BF2S Forums The fruits of Equal Opportunity

Mekstizzle wrote:

So then... lowing, I guess you support the invasion of Palin's privacy on the same grounds as MLK then. Surely you're not going to have the same double standards you accuse everyone else of having

I think with Palin, she was a governor and she also was at the frontline for Vice President and continues to be very politically active. There's more of a case for her than with MLK, especially in terms of relavence to their causes

If Sarah Palin has been caught in an affair she is fair game just like all other public figures. If she is caught cheating on her papers it should be called to task. I have no double standard regarding this.

Theft is not a private action. MLK stole another persons work for his own gains. MLK cheated on his wife while pounding the pulpit of morality and integrity.

Dilbert_X wrote:

lowing wrote:

It has everything to do with his character, his morality, and his integrity, in the face of his self rightousness and his preaching.

And what did he preach exactly lowing?

explain to us why race plays a factor in your opinions regsarding this issue

It doesn't. Not one bit, I am merely holding MLK to the same standard as any other public figure caught up in controversy. Why don't you?

Look pal, you have been busted hands down with 2 different opinions regarding public figures and their privacy. You have tap danced around that for several pages now, and has explained none of it while pressed to do so. Now either explain it, or don't but stop trying to dance your way around it.

You clearly endoese the invasion of privacy to find some dirt ANY DIRT on Sarah Palin, yet you call any dirt actually found on MLK as irrelevant. You really need to explain this double standard.

Last edited by lowing (2010-07-22 06:39:38)

Dilbert_X wrote:

If someone is preaching honesty, morality, probity etc and can be called out on it thats one thing.

If they are preaching equality and racial harmony and you call them out on their PhD thesis and extra-marital affairs then you're just making yourself look petty and hate-filled.

You clearly endorse the invasion of privacy to find some dirt ANY DIRT on Sarah Palin to use against her, yet you call any dirt actually found on MLK as irrelevant. You really need to explain this double standard Sammy Davis Jr.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Its irrelevant to your argument.

My argument is not against civil rights. I have not made civil rights an issue here ever.

My argument is against a PREACHER, cheating on his family and stealing the works of others for his personal gains.  My argument is against a self righteous preacher who does not practice what he preaches. It is the same yardstick used to measure all public figures by everyone apparently except you. The question is why?

You will accept any dirt found on the Palins as relevant regardless if that dirt is political or private because she is a public figure, and you refuse to lend relevancy to dirt found on MLK, another public figure. It is a double standard you need to explain, and as of yet, you refuse to do so.  All yo do is dance.

Last edited by lowing (2010-07-22 06:59:53)

Pug wrote:

lowing wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Its irrelevant to your argument.

My argument is not against civil rights. I have not made civil rights an issue here ever.

My argument is against a PREACHER, cheating on his family and stealing the works of others for his personal gains.  My argument is against a self righteous preacher who does not practice what he preaches. It is the same yardstick used to measure all public figures by everyone apparently except you. The question is why?

You will accept any dirt found on the Palins as relevant regardless if that dirt is political or private because she is a public figure, and you refuse to lend relevancy to dirt found on MLK, another public figure. It is a double standard you need to explain, and as of yet, you refuse to do so.  All yo do is dance.

Because the two items are unrelated.

Aka, even if he was completely open about it at the time the message would have been delivered.

I could go 2 ways with that argument.

If Palin cheated on her husband, it has been made clear that that fact would be relevant and "related" to her public image, and you claim it is not with MLK. So again a double standard. WHY?

Or, I can stick with the same argument that as a public figure, Dilbert has openly stated an inconsistent opinion regarding the yard stick used to measure all public figures.

Take your pick

Last edited by lowing (2010-07-22 07:28:41)

comparing MLK with palin. what a bloody moron.

Pug wrote:

lowing wrote:

I could go 2 ways with that argument.

If Palin cheated on her husband, it has been made clear that that fact would be relevant and "related" to her public image, and you claim it is not with MLK. So again a double standard. WHY?

Or, I can stick with the same argument that as a public figure, Dilbert has openly stated an inconsistent opinion regarding the yard stick used to measure all public figures.

Take your pick

Because Palin is not MLK.

For instance, when you apply for citizenship in this country, people are asked ten questions of a bank of twenty five questions.  One of the questions is "What did Martin Luther King do?".  Another is "What did Abraham Lincoln do?".  Aka, MLK is important enough to be mentioned amongst people like Abraham Lincoln.

Do you see a question like that for Palin in the future?

Pick somebody SIGNIFICANT to make a "this public figure fucked up" argument.

ummm so what exactly is your argument then? MLK is too significant a public figure to be scrutinized??!! Are you really going to try and play that angle? Tell ya what,  I will let you ponder what you just said before I rip your bullshit a new ass.

Uzique wrote:

how is MLK not like palin their both heros and role models

hmmmm yes, one is a PROVEN liar, a cheat, a thief, an adulterer, and a fraud. The other is an ex- governor from Alaska. I mean unless you have some dirt on her. and Oh try and make it something other than the cost of one of her dresses, or the fact that she kept notes on her hands. so far that has been the real big "scandals" you all seemed to be able to dig up.

Last edited by lowing (2010-07-22 10:47:58)

They both hate mooslims

Pug wrote:

lowing wrote:

ummm so what exactly is your argument then? MLK is too significant a public figure to be scrutinized??!! Are you really going to try and play that angle? Tell ya what,  I will let you ponder what you just said before I rip your bullshit a new ass.

Ponder?  Ooooo

YOUR argument is that MLK work should be disregarded because of his in fidelity

Let's not get confused on the question

No but he did copy a lot of his "I have a dream" speech.

lowing wrote:

Pug wrote:

lowing wrote:

ummm so what exactly is your argument then? MLK is too significant a public figure to be scrutinized??!! Are you really going to try and play that angle? Tell ya what,  I will let you ponder what you just said before I rip your bullshit a new ass.

Ponder?  Ooooo

YOUR argument is that MLK work should be disregarded because of his in fidelity

Let's not get confused on the question

yup you are confused, I said his cheating to "earn" his PHD should be REgarded, and that his lying cheating and stealing and fraud should be taken into account just like any other public figure would be.

I have asked repeatedly for an explanation of the double standard, and I still have not been able to get one. All I get is tap dancing. go figure.
For once stand toe to toe with what your argument is and stop dancing. You feel the double standard should exist, now explain why!!

Ya know what, I am starting to think you can not defend your own buillshit arguments as to why you endorse a double standard regarding MLK and well, anyone else.

Okay, and since we are going into this yet again...a continuation from a previous thread...aka you used Tiger Woods instead of Palin.

He cheated to earn a PhD.  He cheated on his wife.  Deplorable.

Yet he did more for civil rights than most people.

I do not believe one eliminates the other...why?  Because the content of the message was epic.

How exactly am I dancing?  We've done this topic a few times already.

Isn't it up to the minority point of view to prove their argument is accurate?

Every time I tell you to prove his message FALSE you tell me I'm the one dancing.  Aka, explain to me that MLK isn't an important, if not most important civil rights activist.

Fuck dude, you act like MLK should be compared to Michael Vick or Pee Wee Herman.  Get a grip.

Pug wrote:

lowing wrote:

Pug wrote:

Ponder?  Ooooo

YOUR argument is that MLK work should be disregarded because of his in fidelity

Let's not get confused on the question

yup you are confused, I said his cheating to "earn" his PHD should be REgarded, and that his lying cheating and stealing and fraud should be taken into account just like any other public figure would be.

I have asked repeatedly for an explanation of the double standard, and I still have not been able to get one. All I get is tap dancing. go figure.
For once stand toe to toe with what your argument is and stop dancing. You feel the double standard should exist, now explain why!!

Ya know what, I am starting to think you can not defend your own buillshit arguments as to why you endorse a double standard regarding MLK and well, anyone else.

Okay, and since we are going into this yet again...a continuation from a previous thread...aka you used Tiger Woods instead of Palin.

He cheated to earn a PhD.  He cheated on his wife.  Deplorable.

Yet he did more for civil rights than most people.

I do not believe one eliminates the other...why?  Because the content of the message was epic.

How exactly am I dancing?  We've done this topic a few times already.

Isn't it up to the minority point of view to prove their argument is accurate?

Every time I tell you to prove his message FALSE you tell me I'm the one dancing.  Aka, explain to me that MLK isn't an important, if not most important civil rights activist.

Fuck dude, you act like MLK should be compared to Michael Vick or Pee Wee Herman.  Get a grip.

Not sure how many time I gotta say this, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT. IF MLK murdered someone, it does not mean the civil rights movement was unjust or wrong. It means MLK was a murderer. Separate the 2 issues like it is supposed to be and then form an argument. MLK was not the civil rights movement. He played a part in it. thsi does not excuse his behavior before hand and during.

My position is this.

Dilbert deems MLK's actions, lying cheating stealing fraud plagerism as a PHD insignifcant, and that dirt should not be exposed on him because he is a private citizen which he is not. He is unarguably a public figure. Yet he feels ( in this example) Sarah Palin is not afforded any privacy when Dilbert himself called her a public figure. This is not a consistant POV regarding public figures and their privacy. MLK is afforded his privacy regardless of his lying cheating stealin and fraud. Something no one else can get away with. On the other hand Dilbert thinks Palin should be drug through the mud, even though there are no scandals surrounding her. This my firend is a double standard. that you seem to endorse.

Pug wrote:

How about this:

Prove to me that Sarah Palin has accomplished something of the same magnitude of MLK, and I'll be happy to tell you there is a double standard.

Prove to me that removing MLK's PhD will prove that his life's work was meaningless.

Prove to me that a media blitz surrounding MLK's infidelity will prove that his life's work was meaningless.



Is that dancing?  No, it means even if you are right, your argument is worthless.

this has nothing to do with accomplishments. It has to do with image and behavior of public figures.

His plagiarism proves nothing more than he did not EARN his PHD, he stole it, and the record should reflect that FACT.

His infidelity proves his character is not aligned with his self righteous image.. He is a fraud.

His lying cheating stealing has absolutely nothing to do with the civil rights movement. you are using the civil rights movement to somehow excuse his behavior out side of that movement. It will not work for this argument.