Email this topic to a friend Printer-friendly version of this topic Bookmark this topic (Registered users only)		Archived thread - Read only  Previous Topic | Next Topic
Conferences The Apprentice General Discussion Forum (Protected)
Original message

RealityX 106 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 10-15-04, 08:40 AM (EST) "More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" The newest episode of The Apprentice 2 adds additional credibility to Stacie J.'s legacy. Although Kevin has yet to be viciously painted as crazy, bizarre, or looney, John oddly called Kevin into the boardroom anyway. As leader, John's top priority was to participate in pricing, and without such participation, John was fully responsible for the pricing errors of his delegates. Both Kevin and Wes worked on pricing and were equally responsible for the pricing error, but once again, a conscious or subconscious excuse was made to target the black guy and to hand the white guy a free pass. When Trump fronted John on John's weird attempt to wolf pack Kevin out of the game, looney John could do nothing but acknowledge his own pathetic mistake. If John had been a real, Trump Organization manager who fired the black guy, but kept the white guy, both equally responsible for the same failed task, the Trump Organization would have been exposed to a multi-million dollar, air-tight, discrimination lawsuit. John was so confused that he consulted the others before deciding who he would bring in the boardroom. Kelly and John discussed that Kevin and Wes were both responsible for pricing, but Kelly advised that bringing two strong people into the boardroom could lead to John's own demise. John foolishly accepted Kelly's ridiculous boardroom strategy as solid gold, as John isolated his own estimate of the comparatively "weak" player, Kevin, for the boardroom confrontation. Stacie J. was also isolated as the "weak link" by the Apex wolf pack, which eventually led to her awful demise. Once again, the ##### of wolf pack racism has been shown for the menace that it is.   Top

Subject     Author     Message Date     ID    Really? mrc 10-15-04 1    RE: Really? HistoryDetective 10-15-04 3        RE: Really? mrc 10-15-04 4            RE: Really? HistoryDetective 10-15-04 8                Obviously, except mrc 10-15-04 10                    RE: Obviously, except HistoryDetective 10-15-04 13                        It's hard to argue mrc 10-15-04 15                            RE: It's hard to argue HistoryDetective 10-15-04 19                                Public Service Announcement Bebo 10-15-04 25                                    *smacks gum* mrc 10-15-04 27                                        RE: *smacks gum* realitychick 10-15-04 41                                            RE: *smacks gum* lrlr1 10-17-04 108                                RE: It's hard to argue lrlr1 10-17-04 107                        RE: Obviously, except lrlr1 10-16-04 105                            RE: Obviously, except HistoryDetective 10-17-04 114                                RE: Obviously, except lrlr1 10-18-04 123                    RE: Obviously, except lrlr1 10-16-04 104                RE: Really? lrlr1 10-16-04 102            RE: Really? lrlr1 10-16-04 101        RE: Really? lrlr1 10-16-04 99    RE: Really? lrlr1 10-16-04 100  RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... samiam 10-15-04 2    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... CantStandToLook 10-15-04 5        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... lrlr1 10-17-04 109    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... Bebo 10-15-04 6  RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... Oscirus 10-15-04 7    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... lrlr1 10-16-04 98  RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... HistoryDetective 10-15-04 9    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... samiam 10-15-04 11        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... HistoryDetective 10-15-04 14    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... amea_gari 10-15-04 73        I thought it said she thought it wa... DontGetMeStarted 10-16-04 93  RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... Lisapooh 10-15-04 12    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... freakusmaximus 10-15-04 16        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... CantStandToLook 10-15-04 20        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... beardance58 10-15-04 29            RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... okaychatt 10-15-04 32                RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... ARnutz 10-15-04 58                    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... amea_gari 10-15-04 74                        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... cbjusmc 10-15-04 77                            RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... TeamJoisey 10-15-04 78                            RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... Chuck45 10-18-04 121        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... lrlr1 10-17-04 110  RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... banzai 10-15-04 17    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... ARnutz 10-15-04 59  RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... unitabackup 10-15-04 18    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... lrlr1 10-17-04 111        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... unitabackup 10-17-04 115            RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... TeamJoisey 10-17-04 117  RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... singer 10-15-04 21    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... samiam 10-15-04 23        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... singer 10-15-04 24            RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... samiam 10-15-04 26            RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... TeamJoisey 10-15-04 28                RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... singer 10-15-04 30                    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... samiam 10-15-04 37                    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... HistoryDetective 10-15-04 39                        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... singer 10-15-04 43                            RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... samiam 10-15-04 55                    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... landruajm 10-15-04 57                        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... singer 10-16-04 80                            RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... landruajm 10-16-04 85                                RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... singer 10-16-04 88                                    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... landruajm 10-16-04 91                    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... TeamJoisey 10-15-04 67                        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... singer 10-15-04 79                            RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... TeamJoisey 10-16-04 81                                RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... Alag 10-16-04 82                                    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... TeamJoisey 10-17-04 112                                RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... singer 10-16-04 87                                    Stop it, Singer Bebo 10-16-04 92                                        RE: Stop it, Singer CallMeNu 10-18-04 118                                            Clarification Bebo 10-18-04 119                                            RE: Stop it, Singer singer 10-19-04 129                                                Second warning AyaK 10-19-04 135                                    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... TeamJoisey 10-16-04 94                RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... amea_gari 10-15-04 75            RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... subman 10-15-04 47                RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... beardance58 10-15-04 50                    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... amea_gari 10-15-04 76  RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... frodo2 10-15-04 22    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... beardance58 10-15-04 31        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... Viewer 10-15-04 33            RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... beardance58 10-15-04 34                RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... Viewer 10-15-04 35                    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... beardance58 10-15-04 38                RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... ARnutz 10-15-04 60        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... tvsmylife 10-15-04 40            RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... beardance58 10-15-04 42                RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... tvsmylife 10-15-04 49                    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... beardance58 10-15-04 64                        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... frodo2 10-16-04 83                            RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... freakusmaximus 10-17-04 116            RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... ARnutz 10-15-04 61    If yall would have read my other po... Oscirus 10-15-04 36        Kevin Opened his Mouth, Wes Didn't rqt9191 10-15-04 52        RE: If yall would have read my othe... ARnutz 10-15-04 62  RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... realitychick 10-15-04 44    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... RealityX 10-15-04 48        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... realitychick 10-15-04 65            RE: Defense of RAJ truffleshuffle 10-15-04 68                RE: Defense of RAJ RealityX 10-15-04 70                    RE: Defense of RAJ truffleshuffle 10-15-04 72                RE: Defense of RAJ beardance58 10-18-04 120  RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... subman 10-15-04 45    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... HistoryDetective 10-15-04 46        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... subman 10-15-04 51            So what? Bebo 10-15-04 54            RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... Alag 10-15-04 56    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... realitychick 10-15-04 66    not everything is racially based Jep1974 10-18-04 125  RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... starletgrrrl 10-15-04 53    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... ARnutz 10-15-04 63    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... frodo2 10-16-04 84        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... HistoryDetective 10-16-04 86    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... beardance58 10-19-04 132  RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... Captain_Savem 10-15-04 69    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... truffleshuffle 10-15-04 71        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... jae 10-16-04 89            RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... RealityX 10-16-04 90                RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... jae 10-17-04 113  RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... Sweater_Puffs 10-16-04 95    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... lrlr1 10-16-04 97        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... Sweater_Puffs 10-16-04 103        lrlr1 Bebo 10-16-04 106            RE: lrlr1 lrlr1 10-18-04 124                Oops Bebo 10-19-04 126                    RE: Oops lrlr1 10-19-04 127    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... Captain_Savem 10-19-04 130  RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... lrlr1 10-16-04 96  RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... Chuck45 10-18-04 122  John's explanation Bebo 10-19-04 128    RE: John's explanation Oscirus 10-19-04 131    RE: John's explanation Bucky Katt 10-19-04 133    RE: John's explanation RealityX 10-19-04 134        WHOA! AyaK 10-19-04 136  RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... RealityX 12-17-04 137    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... HistoryDetective 12-17-04 138        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... RealityX 12-17-04 140    RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... HistoryDetective 12-17-04 139        RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... RealityX 12-17-04 141            RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... mrc 12-17-04 142            RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... HistoryDetective 12-18-04 143                RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... RealityX 12-18-04 144            RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti... kahanasunset 12-18-04 145

Lobby | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

Messages in this topic

mrc 10113 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 09:32 AM (EST) 1. "Really?" You're kidding, right? A PhoenixMons(ter) Siggie   Top

HistoryDetective 9516 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 09:50 AM (EST) 3. "RE: Really?" Well, John and Kelly were working together, so I guess two people could be considered a pack. Does that make the other guys (who outnumbered the pack) a non-pack? Wait, there were enough non-pack guys to form a coven...   Top

mrc 10113 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 09:53 AM (EST) 4. "RE: Really?" Don't you have to have six to have a pack? Or is that just with beer? A PhoenixMons(ter) Siggie   Top

HistoryDetective 9516 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 10:18 AM (EST) 8. "RE: Really?" Well, lots of stuff at the grocery store comes in four-packs ... which makes it obvious that a pack must be comprised of an even number of items or members.   Top

mrc 10113 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 10:34 AM (EST) 10. "Obviously, except" I have a pack of Wrigley's in my drawer, and it comes with five pieces. A PhoenixMons(ter) Siggie   Top

HistoryDetective 9516 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 10:42 AM (EST) 13. "RE: Obviously, except" D'oh! That throws off my whole theory on how the world works. Guess it's back to school for me... I can never win with you, mrc! You always have to show me up in one way or another!   Top

mrc 10113 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 10:52 AM (EST) 15. "It's hard to argue" with my logic about Wrigley gum, isn't it? A PhoenixMons(ter) Siggie I just enjoy razzin' ya. Pokin' at people gets me in trouble sometimes, but it's all done without malicious intent. We historians should work together, I admit.   Top

HistoryDetective 9516 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 11:18 AM (EST) 19. "RE: It's hard to argue" I'm just waiting for the episode with the Wrigley-oriented task so the candidates can all engage in pack mentality. FTR, I never took you as being malicious. You just think things through one step farther than I do sometimes. (And checking my private messages once in a while has taught me how to recognize the difference between good-natured ribbing in public forums and truly malicious intent in private...)   Top

Bebo 21083 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 11:54 AM (EST) 25. "Public Service Announcement" difference between good-natured ribbing in public forums and truly malicious intent in private...) *puts on moderator hat* Posters are expected to follow the guidelines in private messages and emails, not just posts on the forums. If you receive an offensive message, please send a copy to me so that we can deal with it. When you're good to Mama...Mama's good to you.   Top

mrc 10113 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 12:05 PM (EST) 27. "*smacks gum*" Don' be hatin'. A PhoenixMons(ter) Siggie I'm being good, Mama, I promise.   Top

realitychick 200 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Network TV Show Guest Star" 10-15-04, 02:59 PM (EST) 41. "RE: *smacks gum*" Hmm, this chick likes to see six individual groups of tight stomach muscles. LOL. Four pack? Naw, not as visually appealing. Five pack? Kind of off in a way.. However, Kevin's perfect example of displaying and answering the phone at the same time... Man I need TiVo! Replay! A for the start of this thread? I agree. Really? The guys tried to do what the women were good at...gang up on one person. Kevin was in the board room because of pricing, not because he is black, he wasn't as much of a threat (until we saw him defend Andy in the boardroom). Both of the pricing guys should have been in there and I'm happy John is gone. Kelly did most of John's work anyway. Bye-bye John!   Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-17-04, 00:55 AM (EST) 108. "RE: *smacks gum*" > The guys tried >to do what the women >were good at...gang up on >one person. I disagree. The women were clearly ganging up on Stacie J, i.e., convening in Ivanna's room, minus SJ, sharpening their claws. This was not the case with the men. John went around asking the other men for advice on how to save his hide. There was no 'convening', no 'getting our scripts together'. I did not c Kevin was >in the board room because >of pricing, not because he >is black, he wasn't as >much of a threat (until >we saw him defend Andy >in the boardroom). How odd. I remember a clip where Kelly speaks to the camera and praises Kevin as a leader. In the ice cream deal, it was Kevin who suggested (and the men thought enough of him to do so) that part of the money be set aside for charity. Kevin took on the cats when they conspired against Stacie J - assertively and without rancor. Yet, no one thought of him as a threat? Really odd. Oh right! 'until we saw him defend Andy in the boardroom'. But wait! We saw him defend Stacie J. - didn't we? Surely his defense of SJ was as admirable and memorable as him defending Andy? >Both >of the pricing guys should >have been in there Well, John was not bright. Cute, but not bright. Kelly warned him Kevin was one of the strong players... there we go again! How could anyone summarily dismiss Kevin as non-threatening? What's with the 'blind' spot?   Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-17-04, 00:33 AM (EST) 107. "RE: It's hard to argue" >I'm just waiting for the episode >with the Wrigley-oriented task so >the candidates can all engage >in pack mentality. Now that's a great idea - all for one and one for all, regardless of race, color, creed, etc., etc., etc....   Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-16-04, 10:28 PM (EST) 105. "RE: Obviously, except" >D'oh! That throws off my >whole theory on how the >world works. Guess it's >back to school for me... > > > > >I can never win with you, >mrc! You always have >to show me up in >one way or another! > That's what the poster board is for - to clue us in that other people might, with reason, think different from us.   Top

HistoryDetective 9516 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-17-04, 09:12 AM (EST) 114. "RE: Obviously, except" "That's what the poster board is for - to clue us in that other people might, with reason, think different from us." Welcome to the forums, lrlr1. Enjoy your stay. Actually, I strongly share these sentiments with you. After you've spent some more time here and seen more of my posts, I think that you'll see that this is the case.   Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-18-04, 08:43 PM (EST) 123. "RE: Obviously, except" While I'm not exactly 'new', thank you for the welcome, HD. I appreciate it.   Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-16-04, 10:21 PM (EST) 104. "RE: Obviously, except" >I have a pack of Wrigley's >in my drawer, and it >comes with five pieces. > Thank you for proving me right.   Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-16-04, 10:17 PM (EST) 102. "RE: Really?" >Well, lots of stuff at the >grocery store comes in four-packs >... which makes it obvious >that a pack must be >comprised of an even number >of items or members. > Not really.   Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-16-04, 10:12 PM (EST) 101. "RE: Really?" >Don't you have to have six >to have a pack? Or >is that just with beer? > > Just with beer.   Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-16-04, 10:02 PM (EST) 99. "RE: Really?" >Well, John and Kelly were working >together, so I guess two >people could be considered a >pack. Does that make >the other guys (who outnumbered >the pack) a non-pack? >Wait, there were enough non-pack >guys to form a coven... > No, no, no, no, no! There were enough SORORITY gals to form a coven... and they did!   Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-16-04, 10:06 PM (EST) 100. "RE: Really?" >You're kidding, right? Why would you think she was kidding?   Top

samiam 5976 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 09:47 AM (EST) 2. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" John foolishly accepted Kelly's ridiculous boardroom strategy as solid gold, as John isolated his own estimate of the comparatively "weak" player, Kevin, for the boardroom confrontation. I agree that part of John's problem was accepting Kelly's advice. And I think he did choose Kevin because he thought, for some reason, that he was an easier boardroom competitor than Wes. But to automatically assign that reasoning to racism is pushing it, I think. John showed monumental incompetence in this task, and I have no reason to believe that he didn't just pull a name out of a hat, which would be consistent with his reasoning and abilities throughout the show. And to equate Kevin with Stacie J., in any way, shape, or form is to ignore the total differences between them, their actions, and their attitudes. Especially considering that although pricing was a central issue, John stated at the time that he had the utmost faith in both Kevin and Wes to make the decisions that needed to be made. Not everything that looks like it *might* be racial if you squint your eyes and tilt your head the right way IS a racial issue.   Top

CantStandToLook 6254 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 10:05 AM (EST) 5. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" What Sami said!!!! Everything that happens in the world isn't due to racism as some people seem to keep trying week in and week out to make us believe. That's right , you're fired..get out already   Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-17-04, 01:07 AM (EST) 109. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" >What Sami said!!!! > >Everything that happens in the world >isn't due to racism as >some people seem to keep >trying week in and week >out to make us believe. > > What people are those?   Top

Bebo 21083 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 10:11 AM (EST) 6. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" And I think he did choose Kevin because he thought, for some reason, that he was an easier boardroom competitor than Wes. I think this is exactly why John picked Kevin instead of Wes. Kevin's low-key style probably equated to fewer explosions in John's mind. But even worse than following Kelly's advice was John's ability to take the next logical step and be able to explain why he picked Kevin and not Wes. Did he have a good reason? No, and he even admitted that, tightening the noose around his neck even further. Rule #1 for a losing PM: if you're taking someone into the boardroom, you better be damn solid in your explanation of why. Unfortunately for John, Kevin quickly proved to be far more articulate than he was. I think some of the guys on the team are underestimating how Kevin would come across in the BR, seeing his calm nature as a negative instead of a huge positive. I was impressed by how clearly he stated his case and how professional his demeanor was. All the more reason to roast the one who took him in there. Racist? I don't think so, but I can why it might be perceived that way. Kevin another Stacie J? No way. Kevin is respected by his teammates, and I think some may even see him as a threat. And if they don't, they should, because he's been strong so far. When you're good to Mama...Mama's good to you.   Top

Oscirus 1596 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Peanut Festival Grand Marshall" 10-15-04, 10:17 AM (EST) 7. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Can we please get through one week of a black person getting called into the boardroom without going through this whole racism speech again. He picked Kevin because he was to scared to bring both of them into the boardroom and Kevin was attacking him so the choice was preety easy regardless of race. Eventually you are gonna be telling me that trump ridiculed Raj because he was asian .   Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-16-04, 09:56 PM (EST) 98. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" >Can we please get through one >week of a black person >getting called into the boardroom >without going through this whole >racism speech again. > >Eventually you are gonna be telling >me that trump ridiculed Raj >because he was asian . Did he? Is he?   Top

HistoryDetective 9516 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 10:20 AM (EST) 9. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" "Stacie J.'s legacy" Haven't we seen posted elsewhere in this forum a link to an article in which Stacie J. explicitly said that she did not believe that her nomination and firing was racially motivated...?   Top

samiam 5976 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 10:38 AM (EST) 11. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Don't be silly. Just because the "injured party" says it ain't so don't make it not so.   Top

HistoryDetective 9516 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 10:45 AM (EST) 14. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Oh, I agree. I just wanted to add a little more information for reaching conclusions about the Stacie J. situation.   Top

amea_gari 585 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-15-04, 09:49 PM (EST) 73. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I thought the article had her saying repeatedly that she felt she was singled out for being black?   Top

DontGetMeStarted 880 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Fitness Correspondent" 10-16-04, 01:16 PM (EST) 93. "I thought it said she thought it was weirdly 'reverse' racism" that they kept telling her 'your hair is so nice' 'you're so skinny' etc. They said nice things in a weird way that they didn't to each other, and it singled her out by pointing out she was different.   Top

Lisapooh 12664 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 10:41 AM (EST) 12. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I think there is a pack mentality on the show but it's not motivated by race. the pack clearly is on the women's team and consists of Stacy, Ivana, Maria and Sandy. The common denominator in that pack is incompetence. I don't think any of those four girls believe they can stand up to a strong board room challenge, so they systematically isolate and demonize another competitor each week to take the heat off of them. And it's worked so far. They might not even realize they are donig it but they pick out some weakness (real or perceived) of another player and exaggerate it until it becomes the focus of the board room and run with it. total pack mentality and it's the most transparent thing I've ever seen.   Top

freakusmaximus 310 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Cooking Show Host" 10-15-04, 11:00 AM (EST) 16. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I totally agree this was not the result of racism- he just brought the 2 guys who he thought were most low key and who would not do a good job at defending themselves. He couldnt bring in Raj, because Raj is smart and articulate and Trump likes him so that would make him look worse. also its clear taht kevin and andy are friends (kevin was defending andy)   Top

CantStandToLook 6254 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 11:20 AM (EST) 20. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I think he most definitely could and should have brought in Raj. Let's not forget Carolyn or George are there 90% of the time and even The Don made comments about Raj driving the models and the artist nuts. Anytime The Don calls you out by name...he's trying to let the others know you're ready to be butterd cause you're toast. That's right , you're fired..get out already   Top

beardance58 78 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square" 10-15-04, 12:57 PM (EST) 29. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" LAST EDITED ON 10-15-04 AT 12:57 PM (EST) I don't think it necessarily means that Kevin and Andy are friends - he just doesn't like the idea of somebody being a scapegoat. and he is not afraid to tell it like it is.   Top

okaychatt 2810 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Howard Stern Show Guest" 10-15-04, 01:22 PM (EST) 32. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" <he just doesn't like the idea of somebody being a scapegoat You're so right. Kevin was the one that reamed Apex out after they banned together to let Stacie J. take the fall. He seems to have some common sense about what is right and what is wrong. I would definitely want Kevin on any team I worked with. Everyone is entitled to my opinion.   Top

ARnutz 13937 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 05:18 PM (EST) 58. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I would definitely want Kevin on any team I worked with. Me too Okay! If I had to choose a team, Kevin would be my first choice! He won when he was PM, he defended Stacie (w/o assuming it was about race) by pointing out she was a scapegoat, and also he was awesome in the boardroom!!! So many good points. I'm just a squirrel trying to get a nut.   Top

amea_gari 585 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-15-04, 09:55 PM (EST) 74. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" My two cents is basically what everyone else is saying. This wasn't about race. I'll just add that, as a caucasian, I find it pretty offensive that every time a white person makes a move against a black person, in this case John bringing Kevin to the BR, there is SOMEONE out there who will make a claim of racism. Because, ya know, if I'm white I must be a racist, on some level. Whatevah. I'll also sign up for the Kevin fan club. This guy is looking good, and he's actually the only one of the entire bunch, men and women, that I can see winning-- at this point. And I'd be happy if he won. I LOVE people who stand up and with a few words cut through the crap.   Top

cbjusmc 54 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square" 10-15-04, 10:49 PM (EST) 77. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I'm going to have to agree with you on this topic. But let me say this first...As an African American, our first notion when someone white gangs up on a black person, it's automatically perceived as a racist attack. In some instances, that is the case, and blacks will pick up on it quickly because it's something that we all have to deal with at some point in our lives. Whites won't pick up on it unless it's deliberate. However, the smart black person will look at all angles and perspectives to see if there could be any other reason. In Stacie J's case, it's possible that race could have been a factor just by the way they spoke to her (the beginning of episode 3 when Stacy R. was shaking her finger at her like she was a little kid). But it wasn't just about race...she just didn't fit into their little click, nor would she play their childish games. That's why she was singled out. Kevin, on the other hand, has commanded the respect of everyone both male and female. He takes a stand when he sees something wrong and doesn't put up with any foolishness. Plus, he's a team player and consistently puts himself out there for the good of the team. In his case, I believe that John just made a stupid mistake in bringing Kevin in. I honestly thought that he would have brought Wes in (did anyone else notice that Wes never said a word?), but because Kevin took a stand and said that John was wrong for picking on Andy, he took offense and took Kevin instead. But as stated before, he underestimated how Kevin would handle himself. Plus, the fact that he only brought in Kevin when both Kevin AND Wes were equally responsible for pricing, he screwed himself. So bottom line...not everything that happens is truly racist in nature. Make sure that you look at all angles before assuming the worst. But to my white counterparts, it is out there so don't be so quick to dismiss the claims of it being racial. Just picture the situation if the guy was white and everyone else was black, then you'll get a better understanding of how African Americans feel in these situations.   Top

TeamJoisey 3558 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Thong Contest Judge" 10-15-04, 11:25 PM (EST) 78. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Welcome to the boards! Thanks for a very thoughtful and thought-provoking post. A little breeze of sanity on the race issue. There may have been some underlying racial element to StacieJ's firing. Most whites don't see that unless some trigger words are used. And most whites would be appalled to be accused of participating in such things. But we know it happens. On the other hand, I'm convinced there was no racial element to John's selection of Kevin. Kevin was there because he failed in his task, and then suggested John should be fired. It was not because he was black, but because he was no longer an ally. John's fatal mistake was in excusing Wes, his quiet ally, from the boardroom. He had no answer when he was called on it. I'm curious to hear what you thought about the LLCoolJ vs. Mike Piazza question. At the time, this board was awash with folks suggesting there was a racial element to that as well. These reality show contestants need a reality check!   Top

Chuck45 65 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square" 10-18-04, 12:25 PM (EST) 121. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I totally agree and well said.   Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-17-04, 01:26 AM (EST) 110. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" >I totally agree this was not >the result of racism- he >just brought the 2 guys >who he thought were most >low key and who would >not do a good job >at defending themselves. He couldnt >bring in Raj, because Raj >is smart and articulate and >Trump likes him so that >would make him look worse. >also its clear taht kevin >and andy are friends (kevin >was defending andy) And I totally disagree with your assessment. "Raj is smart and articulate..." Kevin is dumb and inarticulate? Is that what you're saying? And to minimize Kevin's humanity, sense of decency - AND LACK OF RACISM - by saying that "its clear that Kevin and Andy are friends" because Kevin defended him is really low. Also, why would John think Kevin could not defend himself? He defended Stacie J just fine, and I find that people who are as respected by their peers as Kevin appears to be by Mosaic, are usually pretty darn good at 'defending' themselves. Blind spot!   Top

banzai 556 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-15-04, 11:01 AM (EST) 17. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" the way I see is that the contestants don't know how to play the game. For example, Kwame didn't know he can fire Omarosa. Mr. Trump also gave out some hints but they don't know: "Ivana, don't you think that Brad made a stupid decision?" "Ivana, you brought Brad in because he made a stupid decision, right?" "Pam, off camera Jenn M. didn't do anything" "Pam, Sandy drove the QVC folks crazy" Bill Rancic warned that alliance is the quickest way to go home. John didn't know that if 3 people were responsible for pricing, then he should bring in those 3 people. If 2 people were responsible for pricing, then he should bring in 2. He just thought although there're 2, but let's bring in only 1 person who were responsible. They don't know how to play.   Top

ARnutz 13937 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 05:22 PM (EST) 59. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" the way I see is that the contestants don't know how to play the game. Yeah... why is that???? This year's bunch didn't learn form last year. For example, Kwame didn't know he can fire Omarosa. Mr. Trump also gave out some hints but they don't know: This was the worst of the Big O last year! I remember when I saw that episode, I even defended Kwame by saying, "I don't think he can fire her." Then we find out he could have!!! Why wasn't Kwame told this??? I'm just a squirrel trying to get a nut.   Top

unitabackup 175 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 10-15-04, 11:13 AM (EST) 18. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I believe that Trump didn't want to fire him and kept "offering" him an out but he even messed those up (ala, I <Trump> don't understand why people aren't taking 3 people to the back). You've played the racism card too quickly as people in this reality/competitive situation are trying to save their butts from being fired. Kevin was an easy target and so was the other guy he (John) took to the back with him - plain and simple. Trump was correct in firing John although I believe that bow-tie guy should have been fired.   Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-17-04, 01:43 AM (EST) 111. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" > Kevin was an >easy target and so was >the other guy he (John) >took to the back with >him - plain and simple. > Why? Kevin is one of the strongest members of Mosaic. He's liked and respected by almost all. So why was he PERCEIVED - then by John and now by you - as an easy target? In my first post on this subject, I said that while race MAY have played a part in John's ill-fated decision to bring Kevin into the boardroom, I thought that it was because John and Wes were friends that John let Wes have a free pass. After reading all these posts with their - BLIND SPOTS - about Kevin's total competence and stellar respect of his peers, I am beginning to think that maybe I was too hasty is dismissing race as probably John's MAIN criteria!   Top

unitabackup 175 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 10-17-04, 12:18 PM (EST) 115. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Well, pricing was pointed out as the problem and Kevin was in charge of pricing - therefore, easy target. Others on the team pointed to the other guy being young and dumb - another easy target for John to say, Hey, I don't care just get Trump off my back. That's why they were easy targets and why I believe John "freaked out" or panicked and picked the two "easiest" targets. Also factoring into this (although I can't 100% confirm this) I believe that John had an "good 'ol boys club" and didn't want to pull any of that club into the back room. I read somewhere recently that someone from the show (Trump, George, I'm not sure) said if you play the alliances game, you're going to lose for sure. John is the perfect example of that.   Top

TeamJoisey 3558 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Thong Contest Judge" 10-17-04, 02:37 PM (EST) 117. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" That anti-alliance advice came from Bill Rancic, last season's winner.   Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser" 10-15-04, 11:28 AM (EST) 21. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Hi, RealityX. The PM definitely made a dumb move on the chess board when he chose Kevin for the boardroom, rather than Kevin and Wes. Definitely a strategic train wreck. And true to his inconsistent manner, The Donald decided to acknowledge this mistake by the Weak Pretty Boy, rather than giving him a pass for being, well, inconsistent in his thinking. How curious. Lesson from The Donald: Inconsistency in decision-making is fine for female project managers and not fine for male project managers. Inconsistency in decision-making is fine for me at all times, because I am The Donald. On your other question, I have some thoughts, but maybe no answer. It's interesting how people react to questions about difficult social issues by attempting to trivialise those difficult questions. Race almost always ends up being a subtext in discussions about meritocracy in the workplace, especially when the people in question are of different ethnic backgrounds. That is the sorry history of racism in America. It is an awful legacy which undergirds the very economic foundations of this country. Because of that reality, people who have been victimised by racism will think or even bravely ask the difficult question out loud, as it were. People who are ashamed of that legacy and who continue to benefit from it will often attempt to trivialise the question or the questioner. It somehow makes them more comfortable to push the hard question aside, if for no other reason than the fact that they themselves would never consciously discriminate. What they fail to realise is that even if they themselves refuse to discriminate, far-too-often, similarly situated members of preferred classes do discriminate, and on a regular basis. That's why white males make more money than similarly situated women and people of color across ethnic cohorts. And that horrible fact prompts the uncomforatable question that you correctly raise. This pattern of pushing aside the hard question is one that I have observed repeatedly in my professional life and in my personal life. I wish that I knew more about the relationships between the players on the men's team. It was interesting to see Kevin stick up for Andy and even more satisfying to watch him stick up for Stacie J. He clearly is unafraid when it comes to fighting injustice, because that is likely what he has had to do to survive in his academic and professional life. I respect him because of what I have observed of his behaviour toward players who have been unfair in their assessments of and treatment of competitors in the game. I also respect Kevin because of the leadership roles that he has assumed on his team--win, lose or draw. I am not overly impressed by his talents and abilities, because I expect him to exude all of these qualities precisely because of his training and family background. He is not an anomaly. Because racist decision-making is of its nature private and unquantifiable, I can only point to statistics that highlight racist outcomes in earnings and wage levels for people of colour in the United States. My guess is that racism drives this outcome for people of colour. Bias also drives these outcomes for women. Is Pretty Boy John a racist for choosing Kevin? Hard to prove. But given the patents of racism from which he was benefitted his entire life, he at least knew that his odds of getting away with a dumb boardroom choice were probably high. --Singer   Top

samiam 5976 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 11:36 AM (EST) 23. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" But given the patents of racism from which he was benefitted his entire life, he at least knew that his odds of getting away with a dumb boardroom choice were probably high. You obviously know more about his life than I certainly do. Can you explain how we know this to be the case? Do I LOOK like a frickin' people person?   Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser" 10-15-04, 11:44 AM (EST) 24. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" White males in America have a preferred position in terms of earnings and wage differentials between them and similarly situated women and between them and similarly situated people of colour across ethnic cohorts. For a footnote, see the Bureau of Labour Statistics website for starters. I have mentioned this fact in other posts that perhaps you have read. If not, the reference is very easy to find on-line. It is likely that people are aware of their privilege and of the fact that they benefit from it. Their awareness or lack thereof does not erase the fact of their privilege. There is a qualifier in my sentence about Pretty Boy John. I raised the idea as a likelihood. I would bet money that the idea is correct, though. --Singer   Top

samiam 5976 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 12:03 PM (EST) 26. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" White males in America have a preferred position in terms of earnings and wage differentials between them and similarly situated women and between them and similarly situated people of colour across ethnic cohorts. Provably true, yes. For a footnote, see the Bureau of Labour Statistics website for starters. Yeah, I know where to get job/salary stats. I have mentioned this fact in other posts that perhaps you have read. Can't say as I have. If not, the reference is very easy to find on-line. Yes, I know, but thanks. I meant more in terms of how he, specifically, has benefitted, rather than just generalizing about an atmosphere that benefits white males in this country. It is likely that people are aware of their privilege and of the fact that they benefit from it. Their awareness or lack thereof does not erase the fact of their privilege. I wouldn't put it past these morons to not be aware of the oxygen they breathe, much less anything else. There is a qualifier in my sentence about Pretty Boy John. I raised the idea as a likelihood. I would bet money that the idea is correct, though. Which one? I just think it's funny how every problem looks like a nail when one has a hammer in one's hand.   Top

TeamJoisey 3558 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Thong Contest Judge" 10-15-04, 12:36 PM (EST) 28. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" You seem pretty sure of yourself on the subject of racism in America. I find that fascinating, since you are not American. I find it distressing that you are projecting a statistical model onto a single person you know almost nothing about. Except his gender and race. And concluding that because he was born a white male, he most certainly is a racist. Here in America, we call that racial profiling. That's the polite term. These reality show contestants need a reality check!   Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser" 10-15-04, 01:05 PM (EST) 30. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" "You seem pretty sure of yourself on the subject of racism in America. I find that fascinating, since you are not American. I find it distressing that you are projecting a statistical model onto a single person you know almost nothing about. Except his gender and race. And concluding that because he was born a white male, he most certainly is a racist. Here in America, we call that racial profiling. That's the polite term." TeamJoisey, I specifically said that it is hard to prove that his decision was racist. Please read my posts. With reference to your other comments, I am an expert on racism in America. Why is the process of highlighting the obvious patterns of racism in this country so "distressing" for you? Also, why don't you reach the merits of my positions, rather than slagging away at me personally? Methodologically, I have done nothing incorrect here. These approaches to analysing the social, economic and political situations of blacks in America have always been used. It seems uncomfortable for you that those same approaches can be used, and with cogent effect, when analysing the social, economic and political situations of white people, particularly white males, in America. But I digress. Specifically, what do you think about the statistics that I mentioned in my numerous posts? Can you explain those outcomes? Are you even curious about them? If you could make things better for people in this country, what would you do? Do you actually believe that Pretty Boy John is not aware of his instant privilege in this society? Is it logical to assume that his knowledge of that would not necessarily inform his private and clearly illogical decision to pick Kevin for the boardroom? I have merely highlighted that uncomfortable possibility in my post. These are some questions and answers that could enlighten all of us. Why don't you think about positive ways forward and share those with us, rather than attempting to impugn my character? What remains interesting to me about this game is the salient question of whether or to what extent it highlights the way that people actually behave toward each other in real life work situations, in spite of its "entertainment" nexus. --Singer   Top

samiam 5976 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 02:39 PM (EST) 37. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I am Marie Antoinette, and I think everyone should eat cake. "_____ exists in general, therefore it must exist in every possible specific situation"? Sexism exists, but had Pamela been the PM of the men's team for the QVC challenge, and they had lost, and she had been fired, I would not have immediately jumped up and down shouting how obvious the sexism was, because she was a woman.   Top

HistoryDetective 9516 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 02:50 PM (EST) 39. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" "Do you actually believe that Pretty Boy John is not aware of his instant privilege in this society?" Whether it's white privilege, male privilege, or heterosexual privilege, I think that lots of people are clueless of the benefits they receive that others do not. Part of what makes any of those a privilege is that they are unspoken and can operate without the beneficiary consciously invoking them. I won't speak for John, but I know plenty of white people who see their "whiteness" as being universal and never even stop to think about white privilege and the advantages that it may have given them. In fact, if you try to discuss the issue with them, they will vehemently deny that their successes and freedoms have anything to do with their race, sex, or other attributes other than hard work and merit. I appreciate your thoughtful posts, singer, and the way that you inject real reality into reality television, so please don't think that I am trying to categorically disagree with you.   Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser" 10-15-04, 03:09 PM (EST) 43. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" "Do you actually believe that Pretty Boy John is not aware of his instant privilege in this society?" Whether it's white privilege, male privilege, or heterosexual privilege, I think that lots of people are clueless of the benefits they receive that others do not. Part of what makes any of those a privilege is that they are unspoken and can operate without the beneficiary consciously invoking them. I won't speak for John, but I know plenty of white people who see their "whiteness" as being universal and never even stop to think about white privilege and the advantages that it may have given them. In fact, if you try to discuss the issue with them, they will vehemently deny that their successes and freedoms have anything to do with their race, sex, or other attributes other >than hard work and merit. > I appreciate your thoughtful posts, singer, and the way that you inject real reality into reality television, so please don't think that I am trying to categorically disagree with you. " It would not trouble me, dear HistoryDetective, if you did disagree with me. Not in the least. I would surely learn something from that process. It would only trouble me if you attacked me personally for raising questions or expressing opinions in a free society. On your other well-considered points, you make complete sense to me. It seems that your position may help explain why some people are so angry and uncomfortable with the questions that I have raised here and with the data that I cite for the purposes of supporting my positions. I applaud Reality X for having the gumption to start this discussion. --Singer   Top

samiam 5976 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 04:33 PM (EST) 55. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" It would only trouble me if you attacked me personally for raising questions or expressing opinions in a free society. Yes, I agree. That would be truly troubling, for all of us, since we don't allow it here. I love discussions like this. Aren't they fun?   Top

landruajm 6040 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 05:09 PM (EST) 57. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" With reference to your other comments, I am an expert on racism in America. By virtue of what? Also, why don't you reach the merits of my positions, rather than slagging away at me personally? Ooh, this would've worked much better had you not just claimed "expert" status.   Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser" 10-16-04, 00:01 AM (EST) 80. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" >With reference to your other comments, >I am an expert on >racism in America. > >By virtue of what? > >Also, why don't you reach the >merits of my positions, rather >than slagging away at me >personally? > >Ooh, this would've worked much better >had you not just claimed >"expert" status. > > > > It is not a claim. --Singer   Top

landruajm 6040 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-16-04, 09:16 AM (EST) 85. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" LAST EDITED ON 10-16-04 AT 09:22 AM (EST) Until you somehow validate it? It's exactly that and no more. ETA: I read your reply to TJ, where you outlined the basis for your claim. Accepting it all at face value, I agree that you're as qualified to make such a claim as anyone.   Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser" 10-16-04, 09:54 AM (EST) 88. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I owe you no proof of my background, nor does the process of proving my background to you serve as a necessary condition for my background being "true" to you or anyone else. Only the examiners at my university and my colleges reserve the right to question it or validate it. And I assure you that they have. The only point that counts on these boards is whether I have the right to post here and to discuss issues with participants here. For the purposes of argument in that process, the only point that counts is whether the arguments on either side are factual and logical. The personal attacks and feckless attempts at ridicule are completely off-point and rude. --Singer   Top

landruajm 6040 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-16-04, 10:48 AM (EST) 91. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" You claimed a level of expertise. All I asked was that you back it with a little additional information, to aid my judgment of how seriously to take that claim. If I'm mistaken in my assumption that you'd prefer to be taken seriously in this discussion, I certainly apologize for that. I'll be happy to relax that assumption in reading your future posts. As for personal attacks, that's for the mods to settle. As a rule, they're not fond of public characterizations of posts as personal attacks--they prefer that if we are offended, we alert the offending post.   Top

TeamJoisey 3558 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Thong Contest Judge" 10-15-04, 06:11 PM (EST) 67. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" >TeamJoisey, I specifically said that it is hard to prove that his decision was racist. Please read my posts. I read your posts. As to John's decision being racist, you said you'd bet on it. >With reference to your other comments, I am an expert on >racism in America. By what criteria? Why is the process of highlighting the obvious patterns of racism in this country so "distressing" for you? Because this discussion is getting tired. If things turn out badly for a minority on a reality TV show, we are flooded with posters who are experts on "obvious patterns of racism" and how so-and-so was victimized. We see so little of the actual relationships between these contestants, and know almost nothing about them. Perhaps John and Wes bonded over basketball, or perhaps they both like to watch The Simpsons. Perhaps John saw Wes as less of a threat in the future, and hoped to see a stronger candidate eliminated for the pricing error. We don't have any evidence beyond what we see on the TV show, which is edited to maximize the drama. So we don't know why Kevin was selected. Suggesting white meritocracy is responsible for the black man being in the board room would be laughable if it weren't so predictable. Also, why don't you reach the merits of my positions, rather than slagging away at me personally? Methodologically, I have done nothing incorrect here. I don't think much of your assumptions. You are grafting your statistical model onto the behavior of people who have been specifically edited to fit a dramatic script. >Specifically, what do you think about the statistics that I mentioned in my numerous posts? Can you explain those outcomes? They indeed suggest a self-perpetuating white meritocracy. And that may be a factor in non-televised boardrooms. >Are you even curious about them? If you could make things better for people in this country, what would you do? Vote against George Bush. Do you actually believe that Pretty Boy John >is not aware of his instant privilege in this society? Yes, actually. I don't think he is concious of any instant privilege. I believe it is so ingrained as to be invisible. By the way, isn't "Pretty Boy" a fairly derogatory phrase for this high-minded argument? Is it logical to assume that his knowledge of that would not necessarily inform his private and clearly illogical decision to pick Kevin for the boardroom? I don't believe it was illogical to choose Kevin. Kevin was reponsible for pricing, which cost Mosaic a victory. Not choosing Kevin would have been illogical. The real question is "why not Wes?" These are some questions and answers that could enlighten all of us. Why don't you think about positive ways forward and share those with us, rather than attempting to impugn my character? I'm not here to impugn your character, just your presumptions. I'm not here to solve the world's problems. I'm here to discuss a TV show, which is only a producer's scripted version of reality.   Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser" 10-15-04, 11:49 PM (EST) 79. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Let us rewind the script, TeamJoisey. 1. You impugned my character when you categorised my method of raising questions "racial profiling." 2. You impugned my character when you announced, with absolutely no evidence, that I was not an American. The subtext of that completely unsubstantiated claim is that your perception of what my background is provides a litmus test for whether I am "worthy" of raising issues that you find "distressing." That kind of thinking smacks of the very biases and exclusionary social behaviours that most enlightened people profess to abhor. ("This person is not like us, so let us get rid of him or her by invalidating the person's right to participate in the community." The little pack mentality thing reminds me of the feckless women on the Apprentice.) 3. You impugned my character when you announced, with absolutely no evidence, that I called the contestant racist for choosing Kevin for the boardroom. Your note was snide, self-serving, based completely on conjecture, and illogical. And that may be because you are very uncomfortable with the points that I raised in my original note. You still have failed to address them. I would love to address them with you, as I have with other posters, but I will not have a discussion with you if you insist on attacking me personally. Full stop. For posters who may have missed TeamJoisey's note, please see below: ""You seem pretty sure of yourself on the subject of racism in America. I find that fascinating, since you are not American. I find it distressing that you are projecting a statistical model onto a single person you know almost nothing about. Except his gender and race. And concluding that because he was born a white male, he most certainly is a racist. Here in America, we call that racial profiling. That's the polite term."" In the first place, the subtext is that one has to be American to validly participate in this discussion. That is incorrect. My lineage has no nexus to the issue of whether I can rightfully engage in this discussion. It would do you well to reach the merits of the points in my note, rather than trying to hide the real issues here. Is it valid to use government-generated statistical outcomes on wage and earnings differentials between white men and similarly situated women or similarly situated people of color across ethnic cohorts as a beginning point for analysing decision-making processes on this game show? Does it make sense to assume that the players' backgrounds may factor into the way that they play the game? My answer to both questions is yes. You obviously have a differnt view. I will not assume that you are not an American because of this, nor will I attack you. I will only disagree with you on these points, and point out that it is entirely logical to debate questions in this manner. Read any series of academic articles in any field of knowledge that moves you, and you will find that this approach to dialectic is common--and logically consistent. In the second place, you are completely incorrect in claiming that I am "projecting a statistical model onto a single person." There is no statistical model at issue here. There are only statistical outcomes that highlight a lurid fact of American life with reference to racism and sexism in the workplace, and you for some reason refuse to reach the merits of that position. Perhaps this is because you cannot disprove these data. (They are posted at the Bureau of Labour Statistics website.) Why are you uncomfortable with confronting those issues? Are you yourself a member of this privileged class? And if you are, does it anger you or embarrass you that someone, who by your lights, is not American raises these issues with you? With reference to the show specifically, does Pretty Boy John (and I do reserve the right to call him that. He is a public figure.) benefit from his preferred position in this society? Is he a television-generated analogue for privilege from which most white males continually benefit in this society? Are you miffed at me for highlighting a valid but uncomfortable advantage that he and others like him will always have in this society? If the latter is true, why is it necessary for you to be angry or "distressed" about these obvious facts? Why not simply accept the fact of these awful injustices and commit yourself to changing them where you can and when you can in your everyday life? --Singer PS I know quite a bit about racism in America. I am black. I am female. I am from the Deep South. I have Ivy League degrees and a Ph.D. from Oxford. My areas of expertise are political philosophy, economics, race studies, comparative government and law. And my grandfather was a sharecropper. My other grandfather was a white landowner. So by experience and training, I know quite a lot about this topic from more than one perspective, because I live it EVERYDAY. I have experienced it and observed it and analysed it formally from a global as well as national context. Are we clear?   Top

TeamJoisey 3558 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Thong Contest Judge" 10-16-04, 02:09 AM (EST) 81. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" 1. Talk about impugning character. You are "willing to bet" that white John chose black Kevin for racial reasons. I'm willing to bet you don't know John personally, yet you make unfounded suppositions based on the color of his skin. I don't have to impugn your character on this point. Your character is quite clear. 2. I said I found it "fascinating" that you knew so much about racism. Your usage of the language indicated that you were not American. In common usage, there is no "u" in labor, or behavior, for instance. If you were, in fact, raised in the deep South, it's admirable that an Oxford education managed to eliminate those quirks of American English. In any case, fascination is not perjorative. You took that as an insult, where none was intended. I am not one of those who believe only Americans can think. But, being American, I'm not well-versed on racial problems in the United Kingdom and wouldn't presume to comment on such. 3. I am not the one who "announced" that you were willing to bet John's decision was based on racial elements. I believe that evidence can be found earlier in this thread under your name. Now, you want to debate the merits of your argument? You suggest statistical information about wage and earnings differential is an indicator that one contestant made a strategic decision based on race. You suggest it is a starting point for analyzing decision-making by the contestants. On what basis? And can you carry it forth with logic? John decided to bring Kevin into the room because some day John will out-earn Kevin? I call that nonsense. There are more reasonable explanations than the idea that John instinctively or knowingly relied on the history that non-televised boardrooms statistically favor the white man. Perhaps the fact that Kevin was responsible for the team losing was a factor. Perhaps the fact that Kevin told Trump to fire John was a bigger factor. Alas, that doesn't fit your argument. You ask if it makes sense to assume that the players' backgrounds may factor into the way that they play the game. Certainly it does. But where's the data? We know nothing about John other than what has been shown on a heavily edited and scripted television program. I have no argument with your claim of institutional racism, and can not refute those labor department statistics. But I take issue with the idea that such data proves a racial element behind John's decision. You lack the basis for any such conclusion. Such supposition is unworthy of an Oxford doctorate. I am distressed and saddened by racism, from any and every source. Unfortunately, prejudice is a state of mind common to all races, genders and religions. And, as you nobly suggest, I do speak out against it when I see it in action. Lastly, you defend your derogatory "Pretty Boy" on the grounds that John is a public figure. (Case law is unclear on that, by the way. Television game show contestants have not been subject to the same "public figure" status accorded politicians, for example.) But if calling a handsome white man "Pretty Boy" is acceptable, then I'm sure we can agree to call Kevin "Black Boy" for the rest of the season. He is, in your words, "a television-generated analogue." PS. If you intend to declare yourself an "expert" in an online forum, it's a good idea to list your qualifications near the top of your first post. Not everyone will believe your resume, but at least your claim of expertise seems grounded in some reality. Snide? Certainly. Illogical? Not usually.   Top

Alag 161 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 10-16-04, 02:39 AM (EST) 82. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Joisey, I'm joining your team.   Top

TeamJoisey 3558 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Thong Contest Judge" 10-17-04, 01:47 AM (EST) 112. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Thanks. Welcome aboard.   Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser" 10-16-04, 09:36 AM (EST) 87. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" You, quite frankly, are lying about what I said. Here is my complete post to Reality X about whether Pretty Boy's John's choice to take Kevin in the boardroom was racist: 21. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Ti..." Hi, RealityX. The PM definitely made a dumb move on the chess board when he chose Kevin for the boardroom, rather than Kevin and Wes. Definitely a strategic train wreck. And true to his inconsistent manner, The Donald decided to acknowledge this mistake by the Weak Pretty Boy, rather than giving him a pass for being, well, inconsistent in his thinking. How curious. Lesson from The Donald: Inconsistency in decision-making is fine for female project managers and not fine for male project managers. Inconsistency in decision-making is fine for me at all times, because I am The Donald. On your other question, I have some thoughts, but maybe no answer. It's interesting how people react to questions about difficult social issues by attempting to trivialise those difficult questions. Race almost always ends up being a subtext in discussions about meritocracy in the workplace, especially when the people in question are of different ethnic backgrounds. That is the sorry history of racism in America. It is an awful legacy which undergirds the very economic foundations of this country. Because of that reality, people who have been victimised by racism will think or even bravely ask the difficult question out loud, as it were. People who are ashamed of that legacy and who continue to benefit from it will often attempt to trivialise the question or the questioner. It somehow makes them more comfortable to push the hard question aside, if for no other reason than the fact that they themselves would never consciously discriminate. What they fail to realise is that even if they themselves refuse to discriminate, far-too-often, similarly situated members of preferred classes do discriminate, and on a regular basis. That's why white males make more money than similarly situated women and people of color across ethnic cohorts. And that horrible fact prompts the uncomforatable question that you correctly raise. This pattern of pushing aside the hard question is one that I have observed repeatedly in my professional life and in my personal life. I wish that I knew more about the relationships between the players on the men's team. It was interesting to see Kevin stick up for Andy and even more satisfying to watch him stick up for Stacie J. He clearly is unafraid when it comes to fighting injustice, because that is likely what he has had to do to survive in his academic and professional life. I respect him because of what I have observed of his behaviour toward players who have been unfair in their assessments of and treatment of competitors in the game. I also respect Kevin because of the leadership roles that he has assumed on his team--win, lose or draw. I am not overly impressed by his talents and abilities, because I expect him to exude all of these qualities precisely because of his training and family background. He is not an anomaly. Because racist decision-making is of its nature private and unquantifiable, I can only point to statistics that highlight racist outcomes in earnings and wage levels for people of colour in the United States. My guess is that racism drives this outcome for people of colour. Bias also drives these outcomes for women. Is Pretty Boy John a racist for choosing Kevin? Hard to prove. But given the patents of racism from which he was benefitted his entire life, he at least knew that his odds of getting away with a dumb boardroom choice were probably high. --Singer" TeamJoisey, you attempted to impugn my character. You have failed. Your attempt to parse my statements is a patent misrepresentation of my points. Period. End of sentence. As far as the merits of my argument are concerned, you appear incapable of having a fair and open debate without attacking people personally. So have at it. But not here and certainly not with me. And do not attempt to give me lessons about writing styles. You know nothing about audiences for which I write, nor are you aware of the frequency of that process, nor are you aware of the habits that I have developed as a result of this, nor do you know of the languages that I use. But you, dear fellow, are completely out of your league if you think that you can carp about my writing style and if you think that somehow that carping will successfully obscure my original questions about Reality X's post. And just because you may not like my writing style, your dislike does not weaken my positions here. What counts is the simple fact that you cannot rightfully cast aspersions on me, because I am somehow different from you or because I do not communicate in a manner that makes you comfortable. My being perhaps "different" from you in experience also does not give you the right to ridicule me. Your anger and rudeness are unjustified and visceral. Perhaps this is because you cannot disprove the premises of anything that I have presented here. You also cannot show me that I do not possess the right, that you obviously take for granted, to think out loud about the motives that may have driven Pretty Boy John's decision to take Kevin to the boardroom. Read my post closely. I told Reality X that I had some thoughts but maybe no answer to his original question. I concluded that it was hard to prove Reality X's question. I concluded that Pretty Boy John enjoys a preferred position in this society, whether he knows it or not. I surmised that "he at least knew that his odds of getting away with a dumb boardroom choice were probably high." The Donald's hiring patterns within his own companies and erratic firing patterns on the show certainly animate my belief on this point. That is one woman's opinion. You are entitled to yours. You are not, however, entitled to misrepresent what I have said here. And you are certainly not entitled to attack me personally. --Singer   Top

Bebo 21083 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-16-04, 12:49 PM (EST) 92. "Stop it, Singer" I've received multiple alerts this morning about your attacks on TJ, as well as your claims of being attacked yourself. - If you claim to be an expert, people have the right to ask you to back up that statement. This is the Internet - people don't know you. We've had countless people come on these forums and claim to be someone they're not, so it's not unreasonable to expect proof of claims. - Do not bash another poster. Calling someone a liar is bashing. - If you feel you're being attacked, then the appropriate recourse on these forums is to hit the Alert button and let the moderators handle it. I trust that someone with a PhD can find the Alert button. Going after posters yourself falls under the vigilante moderation portion of the guidelines and is unacceptable here. If you wish to continue posting to these forums, please refrain from personal attacks, and when you feel you're attacked, alert the moderators.   Top

CallMeNu 1 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "American Cancer Society Spokesperson" 10-18-04, 00:36 AM (EST) 118. "RE: Stop it, Singer" LAST EDITED ON 10-18-04 AT 00:38 AM (EST) Singer, I just registered to tell you that I remember you from the old Apprentice boards. Shame that people can't 'handle' your wisdom and send alerts in an attempt to get you banned. Keep up the good work! Also, Reality X, I don't know why people are saying you aren't responding to your own thread...but I give you several props for even asking the question. You didn't SAY that John took Kevin into be boardroom because of racism, you just put the SUGGESTION out there for discussion...and clearly some can't handle the simple discussion. THAT'S a shame. Whichever poster that said that it's a hard call...I agree. There MAY have been underlying racial reasons as to why John took Kevin in, but I can't make that call...so as another poster said, I will give him the benefit of the doubt. I just can't figure out why on EARTH he thought he stood a chance against Kevin, based on all of the evidence of the past shows. There's the issue that MAY point to racism! Or may Pretty Boy John is just merely stupid John.   Top

Bebo 21083 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-18-04, 07:00 AM (EST) 119. "Clarification" Hitting the alert button doesn't mean you're trying to get a poster banned. Hitting the alert button merely means that a post is questionable, and that the moderators should give it a look. Nothing more. Posters who adhere to the guidelines will not get banned, no matter how many times we receive alerts for them. And if a poster were to use the alert button in that manner - to just try and get someone else who isn't violating the guidelines banned - we would ban the poster who abused the alert button. I'd like to thank posters who hit the alert button, since we mods don't have the time to read every single post on every single forum. By hitting the alert button, you help to stop problems before they start, by making the moderators aware of a potential situation. And by hitting the alert button instead of responding directly to a post you question, you help to keep threads on topic instead of having fights break out on them.   Top

singer 1910 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Herbal Healing Drugs Endorser" 10-19-04, 01:29 PM (EST) 129. "RE: Stop it, Singer" >LAST EDITED ON 10-18-04 >AT 00:38 AM (EST) > >Singer, I just registered to tell >you that I remember you >from the old Apprentice boards. > Shame that people can't >'handle' your wisdom and send >alerts in an attempt to >get you banned. Keep >up the good work! > >Also, Reality X, I don't know >why people are saying you >aren't responding to your own >thread...but I give you several >props for even asking the >question. You didn't SAY >that John took Kevin into >be boardroom because of racism, >you just put the SUGGESTION >out there for discussion...and clearly >some can't handle the simple >discussion. THAT'S a shame. > > >Whichever poster that said that it's >a hard call...I agree. >There MAY have been underlying >racial reasons as to why >John took Kevin in, but >I can't make that call...so >as another poster said, I >will give him the benefit >of the doubt. I >just can't figure out why >on EARTH he thought he >stood a chance against Kevin, >based on all of the >evidence of the past shows. > There's the issue that >MAY point to racism! >Or may Pretty Boy John >is just merely stupid John. > Good to hear from you again, CallMeNu! As usual, your thoughts and comments are interesting and well-reasoned. Just as an FYI, I ran my correspondence with some of these posters past one of my old Oxford professors yesterday, and he said that my analysis was correct, since I focused on "similarly situated white males, women and people of colour across cohorts." Since he is the moral and political philosophy chair for the entire university, I would assume that he is a definitive authority on this debate. He has no vested interest in its outcome, and he certainly knows how to construct a logical proof. I knew that the argument was logically consistent, because of my own publication records and professional experience in this area. But that's not really the point. What counts is that people of varying viewpoints can have these discussions without deliberately misrepresenting information to try and "win" points. But they have to be fundamentally honest about a desire to get to the truth of whatever the source of the debate is. And they have to also have a commitment, not to bullying, but to learning from each other. As we saw last year, some people can handle this, and others cannot. This is an interesting commentary on the way that people interact in communities. Interesting, indeed. --Singer PS And if this "reality show" is purely entertainment, isn't it interesting that Jennifer from New York got fired from her real job for making racially insensitive comments to her team mates while on the show? So "art" does imitate life, and it highlights the fact that in unguarded moments even young cast members can think or behave in biased ways against formerly vilified minorities. And if, heaven forbid, they ever get into positions of authority, it is likely that those same negative tendencies will factor into their hiring and firing patterns, unless they learn the hard lessons associated with rejecting their preferred positions in society.   Top

AyaK 10426 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-19-04, 08:35 PM (EST) 135. "Second warning" What counts is that people of varying viewpoints can have these discussions without deliberately misrepresenting information to try and "win" points. What counts here is whether you can follow the rules of the board, singer, not who wins the debating contest. You're free to award yourself whatever debating victories you want, just like Andy is. But in this post, a moderator informed you to stop calling other posters liars. Apparently that didn't sink in, since you quite clearly accuse other posters of deliberately misrepresenting your views, which is a more polite way of saying the same thing. But we work by substance over form here. Therefore, this is a second warning for violating the board guidelines. Since this is baseball season in the U.S., I want to remind you that "three strikes and you're out."   Top

TeamJoisey 3558 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Thong Contest Judge" 10-16-04, 03:12 PM (EST) 94. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" LAST EDITED ON 10-16-04 AT 11:06 PM (EST) I apologize if you took my fascination with your usage as an attempt to coach or criticize your writing. It was nothing of the sort. You quoted from a previous post, but not the post in which you say you'd bet on your assessment of the situation. You'll find that post at #24. You continue to insist that I am attacking you personally. Please be assured I am not attacking you, only your unsupported suppositions about John's inherent racism. You have failed to substantiate anything related to the argument. You have not addressed any of my points, nor offered any logic behind your original point. You self-righteously feign outrage, and call me a liar, because I take issue with your indefensible position. Because you refuse to back up your assertions, you have rendered this discussion moot and deflated any credibility earned by your claim to an Oxford education. Welcome to the boards. I hope you enjoy your time here and participate in some of the other discussions. But please don't expect to get a free pass on baseless assertions of racism. Thanks for the exercise. These reality show contestants need a reality check!   Top

amea_gari 585 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-15-04, 10:07 PM (EST) 75. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" That was awesome.   Top

subman 1546 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Peanut Festival Grand Marshall" 10-15-04, 03:36 PM (EST) 47. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" So what? Just because a statistic defines an earning gap between men and women or whites and nonwhites, this does not necessarily mean that discrimination is the cause. An earnings gap in some cases can be explained by relative work experience, education or other factors. Engineered by Gothmog, 2004   Top

beardance58 78 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square" 10-15-04, 03:49 PM (EST) 50. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Women and minorities, on the average, make less money for equal work and equal experience and education. It is a well-known and documented fact.   Top

amea_gari 585 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-15-04, 10:16 PM (EST) 76. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Actually, that's an interpretation of documented data. There are also a great many counter measures in place, and any individual who can prove that he/she is not being treated fairly based on sex or race has a practically air-tight lawsuit in today's social environment. Here's food for thought. I recall an episode of Dateline that showcased a variety of services for which women are charged more, such as haircuts. Gosh, women are being charged more for haircuts!? That means discrimination! See where I am going with this?   Top

frodo2 289 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Network TV Show Guest Star" 10-15-04, 11:30 AM (EST) 22. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Kelly advised that bringing two strong people into the boardroom could lead to John's own demise. John foolishly accepted Kelly's ridiculous boardroom strategy as solid gold, as John isolated his own estimate of the comparatively "weak" player, Kevin, for the boardroom confrontation. Note that Kelly did not say that Kevin was weak. Kelly warned John that both Wes and Kevin were strong players. I dont' interpret John's action as racist, although it was foolish. I don't know why he picked Kevin over Wes, but since he wasn't there, he had no idea who was really responsible. My impression was that he was letting other people make his decisions for him and he picked Andy for no other reason that he thought he'd be supported in the boardroom.   Top

beardance58 78 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square" 10-15-04, 01:07 PM (EST) 31. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" LAST EDITED ON 10-15-04 AT 01:10 PM (EST) I think he brought Kevin in because as a white male John would be comfortable with somebody who is more like him -- Wes -- and would not want to hurt his feelings or take him out. Therefore, Wes and John may be better friends than John and Kevin. I mean, what has Wes done up to this point? Has he even been a PM yet? I believe it was racism -- not overt, but the covert racism that is so present in our society. The other poster had it down (I forget the name). Kevin has no problem fighting injustice, because he has probably had to deal with it all his life, regardless of how affluent he is. He also probably has a lower tolerance level for it. The more I see this guy, the more I like him. And I am speaking as a white professional woman. I see this behavior more times than not. He brought Andy in because he was a target. He should have brought Wes, Kevin, and Raj in, and either Raj or John should have been fired. I don't know why the Trump seemed to like John -- I haven't seen that much of him. As for Andy not being a leader yet -- the guys have already said that they draw names out of a hat to decide who is going to be a leader. It will be interesting to see what happens next week when they mix the teams up -- who steps up to the plate.   Top

Viewer 44 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Beauty Pageant Celebrity Judge" 10-15-04, 02:00 PM (EST) 33. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" It WOULD just be hilarious that people are crying: "racism" over John's boardroom decision. He obviously chose Andy because he thought it would be easy to get rid of him because he doesn't "fit in." Every PM has brought in only two (except for the Brad incident) because it seems "honorable" to not put any more than necessary on the wire. John listened to Kelly and took his advice on not bringing two strong people in, so he had to choose one, plain and simple. He probably chose him because he thought he would be weaker in the boardroom. I very seriously doubt that he chose him because he thought The Donald would be more likely to fire a black guy. The cry of racism WOULD be hilarious except that racism is REAL and this cry of wolf is insulting to those who have endured it and defended it.   Top

beardance58 78 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square" 10-15-04, 02:19 PM (EST) 34. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I didn't say that John chose Kevin "because he thought The Donald would be more likely to fire a black guy." I said he chose Kevin because he *may* have felt more comfortable and been better friends with somebody who is most like him. Andy didn't fit in and, for some reason, neither did Kevin. Saying he was a weaker player makes no sense, because he, unlike Wes, had already won as PM.   Top

Viewer 44 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Beauty Pageant Celebrity Judge" 10-15-04, 02:29 PM (EST) 35. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" weaker player? Who said that? I said that he probably thought he would be weaker in the BOARDROOM. He had been warned about bringing two strong players in. Perhaps he chose the one he thought would be less competition to him, oe heck, maybe he chose the one he felt was MORE competition to him hoping that the bad pricing would lead him out the door and out of the competition. Or, hey, maybe he was even stupider than has already been proven and just chose one he didn't like as well. He didn't think it through well at all. He should have brought 3 in, Wes, Kevin and Raj and hoped that TD gave them grace on the bad pricing and just let Raj to go for acting creepy. TD was already fed up with him, and he truly was a distraction. The three of them together could have surely defended their pricing strategy or at least thrown enough attention off of it by accentuating the way Raj acted.   Top

beardance58 78 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square" 10-15-04, 02:44 PM (EST) 38. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" sorry, if I misinterpreted what you said. It certainly didn't seem as though Kevin was weak in the boardroom -- unlike Wes, he actually opened his mouth -- that would be reason enough for me to be concerned. Maybe John thought that anybody who defended Andy would be on Trump's list to go. Regardless, John blew the entire task -- I don't think he did one thing right, so I really didn't expect him to make an intelligent decision about who to bring back. My observation is simply that people in a situation like this tend to ally themselves with a) stronger players or b) the ones that you are comfortable with. John seemed to me to be a follower and not a leader. Regardless, we agree that he blew it -- and we also agree as to who he should have brought in -- Raj, Kevin, and Wes. And then either Raj or John should have been fired. Possible either Kevin and Wes. But I don't think it was the pricing as much as all the other decisions that preceded that. Raj should have been the one to go because he created chaos. No way was the men's team going to win this. Although there were ways. They just failed miserably, and that should fall on the PM.   Top

ARnutz 13937 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 05:29 PM (EST) 60. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Yeah... I don't get why it was said that Wes is a very strong player??? He hasn't done very much from what we've seen on the episodes! In my eyes, Kevin is definitely stronger than Wes. Perhaps all of Wes's great accomplishments have been edited out by MB & DT. (Yeah right!) I'm just a squirrel trying to get a nut.   Top

tvsmylife 32 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Beauty Pageant Celebrity Judge" 10-15-04, 02:51 PM (EST) 40. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" You hit the nail on the head. Kevin seemed to realize that Rag was a problem. Had the PM taken the high road he could have sat on the sideline during the boardroom as The Rag argued with the numbers guys. Did anybody notice the color of the hand that was pointing at the pricelist during the brief discussion of prices. I'm asking not because I'm a racist, but because it may have some bearing on the real reason that the PM took Kevin instead of Wes. Kevin may have been the one who raised the prices line by line beyond the recommendation of the designer. I think it would have been better to reduce the prices because the designer did not seem confident in the prices she gave. She started to say she usually gets then said that she usually looks for the prices she gave.   Top

beardance58 78 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square" 10-15-04, 03:08 PM (EST) 42. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I thought the fashion designer gave them her rock-bottom prices -- the lowest that she could afford to go to break even for her work. In light of what happened last week -- they didn't want to end up pricing themselves too low, so they raised them.   Top

tvsmylife 32 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Beauty Pageant Celebrity Judge" 10-15-04, 03:46 PM (EST) 49. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I thought they won last week because the women overpriced their product by a much higher percentage than the percentage that the men overpriced their product. The men price 71 vs 69, a 3% overprice vs the women price of 27 vs 20. 30% or 8% or whatever. She may have initally said that the prices were the lowest acceptable at one point, but she did some serious backtracking.   Top

beardance58 78 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square" 10-15-04, 05:37 PM (EST) 64. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I meant that if they had priced their item lower last week, they might not have won (they might have sold more units though -- so they may have won anyway). And that was a big debate about the price of the product last week -- so I am just guessing that when they said fashion designers and buyers, they felt they had to mark it up? I don't know. I didn't see the backtracking. Actually, the fashion designer just seemed completely incompetent.   Top

frodo2 289 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Network TV Show Guest Star" 10-16-04, 07:55 AM (EST) 83. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Actually, the fashion designer just seemed completely incompetent. Interesting you say that. In a very real way, the designer was being tested as much as the men were. I wonder what the aftermath was for her in Trump Modeling(assuming she's an employee) after the challenge and also after it aired.   Top

freakusmaximus 310 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Cooking Show Host" 10-17-04, 12:51 PM (EST) 116. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" i think this was similar to last season when they had to pick an artist and sell their artwork- part of the task was to find the best artist to do that job. here, the men clearly picked the wrong person to do this job   Top

ARnutz 13937 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 05:31 PM (EST) 61. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" "The Rag" *snort* that's funny!!! I'm just a squirrel trying to get a nut.   Top

Oscirus 1596 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Peanut Festival Grand Marshall" 10-15-04, 02:30 PM (EST) 36. "If yall would have read my other post" It would explain why Kevin went instead of Wes. Kevin was openly attacking John's credibility and trying to make him look like a fool in the boardroom Wes was not.   Top

rqt9191 30 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Beauty Pageant Celebrity Judge" 10-15-04, 03:51 PM (EST) 52. "Kevin Opened his Mouth, Wes Didn't" I totally agree. At least based upon the scenes they showed, Kevin kept butting in in the boardroom, whereas Wes didn't. Kevin also stood up for Andy when many of the others were saying that Andy should have been fired. It was a mistake for John not to bring in Wes, but not racism. John might have gotten fired anyway, though. He was too hands off, and as we saw with Kwame last season, that style of management just doesn't work.   Top

ARnutz 13937 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 05:32 PM (EST) 62. "RE: If yall would have read my other post" I think Wes is a big wet noodle!! Absolutely no personality! I'm just a squirrel trying to get a nut.   Top

realitychick 200 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Network TV Show Guest Star" 10-15-04, 03:21 PM (EST) 44. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Ah, it should have been Raj and Andy. Mob mentality on Andy...all agreed he was too young and inexperienced but Raj not only asked for more dates but kept the designer busy when she had stuff to do! This would have been the easiest possible way for John to not get fired. Not right choice but a choice nonetheless.   Top

RealityX 106 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 10-15-04, 03:38 PM (EST) 48. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" >Ah, it should have been Raj >and Andy. Mob mentality >on Andy...all agreed he was >too young and inexperienced but >Raj not only asked for >more dates but kept the >designer busy when she had >stuff to do! This >would have been the easiest >possible way for John to >not get fired. Not >right choice but a choice >nonetheless. Hmmmmmm. Bring in both Kevin and Wes, or leave out both Kevein and Wes. Leaving out both Kevin and Wes would have spared stupid John the question of why Wes was not brought into the boardroom and vindicated John of all potential, future accusations of wolf pack racism. John could have then took full responsibly for not participating in pricing, and Raj would have continued to support John against Andy. Brilliant strategy. Underhanded, but brilliant nonetheless.   Top

realitychick 200 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Network TV Show Guest Star" 10-15-04, 05:40 PM (EST) 65. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Yes, I agree, underhanded; but, Raj tried to put the moves on Anna K., the models and then dominated the designer's time. He was asked to leave her alone...numerous times. Maybe if Kelly and John weren't having to "curb the Raj", he could have assisted in pricing or maybe John could have had time to oversee Wes and Kevin. Even Trump knew Raj was hitting on all the models and Anna. Trump would have used it as justification to fire. Raj is socializing in this task, not doing his job! Easy out, still leaves a cohesive unit! Raj should have gone, IMO.   Top

truffleshuffle 39 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Beauty Pageant Celebrity Judge" 10-15-04, 06:32 PM (EST) 68. "RE: Defense of RAJ" The men didn't lose because Raj was annoying. Although, Raj wasted the designer's time, obviously she still finished the designs. So what was the big deal? The MEN lost because the women picked a more business-oriented designer. That was John's fault. Darren, the women's designer, seemed to make most of the decisions, while Ilsie, the men's designer, seemed to leave many of the decisions to the men. What a mistake. She might as well have asked them about feminge hygeine products. Although, I'm sure Kelly would have an opinion about tampons, since he has an opinion about everything else. The only legitimate defense John could muster was to blame Kevin and Wes for overpricing. John's second mistake was not bringing the both of them into the boardroom. He should have never listened to Kelly's advice. Bring Raj into the boardroom would have been just as fruitless as bringing Andy into the boardroom. Last week, Pam brought in Stacey because she was annoying and the Donald fired Pam. Ivana brought in Jenn C for being annoying, and the Donald fired Bradford for being stupid. Clearly, being annoying is not enough of a reason to be fired. To be fired, you have to REALLY do something stupid (Bradford), have your whole team think your mental (Stacie), or suck as PM (everyone else). So I guess John was a dead man walking. It's ashame he got fired. I do think he had the best hair out of all the men.   Top

RealityX 106 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 10-15-04, 06:46 PM (EST) 70. "RE: Defense of RAJ" >Last week, Pam brought in Stacey >because she was annoying and >the Donald fired Pam. Ivana >brought in Jenn C for >being annoying, and the Donald >fired Bradford for being stupid. >Clearly, being annoying is not >enough of a reason to >be fired. True. But given stupid John's desparate situation, keeping Kevin and Wes out of the boardroom, and bringing in Raj for SUPPORT against Andy, not because Raj was annoying, ***IS*** a brilliant strategy. Before stupid John selected Kevin and Andy, Raj chose Andy as the person he would fire. If John had selected Raj, John and Raj would have double-teamed Andy. Then, Kevin's strong comments, which were key in removing John, would never have been heard. That strategy would not have been guaranteed, but it appears to be the only strategy that stupid John had.   Top

truffleshuffle 39 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Beauty Pageant Celebrity Judge" 10-15-04, 09:25 PM (EST) 72. "RE: Defense of RAJ" I understand your point, but I would never risk bringing someone into the boardroom unless I wanted them to be fired. John needed to take control of the boardroom. We've seen Maria and Stacy do this very effectively. Unfortunately, Kevin is a future bloodsucking lawyer (just like evil stacy) and Andy is a world-renowned master debater, so John was verbally-outmatched. There was no way he could get a word in... And he pissed off the Donald by not bringing in Wes.   Top

beardance58 78 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square" 10-18-04, 08:32 AM (EST) 120. "RE: Defense of RAJ" Raj was simply annoying -- he was getting in the way of getting the job done. And not just in one case -- in several. He annoyed the models. He got in the way of the designer   Top

subman 1546 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Peanut Festival Grand Marshall" 10-15-04, 03:25 PM (EST) 45. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I was just wondering if there is a widely used term in these forums that describes a person who posts a thread and then never participates in the discussion? Just curious? Also, it seems to be a popular theme this season to continue making race-based accusations after every challenge, but I fail to see any substance to this myself. Engineered by Gothmog, 2004   Top

HistoryDetective 9516 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 03:33 PM (EST) 46. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Well, since Andy is the masterdebater, maybe we should keep in the spirit of the Apprentice and call that tactic "masterbaiting" since we were so skillfully maneuvered into taking the bait and engaging in a lengthy discussion.   Top

subman 1546 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Peanut Festival Grand Marshall" 10-15-04, 03:49 PM (EST) 51. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Precisely what I was thinking. The guy sows the seeds of racial hatred and prejudice and then rushes off to some other area of the forum to do the same thing. I'm in no position to say it should be a requirement, but why should I bother to get involved in a conversation started by someone who can't even bother to support his comments that started the conversation in the first place? I think we're being played here? Engineered by Gothmog, 2004   Top

Bebo 21083 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 04:08 PM (EST) 54. "So what?" LAST EDITED ON 10-15-04 AT 05:30 PM (EST) why should I bother to get involved in a conversation started by someone who can't even bother to support his comments that started the conversation in the first place? Then don't get involved - it's that simple. As long as the poster doesn't violate the guidelines, he can post whatever he wants. I thought we've already been through that. ETA: I've been hearing from a number of posters who question whether discussion or dissention is being incited here. Folks, if you think someone's just trying to pull your chain, then don't go along with it. There are plenty other threads to post to, or plenty of other topics to start talking about. And y'all should know me well enough by now to know that if posters just seem to keep repeating themselves, or cross over the line, I'll lock the threads as appropriate. Just remember your old pal the Alert button.   Top

Alag 161 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 10-15-04, 04:49 PM (EST) 56. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" >Precisely what I was thinking. >The guy sows the seeds >of racial hatred and prejudice >and then rushes off to >some other area of the >forum to do the same >thing. I'm in no >position to say it should >be a requirement, but why >should I bother to get >involved in a conversation started >by someone who can't even >bother to support his comments >that started the conversation in >the first place? I >think we're being played here? > > >>= "gray" face= arial]Engineered by >Gothmog, 2004 No offense to some of the intelligent posts that this question has drawn out but I find this line of questioning, this baiting for racism to stir the pot, so ridiculous and offensive. As a real minority, I don't need to sift for racist moments in every point in my life. I find it when it exists which is very often and if its not there, I'm not so desperate to look for a needle in a haystack. In my opinion, people who pose questions like this have never faced racism the way that myself and other Americans of color have. I stayed out of the Stacie J. forums for this very reason. I'll sit on the sidelines with you, Subman. Can you bring some popcorn?   Top

realitychick 200 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Network TV Show Guest Star" 10-15-04, 05:56 PM (EST) 66. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Could we make a "racism" link so it stays in one place and the individuals who would like to debate may? Prior, we discussed the use of clinical diagnoses "armchair psychologists" when unqualified individuals would label the Apprentice candidates. Since we are not all judges nor attorneys (well only the qualified speak here because I know we do have some attorneys), allegations should not be made that cannot be legally cannot backed up.   Top

Jep1974 693 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-18-04, 10:50 PM (EST) 125. "not everything is racially based" Also, it seems >to be a popular theme >this season to continue making >race-based accusations after every challenge, >but I fail to see >any substance to this myself. > > I would have to agree... There is a possibility that people were looked at and/or fired, not because of race, but because of a number of other reasons. The problem with immediately pinning something on race is that this will start to get old, and then will be overlooked as it will have been heard too many times. Then when a real, legitimate racial issue arises, it will not be given the attention it deserves. Making everything a racial issue is a hinderence, not a help. Don't get me wrong, when it is, it should be dealt with immediately and severely. But, not everything is racially charged. Without proof, an accusation of racism dangerously approaches "crying wolf"   Top

starletgrrrl 29 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Beauty Pageant Celebrity Judge" 10-15-04, 03:55 PM (EST) 53. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I noticed also how he took Kevin to the boardroom and not Wes, but I highly doubt its b/c of racism, it was just poor judgement like Trump said. I am black and I didnt see the "racism" in last nights episode at all, what happened last night on the men's team was nowhere near what took place on the women's team with Stacie J.   Top

ARnutz 13937 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-15-04, 05:36 PM (EST) 63. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I didn't see it either! Thank you for weighing in on this one. Oh and... Welcome to the boards!! I'm just a squirrel trying to get a nut.   Top

frodo2 289 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Network TV Show Guest Star" 10-16-04, 08:08 AM (EST) 84. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" The other day I said I didn't think it was racism, but now it just seems like one of those "hard to call" experiences. You know what I'm talking about. Real life: at work, I wasn't on the short list for a project, even though I'm known as one of the better workers. All of the people on the short list are both old and also white. (no difference in experience, just age) So it could have been racism, it could have been ageism, it could have been something else, but I just don't know. I might get on the project anyway, but I'm certainly not in the position I'd like. That's the real everyday pain, all those little hard-to-pin-down experiences you have even when you're doing the right things.   Top

HistoryDetective 9516 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-16-04, 09:20 AM (EST) 86. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I see your point, frodo2. We can all guess and second-guess about John's motives, conscious and unconscious, but the whole situation is not a simple black-and-white issue (no pun intended).   Top

beardance58 78 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square" 10-19-04, 05:26 PM (EST) 132. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I did not think that the gang up on Stacie J.'s was racially motivated, whereas I am not so sure about Kevin (note -- I am not so sure). I didn't think Stacie J. fit in from the very beginning, and that was her death knoll -- it was just a matter of time, especially with that group of catty women. From all intents and purposes, Kevin has fit in, played the game, and won his task when he was PM. That's why I felt bringing him into the boardroom *could* have been racially motivated. I think I said before that it is easier to address overt racism. But racism that you can't see is a lot more evil and does more damage because it is harder to fight. Just like on these boards, people do not know, and will claim on their mother's grave that racism does not exist. But it does. When I was married -- my ex's parents were always making these little digs and criticisms of me. Nothing that you could isolate, if I said something I was accused of making a mountain out of a molehill -- oh, it was meant to be funny. Oh, you take things too seriously, etc. so on and so forth, until I felt as though I was wrong. But I wasn't wrong -- they did have a higher opinion of themselves than they did of me. Such is the case with racism that you can not see. It is not something you can point a finger at (or Maria's <grin>) and say this is a clear example, it is something that makes you wonder and speculate. In a perfect world, nobody would be wondering.   Top

Captain_Savem 3731 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Thong Contest Judge" 10-15-04, 06:38 PM (EST) 69. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" It's possible that Kevin was brought in because of racism. I can't read John's mind so to say, abolutely, that racism wasn't the reason Kevin was brought to the boardroom would be a little precarious. The same holds true for the contrary. So what do we know? 1) Kevin and Wes were responsible for pricing. 2) John should have taken a more active role in pricing specifically and during the entire project in general. 3) Kevin defended Andy against John's attacks at his youthful inexperience (allegedly). 4) John made the decision to go with Ilsa. 5) Raj was getting in the way. All signs point to Kevin and Wes. So why didn't John take Wes along with Kevin? There's the rub. Kevin stuck up for Stacey J., and he defended Andy. Not exactly the kind of guy of I would want to go against in the boardroom. Wes seems to be more aggressive and shady than Kevin. Kevin is soft spoken but confident and assertive, and if you don't know the guy very well, he will sneak up on you, like he did John. I believe the reason John brought Kevin into the boardroom was because Kevin is the more honest guy (my perception) of the two. Make no mistake, the BR's name precedes itself, and I'm quite sure they've all seen and heard stories about betrayals and ambushes. He rolled the dice (hey Rolly) and took his chances. Race could've been an underlying reason why John brough Kevin and not Wes (or both) into the BR. And if it was, then shame on him. But there are too many other reasons that I can see why John made the poor decision that he did, and I have to give him the benefit of the doubt. The Evolution Continues... "The receptivity of the great masses is very limited, and their intelligence is small." ~ Aloph Hitler   Top

truffleshuffle 39 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Beauty Pageant Celebrity Judge" 10-15-04, 06:49 PM (EST) 71. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I watched the clip of John on NBC. He said that he didn't bring Wes into the board room, because Wes approached him privately and apologized for the prizing, etc. So I guess John felt that would have been a d!ck move to bring Wes in. But John is too trusting, because the clips on yahoo showed Wes talking to Kevin about how they should gang up on John to make sure they both didn't get fired. So I guess Wes is a sneakly little devil. So John got fired. And now we can't look at his sexy mohican haircut next week.   Top

jae 412 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Daytime Soap Guest Star" 10-16-04, 10:07 AM (EST) 89. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I too am sick of these racism discussions. The bottomline is that we'll never know (and in fact, the alleged racists themselves might not even know if they're unconsciously doing it). So please drop it. I'm surprised there was a lot of talk about this episode. Although John was not the worst player on Mosaic, he deserved to be fired for not bringing in the players worse than him - Wes and Raj. End of story. Isn't this pretty much the consensus here?   Top

RealityX 106 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 10-16-04, 10:38 AM (EST) 90. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" >I too am sick of these >racism discussions. The bottomline is >that we'll never know (and >in fact, the alleged racists >themselves might not even know >if they're unconsciously doing it). >So please drop it. > >I'm surprised there was a lot >of talk about this episode. >Although John was not the >worst player on Mosaic, he >deserved to be fired for >not bringing in the players >worse than him - Wes >and Raj. End of story. >Isn't this pretty much the >consensus here? First, are you familiar with the philosophical phrase "false appeal to the consensus"? Second, you say you hate racism discussions. Hmmmmm. Perhaps. But the existence of the word racism in the headline of this post, taken together with your response, implies that the real bottom line is that you must ***LOVE*** to hate them. Consider that.   Top

jae 412 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Daytime Soap Guest Star" 10-17-04, 06:46 AM (EST) 113. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" >First, are you familiar with the >philosophical phrase "false appeal to >the consensus"? > >Second, you say you hate racism >discussions. Hmmmmm. Perhaps. > But the existence of >the word racism in the >headline of this post, taken >together with your response, implies >that the real bottom line >is that you must ***LOVE*** >to hate them. Consider >that. Sorry, but I have absolutely no idea as to what you're talking about! Are you trying to be funny?   Top

Sweater_Puffs 269 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Network TV Show Guest Star" 10-16-04, 07:47 PM (EST) 95. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I don't think it's racism. I thought it could even be reverse racism on Kevin's side, but I don't see that in Kevin. The way I see it: For that moment, it was John's company and everyone else on that task were basically working for him. They may not like him, but in essence, John gave them all good paying jobs in the fashion industry. Thank god there's a rush on tweed..... John started the company, developed it, got the contacts, secured the cash flow, got the designer did all of the footwork necessary to be able to offer a job to all the boys in the first place. Poor boys, they don't appreciate anything. Ooops, I take that back... all they appreciate is the PM position they don't have. They are willing to murder their own meal ticket. Kill the company, and they don't have food on the table. Guess they'll be eating poorboys instead of caviar for a while.... get it! John gave Kevin a job. That alone should have guaranteed Kevin's loyalty to John. Kevin witnessed Wes jacking up the prices, and he should have reported it to John and/or taken action himself in setting realistic prices, but he didn't. Why didn't he... perhaps he couldn't identify the problem with not being able to identify what was wrong with what Wes was doing. Perhaps he was setting John and Wes and Raj up for failure, so why wouldn't Kevin be in the hot seat as well if that's the case? Why would Kevin think he was exempt.... if you leave stuff out, is it still a lie? It's not about race, but it's all about behavior, attitudes, beliefs and how you treat others. If he's willing to set someone up for failure, he's willing to accept it when someone else sets him up for failure. He needs to be willing to live by the rules that he sets for himself, and that is why he was chosen to be on Ap2. Kevin doesn't realize all of the hard work that John went through to build his company. John has a lot of contacts, and he has helped a lot of people along the way. So Kevin may be vying to take the company over, milk John's company for a bigger paycheck..... whatever the motive. But the difference between the John that is described above and the Kevin described above, is that John will survive, and Kevin will quickly make a reputation for himself.... as someone who doesn't know how to role play.... someone who can never assume a supporting role. No matter if you are the seller or the buyer, you will almost always have to assume the role as the supporter. That's economics 101... supply and demand. Hey Kevin... I heard that Ivana is hiring over at Enron!   Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-16-04, 09:23 PM (EST) 97. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" > >The way I see it: > > >John started the company, developed it, >got the contacts, secured the >cash flow, got the designer >did all of the footwork >necessary to be able to >offer a job to all >the boys in the first >place. >get it! > >John gave Kevin a job. >That alone should have guaranteed >Kevin's loyalty to John. Perhaps he >was setting John and Wes >and Raj up for failure, >so why wouldn't Kevin be >in the hot seat as >well if that's the case? > If he's willing to >set someone up for failure, >he's willing to accept it >when someone else sets him >up for failure. He >needs to be willing to >live by the rules that >he sets for himself, and >that is why he was >chosen to be on Ap2. > WHAT A LEAP! > >Kevin doesn't realize all of the >hard work that John went >through to build his company. > John will survive, >and Kevin will quickly make >a reputation for himself.... as A WINNER > >Hey Kevin... I heard that Ivana >is hiring over at Enron! > What show are you watching? Kevin - not a team player? Kevin - setting John, Wes and... Raj! up? Where are you getting this foolishness? And, finally, ridiculously, you heard "Ivana is hiring over at Enron"? Ivana?! Please read my previous post and can the nonsense.   Top

Sweater_Puffs 269 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Network TV Show Guest Star" 10-16-04, 10:18 PM (EST) 103. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" "Nonsense? What show are you watching?" Limited insight, ohmeohmy! "Please read my previous post and can the nonsense." (Jenice BM)   Top

Bebo 21083 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-16-04, 11:58 PM (EST) 106. "lrlr1" On these forums, telling another poster is equivalent to saying "shut up", and that's not done here. Only a moderator has the authority to tell posters what they are permitted to say.   Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-18-04, 09:02 PM (EST) 124. "RE: lrlr1" >On these forums, telling another poster ...what? >is equivalent to saying "shut >up", and that's not done >here. Only a moderator >has the authority to tell >posters what they are permitted >to say. I would never tell another poster to 'shut up' (I read the Roger Ebert statement - he's one of my heroes). Please tell me what I said that constituted that sentiment and I will take pains to never do so again. Thanks.   Top

Bebo 21083 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-19-04, 07:20 AM (EST) 126. "Oops" Note to self: Do not issue warnings before finishing my coffee. What I meant to say was that telling someone to "can the nonsense" is equivalent to telling them to shut up. I've received alerts from posters who have been interpreting it that way. Sorry to confuse you.   Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-19-04, 09:01 AM (EST) 127. "RE: Oops" >Note to self: Do not issue >warnings before finishing my coffee. > > >What I meant to say was >that telling someone to "can >the nonsense" is equivalent to >telling them to shut up. > I've received alerts from >posters who have been interpreting >it that way. > >Sorry to confuse you. While I respectuflly disagree, to spare anyone from thinking I am trying to quell discussion, if in the future, someone writes something I consider to be total nonsense (based on no fact), is it permissible to write 'THIS is nonsense'? (I am not being facetious; I am totally serious).   Top

Captain_Savem 3731 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Thong Contest Judge" 10-19-04, 04:51 PM (EST) 130. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" LAST EDITED ON 10-19-04 AT 05:16 PM (EST) SP, for future referrence, there is no such thing as "reverse racism". No flame here, just a point of clarification. Many people seem to be under the assumption that racism is something that whites do to minorities, and if it happens the other way around then it is "reverse". That's inaccurate. Racism is racism no matter who does it. ETA: Now that I had a chance to read your entire post. I completely disagree with your assessment. The abridged version is that there isn't any evidence to support any side that racism took place. Second, John didn't do everything by himself. And by that I mean, he didn't go out and get prospective buyers, and chose designs, and fabrics, and the like...alone. It was a team effort. The only thing he did alone was chose the designer. Also, he didn't give Kevin a job, and therefore no allegiance is implied. Finally, Kevin was PM two weeks ago so that would lead me to believe he has some idea of how difficult the job is. The Evolution Continues...   Top

lrlr1 512 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Reality Show Commentator" 10-16-04, 08:37 PM (EST) 96. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" > Kelly and >John discussed that Kevin and >Wes were both responsible for >pricing, but Kelly advised that >bringing two strong people into >the boardroom could lead to >John's own demise. John foolishly >accepted Kelly's ridiculous boardroom strategy >as solid gold, as John >isolated his own estimate of >the comparatively "weak" player, Kevin, >for the boardroom confrontation. I'm feeling for you, RealityX, but don't be too hasty to throw that label on all of Mosaic. I think your above statement proves that it was John's stupidity, if as you suggest, he thought Kevin 'weak', that lead to his demise. While there may have been 'unconscious' racism in John's stupidity, I got the impression that John and Wes were friends, and since they were friends, that was the real reason John gave Wes the 'free pass'. Kelly was pretty blameless, I feel. John sought out his advice. I thought he gave excellent advice when he told John not to take Kevin and Wes, two strong players, into boardroom with him. It was John who came to the conclusion that he could take in only Kevin and live to tell the tale. Kelly did not tell John to take in Kevin. I would not call Mosaic a wolf pack, either. In your example of Stacie J, we saw the women convene in a room and conspire to make her a scapegoat - all of them. We saw John talking first to three of the men, then to Kelly individually. There was no conspiracy in that. If your butt is on the line, that's what you do - you feel out other people to see how to save yourself, so I saw nothing untoward in John probing the others minds. I agree that John may have thought Kevin weak because of his racial 'differentness'. But I believe his major reason was that Kevin and Wes set the prices on those ugly outfits and everyone thought that was the reason Mosaic lost. John (don't ask me how anybody can be this stupid) thought he could get away with bringing in one of the pricers, Kevin, and saving his friend, Wes, the other pricer. His second choice was Andy, who everybody thinks is weak. Of course once in the boardroom, Kevin took the offensive and lit into John like a house on fire until John could look only sick, confused and finally as stupid as he was. Kelly was right - Kevin was too strong a player to take into the boardroom. If John had taken in both Kevin and Wes, he might have had a chance. But he didn't, and Kevin made him first look foolish for taking in only him, and then turned around and won our hearts for making him look even more foolish for bringing in Andy - who had done nothing wrong. I'm not negating your theory, RealityX, but let's take a wait and see approach. Any racism in this episode, conscious or unconscious, was solely on John's part, not on team Mosaic.   Top

Chuck45 65 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Hollywood Squares Square" 10-18-04, 12:36 PM (EST) 122. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Something I noticed in this episode that hasn't been mentioned is that when Kevin and Wes had concluded their pricing, Kelly came in telling them to raise the price on several items. He was very pressing in the matter and I thought for sure that Kevin would bring that up in the boardroom on the first visit. When he didn't I was shocked. Surely he would in the second meeting in the boardroom, but again, nothing. In my eyes Kelly should've been in that boardroom with John. further since Raj was such a distraction why wasn't he brought in? He kept pestering the models and the designer. Kevin makes me proud to be African American for his stand up class and intellect.   Top

Bebo 21083 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-19-04, 01:27 PM (EST) 128. "John's explanation" TVGO: Who would you have brought in if you were given another chance? Wes? John: I think I made the correct boardroom choice. After the task, Wes came up to me — off camera, unfortunately — and said, "I'm really sorry about the pricing. I know we made a mistake and I take ownership of that." And that meant a lot to me as a person and as a businessman. Kevin had the opposite approach. He didn't feel like there was ever a mistake made with pricing. That made it cut-and-dry for me. http://www.tvguide.com/news/insider/   Top

Oscirus 1596 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Peanut Festival Grand Marshall" 10-19-04, 05:21 PM (EST) 131. "RE: John's explanation" And that is why John is gone. What a maroon!   Top

Bucky Katt 3146 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Car Show Celebrity" 10-19-04, 06:38 PM (EST) 133. "RE: John's explanation" Oh Bebo you are so naive. It is obvious that John is a racist. The white guy admitting his mistake and the black guy not owning up to it is obviously just John's racist perception of what happened. I know it and my university professor knows it too. "I have just discovered that this object I found is capable of scratching my back...I call it BACK SCRATCHER!"   Top

RealityX 106 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 10-19-04, 06:49 PM (EST) 134. "RE: John's explanation" >TVGO: Who would you have brought >in if you were given >another chance? Wes? >John: I think I made the >correct boardroom choice. After the >task, Wes came up to >me — off camera, unfortunately >— and said, "I'm really >sorry about the pricing. I >know we made a mistake >and I take ownership of >that." And that meant a >lot to me as a >person and as a businessman. >Kevin had the opposite approach. >He didn't feel like there >was ever a mistake made >with pricing. That made it >cut-and-dry for me. > >http://www.tvguide.com/news/insider/ Oh Bebo, you are so intuitive. It's obvious that John is a not a racist. The white guy admitting his mistake and the black guy not owning up to it. It's obvious that John is telling the truth. I know it and my university professor knows it too. We both know that John had a good reason for not giving the same explanation to Trump during the boardroom session. Lastly, we both know there's no such thing as DAMAGE CONTROL!!!   Top

AyaK 10426 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 10-19-04, 08:39 PM (EST) 136. "WHOA!" Wait a minute -- this reference to "university professor" after singer's similar reference above indicates to me that RealityX and singer may be the same person. Since using multiple IDs is a violation of board guidelines, I'm going to lock this thread until I have a chance to investigate further.   Top

RealityX 106 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 12-17-04, 01:47 AM (EST) 137. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" LAST EDITED ON 12-20-04 AT 10:15 PM (EST) Omarosa, Kwame, Stacey J., Kevin.... Blackballed, blacklisted, blacked-out.... Omarosa, the devil's diva who nearly created Trump's successful Apprentice series, was embarrassingly broken down into tears, then dubbed as having a "chip on her shoulder". Why? Because she fought fire with fire, outlasted several white girls, and was unapologetic. Whatever Omarosa was, she was not a fool. Omarosa was the master of the same dirty corporate politics that unethical corporate managers quietly root on, as long as the target of the game is the enemy. Omarosa's downfall was that she grilled the golden geese, the chosen ones. Omarosa acknowledged that anyone who said they were going to be nice was eliminated early on, but she identified the competition, then proceeded to break them down. There are those of us who are targeted on a regular basis, but no one seems to notice, no one seems to care, and no one wants to hear it. But as Omarosa already knew and rediscovered, the rules of the game change depending on who is the aggressor and who is the target. Omarosa's high-class attack tactics were met with disdain by Trump and Carolyn, who both stared Omarosa down as they displayed strong, stern, and rigid body language that emphasized that they, and not Omarosa, were the ones with a lot of class and naturally belonged out front. First, Trump congratulated Omarosa's contribution to her team’s final task, since it was the best contribution on the team, then brutally interrogated and terminated her, before her time. The plan commences.... Kwame Jackson, Harvard MBA. He never had chance. No matter how smooth, articulate, and well-educated he may have been, his fate was sealed when they first saw his face. They pretty much took the "let's lead this guy on" approach with Kwame because they knew Kwame thought his Harvard MBA, his charming personality, and the Trump Organization's need to prove they weren't a bunch of racists, virtually guaranteed a win. Kwame's boardrooms were next to perfect, he new exactly what to say, regardless of the number of losses any of his teams suffered. The real challenge that the Kwame's of the world must face was pinpointed while Kwame rode around on the bicycle-buggy looking for riders. None of the whites were interested. While everyone else got at least one rider, Kwame found himself ignored, exhausted, then belittled for riding around on a bicycle-buggy all day "doing nothing". While they continued to string Kwame on, Bill was in the background quietly undermining Kwame, by calling Kwame and Troy, dumb and dumber, even though they won the task. Finally, Kwame was "allowed" to make it to the final two. During the final boardroom, Kwame was reprimanded for his early selection and failure to confront and terminate the only black woman, Omarosa. Since he knew no one else would, Kwame picked Omarosa early to comfort an intelligent black woman. Trump obviously was uncomfortable with this kind of racial loyalty and simply did not want to see it running loose in one of his companies. As a result, Kwame was fired. Strung on, then strung up. Kwame was used. He entered the contest as a player of the game, but eventually found himself played like a game. Kwame's "Billion Dollar Deal" was an obvious ploy that purposely failed to mention how much money he would receive, to leave the door wide open to depict Kwame as a figurehead for a white controlled retail project, while at the same time, heralded Trump as a champion of civil rights. The plan accelerates.... Under Trump's command, Stacey J. took a harsh, embarrassing, and illegal fall on national television. As the only black woman, Stacey J. was the first to go. Obviously someone was sending a strong message that they weren't scared of the potential Omarosa's of the world. Innocent, quite little Sandy was a willing participate in the unethical wolf pack attack that knocked out Stacey J. by describing themselves as "really scared" or her. Stacey J., 35, Emory University BA, Mercer University MBA, Subway franchise owner; Sandy, 28, uneducated, wedding and event planning company owner. Under pressure Stacey J. held her composure, Sandy balled her eyes out like a little crybaby. Who takes the fall? Of course, Stacey J., and Trump fans quickly discredited Stacey J. as not owning a "real" restaurant, but never referenced how Sandy's "highly sophisticated" wedding and event planning company and Sandy's lack of education applied to big money real estate management. But we expect that Sandy's "soft skills," "emotional intelligence," and the rest of her subjective non-skills were used as excuses to outcast a black, 35-year-old MBA in the face of a white 28-year-old with no education. Uneducated idiots like Sandy love to talk about their so-called "street smarts," "common sense," and "risk taking," as if they have something the sheep skins are missing, but none of them, especially Sandy, had any business in the final four. So face it, if Stacey J. had Sandy's background and Sandy had Stacey J.'s background, there's no way an uneducated, 28-year-old black chick could publicly criticize and take out a 35-year-old white MBA. The plan matures.... Kevin Allen, Wharton Marketing/Management graduate, Emory MBA, Chicago University Lawyer within a year. His brother, a Brown University Chemical Engineer, his parents, multi-millionaire, entrepreneurial engineers worth up to 8 million dollars. Kevin's track record: Two wins as leader, to Sandy's two and Jennifer M.'s one. Kevin was the only token in the final four and without surprise the first to go. When Kevin showed that he was just as human as the rest of us, by sweating under pressure, he was portrayed as "threatening" by one of his teammates. Unproven rumors from the other players bashed Kevin as using unnecessary "physical intimidation tactics" and as having a "chip on his shoulder". Without referencing Kevin's wins to Sandy's and Jennifer M.'s, the final interviewers pounded and hit Kevin with disabling corporate and racial code words: Misstepping, course correcting, intense, and aggressive. Again without referencing Kevin's wins to Sandy's and Jennifer M.'s, Trump continued the lynching by shafting Kevin with the excuse that Kevin was "overeducated", even though Kevin had less degrees than snow white Kelly. Painting tattoo's all over his arms like the poor a-- trailer trash, may have fed the fire that burned Kevin's black a--, but the tattoos should not have been fatal for today's younger generation. But one factor was fatal: The color of his skin. The plan is complete. True to form, Kelly takes the crown and the good ole boys are still on top. Kelly's leadership track record, his smack down of Jennifer M. by kicking her off his team for not being "strong", and his manipulative and calculated lie that Kevin and Ivana were stronger than Jennifer M., finally worked to shut down Jennifer M.'s sex machine, but the Harvard Princess made a fine showing. Kelly's performance is undeniable and he did deserve the winner's cup, but shouldn't we look a little deeper? Years of nurturing, years of inclusion, and years of respect from everyone around him has led to an seemingly unshakable advantage that the Omarosa's, Kwame's, Stacey J.'s, and Kevin's of the world will seldom see. Instead, they fight for their lives chasing down the big dreams, the big schools, the big jobs, for the big money - that will never materialize. Where did we see the most blacks in the spotlight? Exactly where they wanted them, on the basketball court during Jennifer M.'s final project, and singing "For the Love of Money" during the grand finale. There are those that believe when it comes to Trump and black executives, it's not just business, it's personal, and there's no escape, from the inevitable fate, that awaits all of the little black jelly beans who think they can go toe-to-toe with this high-stepping, high-priced, head honcho of horror: From: "Trumped!: The Inside Story of the Real Donald Trump - His Cunning Rise & Spectacular Fall," by John R. O'Donnell, former president, Trump Plaza Hotel & Casino, pages 147-149: Our lunch at Trump Tower concluded with a discussion of personnel. Donald brought a unique approach to this as well. "Tell me about Steve Hyde," he said. Of course, I had nothing but the highest regard for Steve and I told Donald so. "Yeah, that's my man," he quickly added. "I have to tell you," he went on, "I feel real good about the quality of people he's brought in. It's been a real positive for us." Then just as quickly he changed course. "So who do you think is doing a shitty job?" he asked. I told him no one. But he went down a list of names until we got to a finance employee of Trump Plaza, who happened to be black. "What do you think of him?" Donald asked. I said I was familiar with his abilities, and he had shortcomings. "To be honest, I don't think he's the best we can have," I said. "I'd like to see him either come up to speed, where he can help me a lot more, or maybe there's something else he can do." Instantly, Donald was enthused. "Yeah, I never liked the guy. I don't think he knows what the ##### he's doing. My accountants up in New York are always complaining about him. He's not responsive. And isn't it funny, I've got black accountants at Trump Castle and at Trump Plaza. Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day. Those are the kind of people I want counting my money. Nobody else." I couldn't believe I was hearing this. But Donald went on, "Besides that, I've got to tell you something else. I think that the guy is lazy. And it's probably not his fault because laziness is a trait in blacks. It really is, I believe that. It's not anything they can control.... Don't you agree?" He looked me square in the eye and waited for my reply. "Donald, you really shouldn't say things like that to me or anybody else," I said. "That is not the kind of image you want to project. We shouldn't even be having this conversation, even if it's the way you feel." "Yeah, you're right," he said. "If anybody ever heard me say that...holy #####...I'd be in a lot of trouble. But I have to tell you, that's the way I feel." "Well, I have to tell you, I don't agree with you. We've got people at the Plaza doing good jobs, we've got people doing jobs that are not so good. It's got nothing to do with the color of anybody's skin." He gave a short chop with his hand, as if to wave away my point of view. "Ah, it's a trait. Anyway I'm glad to hear you're going to get rid of the guy." I hadn't said that. So I corrected him. "Donald, I'd like to see what the guy can do. Let's just wait and see. If we continue to have problems in the finance area, then yes, maybe he doesn't have the ability, and I'll think about a replacement." Donald was satisfied with that. But for months afterward he continued to press me to fire the man. Ultimately the executive resigned to pursue other opportunities.   Top

HistoryDetective 9516 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 12-17-04, 08:06 AM (EST) 138. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" It sounds like Kwame Jackson, Harvard MBA, needs to have a little chat with Andy. Kwame's crimson courage should have entitled him to a certain destiny. a sig by syren For the record, Bradford was the first person fired from Stacey J's team. Stacey J. may have been the first woman to go, but the Donald got rid of a balding white guy before he goot around to firing Stacey J.   Top

RealityX 106 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 12-17-04, 06:45 PM (EST) 140. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" >For the record, Bradford was the >first person fired from Stacey >J's team. Stacey J. >may have been the first >woman to go, but the >Donald got rid of a >balding white guy before he >goot around to firing Stacey >J. True, but that was because Bradford made a mistake that gave Trump an excuse to fire Bradford. The look on Stacey J.'s face clearly showed that she was relieved when Bradford was fired. Ivana may have gotton fired too because of proven incompetence, but they were aiming for Stacey J. early on without any real proof of her abilities.   Top

HistoryDetective 9516 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 12-17-04, 08:18 AM (EST) 139. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" I'm answering this a second time and setting aside the snarkiness because I think that you do bring up some important points that deserve discussion. I think that the shortcoming of your position, however, is that you engage in your own hyperbole, as well as your insistence that the African American candidates are the only qualified or the most qualified candidates who completely eclipse the accomplishments of any of the other candidates. Using that style of argument almost seems as though you are daring anybody who wishes to dissent (even a little) to aggressively defend the decisions made on the show. Pardon the pun, but the issue of race in business (and reality television) is not black and white. I am sympathetic to your views and I would enjoy participating in a reasonable discussion about this issue, but I think that you set a tone that makes doing so difficult. a sig by syren I have a great deal of respect for three of the candidates that you triumph, but I would never lump them into the same category as Omarosa. I don't think that she simply got the "villain edit" during the first season. Like any candidate, regardless of their race, she had some definite shortcomings and personality flaws. If we can't even agree to the human-ness of Omarosa instead of trying to make her into somebody who can do no wrong (as Omarosa delusionally thinks of herself) then where can we even begin to have a discussion about these people based on their merits?   Top

RealityX 106 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 12-17-04, 06:58 PM (EST) 141. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" >I think that the shortcoming >of your position, however, is >that you engage in your >own hyperbole, as well as >your insistence that the African >American candidates are the only >qualified or the most qualified >candidates who completely eclipse the >accomplishments of any of the >other candidates. What hyperbole? We never said the blacks were the only qualified candidates. During Apprentice 2, Andy, Kelly, and Jennifer M. consistently ranked at the top of our ranking list. We also stated that Kelly deserved the winner's cup. >Using that >style of argument almost seems >as though you are daring >anybody who wishes to dissent >(even a little) to aggressively >defend the decisions made on >the show. Why would we want you to aggressively defend the decisions made on the show unless you were the one who made those decisions? We simply stated observable facts and welcome others to state their opinions. >Pardon the >pun, but the issue of >race in business (and reality >television) is not black and >white. I am sympathetic >to your views and I >would enjoy participating in a >reasonable discussion about this issue, >but I think that you >set a tone that makes >doing so difficult. Of course it's not black and white. We simply stated facts, and anyone who agrees or disagrees should simply state what they believe and support it. >I have a great deal of >respect for three of the >candidates that you triumph, but >I would never lump them >into the same category as >Omarosa. I don't think >that she simply got the >"villain edit" during the first >season. Like any candidate, >regardless of their race, she >had some definite shortcomings and >personality flaws. If we >can't even agree to the >human-ness of Omarosa instead of >trying to make her into >somebody who can do no >wrong (as Omarosa delusionally thinks >of herself) then where can >we even begin to have >a discussion about these people >based on their merits? We never said Omarosa was perfect. She was not the best candidate in year one, but she was fired before her time. We simply pointed out some of her stronger points and situations that may have been handled differently if Omarosa was not black. A discussion based on merit is always welcome.   Top

mrc 10113 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 12-17-04, 07:29 PM (EST) 142. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" Frankly, I just want to know why you speak in the plural. Are there two or more of you? Slice & Dice Chop Shop 2004   Top

HistoryDetective 9516 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold" 12-18-04, 08:54 AM (EST) 143. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" "We simply stated observable facts and welcome others to state their opinions." "We simply stated facts, and anyone who agrees or disagrees should simply state what they believe and support it." You see, this is where I have a hard time even moving forward with this conversation. The whole situation is nothing if not subjective. I saw some "facts" in your message (like where the candidates went to school) but most of what you had to say was an interpretation of events and possible outcomes, not facts at all. The dichotomy that you set up between your ability to state "facts" while others merely "state their opinions" or "state what they believe" casts doubt on how willing you are to engage in an actual dialogue. Your views are as fundamentally subjective as mine or anybody else's views. I realize that I am presenting an interpretation; from my perspective, this understanding does not appear to be mutual. a sig by syren   Top

RealityX 106 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Blistex Spokesperson" 12-18-04, 09:09 AM (EST) 144. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" >"We simply stated observable facts and >welcome others to state their >opinions." > >"We simply stated facts, and anyone >who agrees or disagrees should >simply state what they believe >and support it." > >You see, this is where I >have a hard time even >moving forward with this conversation. >The whole situation is >nothing if not subjective. >I saw some "facts" in >your message (like where the >candidates went to school) but >most of what you had >to say was an interpretation >of events and possible outcomes, >not facts at all. We stated a collection of facts and comparisons for each of the named candidates. Our and your interpretation of those facts are subjective, but the facts cannot be denied. >The dichotomy that you set up >between your ability to state >"facts" while others merely "state >their opinions" or "state what >they believe" casts doubt on >how willing you are to >engage in an actual dialogue. >Your views are as >fundamentally subjective as mine or >anybody else's views. I >realize that I am presenting >an interpretation; from my perspective, >this understanding does not appear >to be mutual. We did not intend to set up any dichotomy. The dichotomy you cite is coincidental and the result of our random choice of words. We presented facts which drew attention to certain inconsistencies and a pattern of events. The article does not provide all of the facts, it asks a question.   Top

kahanasunset 466 desperate attention whore postings DAW Level: "Daytime Soap Guest Star" 12-18-04, 09:15 AM (EST) 145. "RE: More Wolf Pack Racism - This Time Aimed at Kevin" LAST EDITED ON 12-18-04 AT 11:42 AM (EST) "We never said Omarosa was perfect. She was not the best candidate in year one, but she was fired before her time." No, Omarosa needed to go when she did. I will even submit that she needed to go long before she did. Omarosa could have been a formidable contender had she not been such a DAW, which got the best of her. The fact that she is still given airtime is simply evidence of the producers' pandering to the lowest common denominator of units watching the show, and for ratings. RealityX, a lot of your points in many of your posts are well-taken (including those in other threads). I don't want to seem like I'm ganging up on you but History Detective's comments about your posture on this subject were very well-put. You have given us a lot to chew on, and this subject has been discussed ad infinitum (I will refrain from ad nauseum). Obviously there isn't any resolution to this issue and it is good we can continue discuss it. But it seems to me that this subject has pretty much exhausted itself until the next round (season). And then a lot of the same points will come out. So like I said, pretty much what needs to be said on this subject has already been said.   Top

Remove

Lobby | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

Select another forum Lobby The Amazing Race Message Board Forums (Conference)   |--The Amazing Race Fanatics Forum (Protected)   |--The Amazing Race Basher Forum (Protected)   |--The Amazing Race Spoiler/Speculation Forum (Protected) American Idol Message Board Forums (Conference)   |--American Idol General Discussion Forum (Protected)   |--American Idol Individual Contestant and Judge Discussion Forum (Protected) Big Brother Message Board Forums (Conference)   |--Big Brother Fanatic Forum (Protected)   |--Big Brother Bashers Forum (Protected)   |--Big Brother Live Feed Updates And Spoilers (Protected) Survivor Message Board Forums (Conference)   |--Survivor Fanatic Forum (Protected)   |--Survivor Basher Forum (Protected)   |--Survivor Spoilers Forum (Protected)   |--Survivor Games Forum (Protected) Other Reality TV Shows (Conference)   |--The Bachelor / The Bachelorette Forum (Protected)   |--Dancing with the Stars Forum (Protected)   |--Other Reality TV Shows Forum (Protected) Off Topic (Conference)   |--The Help Forum (Protected)   |--Off-Topic Forum (Protected)