Kansas had to know this was coming. It was just a matter of time. “The Daily Show,” the influential and hilarious satirical “fake news” show starring Jon Stewart, is taking on the evolution debate, with a four-night series starting tonight (see it on Comedy Central at 10 p.m.).
And, yes, the show’s producers say that the Kansas State Board of Education debate will be one of the featured segments.
Kansans who care about good science and the state’s image might have to laugh to keep from crying.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/8
- XXX on Open thread 11/8
- Daniel on Open thread 11/8
- Skeptic on Death penalty review promised
- cosmos_originally on Death penalty review promised
- Daniel on Open thread 11/8
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/8
- oliveoyl on Roberts already wants a fourth term
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/8
- Daniel on Open thread 11/8
60 Comments
Prepare for a beatdown. It’s gonna hurt.
I believe Stewart’s first guest tonight in the week-long extravaganza on the anti-science movement is Chris Mooney, and his book The Republican War on Science. It’s out now, and from what I’ve read, seems to be a good wrapup of the newest fad in America: Anti Science.
Hugs and kisses to crazy Republicans for embarrassing all of us – but most of all yourselves.
Yup, the American Taliban is the Republican party.
Once again you liberals change the issue and set up a straw man argument.
Republicans are not against science, they are against evolution and other politically driven liberal ideologies forced into the scientific realm.
If I were a leftist, I would not be so quick to throw the word monkey around! That smarmy little prick “Stewart” needs a smack!
Hey Nathan,
I just used the Science Citation Index, The Humanities Citation Index and the Social Sciences Citation Index from 1989 to present to find some interesting results. When I typed in “intelligent design” 288 hits were returned and of those 288, 1 had the meaning used here and was published in a minor impact peer reviewed journal.
On the other hand, when I typed in “natural selection”, “common descent”, and “evolution”, over 90,000 hits were returned. Obviously I couldn’t count how many appeared in peer-reviewed journals, but it was certainly tens of thousands.
Now what were you saying about liberal agenda and politically driven ideologies??????
Nathan,”liberals change the issue and set up a straw man argument.”???
” In a speech on May 21 mentioning the importance of integrity in government, business and the military, Bush veered into a challenge to unidentified “people” who practice moral relativism. “It may seem generous and open-minded to say that everybody, on every moral issue, is equally right,” Bush said, at Louisiana State University. “But that attitude can also be an excuse for sidestepping life’s most important questions.”
No doubt. But who’s made such arguments? Hannibal Lecter? The White House declined to name names.”
Sounds like your Plastic Jesus, Bush, used a straw man.
“On May 19, Bush was asked about a plan by his Democratic opponent, Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.), to halt shipments that are replenishing emergency petroleum reserves. Bush replied by saying we should not empty the reserves — something nobody in a responsible position has proposed. “The idea of emptying the Strategic Petroleum Reserve would put America in a dangerous position in the war on terror,” Bush said. “We’re at war.”
Ah-Ha! another straw man ploy.
” The president has used a similar technique on the stump, when explaining his decision to go to war in Iraq in light of the subsequent failure to find stockpiles of forbidden weapons. In the typical speech, Bush explains the prewar intelligence indicating Saddam Hussein had such weapons, and then presents in inarguable conclusion: “So I had a choice to make: either trust the word of a madman, or defend America. Given that choice, I will defend America every time.”
Missing from that equation is the actual choice Bush confronted: support continued U.N. weapons inspections, or go to war.”
Hmmm… Another strawman set-up by our wiley leader!
” On May 4, Bush was discussing the war on terrorism, when he said: “Some say, ‘Well, this is just a matter of law enforcement and intelligence.’ No, that’s not what it is.” On May 10, he posited: “The natural tendency for people is to say, oh, let’s lay down our arms. But you can’t negotiate with these people. . . . Therapy won’t work.”
It is not clear who makes such arguments, however. All but a few lawmakers in both parties support military action against al Qaeda, and Kerry certainly has not proposed opening talks with Osama bin Laden or putting him on the couch.”
Obviously another straw man by Our Glorious Leader.
“Bush has been more active than most in creating phantom opponents: During the 2000 campaign, Bush fought against those who say “it’s racist to test” students — even though his opponent, Al Gore, was saying no such thing.”
Oh My! Another straw man!
“Bush was discussing Iraq when he said: “There’s a lot of people in the world who don’t believe that people whose skin color may not be the same as ours can be free and self-govern. I reject that. I reject that strongly. I believe that people who practice the Muslim faith can self-govern. I believe that people whose skins . . . are a different color than white can self-govern.”
The columnist George Will asked who Bush was talking about, then warned of the “swamp one wanders into when trying to deflect doubts about policy by caricaturing and discrediting the doubters.” There are some, including in the State Department, who are skeptical about the ability of the United States to spread democracy in the Arab world, but that is a far less sweeping argument than the one Bush knocked down.”
Well Nathan, looks like I just knocked down your claim that it’s those pesky liberals that use straw men. You were wrong.
“Republicans are not against science, they are against evolution and other politically driven liberal ideologies forced into the scientific realm.”
Nathan, Evolution IS science…Intelligent Design is so much Voo-Doo. Republicans are against anything post 1950. You all live in a fool’s past.
Bravissimo, Vlad. You certainly impaled Nathan. I guess you’re out for blood. You put a stake right through his heart. You’ve got the magic bullet for keeping these head cases at bay !! (Sorry, :-{, I couldn’t resist).
Why is it that leftists only embrace science when it suits them? Why were the leftists so quick to suppress evidence of certain unpleasant racial realities? The Bell Curve proved that blacks are genetically inferior in terms of intelligence and prone to certain pathologiacl behaviours, Yet we are to disregard science in this matter and adhere to the leftists egalitarian fantatsies as a matter of faith? All of you lefetists are vile hypocrites!
Ian,
For a guy with an alleged IQ of 157 you certainly are a numbnuts. The Bell Curve is a mass market book that was not peer reviewed. Certainly it draws upon some peer reviewed information, but it is hardly an attempt at dispassionate, disinterested construction of a scientific theory. The authors had a goal in mind and used selected information adroitly to make a point they had already decided upon before embarking on the book.
I can’t understand your fanatical racism. I’ve been clling you a spic, a beaner, a mud person, etc. You rightly point out that you shouldn’t be lumped in with all other people with Hispanic surnames. Don’t you see that’s just what you’re doing with everyone who doesn’t strike you right? You have simplified the complexities of history down to your narrow-minded “race is the answer to everything wrong in the world” dictum. As I said before, you’re proof that IQ is not necessarily correlated with intelligence. Grow up.
I am a realist, not a racist! Beaners and negros are destroyers of civilisation at worst and parasites at best! Equality is a myth!
Ian,
Call what you believe whatever you want. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it’s probably a duck.
ATTENTION ALL!!!!!I just busted Hank. He’s Nathan! the proof is on the thread,
“Does Pat Roberts still think Saddam sought uranium?” Go read it for yourself!
XXX Hoorah! I can’t wait to read that one. I had long suspected hank was nathan. I think I even posted that speculation.
As to this thread, well what can ya say for the right?They got Ian and nathan AKA Hank.
I say that proves evolution! I’m definitely more evolved than the racist Ian. And while I am sure of my own personal species and how it cae to be……..nathan does not seem to know who or what he is.
JR as a matter of fact, I believe you have posted to that effect. And now you have your proof.
Why is it such a stretch to believe that God created the world — and He used some forms of evolution to make us who we are today? I know several “creation scientists,” who feel as I do — that God created it all — but that science is also a part of His creation.
Man descended from pine nuts. The mother tree burned down in the last California fire (Yes, I’m afraid your all descended from a tree in California…maybe the tree huggers are right).
Hey, just ask Connie for some lsd and everything will be rosey.
Hank puts his hand in a sock called Nathan and mouths out:
“Once again you liberals change the issue and set up a straw man argument.
Republicans are not against science, they are against evolution and other politically driven liberal ideologies forced into the scientific realm.”
If only Republican craziness was limited to that. No, it goes well beyond. From misrepresenting and falsifying science on stem cell research, the environment including global warming, to evolution, to medicine and the FDA’s decisions, to Terry Schiavo (not in a vegitative state, Mr. Frist?), Republicans are simply against sciences in all fields. Period. They want to make up their own “science” to support their world view, and bypass the messy “scientific method.”
That’s the reason over 7,000 of the world’s leading scientists signed onto this statement to President Bush:
http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/interference/scientists-signon-statement.html
Here’s an excerpt that doesn’t even cover Congress or other Republican activities like being against the teaching of one of the pillars of science – evolution:
“The behavior of the White House on these issues is part of a pattern that has led Russell Train, the EPA administrator under Presidents Nixon and Ford, to observe, “How radically we have moved away from regulation based on independent findings and professional analysis of scientific, health and economic data by the responsible agency to regulation controlled by the White House and driven primarily by political considerations.”
Across a broad range of policy areas, the administration has undermined the quality and independence of the scientific advisory system and the morale of the government’s outstanding scientific personnel:
Highly qualified scientists have been dropped from advisory committees dealing with childhood lead poisoning, environmental and reproductive health, and drug abuse, while individuals associated with or working for industries subject to regulation have been appointed to these bodies.
Censorship and political oversight of government scientists is not restricted to the EPA, but has also occurred at the Departments of Health and Human Services, Agriculture, and Interior, when scientific findings are in conflict with the administration’s policies or with the views of its political supporters.
The administration is supporting revisions to the Endangered Species Act that would greatly constrain scientific input into the process of identifying endangered species and critical habitats for their protection.Existing scientific advisory committees to the Department of Energy on nuclear weapons, and to the State Department on arms control, have been disbanded.
In making the invalid claim that Iraq had sought to acquire aluminum tubes for uranium enrichment centrifuges, the administration disregarded the contrary assessment by experts at Livermore, Los Alamos and Oak Ridge National Laboratories.”
It goes on… read the whole thing from the link above.
How can anyone actually be worried about the representation of Kansas on a comedy show? Who cares? The people behind that show will portray anyone in any manner that they choose regardless of the truth or any of those pesky facts. All that matters to them is that it’s funny/entertaining.
Anyone worried about “The Daily Show” should start wondering if indeed they are the low hanging fruit.
“The people behind that show will portray anyone in any manner that they choose regardless of the truth or any of those pesky facts.”
Yes, but in this case, as in many with The Daily Show, the facts are overwhelmingly, without a doubt on their side.
It’s one of the few outlets for telling it like it is.
Hey Proud,Yeah, they’ll portray us as they want, but that doesn’t mean our State Board of Propagandizing Kids has to hand them the state on a silver platter!As my dear old daddy used to say, if you stick your ass in the air, somebody’s bound to kick it!
Hey Ian, do you know what a “pure” race is? An inbred race…which explains your IQ.
Have you ever heard of “hybrid vigor”? Probably not. It’s when people from two races(not different species, but just regional variants) have a child. That child is more vigorous and healthy than if they had a child with someone from their own region. This is because they usually have inherited the dominant genes from both parents. It has been proven that these progeny are more resistant to disease, live longer and have healthier children because of their “mixed” parents.
Hybrid vigor is a myth and race mixing is an affront to God!
Ian Santiago is a myth. Probably another of Nathan’s many abberent personalities, and an affront to everybody else!
Ian, either you are really that racist or you are just trying to create some drama on this blog. Instead of contributing intelligent dialogue you are baiting people.An idiot or cunning manipulator? Either way, you are an obvious a**hole.
Dear Sane Folks,
For what it’s worth, I think Ian is for real. His narrative of being a Spanish-descended, Cuban Imperialist, racist sectarian Catholic (the breakaway apostate sect St Pius X) has remained pretty constant over time. So has his not-so-secret fascination with swarthy men and what he wants their large pensies to do to him. It all fits together, if you get my drift.
Ian Santiago,
With that 157-point IQ of yours, I assume you’ve heard of the Habsburg Jaw? No? Well, it ISN’T a myth. It refers to the genetic weakenss that results from inbreeding–something that should be intimately familiar to you.
The only thing that negros are good for is filling up prison space and dropping dead from gunfire and aids! All of you low iq minorities and you monkey/beaner loving, self hating White leftists can call me El Diablo Blanco and kiss my White Cuban backside!
So, Ian is showing us his ass and inviting us to…do stuff to it.
Thanks for confirming that you are, in fact, a self-hating, closeted, racist submissive who craves non-white cock.
El Diablo Blanco? What an ego! You’re just a naughty little brat who likes to set fire to puppies. Kiss your white Cuban backside? No thanks! It’s got a smelly Cuban cigar stuck in it! Please take it outside!
Ian, I have to laugh at the way you always run from any serious or intelligent discussion. You’re such a silly little coward. I’ve never seen anyone with an IQ as high as you say your’s is sound so stupid and ignorant. You couldn’t even properly structure a sentence if your life depended on it.
I watched one segment of the Jon Stewart show this week, it was absolutely hilarious!!! I’m so proud to be a Kansan, we provide such comic relief to the rest of the country!
Damoon, I’ve been watching it too. I caught Monday and Tuesday; it’s a hoot! Not sure I enjoy being a laughing stock, tho. But that’s nothing new. Before the BOE, there’s always been Dorothy and Toto (darned little dog).Guess you just gotta be thick-skinned to be a Kansan.
You guys, take it easy on Ian. His vile remarks and his whole personality is a consequence of confronting the reality of cognitive dissonance. You see, when Gerald Ford proclaimed “Hispanics” a legitimate category in that famous OMB paper (this is for real, I read the paper), he did so out of profound but commonplace ignorance. His lack of knowledge about the differences between “Spanish” and mixed raced people was shared by almost all Americans to begin with. He merely institutionalized the ignorance. Then comes someone of predominantly Northern European ancestry with a Spanish last name. Fair in complexion, with blue eyes, with largely Celtic-Germanic ancestry typical of certain regions of Northern Spain, he finds himself looking in the mirror and wondering, “Why am I, all of a sudden, of the same culture and race as a typical Mexican-American?” It turns out many Cuban-origin people have to face this contradiction every day of their lives, since most of the people who left Cuba were Caucasian, often with indirect Northern European phenotypes. The problem really is not Ian’s. He is merely over-reacting to the stresses of dissonance. The ones who need the therapy first are the masses of ignorant Americans who think their Indian maid from Guatemala is of “Spanish” = “Hispanic” origin. Shame on you for making Mr. Ian mentally ill!!!! And as for you, Ian. I know how you feel. Cuban-Americans are disproprotionately successful in this country in all fields, from physics to music. Comprising only about 0.4% of the US population (3.9% of so-called “Hispanics”– it is merely academic that they are the third largest Latino group), people of Cuban-origin are way, way over-represented. Check the facts out for yourselves. The problem is that their successes are drowned out by being immersed in a mythic category of which they form only a very samll fraction. The failures of Mexican-Americans (65% of Latinos) and others who far outnumber Cuban-Americans and who are arbitrarily placed in the same category are consequently assigned to them. They can’t set the record straight, even if they were all physicists and Pulitzer Prize winners (and some have been already), for the “Hispanic” averaged-out statistics would still reflect the much larger whole. It must be tough. Ian, you live in a country that will never accept you. To the average American, including a few stupid Cubans who shamelessly endorse and milk the “Hispanic” set-asides for money, you are the same as a Mexican-American. The American public is just too brainwashed to see that when they discriminate against you because of your nationality, they are doing so against one of many who are of the same genes, ultimately, as they are!!! It is this last reality, which I find the most stupid of all. But, go get some psychiatric help, Ian, before you are consumed.
Dear Regardlessofthetruth,And just what is it that makes your brand of racism any less imbecilic than Ian’s?
truthregardless,In Ian’s case, I think it is much simpler. Xenophobia is common to all human beings. The Chinese had a very closed-door policy for thousands of years and regarded every non-Chinese as barbarians. Ancient Hebrews regarded Gentiles as unclean and were forbidden to associate with them (later broken by JC but that was thousands of years later.) The very idea of the foreigner importing foreign ideas, customs, and culture within the native borders of a different country was seen as a threat to the native nation. Such examples are peninsular Italians disregarding Sicily as an a part of Italy because of the Sicilians overwhelming diverse gene pool that included Moorish North African and later Arab amalgamations with native Etruscans that produced the populous tanned-black haired Italians of the present. Like the peninsular Italians, Ian deems such unions as a loss of his original culture, and as a result, bastardizes the hybrid children and sets himself up as completely separate from them. However, like the peninsular Italians did at the time, Ian fails to realize that those hybrid children still share a common genetic ancestry because of their etruscan blood. That is why Ian really does hate his own heritage, because when he condemns a hybrid person for their genetic condition, he inadvertently condemns BOTH gene pools, the indian AND the Spanish in them.
What Ian fears most is cultural diffusion. All the rhetoric of any racists irregardless of race always talk about fearing of becoming a “muddled race”. But even if mysogeny will not occur anymore (and that’s a BIG IF) cultural diffusion will still take place. Ian speaks English, Ian wears blue jeans, Ian probably even plays football or baseball. All proof of his being assimilated into what is known as “Americanism” DESPITE his much heralded Cuban ancestry. Why do you think the Ayatollah has made it illegal for Iranians to own satellite dishes? Because he fears that his subjects will become more and more “Americanized” by western TV. (hundreds of thousands of Iranians have em operational anyway.) Why do white American youths listen to rap music? Answer: Cultural diffusion. Ian, no matter how hard you try, you will never prevent the exchange of ideas between different cultures, to do so would be to put in effect a fascist state, and history has shown that fascists state always come crumbling down. So you can complain and insult me all you want Ian, because amalgamation and mysogeny has been going on since the dawn of mankind, and it is here to stay.
Jed,I was trying to point out that racism begets racism. When someone dumps another person into a category of people who are disparaged and that category is mythic, the net result is that the person will try to differentiate himself from the group he has been placed in. One such differentiation strategy is to resent the group to which he doesn’t truly belong (this part is not a rascist reaction, by the way, but a natural reaction to absurdity). Thus, Ian will “hate” brown-skinned mestizos knowing full well that he is not, scientifically, one of them. This becomes “rascism.” But then again, the categorizers were the original rascists. Another example is that exhibited by the hatred that so many people of Italian descent have for darker people. They want to distance themselves from people they are too dangerously close to being miscategorized as. I know this example is anecdotal, but I have personally witnessed this numerous times (OK, Italo-Americans, pour your vitriol on me!). Why can’t we be scientific about all of this? If you are going to categorize people into a very few racial “food groups”, then you had better find scientific justification for doing so. If 300 million Americans think the Earth is flat, it doesn’t prove it is so. If almost all Americans are unaware that “Spanish” is not the same thing as Indian, it should not result in the institutionalization of ignorance. I find it comical that we Americans as a group cannot accept that other countries have more than a single race in them. They lump people together as one race or ethnic group (e.g., “Hispanic”)without knowing, much less acknowledging, that the US does not have a monopoly on diversity. Why can’t a Cuban like Ian be simply Caucasian (the group which clearly, and probably correctly, he identifies with)like his genes say he is, and another Cuban, a black man, for example, be a black man. We expect us to stratify ourselves but deny that right to other nationals just simply because of our profound and seemingly indelible ignorance on this issue. By the way, to another writer, not all Italians have Etruscan ancestry, and degree of its influence varies greatly from place to place and person to person. Ian is not necessarily disparaging all Spaniards. Evidently, he is disparaging the darker ones. You should remember that Spain is really several nations, and that there are major cultural and ethnic regional differences.
CrusaderX,
I wish to address your thesis about Ian hating the “Spanish” in the mixed-race (hybrids) when he hates the hybrids. Although your presentation was prosaic and in good spirit, I have to pose a question: Doesn’t your logic extend also to Anglo-American people who hate Black Americans? It has already been demonstrated that Black Americans are at least 25% Caucasian in their genes. Can’t you use the same argument and accuse white racists in this country of hating the “English” in them, simply because they hate the mixture, i.e., Black Americans, that resulted?Also, is hating a criminal, for example, the same as hating yourself, because we all share, ultimately, a common human genetic origin? I think your logic was attractive emotionally, but misleading in its implications and application.
truthregardless,you mean how most peninsular Spaniards in the coastal south are darker and that the Spaniards of the northern hinterlands are fairer skinned? That fact was not lost on me. But there is a problem when you say that Ian should be regarded as “Caucasian”, because scientifically, racial differences are determined by FACIAL STRUCTURE not SKIN COLOR. They classify the races into 3 main groups: Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid. Consequently, Arabs are also considered CAUCASIANS, because of their facial structure and I don’t think Ian would like to be lumped together in that class. And I don’t quite understand your idea that Spain was a conglomerate of nations. What time period are you thinking about? Perhaps you are thinking about the time of the North African invasion when the southern half was governed by Islamic caliphates. Was that what you were thinking of?
truthregardless,You make a good point, however you seem to regard the hybrid individual as being racially divisible. For example: I, as a hybrid Filipino Puerto Rican would be a hypocrite if I made derrogatory racial comments on Ian’s Spanish heritage, because consequently, the Puerto Rican side of my family is very similar to Ian in the respect that they are fair-skinned and brunette. I as a hybrid individual can not simply cast aside either my Filipino heritage or the Spanish heritage without DENYING a part of my ancestry. You see, a white racist hates a purely black person for his being black. However, those same white racists who hate mullatos do not comprehend the fact that a bi-racial individual is not racially divisible. Individuals are indivisible is basically what my inner logic is. In Ian’s case, he cannot stand me, because I don’t fit neatly into his stereotypical view of the “Hispanics” who share in his gene pool. He even goes so far as to condemn fully white people as evidenced by his calling my girlfriend a “self hating guilt ridden bitch.” Now, if that is clearly not evidence of self-hatred of his own gene pool, then I don’t know what is.
Also, is hating a criminal, for example, the same as hating yourself, because we all share, ultimately, a common human genetic origin? I think your logic was attractive emotionally, but misleading in its implications and application
No, because hating a criminal for being a criminal is DIFFERENT from hating a criminal on the sole basis of his being of a particular race. There is a dichotomy between the cause of the hatred which you must address.
CrusaderX,There are Basque separatists in the northeast of Spain today, still active, still bombing other Spaniards. The Catalan people also are fighting for their independence. The Galicians in the Northwest of Spain have more affinity for the Celtic in themselves, and we often see their incarnation in vociferous Cubans like Ian. But really, Ian wouldn’t protest being called a Caucasian, even if it includes Arabic people (I am well aware of that, and by the way, Asiatic Indians are also Caucasians),SIMPLY BECAUSE HE kNOWS THAT MOST PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY ALSO KNOW THAT IT IS AMBIGUOUS. I am referring specifically to the U.S. Census and other questionnaires. This would diffuse his anger, since he would simultaneously be on the same “par” as an Irish Caucasian. He knows that most Americans have a unified, set ideation of what a so-called Hispanic is. In his mind, I believe, it is the exclusion from the Caucasian category that bothers him the most. He probably feels that denying his OBVIOUS phenotype is what happens when he is placed into the “Hispanic” category. This is a very, very real and common problem in Cuban-Americans. The stupid, unscientific category “Hispanics” has generated a tremendous identity crisis in Cuban-Americans. I see this in blogs day in and day out. I feel sorry for them. It’s not just Ian. Many others, and I have been collecting their blog messages. This nation is guilty of causing mental illness in these people. The young ones don’t know who they are (confused by the discrepancy between what their mirrors tell them and the discordant public categorizations), and their parents do, and it isn’t what the US government and most Americans think. It makes for an interesting psychological study. Imagine how you would feel if you had red hair, blue eyes, the features of a leprechaun, and you were always told you are dark-complexioned and look like Pancho Villa. But yes, there are Spanish regional differences even today. Also, you must not exaggerate the influence of Moorish ancestry. The reason most Americans always drag Moors into the picture is because they are trying to account for the darkness of so many Latinos, since Spaniards are Europeans. The problem is that they don’t know how important Indian and Black genes are in the coloring of Latinos, not Moorish genes. Spanish immigration to this country over its history has been almost nil. Check any almanac. Thus, to most American minds, “Spanish” = Latino = dark people. They simply haven’t seen too many Spaniards up close. But no matter how you put, it is ignorance.
To your other comment about criminals. I posed it as a question. The point was that disliking, for example, boats because they make you sea-sick is not the same as disliking all things made of lumber. Hating a combination is not the same as hating the parts. That would be a logical fallacy. I may like ice cream and tomatoes separately, but I may not like them together. Is this any clearer?
truthregardless,my mistake, i interpreted your “Spain being a collective of different nations” as meaning that there were different national governments, I thought you were questioning the fact that Spain does indeed have a single sovereign centralized government. No matter. Spain has an existence of minorities, no argument there. I agree with you that the labeling of the melting pot composition of South, Central, and Carribean people of the Americas was a politically incorrect misnomer that didn’t include the niceties of giving each and every ethnic group and amalgamation. But then again, it is not only an American fault since Columbus and the rest of the conquistador bunch incorrectly regarded there New World as the “West Indies” and regarded its people as Indios, “Indians” in English. The Pilgrims of course followed suit. But, I won’t argue about that, I won’t kick that dead horse anymore.”Imagine how you would feel if you had red hair, blue eyes, the features of a leprechaun, and you were always told you are dark-complexioned and look like Pancho Villa.” From this post I sense you take this “Hispanic” thing quite personally. Are you Cuban as well? As for my feelings on being called something I’m not, they’ve been calling Filipinos and Puerto Rican natives as “Indians” for much longer than they have called us Hispanics, however, you don’t see me making racist durrogatory comments about white Europeans, do you? Let sleeping dogs lie.
Hating a combination is not the same as hating the parts. That would be a logical fallacy.
Once again, I must respectfully disagree with you. A WHOLE IS NO GREATER THAN THE SUM OF ITS PARTS.Because YOU CANT HATE THE COMBINATION… WITHOUT HATING THE PARTS. Saying the opposite would be fallacious.
You also make a bad analogy:Ice cream and tomatoes can be separated, but can a hybrid man separate his dual heritage? I think you know the answer to that, cabron.
CrusaderX,So I guess you’re wild urges are overtaking your cerebral cortex. First of all, you have all the premises screwed up. Originally, it was being stated that Ian couldn’t hate the mixed person, such as yourself, without hating himself, because the mixed person also had part of him in him. Your argument now is that he can’t hate the mixed person because he himself is mixed. How absurd. You’ve switched tactics. Ian doesn’t admit to being mixed within the bounds of a broader group of people he calls whites. I agree he is right. You, CrusaderX, are illogical. You CAN hate the mix without hating the components. Are you simply that stupid? Does the Black-person-hating southerner of English descent hate himself because most Black Americans also have English ancestry? Does he necessarily hate the English? WE KNOW THAT’S NOT TRUE. It is people like you who bring down rascist stereotypes upon themselves. You keep insisting, irrationally, that one CAN’T dislike the whole without disliking the parts. In fact, it happens very often. If you can find one intelligent white person who agrees with your illogic, I will be extremely surprised. You and Ian are both emotionally disturbed. I am sure you resent those angry, intelligent and successful Cubans because you hate yourself (to use your illogic in reverse). Don’t blame them. Blame the people of the United States whose knowledge of other people, cultures, and places is legendary, as the main cause we are having this ugly discussion. Can’t everyone just be a human being in this stupid place? You’ve taken to insulting me because my logic is obvious. Ian would probably blame what he would think is your low IQ on your Puerto Rican ancestry, because of the strongly Black heredity of Puerto Ricans(another example of how the “Hispanic” category conceals the truth). Why don’t your people show the rest of the world what you can do outside of sports and Rickie Martin? Or would you rather consider yourself a Filipino? Then you won’t resent people like Ian, and you will prove them wrong. I forgive you, CrusaderDNAjumble, for you know not what you are doing.
CrusaderX,
My interest in this is very personal. I am a researcher in anthropology, and I feel vulgar, public pseudo-anthropology has no place in a modern, industrialized society. I call things as I see them. Yes, I said before I am collecting blogs. It is painful to see this Cuban vs other Latino war going on. If you think this site is an exception, dream on. Sometimes I find it perversely entertaining, watching how ignorance begets ignorance. If Mexican-Americans, Cuban-Americans, etc., had been given their own personal identity all of this mess would not have taken place. Start with Gerald Ford and the ignorance of the American public. I have known a number of Puerto Ricans, Mexican-Americans, and Cuban-Americans, as well as Spaniards. I know the profound differences. This whole debate has slipped into the depths of emotionalism. Just be yourself. I am just an honest scientist trying to inject truth into the picture. Yes, I do some cajoling because I want to expose the arteries. That way, I can see the emotional trauma this society has generated in its people. Thank you, Gerald Ford, you luminary genius.
truthregardless,where, oh where did I insult you? Because I am critical of your arguments? Ha! What a laugh!”Why don’t your people show the rest of the world what you can do outside of sports and Rickie Martin?” Is it just me, or was that a bigotted racial generalization!? I don’t need white people to agree with me to prove your fallacious and utterly ridiculous analogies equating racial hatred with hatred of inanimate objects, and just because you fail to understand that hybrid people can not separate their respective cultural heritage without fundamentally claiming to be something they are NOT, doesnt mean you can resort to ad hominem attacks which is another fallacy you committed by the way. I am neither a professional athlete or a pop-star, I am a law student, I make arguments for a living. I have a master’s degree in philosophy so if you wanna dispute logical fallacies with me, you better go take up Formal Logic first! If you had even an elementary school understanding of contemporary Spanish, you would know that the word “cabron” means “man” or “dude”, e.g. What’s up man? or How ya doing, dude? Maybe you took that as an insult, may I suggest you study the language of a people if you are to have any credibility as an anthropologist? You do know that if you want to understand a particular group of people’s thought processes then you must have an intimate knowledge of their semantics, right? I didn’t even provoke you, and yet you respond with sweeping racial generalizations. Are you sure you don’t go by the name of John Malkovich?
Your argument now is that he can’t hate the mixed person because he himself is mixed.
Perhaps someone should teach you how to properly interpret “big words”. My previous argument was based on the premise that it was HYPOCRITICAL for someone who shares a particular ancestry with a mixed-race person to condemn the latter for his genetic condition. Why? Because the latter is an individual, who can not separate himself from either of his mixed ancestries. And consequently, the former who condemns the latter condemns the ENTIRETY of the person, and (think real hard now, dummy!) since the latter can NOT separate himself from both ancestries, the former is forced to condemn the ENTIRETY of the latter’s ancestries! (ding ding ding)which in my previous example was illustrated between the shared Spanish ancestry between Ian and myself. (do you get it yet? maybe you should read SLOWLY)
truth,just in case you didn’t comprehend the above explanation i have come up with the following example:Suppose you were a half-black half-white (mullato) person. Now, suppose someone goes up to you and calls you a nigger, can you shrug it off and tell him you were white? Sure you COULD! but not without denying your black genetic heritage. Now suppose someone else comes up to you and calls you a Cracker, can you shrug it off and tell him you were black? Sure you COULD! but not without denying your white genetic heritage. Finally, (pay attention now) If a white or black person came up to you and called you a mixed race Oreo, that would imply that 1) the person (white or black) who called you an Oreo knows you are 1/2 black and 1/2 white. 2)INDIRECTLY insults his OWN genetic heritage by ridiculing yours (black or white heritage depending on the person) Hopefully this layman’s example will clarify my position on the matter, and hopefully is able to be absorbed into that bigotted reptilian brain of yours.
CrusaderX,My, my. What invective from an amoeba like you. You are still too stupid to see the point. Ian is not claiming to be an oreo in the first place. YOU are making the claim that he is. Why should you think he is hypocritical when he is not making the kind of choice in your example? He probably doesn’t have much Moorish ancestry to speak of. If I drew his blood and/or checked his DNA I would probably be able to verify that he is what he claims he is or nearly so. You keep going around in circles because, as Ian would have put it more crassly, you are exactly what the rascists contend you are. He is not denying part of his ancestry. Is this too complicated for your invertebrate little and mixed up brain? You seem not to have read your own statements correctly. But then again, how many like you can claim Ian’s IQ? Besides, and I will repeat it, people can hate one side of themselves. They do it all the time, AND THEY ARE NOT BEING HYPOCRITES!!! You may find it distasteful, but it happens all the time. Look up the definition of hypocritical. I have come to the conclusion that it is people like you that cause intelligent people like Ian to lose his composure. He doesn’t like part of you. YOu may have trouble with hating half of yourself, but he doesn’t have trouble hating half of you. He probably would love the truly Spanish part of you. He might even like the other parts, but separately. Moron, the problem you’re having is due to the fact that from an early age you had to reconcile the dichotomy of your background to preserve your mental health. The basic US government pseudo-anthropological “food groups” never made sense, but their irrationality challenged you in a painful way. You escaped hating a part of your heritage through a number of quasi-productive rationalizations, and now they are coming to the surface. YOU SEE, YOUR MAJOR PROBLEM IS PHILOSOPHICAL. YOU ARE CONFUSING THE MIND WITH YOUR DNA. OBVIOUSLY YOU ARE ONLY ONE PERSON BECAUSE (I HOPE) YOU ONLY HAVE ONE MIND. PRESUMABLY THE MIND IS INDIVISIBLE. THE ISSUE HERE IS YOUR ANCESTRAL GENES. YOU CAN DIVIDE YOUR GENES INTO DIFFERENT POOLS OF ORIGIN. YOU MAY NOT LIKE YOUR DIABETES-PRONE GENES BUT YOU MAY LIKE YOUR MATH ABILITY GENES. I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT YOU, THE MIND. I AM THINKING GENE POOL, YOU ARE THINKING MIND. It would be more profitable for you to open up a philosophical discussion, not argue endlessly when in fact we are talking about different things. The reason you have gotten ridiculous is because I am challenging a very deep part of your psyche. It isn’t all your fault. The problem is that you have to face stupid people that have forced you to reconcile the irreconciliable. If you would stop buying into the typical American’s stupidity about race and ethnicity (talk about hypocrisy!!) you would be free to be a single person. You keep insisting that you are one person. For the last time, Ian is not being hypocritical. You are characterizing his ancestry to suit your misinformed fantasies. It’s your persistent assumption that he is denying part of his heritage, but he would say no. But even if he admitted to being some kind of oreo, he can still hate part (e.g., genetic heritage)of himself and not another. It’s hard to believe that something so commonplace and obvious causes you so much angst. You habe become extremely irrational and illogical. You are guilty of a number of logical fallacies, including circular argumentation, ad hominem, and fallacy of composition (one of your biggies!). You try to impugn me by discrediting my reading comprehension. Never mind that I scored higher than 99 percentile on my GRE verbal part. You still grant yourself the license to impugn my ability to comprehend reading material. You seem to forget also that goodcomprehension requires two participants: the reader AND the writer. Stop being jealous of people you wish you could absorb into your league and claim as yours. Yes, brilliant people like Ian are not going to sacrifice their identities to give you the opportunity to claim their successes as yours!! Do the math. One part of you (Spanish and Oriental) succeeds, the other part (God knows what) fails when assessed separately. Taken together, the mixture fails. So you prostitute yourself by allowing the government to arbitrarily categorize you so you can get minority set asides to help you through school. That’s you, my indivisible buddy!!
Truth – a diversion if I may. You mention an interest in anthropology. I had heard long ago speculation that a Lost Tribe of Israel might have made its way to the Southeastern US region millenea ago. Any information on that speculation?
Hi, CrusaderXTo be guilty of the ad hominem fallacy one uses the credentials (or lack of) of the opponent in an argument to discredit his reasoning. In other words, one would try to win an argument by substituting the low repute of his opponent for facts or reasoning. I may have insulted you, but I did not try to win arguments using your race or whatever as a substitute for reasoning or facts. It was an ad hominem attack, but not ad hominem fallacy (there is a difference, ad hominem simply meaning “to the man”). You also insulted me, using various zoological terms to offend me (and I replied in kind). By the way, I had already pegged you as a philosopher before you revealed that info to me, as I have taken philosophy courses before and am familiar with the interminable and circuitous argumentation of members of your do-nothing profession. If you want to argue about the mind-body problem I’ll be glad to take you on. This is exactly what your problem is. To what extent is the DNA contained in your cells YOU? Is the chemical blueprint the same as YOU? And is YOUR mind separable from the physical substance, the brain? You see, your lack of scientific sophistication is an impediment to our arguments. As for my statements being rascist, yes they were, but I plead not guilty insofar as I am not rascist. Try that one one Aristotle (who by the way injured the advancement of the physical sciences more than any other do-nothing). I’ll clarify this before you pull all of your diverse hairs out of your scalp. I wanted to see how you reacted to certain stimuli. I was being very much the biologist experimenting on lower animals. I enjoyed the rancid and acerbic responses you gave me. What was my point? I wanted to see how you would react if you were put in Ian’s place. So forgive poor Ian. You resorted to the same kind of vitriol as Ian. As for the fact that you claim that you are not an entertainer, I disagree. You have been quite entertaining. I hope to meet you in person someday. I do go to science museums a lot.
CrusaderX is a monkey who should be swinging from a tree, pay him no mind.
lol
I SEE YOU ARE HERE IN BOTH YOUR IDENTITIES JM/IAN!
Truthregardless, John Malkovich,HELLO IAN!!!Nice to see you again. Please stop posting under different pen names, once again Ian, you choose not to understand that the very definition of an individual is that it is an INDIVISIBLE entity. I must admit I was suspicious of your first post which held racist overtones. However, your later posts show that truthregardless, Ian, and John Malkovich have the exact same reasoning pattern! IAN IAN!!! POST UNDER YOUR NAME NEXT TIME, TROLLING IS BAD MANNERS!!Hahahaha! I caught you Ian, you little twerp! You must be surprised sitting there at your keyboard while knowing that an inferior mestizo like myself FOUND YOU OUT, you punk bitch!! hahahaha! Oh, my my my! What would Adolf think Ian? I think you’ve just lost your ticket to Valhalla buddy! HAHAHAHAHA!! Ian is truthregardless AND John Malkovich! HAHAHAHAHA!!! ahhh, you suck Ian, you should know that if you’re going to pretend to be someone else, you have to CHANGE your thought process, you dumbass!!! Oh, I think I just wet myself! I CAUGHT YOU SUCKER!! hahahahaah!
CrusaderXYZ,
Tsk, tsk, have you betrayed your own argument? How can one person be three individuals at the same time? Sort of like the holy trinity: Ian, John, and truth. Ha ha ha!
Crusader X,
Please be easy on the Holy Trinity. Remember your Catholic upbringing? You must capitulate to the overwhelmingly eloquent and elegant nemesis that has rendered your lilliputian rationalizations pulverized. Concomitantly you have only succeeded in excoriating your own soul. Go in peace, my son, and sacrifice by eviscerating with one hand a pulsating cardiac organ from a dark maiden on the top of Mt. Pinatubo, even as you hold Ashaka’s family jewels in the other. Your God, Gerald Ford, will be with you always, and the vainglorious citizenry of the US of Amalgamation will always be there to hand you your pecuniary set asides to make retribution for the mental health they have taken from you! All you need do is acquiesce to their ignorance, my dear philosopher, and thus indirectly accept their pronouncement on the quality of your intellect. May Democritus, the God of Indivisibility, be with you always!!!
Ben Huie,
You can’t be serious about a lost tribe of isrealites doing a founder effect experiment in SE USA, can you? There is no scientific evidence to support that notion. Are you simply part Native American and are just seeking to be allowed to emigrate to the 51st state of the Union, Israel?