We previously discussed how the United States was sharply criticized in a government-supported newspaper in China for the long lines of voters who had to wait for hours to cast their ballots. Now, the happiest place on Earth, has announced its new leader: Xi Jinging. Xi was selected without any lines of citizens, who of course were not allowed to vote at all.
The regular decade transition occurred by an orchestrated vote of the Community Party Congress with his appointment as general secretary after a meeting of senior Communists. The Chinese people were informed of the selection as Xi walked into the Great Hall of the People with other Politburo members.
The rise of Xi to power is viewed as another affirmation of a new “red nobility” class — leaders who come from families with a long communist power pedigree. Xi is the son of a hero of the revolution and three other members have similar family ties. With continuing scandals involving the gathering of huge wealth by Communist leaders, China now fits every definition of an aristocracy using Communist controls to protect its power and wealth. Think of Louis XIV in a Mao jacket.
Source: CBS
Now that’s funny, RO. 😀
they teach cultural sensitivity in medical school? Oh great.
Why do they need to teach that? I learned when I was in 2nd grade that if you called the Italian kid a dago, he kicked your a$$ after school. A smart kid would figure the Chinese, Poles, Jews and other groups would kick your a$$ if you made fun of them as well.
What kind of morons are we sending to medical school or more to the point why arent more second graders getting their a$$es kicked after school?
most probably because of political correctness.
Gene is right about free speech, you can never have too much. Free speech is limited in authoritarian regimes across the political spectrum.
And paying attention to ethnic sensitivities is tribalism writ large.
Can you say Balkanization of the US? Texas and the other states arent going to have to secede, it will occur naturally and with much bloodshed.
All a doctor has to do is to ask a patient from another country if there are any religious or cultural values he needs to be mindful of. Let the patient tell you him/herself. Trying to second guess is paternalism. But then that goes along with pc very well.
I am offended, if you think this is the best I can do!
You can’t joke about rape, W=^..^!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FsfLPohZ_c
Oh, wait. I guess you can.
Bron
1, November 16, 2012 at 11:30 am
manners are the lubricant of social intercourse.
———————————————————–
someone better get the rape kit, quick!
Must you prove that you have nothing to add as to substantive rebuttal and contribute nothing but snark with every comment you make and on every thread upon which you comment, My Lil’ Drive By Troll?
Again, if any of this offends you? Too bad. Your feelings aren’t protected by law.
“I have chosen in my personal growth to simply avoid low level “comedic” remarks, It works for me, and as I have become further removed from this biting style of humor, I find myself more sure of my decision not to participate in such humor.
Just sayin, ….. not judging.” (David Blauw)
I like you … and … as I remarked to pete a bit ago, you have a wickedly cool wit … so:
What David Blauw said
Must you prove them correct with each breath you take?
nick,
“There are MUCH worse things out there than a Chinese, Kucinich joke.”
Poor Dennis 😉
Smom,
Appealing to emotion – “Oh noes! Not the bad old days!” – is an appeal to emotion. Your gender has nothing to do with the logical fallacy. You making a poor argument has nothing to do with your gender. It has everything to do with making a bad argument based in an appeal to emotion. This is a bad argumentation habit that knows no sexual boundary. If you think it does? Then you think wrong.
David,
What you skirt is something that anyone writing comedy knows to be true: low humor is actually harder to write effectively than high humor and it is precisely because of that subjective component of offense. Look at Don Rickles as contrasted to Dice Clay. Both are essentially insult comics which is a form common but not exclusive to low humor. Both are capable of crafting jokes, they both understand the basic dynamics. But Rickles gets away with stuff Clay could never get away with because Rickles is far and away the better craftsman.
Gene H, Another 1950’s argument – women are “emotional”. They are too “emotional” to get the job or the promotion.
I well understand ‘The Esprit de Macho” and have many locker room exchanges (in and outside) with my buddies that are rude and offensive when taken out of context.
However I also have heard and been disgusted by verbal exchanges of very low level speakers that are sincere and ignorance filled by denigrating and abusive language. I think most here can tell the difference.
I have chosen in my personal growth to simply avoid low level “comedic” remarks, It works for me, and as I have become further removed from this biting style of humor, I find myself more sure of my decision not to participate in such humor.
Just sayin, ….. not judging.
Guess what? You’re full of crap in appealing to emotion.
Cultural sensitivity isn’t the same idea as politically correct. One is teaching others to empathize and modify their behavior accordingly. The other is censorship. Got that? Teaching empathy over teaching “you can’t say that”. One is a good thing, the other is a bad thing. The value of free speech should not be impaired because of someone’s feelings, Mullah Smom.
And if you find that offensive?
I suggest you re-read the 1st Amendment and the jurisprudence surrounding it.
No one’s feelings are protected by law.
Guess what you guys. We are not going back to the 1950’s. You have lost this battle. Cultural sensitivity is even being taught in the medical schools. Carry on.
Y’all are special.
A pejorative is sometimes a pejorative because the idea it encapsulates is a crap idea. Very often an extremist crap idea, like “Communist” or “laissez-faire capitalist”. Bron, of all people and good for him, points to the problem with PC language. It’s a form of left wing authoritarianism. Authoritarianism isn’t the sole province of the right wing. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: the motivation behind PC speech is irrelevant. Oppression is oppression. Censorship is a form of oppression. Oppressing speech is rarely – and I mean rarely as in the already dealt with exceptions of defamation and incitement – in the interest of the public. The solution to “offensive” free speech is the same as it is for all free speech issues: more free speech, not censorship. nick isn’t the only one around here who seems to be missing the full implications of a free speech zone. It comes at a cost. Part of the cost for that freedom is you will be offended at some point. How hard you are to offend is subjective.
Bron , Yes, the words p.c. are used by the right wing against us everyday. Look at what is happening in those public schools, They have turned a whole generation against the republicans with that p.c. talk. 😉
political correctness is an attempt by the left to regulate free speech.
manners are the lubricant of social intercourse.