.jpg)
A friend of mine forwarded me a column from the Aspen Times. It's about the "Angry White Man" vote in this year's election. It is one truly unique work, as in it is from another age -- like before the Civil Rights Movement, or before women received the vote, or persons with non-traditional lifestyles could walk around on the street without fear. Basically, columnist Gary Hubell makes it clear that white men are a little more equal than everyone else, and isn't shy about it. If you're looking for a 'feel good redneck white guy' read, click on the headline for the hillbilly point of view.Up front: It's going to be offensive to some -- well most. But it is something that some folks are still believing. What sex or race, religion or heritage someone should not be a challenge to their integrity, intelligence or their right to be an American.
I suppose not all the garbage being put out there today is by Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh. People are entitled to their opinions, no matter how unenlightened, dim, uninformed or vulgar. But watching those opinions is like passing by a car accident that you just can't stop watching until you pull past it.
4 comments:
That's a well-written article. I do not detect any racism, I detect a conservative political viewpoint. As hard as that may be to understand, many people feel this way.
The author says that the "Angry White Man" is just looking for a level playing field -- but insinuates that field doesn't have a lot of diversity on it. Maybe the angry white man doesn't want to deal with "disenfranchised," "voiceless" or "victimized" or hear about it -- because he's never been. Usually, Angry White Men have been the problem and the reason for the former. White men have been amply represented for a long time. It's not a problem.
As for the Angry White Man and paying the tab -- in Monmouth we'll be lucky if the more upper crusty of the Angry White Men pay their taxes accurately, and most of the money the professional Angry White Men in politics make -- is tax money from poltiical types that buy this nonsense. The Angry White Man is usually a problem in most areas of life. I may be White, but angry -- not so much. If there is any anger I have, it's to Angry White Men.
And by the way, the Constitution is a living document, and that is how the framer's made it because they knew the country would change, as would the population, and the constitution, to be relevant, would have to change with it. They were bright, even the angry ones among them.
As for the killing part: Anyone who doesn't mind it would have to be angry, and hopefully not in power.
As for the part about the "heroic angry white man," give me a break. And, the knocks on "metrosexuals" "homosexuals," "immigrants," et. al. That's telling me that the Angry White Men don't need to listen to them. So, since the angry guys are in power, does that mean those groups don't have to pay taxes? Since why pay taxes when you have no voice?
And if all the Angry WHite Men were, as asserted, in the Nat'l Guard, etc., then there wouldn't be recruiting problems -- but they're not.
And the Litany of cultures that were OK didn't include any Blacks -- Hispanic seemed OK as long as it wasn't that much. That isn't racist at all?
And the "He’s a man’s man, the kind of guy who likes to play poker, watch football, hunt white-tailed deer, call turkeys, play golf...",
That's a stereotype. Most of the guys going on about being a "man's man" in GOP politics these days have probably never served, worked a real job that wasn't handed to them, or ever did a real day's work. There's a lot of mom and dad shoved a silver spoon in the mouth and wrote a check.
In a nutshell, this could expalin some fundamental differences between the ideologies. Is it o.k. to borrow from your post when I put together my own peice?
please feel free. a frank exchange is necessary to communicate ideas insofar as concepts of governmental power.
your point of view is honest. i do not agree with it. i don't have to. it's still the u.s. so far. but i respect it and it certainly does reflect a point of view accepted by many.
Post a Comment