Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

This should be locked.

I mean this is such a ridiculous issue.

Just another pathetic, half assed attempt to undermine John Mccain.

Why should we be concerned with the personal lives of candidates?

Idc if Obama did pot or if Mccain said gooks or WHATEVER.

How is it significant to his plans on the economy?

At 7/24/08 01:26 AM, LazyDrunk wrote: Fuck the minority. Words are words, actions are actions. Equality means he's probably slandered fat lazy white people, too, but who gives a fuck? White people are the majority and we don't get worked up unless you portray Jesus buttfucking some little kid before christmas.

And... there it is.
The "Who-cares-we're-majority" attitude.

And yet,
WHY is there that scramble to get that minority vote?

It's like Arnold's special election all over again.
He pushed so hard to get their vote... and so willingly, Californian latinos voted for him. Yet, he's been unwilling to work with the community, even agitating them at times. But, there he is... willing to get his pictures taken with Mayor Villaraigosa.

This is what's happening with McCain.
Right now, he's like a naughty child during Christmastime. He may act nice now... but, what will happen after he's gotten his presents???

At 7/24/08 01:18 AM, slipknotfan591 wrote:
Is it the NY Times?

No. And that doesn't matter. My point was that voters DO think that.

At 7/24/08 02:08 AM, fli wrote:

At 7/24/08 01:26 AM, LazyDrunk wrote: Fuck the minority. Words are words, actions are actions. Equality means he's probably slandered fat lazy white people, too, but who gives a fuck? White people are the majority and we don't get worked up unless you portray Jesus buttfucking some little kid before christmas.

And... there it is.
The "Who-cares-we're-majority" attitude.

And there it is.

The "I've-got-a-better-discriminating-opinio n" attitude.

And yet,
WHY is there that scramble to get that minority vote?

Minorities are poorly educated and believe everything they read.

But, there he is... willing to get his pictures taken with Mayor Villaraigosa.

Yeah, damn him..

Right now, he's like a naughty child during Christmastime. He may act nice now... but, what will happen after he's gotten his presents???

Celebrate Hannukah like the rest of the politicians.

OOOOooooo

At 7/24/08 06:49 AM, LazyDrunk wrote: The "I've-got-a-better-discriminating-opinio n" attitude.

Yes, because it's discrimination against politicians to call on their behaviors...
boo hoo, McCain got tortured-- we can excuse his old fashioned descrimination, and how dare you call on it. He was tortured, poor man.

LOTS of politicians had been in worse crap and didn't exhibit such attitude: Nelson Mandela spent 27 years in jail. Tom Lantos... Holocaust survivor who lost all of his family.

It's one thing to forgive senile old folks about their quirks. You got to say, "He's just old fashioned, set in his ways." That's the only way for us to cope with such people.

But Irwin Tang has it right. John McCain could have never gotten far if he switched the N-word for Gook. It's a double standard. And he feared that he would sabotage his own presidential ambitions, but I think McCain has told everyting about himself by doing that: Carrer politician. Lack of sincerity. Calculative.

I think the only way he could salvage himself from that is if he showed a sincere apology to the people who had NOTHING to do with his torture by 1.) stop saying gook altogether, and 2.) saying sorry to that community who, after all, have more in common with McCain than he is willing to admit. They have, after all, have been victimized by the same people.

At 7/24/08 11:15 AM, fli wrote:

At 7/24/08 06:49 AM, LazyDrunk wrote:

But Irwin Tang has it right. John McCain could have never gotten far if he switched the N-word for Gook. It's a double standard. And he feared that he would sabotage his own presidential ambitions, but I think McCain has told everyting about himself by doing that: Carrer politician. Lack of sincerity. Calculative.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFbfAqJ4h RM

2:36

I'd like to see you all in his position. Nuff said.

At 7/24/08 11:54 PM, slipknotfan591 wrote: I'd like to see you all in his position. Nuff said.

Still would be awesome if he were to sponsor the overthrow of the Communist Government currently in Vietnam

At 7/24/08 11:54 PM, slipknotfan591 wrote: I'd like to see you all in his position. Nuff said.

I've repeated myself...
no excuse. What is more, the Vietnamese has been victimized by the same peope who tortured him.

At 7/24/08 11:15 AM, fli wrote:

At 7/24/08 06:49 AM, LazyDrunk wrote: your horse is limping

LOTS of politicians had been in worse crap and didn't exhibit such attitude: Nelson Mandela spent 27 years in jail.

Mandela has been sainted by the civilized world. He probably ran for president, once, too. But he's just another mistreated African victimized by his own people's inept human rights policies.

How that helps your position eludes me.

It's one thing to forgive senile old folks about their quirks. You got to say, "He's just old fashioned, set in his ways." That's the only way for us to cope with such people.

Cop out.

But Irwin Tang has it right. John McCain could have never gotten far if he switched the N-word for Gook. It's a double standard.

It's American History 101 Henry.

And he feared that he would sabotage his own presidential ambitions, but I think McCain has told everyting about himself by doing that: Carrer politician. Lack of sincerity. Calculative.

Everyone in the Senate holds those three characteristics. No argument here.

I think the only way he could salvage himself from that is if he showed a sincere apology to the people who had NOTHING to do with his torture by 1.) stop saying gook altogether, and 2.) saying sorry to that community who, after all, have more in common with McCain than he is willing to admit. They have, after all, have been victimized by the same people.

I disagree that he should be disregarded entirely for a few statements made about people who've impacted his life the way his was. It's not my duty to police his opinions and descriptive choices of words. It would be arrogant and hypocritical on my part and spineless and calculative on his if he complied with such an ill-concieved option.. especially given the circumstances surrounding Mr. McCain.

Can you see that? It isn't too far from where you are right now, philosophically.

At 7/25/08 01:39 AM, LazyDrunk wrote: I disagree that he should be disregarded entirely for a few statements made about people who've impacted his life the way his was. It's not my duty to police his opinions and descriptive choices of words. It would be arrogant and hypocritical on my part and spineless and calculative on his if he complied with such an ill-concieved option.. especially given the circumstances surrounding Mr. McCain.

Can you see that? It isn't too far from where you are right now, philosophically.

Jesus Christ Lazy...
Do you think the Vietnamese that are living here in the United States (especially here in California) were did anything to McCain?

They were enemies to the same people who tortured McCain-- and yet, McCain spent years calling a whole people as Gooks.

If he hates the Vietnamese, then why should they vote for him... and why should he seek active support for their votes?

This whole afair is entirely odious to me.
How can he represent everyone... if he hates one group who are completely innocent.

Hate the people who tortures you... not the people who so happen to be them.

Hypothetical:
A liberal or a hippy is captured by a "gook" and is tortured.

How much you want to bet that that the liberal/hippy will one day will say the word gook, refferring to his/her captors.

Enough said.

Me thinks we're all missing something. Whether or not use of the word is racist or not, or he means it in an offensive way, is irrelevant. What matters is how people see the fact he's used the word. Percieved racism towards a minority is gonna cost him in states like California.

Regardless of whether you feel he is is justified in utilising the term, a perceived racist viewpoint could drastically fuck thngs over in relations with Asia. Even if he isn't a racist and the entire thing is just a case of him using slang which he's never quite been able to ditch and he can somehow during the campaign show that he harbours no grudge against the Vietnamese, something like this will travel round the East like wildfire and anything good he will have done to counter it will be ignored and you may suddenly find that even in nations that are friendly to the US such as South korea, relations become a lot more Icy than they currently are.

Can you really afford that at a time when you're on the brink of China looking as though its going to be a super power? Do you really want the rest of the Asia to be pushed towards China because they look at the US leader as being racist towards them? Hell, by doing that you'll also be pushing them closer to Russia as China and Russia are quite good buddies with each other.

If this starts to escalate its gonna take some massive PR stunts and media manipulation to reign in the damage.

If what you're saying is true, with the whole "Traumatised" and "permanently mentally scarred", I mean, is he really fit to run the most powerful country in the world then?

At 7/25/08 04:07 AM, GunnerX86 wrote: Hypothetical:
A liberal or a hippy is captured by a "gook" and is tortured.

How much you want to bet that that the liberal/hippy will one day will say the word gook, refferring to his/her captors.

Enough said.

But McCain was calling ALL Vietnamese as Gooks.
It maybe understandable that he would curse his capturers... the people reponsible for his capture. But not all the people, most of whom are also victims. (Hence... the large migration during the 70s and 80s.)

although, some people have gone through worse shit such as Mendela and Lantos, and still... they didn't use racist terms. Period.

As far as being sympathetic and understanding, that's how far it ought to be.
But by supplementing him our personal forgiveness for his disdain for the whole Viet community... now, that's forgiving ignorance.

Guess what. People gone through horrible shit. We know that it will screw them up in many ways... and we can expect them to react in a certain way. This is where reason and compassion meets together.

But, eventually, there's a line drawn somewhere and sometime where somethings don't warrant neither our compassion nor understanding. Being an asshole and blaming it all on your past... it's not acceptable.

It's called GROWING UP and MOVING ON and BEING A BETTER PERSON.
The fact that he hates, basically, all Vietnamese just tells us that he is still struggling with doing the right thing.

I think that most would never use an unexpressive, bland, and immaturely derogatory word to describe anything in a serious manner.

I only use words like that for comedic purposes.

we all know mccain is going to win. so get used to hearing the word "gook" a lot more often.
barrack so-damn-insane obomba is not going to win. i know it, the republicans know it, and deep down inside of you... aside from your great--admirable, even--desire to see obama win, i'm pretty sure you know he's not going to win. would be nice, except for one thing: he's a politician, and he probably won't keep any of his campaign promises! especially not getting the troops out of iraq.

and believe it or not, the main reason he is not going to win is because he is black. and come time the election is over, i will be on ng posting "so... how about obama?" for massive points and hilarity.

and don't give that "what's his skin color have to do with becoming the president of the us?" bull crap. because then you're just being naive.

hell, if obama wins, i'll change my aura from neutral to evil and become an athiest just so i can show my face on ng. (you know... hopping on the bandwagon?)

At 7/25/08 07:55 AM, qu3muchach0 wrote: hell, if obama wins, i'll change my aura from neutral to evil and become an athiest just so i can show my face on ng. (you know... hopping on the bandwagon?)

I'm going to start recording all of the quotes like this from NG users, then depending on who wins, I'll see if everyone actually does become an atheist, or if everyone actually does move to Canada.

At 7/25/08 09:54 AM, Elfer wrote: I'm going to start recording all of the quotes like this from NG users, then depending on who wins, I'll see if everyone actually does become an atheist, or if everyone actually does move to Canada.

by all means! but run, run as fast as you can but...

YOU CAN'T ESCAPE HIS INEVITABLE FAILURE!!!

At 7/25/08 09:57 AM, qu3muchach0 wrote:

At 7/25/08 09:54 AM, Elfer wrote: I'm going to start recording all of the quotes like this from NG users, then depending on who wins, I'll see if everyone actually does become an atheist, or if everyone actually does move to Canada.

by all means! but run, run as fast as you can but...

YOU CAN'T ESCAPE HIS INEVITABLE FAILURE!!!

Sure I can. Unlike many liberals in the United States, I already live in Canada.

At 7/25/08 10:06 AM, Elfer wrote: Sure I can. Unlike many liberals in the United States, I already live in Canada.

canadian, eh? then this doesn't really concern you, but hey... i was plannin to move to canada myself... it's more laid back than california i hear. how long have ya been there?

I think it will be a pretty good race.

Certainly more interesting than Kerry dumb versus George dumber.

At 7/25/08 10:21 AM, JackPhantasm wrote: I think it will be a pretty good race.

Certainly more interesting than Kerry dumb versus George dumber.

as an idea, ya it'll be a good race. but in practice... it'll just be the same prick, different name, different face.

At 7/25/08 10:10 AM, qu3muchach0 wrote:

At 7/25/08 10:06 AM, Elfer wrote: Sure I can. Unlike many liberals in the United States, I already live in Canada.

canadian, eh? then this doesn't really concern you, but hey... i was plannin to move to canada myself... it's more laid back than california i hear. how long have ya been there?

Twenty years and five days legally, but depending on your beliefs you could add up to about nine months onto that.

And yeah, Canada is reasonably less terrifying than the united states. I'm always weirded out when I watch American TV that takes place in a major city and there's officers armed with assault rifles searching bags outside subway entrances, but the characters act as if there's nothing unusual about it. That's fuckin' CRAZY, man.

At 7/25/08 10:27 AM, Elfer wrote:

At 7/25/08 10:10 AM, qu3muchach0 wrote:

At 7/25/08 10:06 AM, Elfer wrote: Sure I can. Unlike many liberals in the United States, I already live in Canada.

canadian, eh? then this doesn't really concern you, but hey... i was plannin to move to canada myself... it's more laid back than california i hear. how long have ya been there?

Twenty years and five days legally, but depending on your beliefs you could add up to about nine months onto that.

And yeah, Canada is reasonably less terrifying than the united states. I'm always weirded out when I watch American TV that takes place in a major city and there's officers armed with assault rifles searching bags outside subway entrances, but the characters act as if there's nothing unusual about it. That's fuckin' CRAZY, man.

eh, one kinda gets used to a cop holding a gun to the back of your head while another one frisks ya. especially if you're mexican walkin down san pedro at night just to go get something to snack on because the food at home is nothin but crappy leftovers. but i was thinkin about movin there so i could just chill without having to listen to the annoying sound of police cruisers and obnoxious shouting.

At 7/23/08 01:31 PM, hhcash wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2rpvj9NS XM&feature=user

, I personally just think that he is angry for being tortured, captured, and given minimal necessities for life at a POW camp in Vietnam for several years. If I was captured, tortured, etc. by people of a race that also were fighting my country and killing my friends,: Discuss.

Well let's see, the U.S. invaded their country, bombed and killed whom ever they decided that day were the enemy. destoryed the natural flora as well as fauna. Raped , killed, murdered and destroyed a huge part of Vietnam. Used the countries volitile internal conflict as a way to "get invited" into the country to "help it".
Yeah , I can definately see why he has every reason to be angry and hateful. If he becomes President...maybe it would give him a nice feeling of closeure if you reinvade & destroy what little they have managed to progress since then....sort of what little George dubya did with the mess his daddy made of the Iraq affair, reopened it & made a bigger mess
-Nice

The liberal thinking here is, if you back Mccain on this whole gook nonsense you are a racist yourself?

At 7/25/08 02:17 AM, fli wrote:

At 7/25/08 01:39 AM, LazyDrunk wrote: I disagree that he should be disregarded entirely for a few statements made about people who've impacted his life the way his was. It's not my duty to police his opinions and descriptive choices of words. It would be arrogant and hypocritical on my part and spineless and calculative on his if he complied with such an ill-concieved option.. especially given the circumstances surrounding Mr. McCain.

Can you see that? It isn't too far from where you are right now, philosophically.

Jesus Christ Lazy...

Blasphemy! Apologize now for insulting an entire slew of christians who hold the ten commandments dear!

Do you think the Vietnamese that are living here in the United States (especially here in California) were did anything to McCain?

Do you think I think that?

They were enemies to the same people who tortured McCain-- and yet, McCain spent years calling a whole people as Gooks.

Gooks, chinks, spics, wiggers, twinks, wetbacks, rollos, gringos and fairies galore, fli. If McCain referred to his daughter as a rugmuncher (or something other than the singular term "lesbian") at some point in time, would you get all uppity and demand he apologize to his daughter.. or would you let them work it out?

If he hates the Vietnamese, then why should they vote for him... and why should he seek active support for their votes?

Because they're Americans? Why does Barack pander to white people then bash them at upscale San Francisco dinner parties? It's because they're politicians, fli.. and I thought we'd already established that fact. But I guess you forgot.

This whole afair is entirely odious to me.

Then remove yourself from the shit-plastered bathroom and go outside. You're going to be offended once in awhile during your lifespan, so don't expect sympathy and hugs when someone makes a stinky comment.

How can he represent everyone... if he hates one group who are completely innocent.

You can't represent everyone. Even my 5 year old cousin understands THAT concept.

And hate? I suppose you believe he hates gays and his own daughter because he doesn't support the idea of congressionally-backed gay marriage. It wouldn't surprise me if you tried to connect those dots together.

Hate the people who tortures you... not the people who so happen to be them.

Ugh, how stupid is that. If/when he does express "hate", 50 million limp-wristed liberals jump his shit and call for his head on a pike.

Cut him some slack, that's all.

Every time I read the topic title I want to correct the OP by telling him the PC term for it for a second before I remember that was the point. I dislike myself.

At 7/25/08 04:36 PM, LazyDrunk wrote: Gooks, chinks, spics, wiggers, twinks, wetbacks, rollos, gringos and fairies galore, fli. If McCain referred to his daughter as a rugmuncher (or something other than the singular term "lesbian") at some point in time, would you get all uppity and demand he apologize to his daughter.. or would you let them work it out?

Since when have I demanded an apology?
No... I got something better.
I simply don't vote for him.

In any case, that would be something on a personal family matter. When McCain calls all Vietnamese as Chinks... he's offending them all in in the public, which then becomes a public affair.

Because they're Americans? Why does Barack pander to white people then bash them at upscale San Francisco dinner parties? It's because they're politicians, fli.. and I thought we'd already established that fact. But I guess you forgot.

Wait, wait, wait.
When McCain looks at the Vietnamese, he doesn't think American. Otherwise, why would he refer to them as Gooks?

How can McCain ever represent all citizens of the United States when he clearly hates on group of it?
He can't. Until he does something sincere and fixes what is a very serious flaw of his character.

This whole afair is entirely odious to me.

Then remove yourself from the shit-plastered bathroom and go outside. You're going to be offended once in awhile during your lifespan, so don't expect sympathy and hugs when someone makes a stinky comment.

You're missing a huge point. The fact that he said said some stinky comment isn't what's important. It's that he isn't being honest about it. He still hates the Vietnamese, who are innocent, but instead he just behaves, for the mean while, as a good guy. And it's important to elect a person who will show GOOD JUDGEMENT towards all people... even his enemies.

Yet, when I point out what's real, thus knocking down McCain from his elevated and delusional Golden Boy level-- the hero who got tortured and surived-- to what's the reality... you become belligerent, offending your friend instead of concentrating on tackling down on what I have said.

Do you think the fact he got tortured is an excuse for everything?
I maybe offended by hypocrisy,

BUT AT LEAST I'm not offended when someone tells me that it's there... or give an excuse for it.
Sympathy hug for you, maybe?

How can he represent everyone... if he hates one group who are completely innocent.

You can't represent everyone. Even my 5 year old cousin understands THAT concept.

And hate? I suppose you believe he hates gays and his own daughter because he doesn't support the idea of congressionally-backed gay marriage. It wouldn't surprise me if you tried to connect those dots together.

Of course a president is suppose to represent everyone.
And here you are, preaching that there is only 1 American and no hyphenated Americans, saying all these airy idealistic things such as, "because they're Americans." Well, guess what?

Even McCain makes the very same distinctions.
Well duh, of course he does... he distinguishes one group as Gooks.

He knows that the Gook-voters won't vote for the anti-Gook canidate, and that he's got to stop saying Gook, although he has said, 'I hated the gooks. I will hate them as long as I live.'

And NO. I don't think he personally hates gays because he hasn't said anything about it, except give the same trite, but at least nonoffensive stuff about traditionalism and the same blah-blah. Do I think he will hurt the Gay Civil Rights Movement? Yes. Do I think he hates them personally? I'm not sure, but since he hasn't said anything offensive, I'm leaning towards no.

I don't believe in your idealism, there's nothing ever good in idealism because it will aways fail REALISTIC expectations.

Of course we have VIETNAMESE-AMERICANS. They are a distict and individual people, just like other peoples. They have a distict culture, as do others, and they ought to vote as VIETNAMESE AMERICANS. As much as we want to believe we're this homogenous melting pot... we're not.

We don't have to vote on a person who don't necesarily need to aid or benefit one group of people, but... for the sake of peace, we must vote for a person who won't harm any group of people.

McCain says he hates the gook. No, worse... he says that he will FOREVER hate the Gook.
If he's in power, what will happen to the Vietnamese when he clearly has a bias.

Hate the people who tortures you... not the people who so happen to be them.

Ugh, how stupid is that. If/when he does express "hate", 50 million limp-wristed liberals jump his shit and call for his head on a pike.

Cut him some slack, that's all.

My own personal symapthy will far where it needs to be. No more or less.
Yes, poor man... he got tortured and imprisioned for years.

But I refuse to idealize the man because of it.
I expect real things from him, from all canidates in fact, and I want to know if he has enough self control to overlook his bias.

Something tells me that if a man who says "I hated the gooks. I will hate them as long as I live," tells me that he's not willing to at least try to eliminate his bias.

And,
How about this?

Why can't he cut slack to the Vietnamese immigrants who lost their country, and the Vietnamese Americans born from them???

At 7/25/08 05:51 PM, fli wrote: Since when have I demanded an apology?

When you suggested he should offer a sincere apology or be excommunicated from your personal peripheral.

No... I got something better.
I simply don't vote for him.

Great, I'm not either, but not for the petty reason of calling some people a bunch of gooks.

Why can't he cut slack to the Vietnamese immigrants who lost their country, and the Vietnamese Americans born from them???

Because America isn't about catering to disenfranchised foreign nationals; it's about providing an atmosphere for freedom to thrive.

It's simple, really.