Hillbillies and guns.

[subversive science]

You missed the part where he compared homosexuality to beastiality:

Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men.

No I didn't. It's his opinion and he may well be absolutely right in his analysis of "deviant" sexual behavior in that it could easily be a "gateway behavior" leading towards more radical sexual expression. It's known, for example, that habitual over-use of porn causes any number of difficulties with normal sexual behavior and often leads to more and more porn viewing and more radical forms of porn to attain arousal because of habituation. It's just as possible that a taste for sexual pleasure provided by one anus might lead to a taste for sexual pleasure from another anus...of another species. Bestiality is not, after all, unknown in human sexual behavior. The Romans were rather notorious in that regard as I recall.

Oh, yeah, and then there were his comments regarding the life of African-Americans in Jim Crow south:

Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues...

I think he was referring to the period between slavery and the welfare state and I do not believe he was evidencing any support whatsoever for Jim Crow laws. And I believe he was discussing the corrosive and evil effects of the welfare state and the ingrained entitlement mentality that it has produced in recent generations, which is itself evil and corrosive to black culture and the best interests of society overall. In that respect I agree with him. I know plenty of black families who will have nothing to do with the welfare mentality, who take responsibility for themselves and their families, who work hard, build companies, build viable and vibrant peaceful communities, who worship together and engage in charity and altruism without dependence on government for largess precisely because they understand the evil, corrosive and frankly racist nature of the welfare system.

The things this man said were vile and homophobic.

No, they were reasoned and appropriate opinions about certain male homosexual proclivities that reflect an understanding of the evolutionary forces that created human beings. He then expressed his religious belief that such acts are "sins," but in doing so he did not throw any stones at homosexuals, he merely expressed bafflement over the motivations of gay men and the opinion that sinners usually don't look very carefully at their actions before sinning, all of which are perfectly acceptable expressions of personal opinion and are not in the least "homophobic," which is a word that radical gay advocates misuse to smear anyone who doesn't happen to agree with or accept wholeheartedly the radical gay advocacy notion that homosexual sexual activities are unquestionably and irrevocably socially and morally appropriate and acceptable and that dissent must be crushed and dissenters reviled and punished for having a different opinion about homosexual sex acts. That's heterophobic bigotry and intolerance of the worst sort made manifest.

He has the right to spew this vitriol; and I have the right to call him a racist, homophobic piece of shit for his remarks. And, A&E has the right to reprimand him.

Yes, you do, and A&E does as well, thanks to our Constitution and the people who wrote it. And WE have the right to come to his defense and call people who call him names racist heterophobic pieces of shit for their remarks, and we have the right to boycott and put economic and social pressure on A&E to quit being heterophobic, anti-religious, anti-gun bigots and hypocrites. And that is precisely what is happening. Welcome to the sauce, gander.

His statements about homosexuality and race show how ignorant he is of empirical evidence.

Also, why aren't his supporters protesting MSNBC firing Alec Baldwin?

[piscator]

Back to topic...

[FBM]

"They've got a right to say it wrong if freedom's to survive"

Read more: Steppenwolf - For Ladies Only Lyrics | MetroLyrics

[JimC]

You missed the part where he compared homosexuality to beastiality:

Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men.

No I didn't. It's his opinion and he may well be absolutely right in his analysis of "deviant" sexual behavior in that it could easily be a "gateway behavior" leading towards more radical sexual expression. It's known, for example, that habitual over-use of porn causes any number of difficulties with normal sexual behavior and often leads to more and more porn viewing and more radical forms of porn to attain arousal because of habituation. It's just as possible that a taste for sexual pleasure provided by one anus might lead to a taste for sexual pleasure from another anus...of another species.

You're a fucking joke!

It's a domino theory, but with anus instead of countries!

[Seth]

You missed the part where he compared homosexuality to beastiality:

Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men.

No I didn't. It's his opinion and he may well be absolutely right in his analysis of "deviant" sexual behavior in that it could easily be a "gateway behavior" leading towards more radical sexual expression. It's known, for example, that habitual over-use of porn causes any number of difficulties with normal sexual behavior and often leads to more and more porn viewing and more radical forms of porn to attain arousal because of habituation. It's just as possible that a taste for sexual pleasure provided by one anus might lead to a taste for sexual pleasure from another anus...of another species.

You're a fucking joke!

The joke's on you I'm afraid.

[Seth]

And the guns? I already know enough about all the other stuff. Except, can you insert Duck Commander intonyour anus, fart, and make duck sounds?

Probably. Why don't you try it and let us know?

[Seth]

Oh, yeah, and then there were his comments regarding the life of African-Americans in Jim Crow south:

Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues...

I think he was referring to the period between slavery and the welfare state and I do not believe he was evidencing any support whatsoever for Jim Crow laws. And I believe he was discussing the corrosive and evil effects of the welfare state and the ingrained entitlement mentality that it has produced in recent generations, which is itself evil and corrosive to black culture and the best interests of society overall. In that respect I agree with him. I know plenty of black families who will have nothing to do with the welfare mentality, who take responsibility for themselves and their families, who work hard, build companies, build viable and vibrant peaceful communities, who worship together and engage in charity and altruism without dependence on government for largess precisely because they understand the evil, corrosive and frankly racist nature of the welfare system.

So to be clear, when you talk about "Welfare state" and "Entitlements", you're talking principally about African Americans, right?

I'm talking about a welfare state and an a deliberately-fostered entitlement mentality that has historically been aimed at and has factually oppressed black people in the US, by deliberate and intentional design...interestingly it's a design created by the Democrat party, which has been anything but interested in liberating blacks from government dependence into sovereignty and economic freedom because the more people they can make people of every color, but primarily inner-city blacks, dependent on the government for the very food in their mouths and their health care, the more effectively they can control them as a voting bloc to support the Marxist Progressive political agenda. That's exactly why Barack Obama was elected twice. But they are far from the only victims involved.

[piscator]

"The Welfare state" hasn't seemed to hurt Armalite, Lockheed, Clear Channel Media and Entertainment, welfare cattle ranchers, prison guards, or anyone who makes a living from a successful patent or copyright... all of whom are "Dependent on the government for the very food in their mouths". But it's a particular "Entitlement mentality" you're against, right?

[subversive science]

Maybe if all of the magnanimous wealth holders that Libertarians keep referencing actually paid these workers a living wage, we wouldn't have to subsidize them with a welfare state.

[Seth]

"The Welfare state" hasn't seemed to hurt Armalite, Lockheed, Clear Channel Media and Entertainment, welfare cattle ranchers, prison guards, or anyone who makes a living from a successful patent or copyright... all of whom are "Dependent on the government for the very food in their mouths". But it's a particular "Entitlement mentality" you're against, right?

There's a substantial difference between fulfilling a contract with the government for services or enjoying the fruits of one's labor that are secured against force and fraud by government action and taking money from one person without their consent to give it to another for reasons of social policy.

But I wouldn't expect you to be able to understand that difference.

[Seth]

Maybe if all of the magnanimous wealth holders that Libertarians keep referencing actually paid these workers a living wage, we wouldn't have to subsidize them with a welfare state.

Perhaps if the workers worked harder to improve their skill sets and moved out of the dependent class minimum-wage job environment, as more than 90 percent of people actually do within a year, they wouldn't need welfare. Perhaps if the government didn't tax businesses to death and impose costs like Obamacare on them in a poor business environment then the economy would heat up, as it has done before, thus creating more jobs and higher wage offers through the market forces of a free labor market then those workers wouldn't need welfare. Perhaps if Obama simply returned to Clinton's welfare-to-work program that was very successful in lifting people out of dependence then those workers wouldn't need welfare.

But that's not what the Marxist Progressive "democrat" party wants. They have zero interest in actually moving the dependent class out of dependency. In fact they are doing their level best to get EVERYONE into the dependent class by using health care as a fetter in order to enslave more people to the whims and caprices of Marxist Progressive government. The larger the dependent class, and the more people who must depend on government for their livelihoods and basic needs, the more powerful the government becomes and the easier it is for the government to demand obedience in return for the essentials of life.

That's at the top of the list of Very Bad Things.

[piscator]

"The Welfare state" hasn't seemed to hurt Armalite, Lockheed, Clear Channel Media and Entertainment, welfare cattle ranchers, prison guards, or anyone who makes a living from a successful patent or copyright... all of whom are "Dependent on the government for the very food in their mouths". But it's a particular "Entitlement mentality" you're against, right?

There's a substantial difference between fulfilling a contract with the government for services or enjoying the fruits of one's labor that are secured against force and fraud by government action and taking money from one person without their consent to give it to another for reasons of social policy.

But I wouldn't expect you to be able to understand that difference.

Why is that, Seth?

[Seth]

"The Welfare state" hasn't seemed to hurt Armalite, Lockheed, Clear Channel Media and Entertainment, welfare cattle ranchers, prison guards, or anyone who makes a living from a successful patent or copyright... all of whom are "Dependent on the government for the very food in their mouths". But it's a particular "Entitlement mentality" you're against, right?

There's a substantial difference between fulfilling a contract with the government for services or enjoying the fruits of one's labor that are secured against force and fraud by government action and taking money from one person without their consent to give it to another for reasons of social policy.

But I wouldn't expect you to be able to understand that difference.

Why is that, Seth?

That you have to ask is evidence of the truth of the claim.

[pErvinalia]

"The Welfare state" hasn't seemed to hurt Armalite, Lockheed, Clear Channel Media and Entertainment, welfare cattle ranchers, prison guards, or anyone who makes a living from a successful patent or copyright... all of whom are "Dependent on the government for the very food in their mouths". But it's a particular "Entitlement mentality" you're against, right?

There's a substantial difference between fulfilling a contract with the government for services or enjoying the fruits of one's labor that are secured against force and fraud by government action and taking money from one person without their consent to give it to another for reasons of social policy.

But I wouldn't expect you to be able to understand that difference.

Why is that, Seth?

That you have to ask is evidence of the truth of the claim.

That you couldn't answer him is truth of my made up rhetorical claim.

[Seth]

"The Welfare state" hasn't seemed to hurt Armalite, Lockheed, Clear Channel Media and Entertainment, welfare cattle ranchers, prison guards, or anyone who makes a living from a successful patent or copyright... all of whom are "Dependent on the government for the very food in their mouths". But it's a particular "Entitlement mentality" you're against, right?

There's a substantial difference between fulfilling a contract with the government for services or enjoying the fruits of one's labor that are secured against force and fraud by government action and taking money from one person without their consent to give it to another for reasons of social policy.

But I wouldn't expect you to be able to understand that difference.

Why is that, Seth?

That you have to ask is evidence of the truth of the claim.

That you couldn't answer him is truth of my made up rhetorical claim.

Oh, I can, I choose not to...