...O/T...I am so sick of this type thing;

indefensible how? he saw them singing... what is wrong with that???? seriously? he also said he never saw one of them complain... if that is what he saw, that is what he saw... get over yourself already

 

...are you going to address this or not? ;

...maybe the "bold font" will help and won't "confuse you".

 

ok... let's look at the comments item by item then, shall we?

regarding race
"I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person. Not once. Where we lived was all farmers. The blacks worked for the farmers. I hoed cotton with them. I’m with the blacks, because we’re white trash. We’re going across the field.... They’re singing and happy. I never heard one of them, one black person, say, ‘I tell you what: These doggone white people’—not a word!... Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues."

"I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person. Not once." ok... that isn't a racist statement...

"Where we lived was all farmers. The blacks worked for the farmers. I hoed cotton with them. I’m with the blacks, because we’re white trash." ok... he said he worked along side of them, not that he was better than them or that there was anything wrong with what they were doing... how is this racist? He even displayed that he himself was a lower class than the typical white family as he was white trash. He didn't say he was better or worse than any African Americans, just that he was with them as he was white trash...

"We’re going across the field.... They’re singing and happy." how is this racist? it isn't. he is just saying they were singing and happy... that is it. it isn't racist!

"I never heard one of them, one black person, say, ‘I tell you what: These doggone white people’—not a word!..." again, how is this racist? he, going off his personal experience said he never saw one of them complain... and he was working in the fields with them... so how is this racist? it isn't...

"Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues." ok, so how is this racist? it isn't... he is saying they were godly, they were happy, no one was singing the blues. nothing wrong with that.

So how was any of what he said, racist???? how?

He never mentioned Jim Crow laws or that they were happier because the laws were or weren't there. He was talking about how this entitlement bullshit is making people less happy. How can anyone not see that?

 

he is not indefensible. you are just blind. You are reading words in between words that aren't there or even implied. sorry, you are wrong

 

Denny seriously with all due respect you have to show me where Robertson said that blacks were happy with riding in the back of buses, drinking from seperate water fountains & getting there food from the rear of resturants. I mean all he said was that in the cotton fields they were singing & that they were happy. And that is what he perceived from what he personally saw. Please you'll have to show me ANYWHERE where he said those other things. I'll wait.

 

Exactly... and he won't be able to show you those things because they were never said (or implied) anywhere

 

...that does not in any way address your contradiction;

1. you first sad; "If you think "bigot" has some negative connotation, feel free to explain why."

2. you then said "He's a racist and a bigot. Not something I'd be proud of or defend"



...which is it?...keep tap dancing.

 

...^^^"I don't like the answer"?

...you have not answered the question, period. The 2 statements you made are blatant contradictions.

...just admit you mis-spoke and don't know what you're babbling about and are now in "damage control" mode.

 

Are you intentionally obtuse or are you simply being coy?...because I can't believe you could be this dense.

...1...you said "If you think "bigot" has some negative connotation, feel free to explain why." ...translation; you DON'T think "bigot" is a bad thing

...2, you then said "He's a racist and a bigot. Not something I'd be proud of or defend"...translation; you DO think "bigot" is a bad thing.

 

...I was wrong about one thing, you really are dense because I don't take offense to anything. I'm simply pointing out your error.

...you've just admitted (again) that you DON'T think the word "bigot" is a bad thing. ("not a negative connotation")

...you also claim that he is a "bigot" (Not something you'd be proud of or defend")(your own words) ,which IS a bad thing (obvious negative connotation)



...when you make 2 contrary statements like that, how can you expect anyone here to take you seriously?

 

...no, I simply have a low tolerance for people who try to blow half baked theories up other people's asses..."straw man"?...you're fucking nuts.

...I QUOTED and used your OWN WORDS and changed NOTHING...and clearly and very simply illustrated your faux pas...feel free to go back and read and point to anything I distorted....you won't be able to....but you already knew that, didn't you?


...you "won't argue" because, well, you fucked up, and you know it.

 

...I already have, dumbass...about 4-5 times...but here are your words again;

"He's a racist and a bigot. Not something I'd be proud of or defend"


...are you seriously trying to say that not being proud of something... or not willing to defend something is in any way a "good thing"?