CNN -
howard kirtz - WHAT IS howard kirtz's AVERSION TO BLACK MEDIA
PEOPLE...I HESITATE TO BRING THIS UP DUE TO THE IDEA THAT THE
RESPONSE TO MY QUESTION MIGHT ,AS ALWAYS, BE MET WITH THE
CASUAL DISMISSAL OF"YOU'RE PLAYING THE "rACE" CARD".
WELL THE UTTER THOUGHT OF ENCOUNTERING THAT ARGUMENT IS MY
EXACT MOTIVATION FOR BRINGING THIS ISSUE UP.
SINCE wHITE bOYS KKKONTROL WHAT YOU SEE ON THE NAIONAL
KKKORPORATE MEDIA...THEY ALWAYS WANT TO INVOKE THE SUCKING
DEFENSE ,"YOU'RE PLAYING THE "rACE" CARD",WHEN YOU CHALLANGE
THEIR PREJUDICE.THIS PLAYED OUT ARGUMENT HAS BEEN USED
SUCCESSFULLY FOR GENERATIONS.IT'S A SLICK ARGUMENT WHICH SEEKS
TO OBFUSCATE THE REAL AND TRUE ISSUE.THAT ISSUE IS THEY DO
AVOID FEATURING CREDITABLE BLACK "AMERICAN" JOURNALIST BY
REPLACING THEM WITH THE wHITE bOY TRICK OF SUBSTITUTING THEIR
wHITE OPINION OF WHAT THE BLACK AMERICAN'S PERSPECTIVE IS,WHICH
HAS BEEN DONE FOREVER.
AT FIRST GLANCE YOU MIGHT LOOK AT WHAT I'M SAYING AND
COMMENT,"HERE IS THE OPINION OF ANOTHER "rACIST" BLACK
PERSON".IF THAT IS YOUR RESPONSE,YOU AGAIN SEEK TO AVOID THE
SUBJECT OF "wHITE bOY" KKKONTROL OF THE NATIONAL KKKORPORATE
MEDIA.PLEASE BE INTELLECTUALLY HONEST ENOUGH TO STAY ON
SUBJECT.DON'T ATTEMPT TO DIVERT ATTENTION AND DISTRACT FROM THE
FUNDEMENTAL ISSUES INCLUDED HERE."wHITE bOYS" DO INDEED
KKKONTROL THE NATIONAL KKKORPORATE MEDIA,AS THEY HAVE FOR
GENERATIONS.
NOW LET ME PROVIDE A CLEAR DEFINITION OF THE ADJECTIVE "wHITE"
AND THE NOUN bOY.
WHITE AS DEFINED BY DICTIONARIES.COM
1.(of human beings) marked by slight pigmentation of the skin,
as of many Caucasoid s.
2.for, limited to, or predominantly made up of persons whose
racial heritage is Caucasian: a white club; a white
neighborhood.
3.light or comparatively light in color.
THERE YOU GO,AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THIS DEFINITION THE ADJECTIVE
"wHITE" ERRONEOUSLY REFERS TO "rACE".NOW,WHEN YOU THINK OF
"rACE" YOU HAVE TO THINK THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO MAY FEEL
THEY ARE,IN SOME WAY SEPARATE FROM OTHER HUMANS BECAUSE OF
THEIR "SPECIAL" "rACE".I WILL NOT QUIBBLE WITH THAT PERSPECTIVE
AT THIS POINT,BUT I WILL MAKE IT VERY CLEAR THAT THERE ARE
THOSE WHO FEEL "ENTITLED" TO SOME SPECIAL TREATMENT,PURELY
BASED ON THEIR "COLOR". THEY ACTUALLY SEEM TO BELIEVE THAT
COLOR IS THE BASIS FOR SOME SUPERIORITY AMONG HUMAN BEINGS.THIS
IS WHERE I FIND ERRORS IN THEIR JUDGMENT."COLOR" IN MY OPINION
IS A DISTINCT FEATURE,WITHOUT QUESTION. HOWEVER,DISTINCT
FEATURE DOES NOT SIGNIFY,ON IT'S OWN,ANY SUCH SUPERIORITY.BUT
YOU HAVE SEEN ,AGAIN FOR GENERATIONS,PEOPLE HAVE MADE THAT
PURELY SUBJECTIVE DETERMINATION.
MY BONE OF CONTENTION IS FOUND IN THE FACT, THAT DESPITE THE
OBVIOUS FALLACIOUS ASSERTION OF SUPERIORITY BEING BASED ON
"COLOR"AS VALID AND IRREFUTABLE POSITION,COLOR ALONE IS NOT AN
ACCURATE INDICATION OF INTELLECTUAL SUPERIORITY.NOR SHOULD
"COLOR" ALLOW ANYONE THE UNILATERAL ABILITY TO DISALLOW OTHERS
FROM BEING REPRESENTED ACCURATELY IN EVERY ASPECT OF SOCIETY.
THIS IS WHY I AM DISMAYED WHEN I SEE "SUPPOSED" MEDIA
PROFESSIONALS,SUCH A HOWARD KIRTZ,CASUALLY IGNORE THE ABSENCE
OF DIVERSE VIEWS ON MEDIA ISSUES.
TO FRIVOLOUSLY INTRODUCE THE "rACE CARD" ARGUMENT IN ANY
SITUATION, IS ABOUT AS SIGNIFICANT AS SUGGESTING THAT TO NOT
INCLUDE "wHITE WOMEN" IN NATIONAL KKKORPORATE MEDIA IS PLAYING
THE "gENDER CARD".
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
♪♫ »-(¯'v'¯)-»♥ O MY! I LOVE THIS! SO TRUE! DAMN! SPIT THAT! WOW!
ReplyDelete