Intermarkets' Privacy Policy
Support


Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!


Contact
Ace:
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
CBD:
cbd at cutjibnewsletter.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com


Recent Entries
Absent Friends
Jon Ekdahl 2026
Jay Guevara 2025
Jim Sunk New Dawn 2025
Jewells45 2025
Bandersnatch 2024
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups





















« Document Dump | Main | On the Ground in Iraq »
November 15, 2005

CNN's New Euphemism For French Youths of Undetermined Ethnic Extraction: "African-Americans"

Nothing says "I'm a racially sensitive liberal progressive" more than pinning violence in France on black Americans.

CNN immediately apologized for the gaffe. Henceforth, all rioting Muslim youths will be described by the racially-sensitive term "rambunctious darkies."


posted by Ace at 02:48 PM
Comments



I bet Melissa Theuriau wouldn't have made that journalistic error. In fact, why not put up another post with her picture as proof of this theory.

Posted by: JohnO on November 15, 2005 03:12 PM

You know what's really funny? I had to think a minute to work out what's wrong with that description. I started with the working hypothesis that they were North Africans, while African Americans are usually sub-Saharan.

But, of course, nobody's putting my wet brain stream of consciousness on the air.

Posted by: S. Weasel on November 15, 2005 03:13 PM

I did too. I focused on the African part (partly true) rather than the American part (not true).

Posted by: ace on November 15, 2005 03:14 PM

I have heard a person refer to Europeans of dark complexion as African-American once before, and it made me laugh out loud. The woman responded by asking me what she was supposed to call them if not that.

Political correctness is nothing but Newspeak, and reduces the need to think dramatically.

Posted by: ArrMatey on November 15, 2005 03:18 PM

Katrina refugees?

Posted by: Dave in Texas on November 15, 2005 03:25 PM

I was thinking the same thing Dave. French Quarter-Americans. At least it has french in the name.

Posted by: polynikes on November 15, 2005 03:30 PM

The woman responded by asking me what she was supposed to call them if not that.

IRAQIAN'S?????

lets get 2 teh real problme,. aec, u dont care about iraqian's!

Posted by: Sortelli on November 15, 2005 03:46 PM

Okay, Sortelli, that made me laugh.

Is there some place you can download that cool moonbat font, or did you just type that with your toes?

Posted by: utron on November 15, 2005 03:57 PM

Actually, it's really easy to get that moonbat effect for yourself. Go buy an old-fashioned mercury thermometer, crack it in half, and take a sip. Refreshing and delicious!

Posted by: Pompous on November 15, 2005 04:04 PM

I had to write a lot of dialogue in internet idiotese back in the day. My general rule is to switch the lats tow lettres of a word.


But man, I wish I could say that "iraqian" line was made up. *sigh*

Posted by: Sortelli on November 15, 2005 04:06 PM

Oh, I saw the "Iraqian" guy yesterday. Nope, you can't make stuff like that up. IIRC, he really did respond by asking what he was supposed to call them, if not that.

Posted by: utron on November 15, 2005 04:18 PM

I think we need terms to distinguish between good and bad Iraqians. The former can be Iraqtaculars, the latter Iraqickies.

Posted by: Enas Yorl on November 15, 2005 05:52 PM

I'm trying to remember a story I heard -- someone at some liberal rag (New York Times? Not sure.) was editing an article that referred to black people in Europe or Asia, hundreds of years ago, and changed the reference to "African-Americans". The original author objected to the change, pointing out that there was no America, per se, at that point, and these folks didn't live there anyway, but the editor pointed to the style book and insisted the text had to change, or the article would be killed.... PC run amok.

Posted by: Wiz on November 15, 2005 06:56 PM

Sounds like the New York Times. They follow their in-house style guide so obsessively that if an article mentioned the singer Meat Loaf, he was invariably called "Mr. Loaf."

Posted by: utron on November 15, 2005 07:35 PM

You folks are all missing the obvious. The Youths of Undetermined Ethnic Extraction are burning cars for one reason, and one reason only.

They want to know:

Who won the poetry contest! And who are the honorable mentions!

Because, many Youths of Undetermined Ethnic Extraction were deeply moved by the Ode to Odgen Nash.

Posted by: Michael on November 15, 2005 09:01 PM

Lennox Lewis has been asked about his African-American heritage many times. In one exchange, he corrected the interviewer with a simple "I'm British," and the interviewer was totally confused - he couldn't tell what the comment was in reference to.

Posted by: Tim Higgins on November 16, 2005 12:07 AM

In the book Paved With Good Intentions by Jared Taylor, (footnote on p. 218) he quotes a WSJ story ("American, Not African-American", by Deborah Wright, 10/30/1990): "Nelson Mandela, leader of the African National Congress, must have been amused when a befuddled reportere referred to him during a trip to New York as an 'African American'".

Posted by: DaveG on November 20, 2005 10:27 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?








Now Available!
The Deplorable Gourmet
A Horde-sourced Cookbook
[All profits go to charity]
Top Headlines
CJN podcast 1400 copy.jpg
Podcast: CBD and Sefton talk birthright citizenship, the 14th Amendment and SCOTUS, no boots in Iran, Artemis II and refocusing NASA, the NBA's hatred of everything non-woke, and more!
In more marketing for Project Hail Mary, scientists say they've found the biosigns indicating life growing on an alien planet. It's not proof, just signatures of chemicals that are produced by biological metabolism, and it could be nothing, but scientists think it's a strong sign that this planet is inhabited by something.
In a paper published in the Astrophysical Journal Letters, a team of scientists announced the detection of dimethyl sulfide (along with a similar detection of dimethyl disulfide) in the atmosphere of an exoplanet called K2-18b. This is actually the second detection of dimethyl sulfide made on this planet, following a tentative detection in 2023.
Tons of chemicals are detected in the atmospheres of celestial objects every day. But dimethyl sulfide is different, because on Earth, it's only produced by living organisms.
"It is a shock to the system," Nikku Madhusudhan, first author on the paper, told the New York Times. "We spent an enormous amount of time just trying to get rid of the signal."

He means they tried to prove the signal was caused by things other than dimethyl sulfide but they could not.
Artemis moon shot a go, scheduled for 6:24 Eastern time tonight
Great marketing arranged by Amazon to promote Project Hail Mary. Okay not really but it does work out that way.
What? Skeleton of the most famous Musketeer, D'Artagnan, possibly discovered in Dutch church closet.
Dumas picked four names of real musketeers out of a history book, D'Artagnan, Athos, Aramis, and Porthos. So there was an actual D'Artagnan, though he made most of the story up. (Or, you know, all of it.)*
Charles de Batz de Castelmore, known as d'Artagnan, the famous musketeer of Kings Louis XIII and Louis XIV, spent his life in the service of the French crown.
The Gascon nobleman inspired Alexandre Dumas's hero in "The Three Musketeers" in the 19th century, a character now known worldwide thanks to the novel and numerous film adaptations.
D'Artagnan was killed during the siege of Maastricht in 1673, and there is a statue honoring the musketeer in the city. His final resting place has remained a mystery ever since.

A lot of Dumas's stories are based on bits of real history. The plot of the >Three Musketeers, about trying to recover lost diamonds from the queen's necklace, was cribbed from the then-almost-contemporaneous Affair of the Queen's Necklace. And the Man in the Iron Mask is based on real accounts of a prisoner forced to wear a mask (though I think it was a velvet mask).
* Oh, I should mention, Dumas says all this, about finding the names in an old book, in the prologue to his novel. But authors lie a lot. They frequently present fictions as based on historic fact. The twist is, he was actually telling the truth here. At least about these four musketeers having actually existed and served under Louis XIV.
Fun fact: You know the beginning of A Fistful of Dollars where the local gunslingers make fun of Clint Eastwood's donkey and Eastwood demands they apologize to the donkey? That's lifted from The Three Musketeers. Rochefort mocks D'Artagnan's old, brokedown farm horse and D'Artagnan is incensed.
A commenter asked which should be read first, The Hobbit of LOTR?
Easy, no question -- read The Hobbit first. It's actually the start of the story and comes first chronologically. It sets up some major characters and major pieces in play in LOTR.
Also, the Hobbit is Beginner-Friendly, which LOTR isn't. The Hobbit really is a delightful book, and a fast read. It's chatty, it's casual, it's exciting, and it's funny. In that dry cheeky British humor way. I love that the narrator is constantly making little asides and commentary, like he's just sitting next to you telling you this story as it occurs to him.
LOTR is a very long story. Fifteen hundred pages or so. The Hobbit is relatively short and very punchy and easy to read. If you don't like The Hobbit, you can skip out on LOTR. If you do like it, you'll be primed to read LOTR.
Oh, I should say: The Hobbit is written as if it's for children, but one of those smart children's stories that are also for adults. Don't worry, there's also real fighting and violence and horror in it, too.
LOTR is written for adults. (It's said that Tolkien wrote both for his children, but LOTR was written 17 years later, when his children were adults.) Some might not like The Hobbit due to its sometimes frivolous tone. Me, I love it. I find it constantly amusing. Both are really good but there is a starkly different tone to both. LOTR is epic, grand, and serious, about a world war, The Hobbit is light and breezy, and about a heist. Though a heist that culminates in a war for the spoils.
The Hobbit Challenge: Read two more chapters. I didn't have much time. Bilbo got the ring.
I noticed a continuity problem. Maybe. Now, as of the time of The Hobbit, it was unknown that this magic ring was in fact a Ring of Power, and it was doubly unknown that it was the Ring of Power, the Master Ring that controlled the others.
But the narrator -- who we will learn in LOTR was none of than Bilbo himself, who wrote the book as "There and Back Again" -- says this about Gollum's ring:
"But who knows how Gollum had come by that present [the Ring], ages ago in the old days when such rings were still at large in the world? Perhaps even the Master who ruled them could not have said."
In another passage, the ring is identified as a "ring of power."
I don't know, I always thought there was a distinction between mere magic rings and the Rings of Power created by Sauron. But this suggests that Bilbo knew this was a ring of power created by Sauron.
Now I don't remember when Bilbo wrote the Hobbit. In the movie, he shows Frodo the book in Rivendell, and I guess he wrote it after he left the Shire. I guess he might have added in the part about the ring being a ring of power created by "the Master" after Gandalf appraised him of his research into the ring.
I never noticed this before. I know Tolkien re-wrote this chapter while he was writing LOTR to make the ring important from the start. And also to make Gollum more sinister and evil, and also to remove the part where Gollum actually offers Bilbo the ring as a "present" -- Bilbo had already found it on his own, but Gollum was wiling to give it away, which obviously is not something the rewritten Gollum would ever do.
But I had no memory of the ring being suggested to be The Ring so early in the tale.
Finish the job, Mr. President!
Melanie Phillips lays out the case for the total destruction of the Iranian government and armed forces. [CBD]
CJN podcast 1400 copy.jpg
Podcast: Sefton and CBD talk about how would a peace treaty with Iran work, Democrats defending murderers and rapists, The GOP vs. Dem bench for 2028, composting bodies? And more!
Oh, I forgot to mention this quote from Pete Hegseth, reported by Roger Kimball: "We are sharing the ocean with the Iranian Navy. We're giving them the bottom half."
Forgotten 80s Mystery Click: Red Leather Suit and Sweatband Edition
And I was here to please
I'm even on knees
Makin' love to whoever I please
I gotta do it my way
Or no way at all
Tomorrow is March 25th, "Tolkien Reading Day," because March 25th is the day when the Ring is destroyed in the book. I think I'm going to start the Hobbit tomorrow and read all four books this time.
The only bad part of the trilogy are the Frodo/Sam chapters in The Two Towers. They're repetitive, slow, and mostly about the weather and terrain. But most everything else is good. Weirdly, the Frodo-Sam chapters in Return of the King are exciting and action-packed and among the best in the trilogy. (Though the chapters with everyone else in Return of the King get pretty slow again. Mostly people talking about marching towards war, and then marching towards war.)
Forgotten 80s Mystery Click
One day I'm gonna write a poem in a letter
One day I'm gonna get that faculty together
Remember that everybody has to wait in line
Oh, [Song Title], look out world, oh, you know I've got mine
US decimation of Iran's ICBM forces is due to Space Force's instant detection of launches -- and the launchers' hiding places -- and rapid counter-attack via missiles
AI is doing a lot of the work in analyzing images to find the exact hiding place of the launchers. Counter-strikes are now coming in four hours after a launch, whereas previously it might have taken days for humans to go over the imagery and data.
Recent Comments
publius, Rascally Mr. Miley (w6EFb): " Audio of the floating turd incident with Apoll ..."

m: "w00t ..."

Skip: "TECH THREAD IS NOOD ..."

Skip: "No reason to get up this morning yet ..."

Skip: "G'Day everyone ..."

Tuna: "Morning all ..."

mikeski: "[i]then a LitRPG monster isekai (reincarnated as a ..."

JQ: ""Oh, just this ONE..." Yep. BTDT and still did ..."

SciVo: "[i]I have a story idea for a supernatural cozy mys ..."

Skip: "Way too early to get up ..."

SciVo: "I've quit several times, Bers, and I can't do that ..."

Idaho Spudboy: "There is nothing wrong with that! In fact, you cou ..."

Bloggers in Arms
Some Humorous Asides
Archives