Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson's comments.

[Shady]

You always pull out the race card to bait people into arguing race issues.

Once again I have no idea what you're talking about. Try and stay on the topic of discussion instead of calling people names.

[kimmy]

Well that didn't take too long. A&E has announced that Phil's "suspension" has been lifted.

I'm sure that there will be lots of spin, but this was always a business decision. They suspended him because they were afraid a backlash against his comments would cost them money. They reinstated him because they realized that suspending him was going to cost them even more money.

-k

[jacee]

Once again I have no idea what you're talking about. Try and stay on the topic of discussion instead of calling people names.

Stop race baiting.

[Shady]

Stop race baiting.

Again, I have no idea what you're talking about.

Anyways, good to see A&E make the right decision. If there's room on television for anti-Christian bigots, there should also be room for anti-gay ones too. It's time some of these groups grew a thicker skin

[jacee]

Again, I have no idea what you're talking about.

Your "ilk" never does.

Anyways, good to see A&E make the right decision. If there's room on television for anti-Christian bigots, there should also be room for anti-gay ones too. It's time some of these groups grew a thicker skin

Maybe it's time anti-gay bigots grew thicker skin instead of whining about the reaction to their bigotry.

.

Edited December 28, 2013 by jacee

[WWWTT]

Well that didn't take too long. A&E has announced that Phil's "suspension" has been lifted.

I'm sure that there will be lots of spin, but this was always a business decision. They suspended him because they were afraid a backlash against his comments would cost them money. They reinstated him because they realized that suspending him was going to cost them even more money.

-k

Another successful publicity stint well done!

WWWTT

[On Guard for Thee]

Your "ilk" never does.

Maybe it's time anti-gay bigots grew thicker skin instead of whining about the reaction to their bigotry.

.

And further to that, let's face it, anti gay's tend to be the bigots, while anti Christian's tend to be just a little more, shall we say, anti bigotry.

[Shady]

And further to that, let's face it, anti gay's tend to be the bigots, while anti Christian's tend to be just a little more, shall we say, anti bigotry.

Nope, a bigot is a bigot. And an anti-Christian bigot is no different than an anti-gay bigot. Other than their reasons.

[Shady]

The wingnuts over at MSNBC now insist that the show is part of America's "white supremacist" culture. Just when you think it couldn't get more absurd, Jesse Jackson and MSNBC to the rescue!

[Wilber]

Nope, a bigot is a bigot. And an anti-Christian bigot is no different than an anti-gay bigot. Other than their reasons.

Only if you believe people leave the womb already Christian.

[sharkman]

Jesse Jackson lost his mojo a long time ago with this stunt:

Rev. Jesse Jackson referred to Jews as "Hymies" and to New York City as "Hymietown" in January 1984 during a conversation with a black Washington Post reporter, Milton Coleman. Jackson had assumed the references would not be printed because of his racial bond with Coleman, but several weeks later Coleman permitted the slurs to be included far down in an article by another Post reporter on Jackson's rocky relations with American Jews.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/frenzy/jackson.htm

He lost his mojo, but only those with common sense noticed it.

I've been viewing this from afar, can anyone point out exactly what Robertson said about Blacks that was racist? What I saw seemed to just be him relating his experiences growing up and inferred that his family treated and thought of them as equals.

[Michael Hardner]

I've been viewing this from afar, can anyone point out exactly what Robertson said about Blacks that was racist? What I saw seemed to just be him relating his experiences growing up and inferred that his family treated and thought of them as equals.

He extols an era where they did not have the same rights as today: "Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues.”"

Is it racist ? Even people who were pro segregation could argue that they aren't racist, but simply 'separate but equal', I suppose. But fictional characters like 'Phil Robertson' are designed to appeal to an audience, and probably a broad-based audience so it's understandable that the goals of the company that owns the character might conflict with the comments made here. But then again, this is starting to look like a PR play to get as much controversial attention as possible to the TV series.

[sharkman]

He extols an era where they did not have the same rights as today: "Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues.”"

Is it racist ? Even people who were pro segregation could argue that they aren't racist, but simply 'separate but equal', I suppose. But fictional characters like 'Phil Robertson' are designed to appeal to an audience, and probably a broad-based audience so it's understandable that the goals of the company that owns the character might conflict with the comments made here. But then again, this is starting to look like a PR play to get as much controversial attention as possible to the TV series.

Okay, I can see where you are coming from. The thing is, that statement doesn't specifically refer to rights or the rights movement, but to political policies instead. People infer racism because of the time frame of Robertson's childhood. For a christian to call another person/group godly, that's a high respectful compliment that general society misses being that godliness is a joke to them. He could be racist, but that line seems pretty weak as evidence, doesn't it?

[Shady]

He extols an era where they did not have the same rights as today: "Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues.”"

Is it racist ? Even people who were pro segregation could argue that they aren't racist, but simply 'separate but equal', I suppose. But fictional characters like 'Phil Robertson' are designed to appeal to an audience, and probably a broad-based audience so it's understandable that the goals of the company that owns the character might conflict with the comments made here. But then again, this is starting to look like a PR play to get as much controversial attention as possible to the TV series.

Okay, I can see where you are coming from. The thing is, that statement doesn't specifically refer to rights or the rights movement, but to political policies instead. People infer racism because of the time frame of Robertson's childhood. For a christian to call another person/group godly, that's a high respectful compliment that general society misses being that godliness is a joke to them. He could be racist, but that line seems pretty weak as evidence, doesn't it?

Exactly. I took it as more of a knock at the degredation of morals and values in society, compared to earlier times. Phil Robertson was dirt poor growing up. He could relate to people in the same economic circumstances, including blacks.

[Michael Hardner]

Okay, I can see where you are coming from. The thing is, that statement doesn't specifically refer to rights or the rights movement, but to political policies instead. ... He could be racist, but that line seems pretty weak as evidence, doesn't it?

I guess the term 'entitlement' is open to opinion. The Phil Robertson character is a mix of real and fictional, and as such must be regarded as a generally fictional character since you don't know where the real/unreal line lies. As such, you have to regard 'him' as racist only as much as the character is designed that way, and it seems they have designed him to be provocative enough to generate attention.

You're right that he "could" be racist, but only the writer(s) really would know IMO.

[Michael Hardner]

He could relate to people in the same economic circumstances, including blacks.

I suppose so, but you wonder what 'entitlement' means, and why he couldn't relate to them after that arrived.

[Shady]

Uh oh! The mainstream media now considers watchers of the Duck Dynasty show to be "hate-watchers."

A&E, which seized the moment to attract more viewers (fans and hate-watchers, both), proved that money is the first priority in TV programming

http://blogs.denverpost.com/ostrow/2013/12/28/duck-dynasty-winners-and-losers/17320/

It's just par for the course when it comes to the usual hyperbole coming from the gaystoppo and their allies in the media. Their ilk can say the most offensive and hateful things about conservatives and/or christians, without even the sligthest hesitation.

[Shady]

I guess the term 'entitlement' is open to opinion. The Phil Robertson character is a mix of real and fictional, and as such must be regarded as a generally fictional character since you don't know where the real/unreal line lies. As such, you have to regard 'him' as racist only as much as the character is designed that way, and it seems they have designed him to be provocative enough to generate attention.

You're right that he "could" be racist, but only the writer(s) really would know IMO.

Does that mean he's racist towards his grandson too?

[Shady]

I guess the term 'entitlement' is open to opinion. The Phil Robertson character is a mix of real and fictional, and as such must be regarded as a generally fictional character since you don't know where the real/unreal line lies. As such, you have to regard 'him' as racist only as much as the character is designed that way, and it seems they have designed him to be provocative enough to generate attention.

You're right that he "could" be racist, but only the writer(s) really would know IMO.

If you regard him as mostly fictional, then what's the issue to discuss? It's like be outraged at Tony Soprano's perceived racism.

[Michael Hardner]

Does that mean he's racist towards his grandson too?

I'm not familiar with the grandson character.

[Michael Hardner]

If you regard him as mostly fictional, then what's the issue to discuss? It's like be outraged at Tony Soprano's perceived racism.

Exactly. The question, though, is for Sharkman not me as I was answering his question.

Since I don't watch the show, is the Phil Robertson character somewhat like Tony Soprano ? If so, that would make sense.

[Bob Macadoo]

If you regard him as mostly fictional, then what's the issue to discuss? It's like be outraged at Tony Soprano's perceived racism.

That's true, although people submit complaints and boycott fictional characters as well. Look at all the groups out there trying to get people to boycott Miley Cyrus.

Hey where's Sarah Palin to stand up for Hannah Montana?

[jacee]

The wingnuts over at MSNBC now insist that the show is part of America's "white supremacist" culture. Just when you think it couldn't get more absurd, Jesse Jackson and MSNBC to the rescue!

Just a recap, so you know what you're defending:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/27/showbiz/duck-dynasty-resumes/?c=&page=2

Furthermore, Robertson said that when he was growing up in Louisiana in the pre-civil rights era, "I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person. Not once."He continued, "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."

"Start with homosexual behavior and just morph from there," Robertson said when asked what is sinful. "Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men."

...

At one point he remarked that "it seems like, to me, a vagina -- as a man -- would be more desirable than a man's anus. That's just me. I'm just thinking: There's more there! She's got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes!"

Isn't that just special!

Clearly there's a market for bigotry, and A&E will follow the money!

[jacee]

Uh oh! The mainstream media now considers watchers of the Duck Dynasty show to be "hate-watchers."

http://blogs.denverpost.com/ostrow/2013/12/28/duck-dynasty-winners-and-losers/17320/

It's just par for the course when it comes to the usual hyperbole coming from the gaystoppo and their allies in the media. Their ilk can say the most offensive and hateful things about conservatives and/or christians, without even the sligthest hesitation.

That's a blog, not "mainstream media".

"gaystoppo ... ilk"

I see you are comfortably enmeshed in the hate lingo.

Maybe you can explain to me Shady ...

Are we incorrect in calling old testament followers 'Christian'?

There seems to me to be nothing of Christ's values in their beliefs. Is there another, more correct name for such religious beliefs?

Edited December 29, 2013 by jacee

[jacee]

Since I don't watch the show, is the Phil Robertson character somewhat like Tony Soprano ? If so, that would make sense.

The interview was with the person about his own beliefs, not the character he plays on the show.