People are Going Ape Over DeSantis Comment

[Joe Guy]

......can Joe (or anyone) come up with some examples (or even one example) of DeSantis (or anyone else) using the phrase "monkey up" to mean what DeSantis says he meant: i.e., the same thing as "muck up" or "fuck up" or "screw up" or "mess up"???

Fast Forward to :49....

[BoSoxGal]

This cartoon says it all:

[MajGenl.Meade]

I wouldn't have known how devastating it was for DeSantis to say, "monkey it up" if I hadn't been alerted by the victim police on TV and here.

If you had never heard of it you would never have heard of it. Probably true. Clearly the media and all offended blacks (and others) should be checking first with you to see if things should be reported.

I've never seen Joe post here at the same time Trump is tweeting. Coincidence? Could it be that Trump is wesw?

[Bicycle Bill]

Could it be that Trump is wesw?

Naaah — even wesw has his lucid, coherent moments on occasion.

-"BB"-

[ex-khobar Andy]

......can Joe (or anyone) come up with some examples (or even one example) of DeSantis (or anyone else) using the phrase "monkey up" to mean what DeSantis says he meant: i.e., the same thing as "muck up" or "fuck up" or "screw up" or "mess up"???

Fast Forward to :49....

Obama clearly uses the phrase 'monkey around' not 'monkey up.' That's a common phraseology and it was also off the cuff: he was clearly trying to find a euphemism which is a little less accusatory than, say 'criminally tamper' which would have been valid in the context but perhaps a little strident.

[Lord Jim]

it is not up to a white person to tell a black one what they should be offended by--if they are offended, that is the end of it.

Not sure what you mean by "the end of it"...

Are you suggesting that if one black person, (or a person of any minority) declares that any word or phrase is racist, that henceforth it should be universally accepted as racist, no questions asked?

If so, I'm certainly not on board with that...

I'm not prepared to hand that sort of moral authority to Al Sharpton or Cornell West, (or anyone else who earns a significant portion of their living from publicly expressing how offended they are)

[Big RR]

well Jim, why focus on whether the word or term is racist or not? Isn't the term "racist" subjective, and something which cannot be objectively defined? If someone is offended, then it is offensive (at least to that person) and etiquette would demand that you not use it around that person. Now yes, this might mean that you refrain from using the word niggardly around a particularly sensitive person who doesn't use the dictionary much but so what? What are you really losing in being polite and avoiding offense? I recently learned that some Asians, particularly younger ones, object tot he term "Oriental", so I avoid its use around Asians. I am not saying the word cannot be used, I am not saying that you cannot (or should not) use it elsewhere--but if you know that something offends someone, you should avoid its use around that person. And if it appears that a lot of people get offended by it, perhaps it's best to just discontinue its use, not because it is an objectively bad or wrong word, but because we should avoid offense in everyday.

Now I am certain that there will be times when this test cannot and should not be used, but for the most part it makes sense.

[Lord Jim]

Now yes, this might mean that you refrain from using the word niggardly around a particularly sensitive person who doesn't use the dictionary

Oh, I couldn't possibly disagree more about something like that...

If a person is "offended" by something because of their own ignorance, it is incumbent on that person to become less ignorant, and gain an understanding as to why their being "offended" is unjustified...

The only obligation others have in a situation like that is to point out the facts, and educate that person ...

You're not doing a person who is ignorant about something any favors by pandering to or coddling their ignorance...

If after they know the facts they continue to insist on being "offended" then I submit what they are doing is more about getting attention than any legitimate cause to take offense...

Joe is as wrong as wrong can be about this business with DeSantis and "monkey up", but on the different and larger question of whether having the universe of words and phrases people take offense to expanding endlessly is a good thing, there's a legitimate point to be made...

(I didn't bother to post about it because it seemed so silly, but I saw that a few weeks ago the phrase "just a cotton picking minute" suddenly joined this ever expanding list... I guess because black people are the only ones who ever picked cotton...some people really need a hobby...)

[Burning Petard]

Probably Emily Post would say that one should avoid being offensive, under any circumstances, but only as a general rule. Bad behavior should never be rewarded, but I don't want to be niggardly.

snailgate.

[Big RR]

Jim--if someone were to say a commonly used term like "cheap" or "stingy" was somehow offensive based on their own ignorance, I think you'd have a point as the ability to communicate is of paramount importance, but I cannot think of a time I ever had the occasion to use the word "niggardly" in ordinary conversation, so I don't think I am giving up all that much (or anything) in avoiding its use around someone who is offended by it. And not, I am saying that avoiding offense should be a matter of common courtesy, and not something with the force of law or regulation (like hate cries or speech codes). IMHO, you can say whatever word you want (absent something like "I'm going to burn your house down" while holding a can of gasoline, but we should refrain from offense.

As for "If after they know the facts they continue to insist on being "offended" then I submit what they are doing is more about getting attention than any legitimate cause to take offense", I don't agree. And, in fact, I think the opposite is more the case and people will use a term like "niggardly" to get attention and prove they can. Now. if there is a legitimate reason why you have to use the word (e.g., to be precise, as is scarlet is much more descriptive than red), by all means use it, but when you can say the same thing without offending a particular person, why not just refrain from using a word you probably wouldn't use all that much, anyway?

Obviously, you cannot predict what will offend someone, and the precision of our speech might require the use of words which will offend some, but I just think it should be avoided if it can be.

Going back to my example of Oriental (which literally translates to Eastern and recognizes that Asia, in western countries, is known as the East or the Far East), I honestly cannot understand why someone from that region would be offended by the term as nothing is meant by it other than designating the area they ethnically derive from. However, if someone is offended I will use the term Asian instead (just as I do not call African Americans negroes or colored anymore because some regard those terms as offensive).

IMHO, this is a lot better than trying to set up laws and codes which restrict the language by decree.

[Joe Guy]

Obama clearly uses the phrase 'monkey around' not 'monkey up.' That's a common phraseology and it was also off the cuff: he was clearly trying to find a euphemism which is a little less accusatory than, say 'criminally tamper' which would have been valid in the context but perhaps a little strident.

It doesn't matter if you say monkey around, monkey with, monkey this up. People are missing the point. The word 'Monkey' is often used in with other words to mean 'mess things up'. Monkey Around, according to Merriam Webster means : to do things that are not useful or serious : to waste time.

The reaction to DeSantis's comment is just like some people's reaction to the word 'Niggardly' and he very likely would have been crucified if he had used that term.

I wouldn't have known how devastating it was for DeSantis to say, "monkey it up" if I hadn't been alerted by the victim police on TV and here.

If you had never heard of it you would never have heard of it. Probably true. Clearly the media and all offended blacks (and others) should be checking first with you to see if things should be reported.

We wouldn't even be having this discussion if the media had reported DeSantis's comment and had not thrown a monkey wrench into the mix by expressing outrage and blowing a dog's whistle...

(I didn't bother to post about it because it seemed so silly, but I saw that a few weeks ago the phrase "just a cotton picking minute" suddenly joined this ever expanding list... I guess because black people are the only ones who ever picked cotton...some people really need a hobby...)

And I guess black people are the only ones who can monkey things up....

[Joe Guy]

.....Now yes, this might mean that you refrain from using the word niggardly around a particularly sensitive person who doesn't use the dictionary much but so what? What are you really losing in being polite and avoiding offense?

So, how does that work? If you're in front of a group of people, do you ask, "Is everybody here familiar with that thing called a Dictionary?

People use words that are not intended to offend anyone but people still find a way to be offended. In the DeSantis example, a few people might have been offended if they heard or read what he said, but that doesn't mean that was his intention and the only reason it is national news is because democrats are pushing it.

Another thing people are missing is, do you really think Trumpanzees can pick up on these secret coded 'dog whistles'? Are there decoder rings being passed out at Trump rallies that I'm not aware of?

[Big RR]

do you really think Trumpanzees can pick up on these secret coded 'dog whistles'

Not sure what ones are "secret", but I would think they couldn't miss this one.

[Lord Jim]

the only reason it is national news is because democrats are pushing it.

Really got to disagree with you there...

As I pointed out, the very first person to make public note of it was the news anchor on FOX who interviewed DeSantis a few minutes earlier when he said it, and there have been plenty of Republicans who have also been publicly critical...

Joe, given the whole context and backstory involved in this specific instance, as I pointed out earlier:

...graduated from Yale University with a B.A. in History in 2001 and from Harvard Law School with a J.D. in 2005...

...He threw in hard with Trump after the 2016 election because he knew that would be very beneficial to him running statewide in Florida in a GOP primary, and his strategy worked brilliantly. He entered the gubernatorial race as a decided underdog, and rode his alliance with Trump to a 20 point victory.

This is a very bright fellow, a careful, deliberate and thoughtful man, who studied Trump's techniques closely and applied them deliberately and effectively to get the nomination. He has a thorough understanding of Trump's core constituencies and what motivates them. His primary victory proves that.

...This guy had just won the GOP primary for the Florida gubernatorial nomination by knowing exactly how to appeal to and motivate Trump supporters, and the very next day he goes on Fox News and says this...

You really believe that the most likely explanation for this guy directing a phrase (that no one can seem to find any example of him or anyone else using before, ever) that includes the word monkey at his Democratic opponent (who by the sheerest coincidence just happens to be black) is that it was purely innocent, with no racial intent?

He said that Desantis - (I'm paraphrasing) being the thoughtful intelligent man that he is - was probably thinking, 'Gee, how can I take advantage of this moment to get people to vote for me that normally wouldn't. Wait, I know! I'll attempt to insult all black people!'

With all due respect to Mr. Elder, he's got the complete wrong end of the stick regarding DeSantis' election strategy...

It isn't about trying to "get people to vote for me that normally wouldn't"...not a bit of it...

It's about driving up the turnout of those voters who as a consciously created Trump Clone he would expect to vote for him...

Hence the dog whistle and wink to the hardcore racists that make up an important part of the Trump base...


ETA:

I like this thread, I'm getting to completely disagree with both Joe and Big RR, and also completely agree with them in the same thread...

[Joe Guy]

Jim, yes I believe there was no racial intent. I know DeSantis is smart and I know a FOX anchor first commented on it. But if he's as smart as you say he is, why didn't he foresee the outrage he would create in the liberal media?

I don't think I will change yours or anyone else's opinion on this subject. However, sometimes being right requires one to be one of a small minority of unbiased and fair-minded people who don't respond emotionally to important issues and are comfortable in knowing this.

I guess you and I will have to agree to disagree...

[Burning Petard]

Because 'outrage in the liberal media' is a desired result! It tactic is called 'firing up your base'.

snailgate

[Econoline]

But if he's as smart as you say he is, why didn't he foresee the outrage he would create in the liberal media?

Of course he foresaw the liberal outrage: that's not a bug, that's a feature.

[Lord Jim]

Econo and SG are correct...

Creating a negative reaction in the liberal mainstream media was part of the goal, just as it is for Trump...

Attracting black voters and getting positive press from CNN are not priorities in this electoral model...

ETA:

sometimes being right requires one to be one of a small minority of unbiased and fair-minded people who don't respond emotionally to important issues and are comfortable in knowing this.

Man, don't I know it...

[Joe Guy]

Econo and SG are correct...

Creating a negative reaction in the liberal mainstream media was part of the goal, just as it is for Trump...

Attracting black voters and getting positive press from CNN are not priorities in this electoral model...

Okay, I guess I was wrong to not realize that someone would create an enormous tidal wave of explosive outraged negative public response in order to get a positive response from people who already share his views.

ETA:

sometimes being right requires one to be one of a small minority of unbiased and fair-minded people who don't respond emotionally to important issues and are comfortable in knowing this.

Man, don't I know it...

It's lonely at the top, isn't it?...

[Crackpot]

Okay, I guess I was wrong to not realize that someone would create an enormous tidal wave of explosive outraged negative public response in order to get a positive response from people who already share his views.

Where have you been the last 3 years?