White People

by GhettoBear04 on Feb 29, 2008 12:32 PM CST Comment 54 comments

This is really funny. It's a blog that is aimed at helping minorities/foreigners understand white people. They don't mention this, but they're really talking about rich, white liberals, but it's pretty funny anyways. Check it out, it's funny to see how easily some of your friends will fit into this mold:

http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.wordpress.com/

0 recs | Comment 54 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

great link

I just wasted an hour reading it. My favorite:

White males arent complete unless they have renovated something.
A mission in life.

Hillarious.

by corbsclinton on Feb 29, 2008 2:43 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

its funny

my girlfriend spent hours on the site the other day

delving deeper, you see that most of this stuff is that white liberals (hippies, hipsters) would like...then later on there is a split based on northerners and southerners.

sharky would have a blast with it.

by ab03 on Feb 29, 2008 2:45 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I love that site

It's amazing how fast it took off...

Rex Hudler is in demand as a motivational speaker.

by Brian Thomas on Feb 29, 2008 2:50 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

It descibes my mom and her friends to a T

Rex Hudler is in demand as a motivational speaker.

by Brian Thomas on Feb 29, 2008 2:52 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Cracker

Look out, March. February is engorged and it's poking into you!

by thedirkatron on Feb 29, 2008 7:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

lol

"I think it's clear that he (Michael Young) made sure that the story (CJ's) got out. " - mjh

by Longhorn on Mar 1, 2008 3:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

funny

there's no need to explain the rationale of rich white right wingers, its simply fiscal greed over civil issues, but the rich lefty not concerned with taxes...

that perplexes most people around the world. especially other rich white people.

my uncle is the rich white conservative with liberal social values, of course, he's will to flush his social values down the toilet to save 5% on his annual taxes.

awe well.

.500 or bust!

by Jayslick on Feb 29, 2008 3:09 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Fallacious conclusion

Motive = "fiscal greed over civil issues"

You are saying wealthy conservatives have no love for their fellow man. I assert they have equal or greater love for their fellow man.

Their financial success, by virtue of the wealth is creates for others, greatly contributes to their fellow man.

Consider, as just one example amongst many, former Dallas Mavericks owner Donald Carter. Could he have contributed more by becoming a schoolteacher, or a nonprofit manager? Or, did he contribute more to his fellow man by growing his company up from nothing, and in the process becoming a self-made millionaire?

I suspect your heart is in the right place, yet I also suspect you've intellectually succumbed to pervasive societal memes, and to an "educational" system which indoctrinates as much as it "educates." I urge you to look with new eyes, and to question your assumptions.

Patience

by Huck on Mar 1, 2008 5:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

i think you ruined an otherwise good point

with that terrible last paragraph

by ab03 on Mar 1, 2008 5:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

What do you mean?

What is better for an opening remark in a discussion than a little condescension and the "I am smarter than you can possibly imagine" attitude?

by Chris Martin on Mar 1, 2008 5:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Chris Martin

It's difficult to not condescend to commenters who eschew reason in favor of flinging vague ad hominem into the atmosphere. There is, so far, nothing to disprove that I am, in fact, smarter than you can possibly imagine.

Cordially, Huck

Patience

by Huck on Mar 1, 2008 7:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Its fair to allege that I was speculating

I was trying to figure out, as best as possible, how he came to the conclusion that, for rich white conservatives: "its simply fiscal greed over civil issues".

If Jayslick wants to return and defend his reasoning, I would be interested to hear what he has to say.

In the meantime, how do you think he reached that conclusion? Is there not a good chance he absorbed it from a pervasive, societal meme that rich conservatives are all about greed? The Barack Messiah himself contributes to this meme in virtually every speech:

"Exxon/Mobil made $12 Billion last quarter. It's not going to be easy to get them to give up that profit."

Don't you think that, as he matriculated through the educational system, many of Jayslick's teachers and professors overtly and covertly alluded to "rich, greedy" corporations and Republicans? Was discredited communist propaganda like "I, Rigoberta Menchu" on Jayslick's honors English reading list? Wouldn't that qualify as an instance of indoctrination inside our education system?

Wouldn't Jayslick benefit from questioning the assumptions he has made?

If you feel I was unfair, please give specifics. I don't want to push incorrect assumptions or opinions upon anyone. If I am offbase, I want to know why, so I can change and tweak my own incorrect opinion.

Patience

by Huck on Mar 1, 2008 7:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Indoctrination

It is "conservatives" who are indoctrinated. Of course, there aren't many real conservatives out there. Instead we get Reagan and Bush spending money like a drunken "tax-and-spend liberal" and figuring out more ways the government can stick it's nose up our asses.

The GOP only pretends to want small government. They really want to severely limit regulation of corporate business activity while finding ways to control our personal lives.

How can you even say Halliburton without wanting to vomit? Discredited? That's the best word to describe the integrity of the GOP right now.

A working class hero is something to be.

by t ball on Mar 1, 2008 7:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

t ball

Maybe some conservatives are indoctrinated. However, I define conservatism as believing in small government. Most people necessarily come to believe in small government via reasoning. It's a lot easier to say, of every problem: "the government should fix it." It takes some thinking to say: "Wait - if the government attempts to fix this it will be bad for all of us - including the people the government is trying to help." One must do some reasoning to defend such an assertion.

Bush does not much believe in losing political good will via fighting over holding down spending. I wish he did.

Reagan, in my understanding, did believe in holding down spending. Reagan was hamstrung 1) by a Dem controlled Congress, and 2) by the necessity of building up U.S. Military power. Since Reagan's build-up of U.S. Military power was partly a strategy to help destroy the U.S.S.R (b/c he knew an economically weaker U.S.S.R. would nevertheless attempt to match the American buildup of military might), it's difficult for me to criticize Reagan's spending as I criticize Bush' spending.

On your third point: "GOP only pretends to want small government", I mostly agree. I shall not defend the danged GOP.

Re: Halliburton
Thank God Halliburton was there to provide services inside war zones. Such services are more difficult and expensive to provide than services in Wichita Falls. Halliburton, as all of large entities, is imperfect. It's impossible there is not graft and corruption going on inside such a huge corporation, and inside such a massive endeavor as delivering services to foreign war zones. However, Halliburton has done this nation a great service in Afghanistan and in Iraq. They are demonized as a political strategy. We don't have to buy into the political propaganda. Maybe it will be proven that Halliburton is actually a witch. So far, all I see are hysterical accusers carrying torches. This is not Salem.

Patience

by Huck on Mar 1, 2008 8:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Ranting

Your first paragraph could be turned around and be just as plausible, maybe more so:

Most people come to believe in the power of good governance via reasoning. It's a lot easier to say, of every problem: "the government should stay out of it". It takes some thinking to say: "Wait, if the government doesn't fix it, that problem might not get fixed at all and be bad for all of us, even the people who hope the government won't take away their unnatural business advantage."

For unnatural business advantage above, just remember child labor, Lake Erie on fire, the Triangle Shirtwaist fire disaster, asbestos, cigarettes, segregated schools, etc.

It's not really Halliburton that was evil. They would be foolish not to take advantage of the incredible sweetheart deal the government setup for them - with coincidentally a dear friend in the White House.

You know who was a real conservative? The elder Bush, #41. This guy took the courageous step of raising taxes and balancing the budget, and probably deserves a large share of the credit for the 90s economic boom. His party dumped him.

I used to be a Republican, when I thought they cared about entrepreneurship and small businesses. They lost me with Reagan, whose only real accomplishment was being popular. Iran-Contra continues a long Republican tradition of flaunting the law in reaches for power. Nixon, Reagan and Dubya are all guilty of it. Ford and the elder Bush, the unpopular one-term guys, stand heads and shoulders above the others in my view for their integrity, and with Bush for his sensible diplomacy.

And it's only going to get worse. All three remaining serious candidates have a loooooong laundry list of completely unrealistic spending proposals, and the Fed is the market's bitch. Bernanke is George Miller to Greenspan's Arthur Burns.

A working class hero is something to be.

by t ball on Mar 1, 2008 10:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

t ball

Nice job reversing the first paragraph. We disagree vis a vis more plausible.

I've never said I'm against government regulation. I'm against oppressive government regulation, which is what we have now in many, many areas. Oppressive regulation hurts all of us. It damages our nation.

It's not like the Dem Congress is unwilling to investigate Bush and Halliburton! So far, there's no "there" there. To me, "HALLIBURTON!" is obvious political spin and propaganda. To me, you are leading with your feelings on this issue, instead of with your head. I could be wrong. But: where is the evidence? If the evidence comes in I will shout "CORRUPTION!" as loudly as anyone.

I disagree about Bush 41. The Laffer Curve has proven itself to be valid: the economic effect of lowering taxes outpaces the arithmetic effect of lowering taxes. Raising taxes, rather than decreasing the deficit, actually increases the deficit. Bush 41 did not understand this fundamental tenet of "Voodoo Economics"!

I politely disagree with your assessment of Reagan, whom I believe to be amongst the handful of greatest ever U.S. Presidents.

You appear to be wrong that GWB has flaunted the law. Like the cries of "HALLIBURTON!", most or all of the accusations against GWB amount to calculated efforts to win votes for the Democratic Party in future elections.

The Dems control both Senate and House. They've launched literally hundreds of investigations of the Bush Administration. What criminality have they found, so far? None. Zero. Nada. You'd think, for every 100 legitimate Congressional investigations launched, Congress could at least find 10 or 20 instances of wrongdoing.

As to your Bernanke crack: heh.

Patience

by Huck on Mar 1, 2008 11:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Not looking to get into a big argument here

but I have no idea what you mean when you suggest that Donald Carter contributed more to his fellow man by owning the Mavs than by running a non-profit or becoming a teacher. Are the Mavs a charitable organization or something?

Glenallen Hill Secrets

by a bebop a rebop on Mar 1, 2008 6:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

a bebop

I was replying to Jayslick's assertion that rich white conservatives are obviously motivated by "fiscal greed over civil issues".

Donald Carter is a self-made millionaire. I assert that his company - via the creation of wealth for it's employees and it's vendors, and via the providing of quality goods to it's customers - contributed more to society than Donald Carter could've contributed (had he become a teacher, or an administrator in a nonprofit).

Adding an example: the Dallas Mavericks. First, when he owned the Mavs, both Donald Carter and the Dallas Mavericks organization were good-hearted, hard working charitable contributors inside the local community, the state, and the nation.

However, had the Dallas Mavericks organization never contributed a dime to charity causes, they still would've made a solid contribution to the community, via creating wealth for their employees and their vendors, and via providing entertainment value, and even artistic inspiration(in an athletic sense) to the community. Even without contributing a dime to charity, the Dallas Mavericks were and are a plus for the community. In such a scenario, Donald Carter could've credibly argued his "greedy" desire for the Dallas Mavericks to make big profit was actually a humanitarian desire, as well as a capitalistic desire.

I guess I was trying to say this: in a free ecomomic market, the creation of wealth helps everyone.

Please do not construe my words as a repudiation of charitable giving. There are always people in societies will can benefit from a helping hand. Charitable giving can be a good thing.

Patience

by Huck on Mar 1, 2008 7:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

but the analogy isn't valid

for the simple reason that you can turn it around exactly to compare Isaac Asimov and Joe Investmentbanker to draw a clearcut conclusion in opposition to yours.

The valid comparison here is between Sally Kindergartenteacher and Joe Investmentbanker. This is where moralizing and personal values come into play, of course, but for me the moral heft is all on one side of that comparison.

Glenallen Hill Secrets

by a bebop a rebop on Mar 2, 2008 2:40 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

i still stick by

my statement that as wealthy individuals have more to lose financially that tends to take a priority over the social issues of the day. ive witnessed it 1st hand on a bunch of occasions. i respect the business side of that, but thats how we have had our bill of right turned into nothing more than a piece of paper. save 10% on taxes but, the guy you voted for has an agenda of provocative foriegn policy that gets you in a war that costs billions weekly, and restricting your civil liberties under the guise of protecting you from terrorism.

.500 or bust!

by Jayslick on Mar 2, 2008 3:25 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

PS:

love the fact that my silly statement demanded such a large response.

.500 or bust!

by Jayslick on Mar 2, 2008 3:26 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Jayslick

Your premise is that giving more money to the government equates to virtuous action. I disagree.

I don't understand your Bill of Rights reference.

I reject your assertion that voting for GW Bush equates to being a greedy, unvirtuous sellout.

I reject your assertion that our civil liberties have been restricted(due to, I assume, NSA wiretapping of terror suspects).

I reject what I take to be an assertion that NSA wiretapping is only a "guise", and does not actually protect us from terrorism.

I also reject the underlying premise that Islamic terrorism is not an actual and serious threat. The war on terror will end when Jihadi culture is resoundingly discredited amongst Muslims. Until then, Jihadis will continuously try to kill enough of us to scare the rest of us into submission.

Patience

by Huck on Mar 2, 2008 3:57 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

a bebop

now it is I who has no idea what you are talking about.

I was talking about that rich white conservatives usually love and care about their fellow man; and their entrepreneurial wealth creation usually contributes more to their fellow man than they would've otherwise contributed if they had served: in the Peace Corps, then at a nonprofit, and then become schoolteachers at an inner city school, for instance.

I don't know what you are talking about. But I will read carefully, if you wish to explain.

Patience

by Huck on Mar 2, 2008 3:33 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

All I'm saying

is that Don Carter is an atypical rich person, and thus not really a valid point to draw conclusions from -- there are many more investment bankers and high-powered lawyers who create nothing for society than there are highly successful entrepreneurs.

And you have to understand that I'm not denigrating the pursuit of wealth. It's perfect valid in its arena and it's more or less the central tenet of a capitalist economy.

The problem I have is when you try to convince me that this approach is somehow more morally pure and right than helping others directly. And Don Carter as an example does nothing to convince me, given how atypical he is of the rich.

Glenallen Hill Secrets

by a bebop a rebop on Mar 2, 2008 3:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

a bebop

I understand your point.

IMO, when you are creating wealth, you are helping others just as surely as if you were bringing them a turkey for Christmas.

I hope you will reconsider your original statement that rich white Republicans are obviously acting out of greed. The truth is they are ctontributing to society, and to their fellow man. It generally requires virtuous action to create wealth(in the sense that one must act virtuously in order to produce at a high level). IMO, the meme that wealthy people have usually somehow cheated, in order to create their wealth, is an exaggeration. That said, I see little virtue in those who were born wealthy, yet are poor stewards of their inherited wealth, and do not use it to create more wealth in an effective and outstanding fashion.

I also hope you will reconsider your original statement that rich liberals do not care how much tax they pay. If rich liberals truly wanted to pay more to the government, they would voluntarily pay more taxes than they have to. The IRS makes provision for exactly those kinds of contritubutions. Like the gap between Al Gore's green rhetoric and Al Gore's private jet reality; there is a gap between rich liberal's rhetoric (pay-more-taxes-b/c-the-government-helps-the-people) and rich liberal's reality of minimizing their tax payments as much as the law allows. Actions speak louder than words. These are people who maybe mean well; yet the gap between words and actions reveal them as hypocrites.

Patience

by Huck on Mar 2, 2008 4:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Final response

Do you truly believe that Johnny Investmentbanker is a better and more selfless person than Sally Kindergartenteacher?

Glenallen Hill Secrets

by a bebop a rebop on Mar 2, 2008 5:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

a bebop

The original assertion was that Johnny Investment Banker was automatically motivated by greed, and by little else. It's the little else part I disagree with.

To your new question: Yes. I believe Johnny Investment Banker can easily be a better and more selfless person than Sally Kindergartenteacher.

Who is acting more virtously? Johnny Investment Banker might easily be acting more virtously(more productively, with more excellence and discipline).

Who is contributing more to society? Johnny Investment Banker might easily be contributing more to society - not merely b/c he might be funding a trust which literally pays Sally's salary, and not merely b/c he might literally have paid for the construction of Sally's classroom; but also b/c (among other contributions) Johnny is loaning money to start up the businesses which create jobs for the parent's of Sally's students.

Sally Kindergartenteacher might be an extremely virtuous woman. Yet she does not have a monopoly on virtue. Johnny's motivation might be greed. Yet his motivation might also be to use his skills as effectively as possible in his life. His skills might be in investment banking. From there, he might easily contribute more to society than Sally.

Patience

by Huck on Mar 2, 2008 5:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

spelling correction

virtuously

a difficult little word to type

Patience

by Huck on Mar 2, 2008 5:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

wasn't looking for equivocation and maybes

I want to know whether you think the average investment banker is a better person than the average schoolteacher, and which of the two you think is more motivated by greed, on average.

Glenallen Hill Secrets

by a bebop a rebop on Mar 2, 2008 6:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

a bebop

I do not consider schoolteaching to be a more virtuous activity than investment banking.

I do consider schoolteaching to be a virtuous activity - just not a more virtuous activity.

I will guess that a higher percentage of investment bankers are more motivated by monetary greed than are schoolteachers. However, that's only a guess, and I'm not certain it's a correct guess.

The monetary greed premise is misleading. Our definitions of greed likely are not the same. Our beliefs about the significance of income, and about the significance of working hard to increase income, likely are not the same.

In your previous comment, you wrote:

Do you truly believe that Johnny Investmentbanker is a better and more selfless person than Sally Kindergartenteacher?

I replied:

Yes. I believe Johnny Investment Banker can easily be a better and more selfless person than Sally Kindergartenteacher.

It takes some work to rationalize my reply as either an equivocation or a maybe.

I have enjoyed our discourse. I disagree with you, but I appreciate and enjoy that you have engaged at the level of logic and reason. Salute.

Patience

by Huck on Mar 2, 2008 8:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

that site is true

most of that describes me. but i ain't rich.

send me nominations for the Hall of the Very Good
http://www.buchanan4pres2008.org/
NIXON: NOW MORE THAN EVER

by gossamer on Feb 29, 2008 6:05 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

huh.

Apparently I am a cliche.

The movie Be Kind Rewind hits three of the categories on the first page alone:

Michel Gondry
Mos Def
Jack Black (musical comedian)

But that river of tears has dried for all of us.

by trza on Feb 29, 2008 7:32 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Maybe I'm not white after all

I have no idea who Mos Def is, never heard of him. And looking at that picture, is he really cold or something? I have never, and will never renovate anything. I do not drink bottled water (unless I'm in a foreign country with poor regulations). My daughter is bilingual -- but that's because my wife is Chinese. The idea of attending an Oscar party makes me ill -- unless there is an open bar, but I'd go anywhere for an open bar. I would never want to live in Canada.

Ok, I do like musical comedy. I just can't picture a black guy chortling at Waiting for Guffman.

A working class hero is something to be.

by t ball on Feb 29, 2008 10:49 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Mos Def

Mos Def is one of my favorite rappers, but honestly I'm pretty surprised to see him on this list.

Yes, he's been on Chapelle. Yes, he's been on Hitchhikers/Italian Job/ Be Kind Rewind.

But honestly, how many white people like Mos Def? Seems like Ludacris would be the more obvious choice.

P.S. Mos Def is an incredible lyricist. For any non hip-hop fans I would strongly recommend Black Star - Mos Def & Talib Kweli Are Black Star. Those guys are great lyricists.

For the second year in a row, the Academy gets it right. That means next year is going to be UGLY.

by TheBZA on Feb 29, 2008 11:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

haha

whitey.

But that river of tears has dried for all of us.

by trza on Feb 29, 2008 11:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You know it

Wanna trade CCR recs?

For the second year in a row, the Academy gets it right. That means next year is going to be UGLY.

by TheBZA on Feb 29, 2008 11:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

no for real though

I'm pumped because there's a free show down on the lake in Austin during SXSW with a bunch of good hip hop acts, including Talib Kweli and Ice Cube! I'm excited, I'm white, what can I say?

But that river of tears has dried for all of us.

by trza on Mar 1, 2008 2:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I might have to check that out...

Kweli's last album was really good...

by GhettoBear04 on Mar 1, 2008 4:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

thing is

I think Luda's white demographic is your average teenage-pop-station-listening girl, whereas Mos Def's a lot more popular among the older rich white liberals who want to seem classy. Not that he's not a great rapper, of course.

Glenallen Hill Secrets

by a bebop a rebop on Mar 1, 2008 9:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Not so fast

Nothing's more whitebread than driving a Prius...

But yeah, the Mos Def column was kind of dumb, anyway.

I think my favorite essay was the one on bicycles.

And the moving to Canada bit? It always cracks me up when some hard core right winger says "If Hillary is elected, I'm moving to Canada!!"

Rex Hudler is in demand as a motivational speaker.

by Brian Thomas on Mar 1, 2008 1:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

haha

I see lotsa black people driving priuses? Is that the plural form of prius?

Ctrl - V

by Dustin on Mar 1, 2008 2:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Let's go with...

...prii?

by GhettoBear04 on Mar 1, 2008 4:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Prius

I bought it for two reasons, the tax credit and the gas mileage, just did a lot of comparison shopping and cost analysis over the lifetime of the car. I'm one of those cheap guys who will put 300,000 miles on it and drive it for 10 years.

After I posted that first comment, I went back and noticed several things on page 2 that nailed me, the Prius being one.

A working class hero is something to be.

by t ball on Mar 1, 2008 7:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

prius

i just can't get past how ugly they are. but i'm the same way i'll drive a car 10 yrs, just upgraded to an 08 a few months ago after driving my 14yr old vehicle for 10yrs

Theory: Jeter wears rings on fielding hand,rendering fielding borderline impossible.

by rentz on Mar 1, 2008 7:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

My wife could not get...

over the look of them at first either. I was able to sell her on the other aspects and now she loves almost everything (still not the look though) about it.

"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates

by slc ranger on Mar 1, 2008 11:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs