Common Sense tells me this post is trying to say something
I venture over to the so called Common Sense site every once in a while to see what the oxymoron’s have to offer. I have those writers that I care for and those I don’t. The kind hand that Art extended to me a few weeks ago not with standing, this post speaks volumes to me and I would like some other opinions before I fly off the handle on the name calling that appears to be one step removed from using a more common term close to the hearts of some people.
Obama appears to be making a play for the ghetto rat portion of his base by revising the penalty differential between powdered and processed cocaine. Crack possession is treated more harshly (for equal quantities) than the powdered variant. This seems to discriminate against minority offenders and this claim has a statistical basis but one can always lie with statistics.
uhhhhhh, wow. Ghetto rat. Minority. Crack. No doubt Art is referring to the Irish Catholic segment I guess.
We have just begun to evaluate a short post but we have to digress a little into typical Art assumptions. Art has been pelted around before when it comes to his answers and his facts most recently by UI the chemist. Art isn’t a chemist and he was schooled by one.
Cocaine (unlike opiates) is not physiologically addictive. In the powdered form, it was considered an elitist treat. A gold coke spoon might be openly worn on a chain in a disco while a hypodermic syringe would mark one as a low-life. Coke was the ‘in drug’ with many of the beautiful people. Yet it is destructive to most users and is rather costly. I have never seen a regular user been able to escape a social harm from use of the drug and there are credible reports that some surgeons in California enjoy a nice income from restoring badly damaged nasal septums. Powder is still considered ‘cool’ in some circles. I would not snort a line if it were free and legal.
Uh, Anyone want to take a stab at the first sentence? Ok, I will. WRONG. It is physiolically addictive. Television would have been a better example but this is Art and in his own mind his facts are facts. That is the world according to Art.
As far as his regular user comment. I guess Art doesn’t know people on ADD meds…As for the rest “credible reports”? To use a Daily Show reference…”Some Guy” comes to mind.
And this little piece of booger sugar is priceless: “Powder is still considered ‘cool’ in some circles.” Hilarious in some circles for sure.
Now back to the real meaning of the omnipotent one’s post
Crack is processed cocaine and it is not associated with the allegedly beautiful people. It offers a relatively quick and cheap effect. While the snorters may blow their salaries and trust fund on junk and even dip into the till, they tend not to knock over liquor stores and mug people to subsidize their pleasures.
Wonder who Art is referencing on this one? Any takers? Must be Obama’s German Bratwurst voting bloc.
Thus the rationale for the difference in penalties.
As a thug-hugger, Obama will certainly act in behalf of the criminal element in his base.
I could be wrong and I won’t jump to conclusions. I will allow you the reader to draw an assesment.
His comments are racist. I know people get the vapors when they find out they are racists, but I’m not going sugar coat it for Downy. Just plain racist, clear cut case.
1 for racism
Pssst….C’mere…. if word gets out that Obama is black it just might push McCain over the top.
What about this:
A gold coke spoon might be openly worn on a chain in a disco
Art is recalling his days in Studio 54 no doubt.
I found it very racist. Do you think it is worth it to do a sentence by sentence rebuttal of this one? I think it would take quite a while to rebut it, I have no idea where he’s getting his information. I don’t know where Art gets his “facts.” His facts always have the air of truthiness to them. “Thug hugger” how is that not racist?
Here is a really long article about cocaine abuse:
Cocaine Abuse
From the article:
First sentence FAIL. I’m sure the others are as correct.
UI don’t waste your time. It’s Art.
2 for Racist
“Cocaine has powerful psychological addictive properties.”
From experience I’ll not elaborate on, both Coke and crack give you enormously fantastic first highs. The problem is that the user keeps trying to replicate the first high, and keeps upping the dosage etc. in a never-ending (and futile) quest to feel as good as they used to. The real difference (although chemically it might be different, you might have to ask UI) the only difference is the price and the penalties for possession.
And yes, that would be 3 for racist
3 for Racist
You know, when you throw out the term “ghetto rat” in the first sentence, it’s pretty much over before it starts.
Check it 4 for racist. And I am NOT one to easily sling that term around, especially when there’s humor involved. But Art’s post is not humorous, it is a stream of concentrated ignorance.
P.S. Anyone else notice that in a subsequent post, Art openly wonders whether Obama is “a polished ghetto rat?”
For fuck’s sake, Art, get it over with and call the guy SuperN-er.
Art’s message here is that drugs are not so bad when white people with money do expensive ones and they are really bad when black people do the cheap ones.
So it isn’t bad enough that we continue the failed drug war, Art is in favor of continuing that war’s Jim Crow.
Because nothing expresses racial supremacy more than the quality of the drugs you consume.
Make that vote #5.
Look’s like we are batting 100%. My racistometer isn’t too sensitive and I thought this was the case.
Do we have a jury of six? I am so glad that we have people to fert out racists and a method so efficient that no context of person or cross examination is necessary. Very efficient, just like a Cuban court.
by Cuban do you mean Guantanamo?
Um…. did David mean ferret out?
And as much as I avoid the “R” word… count me as 7.