PDA

View Full Version : The Dems are back at it again...



Uncle Bill
09-14-2009, 06:19 PM
...raising the "race" issue on anything they can. Here's one you sword-wounded-disciples can read and weep. UB



BUCHANAN TO OBAMA
By Patrick J. Buchanan

Barack says we need to have a conversation about race in America . Fair enough. But this time, it has to be a two-way conversation. White America needs to be heard from, not just lectured to... This time, the Silent Majority needs to have its convictions, grievances and demands heard. And among them are these:

First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known. Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American.

Second, no people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans. Untold trillions have been spent since the ' 60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American community into the mainstream.

Governments, businesses and colleges have engaged in discrimination against white folks -- with affirmative action, contract set-asides and quotas -- to advance black applicants over white applicants. Churches, foundations, civic groups, schools and individuals all over America have donated their time and money to support soup kitchens, adult education, day care, retirement and nursing homes for blacks.

We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude???Barack talks about new 'ladders of opportunity' for blacks. Let him go to Altoona ? And Johnstown , and ask the white kids in Catholic schools how many were visited lately by Ivy League recruiters handing out scholarships for 'deserving' white kids.?

Is white America really responsible for the fact that the crime and incarceration rates for African-Americans are seven times those of white America ?

Is it really white America 's fault that illegitimacy in the African-American community has hit 70 percent and the black dropout rate from high schools in some cities has reached 50 percent?

Is that the fault of white America or, first and foremost, a failure of the black community itself?

As for racism, its ugliest manifestation is in interracial crime, and especially interracial crimes of violence. Is Barack Obama aware that while white criminals choose black victims 3 percent of the time, black criminals choose white victims 45 percent of the time?Is Barack aware that black-on-white rapes are 100 times more common than the reverse, that black-on-white robberies were 139 times as common in the first three years of this decade as the reverse?

We have all heard ad nauseam from the Rev. Al about Tawana Brawley, the Duke rape case and Jena . And all turned out to be hoaxes. But about the epidemic of black assaults on whites that are real, we hear nothing.
Sorry, Barack, some of us have heard it all before, about 40 years and 40 trillion tax dollars ago

gman0046
09-14-2009, 06:28 PM
Nuff said. Before Obama is done race relations in this country will be set back for years to come. Remember he said the white Boston police officer acted stupidly facts when he arrested a black professor. Then tried to make amends with that stupid beer party. Anytime he speaks without his ever present Teleprompter, he steps in it.

YardleyLabs
09-14-2009, 07:24 PM
For this article Buchanan earns a truly special niche in Hell. This should be a spot where he can watch his children be kidnapped, sold, placed into the holds of ships and, if they are among the "lucky" ones they may survive heat, starvation and disease to reach the golden shores of America to which they should offer prayers of gratitude.

There he should be forced to watch as they are sold off as chattel and then bred selectively over generations for those special traits that make a good slave: strong back, trainability, ability to accept pressure without responding aggressively.

I suspect then that there were as many different types of breeders then as there are now with our retrievers. The elite who might give all the attention to breeding a good slave that they would to breeding a good hunting dog. Those equivalent to today's puppy mills, breeding for volume and quick sales. And even some back yard breeders asking around their neighbors for a good stud to match up with that special little girl before she gets too old.

Let Buchanan watch that from his niche in Hell, ever thankful that in return his children are being introduced to a white God and preachers who will help his children accept their industrious role as slaves. After four, five or six generations watching his children and his grandchildren and their children and so forth being bred like so many dogs, let Buchanan watch through the years of Reconstruction when the promise of 40 acres and a mule rapidly turned into a world of horror where former slaves remained for the next 40 years under controls as rigid as those they faced under slavery. And while the situation improved over the next hundred years, there is no quick correction for all those generations of special breeding and special "education".

And to counter this what does Buchanan say are the benefits for which blacks should be grateful? Blacks in this country fared better than blacks in the other African countries that were conquered and exploited viciously by the colonial powers eager to control their natural resources. Grateful for their religious conversion at the end of a whip? Grateful for the destruction of their language and culture, for the selling off of their children, for centuries of inadequate education? Let Buchanan watch his children go through that experience generation after generation and then let him bow down and tell us all "Thanks".

This is one of the most outrageously ethnocentric and arrogant articles I have ever read. Next we'll see cartoons of Buchanan carrying a cross with a black man nailed to it and the slogan "The White Man's Burden." Let him roast in Hell, watching his children in all their generations going through that experience he now praises.

dnf777
09-14-2009, 07:33 PM
"Is white America really responsible for the fact that the crime and incarceration rates for African-Americans are seven times those of white America ?

Is it really white America 's fault that illegitimacy in the African-American community has hit 70 percent and the black dropout rate from high schools in some cities has reached 50 percent?

Is that the fault of white America or, first and foremost, a failure of the black community itself?"

Those points sound a lot like the points raised in President Obama's speech to the NAACP, or his speech to the school kids. (the Hitler Youth Indoctrination speech, as it was referred to on this list) When Bill Cosby raised those same points, he was criticized for "acting too white".

I am damn proud to be an American. But it would be denying truth to try and deny or diminish the errors we made in our past regarding slavery and the Native Americans. Having said that, taking the good with the bad, this IS the greatest country in the history of the world for men and women who want to be free. Maybe we didn't get it right the first time around, but thanks to progressives, we righted some of the early wrongs. Now we need to work out some economic issues.:-x

Bruce MacPherson
09-14-2009, 08:06 PM
For this article Buchanan earns a truly special niche in Hell. This should be a spot where he can watch his children be kidnapped, sold, placed into the holds of ships and, if they are among the "lucky" ones they may survive heat, starvation and disease to reach the golden shores of America to which they should offer prayers of gratitude.

There he should be forced to watch as they are sold off as chattel and then bred selectively over generations for those special traits that make a good slave: strong back, trainability, ability to accept pressure without responding aggressively.

I suspect then that there were as many different types of breeders then as there are now with our retrievers. The elite who might give all the attention to breeding a good slave that they would to breeding a good hunting dog. Those equivalent to today's puppy mills, breeding for volume and quick sales. And even some back yard breeders asking around their neighbors for a good stud to match up with that special little girl before she gets too old.

Let Buchanan watch that from his niche in Hell, ever thankful that in return his children are being introduced to a white God and preachers who will help his children accept their industrious role as slaves. After four, five or six generations watching his children and his grandchildren and their children and so forth being bred like so many dogs, let Buchanan watch through the years of Reconstruction when the promise of 40 acres and a mule rapidly turned into a world of horror where former slaves remained for the next 40 years under controls as rigid as those they faced under slavery. And while the situation improved over the next hundred years, there is no quick correction for all those generations of special breeding and special "education".

And to counter this what does Buchanan say are the benefits for which blacks should be grateful? Blacks in this country fared better than blacks in the other African countries that were conquered and exploited viciously by the colonial powers eager to control their natural resources. Grateful for their religious conversion at the end of a whip? Grateful for the destruction of their language and culture, for the selling off of their children, for centuries of inadequate education? Let Buchanan watch his children go through that experience generation after generation and then let him bow down and tell us all "Thanks".

This is one of the most outrageously ethnocentric and arrogant articles I have ever read. Next we'll see cartoons of Buchanan carrying a cross with a black man nailed to it and the slogan "The White Man's Burden." Let him roast in Hell, watching his children in all their generations going through that experience he now praises.

This just makes me realize that reason on either side is in short supply these days.

zeus3925
09-14-2009, 08:08 PM
If you dudes are looking for a real fascist look no further than Buchanan. If you substitute "the German people' in Adolph's speeches "the American people" in Buchanan's speeches you have a pretty close parallel.

TXduckdog
09-14-2009, 08:28 PM
For this article Buchanan earns a truly special niche in Hell. This should be a spot where he can watch his children be kidnapped, sold, placed into the holds of ships and, if they are among the "lucky" ones they may survive heat, starvation and disease to reach the golden shores of America to which they should offer prayers of gratitude.

There he should be forced to watch as they are sold off as chattel and then bred selectively over generations for those special traits that make a good slave: strong back, trainability, ability to accept pressure without responding aggressively.

I suspect then that there were as many different types of breeders then as there are now with our retrievers. The elite who might give all the attention to breeding a good slave that they would to breeding a good hunting dog. Those equivalent to today's puppy mills, breeding for volume and quick sales. And even some back yard breeders asking around their neighbors for a good stud to match up with that special little girl before she gets too old.

Let Buchanan watch that from his niche in Hell, ever thankful that in return his children are being introduced to a white God and preachers who will help his children accept their industrious role as slaves. After four, five or six generations watching his children and his grandchildren and their children and so forth being bred like so many dogs, let Buchanan watch through the years of Reconstruction when the promise of 40 acres and a mule rapidly turned into a world of horror where former slaves remained for the next 40 years under controls as rigid as those they faced under slavery. And while the situation improved over the next hundred years, there is no quick correction for all those generations of special breeding and special "education".

And to counter this what does Buchanan say are the benefits for which blacks should be grateful? Blacks in this country fared better than blacks in the other African countries that were conquered and exploited viciously by the colonial powers eager to control their natural resources. Grateful for their religious conversion at the end of a whip? Grateful for the destruction of their language and culture, for the selling off of their children, for centuries of inadequate education? Let Buchanan watch his children go through that experience generation after generation and then let him bow down and tell us all "Thanks".

This is one of the most outrageously ethnocentric and arrogant articles I have ever read. Next we'll see cartoons of Buchanan carrying a cross with a black man nailed to it and the slogan "The White Man's Burden." Let him roast in Hell, watching his children in all their generations going through that experience he now praises.


Jeff....WTF?

Where are you coming from? You are spewing the most vile crap I have ever heard. Your hatred of Pat Buchannan is almost palpable.

Yeah...his 2nd paragraph is off the charts stupid. But after that...the man makes very reasonable points...much of which are public statistics.

YardleyLabs
09-14-2009, 09:25 PM
Jeff....WTF?

Where are you coming from? You are spewing the most vile crap I have ever heard. Your hatred of Pat Buchannan is almost palpable.

Yeah...his 2nd paragraph is off the charts stupid. But after that...the man makes very reasonable points...much of which are public statistics.
You are right. My disgust with Buchanan is very visceral. I believe he is truly evil. If he has redeeming characteristics, he saves them for his private life. In his public incarnation, he is a liar and a hate monger.

His second paragraph is off the charts. His following paragraphs follow the tune.

"Second, no people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans. Untold trillions have been spent since the ' 60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American community into the mainstream."

If blacks were the only beneficiaries of programs for the poor, there would be no such programs. The poster children for the War on Poverty were the white families of the Appalachias. Blacks represent about 22% of Medicaid beneficiaries (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?indexed=google&rid=healthus06.table.416). While I have not yet found direct data, I believe they represent a much lower percentage of expenditures under Medicaid since the overwhelming bulk of these expenses go to the elderly and disabled (http://www.cms.hhs.gov/ActuarialStudies/downloads/MedicaidReport2008.pdf (http://www.cms.hhs.gov/ActuarialStudies/downloads/MedicaidReport2008.pdf)) rather than to adults and children where blacks are more overrepresented. Similar statistics apply to the pther programs mentioned by Buchanan. Buchanan's classification of these programs as examples of white lifting up blacks is itself a product of his racist glasses. Blacks are overrepresented in these programs for a simple reason. Whites earn $1.67 to $2 for every dollar earned by blacks.

"Governments, businesses and colleges have engaged in discrimination against white folks -- with affirmative action, contract set-asides and quotas -- to advance black applicants over white applicants. Churches, foundations, civic groups, schools and individuals all over America have donated their time and money to support soup kitchens, adult education, day care, retirement and nursing homes for blacks. "

In my mind, if whites are being discriminated against by all of these programs, you would expect to see blacks overrepresented in all of those jobs and college seats. They aren't. There are lots of explanatons for the fact that whites remain favored in the outcomes of hiring, college admission, and contracting decisions. However, what no one can prove is that they end up being favored because they are somehow better according to some miraculously objective measurement.

As for racism, its ugliest manifestation is in interracial crime, and especially interracial crimes of violence. Is Barack Obama aware that while white criminals choose black victims 3 percent of the time, black criminals choose white victims 45 percent of the time?Is Barack aware that black-on-white rapes are 100 times more common than the reverse, that black-on-white robberies were 139 times as common in the first three years of this decade as the reverse?

Whites and hispanics classified as whites make up about 80% of the population. If black crime was color blind, 80% of black crime would be against whites. How then does the 45% number cited by Buchanan become eviene of racism? Buchanan's statistics on rape are not attributed to a source but create a completely erroneous set of perceptions. Assuming they are based on Federal statistics, which only include a fraction of rapes, the reality is that most rapes and murders are not interracial at all. For those that are, the rates remain lower than would be expected if victims were selected in a colorblind way. How then can the underrepresentation of whites among black victims be counted as evidence of racism? Buchanan's "statistics" are not only given no source, they are distorted in a manner designed to promote racial division.

You are absolutely correct that I detest what Buchanan stands for. The reason is simple: he stands for hate and all that is worst about America. Standing up as an apologist for slavery and suggesting that the children of slaves should be grateful and the children of slave holders should be proud of their role in lifting blacks out of the heathen ways is simply the most recent example of his hatefulness, not mine.

Hoosier
09-14-2009, 09:54 PM
I didn't think you believed in hell Jeff!! Or is that a place reserved for the far right?

Bruce MacPherson
09-14-2009, 10:00 PM
Jeff....WTF?

Where are you coming from? You are spewing the most vile crap I have ever heard. Your hatred of Pat Buchannan is almost palpable.

Yeah...his 2nd paragraph is off the charts stupid. But after that...the man makes very reasonable points...much of which are public statistics.

I happen to agree with your statement except please name another country where blacks have reached a higher level of freedom and prosperity than the US. History is replete with people who have been enslaved. It is also replete with those that have risen either because or in spite of it. I do not believe future outcomes are preordained by past events, those that do, in my opinion, are practicing a reprehensible form of elitism.

YardleyLabs
09-15-2009, 05:05 AM
I happen to agree with your statement except please name another country where blacks have reached a higher level of freedom and prosperity than the US. History is replete with people who have been enslaved. It is also replete with those that have risen either because or in spite of it. I do not believe future outcomes are preordained by past events, those that do, in my opinion, are practicing a reprehensible form of elitism.
England, Switzerland, and even France

ducknwork
09-15-2009, 06:28 AM
In my mind, if whites are being discriminated against by all of these programs, you would expect to see blacks overrepresented in all of those jobs and college seats. They aren't. There are lots of explanatons for the fact that whites remain favored in the outcomes of hiring, college admission, and contracting decisions. However, what no one can prove is that they end up being favored because they are somehow better according to some miraculously objective measurement.


Jeff, this paragraph contradicts every other thing that you just said. Do you realize that? In every other paragraph, you stated that the black population is so much smaller, therefore statistics are skewed, blah, blah, blah. If the black population is so much smaller, why should the number of blacks and whites be even close to the same in said jobs? Obviously, if whites are 80% of the population (your stats) then 80% of the people in college and said jobs should be white, if things are truly equal.

I know for a fact that my dad was overlooked for a job at his previous company due to affirmative action. A lesser qualified black man was selected over him. How is that right? I don't care what the color is, if the black man was more qualified, he should have gotten the job. If not, my dad should have. If a mexican or a Jew or a german was more qualified, give them the job.

The black community has to stop idolizing rappers and sports stars. So many times, you hear that is the only way out of their life. I know it is not easy to do well in school living in the conditions that many of them live in, but that doesn't mean that you have to be a POS.

I don't want to get too deep into this argument, because I have very strong feelings about this topic. I hate racism and reverse racism (because it is approved of) absolutely disgusts me. Do not ever try to paint me as a racist.
________
Cat Exercise Wheel (http://www.catwheelcompany.com/)

Steve Amrein
09-15-2009, 08:25 AM
Here is a great vid on race relations I watched on the morning news this AM while getting dressed.http://video.yahoo.com/watch/5984601/15560257

YardleyLabs
09-15-2009, 10:35 AM
Jeff, this paragraph contradicts every other thing that you just said. Do you realize that? In every other paragraph, you stated that the black population is so much smaller, therefore statistics are skewed, blah, blah, blah. If the black population is so much smaller, why should the number of blacks and whites be even close to the same in said jobs? Obviously, if whites are 80% of the population (your stats) then 80% of the people in college and said jobs should be white, if things are truly equal.

I know for a fact that my dad was overlooked for a job at his previous company due to affirmative action. A lesser qualified black man was selected over him. How is that right? I don't care what the color is, if the black man was more qualified, he should have gotten the job. If not, my dad should have. If a mexican or a Jew or a german was more qualified, give them the job.

The black community has to stop idolizing rappers and sports stars. So many times, you hear that is the only way out of their life. I know it is not easy to do well in school living in the conditions that many of them live in, but that doesn't mean that you have to be a POS.

I don't want to get too deep into this argument, because I have very strong feelings about this topic. I hate racism and reverse racism (because it is approved of) absolutely disgusts me. Do not ever try to paint me as a racist.
My comment is that representation in jobs and colleges would be proportional. They are not. Representation continues to favor whites. I believe each of us is personally responsible for our lives. However, that does not mean that some people did not receive more than their share of advantages and that others didn't get the short end of the stick. It is simply not useful sitting around blaming others for your condition when you could be doing things yourself to improve your life. That has actually been Obama's continuing message to blacks and one that got him in trouble with many black leaders during the primaries.

However, I believe that affirmative action, beginning with improved access to education and health care from birth, is essential to overcome the long term impact of institutional racism and institutionalized poverty. It will remain needed until color and economic circumstances of birth are essentially unrelated to long term performance.

The world is filled with individual injustice. A bright child born into a semi-literate poor family, regardless of color, will suffer the consequences of his birth for his entire life. A below average child born into a wealthy, highly educated family will enjoy privileges of his birth for his entire life. Both of these sets of consequences are unearned and reflect personal injustice.

My alma mater practices affirmative action. For many years it practiced it to increase the admission rate for white males as they began to be displaced by females -- part of an arrangement with alumni who were concerned that coeducation would reduce the slots available to alumni children. Today it continues to practice discrimination that favors whites on a de facto basis by giving preference to alumni children, who are from predominantly white families. It also practices affirmative action to admit more economically disadvantaged student since they are known to have had fewer education opportunities to obtain the educational exposure that would permit them to compete head to head academically at the time of admission. However, that dpoes not change the fact that most admitted freshmen come from the elite private schools rather than the public schools that most people, regardless of color, go to. Efforts to expand public school enrollment directly affect the likelihood that students with better grades and better test scores will be admitted. Is that wrong? Or does it create a class of students who are more reflective of the diversity that exists in our society and by doing so provide a richer education experience for all?

JDogger
09-15-2009, 11:04 AM
This is from Harold a sargent in Afganistan


This is going to sound strange when I say it -- I respect what Pat Buchanan is saying right now (http://buchanan.org/blog/is-america-coming-apart-2159). He is clearly one of the only guys on the conservative side of the spectrum with enough gall to actually say what this backlash from the teabaggers and town hall protesters is really about. Now, that being said, the fact still remains that I completely disagree with his viewpoint on nearly every level imaginable, yet there is something to be said for him actually speaking in candid terms about what many on the Right are undoubtedly thinking. The point being that I just appreciate Buchanan's honesty, regardless of how opposite his viewpoint may be.



"We seem not only to disagree with each other more than ever, but to have come almost to detest one another. Politically, culturally, racially, we seem ever ready to go for each others’ throats.



One half of America sees abortion as the annual slaughter of a million unborn. The other half regards the right-to-life movement as tyrannical and sexist.


Proponents of gay marriage see its adversaries as homophobic bigots. Opponents see its champions as seeking to elevate unnatural and immoral relationships to the sacred state of traditional marriage.



One part of America loves her history, another reviles it as racist, imperialist and genocidal. Old heroes like Columbus, Stonewall Jackson and Robert E. Lee are replaced by Dr. King and Cesar Chavez.



But the old holidays, heroes and icons endure, as the new have yet to put down roots in a recalcitrant Middle America.


We are not only more divided than ever on politics, faith and morality, but along the lines of class and ethnicity. Those who opposed Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court and stood by Sgt. Crowley in the face-off with Harvard’s Henry Louis Gates were called racists. But this time they did not back down. They threw the same vile word right back in the face of their accusers, and Barack Obama.



The European-Christian core of the country that once defined us is shrinking, as Christianity fades, the birth rate falls and Third World immigration surges. Globalism dissolves the economic bonds, while the cacophony of multiculturalism displaces the old American culture."


Buchanan chose to elevate Stonewall Jackson and Robert Lee as American heroes. Which was clearly on purpose. That statement is perhaps one of the most intriguing in his text, made more so by the juxtaposition of these Confederate traitors to Martin Luther King. If ever there was a person who truly understood the American ideal, King is one of them on a short list along with Lincoln, Jefferson, Kennedy, Roosevelt, and Obama.



One thing is clear in Buchanan's article -- he is not dancing around what he believes this fight between the Right and the Left is really about; the soul of America. Where progressives see multiculturalism as an advancement of the American ideal, conservatives like Buchanan see it as America's downfall. This message was woven throughout many of President Obama's campaign speeches, and even implied during his speech on health care last week. It truly is an interesting dynamic. Many of us see the election of Barack Obama as one of our greatest modern examples of American exceptionalism. As Obama has implied, along with many others, that only in America could a person like Obama have ascended to it's highest office. Moreover, America is the only nation in the Western world that has elected a person of color to be it's President or equivalent. So, it is America, the nation with perhaps the most treacherous past in the West when it comes to racism; also the first nation to truly rise above it. On the other hand, the people who are so angry at these protests see the complete opposite. They long for the iconic days of the 1950's, when America's only identity was white and Christian. The days when it wasn't politically incorrect to talk about people who were different from them. I see it so blatantly over here in Afghanistan. Many of my fellow Soldiers, brave as they are, have a level of hate for the "difference" in the people who we call our enemy. Where I see the Taliban as an enemy, many people see all Afghans and Iraqis as "dirty, nasty Haji" (That's a direct quote) who do not deserve an ounce of our respect. When I point out to people how that attitude and demeanor is offense to me, an American soldier, they look at me like I am the "PC police". Many of these people see the election of Barack Obama as a further erosion of what America truly is.



The reason that I respect Buchanan, at least on some rudimentary level, is because at least by him bringing to light his viewpoint in full, we can actually begin to have a more civil debate on its relevance. What makes Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and Ann Coulter so much more treacherous, is that they mask their beliefs, which are nearly identical to Buchanan's, in a veil of pseudoism. They attempt to hide behind a deniability clause, so when someone calls them out on what we all know to be true, they deny the claim as ludicrous. We know what Hannity means when he shows pictures of Valerie Jarrett, Van Jones, and Michelle Obama with the subtitle "radical extremists". We all know what Fox and Friends' host Brian Kilmeade (http://www.alternet.org/blogs/media/141457/fox_and_friends_host_apologizes_for_racist_%22pure _species%22_comment/) means when he says that America has been mixing with too many "species" and should be more pure like Sweden. There's is no real substantive difference in the belief of many of these conservatives and Buchanan. The only caveat being Buchanan will actually put his beliefs out there for all to see.



My goal here is not to argue the merits of Buchanan's argument. It is clear that he is living in a past that perhaps never even existed. What is more important is that he convince more of his conservative compadres to come out and say what we all know they really mean. Perhaps only then will progressives be able to call the right-wing out on the ideal that truly defines their cause -- "Do you hate the right people"?

ducknwork
09-15-2009, 11:16 AM
I agree 1000% with your first paragraph. In fact, that is one thing that I am totally thrilled about that Obama has done. He has, on numerous occasions, called out the black community to be better than they (stereotypically) are. I applaud him for that. I recall his speech on Father's Day when he called black men to be dads, not just fathers. Yes, it ruffled a few feathers, but it is the truth. I hope he continues to call anyone out he actually deserves it. He can get away with saying things that no other president in history would have been able to, simply because of his color. I am glad to see that he is using that to his advantage in that respect. Can you imagine if W had said the same thing?! It would have been no less correct, but he would have been crucified.

It is disgusting that Obama's comments got him into trouble with black leaders. It shows that Al, Jesse, Jeremiah, etc do not want equality as MLK did. King wanted EQUALITY. The 'leaders' these days want handouts and revenge. We will never have equality as long as that is the attitude.

I tend to disagree with you about money being such a large influence on the life of a child. Yes, it does play a role in how someone turns out, but I believe that the biggest factor is parenting. Money goes hand in hand with that to an extent...I think that lower income families tend to have parents that don't teach the same values as higher income families. (Note: not an absolute statement) If parents raise their children with work ethic, respect and discipline (among other things) they will stand a much better chance of getting a good education and good jobs, regardless of color or economic status.

If you go to a public school, you can fairly easily pick out which children have a stable home life and which children do not. The majority of those without are black.

Take a look at the divorce rates of whites vs. blacks. Better yet, take a look at the number of single mothers by race, or the rates of children by multiple fathers by race. The numbers don't lie. Blacks clearly have less stable home lives while growing up, due to the said factors, among other things. Of course, a single mother with a few children is going to have a lower income than married parents in a good home.

But is the problem low income? Or is that just a symptom of morals, values, work ethic, and respect not being taught by the single mother's parents, therefore leading to pregnancy at age young age (typically) and unsuccessful relationships throughout life? What kind of example is being set for young black children?

No amount of affirmative action, reperations, free education, etc is going to fix that. It has to start at home and parents have to be willing to change the status quo. Do you make someone want to change their life by giving handout after handout? Or do you do it by making them realize they will have to be responsible for themselves and their children?
________
CuteSophie (http://www.girlcamfriend.com/cam/CuteSophie/)

ducknwork
09-15-2009, 11:22 AM
Perhaps only then will progressives be able to call the right-wing out on the ideal that truly defines their cause -- "Do you hate the right people"?

You assume that hate defines the right wing cause? Wow. I don't even know what to say.
________
Public German (http://www.fucktube.com/categories/935/german/videos/1)

TXduckdog
09-15-2009, 11:45 AM
You assume that hate defines the right wing cause? Wow. I don't even know what to say.


It's the Liberal Way.

It can be a "million man march" anf gets all kinds of soft coverage, even when the main speaker spews absolute racist bilge.

But hey, let close to 2 million mainly caucasion, middle class folks show up in Washington and all they can talk about is "racism" and how hand-wringing terrible the signs that say "Bury Healthcare with Kennedy" are....it's a joke...but nobody is laughing.

JDogger
09-15-2009, 11:59 AM
You assume that hate defines the right wing cause? Wow. I don't even know what to say.

Not me, ducknwork, Harold a black US Army sargent who blogs from Afghanistan.
http://www.haroldsleft.com/

I thought he had an interesting point of view on Buchanan's article.

I don't think hate is the singular definition of the right wing cause, but along with fear, angst, and being poor losers, is a part of it.

I hate to be the one to break it to you ducknwork, but some of the posts here made by those on the right are extremely hateful.

I have been accused of being a Bush hater/basher, but trully I only found him a little insipid. I don't recall a level of hate for Bush being portrayed here that ever approached the level now being directed at Obama, but there was no special forum for it at the time.

TXduckdog
09-15-2009, 12:20 PM
Not me, ducknwork, Harold a black US Army sargent who blogs from Afghanistan.
http://www.haroldsleft.com/

I thought he had an interesting point of view on Buchanan's article.

I don't think hate is the singular definition of the right wing cause, but along with fear, angst, and being poor losers, is a part of it.

I hate to be the one to break it to you ducknwork, but some of the posts here made by those on the right are extremely hateful.

I have been accused of being a Bush hater/basher, but trully I only found him a little insipid. I don't recall a level of hate for Bush being portrayed here that ever approached the level now being directed at Obama, but there was no special forum for it at the time.


Dogger....you're entirely typical of the left who think anyone disagreeing with a liberals opinion is racist or hate-mongering. The liberal simply can't understand how anyone can possibly look at life differently than liberals. Liberals find ANYBODY and EVERYBODYnot agreeing with their worldview as insipid.

That is why most lefties/liberals are not capable of an objective discussion. They don't want to be confused with the facts.

Then there is the time-honored liberal tradition of character assasination for anyone that opposes them. Hell, they even feed on their own if they deem them not lefist/liberal enough.

Hatred at Obama....how bout more like disgust for his policies?

JDogger
09-15-2009, 12:59 PM
Originally Posted by JDogger http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?p=499877#post499877)
Not me, ducknwork, Harold a black US Army sargent who blogs from Afghanistan.
http://www.haroldsleft.com/

I thought he had an interesting point of view on Buchanan's article.

I don't think hate is the singular definition of the right wing cause, but along with fear, angst, and being poor losers, is a part of it.

I hate to be the one to break it to you ducknwork, but some of the posts here made by those on the right are extremely hateful.

I have been accused of being a Bush hater/basher, but trully I only found him a little insipid. I don't recall a level of hate for Bush being portrayed here that ever approached the level now being directed at Obama, but there was no special forum for it at the time.

Dogger....you're entirely typical of the left who think anyone disagreeing with a liberals opinion is racist or hate-mongering. The liberal simply can't understand how anyone can possibly look at life differently than liberals. Liberals find ANYBODY and EVERYBODYnot agreeing with their worldview as insipid.

That is why most lefties/liberals are not capable of an objective discussion. They don't want to be confused with the facts.

Then there is the time-honored liberal tradition of character assasination for anyone that opposes them. Hell, they even feed on their own if they deem them not lefist/liberal enough.

Hatred at Obama....how bout more like disgust for his policies?
__________________

Thanx, you made my point perfectly.

JD

Gerry Clinchy
09-15-2009, 01:02 PM
Originally Posted by Bruce MacPherson http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?p=499579#post499579)
I happen to agree with your statement except please name another country where blacks have reached a higher level of freedom and prosperity than the US.


Yardley

England, Switzerland, and even France

Why are there no African countries on that list? I might grant that there could be colonialistic reasons why some African countries might not be able to provide high levels of "prosperity" ... but what about the freedom aspect.

Do Africans in Africa have less freedom there than in France or Switzerland? Why would that be? If African countries threw off the mantle of colonialism because it constricted their freedom, what would make those (African) countries discard freedom so dearly won?

God bless 'em ... the Swiss have managed to stay neutral in the big wars ... but they require every male adult to own a firearm and learn how to use it :-) Also have a world-renowned banking system.

YardleyLabs
09-15-2009, 01:09 PM
...

I tend to disagree with you about money being such a large influence on the life of a child. Yes, it does play a role in how someone turns out, but I believe that the biggest factor is parenting. Money goes hand in hand with that to an extent...I think that lower income families tend to have parents that don't teach the same values as higher income families. (Note: not an absolute statement) If parents raise their children with work ethic, respect and discipline (among other things) they will stand a much better chance of getting a good education and good jobs, regardless of color or economic status.

If you go to a public school, you can fairly easily pick out which children have a stable home life and which children do not. The majority of those without are black.

Take a look at the divorce rates of whites vs. blacks. Better yet, take a look at the number of single mothers by race, or the rates of children by multiple fathers by race. The numbers don't lie. Blacks clearly have less stable home lives while growing up, due to the said factors, among other things. Of course, a single mother with a few children is going to have a lower income than married parents in a good home.

But is the problem low income? Or is that just a symptom of morals, values, work ethic, and respect not being taught by the single mother's parents, therefore leading to pregnancy at age young age (typically) and unsuccessful relationships throughout life? What kind of example is being set for young black children?

No amount of affirmative action, reperations, free education, etc is going to fix that. It has to start at home and parents have to be willing to change the status quo. Do you make someone want to change their life by giving handout after handout? Or do you do it by making them realize they will have to be responsible for themselves and their children?
I agree that income is not the defining factor as much as the work ethic and other character and mental skills encouraged by parents. I have known many relatively poor parents who have instilled great work ethics in their children. My father's father was a drunk and a member of the KKK. He died when my father was ten leaving behind my grandmother with seven children aged two months to 14. My grandmother was 32 at the time. She worked as a waitress for $1/day plus tips and a portion of the family's food came from Ag Department surplus. Every kid grew up well.

However, money, literacy and an attitude of success from parents has a lot to do with successful parenting. I work on a volunteer basis with kids that are never more than one moderate illness away from eviction and bankruptcy. Almost all have been homeless at some point in their lives. That affects their whole outlook on life. Most children who have been homeless during the year attend three or more different schools. 45% have excessive absenteeism and 12% drop out altogether. Their literacy and communication skills decline because of the instability in their home lives. The likelihood that they will become involved in gangs, and abuse alcohol and drugs goes up. That injury will affect their whole lives without special assistance to break the pattern.

If you want to find reasons for high rates of single parent households, look back to the training and breeding we provided in slavery. How often do we keep the stud dogs around to help with the pups? Not often, and the same attitude was an integral part of slave life. Welfare rules reinforced a similar pattern. Families with fathers present were ineligible for assistance. The father had to leave and keep away from his family to qualify for welfare. Teen and yound adult unemployment rates have seldom gone below 50% in black communities and the jobs that are available provide neither rent money nor pride. The Clinton administration was the first that seemed to begin to break through this cycle with a mix of tough love through welfare reform and new economic opportunities. However, the end of that administration also saw an end to that progress.


By the way, unmarried teen pregnancy is increasingly becoming a problem of the south and of evangelicals rather than a problem of urban blacks.

ducknwork
09-15-2009, 01:24 PM
Dang it. It's hard to argue when you keep saying stuff I agree with.;-)

Are you saying that the reason a lot of blacks are the way they are is due to selective breeding? I have never heard that one before and I would be interested in reading some information on it if you have any links concerning it.

Obviously, your grandmother was a good, hardworking woman. I am sure that she instilled that into your Dad, aunts and uncles. That is exactly my point. Regardless of her economic situation, she was still able to raise productive people rather than government leaches. Why can't that be done in this day and age? Is it just too easy to collect a government check? Do people have no pride in themselves and providing for their families?

You are absolutely correct in your second paragraph about being homeless and low income and such. To me, the low income still seems to be more of a symptom of a deep rooted problem than the problem itself. Obviously, the parent's parents, or the parent's parent's parents failed at some point while raising their children, screwing the family for generations to come.
________
Lovely Wendie (http://www.lovelywendie99.com/)

YardleyLabs
09-15-2009, 01:40 PM
Dang it. It's hard to argue when you keep saying stuff I agree with.;-)

Are you saying that the reason a lot of blacks are the way they are is due to selective breeding? I have never heard that one before and I would be interested in reading some information on it if you have any links concerning it.

Obviously, your grandmother was a good, hardworking woman. I am sure that she instilled that into your Dad, aunts and uncles. That is exactly my point. Regardless of her economic situation, she was still able to raise productive people rather than government leaches. Why can't that be done in this day and age? Is it just too easy to collect a government check? Do people have no pride in themselves and providing for their families?

You are absolutely correct in your second paragraph about being homeless and low income and such. To me, the low income still seems to be more of a symptom of a deep rooted problem than the problem itself. Obviously, the parent's parents, or the parent's parent's parents failed at some point while raising their children, screwing the family for generations to come.
My point on breeding of slaves was less a genetic one than a social one. The view of slaves as chattel meant that they were simply not permitted to have a traditional family structure. Parents were separated from each other and sometimes from their children whenever family relationships interfered with their "jobs" as slaves. Do that for a period of 2-300 years and the amazing thing is that families remained as strong as they did. My own experience is that black families are often stronger in the face of economic challenges than their white counterparts. With the increasing need of families to have two full time wage earners to make ends meet, family structures break down even in "intact" families and fewer and fewer families match the 2-parent "ideal". In fact, less than half of our children are now growing up in two parent households.

My grandmother was extraordinary in her ability to deal with the stresses of poverty and single parenthood. Unfortunately, most people are average, not extraordinary. For all those average people, the stresses of such a life are overwhelming and the children are the ones that pay. In my mind, we can either choose to let those shortcomings affect generations of children to follow, or we can seek ways to enrich the opportunities available to both parents and children to help beak the cycle. "Affirmative action" is one name for enriched opportunities. Programs may work well or work poorly. However, we cannot break the link between race and poverty by waiting for extraordinary parents to save their children. We have to help ordinary parents to give their children the educational and cultural exposures that will help.

ducknwork
09-15-2009, 02:56 PM
Too many people are unwilling to do anything different than what they are doing now. Why take advantage of affirmative action if you could stay home and collect a government check? Why work for $10/hour if you can sell drugs and make all the money you could ever want?

People have to want to be better before they can be better.

All children should have the same opportunities to receive a good education. A child could have the best education in the world and be exposed to all that you refer to that they need to be exposed to, but if they go home to an abusive parent or a parent who doesn't care or a drunk or high parent, I just don't see how that education will make anything change. I am sure it is hard to do your homework while your dad's friends are drinking and smoking dope in the living room. It's probably pretty hard to study for a test when your mom is selling drugs or sex out of the back door, or you hear your neighbors beating on each other. We have to fix HOME and FAMILY before education or jobs can make much of an impact at all.
________
JUSTIN BIEBER FAN (http://justinbieberfan.info/)

Uncle Bill
09-15-2009, 03:16 PM
Dear EPL...and the walking wounded that follow your lead. Your guilt is dripping all over us. As you continue to attempt to make the rest of us to feel as guilty as you apparently do, forget it. Your bleeding heart story of your ancestors can be repeated so damned many times by practically everyone that pioneered this great nation....from which many of us descendants received a similar education about life you arrogently imply we have no clue. Puhleeze.

You mistakenly and arrogently accuse many of us as being racists, just because we are so passionate about not wanting the current administration to railroad our freedoms into the toilet. So, as is so typical, the Dems play the racist card whenever they have no other answers for Americans exercising their rights, vociferously, against what we perceive as further attempts at usurping our liberties.

When it comes to hypocrites, there are none so obvious as the party you champion. Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Clarence Thomas, Condoleeza Rice are just a few that your party can chastise, and nobody seems to see any racism in that. They are just 'consevatives', and obvious 'oreos'. Must make you so proud how your constituency can recognize the differences.

Under the present administration, this nation will be more racially divided than anytime in the past 50 years.

UB

gman0046
09-15-2009, 03:32 PM
Yardley you are a case, too bad you can't tell how it really is. There hasn't been slavery in the US in almost 150 years and your still blaming it for the ills of blacks. Give it up, get off the guilt trip your trying to lay on us. How long will you and The Messiah be blaming Bush for everything. Sometimes people have to be responsible for their actions and not blame others for their own short comings. There's a reason for the disproportionate number of blacks in our prison system. THEY COMMITTED CRIMES because they chose to. There's a reason for the high rate of illegitimacy because they chose it. Nobody gave me anything, I got what I have by working my butt off. Others should do the same instead of always asking for a free luch.

Buzz
09-15-2009, 04:31 PM
It's the Liberal Way.

It can be a "million man march" anf gets all kinds of soft coverage, even when the main speaker spews absolute racist bilge.

But hey, let close to 2 million mainly caucasion, middle class folks show up in Washington and all they can talk about is "racism" and how hand-wringing terrible the signs that say "Bury Healthcare with Kennedy" are....it's a joke...but nobody is laughing.

Two Million? Are you joking?

The DC fire department said 60-70k. Please don't tell me that they are lying. I grew up around firefighters, and as far as I'm concerned they are well trained American Heros.

BonMallari
09-15-2009, 04:46 PM
My point on breeding of slaves was less a genetic one than a social one. The view of slaves as chattel meant that they were simply not permitted to have a traditional family structure. Parents were separated from each other and sometimes from their children whenever family relationships interfered with their "jobs" as slaves. Do that for a period of 2-300 years and the amazing thing is that families remained as strong as they did. My own experience is that black families are often stronger in the face of economic challenges than their white counterparts. With the increasing need of families to have two full time wage earners to make ends meet, family structures break down even in "intact" families and fewer and fewer families match the 2-parent "ideal". In fact, less than half of our children are now growing up in two parent households.

My grandmother was extraordinary in her ability to deal with the stresses of poverty and single parenthood. Unfortunately, most people are average, not extraordinary. For all those average people, the stresses of such a life are overwhelming and the children are the ones that pay. In my mind, we can either choose to let those shortcomings affect generations of children to follow, or we can seek ways to enrich the opportunities available to both parents and children to help beak the cycle. "Affirmative action" is one name for enriched opportunities. Programs may work well or work poorly. However, we cannot break the link between race and poverty by waiting for extraordinary parents to save their children. We have to help ordinary parents to give their children the educational and cultural exposures that will help.

Jeff, you are Ivy League educated, what do you know about ordinary or the plight of minorities. No one helped my family to educate their kids. They did it themselves because they were proud to be American citizens and they wanted us to be accepted by our neighbors and friends even though we were a minority. They never asked for a handout or aid, and we probably could have qualified on many different levels, but they didnt want charity, they didnt want welfare,all they wanted was a chance to raise their kids in a country that my dad fought a world war over..

Uncle Bill
09-15-2009, 04:48 PM
Two Million? Are you joking?

The DC fire department said 60-70k. Please don't tell me that they are lying. I grew up around firefighters, and as far as I'm concerned they are well trained American Heros.


Do the actual numbers really have ANY value in your eyes, Buzz? Or for that matter, in the eyes of your leaders?

Am I wrong in assuming you hold in contempt the actions of these demonstrators? As a small business man, you are looking forward to having universal healthcare, so the 'burden' is off your shoulders? My question is, what is stopping you from removing your responsibility of carrying employee healthcare? Is there a law that requires it?

UB

YardleyLabs
09-15-2009, 04:54 PM
Yardley you are a case, too bad you can't tell how it really is. There hasn't been slavery in the US in almost 150 years and your still blaming it for the ills of blacks. Give it up, get off the guilt trip your trying to lay on us. How long will you and The Messiah be blaming Bush for everything. Sometimes people have to be responsible for their actions and not blame others for their own short comings. There's a reason for the disproportionate number of blacks in our prison system. THEY COMMITTED CRIMES because they chose to. There's a reason for the high rate of illegitimacy because they chose it. Nobody gave me anything, I got what I have by working my butt off. Others should do the same instead of always asking for a free luch.
Let us be clear where this thread started: UB elected to post an article by an idiot suggesting that blacks should be thinking whites for having brought them out of heathen Africa to our golden shores where they could live as slaves and learn the Christian and American way. I didn't start off suggesting anything about feeling guilt. Quite frankly, my relatives never owned any slaves. I also didn't suggest a free lunch for anyone.

I stated that Buchanan should have the privilege of watching his own children and all of their descendants live the life for which he says blacks should be giving whites thanks. If those hundreds of years of history are evidence of the good whites did for blacks, he should be happy to see his family receive similar privileges.

The fact is that Buchanan's article is obscene. When I was accused of saying vile things and missing the good points made in his article, I addressed those points specifically.

I believe in affirmative action; I do not believe in giving anyone a free ride. There is a big difference. Quite frankly, everyone talks about how blacks are taking jobs from whites who are better qualified. Where's the proof that they are better qualified? What are the criteria being used? For those that say that affirmative action represents discrimination against whites, I point out that if the process were truly racist, blacks would be receiving a disproportionate share of the best jobs and best seats in colleges. They are not.

Buchanan's citations of questionable (at best) crime statistics as evidence of black racism and what he calls "the epidemic of black assaults on whites that are real" are outrageous and I stated why.

Buchanan's descriptions of programs for the poor as evidence of how whites are acting to lift up blacks are even more outrageous, especially since the majority of the recipients of assistance under those programs are white.

And finally, Buchanan's suggestion that Blacks should be happy that they were brought over as slaves because it allowed them to become Christians may be the least Christian comment I have heard.

The point of my comments is not to suggest that whites should bow down under the weight of their guilt for the evils of slavery and racism. The point of my comments was not that blacks should feel free to demand favored treatment because of those past sins rather than accept personal responsibility for their own lives. The point of my comments was that Buchanan is an idiot and is engaging in what I believe is deliberate hate mongering when he says to blacks "Where is the gratitude?"

Marvin S
09-15-2009, 04:55 PM
Two Million? Are you joking?

The DC fire department said 60-70k. Please don't tell me that they are lying. I grew up around firefighters, and as far as I'm concerned they are well trained American Heros.

I can't figure out which of your statements is the least credible, but for a supposedly well educated individual you are proving to be something else. :p :p ;-) Where are you coming up with this stuff? :confused:

Bruce MacPherson
09-15-2009, 05:20 PM
[/i]


Yardley


Why are there no African countries on that list? I might grant that there could be colonialistic reasons why some African countries might not be able to provide high levels of "prosperity" ... but what about the freedom aspect.

Do Africans in Africa have less freedom there than in France or Switzerland? Why would that be? If African countries threw off the mantle of colonialism because it constricted their freedom, what would make those (African) countries discard freedom so dearly won?

God bless 'em ... the Swiss have managed to stay neutral in the big wars ... but they require every male adult to own a firearm and learn how to use it :-) Also have a world-renowned banking system.

Frankly England, Switzerland and France don't offer more opportunity nor do they have a higher standard of living if you compare apples to apples. The total percent of blacks in England is just a little over 2% not a sterling example of multi racial diversity.
I am convinced that there are those that voted for Obama simply because he is black, as certainly is their right, more concerned about showing the rest of the world how enlightened we are rather than examining the character of the man and his ideas for the country. It appears that anyone willing to stand up and proclaim the king has no clothes is immediately marginalized by being branded a racist, not by Obama himself but by his supporters and with his tacit approval.
Argue about race all you will it does nothing but obfuscate the real problems with the policy.

YardleyLabs
09-15-2009, 06:05 PM
Frankly England, Switzerland and France don't offer more opportunity nor do they have a higher standard of living if you compare apples to apples. The total percent of blacks in England is just a little over 2% not a sterling example of multi racial diversity.
I am convinced that there are those that voted for Obama simply because he is black, as certainly is their right, more concerned about showing the rest of the world how enlightened we are rather than examining the character of the man and his ideas for the country. It appears that anyone willing to stand up and proclaim the king has no clothes is immediately marginalized by being branded a racist, not by Obama himself but by his supporters and with his tacit approval.
Argue about race all you will it does nothing but obfuscate the real problems with the policy.
What you seem to be missing is that Buchanan made a specific statement that blacks in America had "reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known." You asked me to provide a single example of a country where blacks had more freedom and greater prosperity than in the US. I did not mention African countries since, as a group, they are third world countries that do not offer the level of prosperity available in the advanced, industrial nations.

The examples I offered include two where blacks have educational and work opportunities that are clearly comparable to those available to whites and where the overall standard of living is comparable to the US. More importantly, they are countries where color is not generally a limiting or defining factor affecting socio-economic status as it is in this country where the gap between white incomes and black incomes is growing rather than shrinking. France is a somewhat different situation since it has been overwhelmed in recent years by African immigrants that are relatively poor and uneducated. That has raised a number of questions within the country. However, those questions appear to be getting addressed in a manner that assumes that the African population will be fiully assimilated within French culture through full access to educational resources, jobs, housing, and open acceptance of intermarriage. None of those countries has a history comparable to ours of legal discrimination. None of those countries has a history and tradition of relegating blacks to an economic and social underclass. As a conswquence, I believe each meets your challenge to " please name another country where blacks have reached a higher level of freedom and prosperity than the US."

twall
09-15-2009, 06:27 PM
By the way, unmarried teen pregnancy is increasingly becoming a problem of the south and of evangelicals rather than a problem of urban blacks.

Jeff,

Some may consider unmarried teen pregnancy a problem. I think abortion is a much greater problem. When you break down who gets abortions blacks are much more likely to get abortions than whites. The greatest genocide ever has been the abortion/murder of so many black babies in the name of a "right to choose!"

The race card has been used way too much to have any impact anymore. I have grown up with it. I was raised by liberal parents, in a liberal community. The first school I went to that wasn't half-black was the University of Illinois. We all have problems. I'm all for helping those who need help black, white, yellow, orange, male, female, even those who are more than a little confused about who/what they are.

Most of our problems aren't because of who/what we are but because of what we do, or don't do. That is what is so upsetting about what is happening in our country now. Our leaders are trying to what our country is fundamentally. America is a great country that was built on the toil and sweat of hard working people of all races. We need to be giving hands-up to the less fortunate, not hand-outs!

Tom

Buzz
09-15-2009, 07:57 PM
I can't figure out which of your statements is the least credible, but for a supposedly well educated individual you are proving to be something else. :p :p ;-) Where are you coming up with this stuff? :confused:


I always appreciate a good personal attack.

Buzz
09-15-2009, 08:01 PM
Do the actual numbers really have ANY value in your eyes, Buzz? Or for that matter, in the eyes of your leaders?

Am I wrong in assuming you hold in contempt the actions of these demonstrators? As a small business man, you are looking forward to having universal healthcare, so the 'burden' is off your shoulders? My question is, what is stopping you from removing your responsibility of carrying employee healthcare? Is there a law that requires it?

UB

Seems to be of great importance to Glenn Beck and his followers.

Gerry Clinchy
09-15-2009, 11:10 PM
Yardley

France is a somewhat different situation since it has been overwhelmed in recent years by African immigrants that are relatively poor and uneducated. That has raised a number of questions within the country. However, those questions appear to be getting addressed in a manner that assumes that the African population will be fiully assimilated within French culture through full access to educational resources, jobs, housing, and open acceptance of intermarriage. None of those countries has a history comparable to ours of legal discrimination. None of those countries has a history and tradition of relegating blacks to an economic and social underclass.

It should prove interesting to see how this situation evolves in France. How well France can assimilate large numbers of immigrants may depend on how long heavy immigration continues, and if it keeps getting larger each year. If they are being overwhelmed with poor & under-educated African immigrants, it's almost analogous to immigrants from Mexico to the U.S.

It could also depend on how much the Africans want to be assimilated. With Mexican immigration to the U.S., there are at least some who do not wish to be assimilated.

How well the assimilation takes place could also depend on how robust the French economy is or can become ... to provide more jobs for added population that is larger than it would otherwise have been.

There are certainly racists left in our country. There probably always will be. Their prejudice has not, and willl not, be limited to just black Americans. However, the American experience does have a unique factor in the history of slavery as a way of life for the first 100 years of its existence; and longer for the history of segregation.

What I have a hard time believing is that racists are large in numbers compared to the number of fair-minded people who are willing to give any sincere, hard-working, aspiring individual a chance to get ahead in making a better life for themselves or their families.

I do have a hard time accepting that one must pay for the sins of their fathers for time eternal. If a man murders somebody, does anyone expect that the murderer's grandchildren should continue to make reparation to the victim's grandchildren? How many generations should it continue? Just doesn't compute for me.

OTOH, I do agree with Dave about Native Americans. Not only did we take their homeland, we broke our treaties over and over again. And our behavior hasn't improved much (at all?) even today. They could have surely used the help of the NAACP over the years.

gman0046
09-16-2009, 08:29 AM
Yardley, affirmative action has been proven over and over not to work. I worked for the Federal Government and can't tell you how many blacks were set up for failure by affirmative action as they didn't posses the skills necessary for the job they were promoted into. I've also seen many jobs were white males need not apply. Affirmative action is nothing more then reverse discrimination.

road kill
09-16-2009, 08:50 AM
Yardley, affirmative action has been proven over and over not to work. I worked for the Federal Government and can't tell you how many blacks were set up for failure by affirmative action as they didn't posses the skills necessary for the job they were promoted into. I've also seen many jobs were white males need not apply. Affirmative action is nothing more then reverse discrimination.

Quota's for votes (money & power)!!

JDogger
09-16-2009, 09:32 AM
Yardley, affirmative action has been proven over and over not to work. I worked for the Federal Government and can't tell you how many blacks were set up for failure by affirmative action as they didn't posses the skills necessary for the job they were promoted into. I've also seen many jobs were white males need not apply. Affirmative action is nothing more then reverse discrimination.

There in a nutshell we see the basic root of the rights opposition to Obama. They don't believe the country should be led by a black man.
That friends, is what we call racism.

JD

YardleyLabs
09-16-2009, 10:28 AM
Yardley, affirmative action has been proven over and over not to work. I worked for the Federal Government and can't tell you how many blacks were set up for failure by affirmative action as they didn't posses the skills necessary for the job they were promoted into. I've also seen many jobs were white males need not apply. Affirmative action is nothing more then reverse discrimination.
It is virtually impossible to have a balanced conversation about affirmative action without going well beyond the sound bites traditionally allowed in news or even forum environments. I do not believe that affirmative action is in any manner whatsoever equivalent to reverse racism. Those who condemn it as such are usually choosing to look at only one side of the decisions being made. However, I agree absolutely that many blacks are set up for failure by people claiming to be responding to requirements for affirmative action. The fact is that no requirements for affirmative action require anyone to hire an unqualified individual. If they do so the fault is the incompetence of the person doing the hiring -- not the affirmative action requirements and not the individual being hired. There was a post on this forum several months ago that is illustrative of the type of problem encountered (I will make no effort to find the post since my comment is not intended as a reflection on the poster). The person indicated that he had been passed over for a job to hire a less qualified minority person. He noted that his father and other family members worked in the field, that he had summer jobs in the field, and that he was well connected to the other workers in the field but still did not get the job. In many industries, hiring is done traditionally through such personal networks. A by product of this is that fields that are dominated by a particular group tend to be closed to people outside of that group.

Affirmative action, done correctly, forces employers to expand their horizons in looking for new recruits. I believe that this benefits both the people hired and the companies that do the hiring because those new people bring new blood and new perspectives that can help improve the ways things are done. Unfortunately, the individuals who would have benefited from the more restrictive recruiting perspective lose when competition for jobs is opened up in this way.

Even more insidious are the arguments of reverse discrimination when test results are over-turned. In college admissions, there have been many law suits where people with higher college admission test scores have sued when minorities were admitted with lower scores. In another context, these same individuals might be the ones arguing that such test results are artificial. However, in this context the test scores are assigned some miraculously unerring skill in determining who is or is not most qualified. Personally, my experience and the experience of people who make admission decisions on a regular basis is that such test scores are simply one tool to be used in identifying the best candidates. While there are real differences between candidates with widely varying scores, there is almost no difference between individuals with scores in similar ranges. Further, scores are often inordinately affected by certain factors that are not at all related to the actual capabilities of the individuals tested. For example, cultural differences, language differences, class differences, prior test taking experience, etc. can all affect results significantly but have no implications for future success. Even in the absence of affirmative action, this results in decisions that would appear irrational if measured solely against test results.

Another consideration is that when making admission decisions or hiring decisions, my goal is not to hire the most "qualified" individual for the job. My goal is to create to most qualified team or, in the case of a school, the student body that will provide the most challenging educational environment for helping students to excel. For example, in staffing large teams to design and implement computer systems, I found that I needed a mix of people who were highly experienced with the tools being used balanced by a group of highly motivated and intelligent people with little to no experience with the tools being used. If I replaced those less experienced staff with more experienced programmers, total team productivity declined dramatically even while costs of development went up. There are lots of reasons for this, but they underscore the point that there are no simple measures of who is "best qualified" for a position. In particular, I found that cultural diversity was one of the factors that measurably improved team productivity.

ducknwork
09-16-2009, 11:03 AM
There in a nutshell we see the basic root of the rights opposition to Obama. They don't believe the country should be led by a black man.
That friends, is what we call racism.

JD

WHAT?!

That has nothing to do with the opposition to Obama. I am sure that there are a few people that oppose him due to that, but not 'the right'. Could it have anything to do with his lack of experience? How about his questionable ties with questionable people in his life? What about his far left ideals and policies? What part of that is racist?

I hope you are stirring the pot, because if not, you must be pretty ignorant to make a comment like that.
________
LovelyWendie99 (http://www.lovelywendie99.com/)

Uncle Bill
09-16-2009, 11:12 AM
Seems to be of great importance to Glenn Beck and his followers.


And that's your answer to my questions? Seems obvious you have no answers.

As to your questioning the 'count', according to what I've seen, it's more than a few thousand. Even someone only looking through one eye could make that estimate.

But, as stated, it will have little to do with what your party chooses to see, or what this corrupt administration chooses to force upon us all.

Just for the hell of it, take a look at this:

I ' ve been receiving these all day, and I thought I ' d send this one out that seems to have the most pics (except this one has a really great shot of the masses outside the capitol from a different angle than most:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1213056/Up-million-march-US-Capitol-protest-Obamas-spending-tea-party-demonstration.html?ITO=1490 (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1213056/Up-million-march-US-Capitol-protest-Obamas-spending-tea-party-demonstration.html?ITO=1490) ) It's quite the spectacle.



UB

Hoosier
09-16-2009, 11:14 AM
There in a nutshell we see the basic root of the rights opposition to Obama. They don't believe the country should be led by a black man.
That friends, is what we call racism.

JD

And this post, in a nutshell, is an example of why there will never be an honest discussion of race relations. No opposing view will ever be discussed without the left turning to the race card.

There is obviously a difference in performance between the races. The left would like to place that blame on the history of the country and racism only, and that could play a large roll in the current problems in black culture. But any alternative to that view isn't even discussed, and is shot down as racism 100% of the time. If the problems in black culture are rooted in a combination of factors and some of those factors are within the culture itself, they will never be worked out, because there will never be a discussion about them.

I'm going to end right there before I'm accused of being a racist.

ducknwork
09-16-2009, 11:29 AM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1213056/Up-million-march-US-Capitol-protest-Obamas-spending-tea-party-demonstration.html?ITO=1490 (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1213056/Up-million-march-US-Capitol-protest-Obamas-spending-tea-party-demonstration.html?ITO=1490) ) It's quite the spectacle.



UB


I'd say there's only a couple hundred people there.;)
________
Marijuana card (http://medicalmarijuanacard.info)

gman0046
09-16-2009, 11:35 AM
JDogger you are whacked. Nowhere in my post about Affirmative Action is Obamas name even mentioned and you turn it into a racist issue. Get real, you Liberals are the ones always spouting racism if someone doesn't agree with your views. The fact of the matter is Obama has NEVER run anything, not even a Dairy Queen which is becoming very apparent to the American Public.

dnf777
09-16-2009, 11:56 AM
JDogger you are whacked. Nowhere in my post about Affirmative Action is Obamas name even mentioned and you turn it into a racist issue. Get real, you Liberals are the ones always spouting racism if someone doesn't agree with your views. The fact of the matter is Obama has NEVER run anything, not even a Dairy Queen which is becoming very apparent to the American Public.

wacked, ignorant, bigot...the list is growing! Thanks.
I enjoy discussing politics with most on this list who can disagree in civil, if not spirited terms. I enjoy seeing the others bare their ineptitude by resorting to name calling!

Nice day regards....
dave

JDogger
09-16-2009, 12:13 PM
JDogger you are whacked.

Good responce gman.

Here's a little more.

Hoosier writes;

"There is obviously a difference in performance between the races."

Care to elaborate on that a little more Tremayne?

JD

luvmylabs23139
09-16-2009, 12:13 PM
Affirmative action is racist. When I was in my 20's I got a well earned promotion. The corp had a temp doing my old job. The temp who was in her 50's, doing a great job, well qualified based on experience and on the job performance was denied the perm position because she was not a minority.
Quote from big boss who got the hell out said "HR says your job will only be filled by a monority"
Minority who got the job was an illegal who got amnesty in the early 90's. This took place in the early 90's
Add insult I was forced to train this person to do the job.
This crap all tied back to gov't contracts.

Franco
09-16-2009, 12:25 PM
As a Conservative (not neo-Conservative), it is only a matter of time until seccesion becomes reality.

The issues that divide will NEVER be resolved. Those that hate our history vs those that adore our history.

Like I've said before, we have no real leadership. Therefore only chaos can follow. This current administration is leading us into a financial meltdown and it is not the fault of the real Conservatives.

It is not about color but mentality. Obama was elected because of his color and because he is polished enough to appealed to many non-blacks who are disgusted with the Bush years. In Louisiana, we elected a man of Hindu origins as Gov. Not because of his color but because we knew he was smart enough to make the correct decisions!

White Americans will be pursecuted in the future by non-whites in this country. If you don't see that coming, then you must be living in areas of the USA that are predomiently lilly-white.

luvmylabs23139
09-16-2009, 12:54 PM
Honestly, I don"t understand any of this race stuff except for when I see whites forced to take a back seat to minorities because of quotas.
I just don't understand why the most qualified is denied the job because they are not a minorty.
Born in the UK, grew up in the US as a result of my Dad being head hunted by the US gov't.

ducknwork
09-16-2009, 01:09 PM
WHAT?!

That has nothing to do with the opposition to Obama. I am sure that there are a few people that oppose him due to that, but not 'the right'. Could it have anything to do with his lack of experience? How about his questionable ties with questionable people in his life? What about his far left ideals and policies? What part of that is racist?

I hope you are stirring the pot, because if not, you must be pretty ignorant to make a comment like that.


wacked, ignorant, bigot...the list is growing! Thanks.
I enjoy discussing politics with most on this list who can disagree in civil, if not spirited terms. I enjoy seeing the others bare their ineptitude by resorting to name calling!

Nice day regards....
dave

I enjoy seeing others ignore valid questions in order to make themselves seem more correct. Did you only read the last sentence in my post?

OK. I lied. I don't enjoy seeing people ignore valid questions.
________
Design host (http://hostndesign.com)

Hoosier
09-16-2009, 02:56 PM
Good responce gman.

Here's a little more.

Hoosier writes;

"There is obviously a difference in performance between the races."

Care to elaborate on that a little more Tremayne?

JD

By performance I mean % living in poverty, % living in single parent homes, % in prison. There have to be reasons for this, and to limit the discussion to blaming others, and putting looking at culture off limits will not answer the questions that need to be answered. I'm sure institutional racism was a contributing factor, but the discussion shouldn't be limited to that.

Now that I responded to your post I would appreciate it if you didn't twist what I said or take one sentence from a whole post and call me a racist.

YardleyLabs
09-16-2009, 03:46 PM
As a Conservative (not neo-Conservative), it is only a matter of time until seccesion becomes reality.

The issues that divide will NEVER be resolved. Those that hate our history vs those that adore our history.

Like I've said before, we have no real leadership. Therefore only chaos can follow. This current administration is leading us into a financial meltdown and it is not the fault of the real Conservatives.

It is not about color but mentality. Obama was elected because of his color and because he is polished enough to appealed to many non-blacks who are disgusted with the Bush years. In Louisiana, we elected a man of Hindu origins as Gov. Not because of his color but because we knew he was smart enough to make the correct decisions!

White Americans will be pursecuted in the future by non-whites in this country. If you don't see that coming, then you must be living in areas of the USA that are predomiently lilly-white.
I love our history.

I love the fact that a bunch of white slave-owning guys got together and laid the original foundation for equality among sexes and races and religions even though that was not the practice at the time.

I love the fact that the country fought a civil war, threatening the very existence of our country, in part to end the practice of slavery and that slavery was, in fact, ended.

I love the fact that a bunch of white men on the Supreme Court overthrew precedent in support of equality, and I love the fact that a Texas bigot, who used his power in Congress to thwart efforts to make lynching illegal, ended up as the champion of civil rights and a champion of services for the poor.

I love the fact that a shoe salesman from Missouri ended the unconscionable segregation of our army. I love the fact that a conservative movie star used his power as President to offer amnesty to persons who had entered our country illegally but contributed to the country, obeyed our laws and paid our taxes. And finally, I am proud that despite the doubts of many, the people of our country overcame centuries of prejudice to elect a black man as President because they thought he was the better candidate.

I am very proud of our history as a nation and hopeful for our future. I wonder at times how you seem to believe that those who help make our history are now traitors to it.

JDogger
09-16-2009, 03:49 PM
By performance I mean % living in poverty, % living in single parent homes, % in prison. There have to be reasons for this, and to limit the discussion to blaming others, and putting looking at culture off limits will not answer the questions that need to be answered. I'm sure institutional racism was a contributing factor, but the discussion shouldn't be limited to that.

Now that I responded to your post I would appreciate it if you didn't twist what I said or take one sentence from a whole post and call me a racist.

OK...I'll quote your whole post, but I'm interested in one line in particular.

"There have to be reasons for this,"

....and some of those might be...?

JD

Hoosier
09-16-2009, 09:09 PM
OK...I'll quote your whole post, but I'm interested in one line in particular.

"There have to be reasons for this,"

....and some of those might be...?

JD

I'm not falling for that. As soon as I say something that you don't agree with you'll whip out the old race card and start throwing labels around. No thanks.

JDogger
09-16-2009, 09:40 PM
I'm not falling for that. As soon as I say something that you don't agree with you'll whip out the old race card and start throwing labels around. No thanks.

If you trully had some basis for your statement,

"there has to be some reason for this"

you would not cut and run.

Please explain. I'll not call you names. You said these matters may not be discussed. Why?

JD

M&K's Retrievers
09-16-2009, 09:55 PM
It is virtually impossible to have a balanced conversation about affirmative action without going well beyond the sound bites traditionally allowed in news or even forum environments. I do not believe that affirmative action is in any manner whatsoever equivalent to reverse racism. Those who condemn it as such are usually choosing to look at only one side of the decisions being made. However, I agree absolutely that many blacks are set up for failure by people claiming to be responding to requirements for affirmative action. The fact is that no requirements for affirmative action require anyone to hire an unqualified individual. If they do so the fault is the incompetence of the person doing the hiring -- not the affirmative action requirements and not the individual being hired. There was a post on this forum several months ago that is illustrative of the type of problem encountered (I will make no effort to find the post since my comment is not intended as a reflection on the poster). The person indicated that he had been passed over for a job to hire a less qualified minority person. He noted that his father and other family members worked in the field, that he had summer jobs in the field, and that he was well connected to the other workers in the field but still did not get the job. In many industries, hiring is done traditionally through such personal networks. A by product of this is that fields that are dominated by a particular group tend to be closed to people outside of that group.

Affirmative action, done correctly, forces employers to expand their horizons in looking for new recruits. I believe that this benefits both the people hired and the companies that do the hiring because those new people bring new blood and new perspectives that can help improve the ways things are done. Unfortunately, the individuals who would have benefited from the more restrictive recruiting perspective lose when competition for jobs is opened up in this way.

Even more insidious are the arguments of reverse discrimination when test results are over-turned. In college admissions, there have been many law suits where people with higher college admission test scores have sued when minorities were admitted with lower scores. In another context, these same individuals might be the ones arguing that such test results are artificial. However, in this context the test scores are assigned some miraculously unerring skill in determining who is or is not most qualified. Personally, my experience and the experience of people who make admission decisions on a regular basis is that such test scores are simply one tool to be used in identifying the best candidates. While there are real differences between candidates with widely varying scores, there is almost no difference between individuals with scores in similar ranges. Further, scores are often inordinately affected by certain factors that are not at all related to the actual capabilities of the individuals tested. For example, cultural differences, language differences, class differences, prior test taking experience, etc. can all affect results significantly but have no implications for future success. Even in the absence of affirmative action, this results in decisions that would appear irrational if measured solely against test results.

Another consideration is that when making admission decisions or hiring decisions, my goal is not to hire the most "qualified" individual for the job. My goal is to create to most qualified team or, in the case of a school, the student body that will provide the most challenging educational environment for helping students to excel. For example, in staffing large teams to design and implement computer systems, I found that I needed a mix of people who were highly experienced with the tools being used balanced by a group of highly motivated and intelligent people with little to no experience with the tools being used. If I replaced those less experienced staff with more experienced programmers, total team productivity declined dramatically even while costs of development went up. There are lots of reasons for this, but they underscore the point that there are no simple measures of who is "best qualified" for a position. In particular, I found that cultural diversity was one of the factors that measurably improved team productivity.

Yeah, just ask those firemen who didn't get their promotions based on a ruling by a judge who is probably a product of Affirmative Action..

Pete
09-16-2009, 10:11 PM
I just finished watching 4 talking heads on a news show. The topic was racism. According to the 3 darker colored skinned people,,,those who partisipated in the tea party rallies are mostly racist. Anytime you disagree with this administration you are a racist.
I dont even know what a racist is anymore. I thought it was someone who hated other races for no apparent reason.

can someone tell me what a liberal means when they call someone a racist.
I dont know to many consevative racists but most liberals seem full of hate. Are they racists by nature?
I eagerly await an explaination.
Thanks Pete

.

blind ambition
09-16-2009, 10:38 PM
I just finished watching 4 talking heads on a news show. The topic was racism. According to the 3 darker colored skinned people,,,those who partisipated in the tea party rallies are mostly racist. Anytime you disagree with this administration you are a racist.
I dont even know what a racist is anymore. I thought it was someone who hated other races for no apparent reason.

can someone tell me what a liberal means when they call someone a racist.
I dont know to many consevative racists but most liberals seem full of hate. Are they racists by nature?
I eagerly await an explaination.
Thanks Pete

.

Sir, I believe I saw the very same broadcast, my count was two vs two.
One at each end of the pole and two straddling the middle just either side of the centre line...sounded like balanced and fair to me, I heard no hate being spewed. Seemed so balanced and fair I had to check the channel header to be certain I wasn't on a Canadian channel.:razz:

Bruce MacPherson
09-16-2009, 11:11 PM
If you trully had some basis for your statement,

"there has to be some reason for this"

you would not cut and run.

Please explain. I'll not call you names. You said these matters may not be discussed. Why?

JD

Maybe he read The Bell Curve JD.

Bruce MacPherson
09-16-2009, 11:17 PM
I love our history.

I love the fact that a bunch of white slave-owning guys got together and laid the original foundation for equality among sexes and races and religions even though that was not the practice at the time.

I love the fact that the country fought a civil war, threatening the very existence of our country, in part to end the practice of slavery and that slavery was, in fact, ended.

I love the fact that a bunch of white men on the Supreme Court overthrew precedent in support of equality, and I love the fact that a Texas bigot, who used his power in Congress to thwart efforts to make lynching illegal, ended up as the champion of civil rights and a champion of services for the poor.

I love the fact that a shoe salesman from Missouri ended the unconscionable segregation of our army. I love the fact that a conservative movie star used his power as President to offer amnesty to persons who had entered our country illegally but contributed to the country, obeyed our laws and paid our taxes. And finally, I am proud that despite the doubts of many, the people of our country overcame centuries of prejudice to elect a black man as President because they thought he was the better candidate.

I am very proud of our history as a nation and hopeful for our future. I wonder at times how you seem to believe that those who help make our history are now traitors to it.

And I wonder at times why you don't think someone could indeed make history in one regard yet be a traitor to it in another.

JDogger
09-16-2009, 11:22 PM
I just finished watching 4 talking heads on a news show. The topic was racism. According to the 3 darker colored skinned people,,,those who partisipated in the tea party rallies are mostly racist. Anytime you disagree with this administration you are a racist.
I dont even know what a racist is anymore. I thought it was someone who hated other races for no apparent reason.

can someone tell me what a liberal means when they call someone a racist.
I dont know to many consevative racists but most liberals seem full of hate. Are they racists by nature?
I eagerly await an explaination.
Thanks Pete

.

Then google it Pete. Make up your own mind, what it is and isn't. Kinda like intimidation on the line, hard to define...but you know it when you see
it. Like porn ya know, but it can be much more subtle.
Racism isn't always hateful, but the effect can be the same.

What do you mean when you call someone a "liberal"? Is it a predetermined set of expectations on your part?
If I refer to someone on this board as racist, or merely prejudicial, is there a difference in your mind?
If I question the statements of some other poster on this board, am I challenging their premise or their racial orientation?
Whadda you think?

JD

subroc
09-17-2009, 03:33 AM
For this article Buchanan earns a truly special niche in Hell. This should be a spot where he can watch his children be kidnapped, sold, placed into the holds of ships and, if they are among the "lucky" ones they may survive heat, starvation and disease to reach the golden shores of America to which they should offer prayers of gratitude.

There he should be forced to watch as they are sold off as chattel and then bred selectively over generations for those special traits that make a good slave: strong back, trainability, ability to accept pressure without responding aggressively.

I suspect then that there were as many different types of breeders then as there are now with our retrievers. The elite who might give all the attention to breeding a good slave that they would to breeding a good hunting dog. Those equivalent to today's puppy mills, breeding for volume and quick sales. And even some back yard breeders asking around their neighbors for a good stud to match up with that special little girl before she gets too old.

Let Buchanan watch that from his niche in Hell, ever thankful that in return his children are being introduced to a white God and preachers who will help his children accept their industrious role as slaves. After four, five or six generations watching his children and his grandchildren and their children and so forth being bred like so many dogs, let Buchanan watch through the years of Reconstruction when the promise of 40 acres and a mule rapidly turned into a world of horror where former slaves remained for the next 40 years under controls as rigid as those they faced under slavery. And while the situation improved over the next hundred years, there is no quick correction for all those generations of special breeding and special "education".

And to counter this what does Buchanan say are the benefits for which blacks should be grateful? Blacks in this country fared better than blacks in the other African countries that were conquered and exploited viciously by the colonial powers eager to control their natural resources. Grateful for their religious conversion at the end of a whip? Grateful for the destruction of their language and culture, for the selling off of their children, for centuries of inadequate education? Let Buchanan watch his children go through that experience generation after generation and then let him bow down and tell us all "Thanks".

This is one of the most outrageously ethnocentric and arrogant articles I have ever read. Next we'll see cartoons of Buchanan carrying a cross with a black man nailed to it and the slogan "The White Man's Burden." Let him roast in Hell, watching his children in all their generations going through that experience he now praises.

Jeff, you have lost your mind. You are focusing on things that happened 150 years ago as if it is current state.

YardleyLabs
09-17-2009, 05:33 AM
Jeff, you have lost your mind. You are focusing on things that happened 150 years ago as if it is current state.
Hey, talk to Buchanan. He was the one suggesting that blacks should be thanking whites for having saved them by bringing them over to be slaves.


Yeah, just ask those firemen who didn't get their promotions based on a ruling by a judge who is probably a product of Affirmative Action..
Their case is actually a perfect example. A test was given with multiple sections. To calculate an aggregate score, different weights were assigned to each section. Those weighting were not published in advance and were not, in fact, the result of any analysis or any particular discussion. When scores were calculated, it was found that no blacks had passed. By law and Supreme Court precedent, discrimination may be measured by:
an overtly discriminatory process
a clear discriminatory resultIn the event that either of these occurs, the burden of proof is on the employer to demonstrate that the test is a fair measure of qualification for the position. If it cannot, the test is thrown out and they start over or correct the observed discrimination. In this case, the town counsel reviewed the weightings assigned on the test and determined that they had no foundation at all. If weightings were changed to ones that were believed to be equally valid, the rankings on the list were affected in a manner that eliminated the discriminatory result. That is what they did. The individuals selected for promotion under the original weightings sued. In accordance with precendents, the district and appellate courts ruled against them and in favor of the town. The Supreme Court overturned precedent cases and returned the case to lower courts. If the candidiates that failed the test choose to do so they probably have a strong case for overturning the result anyway. Why? Because the weightings used to rank test results had no relationship whatsoever to job performance or qualification and had a discriminatory impact. In my opinion, if you grade people based on a test that fails all blacks, and you cannot justify that test on any grounds related to the decision being made, it should be thrown out. How would you feel if you were applying for a job as a cop and were told that the people hired would be those who were the best basketball players?

Hoosier
09-17-2009, 08:26 AM
If you trully had some basis for your statement,

"there has to be some reason for this"

you would not cut and run.

Please explain. I'll not call you names. You said these matters may not be discussed. Why?

JD

Well the other possibility would be lack of work ethic as a people. I believe it is lack of effort due to having a built in excuse (racism) for any and all things that go wrong, or lack of advancement. It's human nature for people to look for a reason outside themselves for failure. With decades of public opportunity weighted in their favor isn't that at least a possibility.

My opinion on this is based on observing my own family (white trash) and other families around them not advancing for generations. They live in a medium sized town where the family name is well known. Anything that is wrong in a large % of their lives is blamed on their last name, it's a crutch. Don't have a job "nobody will hire me because I'm an Isaacs";but they haven't even looked for one, and don't have the skills that come with a work history. Got arrested "cops picking on me because I'm an Isaacs";couldn't be because you walked up to a cop drunk off your ass with a bag of weed hanging out of your pocket; bad grades in school " teachers don't like me because I'm an Isaacs" couldn't have been because you didn't do your homework one time all year.

The kids in the family hear this and think giving it any effort is a waste of time. They think that the system is so weighted against them that they can't succeed. That is what this constant blaming on racism is doing the the black community. In some cases there is some discrimination against people in my family based on name, I felt it a few times as a kid. The vast majority of the time though, it is looking so hard to find something to blame lack of effort on, that they manage to find it.

ducknwork
09-17-2009, 08:39 AM
Well said, Hoosier.
________
WASHINGTON MEDICAL MARIJUANA (http://washington.dispensaries.org/)

Pete
09-17-2009, 08:54 AM
Sir, I believe I saw the very same broadcast, my count was two vs two.
One at each end of the pole and two straddling the middle just either side of the centre line...sounded like balanced and fair to me, I heard no hate being spewed. Seemed so balanced and fair I had to check the channel header to be certain I wasn't on a Canadian channel

Yes the moderater appeared to be neutral unless you can read faces and inflections.
The questions asked and the eyes told a different story. She was much more goo goo eyed listening to her guests who she secretly agreed with. Its so obvious. Now I could call that white racism if I follow their logic. Unfortunately logic and rational is severly lacking these days on the far left.

Its oviously pure hatred in the heart of a man when someone says I'm against all these social programs and the first thing that comes out of the oponents mouth is racism is the cause behind it..

My perception anyway.

JDogger
09-17-2009, 08:57 AM
Well the other possibility would be lack of work ethic as a people. I believe it is lack of effort due to having a built in excuse (racism) for any and all things that go wrong, or lack of advancement. It's human nature for people to look for a reason outside themselves for failure. With decades of public opportunity weighted in their favor isn't that at least a possibility.

My opinion on this is based on observing my own family (white trash) and other families around them not advancing for generations. They live in a medium sized town where the family name is well known. Anything that is wrong in a large % of their lives is blamed on their last name, it's a crutch. Don't have a job "nobody will hire me because I'm an Isaacs";but they haven't even looked for one, and don't have the skills that come with a work history. Got arrested "cops picking on me because I'm an Isaacs";couldn't be because you walked up to a cop drunk off your ass with a bag of weed hanging out of your pocket; bad grades in school " teachers don't like me because I'm an Isaacs" couldn't have been because you didn't do your homework one time all year.

The kids in the family hear this and think giving it any effort is a waste of time. They think that the system is so weighted against them that they can't succeed. That is what this constant blaming on racism is doing the the black community. In some cases there is some discrimination against people in my family based on name, I felt it a few times as a kid. The vast majority of the time though, it is looking so hard to find something to blame lack of effort on, that they manage to find it.

Well at least you didn't cite any of the scientific racism of The Bell Curve, but aren't you painting with a broad brush in your statement, "lack of work ethic as a people"?

JD

Pete
09-17-2009, 09:02 AM
Then google it Pete. Make up your own mind, what it is and isn't. Kinda like intimidation on the line, hard to define...but you know it when you see
it. Like porn ya know, but it can be much more subtle.
Racism isn't always hateful, but the effect can be the same.



I dont google If I did I would be sitting here forever. I have tryed to google information and all I get is all kinds of junk. Nothing at all related to what I was looking for.

How would you google a tv show.
dude ,,,your dealing with a technological idiot here.
I get all my news from you guys. My wife set up my computer so I can click on RTF and thats how I get here.
I am truely inept when it comes to all technology.

On nmy remote for the tv. I can turn the tv on ,,go up and down with the channels and volume. That is the extent of my high tech skills.
Google hell,
Now give me something to fix or a nasty dog to temper and I can do it in my sleep.:D

Pete

ducknwork
09-17-2009, 11:28 AM
"There is obviously a difference in performance between the races."

Care to elaborate on that a little more Tremayne?



You didn't ask me, but I figure I'll answer anyway...

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-welfareblack.htm

Welfare Recipients by race (Don't forget the difference in the population between whites and blacks...)

Race
--------------
White 38.8%
Black 37.2
Hispanic 17.8
Asian 2.8
Other 3.4

http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/acrossstates/Rankings.aspx?ind=107

Kids in single parent families by race

United States
Non-Hispanic White 23%
Black or African American 65%
American Indian 49%
Asian and Pacific Islander 17%
Hispanic or Latino 37%
Total 32%

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0104716.html

Unemployment by race

2001 2002 2003
White
Total, 16 years and over 4.2% 5.1% 5.2%
Total, 16?19 years 12.7 14.5 15.2
Men, 20 years and over 3.7 4.7 5.0
Women, 20 years and over 3.6 4.4 4.4
Black
Total, 16 years and over 8.6 10.2 10.8
Total, 16?19 years 29.0 29.8 33.0
Men, 20 years and over 8.0% 9.5% 10.3%
Women, 20 years and over 7.0 8.8 9.2
Hispanic or Latino
Total, 16 years and over 6.6 7.5 7.7
Total, 16?19 years 17.7 20.1 20.0
Men, 20 years and over 5.2 6.4 6.4
Women, 20 years and over 6.6 7.2 7.8

http://www.ojp.gov/bjs/prisons.htm

At midyear 2008, there were 4,777 black male inmates per 100,000 black males held in state and federal prisons and local jails, compared to 1,760 Hispanic male inmates per 100,000 Hispanic males and 727 white male inmates per 100,000 white males.

http://www.abanet.org/domviol/statistics.html

Domestic violence

Overall, African Americans were victimized by intimate partners a significantly higher rates than persons of any other race between 1993 and 1998. Black females experienced intimate partner violence at a rate 35% higher than that of white females, and about 22 times the rate of women of other races. Black males experienced intimate partner violence at a rate about 62% higher than that of white males and about 22 times the rate of men of other races.


All of that with Google...;)
________
FIX PS3 (http://fixps3.info/)

TXduckdog
09-17-2009, 11:51 AM
Very interesting....

Pete
09-17-2009, 12:13 PM
All of that with Google...:wink:

See that what I mean:D


why would I need to google something to know something. here is an example.
Illegal aliens will still get health care weather they have insurance or not.
Now I couldnt google that if I tried.
However I literally spoke to well over a hundred nurses who deal with this each day.
In between training dogs and giving the dog a break,,,I,,,being the social being that I am,,,drill the nurses on all different aspects of their job. I truely have an interest in other peoples lives and take full advantage of the situation.
Every one of them confirmed my belief,,that every gets medical care with or without insurance.
They are not lying,,they were not all conservatives.,,,,but they were a cross section of america that I put much more weight into than some googlied information found on a computer. The computer is the last place I would look to get the facts I need or the trueth..
You can find opposing views on everything from apples to zebra,s. here

I'll put my trust in my first hand interviews with the customers I know and trust.

Pete.

Hoosier
09-17-2009, 03:00 PM
Well at least you didn't cite any of the scientific racism of The Bell Curve, but aren't you painting with a broad brush in your statement, "lack of work ethic as a people"?

JD

My original post was in a nutshell saying that any conversation about race gets shot down as racism if you don't agree with the left. Let's use this thread as an example. I know you haven't flat out called my statements racist, but you have implied it in the way you have responded to my posts.

Here is a quote from Jeffs post and the implication is that it is the result of racism. " Whites earn $1.67 to $2 for every dollar earned by blacks." Now that is a stat that is a generalization of white verses black income. How can you present any alternative to racism that could be the cause or partially the cause without generalizing (painting with a broad brush). This technique is used to shut down any disagreement with the left, and probably perpetuates the problems in the black community, because it puts everything but racism off limits as reasons for the stats cited by ducknwork.

subroc
09-17-2009, 04:27 PM
Hey, talk to Buchanan. He was the one suggesting that blacks should be thanking whites for having saved them by bringing them over to be slaves...

That is not what he said.

YardleyLabs
09-17-2009, 04:29 PM
That is not what he said.
Seems like it to me:

First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known. Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American.

Eric Johnson
09-17-2009, 04:56 PM
I interpret it differently than you. I see him as saying that having been brought here, that they then had the opportunities...unlike those who were not brought to this country. It's a subtle difference. The statement about Rev. Wright is that he has ignored the gains and advantages of blacks in America vis a vis the blacks in other countries. Seems a bit crude but that's how I would interpret it.

Don't feel the need to argue the point. I can't say what he meant with certainty and I haven't lived the experience. It was just my impression/interpretation of the comment.

Eric

subroc
09-17-2009, 04:57 PM
...Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American.

not to me....

subroc
09-17-2009, 05:01 PM
However, how one arrives in the United States is less the issue than how one takes advantage of the opportunity. If you are a racist Jeff and view everything through your racist lens, you may not see that. Many view this country as the greatest nation on the face of the earth and are greatfull for the opportunities it has offered us.

Gun_Dog2002
09-17-2009, 07:55 PM
Let us be clear where this thread started: UB elected to post an article by an idiot suggesting that blacks should be thinking whites for having brought them out of heathen Africa to our golden shores where they could live as slaves and learn the Christian and American way.


Boy you must really be forgetful. The African slave trade was alive and well, with black enslaving black for centuries. In fact it still is. The demand for slaves in the US is what drove the bringing of slaves to this country. You also seem to forget that originally slaves where not just black. Many European slaves were brought her as well. Somehow, people always tend to forget that.

/Paul

YardleyLabs
09-17-2009, 08:49 PM
Boy you must really be forgetful. The African slave trade was alive and well, with black enslaving black for centuries. In fact it still is. The demand for slaves in the US is what drove the bringing of slaves to this country. You also seem to forget that originally slaves where not just black. Many European slaves were brought her as well. Somehow, people always tend to forget that.

/Paul
Actually, Europeans were brought here as indentured servants with a period of servitude that lasted for a specific number of years (typically seven) and never extended to their families. They also entered into their indentured service voluntarily, often as part of a defined apprenticeship. If you read my post, you will also see that I did not accuse the European and American slave traders of being the ones who captured the persons sold into slavery. In fact, they almost always purchased them from slave traders in Africa. However, that doesn't make them any less slave traders.

Gun_Dog2002
09-17-2009, 09:04 PM
Actually, Europeans were brought here as indentured servants with a period of servitude that lasted for a specific number of years (typically seven) and never extended to their families. They also entered into their indentured service voluntarily, often as part of a defined apprenticeship. If you read my post, you will also see that I did not accuse the European and American slave traders of being the ones who captured the persons sold into slavery. In fact, they almost always purchased them from slave traders in Africa. However, that doesn't make them any less slave traders.

Lets be clear. All slaves originally brought here were indentured servants.

/Paul

WRL
09-17-2009, 10:13 PM
Actually, Europeans were brought here as indentured servants with a period of servitude that lasted for a specific number of years (typically seven) and never extended to their families. They also entered into their indentured service voluntarily, often as part of a defined apprenticeship. If you read my post, you will also see that I did not accuse the European and American slave traders of being the ones who captured the persons sold into slavery. In fact, they almost always purchased them from slave traders in Africa. However, that doesn't make them any less slave traders.

And the Chinese were imported for work on the RRs. Plus the American Natives had slaves. They were either captured other natives or captured white people typically. They tattooed their slaves.

The black on black culture in Africa had slaves. The Romans had slaves......slavery and indentured servitude has been around a long long long long time before America even existed.

WRL

WRL
09-17-2009, 10:17 PM
Seems like it to me:

First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known. Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American.

I read this quote and take it to mean: if their ancestors had not been brought to America, they could be experiencing the wonderful genocide and other atrocities being committed in Africa currently.

A higher percentage of people (blacks included) have been successful in the US than any other nation.

WRL

YardleyLabs
09-18-2009, 05:57 AM
Lets be clear. All slaves originally brought here were indentured servants.

/Paul
There was always a fundamental difference between those that came as slaves and those that came as indentured servants. A slave was a slave for life and his owner owned not only the slave but all that the slave produced including children. There was no legal escape from slavery other than being freed by his owner voluntarily or death.

Indentured servants, with few exceptions (typically prisoners) entered into their indenture contract voluntarily and for a fixed term -- typically 3-7 years. From a practical perspective, their term in service was essentially identical to slavery but did not extend beyond the body of the person (i.e., children were born free, not owned by the person holding the contract). At the conclusion of service, an indentured servant was freed and received some additional recompense. Approximately half of those coming to the colonies in pre-revolutionary times arrived as indentured servants.

However, the flow of indentured servants and the requirement that they be freed did not meet the needs of the tobacco and cotton industries. As a consequence, over time, they were largely displaced by slaves who were cheaper in the long term and could also be bred to increase the population.

dnf777
09-18-2009, 06:25 AM
There was always a fundamental difference between those that came as slaves and those that came as indentured servants. A slave was a slave for life and his owner owned not only the slave but all that the slave produced including children. There was no legal escape from slavery other than being freed by his owner voluntarily or death.

Indentured servants, with few exceptions (typically prisoners) entered into their indenture contract voluntarily and for a fixed term -- typically 3-7 years. From a practical perspective, their term in service was essentially identical to slavery but did not extend beyond the body of the person (i.e., children were born free, not owned by the person holding the contract). At the conclusion of service, an indentured servant was freed and received some additional recompense. Approximately half of those coming to the colonies in pre-revolutionary times arrived as indentured servants.

However, the flow of indentured servants and the requirement that they be freed did not meet the needs of the tobacco and cotton industries. As a consequence, over time, they were largely displaced by slaves who were cheaper in the long term and could also be bred to increase the population.

Yeah....indendutured servants signed up for it! But what does having teeth have to do with it? :p

Gun_Dog2002
09-18-2009, 10:43 AM
There was always a fundamental difference between those that came as slaves and those that came as indentured servants. A slave was a slave for life and his owner owned not only the slave but all that the slave produced including children. There was no legal escape from slavery other than being freed by his owner voluntarily or death.

Indentured servants, with few exceptions (typically prisoners) entered into their indenture contract voluntarily and for a fixed term -- typically 3-7 years. From a practical perspective, their term in service was essentially identical to slavery but did not extend beyond the body of the person (i.e., children were born free, not owned by the person holding the contract). At the conclusion of service, an indentured servant was freed and received some additional recompense. Approximately half of those coming to the colonies in pre-revolutionary times arrived as indentured servants.

However, the flow of indentured servants and the requirement that they be freed did not meet the needs of the tobacco and cotton industries. As a consequence, over time, they were largely displaced by slaves who were cheaper in the long term and could also be bred to increase the population.

The point is African Americans were not the only slaves. They are though th only race that continues to use that history as a crutch.

/Paul

TXduckdog
09-18-2009, 10:55 AM
Yardley.......do you happen to know the statistics of how big the slave trade of Brazil was during this timeframe?

They imported something like 3.6 million africans with 1.3 in the 1700's and 1.6 in the 1800's. (These are UN statistics)

By 1800 african slaves made up 30% of Brazil's population. All for the purpose of providing sugar to europe.

How come nobody ever disses Brazil for this?

ducknwork
09-18-2009, 10:57 AM
Because they have nice beaches and hot women.

Not to mention they invented that wax...:razz:;)
________
Spice Weed (http://syntheticweed.org)

Raymond Little
09-18-2009, 10:59 AM
Yardley.......do you happen to know the statistics of how big the slave trade of Brazil was during this timeframe?

They imported something like 3.6 million africans with 1.3 in the 1700's and 1.6 in the 1800's. (These are UN statistics)

By 1800 african slaves made up 30% of Brazil's population. All for the purpose of providing sugar to europe.

How come nobody ever disses Brazil for this?
They aren't WHITE!:rolleyes:

YardleyLabs
09-18-2009, 01:03 PM
Yardley.......do you happen to know the statistics of how big the slave trade of Brazil was during this timeframe?

They imported something like 3.6 million africans with 1.3 in the 1700's and 1.6 in the 1800's. (These are UN statistics)

By 1800 african slaves made up 30% of Brazil's population. All for the purpose of providing sugar to europe.

How come nobody ever disses Brazil for this?
Brazil accounted for about 34% of the total traffic in african slaves. It ended slavery as a matter of law about 25 years after it was ended in the US, although the owners of sugar plantations continued with abuses for long after and as recently as the year 2000 the Brazilian government noted that about 25,000 people continued to work in conditions equivalent to slavery. What does that have to do with our own history?

Raymond Little
09-18-2009, 01:39 PM
Brazil accounted for about 34% of the total traffic in african slaves. It ended slavery as a matter of law about 25 years after it was ended in the US, although the owners of sugar plantations continued with abuses for long after and as recently as the year 2000 the Brazilian government noted that about 25,000 people continued to work in conditions equivalent to slavery. What does that have to do with our own history?

Gee Jeff, you are a F'n Ensyclopedia, ever been on Jepardy?:rolleyes:

zeus3925
09-18-2009, 02:03 PM
Canada also had black slaves as well as native slaves. Mostly they were domestics. Life expectancy was 18 years for native slaves and 25 for slaves of African origin. Slavery was abolished throughout the British Empire in 1834.

Gerry Clinchy
09-18-2009, 02:27 PM
Brazil accounted for about 34% of the total traffic in african slaves. It ended slavery as a matter of law about 25 years after it was ended in the US, although the owners of sugar plantations continued with abuses for long after and as recently as the year 2000 the Brazilian government noted that about 25,000 people continued to work in conditions equivalent to slavery. What does that have to do with our own history?

Well, I sure learned some history here.

I suspect that the answer to your last question, Jeff, is that we (Americans) have a guilt complex for the existence of slavery in what was supposed to be a nation devoted to individual freedom.

I don't think we're wrong to point to the evil of slavery, but we've forgotten that our ancestors lived in a different environment that didn't generally see slavery the same way we see it in retrospect. Some of our founding fathers did, but many more did not.

I'm sure that many people don't know how widespread slavery was in the New World ... like me! Although I did know that slavery dated back to Greece and Rome; not always limited to slaves of African origin.

I recently had a disagreement with my son. At first I was feeling guilty. Then I realized that he's 40 years old now! (probably going through his midlife crisis :D) It's time for him to "get over it" and move forward.

In some ways our obsession with the fact that our ancestors allowed slavery to persist continues to haunt our national psyche. It's maybe time for us to "grow up" and use what we've learned so we do not repeat past errors of hate, but move on with the potential for hope the US provides for the world at large.

YardleyLabs
09-18-2009, 02:36 PM
Canada also had black slaves as well as native slaves. Mostly they were domestics. Life expectancy was 18 years for native slaves and 25 for slaves of African origin. Slavery was abolished throughout the British Empire in 1834.
And the Canadian slave population totaled a little more than 4000 slaves during the entire history of Canadian slavery, or less than 1% of the number of slaves in South Carolina alone in 1860. Half of the Canadian slave were indigenous (i.e. native populations) and the balance "imported".

Uncle Bill
09-18-2009, 02:43 PM
Hard to believe that it's taking a hundred posts and 11 pages to try to rid Yardley of his guilt. Did you miss this important epistle when it was first penned, shortly after the election of BHO, EPL?

Read it and be uplifted. UB

WHITE GUILT IS DEAD


By Tom Adkins




Look at my fellow conservatives! There they go, glumly shuffling along, depressed by the election aftermath. Not me. I'm virtually euphoric. Don't get me wrong. I'm not thrilled with America 's flirtation with neo-socialism. But there's a massive silver lining in those magical clouds that lofted Barak Obama to the Presidency. For today, without a shred of intellectually legitimate opposition, I can loudly proclaim to America : The Era of White Guilt is over.




This seemingly impossible event occurred because the vast majority of white Americans didn't give a fluff about skin color and enthusiastically pulled the voting lever for a black man. Not just any black man. A very liberal black man who spent his early career race-hustling banks, praying in a racist church for 20 years, and actively worked with America-hating domestic terrorists. Wow! Some resume! Yet they made Barak Obama their leader. Therefore, as of Nov 4th, 2008, white guilt is dead.




For over a century, the millstone of white guilt hung around our necks, retribution for slave-owning predecessors. In the 60s, American liberals began yanking that millstone while sticking a fork in the eye of black Americans, exacerbating the racial divide to extort a socialist solution. But if a black man can become President, exactly what significant barrier is left? The election of Barak Obama absolutely destroys the entire validation of liberal white guilt. The dragon is hereby slain.




So today, I'm feeling a little "uppity," if you will. From this day forward, my tolerance level for having my skin color hustled is now exactly ZERO. And it's time to clean house. No more Reverend Wright's "God Damn America", Al Sharpton's Church of Perpetual Victimization , or Jesse Jackson's rainbow racism. Cornell West? You're a fraud. Go home. All those "black studies" programs that taught kids to hate whitey? You must now thank Whitey. And, I want that on the final.



Congressional Black Caucus? Irrelevant. Maxine Waters? Shut up. ACORN? Outlawed. Black Panthers? Go home and pet your kitty. Black separatists? Find another nation that offers better dreams. Go ahead. I'm waiting. Gangsta rappers? Start praising America . Begin with the Pledge of Allegiance. And please…no more ebonics. Speak English, and who knows where you might end up? Oh, yeah…pull up your pants. Your underwear is showing. You look stupid. To those Eurosnots who forged entire careers hating America ? I'm still waiting for the first black French President.




And let me offer an equal opportunity whupping. I've always despised lazy white people. Now, I can talk smack about lazy black people. You're poor because you quit school, did drugs, had three kids with three different fathers, and refuse to work. So, when you plop your Colt 45-swilling, Oprah watchin' butt on the couch and complain "Da Man is keepin' me down," allow me to inform you: Da Man is now black. You have no excuses. No more quotas. No more handouts. No more stealing my money because someone's great-great-great-great grandparents suffered actual pain and misery at the hands of people I have no relation to and I personally revile.







It's time to toss that massive, obsolete race-hustle machine upon the heap of the other stupid 60s ideas. Drag it over there, by wife swapping, next to dope-smoking. Plenty of room right between free love and cop-killing. Careful…don't trip on streaking. There ya go, don't be gentle. Just dump it. Wash your hands. It's filthy.



In fact, Obama's ascension created a gargantuan irony. How can you sell class envy and American unfairness when you and your black wife went to Ivy League schools, got high-paying jobs, became millionaires, bought a mansion, and got elected President? How unfair is that??? Now, like a delicious O'Henry tale, Obama's spread-the-wealth campaign rendered itself moot by it's own victory! America is officially a meritocracy. Obama's election has validated American conservatism!

So listen carefully......Wham!!!







That's the sound of my foot kicking the door shut on the era of white guilt. The rites have been muttered, the carcass lowered, dirt shoveled, and tombstone erected. White guilt is dead and buried.




However, despite my glee, there's apparently one small, rabid bastion of American racism remaining. Black Americans voted 96% for Barak Obama. Hmmm. In a color-blind world, shouldn't that be 50-50? Tonight, every black person should ask forgiveness for their apparent racism and prejudice towards white people. Maybe it's time to start spreading the guilt around.

YardleyLabs
09-18-2009, 04:23 PM
Hard to believe that it's taking a hundred posts and 11 pages to try to rid Yardley of his guilt. Did you miss this important epistle when it was first penned, shortly after the election of BHO, EPL?

Read it and be uplifted. UB

WHITE GUILT IS DEAD


By Tom Adkins
.....
However, despite my glee, there's apparently one small, rabid bastion of American racism remaining. Black Americans voted 96% for Barak Obama. Hmmm. In a color-blind world, shouldn't that be 50-50? Tonight, every black person should ask forgiveness for their apparent racism and prejudice towards white people. Maybe it's time to start spreading the guilt around.

By Adkin's logic there is, therefore, one huge bastion of racism and prejudice against black people: white Republicans -- 91% voted against Obama. Shouldn't that be 50/50?

Obviously, Adkin's logic got stuck in his undershorts. But what do you expect from a realtor who predicted, on 12/31/2006 that housing prices would go up 10% in 2007 (and then denied it 12 months later when proven wrong).

[Boy, isn't that size 4 bold type irritating?]

WaterDogRem
09-18-2009, 04:39 PM
By Adkin's logic there is, therefore, one huge bastion of racism and prejudice against black people: white Republicans -- 91% voted against Obama. Shouldn't that be 50/50?

Obviously, Adkin's logic got stuck in his undershorts. But what do you expect from a realtor who predicted, on 12/31/2006 that housing prices would go up 10% in 2007 (and then denied it 12 months later when proven wrong).

[Boy, isn't that size 4 bold type irritating?]

I'm not trying to defend Adkin, but your interpretations is totally incorrect as Adkin is only stating race and Yardley you're adding a category to a certain race which Adkin did not. If you used the same logic as Adkin you would look at how all Caucasians voted not just Caucasians who have opposing ideologies. What would you expect to see with opposite ideological thinking people no matter race, duh!

YardleyLabs
09-18-2009, 04:45 PM
I'm not trying to defend Adkin, but your interpretations is totally incorrect as Adkin is only stating race and Yardley you're adding a category to a certain race which Adkin did not. If you used the same logic as Adkin you would look at how all Caucasians voted not just Caucasians who have opposing ideologies. What would you expect to see with opposite ideological thinking people no matter race, duh!
It's a you pick'em kind of argument. Obama received hardly any more votes from blacks than did Al Gore and John Kerry -- both white men. The fact is that more than 90% of blacks vote for the Democratic candidate in every presidential election in recent history. Why is their vote now a measure of racism?

The ultimate racism is the interpretation of all things based on color. I gave an example of that when UB published the idiot Buchanan's message on black ingratitude and classified social service programs as examples of whites helping to lift up blacks. As I noted in my response, whites are the primary recipients of funds from those programs. That did not prevent Buchanan from classifying these as black programs because it fit his his fundamentally racist message.

WaterDogRem
09-18-2009, 05:06 PM
Yardley, I agree that majority of blacks are Dem but that's not what Adkin used, he just used race. Like I said I'm not defending his article nor any other article, just making sure we are talking apples to apples.
Personally I don't believe their vote or anyone's vote should be questioned as a measure of racism. It's just a bunch of fear/hate mongering, which I believe both parties have used for a long time to try and move their agendas. What's scary is how members of Dem party are trying to instigate it further in an effort to quiet opposing views by using racists labels to try and quiet them. But I do believe it will back fire for the Dems in the end.

dnf777
09-18-2009, 05:10 PM
""That's the sound of my foot kicking the door shut on the era of white guilt. The rites have been muttered, the carcass lowered, dirt shoveled, and tombstone erected. White guilt is dead and buried. ""

Wow. Some of us who have the ability to ignore the fringe elements on both sides have learned to bury racism a long time ago...both whites and blacks. We called each other "friend" back in the 70s and 80s. That's when I was a teen coming of age, so I can't speak for earlier generations.

I'm glad that other guy finally did.

zeus3925
09-18-2009, 05:21 PM
This then begs the question : How many of you that call yourselves " conservative" or "Libertarian" would vote for a non-Caucasian candidate for POTUS given he may have modererate to conservative views?

luvalab
09-18-2009, 05:23 PM
Came across this in some other reading--seems apropos.

“The counsels of impatience and hatred can always be supported by the crudest and cheapest symbols; for the counsels of moderation, the reasons are often intricate, rather than emotional, and difficult to explain. And so the chauvinists of all times and places go their appointed way: plucking the easy fruits, reaping the little triumphs of the day at the expense of someone else tomorrow, deluging in noise and filth anyone who gets in their way, dancing their reckless dance on the prospects for human progress, drawing the shadow of a great doubt over the validity of democratic institutions. And until peoples learn to spot the fanning of mass emotions and the sowing of bitterness, suspicion, and intolerance as crimes in themselves – as perhaps the greatest disservice that can be done to the cause of popular government – this sort of thing will continue to occur.”--George Kennan

Won't read again until Monday, probably--hunt test tomorrow. Atticus the Lab is generally steady-freddy, and if I do the right thing, he will too; Miss Raven the flat-coat may or may not be ready for senior, but I didn't see the point of entering her in junior at this stage--but pass or fail, she's always spectacular--so I've got to go clean the house, pack, and get my head out of politics and into the game.

Have a good weekend.

ducknwork
09-19-2009, 06:17 AM
This then begs the question : How many of you that call yourselves " conservative" or "Libertarian" would vote for a non-Caucasian candidate for POTUS given he may have modererate to conservative views?

I would vote for a purple man (or woman) if I liked what they stood for.

Your question is basically implying that all conservatives or libertarians are racist. How did we get back to that?
________
TRIAX (http://www.chevy-wiki.com/wiki/Chevrolet_Triax)

Hew
09-19-2009, 06:20 AM
This then begs the question : How many of you that call yourselves " conservative" or "Libertarian" would vote for a non-Caucasian candidate for POTUS given he may have modererate to conservative views?
LOL. You should have thrown in at the end, "and do you still beat your wife?" :rolleyes:

ducknwork
09-19-2009, 06:22 AM
LOL. You should have thrown in at the end, "and do you still beat your wife who is barefoot and pregnant?" :rolleyes:

Fixed it...
________
Electric cigarettes (http://www.ecigarettes123.com/)

Gerry Clinchy
09-19-2009, 07:32 AM
How many of you that call yourselves " conservative" or "Libertarian" would vote for a non-Caucasian candidate for POTUS given he may have modererate to conservative views?

In a heartbeat. My sense is that all on this forum (right or left leaning) actually seek the same kind of qualities in a leader: leadership quality (not the same as oratorical ability), common sense, fiscal responsibility, and long-term solutions rather than "feel good" quick fixes.

subroc
09-19-2009, 09:38 AM
This then begs the question : How many of you that call yourselves " conservative" or "Libertarian" would vote for a non-Caucasian candidate for POTUS given he may have modererate to conservative views?

You pose a question like this as if those that are conservative or libertarian wouldn't vote for a non-Caucasian.

There is currently a non-Caucasian, Clarence Thomas serving as a Supreme Court justice, who has full support of conservatives nationwide. In actuality, he is a model of what conservatives believe a Supreme Court justice should be.

The face of the nation to the world as secretary of state in the last administration were both non-Caucasian. That is 8 years in case you are mathematically challenged. I expect one, Condoleeza Rice, still has full support of conservatives nationwide. There was an active grass roots movement leading up to the 2008 election to draft Rice as a presidential or vice presidential candidate. The other, Colin Powell has shown he is more a liberal than conservative and supported, for racial reasons, an extreme left wing liberal democrat in the last election, obama, so I expect he would not be supported by conservatives.

I expect if either Clarence Thomas or Codoleeza Rice ran for office. The support would be overwhelming. Would they win? Who knows, but it wouldn’t be because they lacked conservative credentials or because of the color of their skin.

ducknwork
09-19-2009, 10:35 AM
[FONT=Arial][SIZE=3]I expect if either Clarence Thomas or Codoleeza Rice ran for office. The support would be overwhelming. Would they win? Who knows, but it wouldn?t be because they lacked conservative credentials or because of the color of their skin.


That would be a curious situation. Would blacks change the party they normally tend to vote for due to race of the candidate? Or would they stick with the party of handouts and free lunches? I would love to see that. Condy would also have gender as another advantage in her corner.
________
Herbal shop (http://herbalhealthshop.com)

Hoosier
09-19-2009, 12:04 PM
I also believe had J C Watts from Oklahoma stayed in politics he would have full support from conservatives.

Uncle Bill
09-19-2009, 12:59 PM
Hellsbells, I'd have voted for Denzel Washington over either the black guy OR the white guy. He has more common sense on his side.

What's got to be so ironic for the leftists and black apoligists is that a batch of white facists are pulling the strings of their black puppet. Who do you think is writing that GDG the teleprompter is telling BHO to spew? He damn sure isn't the author.

UB

Gerry Clinchy
09-20-2009, 04:40 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/20/nyregion/20paterson.html?_r=1&th&emc=th

As we debate whether racism is a driving force of those who don't like O's policies, the D party seems to have concerns for the same within their own party.

Seems like politics is just politics, and it is politics and votes that is pitting the first black President against the first black governor of NYS.

Bob Gutermuth
09-20-2009, 08:36 AM
I voted against Osama because he is a far left liberal, whould turn America into a socialist state and take away my guns, my vote had nothing to do with race. I would have voted FOR Mike Steele, JC Watts,or Alan Keyes because they are conservatives.