This is worth the watch!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBf2x...eature=related

Not really funny, but I loved what he said. Somehow I don't think he'll be invited to the White House any time soon.

MF Katt
 

That's Katt. His shtick.

The most interesting part is the hysterical reaction to him by his audience. They just love that !

I wouldn't be too confident that Katt wouldn't be welcome in the White House. Michelle has a propensity for inviting some of her colored radicals.

Colored radicals? WTF?

Radicals
 

Outrage Flares As Michelle Obama Invites Common To White House To Read Poetry [UPDATED]

First Posted: 05/10/11 12:26 PM ET Updated: 05/11/11 10:03 AM

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_859945.html

I knew all about this, I was just questioning your choice of words. I thought the term "colored" had been pretty much obsolete since the 1950's. And I hardly think Katt qualifies as a radical.

"illegals" and "anchor babies" could be obsolete soon too, if political correctness prevails. I never saw the term colored as derogatory, but "people of color" is the new buzzword, and maybe we should jump on that right now too, before it takes root.

This is another clue at the perversion of the struggle against racism and how far its gone. At one time "colored" was a demeaning term, but it always referred to people who were African American. "Negro" was another term that people tried to do away with and replace it with African American. Of course with a booming population of voluntary immigrants from Africa, "African America" doesn't have the same political meaning any more either.

But in order to graft illegals from South and Central America onto the civil rights movement, we got "people of color", a passive term, meaning nothing. Are Chinese Americans "people of color"?

I thought someone might bring up this point. The term "colored" may be not be intrinsically derogatory, as no term is, it's the meaning we give it that determines whether or not it's acceptable. I'm just surprised that someone would be still be using that term today. And as for "illegals" and "anchor babies", these terms may become politically incorrect one of these days, as there are those even today who believe them to be and refuse to use them. And what about the term "wetback"? That was acceptable 50 years ago, but a lot of people don't dare use it today, and as you probably know this board used to automatically censor it if you spelled it out in its entirety. It looks like I got away with it here though.

Politically correct or not, one should at least strive for accuracy in a term and use it accurately, whatever term is used as a description - such as "Anchor Baby" or "Mexican".

However, I heard a new one the other day, "Muslim-American". What the hell does that mean? It doesn't make sense, try "Christian-American", Agnostic-American, Atheist-American, Catholic-American, Jewish-American, Zen Buddhist-American", Heathen-American, Pagan-American, Animist-American, Zoroastrian-American, Satanist-American, Hard Shell Baptist-American, Holy Roller American, Casting Out Serpents-American, and so on.

It's so vague as to be meaningless. It was the basis of an article in the Press Enterprise or SB Sun, I believe a week or so ago. Something about alleged persecution or similar.