it doesn't hold true that because someone is born a part of that race that they will also commit crimes or will not be very smart. In this case it is a social problem, not a racial problem. This social divide came about from the whites' mistreatment of blacks in the first place, starting with slavery. What do you think?
What do I think? The burden of proof is on you, to prove that it's a social problem. Being that there is a clear and obvious correlation between race (regardless of social status and society/country/culture) and ignorant/criminal behavior, it is completely logical to conclude that such behavior is racially influenced. Race is the de facto cause, any claim to the contrary assumes the burden of proof.
Even niggers born into affluent families, with educated parents, tend to exhibit such behaviors. Which would strongly indicate race as the cause, and that their parents are simply familial anomolies made "successful" by social pressures.
In fact, it is society (the white man's society at that) which improves the shitskins, despite their innate nature. Alas, this improvement has a very low success ratio. That's why we find ourselves in our current state, having society dragged down by these dirty bastards.
the flaw in their logic system (lets face it, prejudice is a major flaw)
Well, you just invalidated your whole statement. Prejudice and opinion are synonymous, the only delineation (in the usage you've applied) is that a prejudice is an opnion that is not politically correct.
behaviour
Ah, sounds like you're British (I'm guessing). That might explain your misguidedness, since Europe (in general) has quite a little thought police regime going on.
this sort of behaviour needs to be pushed back, even if its to save that one AOL teen who is googling for NeoNazi friendster
I would say that this sort of behavior needs to be encouraged, in order to save the human race from the slide into niggerdom which is just lurking over the horizon on our current course. Pretty much all of society's problems are strongly linked to niggers/spics/arabs/jews/chinks. You really can't deny that fact, all you can do is make bullshit excuses for it.
Mudbabies make me want to fucking puke. There's something really wrong with you... you fuck niggers, you live with a nigger, you breed with niggers. You should be fucking castrated, before you do any more damage to humanity. I hope some dumb crackmonkey fucking shoots you. You deserve to get cancer of the cock.
Obviously, you are a horrible person. Whites have rejected you, so you turned to the blacks, who can't realistically look down upon anyone.
I still get people talking about moving thier kids to a different school district so that they don't have to be with "those black people"
Not everyone wants to surround themselves with disgusting shitskins, like you do.
I have a son who is mixed.
Your filthy half-breed child is destined to fail, and it's all your fault. You chose to
have an oreo for a kid. Hell, the fact that you made such a choice suggests that you have rather inferior genes yourself, since you weren't able to find a human female to breed with.
My son is black as far as society is concerned, and he may be sitting accross the interview desk from one of these bigots someday.
Not only would I not hire your son, I would try to ensure that no one else would either. I hope he fucking dies (and I hope you do too).
Unfortunately, people use PC as an excuse not to be courteous.
Bullshit.
People who are rude and obnoxious sometimes use PC as a straw man saying "I'm not PC" and saying that they are not frank, when in reality they are boorish and of low character.
More bullshit.
Bigotry and intolerance are not frankness, PC or not.
Actually, they are. Most whites fucking hate you. They may not admit that. In fact, many are trying to pretend it's not true, when deep down, they really are disgusted by you. People cling to this idea of equality and tolerance, despite what they know to be true. As a test, walk past some whites in their cars at a red light. Watch how they lock their doors. To them, you're just an ignorant criminal shitskin, like all the others.
The reason that there is no "Gun ownership of white people movies" is because they don't try hard enough.
Nope, it really is because they do not fit in with the touchy-feely liberal agenda backed by the organizers.
Maybe it's because they don't make good movies.
Hmm, this is actually an interesting point. There are very very few movies supporting white rights. This is because such a movie would automatically get slapped with all kinds of bad labels, due to content not quality. So, there's not a really valid sample (if any at all) to judge by.
They have just as much chance as anyone else does to make a good movie.
Nope, they don't. It's not fashionable to be honest nowadays.
You stupid, drunken, shitskin wannabe. Fuck you and all your red kind. You are some of the dumbest motherfuckers the planet has ever seen. A red bastard calling someone a redneck, how the hell did that happen? Shouldn't you be eating some peyote, getting liquored up, and not going to look for work right about now?
He may not be racist, but I certainly am! I hate you, you filthy shitskin. I hope you get cancer of the balls. I want you to suffer and fucking die.
...self respecting black person...
There is no such thing as a "self respecting" spook. You all hate yourselves, everyone else hates you. You just suck. Even the other dirty races look down on you.
You look like shit, you smell like shit, and you are as worthless as shit.
What, you'd propose that people should mod up propoganda promoting bullshit ideas of racial tolerance? Fuck you and all your kind.
You are clearly a moron. The so-called "racist tripe" that you chose as an example is one of the less-inflammatory posts you could've chosen. The "Down with Saudi Arabia!!!" signature is not "blatantly racist", it's blatantly anti-Saudi Arabia. That doesn't, in and of itself, imply racism. There are plenty of people (including natives of that shithole) who hate Saudi Arabia.
it feels almost like the slashdot community is saying they're comfortable with this kind of shit
That's because they are. People should be comfortable with it, since there's nothing wrong with it.
In closing, fuck you. I hope you die a miserable and painful death. I hope you get cancer of the crotch, you shitskin loving filthmonger.
Nope. A database is a collection of data. It makes no assertion about the factual nature of such data. Moreover, law enforcement tapping a phone line will have to infer things from the conversation, otherwise, what's the fucking point?
Listen to your typical "Yo", and you will find Whites, asians, and/or hispanics that have the same speech patterns as an urban hoodlum
That's the point. It "sounds black". Even if it's a white guy talking, one of his characteristics is that he sounds black. He might also have a certain tattoo. Either of these things can be used to identify the individual. When someone is described as "sounding black" people automatically connect that to an easily identifiable pattern of speech. Of course, that characteristic is common to niggers, which is why it specifically makes reference to blacks (thus, it's likely that the person is a junglebunny).
As far as prostitution goes, what if someone has a smart-alec kid who changes the answering machine message one day? What if you happen to catch an amorous couple role playing over the phone? If that was not complicated enough, even if you have a prostitute, is she the street-walking drug huffing type, or the high-priced corporate concubine, or the Hollywood Hiede with a regular stable of influential patrons?
If you overhear Martha Stewart getting ImClone info over the phone, it could just be Martha roleplaying with her buddy...
In such a case, a database is used to organize observations, in order to establish the validity of that data by combining it with other observations, be they auditory, visual, or whatever.
african american
You can only use this term for people who hold dual citizenship in both America and some African country. If you really want to push things, you could use it for someone who was born in Africa and immigrated here. Being black does not qualify anyone to be African-American, being white and from South Africa does qualify them. The word nigger is unambiguous and will work quite well.
I never argued that any of this had to do with truth.
This whole discussion is about truth. It's pretty fucking stupid to believe in something that isn't true.
It's still at the stage of logical consistency
You're logically inconsistent. I've explained it pretty clearly, you just don't want to admit it.
which atheism fails to satisfy just as certainly as theism does
Keep telling yourself that, maybe someday you'll believe it... it still won't be true though. Religion is based on the ridiculous idea of all-powerful beings. Show me one. The burden of proof is on the one claiming that such a thing exists. Careful observation of the world doesn't reveal a diety, so why believe in them? The default thinking is that 'there are no gods'.
I brought up Heisenberg precisedly [sic] to point out that it may well be beyond our abilities to explain everything rationally.
The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle is a rational explanation of observable phenomena.
we are still pretty stupid about the answers to big questions
That's a loaded statement, requiring further definition before I'll argue about it. Anyway, that's outside the scope of this discussion.
If religion has made a mistake, it is in saying it knows the answers without evidence. In that way, atheism is a religion.
No, it's not the same, precisely because athiesm is the default. Like I said, you missed the point. Children aren't born believing in gods, they believe it because they are told to. I wasn't born believing in the existence of electrons, I believe they exist because I can observe phenomenological evidence of them. I have never run an experiment in the QCD domain, yet I accept it because of the reputation of those who claim to have done so, as well as the fact that it fits in nicely with phenomena that I have observed directly.
That's the whole point. You aren't born believing things exist (hence the default is to assume they don't exist). You accept their existence by observing evidence or trusting the word of others. You learn about the existence of gravity, the need for food, the difference between light and dark, and so on. In the case of religion, people believe it because they're trusting others. The problem is that their sources (the bible, etc) are unreliable. There is no hard evidence to back up the outrageous claims made in religions. It's all very inconsistent with observations that people can make.
Of course, you'll say (again) that atheism isn't the default. You have no recourse but to push that argument, since anything else would be admitting that you're an idiot. This, despite the fact that I've clearly explained how/why athiesm is the default assumption.
you couldn't come to the conclusion there are no purple unicorns
You missed the whole fucking point.
Every culture has created belief systems to explain the unknown
So what? Cultures make up lots of shit, that doesn't necessarily make it true. They explain things to the best of their abilities. Our culture's intellectual accomplishments mean that we do not need to rely on the crutch of gods to explain the world.
the default is faith
Nope, completely wrong.
That is not idiotic, unless you believe the scientific method to be idiotic as well
The scientific method relies on evidence and verifiable facts (as I discussed earlier). That's why the scientific method isn't idiotic. Making up shit about supernatural beings is idiotic. It's not enough to just explain things, they must be explained rationally.
much more certain than Heisenberg was
Um, Heisenberg was the most uncertain man who ever existed...
How many people know of "relativity"? It's had the requisite 50 years that you propose to integrate into popular society... so, shouldn't most people understand it? I seem to remember only a handful of people in any of my upper-level and graduate physics classes.
Most college degrees are bullshit (business, english, psychology, etc). Most of the jerk-offs with college degrees don't understand much of anything. The thing that makes them dangerous is that they think they understand. In a best case scenario, this just results in the propogation of ignorance. At worst, it can lead to the fall of a society (politicians think that they understand the things that they are regulating).
Giving a fool the impression that he's intelligent is worse than letting him wallow in his own ignorance. That was the crux of my original point.
By the way, what's wrong with being elitist, if you really are elite? Having a huge overblown ego is bad, but false humility isn't a whole hell of a lot better. Just admit to your strengths/faults, and those of others, don't pretend they aren't there.
if you read a book about anthropology, race or science in general with a publication date past 1955
There's a reasonable chance that either I wrote it, or I know one of the primary authors. That is, of course, within the limited fields of optics, atomic physics, combinatorics, topology, genomics, microscopy, experimental neuroscience, particle accelerators, high throughput biological assays, cosmology, interstellar matter, and a few other specific areas.
Or you could simply visit this site. Or this one. Or even this one.
What the hell is that supposed to prove? That 6 out of a billion dirty skins can become successful? The percentage of highly intelligent/accomplished whites far exceeds that of any other race. Of course, you'll say that "the white man keeps the others down"... but that's certainly not the case. Hell, they get special consideration, and are evaluated against lower standards (ie. affirmative action). And, if they really are "equal", why have the culture, technology, science, and society created by white people been adopted by all the other races? Why do they aspire to be like us?
Just imagine how much better this world would be if we weren't dragged down by the weight of all the dirty skins? If we weren't constantly devoting resources to keeping them alive (feeding them, stopping their own intra-racial genocides, etc), we could do so much more! I'm not saying we should kill every last one of them, keeping a few in zoos would be okay.
If you can tell two creatures apart by a quick visual inspection, they may still have some similarities, but they are likely very different. Skin color is a major difference, do you really think the differences stop there?
Try thinking for yourself, logically, instead of just spitting out that bullshit rhetoric. Don't lie to yourself, no matter how hard you want to believe that everyone's equal, all the evidence contradicts that.
So you also believe that all nicotine based products (cigarettes, etc) and alcohol should be criminalized, right?
Yeah. Technically, I don't care about all nicotine based products, only the ones that will affect me (cigarettes, cigars, pipes). Anything that can affect someone's judgment, thus making them a danger, needs to be controlled. If people were responsible for themselves, this wouldn't be an issue.
People, in general, have no self-control or discipline. It's rather pathetic. Look at all these fat cows that need to get their stomachs stapled because they can't stop eating. Fuck that, if they're hungry, they should get a belly full of lead. Why the fuck should those of us with some discipline have to put up with these pathetic shitbags?
The same applies to junkies and drunks.
...I'd like to see the "war on drugs" people answer.
The only argument not to outlaw alcohol is that it was tried, and failed (prohibition). However, that's the defeatist stance. Using that same logic (read: "we can't hope to stop it completely") would mean that all drugs should be legal (and all murder/rape/robbery should be legal too).
I think alcohol should be illegal. However, it's very ingrained in our society, in fact, many social interactions rely on alcohol. Just like I said in my original post, it's hard to convince people to change their conception of what their rights are (vis a vis downloading off of P2P).
I hope anyone who has a problem with making drugs illegal (and treating junkies harshly) gets hit by a drunk driver... even better, the bastard will get hit, become a parapalegic, who has to spend the rest of his life watching his dick get hard and not being able to feel it. Oh yeah, let's not forget, he should spend the rest of his life ingesting his meals through a straw too.
In conclusion, alcohol and tobacco should be illegal. However, it's unlikely that that will happen any time soon (although tobacco is slowly on its way out). I suppose it'd be nice to be able to "feel good chemically", but this is unrealistic, and simply fucking dangerous. If anyone wants to kill themselves, fine, fuck 'em. But, they absolutely can not be allowed to be a threat to me.
RIAA Executive: I feel that both principles have their uses in a free society. To not afford protection to the citizen's of this nation, from all forms of intellectual theft, would be similar to allowing terrorist cells to operate freely within our borders.
What do you think would happen if copyright law no longer existed, but plaigarism laws did?
RIAA Executive: Copyright and plaigarism cover two different things. Copyright protect's an artist's right to control the distribution of their work. Plaigarism is a precept that guards against people passing of the work of others as their own. There is a vague connection between these two ideas, but they really are at different ends of the intellectual property spectrum.
These are only some of the many possible ways to answer that, without going against the RIAA's stance. Maybe you can tear these arguments down, but in such a format (ie. this debate), I seriously doubt that will happen. In fact, copyright and plaigarism are truly different, and should be treated as such (in my opinion).
Anyway, the point of my original post is, nobody will walk through the logic with them, making sure it's valid. Nobody will question either of them (Lessig or Oppenheim) if they say something ridiculous. They'll be asked a question, give some answer, and then not have to support that answer with a logical argument and/or facts.
No, not in "race theory", or in any other humanities-type subject. They're all in science and engineering. As for being vocally racist, that's tough situation. It can lead to problems, such as getting arrested in Germany (even if you make the statements here). Suffice it to say, I'm probably not as outspoken (most of the time) as I am on here, but I'm not quiet about my opinions either. I talked about this a little bit before. Despite what some people will say, I believe that the majority of whites do not like niggers.
How does one get like this?
That's a bit of a loaded question, don't you think? How does one come to believe that all races are equal? A simple visual inspection shows otherwise.
Biology is very complicated, there's a bit of a "butterfly flaps its wings" effect (ie. chaos theory stuff)... meaning, if you see what are some pretty massive physically distinguising characteristics, you can assume lots of other things are notably different as well (intelligence, etc). To claim that all races are equal is idiotic. A classic example of this complexity is drosophila's "eyeless" gene and the human homologue PAX-6 (and the associated disorder - Aniridia).
I haven't done it, but I'm sure you could very easily distinguish the races genetically. Let's say you do a nice big Affymetrix assay, with statistically significant samples from a few different races. Not only do I think you could easily tell them apart (with just a simple linear discriminator), but you'll see other, deeper, differences (besides the genes that control melanin). You'll find genes that influence intelligence, motor skills, etc. Also, genes work in a very complex network, the genes that control melanin production, nose size/shape, and so on, probably influence other traits too.
If it doesn't look like a duck or quack like a duck, it's probably not a duck.
Now, if you want to claim that they should all be treated equally, that's a different argument entirely. My short answer to that is, the nignogs are not capable/willing to play by those rules (they'll take without giving back).
...are you merely trying to offend as many people as you can in the most efficient manner possible?
Offending people is not a bad thing, it can even be fun. The fact that my ideology/beliefs are offensive is just a happy bonus.
Or a certain honky who's now selling a well-timed novel plagiarized from his real life.
Kudos for simultaneously karma-whoring and slipping the words "nigger" and "porch monkey" into your post. I rarely see anyone pull that off.
I'm the man!
You're certainly a character- a racist with a degree in astrophysics- in fact you seem like you'd be an interesting person to know in real life.
I've got a few other degrees, in somewhat diverse fields, and more on the way. As for being interesting... I'm a biased source for that opinion.
I know you're only karma whoring
That's not necessarily the case. My journal entry mentions doing some karma whoring, and maybe I do a little, but no more than anyone else. I wrote that shortly after registering my account, and I may have been somewhat wrong. However, I will not remove/edit any of my journal entries... I just think it's more ethical to leave everything in its original form (even if I may have been mistaken). I'll readily admit if/when I'm wrong, and won't hide that fact (unlike a certain spook). As a general rule, I don't actively set out to karma whore. Nor do I typically intend to be a troll or to post flamebait.
Slashdot Mirror
Even niggers born into affluent families, with educated parents, tend to exhibit such behaviors. Which would strongly indicate race as the cause, and that their parents are simply familial anomolies made "successful" by social pressures.
In fact, it is society (the white man's society at that) which improves the shitskins, despite their innate nature. Alas, this improvement has a very low success ratio. That's why we find ourselves in our current state, having society dragged down by these dirty bastards.
Obviously, you are a horrible person. Whites have rejected you, so you turned to the blacks, who can't realistically look down upon anyone. Not everyone wants to surround themselves with disgusting shitskins, like you do. Your filthy half-breed child is destined to fail, and it's all your fault. You chose to have an oreo for a kid. Hell, the fact that you made such a choice suggests that you have rather inferior genes yourself, since you weren't able to find a human female to breed with. Not only would I not hire your son, I would try to ensure that no one else would either. I hope he fucking dies (and I hope you do too).
The opinion of a racist is worthwhile, simply because they have the clarity of mind to recognize and admit to the inferiority of the shitskins.
Oh, yeah, and being able to spell "racist" is always a bonus, dipshit. Not to mention being able to properly conjugate "count".
You stupid, drunken, shitskin wannabe. Fuck you and all your red kind. You are some of the dumbest motherfuckers the planet has ever seen. A red bastard calling someone a redneck, how the hell did that happen? Shouldn't you be eating some peyote, getting liquored up, and not going to look for work right about now?
I've got a blanket for you, dumbfuck.
There is no such thing as a "self respecting" spook. You all hate yourselves, everyone else hates you. You just suck. Even the other dirty races look down on you.
You look like shit, you smell like shit, and you are as worthless as shit.
You are clearly a moron. The so-called "racist tripe" that you chose as an example is one of the less-inflammatory posts you could've chosen. The "Down with Saudi Arabia!!!" signature is not "blatantly racist", it's blatantly anti-Saudi Arabia. That doesn't, in and of itself, imply racism. There are plenty of people (including natives of that shithole) who hate Saudi Arabia. That's because they are. People should be comfortable with it, since there's nothing wrong with it.
In closing, fuck you. I hope you die a miserable and painful death. I hope you get cancer of the crotch, you shitskin loving filthmonger.
In such a case, a database is used to organize observations, in order to establish the validity of that data by combining it with other observations, be they auditory, visual, or whatever. You can only use this term for people who hold dual citizenship in both America and some African country. If you really want to push things, you could use it for someone who was born in Africa and immigrated here. Being black does not qualify anyone to be African-American, being white and from South Africa does qualify them. The word nigger is unambiguous and will work quite well.
That's the whole point. You aren't born believing things exist (hence the default is to assume they don't exist). You accept their existence by observing evidence or trusting the word of others. You learn about the existence of gravity, the need for food, the difference between light and dark, and so on. In the case of religion, people believe it because they're trusting others. The problem is that their sources (the bible, etc) are unreliable. There is no hard evidence to back up the outrageous claims made in religions. It's all very inconsistent with observations that people can make.
Of course, you'll say (again) that atheism isn't the default. You have no recourse but to push that argument, since anything else would be admitting that you're an idiot. This, despite the fact that I've clearly explained how/why athiesm is the default assumption.
Dumbass.
How many people know of "relativity"? It's had the requisite 50 years that you propose to integrate into popular society... so, shouldn't most people understand it? I seem to remember only a handful of people in any of my upper-level and graduate physics classes.
Most college degrees are bullshit (business, english, psychology, etc). Most of the jerk-offs with college degrees don't understand much of anything. The thing that makes them dangerous is that they think they understand. In a best case scenario, this just results in the propogation of ignorance. At worst, it can lead to the fall of a society (politicians think that they understand the things that they are regulating).
Giving a fool the impression that he's intelligent is worse than letting him wallow in his own ignorance. That was the crux of my original point.
By the way, what's wrong with being elitist, if you really are elite? Having a huge overblown ego is bad, but false humility isn't a whole hell of a lot better. Just admit to your strengths/faults, and those of others, don't pretend they aren't there.
Just imagine how much better this world would be if we weren't dragged down by the weight of all the dirty skins? If we weren't constantly devoting resources to keeping them alive (feeding them, stopping their own intra-racial genocides, etc), we could do so much more! I'm not saying we should kill every last one of them, keeping a few in zoos would be okay.
If you can tell two creatures apart by a quick visual inspection, they may still have some similarities, but they are likely very different. Skin color is a major difference, do you really think the differences stop there?
Try thinking for yourself, logically, instead of just spitting out that bullshit rhetoric. Don't lie to yourself, no matter how hard you want to believe that everyone's equal, all the evidence contradicts that.
People, in general, have no self-control or discipline. It's rather pathetic. Look at all these fat cows that need to get their stomachs stapled because they can't stop eating. Fuck that, if they're hungry, they should get a belly full of lead. Why the fuck should those of us with some discipline have to put up with these pathetic shitbags?
The same applies to junkies and drunks. The only argument not to outlaw alcohol is that it was tried, and failed (prohibition). However, that's the defeatist stance. Using that same logic (read: "we can't hope to stop it completely") would mean that all drugs should be legal (and all murder/rape/robbery should be legal too).
I think alcohol should be illegal. However, it's very ingrained in our society, in fact, many social interactions rely on alcohol. Just like I said in my original post, it's hard to convince people to change their conception of what their rights are (vis a vis downloading off of P2P).
I hope anyone who has a problem with making drugs illegal (and treating junkies harshly) gets hit by a drunk driver... even better, the bastard will get hit, become a parapalegic, who has to spend the rest of his life watching his dick get hard and not being able to feel it. Oh yeah, let's not forget, he should spend the rest of his life ingesting his meals through a straw too.
In conclusion, alcohol and tobacco should be illegal. However, it's unlikely that that will happen any time soon (although tobacco is slowly on its way out). I suppose it'd be nice to be able to "feel good chemically", but this is unrealistic, and simply fucking dangerous. If anyone wants to kill themselves, fine, fuck 'em. But, they absolutely can not be allowed to be a threat to me.
RIAA Executive: Copyright and plaigarism cover two different things. Copyright protect's an artist's right to control the distribution of their work. Plaigarism is a precept that guards against people passing of the work of others as their own. There is a vague connection between these two ideas, but they really are at different ends of the intellectual property spectrum.
These are only some of the many possible ways to answer that, without going against the RIAA's stance. Maybe you can tear these arguments down, but in such a format (ie. this debate), I seriously doubt that will happen. In fact, copyright and plaigarism are truly different, and should be treated as such (in my opinion).
Anyway, the point of my original post is, nobody will walk through the logic with them, making sure it's valid. Nobody will question either of them (Lessig or Oppenheim) if they say something ridiculous. They'll be asked a question, give some answer, and then not have to support that answer with a logical argument and/or facts.
That's a bit of a loaded question, don't you think? How does one come to believe that all races are equal? A simple visual inspection shows otherwise.
Biology is very complicated, there's a bit of a "butterfly flaps its wings" effect (ie. chaos theory stuff)... meaning, if you see what are some pretty massive physically distinguising characteristics, you can assume lots of other things are notably different as well (intelligence, etc). To claim that all races are equal is idiotic. A classic example of this complexity is drosophila's "eyeless" gene and the human homologue PAX-6 (and the associated disorder - Aniridia).
I haven't done it, but I'm sure you could very easily distinguish the races genetically. Let's say you do a nice big Affymetrix assay, with statistically significant samples from a few different races. Not only do I think you could easily tell them apart (with just a simple linear discriminator), but you'll see other, deeper, differences (besides the genes that control melanin). You'll find genes that influence intelligence, motor skills, etc. Also, genes work in a very complex network, the genes that control melanin production, nose size/shape, and so on, probably influence other traits too.
If it doesn't look like a duck or quack like a duck, it's probably not a duck.
Now, if you want to claim that they should all be treated equally, that's a different argument entirely. My short answer to that is, the nignogs are not capable/willing to play by those rules (they'll take without giving back).
Offending people is not a bad thing, it can even be fun. The fact that my ideology/beliefs are offensive is just a happy bonus.
That "honky" is a jew.
I've got a few other degrees, in somewhat diverse fields, and more on the way. As for being interesting... I'm a biased source for that opinion.
That's not necessarily the case. My journal entry mentions doing some karma whoring, and maybe I do a little, but no more than anyone else. I wrote that shortly after registering my account, and I may have been somewhat wrong. However, I will not remove/edit any of my journal entries... I just think it's more ethical to leave everything in its original form (even if I may have been mistaken). I'll readily admit if/when I'm wrong, and won't hide that fact (unlike a certain spook). As a general rule, I don't actively set out to karma whore. Nor do I typically intend to be a troll or to post flamebait.