Biggie - if you go back to your first 20-30 odd posts you really brought things to the table. Interesting stuff. OK some of it a little close the edge but over-all very much in tune. Now-a-days your shtick seems to be stuck in second gear. Offense for offense sake and when someone calls you on it you take offense and lash back. What's up with that?

CO - Biggie was not implying the BIU members are monkeys. He was commenting on the big dogs treating the pinions with disdain. It was posted earlier about the big wigs over in IB and as far as I'm concerned I think it's a hillarious way of looking at some of the hierachies we see in Bermuda and the world. White collar or blue.

See - offense and defense. Makes for a balanced debate. Don't ya think.

Oh and oneeye.... do your own reading before you comment. Dont rely on CO's perception.

OneEyeOpen - The term used was "nut cases".

I can't be in every post in every thread, so if i missed you being attacked i sincerely apologize, and i shall endeavour to do a better job.  Since we are being honest, i found that the nature of your posts were designed to elicit that type of response in the first place, so modifying what you wanted to recieve seemed redundant.  I say that in the past tense since i've noticed that your recent posts have been of more 'substance', so i shall treat you with the same respect as others from this point forward.  

On to the Biggie topic, he hasn't said that he called them monkey's cuz they were Black.  That has never been explicitly expressed by him, and until then i can only assume he's calling them monkey's cuz they are as incompetent at doing their jobs as if a bunch of monkey's in suits were in Gov't.  Kinda like those commercials on tv about working in an office when all your superiors are monkey's, i'm sure that those ads aren't racist.  Although i guess some may not agree, either way, i can't make the connection cuz there's a possibility of it being there.  That's not up to me, that's up to our illustrious site leader...errrrr...leader's now.  I Moderate, and i only do so when the obvious is present.

So calling Biggie racist based on his remarks is close to the line, but as far as i'm concerned acceptable.  Now it's up to Biggie to refute, or refuse to respond.

CC

I sincerely hope Biggie doesn't photoshop his response to my question.  Words are enough for me.

I do not find "nut cases" to be offensive at all and wonder how anyone could within the context of eyeopen's comment.  My grown kids call me a nut case now and then!  I just tell 'em the apple doesn't fall far from the tree! 

As far as biggie is concerned... sometimes I laugh at his antics... sometime I just shake my head.  Hey, go for it biggie...?? 

Also... I noticed that someone 'starred out' part of the "N" word... but spelled out the "H" word in full in a post here.  I find that slightly offensive.  Why is it okay to use the word "honky"...? 

I am not here to question a Moderator's actions, they do what they feel is right, it's a tough job, but someone's got to do it.  On the issue of the post in question...  As I believe the comment "nut cases" was at least, in part ,directed at me, let me say that I certainly do not find that terminology in any way offensive.  As a matter of fact, I actually find it mildly humourous.  But be that as it may, Moderators provide a valuable service -  Good on yer, CC, keep up the good work! 

LP 

My post was in no way critical of CC or any Moderator... it was just my opinion.  You don't know what honky means Gunner...?  C'mooon...!!  The Urban Dictionary defines it as follows....

1. honky     

a derogatory term for a Caucasian person.
there are three main theories for the origin of the word:
1. the word originated from the practice of white males wishing to hire African-American prostitutes in the 1920's, and going to the appropriate part of town while honking their car horns to attract the whores. Some versions state that the reason for this was that the white men were too afraid to actually stop in those neighborhoods, so the honking would bring the hookers to them. Others say that since few African-Americans could afford cars back in that time, the honking signaled a higher-paying white client and would quickly gain the prostitutes attention.
2. the term comes from the word "honky-tonk", which was used as early as 1875 in reference to wild saloons in the Old West. Patrons of such disreputable establishments were referred to as "honkies", not intended as a racial slur but still a disparaging term.
3. "honkie" is a variation of "hunky" and "bohunk", derogatory terms for Hungarian, Bohemian, and Polish immigrant factory workers and hard laborers in the early 1900's. African-Americans began to use the word in reference to all whites regardless of specific nation of origin.
also spelled "honkie". 

After the "straw man", the next most commonly used debating technique of liberals is the "ad hominem", Latin for "to the man", which is to say, an attack on the person making the argument, rather than the argument itself.

Is Biggie a racist? Is he a Nazi? Is he a homophobe? I don't know him, so I can't say. I can say that *it is completely irrelevant.* What matters is the content of the argument, not the person making it. The argument is true- or not true- logically compelling- or not-regardless of the person making it.

Liberals love to dish it out but they can't take it. Liberals call conservatives Nazis, or racists, or homophobes, or closet cases, all the time, or frequently all four at the same time. If Biggie puts up a Photoshopped picture of various PLP politicians as Nazis or flamers at least that's just a straight out insult, not pretending to be a political argument. People with something to say don't really mind being insulted, it's just proof your opponents don't have any real ammunition. People who rely on maintaining the moral high ground for their legitimacy- almost all liberals- can't tolerate it. What they don't understand is the strength of your argument *is* the moral high ground.

What are called "conservatives" are not all the same, but people who come from a variety of similar but distinct philosophies. Conservatives aggressively argue amongst themselves, and sometimes it gets pretty ugly. Conservatives are forced to constantly rebut the mud liberals sling against them, so they generally are well prepared to debate and have thick skins. Liberals on the other hand all think pretty much the same thing, somebody decides what they should be thinking and they go with that. This goes back to the 1930's Popular Front, where liberals of all kinds had to line up with the Soviet Communist Party positions.

In fact, the modern day accusation of racism is very much like the denunciations in 30's Russia. Responding by denying you're a racist is simply not an option. The only way to save yourself is to admit your fault, and do a great deal of groveling, and maybe- just and only maybe- you can save yourself. Playing the race card works big time, which is why it's played so often, and so successfully.

So, will somebody *please* mount a principled defense of Kwame Kilpatrick, or the PLP government of Bermuda, or something or somebody that was attacked in the original post.