Patterico's Pontifications

7/3/2015

George Takei Doubles Down On Stupid

Filed under: General — Dana @ 10:56 am



[guest post by Dana]

Revealing that he is still clueless, George Takei explains his racist outburst directed at Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas:

A few fans have written wondering whether I intended to utter a racist remark by referring to Justice Thomas as a “clown in blackface.”

“Blackface” is a lesser known theatrical term for a white actor who blackens his face to play a black buffoon. In traditional theater lingo, and in my view and intent, that is not racist. It is instead part of a racist history in this country.

I feel Justice Thomas has abdicated and abandoned his African American heritage by claiming slavery did not strip dignity from human beings. He made a similar remark about the Japanese American internment, of which I am a survivor. A sitting Justice of the Supreme Court ought to know better.

I have expressed my full thoughts on the matter here.

Well, we know who’s got the upper hand here. Takei is an iconic Hollywood figure, he’s gay, he’s Japanese, he’s liberal, he’s a self-proclaimed “social justice activist” and “social media mega-power”. And Clarence Thomas? Well, he’s just some black guy.

I’ve poked around the internet and for some reason, it seems most left-leaning sites are not discussing Takei’s bigotry.

–Dana

70 Responses to “George Takei Doubles Down On Stupid”

  1. Hello.

    Dana (86e864)

  2. Blackface was originally used by white minstrels as a protest for not allowing their fellow black musicians and artists the same freedom as whites because of segregation. It was meant as an “in your face” display and meant to offend, whites. Takei has no clue about which he speaks.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27)

  3. in my view and intent, that is not racist

    Hmmm, does that construct work for all of us, or just bonefide lefties?

    Angelo (ff88c3)

  4. Oh, puhlease! Takei is a second-rate fag actor. Flitting around other Hollywood degenerates like himself, and cruising for houseboys the kind he once was. Justice Thomas is one of the brightest stars in the legal constellation and in the highest seats of government. Dung beetle mouthing off about a lion.

    nk (dbc370)

  5. Takei is also an old man (just turned 78), so he has that ugly mix of stubbornness combined with grumpiness that is so unappealing in the elderly.

    JVW (8278a3)

  6. Black face also had other history too:

    http://black-face.com/

    The American minstrel show was effectively dead by WW1, yet some old-timers continued to peddle the same blackface stereotypes later in vaudeville, films and television. It’s one of the interesting twists of history that in the first half of the twentieth century, the main purveyors of the old-fashioned blackface minstrel tradition were Black performers, who’d began in show business wearing the blackface mask — either literally or figuratively — and were reluctant to give it up.

    Things are always a bit more complex than first understood.

    BfC (8661e2)

  7. Not a good comment, nk.

    Patricia (5fc097)

  8. He made a similar remark about the Japanese American internment, of which I am a survivor

    He makes much of this, but actually he is not a survivor of what is usually called “the Japanese American internment”. That term is usually used about the decision to exclude Americans of Japanese ancestry from potential battlefield states, because the government suspected their loyalty. They were not actually interned, but most of them had nowhere else to go, so they ended up living in government-provided camps, under very bad conditions.

    Americans of Italian and German ancestry were not automatically suspected, and were not excluded from anywhere unless there was actual reason to believe they were disloyal. It was controversial at the time, the Supreme Court upheld it, but that decision is now widely regarded as having been wrong.

    Takei’s father, however, was not American; he was a Japanese citizen, and thus was quite properly interned for the duration of the war, just like all enemy aliens. It was also reasonable to suspect his mother’s loyalty, as the wife of an enemy alien. And with the parents living in a camp, of course the children went with them; where else were they to go?

    Milhouse (a04cc3)

  9. As an American, I like to read and hear accounts from survivors of “internments” by the Japanese in the Phillipines and all through the South Pacific in the time leading up to as well as during WWII. I believe context is extremely important when reviewing real atrocities (e.g., torture, rape, firing squads, beheadings) perpetrated by the enemy, as it helps explain why some policies – now considered abhorrent in hindsight – were pursued at that time.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  10. ==I’ve poked around the internet and for some reason, it seems most left-leaning sites are not discussing Takei’s bigotry.==

    To reinforce nk’s colorful point I think we’d be really smart not to pay any more mind to it, too, Dana. Why we should have any interest whatsoever in calling attention to anything a has-been actor says about politics is truly beyond me. We don’t have a thread every time Cher or Barbra say something idiotic. Maybe two days in a row Takei is a little overkill? Yes, I’m aggravated. Why the hell the right is giving this horrible man’s horrible statements more clicks and more places to be listed for google hits, instead of ignoring Takei, seems crazy to me if we truly want to show Justice Thomas the respect he deserves and honor his stellar reputation.

    elissa (966fbb)

  11. Filipinos have a special affinity for the Japanese.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  12. “Japanese Internment survivor”. Spare me. They were not being killed in the camps. Maybe he should talk to Nanking survivors. Oh, wait ….

    nk (dbc370)

  13. George Takei can go fellate a thousand “principle points”…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  14. George, dear, you were a decent helmsman, in a TV shot that was canceled, what?, 46 years ago. On all other subjects you betray a towering provincialism. Please shut up.

    C. S. P. Schofield (a196fd)

  15. Why we should have any interest whatsoever in calling attention to anything a has-been actor says about politics is truly beyond me.

    I see where you’re coming from, elissa, but the fact of the matter is that as of this moment George Takei has 8.74 million Facebook followers and 1.68 million Twitter followers. Granted there is no doubt overlap in the two, but that is an awful lot of people who are exposed to his daily musings, not to mention the millions who come across them via reposts and retweets. I think our side makes a huge mistake when we decide that we don’t need to engage with these sorts of people and that we can just safely leave them alone — it’s how low-information voters remain so low-information. In fact, we have an obligations to hoist progressives on their own pretards. When Takei or any other celebrated media lefty says something undeniably racist let’s make sure that it does not go unchallenged or unexposed.

    JVW (8278a3)

  16. elissa,

    What JVW said.

    Patterico provides an amazing and useful platform here with which to counter ridiculous lies and hysterical accusations by the left. I would feel remiss in the privilege I’ve been given to expose them and point them out because these absurdities become and speak truth to so many. Just like the Daily Show is considered “real news” to millennials, so too do the rantings of Hollywood icons. I’m sorry you don’t see it this way, but I frankly how else to counter what is popular thought and belief? And popular thought and belief that easily translates to votes?

    Dana (86e864)

  17. eh…I would feel remiss in the privilege I’ve been given to expose them and point them out because these absurdities become and speak truth to so many.

    Should say: I would feel remiss in not using this privilege I’ve been given to expose the absurdities and and point them out because these absurdities actually become, and speak, truth to so many.

    Dana (86e864)

  18. Just beam him up.

    navyvet (c33501)

  19. Takei is enormously popular, and usually witty, and therefore has a lot of influence on public opinion. So when he does something like this it needs to be publicized,

    Milhouse (a04cc3)

  20. The Hill covered Takei’s comments, and there is a complimentary thread at DemocraticUnderground. There is also this post complaining that conservatives don’t like free speech.

    DRJ (1dff03)

  21. I think by focusing on Takei for several consecutive days we are actually extending and expanding and more widely broadcasting his bile and slander of Justice Thomas in the process of trying to “counter” or “expose” it. We are granting it and Takei much more importance and a wider hearing than he deserves–facebook friends or not. Obviously, reasonable people can differ on messaging and how communication works and is perceived in this age of social media.

    elissa (966fbb)

  22. What amazes me is the unabashed childishness of Takei’s posture. I get it — he’s gay, and he feels passionately about issues involving gays. Great; many people of varying political allegiances are passionate about controversial political topics. However, most of us — certainly more of us on the conservative side, I submit, although, obviously, exceptions exist — are generally able to express that passion in a civil way, and, to express our opinions using logic and substantive, reasoned argument, without resorting to juvenile personal insults.

    Takei’s childish histrionics and insulting invective aimed at a person who disagrees with him on a certain topic of legal/cultural significance — reveal what I think is ain increasingly recurring intellectual laziness and insecurity that is prominent on the Left — it being far easier and quicker to insult and demean people who hold views at variance with one’s own, that it is to formulate substantive and cogent rebuttal.

    Guy Jones (173efd)

  23. I see where you’re coming from Dana and JVW however, folks like us posting on blogs like this don’t do squat. In order to reach the idiots Takei and clowns like he influence we’d need to post on their tweets, Facebooks and blogs and we all know they just block us, remove our posts or censor us one way or the other. That’s the reason they’re LIV, they only get one side. I’m afraid until the time comes we can make conservatisms “fun” and “cutting edge” we’re shut out.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27)

  24. ==how else to counter what is popular thought and belief? And popular thought and belief that easily translates to votes?==

    I was unaware that either Takei or Justice Thomas were running for any elective office at this time.

    elissa (966fbb)

  25. They aren’t elissa, but the idiocy Takei espouses is being run by populists for votes. In case you haven’t noticed recently, they’re winning.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27)

  26. Characters like Bill Clinton and actor Alec Baldwin have a history of being bigots behind closed doors or in public, but their liberal background has provided them with sort of a safety shield. For instance — and by contrast — some painful truth uttered by Donald Trump over the past few days has raised the ire of corporate sponsors, including Univision and Macy’s, while Baldwin’s totally vindictive comments awhile back didn’t trigger any backlash from at least his biggest corporate sponsor at the time, Capital One.

    More tellingly, the blatantly ultra-conservative or reactionary customs (eg, throwing gays off rooftops) of a not-inconsiderable portion of the Islamic world have been treated with kid gloves by much of the left, although the owner of the Beverly Hills Hotel, the Sultan of Brunei, did generate a bit of ire with Hollywood liberals last year. However, some of that may be due to the quasi-Asian orientation of Brunei, meaning that nations isn’t perceived as having the protective cover afforded by Middle Easternism.

    What really makes this particularly galling is that most liberals deem themselves as being such kind-hearted, tolerant, worldy human beings.

    Mark (af4d4a)

  27. MSNBC, the Lean Forward home of “news, video and progressive community,” has 68 stories over the years on Takei, including the Thomas quote. Takei may not be running for office but he’s a popular voice on the Left.

    DRJ (1dff03)

  28. Running for office puts people under scrutiny and attack from the other sides’ partisans. Thomas has been under attack since his confirmation hearing and everyday thereafter. Thus, in a sense, he has been running for office since he was nominated to serve on the Court.

    DRJ (1dff03)

  29. Takei may not be running for office but he’s a popular voice on the Left.

    Indeed. Imagine telling a progressive that they shouldn’t care what Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter says because neither one of them is running for office.

    JVW (8278a3)

  30. In addition, Obama isn’t running for office but his position of authority makes him relevant and influential. Liberals certainly never hesitate to object to comments about Obama – whether they are fair or unfair. Thomas is also influential and relevant, and I think conservatives should also respond when he is attacked.

    DRJ (1dff03)

  31. Perhaps, DRJ. But Thomas is an actual Republican descendant of slaves whereas Obama is a democrat descendant of slave traders. Big difference.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie (f4eb27)

  32. I’m not sure I understand the distinction you are making, Hoagie. I’m not talking about race. I am addressing the suggestion that we don’t need to respond to attacks if someone isn’t running for office.

    DRJ (1dff03)

  33. elissa,

    I believe any falsehoods and bigoted and racist accusations made against upstanding conservatives (especially one like Thomas who has endured so much attack) by liberal cultural icons with a wide-reaching audience should be countered if they can. And if the culprits decide to double down on stupid, then that should be exposed as well.

    Dana (86e864)

  34. ==the suggestion that we don’t need to respond to attacks if someone isn’t running for office.==

    There was no suggestion of that, that I am aware of, DRJ. I initially copied a blurb from Dana @16 where I felt she was perhaps conflating the larger influence of a Jon Stewart’s multi year TV show on voting trends, compared to the relative insignificance of Takei’s one-off idiocy, and I made a snarky comment. The thing sort of took on a life of its own from there as so often happens! :)

    elissa (966fbb)

  35. Takei is enormously popular, and usually witty, and therefore has a lot of influence on public opinion. So when he does something like this it needs to be publicized,

    I’m sure a certain subset of people finds him so, but that’s true of many excremental “pop culture” things these days.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  36. But elissa,

    I think I was making a solid point: Jon Stewart’s drivel was *real* news to a large swath of the *voting* public. Takei, in his iconic stature, reaches millions of people and surely, a large number of his supporters are also voters. Both peddle distortions. Both dislike conservatives. Both capture viewers/readers. Both back liberal politicians. And both completely rely upon the uninformed and low-information voter for an audience.

    Dana (86e864)

  37. Further, I guess I just don’t know the rules and/or expiration dates of when something is noteworthy and when it crosses the line to “overkill”.

    Dana (86e864)

  38. this should leave a mark…

    http://t.co/VeCGd1ky8n

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  39. I now realize you are taking my observation personally and I regret that Dana. You are a good person and a very good blogger and I respect you. I personally don’t think we can manage to combat every slight, falsehood, insult and accusation made by a minor celebrity against our side in this age where anybody and everybody has a facebook, instagram, and twitter account and can therefore blurt out anything they feel like. There are not enough bloggers and not enough hours in the day. And continuous outrageous outrage is exhausting–at least for me. Let’s leave it at that.

    elissa (966fbb)

  40. good one, colonel

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  41. I think he has made a further statement now, apologizing for his use of the term.

    RigelDog (b70d0f)

  42. elissa,

    I am not taking it personally. I am taking it with thought because I respect you. Wouldn’t you have me do that?

    I am seriously questioning, is there an expiration date? Is there a rule of thumb that I am unaware of? Personally, I often read follow-ups to idiot’s attacks on conservatives because they inevitably reveal their incoherency in arriving at their conclusion. It’s instructive to me as I deal with people like Takei in real life, and it makes me weigh out what sort of thoughtful response might not just knock down their misrepresentations, but actually provoke the person to discussion.

    As far as Takei goes, he is the culmination of everything the left adores and reveres. He is useful to them, he is one of them, and therefore, what he says matters. He will no doubt be elevated further in deification by Democrats as a result of this kerfuffle, but not because of conservatives pointing out the absurdity of his words and beliefs, but because he is the exact sort of poster boy they need to further their agenda.

    Dana (86e864)

  43. I posted excerpts in another thread about a survey done by Pew Research that indicated the Islamic religion and Islamicists went up in public esteem following 9-11 in the USA and the Charlie Hedbo massacre in France. Pew called such a response “counter-intuitive.”

    Interestingly or coincidentally enough, a recent Gallup Poll revealed that liberalism (or cultural leftism) is increasing in favor among respondents (along with squish-squish “centrism” too) and is beginning to equal self-identified conservatives for the first time ever — at least since Gallup started surveying for the public’s ideological orientation — during this era of liberalism run amok.

    Between the fanaticism of Islamism and the fanaticism of modern-day (in particular) Western liberalism, I’m now starting to understand the origins of the social, political stupidity or lunacy that has greeted just about every major era of human existence.

    Between forces like ISIS, etc, or the loons demanding that their sexuality be catered to (figuratively and literally—by bakers, for instance), may the two sides meet on the proverbial great battle field (even though they tend to be enablers to one another) and, well, end up with mutual annihilation. Hopefully people with sanity (the apparent diminishing number of them) won’t be caught between the two sides.

    Mark (e584c3)

  44. Oops, sorry Colonel. I forgot to refresh and re-posted what you had already done. Apologies.

    Gazzer (ee3742)

  45. I think people decide how to vote based on many things, including suggestions and ideas they get from entertainers. George Takei’s emotional outbursts might have an impact on some people, and a prompt and continued response might help keep that from happening.

    DRJ (1dff03)

  46. Bloggers have lots of space to put lots of words. I don’t think this hurts but if it does, then people who are annoyed by this sort of thing probably don’t tune in to start with or tune out when it irritates them.

    DRJ (1dff03)

  47. By calling him a “clown in blackface,” Takai is essentially insinuating that Thomas isn’t really black, which is certainly racist on it’s face. I think the term he’s looking for is “House Ni**ger.”

    If you’re going to be a racist pig, George, you really ought to get your epithets correct, the better to wallow in the filth you so exuberantly fling.

    arik (02de93)

  48. I’m now fully prepared to never take the basic wisdom of people for granted, to realize I can never be too cynical and skeptical about just how nonsensical the average person is or will be—ie, polls from Pew and Gallup. Then again, I’ve long had suspicions about just how absurdly bad that destructive, self-destructive trends can become given the textbook examples of urban American areas ravaged for decades by liberalism and left-leaning politicians, but where most people in such areas never change their voting stripes (colored a deep, dark blue).

    Mark (e584c3)

  49. Shorter Takei: “I’m the victim here. Me. *I* *am* *the* *Victim*. Don’t you understand? You’re supposed to take MY side. The Biggest Victim WINS!!! The Biggest Victim doesn’t have to “explain” or “walk back” any statement if he *feeels* desperately, passionately, deeply, that it SHOULD be true. Why are you looking at me like that?”

    A_Nonny_Mouse (07d2fa)

  50. Whoops! He is trying to apologize.

    https://www.facebook.com/georgehtakei/posts/1299475283415255

    This takes me to something very important. It’s from the late Randy Pausch (who wrote “The Last Lecture”):

    http://tasithoughts.com/2008/07/08/a-bad-apology-is-worse-than-no-apology/

    I’m afraid Mr. Sulu doesn’t get it.

    Simon Jester (6c4043)

  51. Mark, you hit the nail on the head with respect to the Left’s blatant hypocrisy regarding its enthusiastic embrace of, and its constant, reflexive defense of, the ideology of “Submission.” Obama and the Left have never been able to reconcile (or, for that matter, been forced to reconcile) their embrace of Islam under the multiculturalist banners of “tolerance,” “diversity,” and (increasingly) the narrative of alleged victimhood (“Islamophobia”), with that undeniably supremacist ideology’s odious and unabashedly violent treatment of women and gays, two of the groups that the Left claims as part of its tent-pole constituencies and protected classes.

    At some point, you have to unabashedly and unequivocally call a supremacist, totalitarian ideology for what it transparently is. The Left doesn’t have the courage and the intellectual honesty to do that when it comes to “Submission.”

    Guy Jones (173efd)

  52. Another reason to keep pushing stories like this is that, after he initially doubled-down, ultimately Takei apologized.

    DRJ (1dff03)

  53. The Left can complain but when Takei apologized, it made it hard for this story to do anything but hurt them.

    DRJ (1dff03)

  54. I think he’s lost his cachet with a lot of people who thought he was a cute, friendly, gay old guy. I was one of them.

    nk (dbc370)

  55. Takei said something racist and demeaning. After intense public backlash, he issued an apology. If the result of blog posts like Dana’s is that the Left can’t start to normalise racist attacks on conservatives, then it is worthwhile,

    JMHO.

    bridget (3886f0)

  56. What’s sad about Takei’s apology, is that he still misconstrues what Thomas said. He apologized for his incivility, but does not understand the point Thomas carefully made and how important it is.

    Dana (86e864)

  57. Dana-I was at an event and could not respond to you earlier. I don’t know if this will help clarify but I’ll try. My thought here is that it’s the focus and spotlight on Takei–the “Me me me! Look at poor me. I used to be somebody. I’m a victim. Listen to my potty mouth!”, that’s such a poor use of right leaning blog efforts. By pointing fingers at him and linking/repeating his vile statements we’re just giving Takei more of the very attention he craves. In my opinion we should deny Takei what he most wants.

    Instead, if this is a story that you feel has not already been adequately publicized on the blogs, then why not change it up? Tell the story a different way. Tell the story from our side. Tell it from Justice Thomas’ side. Get that POV in the google search engines. Educate people who may not know Justice Thomas other than as a black robed caricature from the likes of lefties such as Takei or Rachael Maddow. Use a headline where Thomas is the hero. Perhaps a headline like:

    “Justice Thomas is owed a big apology” or
    ” Why Takei is so wrong about Thomas” or
    “Justice Thomas finally receives well deserved apology from Hikaro Sulu.” or
    “Justice Thomas is a man of accomplishment who deserves America’s respect–not the racist rants from a fading celebrity” or
    “Justice Thomas -an American success story who rose from nothing.” or
    “Clarence Thomas inspires. George Takei insults”. or
    “Clarence Thomas shines above small men like George Takei”, or
    “Justice Thomas is no Uncle Tom, George Takei, shame on you!” or
    “Blacks should stand in Clarence Thomas’ corner and tell George Takei to shut up” etc. etc.

    I am sure you would come up with much more clever thread headlines than these that I just threw together. But then use the meat of the thread to detail a poignant piece of Thomas’ life story, or some cases he’s led on the court, or a personal anecdote, or how he has had to endure hurtful racism like Takei’s his whole life because of both the color of his skin and because of his Conservative principles.

    I know that writing on blogs is not the same as corporate or legal communications, but I think some of the same “rules” and strategy probably apply. Who is the target audience? What is the specific intended message? What is the desired result of this communication? How do I want this piece to read/be listed in a search engine for future readers?

    elissa (4d3f88)

  58. Obama and the Left have never been able to reconcile (or, for that matter, been forced to reconcile) their embrace of Islam under the multiculturalist banners of “tolerance,” “diversity,” and (increasingly) the narrative of alleged victimhood (“Islamophobia”), with that undeniably supremacist ideology’s odious and unabashedly violent treatment of women and gays, two of the groups that the Left claims as part of its tent-pole constituencies and protected classes.

    Of course not. IT NEVER EVER WILL.

    Liberalism is all about dualities — of retaining the belief in multiple blatantly irreconcilable notions in their heads at the exact same time, never, ever attempting to reconcile them to arrive at one indisputable Truth.

    The relevance here is the existence of the Liberal Midnight Reset Button®, something whose existence I have commented on more than once, and which CLEARLY comes into play, here.

    What is the LMRB, you ask? I’ll copy something I’ve posted in more than one place:

    The Liberal Midnight Reset Button® operates to protect Officially Accepted Liberal Dogma® from challenges to the latters’ “integrity”.

    Consider:

    a) Suppose you meet a libtard who appears reasonable (the do exist… kinda like actual true moderate Muslims). They are open and honest and fully willing to discuss, without excessive histrionics, any point of view they espouse…

    b) Now, pick a topic dear to them, which you know they believe in but which you also know to be clearly wrongheaded, even if well-meaning.

    c) Start with their supposition, and take them, step by logical step through from their supposition, getting acquiescence at each stage: “Yeah, that follows, uh-huh…”. Show by such reasoning that the net affect of their supposition is the end result will be the exact opposite of what they purportedly support or believe in.

    d) OK, you’ve won. Now what? Wait. You’ll hear something like… “Hmmm. I’m going to have to think about that.”, and you’ll go your own separate ways.

    e) Now, a week passes, seek them out. Bring the subject of their supposition up again, subtly. You will hear them espousing the exact same notions of their original supposition unchanged, unaltered, as though the entire reasoning process you took them through in “c” never happened!

    So what happened? The Liberal Midnight Reset Button® is what happened. At some point in the ensuing day or so, after they dropped off to sleep, their tiny widdle libtard brain started to process the new information. It carefully examined the new information in relation to Officially Accepted Liberal Dogma® (OALD), found it to be unacceptably running counter to it, and purged the new information without adding it to the libtard’s store of knowledge. BAM, conflict ended, Liberal Twitticism remains intact.

    With practice, you can even watch this thing start to kick in as you have the discussion with them. In many cases, if they learn you’re “dangerous” to their precious Officially Accepted Liberal Dogma®, they will preemptively act to terminate, redirect, or otherwise alter the conversation to avoid the necessary mental CPU cycles required to purge the non-agreeing data.

    You think I’m being facetious? Only in a sense. This process does exist and it really does act to prevent true libtards from actually learning anything new. And yes, I’ve seen it kick in on more than one occasion.

    I will follow this up with my open contention that there are several clearly defining qualities of liberals, not the least of which is an almost absolute LACK of any kind of “wisdom”, that is, understanding of the world gained from experience of the world. Knowledge gained from experience, as opposed to intellect, which is knowledge gained from books.

    If there was a “WQ” test to match the IQ test, then on the inevitable bell curve of the WQ, you would find liberals almost uniformly occupying the bottom third of that bell curve.

    The reason is the Liberal Midnight Reset Button®.

    This is why they have endless faith in Light Rail, in Communism/Socialism/Collectivism, and in Democrats.

    No matter how many times they fail, abysmally, utterly, they just need to be “tweaked” to work better.

    IGotBupkis, "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses." (225d0d)

  59. Clarence Thomas has no need of apologetics. His position speaks for itself. The George Takeis, on the other hand, need to be shown for the poisonous little toads they are when they let the mask slip.

    nk (dbc370)

  60. elissa,

    I suggest you talk to Patterico about writing a guest blog entry. It’s fun and I think you will find it rewarding and challenging.

    DRJ (1dff03)

  61. the point is not Thomas’s record, but the rank prejudice displayed by an itinerant hasbeen actor, who seeks to share his mindthoughs as a pretence of tolerance,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  62. In my opinion we should deny Takei what he most wants.

    But it’s not just so much “Mr Sulu” all by himself but the liberals or leftists all around him who crave that public discourse move in a certain direction. They’re the ones who love seeing a conservative publicly say something politically incorrect and then get hit by, of course, the media and prominent liberal talking heads, and their supplicants throughout society in general. The left knows that a similar phenomena will not happen — or won’t trigger quite as much commotion — when one of their own blabs something intemperate.

    That’s why I’d never say that the right should back away from piling onto liberal buffoons like Takei, although your suggestions of how such a response to him can be modified are perfectly good.

    I will follow this up with my open contention that there are several clearly defining qualities of liberals

    I think the worst one is their belief that liberalism imbues a person and a society overall with wonderful qualities. But public debate rarely or never points out that a higher percentage of people on the left is less generous in contributing time and money to philanthropic causes.

    Public discourse also never or rarely involves attention given to the fact that some of the major political figureheads of the left in US history (ie, Woodrow Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, Clinton) have been classically bigoted/racist either out in open or behind closed doors.

    Public conversation certainly rarely or never involves a highlighting of the fact that the most dysfunctional cities throughout the US and most of the very dysfunctional nations throughout the world share one thing in common: They’re dominated by people and politicians who are consistently, persistently, nonsensically liberal—and they’re also often less humane, caring, kinder and gentler places too.

    Mark (e584c3)

  63. His third try was better. It’s now pinned at the top of his Facebook page. I think it still has too much self-justification, abstraction, … but it’s better. Not good yet, but better.

    htom (4ca1fa)

  64. Htom – he still shows zero understanding of Thomas’ position.

    JD (3b5483)

  65. “I have expressed my full thoughts on the matter here.”

    Isn’t that cute? He thinks he’s having real thoughts like a real adult.

    pst314 (ae6bd1)

  66. JD — Yup. That’s not required to apologize, though. I don’t remember learning how to apologize, must have been my parents. The formula doesn’t always fit, and it’s always tempting to self-justify and be overlong.

    I am sorry.
    I’ve hurt you.
    I was wrong.
    I won’t do that again.
    I can repair (or atone) for the damage by …
    I offer you my apology.
    [optional] I beg your forgiveness.

    Rearrange and elaborate as required. Be brief.

    htom (4ca1fa)

  67. Elissa,

    I don’t know if you’re still reading, but this report nicely explains why I think this story needed to be posted and followed up on:

    For whatever reason, these sites don’t seem to want their readers to know what one of the primary cheerleaders of same-sex marriage has to say about minorities who disagree with the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell. If Takei were a conservative, a Republican, a Christian, or a defender of natural marriage, I have to assume his racist attack on a black man who wrote something he didn’t like would be front-page news. But it’s not. And the only surprising thing about that is that it’s not surprising at all.

    Earlier this week, washed up Hollywood D-lister-turned-gay-rights-activist George Takei went on a vicious racist rant against Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, calling him a “clown in black face.” Takei was regularly trotted out by numerous media outlets as a friendly, familiar, happy mascot for gay marriage in the U.S. But if you get your news from liberal websites like BuzzFeed, ThinkProgress, Huffington Post, or Talking Points Memo, you’d know nothing of Takei’s racist rant.

    Dana (86e864)

  68. ==nicely explains why I think this story needed to be posted and followed up on: ==

    Let me say up front I wasn’t able to get your link to work, so using only what you excerpted I’ll just add this: it is possible that the people who get their news solely from liberal websites like BuzzFeed, ThinkProgress, Huffington Post, or Talking Points Memo were not specifically and directly told about Takei’s racist rants there. Yet, you’ve been saying how influential Takei is in the liberal community with tweets and retweets and millions of facebook followers etc., which suggests that you think great numbers of liberals and other Takei fans had already learned first hand of his racist rants and were passing them on. CBS, CNN and ABC also covered this. I guess we’ll never really know how people became aware of it, or what the ratio of cheers to horrified response was. Maybe you reached some of them for the first time with the Takei posts and if so, good on you. I continue to think the Thomas thing was largely a manufactured cry for relevance and a publicity stunt by Takei in the same vein where he recently “divulged” a long standing feud with William Shatner. Between his initial Thomas insult and his two half-assed attempts at an “apology”, Takei managed to get and keep his name in the news for four straight days. Not bad for a has-been on a mission.

    Just as Bruce Jenner was coincidentally hawking a new Kardashian family reality show exactly when he appeared on the cover of Vanity fair, George Takei coincidentally is hawking a new Broadway production “Allegiance” about his experience in the wartime Japanese internment camp. The show is scheduled to open in October. It will be interesting to see if l’affaire Thomas has any residual effect on Takei’s show–either positive or negative.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/george-takei-from-star-trek-to-broadway/

    elissa (84831c)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2938 secs.