who actually has a clue about the issue, I wouldn't have needed to present anything because this is widely known.

So, you care to invent new falsities now, or what?

I am reminded of this quote:

But the more you hate me the more you will learn. I am hard but I am fair! There is no racial bigotry here! I do not look down on niggers, kikes, wops or greasers. Here you are all equally worthless!

(Full Metal Jacket)

Disclaimer: I am Jewish, so not trying to insult anybody with this post.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050401-114205-2153r.htm
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/02/ballot.samesex.marriage/
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pages/results/ballot.measures/

Then again, to anyone who actually has a clue about the issue, I wouldn't have needed to present anything because this is widely known.

So, you care to invent new falsities now, or what?


Opposing same-sex marriage does not a homophobe make.

Opposing same-sex marriage does not a homophobe make.

Yes, yes it does. Just like opposing interracial marriages does a racist make.

I'm sexually attracted to males and opposed to same-sex marriage.

Mind, I'm opposed to state recognition of any marriage.

Yes, yes it does. Just like opposing interracial marriages does a racist make.

Or saying it is okay to tell chinese people to get a sense of humor.

If I was Rosie O Donnal I'd live in a box....

I don't think a box of that size is structurally feasible...

Mind, I'm opposed to state recognition of any marriage.

These people aren't, and that's not what they voted on. Be facetious all you want, it just reveals you're in want of an actual point.

Or saying it is okay to tell chinese people to get a sense of humor.

You're comparing someone mimicking Mandarin to someone who wants to ban Chinese people from marrying white people? What did you have to say about the Swedish chef? Should I be upset at it and demand restitution from Jim Henson?

These people aren't, and that's not what they voted on. Be facetious all you want, it just reveals you're in want of an actual point.

Let me explain my point to you:

Gay marriage is not a right. Government giving you any official slip of paper is not a right. Nobody violates your rights by not-issuing you any slip of paper.

Nor is gay marriage actually important.

Why? Because two people who live together and love each other and have a home and family ARE married, and Mr. Smith the Legislator can stomp his feet and whine and bitch and spit all he wants, until he gets blue in the face, and he still can't change that.

Yes, some people think gay sex is wrong. These people are not any kind of morally worse then the people that say eating pork is wrong, or marrying non-Jews is wrong - until they try to somehow prevent you from doing neither. Considering the lack of gay marriage does not in any way stop you from exercising your rights as a gay person... yeah, no violation of your rights there.

For the record: I am banned by law of my country from marrying a non-Jew.

Let me explain my point to you:

Gay marriage is not a right. Government giving you any official slip of paper is not a right. Nobody violates your rights by not-issuing you any slip of paper.

Actually, they do. Marriage is a right; read the Declaration of Human Rights, and also read the Swedish constitution. Your opinion on what is and is not a right is irrelevant to it actually being it.

Nor is gay marriage actually important.

I couldn't give a shit what you do or don't find important.

Why? Because two people who live together and love each other and have a home and family ARE married, and Mr. Smith the Legislator can stomp his feet and whine and bitch and spit all he wants, until he gets blue in the face, and he still can't change that.

You obviously have no idea what legal ramifications marriage has; not only are you ignorant of its status as a right, you actually think it exists beyond the law.

Yes, some people think gay sex is wrong. These people are not any kind of morally worse then the people that say eating pork is wrong,

Yes, they are.

or marrying non-Jews is wrong

People who say that are morally reprehensible.

- until they try to somehow prevent you from doing neither.

Are you under the false assumption that people's opinions are removed from reproach?

Considering the lack of gay marriage does not in any way stop you from exercising your rights as a gay person... yeah, no violation of your rights there.

It does stop you from exercising your right as a person, not just a gay person. It also robs you of any rights to the person you live with and love; you are treated like a stranger to them, with no visitation rights in hospitals, no rights to make decisions in that person's stead, no protection for your common children, no tax subsidies given others, no inheritance rights, no health benefits and so on and so on. Again, you obviously have no idea what marriage entails.

For the record: I am banned by law of my country from marrying a non-Jew.

Then your country is a racist shit hole. Then again, Israel (IIRC) being that should come as a surprise to no one.

Actually, they do. Marriage is a right; read the Declaration of Human Rights, and also read the Swedish constitution. Your opinion on what is and is not a right is irrelevant to it actually being it.

Actually, since I am neither a Swedish public official, or a signatory of the UNDHR, I am not bound by either documents. I also note that this is a discussion between two individuals.

I personally also do not give a shit about what is in the UNDHR.

I subscribe to the natural rights philosophy, sorry.


I couldn't give a shit what you do or don't find important.

Then don't have the discussion with me.


You obviously have no idea what legal ramifications marriage has

That's because they're different in any country.

Where I live, *anybody* that the ill person wishes to see has visitation rights.

Also, where I live, any two people who live together for an extended period of time can get the tax benefits, and other benefits of marriage. However, gay people, jews and non-Jews, and others, cannot be legally registered as married.

you actually think it exists beyond the law.

Yes, it does.


Yes, they are.

How so?


People who say that are morally reprehensible.

Why? Not having gay sex is a personal choice just as having gay sex is.
Not eating pork is equally such a church.

I think people should be free to make this choice, and to try and persuade their fellow man to make it.



Then your country is a racist shit hole.

Correct.

You're comparing someone mimicking Mandarin to someone who wants to ban Chinese people from marrying white people? What did you have to say about the Swedish chef? Should I be upset at it and demand restitution from Jim Henson?

You brought up the swedish chef again. You should get a sense of humor.

It was racist and douchy. Your attempt to defend it speaks volumes.

I never once mentioned marriage.

Actually, since I am neither a Swedish public official, or a signatory of the UNDHR, I am not bound by either documents. I also note that this is a discussion between two individuals.

I personally also do not give a shit about what is in the UNDHR.

I subscribe to the natural rights philosophy, sorry.

So, basically: "I don't care what the legal documents that define and list rights say, I'll say something isn't a right, and that's the way it'll be because I said so." Sorry, honey, I don't subscribe to the omnipotence of your feeble opinions' arbitration when it comes to what is and is not a right.

Then don't have the discussion with me.

There is no discussion to be had with someone who claims falsehoods and when exposed as the falsehoods they are then states that they will continue to stick to them anyway.

You brought up the swedish chef again. You should get a sense of humor.

I think the Swedish chef is hilarious. You're the one claiming it racist.

It was racist and douchy.

Well, as the one subject to it, I don't deem it one bit racist as it has no racist intent.

Your attempt to defend it speaks volumes. I never once mentioned marriage.

As does your inability to read what you're responding to.

So, basically: "I don't care what the legal documents that define and list rights say, I'll say something isn't a right, and that's the way it'll be because I said so." Sorry, honey, I don't subscribe to the omnipotence of your feeble opinions' arbitration when it comes to what is and is not a right.

Interesting. So you are not prepare to have an actual discussion?




There is no discussion to be had with someone who claims falsehoods and when exposed as the falsehoods they are then states that they will continue to stick to them anyway.

No, you have not exposed what I said as a falsehood. You merely showed that in a system of belief not based on a natural rights and negative-freedom based definitions of 'rights', getting fancy slips of paper is a right.

Under this definition, if a nation codes something into law, it's a 'right'.

For example, Israel's law considers serving in the Glorious Military a 'right' (under law, the military CANNOT deny a recruit entrance if they're somehow able to crawl into the recruitment office).

The UN Declaration of Human Rights actually also recognised 'having a job' as a right, and so forth.

Clearly this is ridiculous.

Well, as the one subject to it, I don't deem it one bit racist as it has no racist intent.


I was talking about the 'let's make fun of the chinese people' thing.

Not the swedish chef.

Tell you what, I'll go and ask the chinese person who lives with me what she feels about the o'donell female's attempt at humour. 'K.

I'm pretty sure she'll think it is racist and douchey also.

Interesting. So you are not prepare to have an actual discussion?

There is no discussion to be had with someone who makes up their own definitions of things when I do not buy those definitions, especially since they are factually wrong.

No, you have not exposed what I said as a falsehood. You merely showed that in a system of belief not based on a natural rights and negative-freedom based definitions of 'rights', getting fancy slips of paper is a right.

Yes, that "system of belief" being facts, instead of your opinion, which I must repeat I do not buy the arbitration of.

So, are you arguing that "something being in a Constitution makes it a right"?

Yep. Racist and douchey.

I was talking about the 'let's make fun of the chinese people' thing.

Not the swedish chef.

There is no difference between the two. Either they're both racist or none of them are. Would you call the Swedish chef racist? He obviously ridicules Swedes and the way we talk.

Tell you what, I'll go and ask the chinese person who lives with me what she feels about the o'donell female's attempt at humour. 'K.

I'm pretty sure she'll think it is racist and douchey also.

And I'll find someone Chinese who doesn't think so and we can have ourselves a gay, old anecdotal time.

Yep. Racist and douchey.

but comon Lacadaemon, it's not like she called Chinese people a racist slur, no, she just mocked the way they talk. /sarcasm.

So, are you arguing that "something being in a Constitution makes it a right"?

No, honey, you're the one arguing that you get to decide what is and is not a right. Added to that that you were factually wrong.

I was making an argument based on my understanding of natural rights.

You were making an argument based on the Swedish Constitution. Why the Swedish, God only knows.

(yes, I said God. Here, again: God, God, God, God, God, God).

Feh who cares what Gov. Co. says, if you want to have a homosexual as your husband/wife then go ahead and do it. Gov. Co. really should bump out of marriage.

Feh who cares what Gov. Co. says, if you want to have a homosexual as your husband/wife then go ahead and do it. Gov. Co. really should bump out of marriage.

And Wilgrove nails it.

I was making an argument based on my understanding of natural rights.

No, you were just stating an opinion that was factually wrong. Now you're trying to grasp at some sort of truthiness.

And Wilgrove nails it.

To me Marriage should be between the two person getting married and the person marrying them, whether they be a Father, a Rabbi, a Muslim holy man (forgot the name for them) or the crazy guy at the corner. The only possible reason Gov. Co. would have any interest in marriage is 1. census and 2. the legality of the marriage involving death, divorces etc.

How can an opinion about natural rights be 'factually wrong'? Can you actually proof (and not by quoting someone else's opinion) that N is a right?

Note: The framers of the Swedish Constitution were people just like me, and their is just an opinion.

There is no difference between the two. Either they're both racist or none of them are. Would you call the Swedish chef racist? He obviously ridicules Swedes and the way we talk.


Fass, your are much smarter than I am, and I'll admit it. But in this case you are wrong. Call it being insular, call it being UScentric, call it what you will, but the point is that historically the chinese community in the US suffered a great deal of prejudice.

So there is a huge difference between the two. The swedes in the US were never indentured as slaves to the railroads. They never suffered discrimination under things like the chinese exclusion act.

If the O'Donell female showed up in black face and started to use the N word, you'd get it instantly. You would admit that it was racist and douchey tout de suite. And for good reason.

In this situation, the case is not dissimilar.

So it was stupid. And it was racist.

Fass, your are much smarter than I am, and I'll admit it. But in this case you are wrong. Call it being insular, call it being UScentric, call it what you will, but the point is that historically the chinese community in the US suffered a great deal of prejudice.

So there is a huge difference between the two. The swedes in the US were never indentured as slaves to the railroads. They never suffered discrimination under things like the chinese exclusion act.

If the O'Donell female showed up in black face and started to use the N word, you'd get it instantly. You would admit that it was racist and douchey tout de suite. And for good reason.

In this situation, the case is not dissimilar.

I saw a roast of some black comedian (I don't recall who it was) on youtube where they said ****** all the time; Andy Dick was on it and they constantly referred to him as a faggot (which he clearly is, by the way). For some reason nobody took it as racist and homophobic. Why? Because it lacked the intent to be, and it was still much, much more capable of causing offence than what Rosie or the Swedish chef did.

So it was stupid. And it was racist.

Only if it had racist intent, which I don't see that it did, especially since Rosie wasn't talking about Chinese people in the US, but Chinese people in China (who, if we're going to go that route, were never indentured to people from the US - well, if we don't take Walmart into account... - which negates your entire paragraph) and saying what it sounded like on her TV.

How can an opinion about natural rights be 'factually wrong'?

When it claims that something listed as a right is not a right. You didn't say "my opinion of natural rights says that it's not a right" (something I still dismiss seeing as I don't quite care that don't feel it to be a right when it clearly is one) - you just claimed that it wasn't a right. When pointed out that it factually is, you resort to truthiness under the guise of some philosophy I have no intent to entertain.

Note: The framers of the Swedish Constitution were people just like me, and their is just an opinion.

The Regeringsformen didn't have "framers;" it had Constitutional committees.

The Regeringsformen didn't have "framers;" it had Constitutional committees.

So the people who sat on them were still 'framers' as they framed it. :D

And them being organised in committees doesn't make it smarter.

Hell, it makes it dumber. :D

So the people who sat on them were still 'framers' as they framed it. :D

Sure, if you'd like to call the over 1000 people involved in a parliamentary process of Constitutional revision and reform "framers," but as we've seen you have some quite unique definitions of words.

And them being organised in committees doesn't make it smarter.

Hell, it makes it dumber. :D

Looky, another opinion I'm not gonna entertain. :)

Sure, if you'd like to call the over 1000 people involved in a parliamentary process of Constitutional revision and reform "framers," but as we've seen you have some quite unique definitions of words.



Yeah, why not?

'Framers' - people who 'frame' a document. Clearly, their number has no relevance to the function.

I saw a roast of some black comedian (I don't recall who it was) on youtube where they said ****** all the time; Andy Dick was on it and they constantly referred to him as a faggot (which he clearly is, by the way). For some reason nobody took it as racist and homophobic. Why? Because it lacked the intent to be, and it was still much, much more capable of causing offence than what Rosie or the Swedish chef did.

No dude. People over here* pretty much accept that using the N word is not cool. I don't know what you saw but all I can say is that Ted Danson - from cheers - tried the blackface routine and the N word and it ended his career. See also Micheal Richards.

Only if it had racist intent, which I don't see that it did, especially since Rosie wasn't talking about Chinese people in the US, but Chinese people in China (who, if we're going to go that route, were never indentured to people from the US - well, if we don't take Walmart into account...) and saying what it sounded like on her TV.

Intent is irrelevant. If you have to stoop to ridiculous sterotypes to get a cheap laugh then you have failed as a comedian. Making fun of the chinese accent is no more funny than that Peter Sellers Indian shit in the sixties (which is also racist and douchy). I would have hoped that by the 21'st century we would have moved beyond that type of crap. I guess not however. Moreover Rosie might not have been talking about chinese people in the US, but there is still a tremendous amount of them who are here and take it to heart.

Anyway, the point is, unlike strategic bombing in WWII, which we can happily condemn knowing it will never effect us, making a stand against racist thoughts today actually might make a difference.

Yeah, why not?

'Framers' - people who 'frame' a document. Clearly, their number has no relevance to the function.

You must be quite unfamiliar with how a parliamentary committee works and how it garners opinions from large wafts of society before implementing certain legislation; for instance, special interest groups pertaining to sections of the Constitution dealing with provisions affecting them especially, which would of course by your definition inflate the number of "framers" exponentially. In any case, rendering the word meaningless.

No dude. People over here* pretty much accept that using the N word is not cool. I don't know what you saw but all I can say is that Ted Danson - from cheers - tried the blackface routine and the N word and it ended his career.

I've no idea who that is, so I cannot comment; all I can comment on is this, and there flew words like "spic, kike, and gook" all over and everyone laughed, nobody taking it as an airing of actual degrading racial slurs because the intent was clear. I see Rosie's intent clearly; she was mimicking what it sounded like on her TV, nothing more, nothing less in an attempt to convey the internationalisation of the news (which, by the way, she exaggerated, because I hardly even know who Danny DeVito is, let alone knew he was drunk on some chat show.) She did exactly what the Swedish chef does, and as I'm not in the least bit convinced of that being racist, I shan't be of this either.

See also Micheal Richards.

Michael Richards had a hurtfully racist intent.

Intent is irrelevant.

Rendering all further discussion with you moot.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/12092006/gossip/pagesix/rosie_to_asians__loosen_up_pagesix_.htm

Since I believe it is indicative of an attitude as obtuse as that displayed by Michael Richards towards blacks, I believe Rosie O'Donnell needs to apologize to whoever is the most objectionable representative of Chinese possible.

After all, Richards has to apologize to Al Sharpton, and Mel Gibson has to apologize to some Jewish guy, so I think it's only fair that we find the biggest and most vitriolic Chinese public relations person we can find and force Rosie O'Donnell to her knees and have her publicly admit her shame and regret over such an offensive remark.

Oh wait - she's not a Republican. Never mind.

Rosie O'Donnell is not funny, period. And her bitching out Kelly Ripa for telling Clay Aiken to take his hand off her face and making out that it was a "homophobic" reaction should tell you that the woman's connection to reality iis not all that solid. The faster that embarrassment is off The View, the better.

The faster that embarrassment is off The View, the better.

The View itself is an embarrassment, to the people on it and to the people who watch it...

So, basically: "I don't care what the legal documents that define and list rights say, I'll say something isn't a right, and that's the way it'll be because I said so." Sorry, honey, I don't subscribe to the omnipotence of your feeble opinions' arbitration when it comes to what is and is not a right.



There is no discussion to be had with someone who claims falsehoods and when exposed as the falsehoods they are then states that they will continue to stick to them anyway.

Legal documents in your corner of the world. Or do you think that Sweden should be forced to obey American laws? They are legal... just not in Sweden.

That said, I'm glad I know other Swedes... you don't precisely make me want to rush out and embrace Swedish cultural values and history... should we consider you a representative of your nation?

*doesn't read topic*

Well, she's not far off. No offence, but Chinese isn't the most variable language when it comes to sounds.

Besides, she wouldn't be have been asked to apologise, had she said something about, say, the Germans; "Ach hoogen harfargen Danny DeVito!"

a rep for O'Donnell said, "She's a comedian..."
wow. news to me.

Legal documents in your corner of the world. Or do you think that Sweden should be forced to obey American laws? They are legal... just not in Sweden.

I also referred to the declaration of human rights, that's global. I can also refer to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. That's pan-European. Or to Loving vs Virginia. That's from the US. They all define marriage as a right, making the "marriage is not a right" crowd factually wrong.

That said, I'm glad I know other Swedes... you don't precisely make me want to rush out and embrace Swedish cultural values and history... should we consider you a representative of your nation?

Oh, you wound me so. I guess Sweden should at least appreciate needing something representative of it to be taken as a negative - certain other countries have reputations that precede their citizens...

They all define marriage as a right, making the "marriage is not a right" crowd factually wrong.

You do understand the difference between a legal right and a moral right?

You do understand the difference between a legal right and a moral right?

You do understand that the fight for gay marriages is a fight for a legal right? A legal right that very much exists, no matter how many times the ignorant repeat the untruth to the contrary.

"Moral rights?" Arbitrary hogwash that I've no interest in when it comes to the issue of marriage, which is demonstrably a right; so much so a right, that it is a defined fundamental human right. So spare me the libertarian nonsense.

I see Rosie's intent clearly; she was mimicking what it sounded like on her TV, nothing more, nothing less in an attempt to convey the internationalisation of the news (which, by the way, she exaggerated, because I hardly even know who Danny DeVito is, let alone knew he was drunk on some chat show.)
Danny Devito's drunkeness didn't in fact make the news here in China which makes her a lying, unfunny racist.

You do understand that the fight for gay marriages is a fight for a legal right? A legal right that very much exists, no matter how many times the ignorant repeat the untruth to the contrary.

Regardless, you are engaging in equivocation.

Your opponent, pages ago, pointed out that legalities do not determine what is and is not a right. Thus it is clear that she was not talking about legal rights. You cannot demonstrate that a moral right to marriage exists with reference to a legal right to marriage.

The moral right is, of course, what is actually relevant, because what the law says is a pretty bad argument for what ought to be. Or is it your view that denying gays marriage equality would be more justified if there were no Loving v. Virginia and no mention of marriage rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? If the Universal Declaration of Human Rights included the right not to live in a society where gay relationships have legal recognition, would you oppose gay marriage?

"Moral rights?" Arbitrary hogwash

Hardly, but irrelevant.

that I've no interest in when it comes to the issue of marriage, which is demonstrably a right; so much so a right, that it is a defined fundamental human right.

And why should we care that the laws of several countries and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes it as a right? What bearing does this have on what the law actually should be?

So spare me the libertarian nonsense.

I don't know what sense you're using "libertarian" in, but it's quite possible that I don't qualify. Regardless, my intent has merely been to illustrate that your argument illustrates a common lack of understanding of an important distinction, not that moral rights actually exist, or that your conclusion is wrong.

(For what it's worth, I certainly accept that marriage is a right, both morally and legally, but because I think laws are pretty irrelevant to moral questions, I really couldn't care less as to what the Supreme Court and the UDHR think on the subject.)

Regardless, you are engaging in equivocation.

I'm engaging in ignoring the irrelevant, and that being the claims of something not being a right when it is clearly defined as one.

Your opponent, pages ago, pointed out that legalities do not determine what is and is not a right.

But they do once those rights are codified. There is no claiming that something isn't a right when it is already a right.

Thus it is clear that she was not talking about legal rights.

And I made it clear that I was not the least bit interested in her irrelevant "philosophy" which claimed the opposite of what already is.

You cannot demonstrate that a moral right to marriage exists with reference to a legal right to marriage.

But I can ignore the claims to "moral rights" as the contextual irrelevance they are.

The moral right is, of course, what is actually relevant, because what the law says is a pretty bad argument for what ought to be.

The thing being that this isn't a discussion of what "ought to be" - this is a discussion of what is. She claimed marriage wasn't a right, while it clearly is.

Or is it your view that denying gays marriage equality would be more justified if there were no Loving v. Virginia and no mention of marriage rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?

No, that would make it more justified to deny everyone the right to marriage as these people claim to want; the snag is that marriage already is a right. If all were denied marriage, then there'd be no point for gay people to strive for it - no one else would be enjoying a benefit the right gives, but all would be treated equally in having their relationships count as much. They don't, however. Refusing the discussion of the inequality that some have a right others are denied with feeble allusions to some illusory "moral right's non-existence" which flies against the real right those other people are already granted is a cop out; it's ignoring what is and pretending that it isn't.

If the Universal Declaration of Human Rights included the right not to live in a society where gay relationships have legal recognition, would you oppose gay marriage?

Irrelevant.

Hardly, but irrelevant.

Nice to see you admit the irrelevance.

And why should we care that the laws of several countries and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes it as a right? What bearing does this have on what the law actually should be?

And why should I care what she thinks isn't a "moral right" when there is already a real right out there?

I don't know what sense you're using "libertarian" in, but it's quite possible that I don't qualify. Regardless, my intent has merely been to illustrate that your argument illustrates a common lack of understanding of an important distinction, not that moral rights actually exist, or that your conclusion is wrong.

What you miss is that I don't have problems understanding her "philosophy" - I simply do not acknowledge its relevance to the discussion of the legal right of marriage.

(For what it's worth, I certainly accept that marriage is a right, both morally and legally, but because I think laws are pretty irrelevant to moral questions, I really couldn't care less as to what the Supreme Court and the UDHR think on the subject.)

And I really couldn't care less about her "philosophy."

No, that would make it more justified to deny everyone the right to marriage as these people claim to want; the snag is that marriage already is a right. If all were denied marriage, then there'd be no point for gay people to strive for it - no one else would be enjoying a benefit the right gives, but all would be treated equally in having their relationships count as much. They don't, however. Refusing the discussion of the inequality that some have a right others are denied with feeble allusions to some illusory "moral right's non-existence" which flies against the real right those other people are already granted is a cop out; it's ignoring what is and pretending that it isn't.

That is not the point I have read you as making, but if that is the point you wish to make, I have no disagreement.

but comon Lacadaemon, it's not like she called Chinese people a racist slur, no, she just mocked the way they talk. /sarcasm.
Yeah, well, attempted sarcasm aside, I think you hit on a point here - she didn't use a racial slur. To my mind she wasn't being racist, nor did she actually mock the way the chinese talked. The point as it came across to me, was simply:

"[Unintelligible foreign language] Danny DeVito [Unintelligible foreign language] The View"

I fail to see what she's got to apologize for. And why american-chinese would be offended. But maybe I simply have a thicker skin? I kinda doubt it...
Feh who cares what Gov. Co. says, if you want to have a homosexual as your husband/wife then go ahead and do it. Gov. Co. really should bump out of marriage.
Maybe they should, but as long as they haven't bumped out of it - we should care what they say about it, since it affects the citizens directly.