Slog

Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drunks

Friday, January 21, 2011

That Wasn't So Bad, Was It?

Posted by on Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 5:09 PM

Dennis Dale's daughter purchased the right for him to post on Slog for a week through our annual holiday auction Strangercrombie, which this year benefited neglected children and the homeless. More info about our charity auction here. The views expressed in Dale's editorials on Slog are his alone and have not been edited based on ideology.

No one opens up when you scream and shout,
But it's time to make a couple things clear

—LCD Soundsystem, "Home"

Well, I had planned a great big F-U post to finish out the week, but frankly I'm tired and have grown fond of everyone here. So one more short post on a wholly non-controversial subject, as you've requested. Sorry if I've tended to indulge myself—but hey, give a guy a megaphone, what do you expect? Thanks to the great people at The Stranger, particularly a certain editor who must have seriously pissed somebody off to draw the Dennis detail and probably was every bit as appalled as you by what she had to read (no "didn't read it but it still sucks" for her). In all seriousness, it's been great, if sometimes perverse, fun. One last boast, in good fun—whoever wins next year, I guarantee you won't remember a word. Below the fold.

From February 2009

Deconstructing Eric, or, Little by Little

Abraham Lincoln once said that "If you're a racist, I will attack you with the North," and these are the principles I carry with me in the workplace.
—Michael Scott

Our Attorney General is right. We are a nation of cowards, fearing an honest discussion of race. But, unless he's breaking utterly with rigorously observed convention, he's dead wrong about what that discussion would look like. A newly open conversation about race and public policy is the last thing an Eric Holder wants.

In fact, Mr. Holder's intent was to preempt just this possibility, which he reasonably fears as an unintended consequence of Barack Obama's remarkable success. That success shatters the very assumption upon which it is most dependent—that America is inherently and uniquely racist, forever incomplete thereby. Holder finds himself tasked with performing the traditional February rite of reinforcing this assumption—as the first black attorney general serving the first black president. That's one hell of a contradiction. It's going to take a nation of millions to obscure it. Thus Attorney General Michael Scott's suggestion that every day be a nation-wide Diversity Day:

...if we are to make progress in this area we must feel comfortable enough with one another, and tolerant enough of each other, to have frank conversations about the racial matters that continue to divide us.

When I saw the scare-quote screen crawl (I shall start calling them scare-crawls) on a television across a room, "Atty General Holder Says US 'Nation of Cowards'," I assumed Mr. Holder had renounced the fear-mongering on behalf of "security" that has overtaken the Nation since 9/11. Something about the courage required by liberty and the cowardice required by tyranny. Perhaps he even had the nerve to suggest the terrorist threat has been exaggerated by those seeking power and wealth. I imagined myself defending him to you. This is, after all, only what he should be saying. But Holder wasn't there to calm a panicked nation; he was there to panic a calm one:

If we allow this attitude to persist in the face of the most significant demographic changes that this nation has ever confronted — and remember, there will be no majority race in America in about 50 years — the coming diversity that could be such a powerful, positive force will, instead, become a reason for stagnation and polarization. We cannot allow this to happen and one way to prevent such an unwelcome outcome is to engage one another more routinely — and to do so now.

But this is nothing new. The remarkable thing about Wednesday's speech was that the Attorney General broadened the mandate of the U.S. Department of Justice:

But we must do more, and we in this room bear a special responsibility. Through its work and through its example this Department of Justice, as long as I am here, must — and will — lead the nation to the "new birth of freedom" so long ago promised by our greatest president. This is our duty and our solemn obligation.

Mr. Holder did not reveal any plans for how he will "lead the nation to [Lincoln's] 'new birth of freedom'"; probably because he has none. Of course he may think we're not ready for them. As if this immodest language isn't disturbing enough, Holder combines it with an attempt not to merely prompt debate but to direct it:

I fear however, that we are taking steps that, rather than advancing us as a nation are actually dividing us even further. We still speak too much of "them" and not "us." There can, for instance, be very legitimate debate about the question of affirmative action. This debate can, and should, be nuanced, principled and spirited. But the conversation that we now engage in as a nation on this and other racial subjects is too often simplistic and left to those on the extremes who are not hesitant to use these issues to advance nothing more than their own narrow self interest

This is a false accommodation. That there "can be" a "very legitimate debate about the question of affirmative action"; is given, and not by the Attorney General. The implication is that current debate is heading for "illegitimate" territory, deliberately reinforcing white anxiety and black resentment that holds opposition to affirmative action as racist until proven otherwise.

To limit the debate is to control it. Holder, arguing like the lawyer he is, needs to place the status quo he defends between two arbitrary "extreme" boundaries. Thus certain opinions are "simplistic" (of course he could be talking about the stubbornly crude logic of disparate impact and quotas—his call to frankness and depth included neither) or "extreme," serving "narrow self-interest."

It is a monologue Holder desires, alternating between narrow, meaningless poles toward a safely predetermined end, mouthed by a multitude distracted by false choices. The product of a collective, conditioned mind. But this much is obvious. What is more interesting is the unintentional but more revealing subtext, inaccessible to the author, incapacitated as he is by status, position and, appropriately enough, chauvinism. Holder's speech revealed the potential conflicts facing a civil rights movement-turned-industry by Barack Obama's stunning, rapid rise.

Those who most fear the reality of a "transformation" to a "post-racial" America are those who've most benefited from the decidedly racial nature of recent American politics—again, embarrassingly demonstrated with Obama's success. The end game of affirmative action and discrimination-through-litigation is revealed as long overdue. The intent of the "conversation" about race, now more than ever, is to de-legitimize that challenge by declaring it unfit for conversation.

If we should start taking seriously the "post-racial" nature of Obama's rise, we might start asking that it mean something beyond assigning a professional and political premium to certain individuals based on Obama's myth of "race and inheritance." But the obvious advantage that race played for the inauthentic son of slavery and segregation contradicts the myth. The notion of a white American jackboot forever on the neck of our culturally most powerful—black Americans—was questionable before Obama's remarkable campaign and the ecstatic reception of his inauguration. Now it is farcical.

But it isn't only that Barack Obama renders the white/black reparations dynamic absurd. The nascent Diversity State finds itself too soon and too totally triumphant. The bogey of white oppression threatens to become no longer plausible, and those groups assigned varying stature within the hierarchy of grievance are already eyeing one another uneasily.

The order now threatened by diversity is not pre- but post-civil rights. That minority became synonymous with oppressed, and "underrepresented" synonymous with denied, once only enhanced the power of the dominant minority, which extracted concessions from a still comfortable majority (that could still afford them and held an expectation of final conciliation). Smaller minority groups were content to follow the leader and accept a subordinate position. But what happens to that dynamic in a "post-racial" ("post-white") America where the majority of individuals have a birthright claim against the white plurality and no sense of obligation toward a black population that is culturally dominant, politically favored and stubbornly lagging in professional and scholastic achievement?

It was therefore Holder's purpose to preclude any challenges to black America's position atop the hierarchy of grievance. Black equality is more than simple equality. Holder is here to defend the primacy of his faction as the vanguard of a revolution now triumphant:

In addition, the other major social movements of the latter half of the 20th century — feminism, the nation's treatment of other minority groups, even the antiwar effort — were all tied in some way to the spirit that was set free by the quest for African American equality. Those other movements may have occurred in the absence of the civil rights struggle, but the fight for black equality came first and helped to shape the way in which other groups of people came to think of themselves and to raise their desire for equal treatment. Further, many of the tactics that were used by these other groups were developed in the civil rights movement.

By more false accommodation he allows that feminism, anti-war protests and other minority rights movements "may" have happened without the black civil rights movement—insinuating that they probably would have not. When Holder goes on to assert that black history is too little studied, and that "African American history is American history", he declares that black history is more than American history, and greater than any other group's American history.

The line is that we must continually revisit the sins of the past to understand our present. But in reality the better things get in the present, the more the self-interested must recourse to the dismal past, and the more the present has to be compared to an ideal of race relations that has never existed and may not be possible. There is no historical precedent for America, and nothing like her at present.

The regions from where America's "disadvantaged minorities" originate cannot compare in wealth, opportunity or liberty. Resentment of this humiliating reality feeds into that encouraged by the dishonest class of political opportunists represented by Holder. The language of civil rights has become an affront, no longer condemnatory of practice but of a people and a nation: the long history of Western civil liberties is only begun with the American civil rights movement and invalidated by the interlude of American slavery. "Simplistic," indeed.

We are in the late decadent phase of the civil rights movement. Declaring victory and demobilizing is not an option—this would involve the voluntary surrender of power, something that does not happen. Power is only surrendered under coercion or dissipated over time. The latter threat panics Holder and friends. Pretext must be found to justify power. Enemies, if they don't appear, must be found. First, they are said to be hiding among us. Then, the enemy hides latent within each of us. Our eternal vigilance against "hateful" thought is a population regulating itself on behalf of power.

Holder's acknowledgement of the problematic nature of diversity reveals an internal contradiction. By unmindful incrementalism we went from the noble ideals of equality and tolerance to their near-opposite: diversity as a goal in itself. Even now one cannot suggest publicly that a policy of ethnic diversifying is no more legitimate than one of ethnic cleansing, and no more fair. And while ethnic cleansing has a long, sordid history, ethnic diversifying has none at all.

A multiracial democratic republic worthy of the name will defend equality before the law against those who equate it with equality of results. It's too late in the game to deny that fairness in hiring and education produces racial inequality—inequality that, as we've seen, does not necessarily benefit the majority. Ethnic diversity and democracy are thus at odds. This was once a given; now it is heresy. But it is heresy only because we think it's awful that it should be so. Thus far we have chosen not to reconcile a diverse population to democracy, but to reconcile democracy to a diverse population. This may be inevitable. But, as the truth is always worth knowing and no subterfuge lasts forever, we would do well to call the Attorney General's bluff.

 

Comments (47) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
pissy mcslogbot 1
buh bye.

shots!
Posted by pissy mcslogbot on January 21, 2011 at 5:14 PM · Report this
TVDinner 2
I would have preferred the "fuck you" post. Go out with a bang, I always say.
Posted by TVDinner http:// on January 21, 2011 at 5:22 PM · Report this
3
You should do the exaggerated applause gag--as in we don't approve but we're sure glad you're done.
See you next year--I've won the lottery! Just kidding.
Posted by eladsinned on January 21, 2011 at 5:22 PM · Report this
balderdash 4
Good riddance, you mushmouthed old troll.
Posted by balderdash http://introverse.blogspot.com on January 21, 2011 at 5:29 PM · Report this
venomlash 5
I would have read your posts if they weren't all about at long as the Silmarillion. Get the fuck out.
Posted by venomlash on January 21, 2011 at 5:32 PM · Report this
TVDinner 6
@4: "Mushmouthed old troll." That's brilliant! I do think Mr. Dale might have brought out the best in the Slogerati. I might even miss him next week.

Might.
Posted by TVDinner http:// on January 21, 2011 at 5:33 PM · Report this
AmyC 7
@5 - nicely put. :)
Posted by AmyC on January 21, 2011 at 5:37 PM · Report this
OuterCow 8
@5 Rofl, yeah I gave up on that too.

Dennis, your Wall of Verbiage technique, while being hilarious, gave me no decent reason to actually try to read it after the first post. I hope you die sad and alone, my friend. May history obliterate all traces of your existence.
Posted by OuterCow on January 21, 2011 at 5:41 PM · Report this
9
Shot! Here's to Dennis, the only man in comparison to whom Will in Seattle seemed very nearly cogent this week.
Posted by gloomy gus on January 21, 2011 at 5:42 PM · Report this
Canuck 10
@9 I think you mean "body shot"...off Sergio's abs.
Posted by Canuck on January 21, 2011 at 5:47 PM · Report this
11
allow me to summarize:

blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah black president blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah racism is over blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah poor old white male me blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
Posted by planned barrenhood on January 21, 2011 at 6:31 PM · Report this
Greenwood 12
What is it about your writing that is so unappealing? I just can't make myself read enough to disagree with you. I typically pride myself in enjoying writers from many ideological perspectives, but your words just turn into mush.
Posted by Greenwood on January 21, 2011 at 6:33 PM · Report this
trstr 13
And there we have it. A bare-faced White Nationalist screed.

This will be the last time I ever read the Stranger. Printing this shit is vile. I imagine some of your advertisers will feel likewise.
Posted by trstr on January 21, 2011 at 6:53 PM · Report this
14
Hey! In here! We need twenty more commenters to foam and cuss and spill a lot of bile!

What's that? Better make it more than twenty? Ok!
Posted by Rhettro on January 21, 2011 at 6:55 PM · Report this
15
Canuck, you encouraged me to look up Sergio's doings - would you believe a dustup with Ronaldo in the Real Madrid locker room is part of rumors Ramos is entertaining offers from teams in England? Hmph.
http://www.caughtoffside.com/2011/01/19/…
Posted by gloomy gus on January 21, 2011 at 6:59 PM · Report this
Lex Luthor 16
That was actually by far the most coherent and well-written post of the bunch.
Posted by Lex Luthor on January 21, 2011 at 7:02 PM · Report this
17
13: And there we have it. A bare-faced White Nationalist screed.

What is it? It's White Nationalism.

What's it for? Well, it's your new boogey-man. Yeah, like a villain. Like the KKK and Neo-Nazis? Yes, exactly! It's not actually a thing you have to learn about--oh, sure, I guess there are some crazies in a basement somewhere who believe in it, but that's not the point. It's just a term and set of images. You can throw it in your brain whenever someone starts talking about race in ways that run against your grain and make you uncomfortable.

Yup, you can use it to suppress debate and cow people into submission. It's just a little more high-brown and current. No, no, you can keep the old ones, they still work, too. Think of this as sort of a fine liquor to add to your cabinet, or an expensive cologne.
Posted by Rhettro on January 21, 2011 at 7:03 PM · Report this
18
You read WAY too much into that speech! Wow. He never said the things you insist he said. And racism is dead? Yeah. right.... You just keep deluding yourself.
Posted by VerdeENL on January 21, 2011 at 7:10 PM · Report this
19
Wow, DD. You're reeeeaaaalllly bothered that we have a black president, aren't you?
Posted by elm+1character on January 21, 2011 at 7:22 PM · Report this
20
tl;dr
Posted by snakefield on January 21, 2011 at 7:43 PM · Report this
Lissa 21
@9: Is it over? Cuz I can't drink any more shots, I really can't. Well, maybe just one more.......
Posted by Lissa on January 21, 2011 at 7:54 PM · Report this
Urgutha Forka 22
No more posts from this guy?

Hallelujah!!!
Posted by Urgutha Forka on January 21, 2011 at 8:37 PM · Report this
Canuck 23
What, gus? He'll get all pasty in England, not to mention the steady diet of bangers and mash will wreak havoc on his lovely skin...sad days, indeed. But that Ronaldo seems like a cow, so it doesn't surprise me.

In other news, I am watching "I Am Love" as I type, but as the subtitles are cut off by my silly TV, and my Italian is 25 years rusty, I am merely gaping at the stunning landscape, marveling at their palazzo, and watching the sex. Young son with the fine features is quite hot...
Posted by Canuck on January 21, 2011 at 8:42 PM · Report this
trstr 24
@17: "It's just a little more high-brown and current."

Your Freud is showing.
Posted by trstr on January 21, 2011 at 8:50 PM · Report this
25
Oh, darling Canuck, the words are wonderful though! Aaugh! Still, you have the fabrics, the lighting, the furniture, the hair, the jewelry....yes, young son and his friend the chef...
Posted by gloomy gus on January 21, 2011 at 8:54 PM · Report this
Canuck 26
Oh gus, the accident...is this becoming a morality play? And why didn't she jump in after him...sob. Tilda is a goddess, she and Cate Blanchett (who was in my other favourite movie, Oscar and Lucinda) are just radiant. And eating the shrimp...like Babette's Feast...
Posted by Canuck on January 21, 2011 at 8:58 PM · Report this
Canuck 27
Noooooooooooo, she's putting on a black dress...
Posted by Canuck on January 21, 2011 at 9:01 PM · Report this
Posted by venomlash on January 21, 2011 at 11:55 PM · Report this
dirac 29
Thanks DD, for all of your 'fuck you' posts. I honestly wish you (and your friends who registered just to comment on your posts two days ago at 3am) well.
Posted by dirac on January 22, 2011 at 12:37 AM · Report this
reverend dr dj riz 30
no..no.. dennis .. this is how you do it.
FUCK you ! and fuck you ..and fuck especially YOU.. fuck all y'all ! all ya'll motherfuckers can kiss where the sun don't shine up my lily white ass... motherfuckers.. and if i catch any one of you unclefuckers around my house..or fucking with my kids.. or fucking with ANY of my peoples..i will FUCK you and your family UP !
DO !
YOU !
HEAR !
ME ????...
*motherfucking piece of shit motherfuckers*
...
see ?
Posted by reverend dr dj riz on January 22, 2011 at 4:22 AM · Report this
31
• Short post
• Your posts

Pick one.
Posted by tl;dr as always on January 22, 2011 at 7:31 AM · Report this
6 32
Wow....you "guys" are mean.
Posted by 6 on January 22, 2011 at 12:22 PM · Report this
33
I don't agree with Mr. Dale's arguments, but I think he stated them well enough that I became curious to read the comments for an adequate response. I'm disappointed, and I have to think that he is, too.

First, to call him a "White Nationalist" -- at least based on the content of this post (I haven't read his others) -- means that you didn't read the piece. Second, to insinuate that he's a racist for being white and discussing race actually helps his argument -- that the people within the civil rights movement who are benefiting the most from the civil rights movement have a political motive for encouraging and perpetuating a narrative of oppression.

I think his argument is too cynical. Sure, political parties will have hidden strategic agendas that run counter to their expressed agendas (i.e. the Republican Party will never really overturn Roe v. Wade because abortion is such a motivating source of energy and contributions from their base), but the civil rights movement is larger than a single point of law and is not so easily controlled.

Also, his argument discounts the presence of deep, ongoing white privilege in this country and elsewhere in the Western world. Light-skin people are more prone to get the benefit of the doubt in every aspect of society and dark-skinned people are more likely to be met with suspicion. It is a subtle but constant reaffirming of position that comes not just from white people, but from our culture as a whole. Over time, it provides ample advantage to white people and ample disadvantage to black people. You can see some effect of this white privilege when you divide broad swaths of people by race -- in finance, in justice, in education, whites fair better than blacks.

This is the fact that many white supremacists wrongly use to conclude that white people are smarter or somehow better. They ignore that science has proven, over and over again, that humans, as a group, are nearly identical in their capacities. Whites aren't better than blacks. Blacks aren't better than whites. We are all equal because we are all the same.

So what, then, explains what Mr. Dale calls "a black population that is ... stubbornly lagging in professional and scholastic achievement?" I think it must be the legacy and generational aftermath of a forced migration, the routine destruction of family and culture, and the subjugation of human labor over a span of several centuries that greatly disrupted the lives of millions of people.

I think we can all reasonably agree that we've come a very long way in a short time on the subject of civil rights in this country, but electing Barack Obama president did not solve the problem of white privilege (especially when you consider that George W. Bush essentially failed his way up to the office before him).

Affirmative Action is not a very elegant solution to the white privilege issue, but it's something. Sure, I think it has been counter productive in ways, inefficient in others and in some ways it's downright unfair, but changing a culture is harder than doing a three-point turn with an aircraft carrier. Still, better to do it imperfectly over a long time than to not try to do it at all.
More...
Posted by PoorYorick on January 22, 2011 at 12:54 PM · Report this
Lex Luthor 34
@ 33: You said: "science has proven, over and over again, that humans, as a group, are nearly identical in their capacities. Whites aren't better than blacks. Blacks aren't better than whites. We are all equal because we are all the same."

Of course no group is "better" than any other. We are all human and everyone of us has a unique set of talents regardless of whatever group we belong to. But "science" certainly has not proven that we are all identical in our capacities, or even that there aren't differences between some groups. What percentage of these differences is genetic and what is cultural I don't know, but you can't tell me that there isn't some inherent advantage that West Africans don't enjoy say, in the 100 meter dash, or that East Asians as a group tend to produce more individuals adept at higher mathmatics.

This doesn't mean to say that group proclivities should ever have any bearing on individual opportunity, because our group affinities say nothing about our indvidual talents (e.g. Yao Ming vs. Neil DeGrasee Tyson). However we need to get past the idea that every profession or occupation must include individuals from each societal group in exact proportion to their representation in the larger society. If there is evidence of systematic discrimination, root it out and remedy that particular situation. But just the mere fact that one group dominates a certain sector does not mean that someone is being unfairly excluded. This is the unitended evil of concepts such as "disparate impact" which assume that wrongdoing is the cause for every instance of unequal outcome. Applying "social justice" remedies on a group basis always means injustice for some individuals. The only legitimate course of action is the defense and encouragment of equality of opportunity.
More...
Posted by Lex Luthor on January 22, 2011 at 5:05 PM · Report this
Dee 35
Damn it venom @#5, I literally sprayed rum and Pepsi all over my desk.
Posted by Dee on January 22, 2011 at 5:43 PM · Report this
36
Rum and Pepsi? ICK. You're very young aren't you?
Posted by crone on January 23, 2011 at 1:03 AM · Report this
37 Comment Pulled (Trolling) Comment Policy
38
Guess what, "progressives", 2010 wasn't any better. Blacks ( a tiny minority in Seattle) STILL committed half the homicides in Seattle in 2010. Keep it real! No snitching yo! Let the Tuba Man's murderers free after doing only 3 months! It's the white-guilt "progressive" Seattle way!
Posted by Disgusted in MLK County on January 23, 2011 at 9:21 AM · Report this
39
Justice Sanders was correct!
Posted by So was Dr. James Watson on January 23, 2011 at 9:22 AM · Report this
Free Busch On Tuesday 40
Jesus Christ, I spend ONE WEEK in nowhere afghanistan, drive 10 hours back to my FOB through an ambush and I have to read Dale Dennis' inane ramblings? Dear Strangercrombie, dump the free slog posts as an option already.
Posted by Free Busch On Tuesday on January 23, 2011 at 9:48 AM · Report this
41
@34: Agreed, there are noticeable differences between ethnic groups and we don't know for certain how much that difference is genetic and how much is our environment. Given that we share 99.9% of the same dna, though, I'm inclined to believe that the differences are mostly environmental.

My point is that our environment, our culture, is one that still favors white people. Your point about defending and encouraging the equality of opportunity is well taken but I think it is impossible to implement. Simply making everyone an equal opportunity employer won't by itself level the playing field if everyone hasn't had equal preparation for the job.

Because white privilege is so deeply ingrained in us, so hidden from ourselves even, there's no way that we as individuals can really change it. I AM NOT SAYING WE ARE ALL INCORRIGIBLE RACISTS. I am instead saying that institutionalized racism was comparatively easy to spot and change. Our culture of white privilege will only recede after many generations of effort.

I agree that we do not need to have statistical representation of each race in every profession. We do need to devote specific resources to African American families and students if we sincerely hope to have real racial equality in this country.
Posted by PoorYorick on January 23, 2011 at 10:04 AM · Report this
42
@37: I'm curious about what conclusions you're drawing from these "FACTS that 'progressives' ignore and excuse." Is it that black people are several orders more murderous than white people?

Do these facts describe a symptom of the problem we've been discussing or do they describe its cause?
Posted by PoorYorick on January 23, 2011 at 10:11 AM · Report this
Lex Luthor 43
@42: "Because white privilege is so deeply ingrained in us, so hidden from ourselves even, there's no way that we as individuals can really change it."

So why bother with it? I can tell you it is very hidden from myself. If we need a microscope or an MRI to find our racism, is it such a big deal?

White privelege was certainly a dominant factor in race relations for the first two centuries of this nation. I can tell you though, I certainly haven't noticed a whole lot of privilege stemming from my white maleness during my lifetime, just the opposite actually. Maybe I need a telescope.

We need to devote resources to eveyone, we need to start treating people as individuals who are full partners in the human condition.
Posted by Lex Luthor on January 23, 2011 at 11:21 AM · Report this
44
re 33:
I don't agree with Mr. Dale's arguments, but I think he stated them well enough that I became curious to read the comments for an adequate response. I'm disappointed, and I have to think that he is, too.

Thank you. The sad part isn't that these folks don't have it in them, it's that they do.
Posted by eladsinned on January 24, 2011 at 6:29 PM · Report this
45
And there we have it. A bare-faced White Nationalist screed.

This will be the last time I ever read the Stranger. Printing this shit is vile. I imagine some of your advertisers will feel likewise.


The integrity of The Stranger is inversely proportionate to the integrity of this man. Vile, indeed.
Posted by eladsinned on January 24, 2011 at 7:44 PM · Report this
46
re 30:
no..no.. dennis .. this is how you do it.
FUCK you ! and fuck you ..and fuck especially YOU.. fuck all y'all ! all ya'll motherfuckers can kiss where the sun don't shine up my lily white ass... motherfuckers.. and if i catch any one of you unclefuckers around my house..or fucking with my kids.. or fucking with ANY of my peoples..i will FUCK you and your family UP !
DO !
YOU !
HEAR !
ME ????...
*motherfucking piece of shit motherfuckers*
...
see?


No, I can't quite make it out. Perhaps you should project harder.
Posted by eladsinned on January 25, 2011 at 6:02 AM · Report this
47
I'll sign off with a boast, because we all love hiphop: note that I only used 9 of 10 posts due me. I spilled one for my homies.

--Left one in the clip and still had you bobbing your heads the whole time.
Posted by eladsinned on January 25, 2011 at 6:07 AM · Report this

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!


All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy