Author

Topic: Racism in America (Read 3589 times)

hero member
Activity: 994
Merit: 1000
June 22, 2015, 03:02:31 PM
#72
there is definitely racism that still exists. it's just that you can't be as open about it these days, so probably more closet racists than anything. a lot of people from the south a xenophobic and fear minorities coming in and taking "their country" back. that's what sarah palin meant when she said she wanted to take "OUR country" back.

Obama recently said that racism is much more than just people not saying the n word in public. That is not the cure, he states. It should be felt from heart that we all are equal and belong to the same mother, and belong from the aame mother. It was the first time Obama said the n word publicly though, haha.
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100
June 21, 2015, 11:22:56 PM
#71
Some think Lyndon Johnson was not one of our best presidents.
But Johnson did pass the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964, and that was and is a really big deal.
Today I saw one effect of outlawing dscrimination in education. In 1964 there were 365,000 African American bachelor's degrees awarded. In 2014 5.1 million were awarded.
Imagine how many lives are changed by that!
One more thought; if you think there is no role for government, try to imagine this outcome without government's involvement.

Good information, Without Government involvement it is not that easiest task as all think, whatever the good or stringent things to happen in the country, there must be a role of government. " Sure there are dishonest men in local government. But there are dishonest men in national government too", told by Richard Nixon.
full member
Activity: 175
Merit: 100
June 21, 2015, 10:33:03 PM
#70
Tptb are using the mainstream media to foment a kind of race war so that they can usurp the constitution and gain more power in the guise of "keeping us safe". They are slowly taking over our police forces just like in Baltimore.
legendary
Activity: 3752
Merit: 1217
June 21, 2015, 09:11:04 PM
#69
The problem in America is not "black vs. white". The bigger problem is "US citizen vs. illegal immigrant". There are not enough jobs, and the welfare system is being overwhelmed. For the most part black and white should be on the same "team". It's not about race, it's about resources and the rule of law. 

The Blacks and the whites can never be in the same team, at least in the United States. Radical fringe groups (many of them supported by the two mainstream political parties) have been igniting the hatred between them for many years now, possibly to consolidate the vote-banks. So the issue about illegal immigration is treated as just another race problem, when it should be treated as a law and order problem instead.
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 500
June 21, 2015, 08:12:07 PM
#68
You can't delete racism. It's like a cigarette. You can't stop smoking if you don't want to, and you can't stop racism if people don't want to.Racism is still with us. But it is up to us to prepare our children for what they have to meet, and, hopefully, we shall overcome.
full member
Activity: 175
Merit: 100
June 21, 2015, 05:14:08 PM
#67
The problem in America is not "black vs. white". The bigger problem is "US citizen vs. illegal immigrant". There are not enough jobs, and the welfare system is being overwhelmed. For the most part black and white should be on the same "team". It's not about race, it's about resources and the rule of law.
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
June 21, 2015, 09:14:43 AM
#66
stop racism and make love :-)
yeah , this is the solution.......

Racism is not a tv which can be switched off. It is a disease which has to be cured, it has to treated and fixed. To treat and fix something takes time. Making love is technically coitus and that will just increase the population. So what's the solution? FUCKING THE RACISM OFF?
sr. member
Activity: 252
Merit: 250
June 21, 2015, 06:05:26 AM
#65
Some think Lyndon Johnson was not one of our best presidents.

But Johnson did pass the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964, and that was and is a really big deal.

Today I saw one effect of outlawing dscrimination in education. In 1964 there were 365,000 African American bachelor's degrees awarded. In 2014 5.1 million were awarded.

Imagine how many lives are changed by that!

One more thought; if you think there is no role for government, try to imagine this outcome without government's involvement.

A number of federal laws protect individuals from being discriminated against in education. This article provides links and information on the Education Amendments of 1972, the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
July 10, 2014, 10:05:01 AM
#64
WATCH: Dozing Off After Work While Black Now Illegal on NYC Subway TrainsPolice brutalize a man for the crime of sleeping on his way home from work.
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/watch-dozing-after-work-while-black-now-illegal-nyc-subway-trains
I didn't watch the whole video, just the first 3 minutes. That's all I needed to see. The guy did nothing wrong initially. Also police have the freedom to intervene when someone is sleeping on the subway, because subways aren't for sleeping in. Also they might have an incentive to check on people in that situation because for all they know they could have had a medical emergency and died there in their seat. Or maybe they want to see if he was a homeless person who's just sleeping on the subway with no destination.
Anyways the guy was being combative. You can be arrested for being combative even if there wasn't a crime beforehand.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
July 10, 2014, 08:50:17 AM
#63
WATCH: Dozing Off After Work While Black Now Illegal on NYC Subway TrainsPolice brutalize a man for the crime of sleeping on his way home from work.
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/watch-dozing-after-work-while-black-now-illegal-nyc-subway-trains
Possibly, new cops just starting out as new academy grads were just assigned. Many PD officers do not live in NYC and may only go into the subway when they're on the job.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
July 10, 2014, 08:10:34 AM
#62
WATCH: Dozing Off After Work While Black Now Illegal on NYC Subway TrainsPolice brutalize a man for the crime of sleeping on his way home from work.
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/watch-dozing-after-work-while-black-now-illegal-nyc-subway-trains
I saw this. If sleeping on the train on the way home from work is cause for arrest, the jails will be full of tired workers. The NYPD is one of the most corrupt organizations in the US. The case of Adrian Schoolcraft has proven that beyond any doubt whatsoever.
While its hard to argue that the NYPD isn't full of bad, sometimes vicious, corrupt asshoIes, these were MTA transit cops. They're not NYPD. There's been change at the top of the NYPD too, since we got the new mayor.
These were not MTA as both the article and the video identify them as NYPD. Plus, still frames from the video (link) show "NYPD Police" clearly printed on the back of one or more cop's jacket.
Could there be only one or two NYPD cops there and the rest MTA? Remotely possible but bloody unlikely.
The NYPD likes to assault from the protection of groups. It makes lying about their arrests more credible when you have fellow corroborators.
sr. member
Activity: 994
Merit: 441
July 10, 2014, 08:04:04 AM
#61
WATCH: Dozing Off After Work While Black Now Illegal on NYC Subway TrainsPolice brutalize a man for the crime of sleeping on his way home from work.
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/watch-dozing-after-work-while-black-now-illegal-nyc-subway-trains
I saw this. If sleeping on the train on the way home from work is cause for arrest, the jails will be full of tired workers. The NYPD is one of the most corrupt organizations in the US. The case of Adrian Schoolcraft has proven that beyond any doubt whatsoever.
While its hard to argue that the NYPD isn't full of bad, sometimes vicious, corrupt asshoIes, these were MTA transit cops. They're not NYPD. There's been change at the top of the NYPD too, since we got the new mayor.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
July 10, 2014, 07:00:54 AM
#60
WATCH: Dozing Off After Work While Black Now Illegal on NYC Subway TrainsPolice brutalize a man for the crime of sleeping on his way home from work.
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/watch-dozing-after-work-while-black-now-illegal-nyc-subway-trains
I saw this. If sleeping on the train on the way home from work is cause for arrest, the jails will be full of tired workers. The NYPD is one of the most corrupt organizations in the US. The case of Adrian Schoolcraft has proven that beyond any doubt whatsoever.
sr. member
Activity: 994
Merit: 441
July 10, 2014, 06:51:18 AM
#59
WATCH: Dozing Off After Work While Black Now Illegal on NYC Subway TrainsPolice brutalize a man for the crime of sleeping on his way home from work.
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/watch-dozing-after-work-while-black-now-illegal-nyc-subway-trains
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 10:27:59 PM
#58
BTW,

For those of you who strongly advocate states rights and smaller government, do you think the CRA of 1964 could ever have happened if your vision for America had been in place?

Great question - do you think our southern friends will take it on?
The CRA is a horrible law and contributed to the most recent financial crisis.

member
Activity: 73
Merit: 10
...math, you can trust math.
July 09, 2014, 03:35:31 PM
#57
Malcolm X is da man! LOL

Funny thing is when racism criticising people are racist.

For example Malcolm X was studying history of blacks and he found out, that whole slave market was developed by jews. When he learned it he thought blacks that jews were owners of slaveships and hated them.

Another cool thing is when blacks hate hispanics.

Hispanics hate asians and so on...

Most racist in america is Hollywood. Hollywood is 100% jewish, so they put lot of "tolerance for minorities message" into their movies, show black people like "cool dudes"....but you know, that main hero is white, and black guy (if he doesnt die), is funny but only second! They use black people as monkyes because they can sing, dance and make funny faces....not cool.

Ok, maybe KKK is more racist Cheesy
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 10:52:12 AM
#56
BTW,

For those of you who strongly advocate states rights and smaller government, do you think the CRA of 1964 could ever have happened if your vision for America had been in place?

Great question - do you think our southern friends will take it on?

You do realize the south losing the war contributed a big part of banking system we have today?

yes i realize it!
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 10:48:36 AM
#55
I guess I do not understand.

On the 50th anniversity of the CRA of 1964 that is plenty of credit to go around.

Republicans were mostly in Northern states then and their courage in acting was admirable. Democrats supported the bill with a majority but were unable to deliver votes from the South. So much so that after the bill passed many of them moved to the Republican Party in the South or lost their seats in congress.

The passage of the bill took compromise and courage, with many knowing their seats would be at risk. Yet they did the right thing.

So why can't we do the right thing and simply acknowledge that this was a good thing, a good decision, and a good law?

Sadly, there was nothing courageous about it--it was pure political calculation--and the last admirable Republican was Teddy Roosevelt...and before him Lincoln, Stanton and Thaddeus Stevens. Admirable folks come very few and very far apart in that party.

No, this was the easiest political calculation ever--as Johnson knew, "We have lost the south for a generation."

Dems wouldn't pick up any new votes in the north, but they would lose them in the south.

Republicans wouldn't LOSE any new votes in the north (or few enough to matter) but they would gain HORDES (barbarian hordes) of them in the south.

Let us be frank, without the CRA, which gave them the south, the Republican party would already be extinct, rather than on  the verge of falling apart as it is today. Republican ideology was proven bankrupt as early as 1929, with the onset of the Depression. It experienced a brief chance at redemption under Eisenhower, but even then, with the alliance of the Republicans to Southern Dems, in return for those Dems support on Taft-Hartley, they were already breathing their last gasp as a national party.

Without the hatreds, racism and religious extremism of the south, there would BE no Republican Party today. They saw what was happening--Americans were turning towards the Dems in droves--so realized that sometimes, unless you can divide and conquer, you yourself will die.

So that's all the GOP has done for nigh on 60 years now, stoke the fires of hatred, racism and religious extremism in the south, and the desert west areas, and in Texas, against anyone they can find.

So no, I find nothing courageous or noble in the GOP Senators FINALLY, after multiple attempts by Northern Democrats to pass CR, breaking their alliance with Southern Dems. It was pure political strategy, their last lifeline, and they grasped it for they were worth.

And America is FAR worse off as a result.
full member
Activity: 174
Merit: 100
July 09, 2014, 10:47:06 AM
#54
BTW,

For those of you who strongly advocate states rights and smaller government, do you think the CRA of 1964 could ever have happened if your vision for America had been in place?

Great question - do you think our southern friends will take it on?

You do realize the south losing the war contributed a big part of banking system we have today?
sr. member
Activity: 994
Merit: 441
July 09, 2014, 10:36:03 AM
#53
BTW,

For those of you who strongly advocate states rights and smaller government, do you think the CRA of 1964 could ever have happened if your vision for America had been in place?

Great question - do you think our southern friends will take it on?
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 10:34:17 AM
#52
BTW,

For those of you who strongly advocate states rights and smaller government, do you think the CRA of 1964 could ever have happened if your vision for America had been in place?
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 10:24:56 AM
#51
"If I fail a semester of school, I am assured preferential treatment again based on my race.


The teachers were all racist, thats why I failed. Oh okay lets try this set of teachers.



My brain runs on the Binford(promoted by Tim the Toolman) 999 Kv battery. Hardly ever wears down."
Nothing in your post makes sense.But let's take a real example. I fly a plane in the War. I come home and I am unable to get a job in my field, when white pilots do. Should I protest, or accept that's the way things are and work as a shoe shine man/porter/handyman/dishwasher/butler/waiter?
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 10:09:57 AM
#50
I guess I do not understand.

On the 50th anniversity of the CRA of 1964 that is plenty of credit to go around.

Republicans were mostly in Northern states then and their courage in acting was admirable. Democrats supported the bill with a majority but were unable to deliver votes from the South. So much so that after the bill passed many of them moved to the Republican Party in the South or lost their seats in congress.

The passage of the bill took compromise and courage, with many knowing their seats would be at risk. Yet they did the right thing.

So why can't we do the right thing and simply acknowledge that this was a good thing, a good decision, and a good law?
full member
Activity: 153
Merit: 100
July 09, 2014, 10:01:36 AM
#49
Immigrants should adjust to where they are residing rather than demanding the local to change law to fit their need.

Can always go back to their own country or move to another country if they are not happy here.
sr. member
Activity: 994
Merit: 441
July 09, 2014, 09:59:52 AM
#48
"If I fail a semester of school, I am assured preferential treatment again based on my race.


The teachers were all racist, thats why I failed. Oh okay lets try this set of teachers.



My brain runs on the Binford(promoted by Tim the Toolman) 999 Kv battery. Hardly ever wears down."
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 09:58:11 AM
#47
So blacks were not ambitious ? that was the problem all along? Not because there were restrictions on who they were able to do business with, occupations they could have, places they could go. As long as they accepted and lived within the limitations they should have been able to prosper right?
But it still does not answer the question, of why whites did not fail because of programs that they were the beneficiaries of. Do you think you could tackle that one?
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 09:51:19 AM
#46
Let's go back to my original question. Why did the benefits whites received not enable them to fail?
Mostly AA ones like you must have so many of this color. Hardly MLK's dream of color blindness. What benefits Zolace?
Blacks received less from government programs like the New Deal and the Fair Deal. and then there was this

......African-American veterans received significantly less help from the G.I. Bill than their white counterparts. ''Written under Southern auspices,'' he reports, ''the law was deliberately designed to accommodate Jim Crow.'' He cites one 1940's study that concluded it was ''as though the G.I. Bill had been earmarked 'For White Veterans Only.' '' Southern Congressional leaders made certain that the programs were directed not by Washington but by local white officials, businessmen, bankers and college administrators who would honor past practices. As a result, thousands of black veterans in the South -- and the North as well -- were denied housing and business loans, as well as admission to whites-only colleges and universities. They were also excluded from job-training programs for careers in promising new fields like radio and electrical work, commercial photography and mechanics. Instead, most African-Americans were channeled toward traditional, low-paying ''black jobs'' and small black colleges, which were pitifully underfinanced and ill equipped to meet the needs of a surging enrollment of returning soldiers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/28/books/review/28KOTZL.html?pagewanted=all


So, why didn't such programs enable whites to fail?
And I keep asking where were the ambitions of blacks .Did they read their contracts before signing on? If all victims of crooks just silently acquiesce don't you think that enables the crooks? But if you fight back, that sends another message doesn't it?
Why can't blacks just make stuff people want?  Zolace wants to know.  Jews make furniture, Italians make pizza, Quakers make oats,  and Chinese do a great load of laundry.   What's your excuse?
Yea if what ever I do, I get rewarded for it -- guess what happens? Now that was kinda funny.
What do you mean by "if whatever I do gets rewarded".   I'll tell you what you mean...you don't mean YOU get rewarded for 'whatever'...all that wonderfulness that you are.   You mean they get rewarded for nothing, at your expense.  You're completely ignorant about AA and what it has done FOR this country and its minorities, not "to" them. 
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 09:41:02 AM
#45
Let's go back to my original question. Why did the benefits whites received not enable them to fail?
Mostly AA ones like you must have so many of this color. Hardly MLK's dream of color blindness. What benefits Zolace?
Blacks received less from government programs like the New Deal and the Fair Deal. and then there was this

......African-American veterans received significantly less help from the G.I. Bill than their white counterparts. ''Written under Southern auspices,'' he reports, ''the law was deliberately designed to accommodate Jim Crow.'' He cites one 1940's study that concluded it was ''as though the G.I. Bill had been earmarked 'For White Veterans Only.' '' Southern Congressional leaders made certain that the programs were directed not by Washington but by local white officials, businessmen, bankers and college administrators who would honor past practices. As a result, thousands of black veterans in the South -- and the North as well -- were denied housing and business loans, as well as admission to whites-only colleges and universities. They were also excluded from job-training programs for careers in promising new fields like radio and electrical work, commercial photography and mechanics. Instead, most African-Americans were channeled toward traditional, low-paying ''black jobs'' and small black colleges, which were pitifully underfinanced and ill equipped to meet the needs of a surging enrollment of returning soldiers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/28/books/review/28KOTZL.html?pagewanted=all


So, why didn't such programs enable whites to fail?
And I keep asking where were the ambitions of blacks .Did they read their contracts before signing on? If all victims of crooks just silently acquiesce don't you think that enables the crooks? But if you fight back, that sends another message doesn't it?
Why can't blacks just make stuff people want?  Zolace wants to know.  Jews make furniture, Italians make pizza, Quakers make oats,  and Chinese do a great load of laundry.   What's your excuse?
Yea if what ever I do, I get rewarded for it -- guess what happens? Now that was kinda funny.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 09:26:25 AM
#44
Let's go back to my original question. Why did the benefits whites received not enable them to fail?
Mostly AA ones like you must have so many of this color. Hardly MLK's dream of color blindness. What benefits Zolace?
Blacks received less from government programs like the New Deal and the Fair Deal. and then there was this

......African-American veterans received significantly less help from the G.I. Bill than their white counterparts. ''Written under Southern auspices,'' he reports, ''the law was deliberately designed to accommodate Jim Crow.'' He cites one 1940's study that concluded it was ''as though the G.I. Bill had been earmarked 'For White Veterans Only.' '' Southern Congressional leaders made certain that the programs were directed not by Washington but by local white officials, businessmen, bankers and college administrators who would honor past practices. As a result, thousands of black veterans in the South -- and the North as well -- were denied housing and business loans, as well as admission to whites-only colleges and universities. They were also excluded from job-training programs for careers in promising new fields like radio and electrical work, commercial photography and mechanics. Instead, most African-Americans were channeled toward traditional, low-paying ''black jobs'' and small black colleges, which were pitifully underfinanced and ill equipped to meet the needs of a surging enrollment of returning soldiers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/28/books/review/28KOTZL.html?pagewanted=all


So, why didn't such programs enable whites to fail?
And I keep asking where were the ambitions of blacks .Did they read their contracts before signing on? If all victims of crooks just silently acquiesce don't you think that enables the crooks? But if you fight back, that sends another message doesn't it?
Why can't blacks just make stuff people want?  Zolace wants to know.  Jews make furniture, Italians make pizza, Quakers make oats,  and Chinese do a great load of laundry.   What's your excuse?
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 09:12:54 AM
#43
Let's go back to my original question. Why did the benefits whites received not enable them to fail?
Mostly AA ones like you must have so many of this color. Hardly MLK's dream of color blindness. What benefits Zolace?
Blacks received less from government programs like the New Deal and the Fair Deal. and then there was this

......African-American veterans received significantly less help from the G.I. Bill than their white counterparts. ''Written under Southern auspices,'' he reports, ''the law was deliberately designed to accommodate Jim Crow.'' He cites one 1940's study that concluded it was ''as though the G.I. Bill had been earmarked 'For White Veterans Only.' '' Southern Congressional leaders made certain that the programs were directed not by Washington but by local white officials, businessmen, bankers and college administrators who would honor past practices. As a result, thousands of black veterans in the South -- and the North as well -- were denied housing and business loans, as well as admission to whites-only colleges and universities. They were also excluded from job-training programs for careers in promising new fields like radio and electrical work, commercial photography and mechanics. Instead, most African-Americans were channeled toward traditional, low-paying ''black jobs'' and small black colleges, which were pitifully underfinanced and ill equipped to meet the needs of a surging enrollment of returning soldiers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/28/books/review/28KOTZL.html?pagewanted=all


So, why didn't such programs enable whites to fail?
And I keep asking where were the ambitions of blacks .Did they read their contracts before signing on? If all victims of crooks just silently acquiesce don't you think that enables the crooks? But if you fight back, that sends another message doesn't it?
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 09:05:32 AM
#42
Let's go back to my original question. Why did the benefits whites received not enable them to fail?
Mostly AA ones like you must have so many of this color. Hardly MLK's dream of color blindness. What benefits Zolace?
Ah, that multitude of program.  Enacted to make them fail.   Never looked at it that way.Who are you kidding?  You are claiming to be disadvantaged by affirmative action.  That one program.  All your shit about "freebies" comes down to this.  One "program", not multitudes of programs.    You actually see yourself as a victim of AA.  If it weren't so sad it would be funny.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 08:59:57 AM
#41
Let's go back to my original question. Why did the benefits whites received not enable them to fail?
Mostly AA ones like you must have so many of this color. Hardly MLK's dream of color blindness. What benefits Zolace?
Blacks received less from government programs like the New Deal and the Fair Deal. and then there was this

......African-American veterans received significantly less help from the G.I. Bill than their white counterparts. ''Written under Southern auspices,'' he reports, ''the law was deliberately designed to accommodate Jim Crow.'' He cites one 1940's study that concluded it was ''as though the G.I. Bill had been earmarked 'For White Veterans Only.' '' Southern Congressional leaders made certain that the programs were directed not by Washington but by local white officials, businessmen, bankers and college administrators who would honor past practices. As a result, thousands of black veterans in the South -- and the North as well -- were denied housing and business loans, as well as admission to whites-only colleges and universities. They were also excluded from job-training programs for careers in promising new fields like radio and electrical work, commercial photography and mechanics. Instead, most African-Americans were channeled toward traditional, low-paying ''black jobs'' and small black colleges, which were pitifully underfinanced and ill equipped to meet the needs of a surging enrollment of returning soldiers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/28/books/review/28KOTZL.html?pagewanted=all


So, why didn't such programs enable whites to fail?
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 08:40:16 AM
#40
Let's go back to my original question. Why did the benefits whites received not enable them to fail?
Mostly AA ones like you must have so many of this color. Hardly MLK's dream of color blindness. What benefits Zolace?
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 08:16:58 AM
#39
Let's go back to my original question. Why did the benefits whites received not enable them to fail?
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 08:15:50 AM
#38
I cannot count the times when I was in America that I was stopped by cops for driving while black.  One time they were particularly solicitous for the welfare of my wife (who is blonde) while we were having a discussion about Derrida.
When progs change their minds it is called evolving. When cons do it it is called flip-flopping. Go figure .I'll bet you are just a shitty driver.
I have never been stopped in Germany, the Netherlands, the UK, nor here in NZ.  I have been stopped by cops in France as well as the US.   It appears that I am a shitty driver in racist shitholes but not elsewhere.
On this I agree with you.Not sure there is anything sinister about it though. Its really sad that smart policing should include this kinda thing.
Why would you reduce these men, who led a movement that changed the country, to people who could do no more than sell themselves to the person with the most treats. Because you cannot respect that they are intelligent enough to make a decision that was best for them. Do you think these people would, after fighting racists all their lives, now turn around and go to bed with them? You actually think you are smarter than they are, don't you?
Well I have the highest regard for MLK in phase one. Phase one was the assertion of individual rights.Phase two was his downfall. Phase two was the notion that the State had to commit itself to revenge.
And by revenge you mean expecting the government to treat blacks like they treated whites?The multitudes of Govt programs to enable blacks to fail.
Which programs are those?  Out of the multitudes of programs written especially for blacks.  Are you saying they were/are given unfair advantage over you?  Or are you saying that for some reason, the government has some unspoken (shh, it's a secret) agenda to see that racial minorities fail.   Is it a plot?   Should we be afraid, as afraid as you?
Huh?
This is where there is a disconnect.The Jews who came here found a way to make furniture and survived without Govt programs.Why weren't(aren't) blacks capable of producing something somebody else wants? Anything? There is no racism involved with a project like this. The people who sell wood only wanna make a sale. They don't care if you are from the moon.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 08:07:36 AM
#37
I cannot count the times when I was in America that I was stopped by cops for driving while black.  One time they were particularly solicitous for the welfare of my wife (who is blonde) while we were having a discussion about Derrida.
When progs change their minds it is called evolving. When cons do it it is called flip-flopping. Go figure .I'll bet you are just a shitty driver.
I have never been stopped in Germany, the Netherlands, the UK, nor here in NZ.  I have been stopped by cops in France as well as the US.   It appears that I am a shitty driver in racist shitholes but not elsewhere.
On this I agree with you.Not sure there is anything sinister about it though. Its really sad that smart policing should include this kinda thing.
Why would you reduce these men, who led a movement that changed the country, to people who could do no more than sell themselves to the person with the most treats. Because you cannot respect that they are intelligent enough to make a decision that was best for them. Do you think these people would, after fighting racists all their lives, now turn around and go to bed with them? You actually think you are smarter than they are, don't you?
Well I have the highest regard for MLK in phase one. Phase one was the assertion of individual rights.Phase two was his downfall. Phase two was the notion that the State had to commit itself to revenge.
And by revenge you mean expecting the government to treat blacks like they treated whites?The multitudes of Govt programs to enable blacks to fail.
Why did the benefits that whites got not enable them to fail. They received preferential treatment in many areas for hundreds of years. How did that not enable them to fail?
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 08:05:16 AM
#36
I cannot count the times when I was in America that I was stopped by cops for driving while black.  One time they were particularly solicitous for the welfare of my wife (who is blonde) while we were having a discussion about Derrida.
When progs change their minds it is called evolving. When cons do it it is called flip-flopping. Go figure .I'll bet you are just a shitty driver.
I have never been stopped in Germany, the Netherlands, the UK, nor here in NZ.  I have been stopped by cops in France as well as the US.   It appears that I am a shitty driver in racist shitholes but not elsewhere.
On this I agree with you.Not sure there is anything sinister about it though. Its really sad that smart policing should include this kinda thing.
Why would you reduce these men, who led a movement that changed the country, to people who could do no more than sell themselves to the person with the most treats. Because you cannot respect that they are intelligent enough to make a decision that was best for them. Do you think these people would, after fighting racists all their lives, now turn around and go to bed with them? You actually think you are smarter than they are, don't you?
Well I have the highest regard for MLK in phase one. Phase one was the assertion of individual rights.Phase two was his downfall. Phase two was the notion that the State had to commit itself to revenge.
And by revenge you mean expecting the government to treat blacks like they treated whites?The multitudes of Govt programs to enable blacks to fail.
Which programs are those?  Out of the multitudes of programs written especially for blacks.  Are you saying they were/are given unfair advantage over you?  Or are you saying that for some reason, the government has some unspoken (shh, it's a secret) agenda to see that racial minorities fail.   Is it a plot?   Should we be afraid, as afraid as you?
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 08:01:57 AM
#35
I cannot count the times when I was in America that I was stopped by cops for driving while black.  One time they were particularly solicitous for the welfare of my wife (who is blonde) while we were having a discussion about Derrida.
When progs change their minds it is called evolving. When cons do it it is called flip-flopping. Go figure .I'll bet you are just a shitty driver.
I have never been stopped in Germany, the Netherlands, the UK, nor here in NZ.  I have been stopped by cops in France as well as the US.   It appears that I am a shitty driver in racist shitholes but not elsewhere.
On this I agree with you.Not sure there is anything sinister about it though. Its really sad that smart policing should include this kinda thing.
Why would you reduce these men, who led a movement that changed the country, to people who could do no more than sell themselves to the person with the most treats. Because you cannot respect that they are intelligent enough to make a decision that was best for them. Do you think these people would, after fighting racists all their lives, now turn around and go to bed with them? You actually think you are smarter than they are, don't you?
Well I have the highest regard for MLK in phase one. Phase one was the assertion of individual rights.Phase two was his downfall. Phase two was the notion that the State had to commit itself to revenge.
And by revenge you mean expecting the government to treat blacks like they treated whites?The multitudes of Govt programs to enable blacks to fail.
full member
Activity: 142
Merit: 100
July 09, 2014, 05:49:41 AM
#34
I can't help but notice that they never complain about all of the white people on welfare, which outnumber blacks by huge numbers.
Why is that?

Most likely because people think US is build by Caucasian and hence it is ok for them to be on welfare while it is not ok for immigrant and black.

First off, US IS built by primarily and 90% european hands, and others took more than they offered by proportion. No one should try to deny this with racial agenda - US was and is a mianly european american affair, otherwise, it would not be American, period. Get the picture? You might as well ask the chinese to start wearing sari while calling themselves manchus otherwise.

The fact that this ignorance and painfully obvious ulterior motive of trying to advance a racially based agenda of minority bitch fest is being taken as some kind of balancing equalizer is truly  pathetic. You may as well ask all the chinese to go jump in the yellow sea or ask the arabs to confine themselves to only saudi arabia in the middle east. America achieved in less than 250 years what many nations took thousands.

I give credit and acknowledgement to where they are due, and respect the achievements of those who made an impact.

Any one who does not acknowledge this fact is either a racially motivated mouthy ignorant, or simple fool who prefers to masturbate to ignorance of their own fantasies.

Are you so desperate that now you try to cajole and manipulate the sensitivities of 1st world nations for your painfully obvious ulterior motive that has nothing to do with social justice or equality? That boat sailed long ago and people who really deserved to have them will probably drag you in to the alley to be raped and shot.

Check your selves.

As for welfare statistics, blacks being less than 13 % of the population yet drawing almost 30to 40% of the welfare recipient is certainly a problem. If they were 13% as is proportional, maybe that would take away that talking point, but that is not the reality.

You have to be really stupid to think 'well white people number more in welfare' is some kind of an excuse. The country is 72% white, yet they make up less than that in welfare recipient statistics, while certain minorities make up disproporionate percentage of their share.

People have gone through far worse and ended up whole lot better in much less of a time than the so called 'ultimate' tragedy of american 'slavery' which is nothing compared to some real atrocities committed by those outside of US borders. In many ways people bitching about 'racism' in US to me seem to show the ultimate naked case of 1st world privilege. Is it that nice to be able to bitch and moan to your heart's content while riding along with 20k stereo and thumping childish rap music as if they prove your identity?

Get it together people. These are some really weak 1st world problems you are trying to make out to be a humanitarian crisis largely of their own making.

Good points.

Culture with issues should not drag their problems into first world and bring everyone else down to their level. Solve their own problems in their own land.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 250
July 09, 2014, 03:26:20 AM
#33
I can't help but notice that they never complain about all of the white people on welfare, which outnumber blacks by huge numbers.
Why is that?

Most likely because people think US is build by Caucasian and hence it is ok for them to be on welfare while it is not ok for immigrant and black.

First off, US IS built by primarily and 90% european hands, and others took more than they offered by proportion. No one should try to deny this with racial agenda - US was and is a mianly european american affair, otherwise, it would not be American, period. Get the picture? You might as well ask the chinese to start wearing sari while calling themselves manchus otherwise.

The fact that this ignorance and painfully obvious ulterior motive of trying to advance a racially based agenda of minority bitch fest is being taken as some kind of balancing equalizer is truly  pathetic. You may as well ask all the chinese to go jump in the yellow sea or ask the arabs to confine themselves to only saudi arabia in the middle east. America achieved in less than 250 years what many nations took thousands.

I give credit and acknowledgement to where they are due, and respect the achievements of those who made an impact.

Any one who does not acknowledge this fact is either a racially motivated mouthy ignorant, or simple fool who prefers to masturbate to ignorance of their own fantasies.

Are you so desperate that now you try to cajole and manipulate the sensitivities of 1st world nations for your painfully obvious ulterior motive that has nothing to do with social justice or equality? That boat sailed long ago and people who really deserved to have them will probably drag you in to the alley to be raped and shot.

Check your selves.

As for welfare statistics, blacks being less than 13 % of the population yet drawing almost 30to 40% of the welfare recipient is certainly a problem. If they were 13% as is proportional, maybe that would take away that talking point, but that is not the reality.

You have to be really stupid to think 'well white people number more in welfare' is some kind of an excuse. The country is 72% white, yet they make up less than that in welfare recipient statistics, while certain minorities make up disproporionate percentage of their share.

People have gone through far worse and ended up whole lot better in much less of a time than the so called 'ultimate' tragedy of american 'slavery' which is nothing compared to some real atrocities committed by those outside of US borders. In many ways people bitching about 'racism' in US to me seem to show the ultimate naked case of 1st world privilege. Is it that nice to be able to bitch and moan to your heart's content while riding along with 20k stereo and thumping childish rap music as if they prove your identity?

Get it together people. These are some really weak 1st world problems you are trying to make out to be a humanitarian crisis largely of their own making.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
July 08, 2014, 11:19:18 AM
#32
I can't help but notice that they never complain about all of the white people on welfare, which outnumber blacks by huge numbers.
Why is that?

Most likely because people think US is build by Caucasian and hence it is ok for them to be on welfare while it is not ok for immigrant and black.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
July 08, 2014, 11:15:33 AM
#31
I can't help but notice that they never complain about all of the white people on welfare, which outnumber blacks by huge numbers.
Why is that?
full member
Activity: 154
Merit: 100
July 07, 2014, 01:24:24 PM
#30
racism will always stay, I mean look at people doing streotypes of an asian owning a liquor store all because of the nationality. like wtf?
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
July 07, 2014, 11:51:05 AM
#29
I cannot count the times when I was in America that I was stopped by cops for driving while black.  One time they were particularly solicitous for the welfare of my wife (who is blonde) while we were having a discussion about Derrida.
When progs change their minds it is called evolving. When cons do it it is called flip-flopping. Go figure .I'll bet you are just a shitty driver.
I have never been stopped in Germany, the Netherlands, the UK, nor here in NZ.  I have been stopped by cops in France as well as the US.   It appears that I am a shitty driver in racist shitholes but not elsewhere.
On this I agree with you.Not sure there is anything sinister about it though. Its really sad that smart policing should include this kinda thing.
Why would you reduce these men, who led a movement that changed the country, to people who could do no more than sell themselves to the person with the most treats. Because you cannot respect that they are intelligent enough to make a decision that was best for them. Do you think these people would, after fighting racists all their lives, now turn around and go to bed with them? You actually think you are smarter than they are, don't you?
Well I have the highest regard for MLK in phase one. Phase one was the assertion of individual rights.Phase two was his downfall. Phase two was the notion that the State had to commit itself to revenge.
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
July 07, 2014, 11:43:04 AM
#28
I cannot count the times when I was in America that I was stopped by cops for driving while black.  One time they were particularly solicitous for the welfare of my wife (who is blonde) while we were having a discussion about Derrida.
When progs change their minds it is called evolving. When cons do it it is called flip-flopping. Go figure .I'll bet you are just a shitty driver.
I have never been stopped in Germany, the Netherlands, the UK, nor here in NZ.  I have been stopped by cops in France as well as the US.   It appears that I am a shitty driver in racist shitholes but not elsewhere.
On this I agree with you.Not sure there is anything sinister about it though. Its really sad that smart policing should include this kinda thing.
Why would you reduce these men, who led a movement that changed the country, to people who could do no more than sell themselves to the person with the most treats. Because you cannot respect that they are intelligent enough to make a decision that was best for them. Do you think these people would, after fighting racists all their lives, now turn around and go to bed with them? You actually think you are smarter than they are, don't you?
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
July 07, 2014, 11:39:44 AM
#27
I cannot count the times when I was in America that I was stopped by cops for driving while black.  One time they were particularly solicitous for the welfare of my wife (who is blonde) while we were having a discussion about Derrida.
When progs change their minds it is called evolving. When cons do it it is called flip-flopping. Go figure .I'll bet you are just a shitty driver.
I have never been stopped in Germany, the Netherlands, the UK, nor here in NZ.  I have been stopped by cops in France as well as the US.   It appears that I am a shitty driver in racist shitholes but not elsewhere.
On this I agree with you.Not sure there is anything sinister about it though. Its really sad that smart policing should include this kinda thing.
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
July 07, 2014, 11:35:41 AM
#26
I cannot count the times when I was in America that I was stopped by cops for driving while black.  One time they were particularly solicitous for the welfare of my wife (who is blonde) while we were having a discussion about Derrida.
When progs change their minds it is called evolving. When cons do it it is called flip-flopping. Go figure .I'll bet you are just a shitty driver.
I have never been stopped in Germany, the Netherlands, the UK, nor here in NZ.  I have been stopped by cops in France as well as the US.   It appears that I am a shitty driver in racist shitholes but not elsewhere.
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
July 07, 2014, 11:01:16 AM
#25
If Republicans did so much for blacks, I wonder why blacks turned their backs on them after the bill was signed. So much so that MLK's father did the invocation as the DNC soon after his death. Maybe they do not know as well as white republicans who are on their side and who are not.
hey were bought by the Democrats who handed them freebies. It didnt take much either.
More likely they were smart enough to see the change in the parties after the signing of the Civil Rights Act. But you won't see it that way Codify because you have no respect for black people. Do you think that a man who raised Dr. King can be so easily bribed that he would side with racists? And turn his back on people who are not racist? Is that what you think of men like Dr. King Sr.?
Sorry, but that is hogwash. They traded their past lives as slaves only to become slaves to a party who knew they had an offer that couldn't be refused.
Maybe in part because of people not being very familiar with 'blacks', but still one has to wonder where the ambitions were.
sr. member
Activity: 994
Merit: 441
July 07, 2014, 10:55:25 AM
#24
If Republicans did so much for blacks, I wonder why blacks turned their backs on them after the bill was signed. So much so that MLK's father did the invocation as the DNC soon after his death. Maybe they do not know as well as white republicans who are on their side and who are not.
hey were bought by the Democrats who handed them freebies. It didnt take much either.
More likely they were smart enough to see the change in the parties after the signing of the Civil Rights Act. But you won't see it that way Codify because you have no respect for black people. Do you think that a man who raised Dr. King can be so easily bribed that he would side with racists? And turn his back on people who are not racist? Is that what you think of men like Dr. King Sr.?
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
July 07, 2014, 10:49:48 AM
#23
If Republicans did so much for blacks, I wonder why blacks turned their backs on them after the bill was signed. So much so that MLK's father did the invocation as the DNC soon after his death. Maybe they do not know as well as white republicans who are on their side and who are not.
hey were bought by the Democrats who handed them freebies. It didnt take much either.
sr. member
Activity: 994
Merit: 441
July 07, 2014, 10:34:19 AM
#22
Hold on, did you just post something she's hoping will be read as an argument against "inter-breeding"?   With...neaderthals?  You cannot make this kind of entertainment up.  Not even for a $300 Las Vegas ticket. 
Thanks for figuring that out. I was wondering in what context one would use Neanderthals to support a point.I think he was just looking for an opening to call one of us "crack ho" .
sr. member
Activity: 994
Merit: 441
July 07, 2014, 10:25:37 AM
#21
If Republicans did so much for blacks, I wonder why blacks turned their backs on them after the bill was signed. So much so that MLK's father did the invocation as the DNC soon after his death. Maybe they do not know as well as white republicans who are on their side and who are not.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
July 07, 2014, 10:25:15 AM
#20
Hold on, did you just post something she's hoping will be read as an argument against "inter-breeding"?   With...neaderthals?  You cannot make this kind of entertainment up.  Not even for a $300 Las Vegas ticket. 
newbie
Activity: 4
Merit: 100
July 07, 2014, 10:08:21 AM
#19
It is human nature to discriminate and judge, and that in itself is not something that should be called wrong - rather it must be your choices and decisions regarding what the end result is that must be questioned.

Just to nitpick: to discriminate is to act based on a prejudice. You should properly say "to have prejudices is not wrong, to discriminate is wrong" - a sentiment with which I broadly agree.

I also agree that it's natural to have some level of prejudice against people who look different - natural in the sense that the behaviour can be observed in people from all cultures, in young children, and in other species of animal - but 'natural' does not mean 'desirable'. There are many aspects of our 'natural' behaviour that we rightly seek to suppress for our own good, like our instincts for violence, superstition and greed, and I would argue that racial prejudice is certainly one of these traits to be avoided.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
July 07, 2014, 10:11:09 AM
#19
I cannot count the times when I was in America that I was stopped by cops for driving while black.  One time they were particularly solicitous for the welfare of my wife (who is blonde) while we were having a discussion about Derrida.
When progs change their minds it is called evolving. When cons do it it is called flip-flopping. Go figure .I'll bet you are just a shitty driver.
No figuring required zolace.  Cons don't evolve (unless its backwards, called de-volving) and they don't flip flop.  They just rewrite history, otherwise known as lying.   
Who progressed?Huh??

Neanderthal-human sex bred light skins and infertility

    29 January 2014 by Michael Marshall
    Magazine issue 2954. Subscribe and save
    For similar stories, visit the Neanderthals   , Genetics   and Human Evolution   Topic Guides

IT IS surprising what a little hanky-panky can do. A handful of sexual encounters between humans and Neanderthals made many of us what we are today, affecting both our appearance and our vulnerability to disease. But the genetic legacy left by the Neanderthals also highlights just how different we are from our sister species.

Neanderthals lived in Europe and Asia between about 200,000 and 30,000 years ago. Our species – sometimes dubbed "modern humans" – made it to Eurasia about 65,000 years ago, and so the two species had plenty of time to cosy up. In 2010, geneticists discovered that they had been very close neighbours indeed. They sequenced a Neanderthal genome and discovered it carried genes that also appear in the genomes of people of European and Asian descent: our species must have interbred with Neanderthals.

Now, by studying Neanderthal genes in people alive today, researchers are beginning to appreciate how that interbreeding influenced our species.

In one new study of 1000 human genomes, Sriram Sankararaman and David Reich of Harvard Medical School and colleagues found that Neanderthal DNA is most common in regions of the genome with the greatest genetic variability, making them a prime target for natural selection. While Neanderthal DNA may make up only 1.6 to 1.8 per cent of the Eurasian genome, it punches above its weight in terms of biological impact, says Reich (Nature, DOI: 10.1038/nature12961).

Joshua Akey and Ben Vernot of the University of Washington in Seattle have analysed the Neanderthal DNA in a further 665 humans (Science, DOI: 10.1126/science.1245938). Both their study and the Harvard one found a hotspot of Neanderthal ancestry in genes relating to keratin, a fibrous protein found in our hair, skin and nails.

One of the genes, BNC2, is involved in skin pigmentation. That implies that Eurasians owe their paler skins partly to Neanderthals. Light skin is an advantage at higher latitudes because it is more efficient at generating vitamin D from sunlight, so Neanderthal DNA may have helped modern humans to adapt to life outside Africa.

If so, the adaptation took thousands of years to become universal. A third study published this week describes a DNA analysis of one person who lived in Stone Age Europe about 7000 years ago – 40,000 years after any Neanderthal interbreeding. His genes suggest his skin was dark (Nature, doi.org/q74). It may be that the Neanderthal keratin affected early Eurasians' hair instead, perhaps straightening it.

Not all of the Neanderthal genes are beneficial. Sankararaman and Reich found that our Neanderthal inheritance includes several genes that make us susceptible to diseases including type 2 diabetes, lupus and Crohn's disease.

Some of the genes, meanwhile, appear to have led to fertility problems. For instance, Sankararaman found that the X chromosome is almost devoid of Neanderthal DNA. This suggests that most Neanderthal DNA that wound up on the X chromosome made the bearer less fertile – a common occurrence when related but distinct species interbreed – and so it quickly disappeared from the human gene pool. "Neanderthal alleles were swept away," says Sankararaman.

"This underlines that modern humans and Neanderthals are indeed different species," says Fred Spoor of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, who was not involved in any of the studies.

The genetic evidence further backs this up. Neanderthal DNA is irregularly spaced through the modern human genome rather than being fully mixed. That implies that interbreeding occurred very rarely. Sankararaman estimates it may have happened just four times.

"But these relatively few matings obviously were an important event in the history of non-Africans," says Reich.

This article appeared in print under the headline "Neanderthal sex, the aftermath"
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
July 07, 2014, 10:00:50 AM
#18
stop racism and make love :-)
yeah , this is the solution.......
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
July 07, 2014, 10:00:18 AM
#17
I cannot count the times when I was in America that I was stopped by cops for driving while black.  One time they were particularly solicitous for the welfare of my wife (who is blonde) while we were having a discussion about Derrida.
When progs change their minds it is called evolving. When cons do it it is called flip-flopping. Go figure .I'll bet you are just a shitty driver.
No figuring required zolace.  Cons don't evolve (unless its backwards, called de-volving) and they don't flip flop.  They just rewrite history, otherwise known as lying.   
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
July 07, 2014, 09:55:35 AM
#16
I cannot count the times when I was in America that I was stopped by cops for driving while black.  One time they were particularly solicitous for the welfare of my wife (who is blonde) while we were having a discussion about Derrida.
When progs change their minds it is called evolving. When cons do it it is called flip-flopping. Go figure .I'll bet you are just a shitty driver.
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
July 07, 2014, 09:53:58 AM
#15
I cannot count the times when I was in America that I was stopped by cops for driving while black.  One time they were particularly solicitous for the welfare of my wife (who is blonde) while we were having a discussion about Derrida.
legendary
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1132
July 07, 2014, 03:22:33 AM
#14
I do not izameriko but looked like it on Discovery about your Nazis. It's a nightmare and laughter. Neo-Nazis are real freaks. Then he was surprised to learn that in America is was his neo-Nazi movement after the war in 1950x
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 250
July 07, 2014, 02:43:41 AM
#13
People are made to discriminate. It's not whether you discriminate, but whether you choose to find a common ground and willingly set aside natural differences. For that matter, these days those who rail against 'discrimination' are often the most annoying and pathetic out of them all.

There is nothing wrong with white people or anyone else being suspicious or otherwise on guard when encountering those of difference ethnicity. It is human nature to discriminate and judge, and that in itself is not something that should be called wrong - rather it must be your choices and decisions regarding what the end result is that must be questioned. People rarely in the most honest sense see eye to eye even with their own family members and people of their own race - how the fuck do you expect people to instantly sing kumbaya and who the hell do you think you are to consider yourself a victim? For that matter, it's a given that every individual is inclusive towards their own and that is completely natural. What is now being call 'equality' is nothing more than minorities attempting to maintain their own racial attitudes while claiming any perfectly justified hostility against such attitudes as 'racism'.

There is not so much racism in america as there are too many spoiled children with hidden racial agendas driving their actions. No where is that more prevalent than blacks or other minorities.

Face the fact - America is mainly a european american affair with its roots in europe and its people. Those who are unwilling to respect or acknowledge this fact have no business getting mouthy. What justification does a chinese have to go to india or malaysia, start waving a chinese flag and demanding to be treated like an equal when obviously he doesn't have any inclination of acknowledging any of those respective nations and peoples and clearly has his own racial agenda? Now if you think this is supposed to be 'equality' and 'freedom' you deserve to be violated and raped for that attitude of yours.

No minority living in the west and america has any right to bitch and moan. I have seen racism and oppression. I am a minority in america. I can say for certain that spoiled ass children today need to watch their mouths before thinking they know anything about anyone. In many ways, they act in the most negatively stereotypical american fashion better than any white people i've met: spoiled, soft, naive, and constantly throw shallow tantrums.

Check your privileges, fuckers.
full member
Activity: 140
Merit: 110
bitcoinnaire
July 06, 2014, 02:17:38 AM
#12
Living in the south I don't see any form of racism at all.

In fact most of the african american people living down here are nicer, and friendlier, and get along with everyone else much better than any other place than I've lived. They are respectful and pleasant. Which up north, they act as if they are entitled (within reason of course) to just about everything. Sure I've met some really nice AM's up north (MERICA) but generally speaking the south doesn't fit that whole image of the place for bigotry and what not anymore.

I lived in the deep south for 4 years. Where I lived there was still a very visible amount of racial tension. There was also a soft prejudice that wasn't spoken but quite clear. The south still has a long way to go in race relations. They can start by getting rid of that stupid confederate flag and ending organizations like "the sons of the confederacy."

Well you are right, there is a lot of tension still. You can see it in the peoples eyes when they cross each other's paths, the nod and then the turn around or the face, or the side eye it's still there. But when I moved down here in November I was expecting MUCH worse than what I got. I agree about getting rid of the confederate flag, I haven't seen it much here and surprisingly I live in a pretty small town right now that everyone knows just about everyone else. Maybe the soft prejudice is what I was talking about before, I don't know I just know it isn't nearly as bad as I thought it'd be.
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
July 05, 2014, 03:47:17 PM
#11
there is definitely racism that still exists. it's just that you can't be as open about it these days, so probably more closet racists than anything. a lot of people from the south a xenophobic and fear minorities coming in and taking "their country" back. that's what sarah palin meant when she said she wanted to take "OUR country" back.
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 250
July 05, 2014, 03:06:52 PM
#10
Living in the south I don't see any form of racism at all.

In fact most of the african american people living down here are nicer, and friendlier, and get along with everyone else much better than any other place than I've lived. They are respectful and pleasant. Which up north, they act as if they are entitled (within reason of course) to just about everything. Sure I've met some really nice AM's up north (MERICA) but generally speaking the south doesn't fit that whole image of the place for bigotry and what not anymore.

I lived in the deep south for 4 years. Where I lived there was still a very visible amount of racial tension. There was also a soft prejudice that wasn't spoken but quite clear. The south still has a long way to go in race relations. They can start by getting rid of that stupid confederate flag and ending organizations like "the sons of the confederacy."
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
July 05, 2014, 01:14:22 PM
#9


Enforcement Act of 1871 (third act)

On April 20, 1871, at the urging of President Ulysses Grant, Congress passed the Ku Klux Klan Act. Also known as the third Enforcement Act, the bill was a controversial expansion of federal authority designed to give the federal government additional power to protect voters. The act established penalties in the form of fines and jail time for attempts to deprive citizens of equal protection under the laws and gave the President the authority to use federal troops and suspend the writ of habeas corpus in ensuring that civil rights were upheld.

Founded as a fraternal organization by Confederate veterans in Pulaski, Tennessee, in 1866, the Ku Klux Klan soon became a paramilitary group devoted to the overthrow of Republican governments in the South and the reassertion of white supremacy. Through murder, kidnapping, and violent intimidation, Klansmen sought to secure Democratic victories in elections by attacking black voters and, less frequently, white Republican leaders.

http://millercenter.org/president/events/04_20

NEGROES WITH GUNS

This will give you an idea of how gun control laws worked. Following the firebombing of his house in 1956, Dr. Martin Luther King, who was, among other things, a Christian minister, applied for a gun permit, but the Alabama authorities found him unsuitable. A decade later, he won a Nobel Peace Prize.

How’s that “may issue” gun permit policy working for you?

The NRA opposed these discretionary gun permit laws and proceeded to grant NRA charters to blacks who sought to defend themselves from Klan violence — including the great civil rights hero Robert F. Williams.

A World War II Marine veteran, Williams returned home to Monroe, N.C., to find the Klan riding high — beating, lynching and murdering blacks at will. No one would join the NAACP for fear of Klan reprisals. Williams became president of the local chapter and increased membership from six to more than 200.

But it was not until he got a charter from the NRA in 1957 and founded the Black Armed Guard that the Klan got their comeuppance in Monroe.

Williams’ repeated thwarting of violent Klan attacks is described in his stirring book, “Negroes With Guns.” In one crucial battle, the Klan sieged the home of a black physician and his wife, but Williams and his Black Armed Guard stood sentry and repelled the larger, cowardly force. And that was the end of it.

As the Klan found out, it’s not so much fun when the rabbit’s got the gun.

The NRA’s proud history of fighting the Klan has been airbrushed out of the record by those who were complicit with the KKK, Jim Crow and racial terror, to wit: the Democrats.

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2012-04-18.html

The Democratic Convention of 1924

The Democratic party was an uneasy coalition of diverse elements: Northerners and Southerners, Westerners and Easterners, Catholics and Jews and Protestants, conservative landowners and agrarian radicals, progressives and big city machines, urban cosmopolitans and small-town traditionalists. On one side were defenders of the Ku Klux Klan, prohibition, and fundamentalism. On the other side were northeastern Catholics and Jewish immigrants and their children. A series of issues that bitterly divided the country during the early 1920s were on display at the 1924 Democratic Convention in New York, including prohibition and religious and racial tolerance. The Northeasterners wanted an explicit condemnation of the Ku Klux Klan. The final vote was 546.15 for the Klan, 542.85 against it.

The two leading candidates symbolized a deep cultural divide. Al Smith, New York’s governor, was a Catholic and an opponent of prohibition and was bitterly opposed by Democrats in the South and West. Former Treasury Secretary William Gibbs McAdoo, a Protestant, defended prohibition and refused to repudiate the Ku Klux Klan, making himself unacceptable to Catholics and Jews in the Northeast.

Newspapers called the convention a “Klanbake,” as pro-Klan and anti-Klan delegates wrangled bitterly over the party platform.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1924_Democratic_National_Convention#KKK_platform_plank



“I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan…I saw through the door dim figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses…I was escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to speak…In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered.” (Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography, P.366)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Fj-E-Yk78M

Etc... Etc...




sr. member
Activity: 994
Merit: 441
July 05, 2014, 01:04:34 PM
#8
If you dems want to take credit for your real efforts on behalf of blacks laud yourselves for trying to get ebonics taught in schools because black children weren't capable of learning English. That about sums up the dems efforts and their attitude, that's why dems keep the welfare rolls filled, to keep the blacks ignorant and voting dumb, I mean dem. If that doesn't send the message look at the New Haven fire fighters lawsuit that claimed the advancement test was racist because not enough blacks could pass the test. I'd love to hear how that test was racist and why blacks aren't allowed to learn the same things whites are.
full member
Activity: 140
Merit: 110
bitcoinnaire
July 05, 2014, 01:01:23 PM
#7
Living in the south I don't see any form of racism at all.

In fact most of the african american people living down here are nicer, and friendlier, and get along with everyone else much better than any other place than I've lived. They are respectful and pleasant. Which up north, they act as if they are entitled (within reason of course) to just about everything. Sure I've met some really nice AM's up north (MERICA) but generally speaking the south doesn't fit that whole image of the place for bigotry and what not anymore.
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
July 05, 2014, 12:49:11 PM
#6
Some think Lyndon Johnson was not one of our best presidents.

But Johnson did pass the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964, and that was and is a really big deal.

Today I saw one effect of outlawing dscrimination in education. In 1964 there were 365,000 African American bachelor's degrees awarded. In 2014 5.1 million were awarded.

Imagine how many lives are changed by that!

One more thought; if you think there is no role for government, try to imagine this outcome without government's involvement.
Why don't you tell us how hard he worked to get that bill passed . Tell us how he wrote the bill and worked to get his fellow democrats to on board and support it. Tell us all about his valiant effort doc, we'd love to hear it.
http://politicalfray.com/history/2503-republican-roots-1964-civil-rights-act.html

On his deathbed in 1874, Senator Charles Sumner (R-MA) told a Republican colleague: ?You must take care of the civil rights bill ? my bill, the civil rights bill. Don?t let it fail.? In March 1875, the Republican-controlled 43rd Congress followed up the GOP?s 1866 Civil Rights Act and 1871 Civil Rights Act with the most comprehensive civil rights legislation ever. A Republican president, Ulysses Grant, signed the bill into law that same day.

Among its provisions, the 1875 Civil Rights Act banned racial discrimination in public accommodations. Sound familiar? Though struck down by the Supreme Court eight years later, the 1875 Civil Rights Act would be reborn as the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Clever strategizing had won him the support of most African-American voters, but it took President John Kennedy (D-MA) nearly two years to make good on even one of his promises to them. He refused to attend a dinner commemorating the 100th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation and turned down Martin Luther King?s invitation to speak at the March on Washington. He did name Thurgood Marshall to the federal bench, but that was to an appeals court in New York, far from the fray in southern states. Kennedy did not honor his campaign promise to submit to Congress a new civil rights bill soon after taking office.

While the Kennedy administration was ignoring its campaign pledges, the Republican minority in Congress introduced several bills to protect the constitutional rights of African-Americans. In January 1963, congressional Republicans introduced a sweeping civil rights bill to enact what Democrat opposition had prevented from being included in the 1957 and 1960 laws. Threatened by this initiative, the president finally acted. Hastily drafted in a single one-nighter, the Kennedy bill fell well short of what the GOP had introduced the month before. Many Democrats were preparing a protracted Senate filibuster of this civil rights bill, which was in a committee of the House of Representatives when John Kennedy was murdered in November 1963.
Republicans supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act much more than did the Democrats. Contrary to Democrat myth, Everett Dirksen (R-IL), the Senate Minority Leader ? not President Lyndon Johnson ? was the person most responsible for its passage. Mindful of how Democrat opposition had forced Republicans to weaken their 1957 and 1960 Civil Rights Acts, President Johnson promised Republicans that he would publicly credit the GOP for its strong support. Johnson played no role in the legislative fight. In the House of Representatives, the 1964 Civil Rights Act passed with 80% support from Republicans but only 63% support from Democrats.
sr. member
Activity: 994
Merit: 441
July 05, 2014, 12:45:59 PM
#5
Some think Lyndon Johnson was not one of our best presidents.

But Johnson did pass the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964, and that was and is a really big deal.

Today I saw one effect of outlawing dscrimination in education. In 1964 there were 365,000 African American bachelor's degrees awarded. In 2014 5.1 million were awarded.

Imagine how many lives are changed by that!

One more thought; if you think there is no role for government, try to imagine this outcome without government's involvement.
Some think Lyndon Johnson was not one of our best presidents.

But Johnson did pass the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964, and that was and is a really big deal.

Today I saw one effect of outlawing dscrimination in education. In 1964 there were 365,000 African American bachelor's degrees awarded. In 2014 5.1 million were awarded.

Imagine how many lives are changed by that!

One more thought; if you think there is no role for government, try to imagine this outcome without government's involvement.
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
July 05, 2014, 12:42:53 PM
#4
So much to be said about, and for LBJ.  He was a mixed bag of the bad the good and the ugly like every president.  The times shaped him as much as he shaped the times, as president.  But by god, he did get the CRA passed, and that can never be taken away from him.   Or co-opted by Republicans.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
July 05, 2014, 12:32:05 PM
#3
Your example, is one explanation of why our friends in the south seem to hate our federal government so much. 

It forces them to stop discriminating, forces them to allow Blacks to vote, and add to that, it allows Black and White folks to marry each other.  Lawdy - no wonder they hate our government so!!
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1000
July 05, 2014, 09:10:34 AM
#2
Quote
One more thought; if you think there is no role for government, try to imagine this outcome without government's involvement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnPZ1yuoFIc
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
July 05, 2014, 08:09:28 AM
#1
Some think Lyndon Johnson was not one of our best presidents.

But Johnson did pass the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964, and that was and is a really big deal.

Today I saw one effect of outlawing dscrimination in education. In 1964 there were 365,000 African American bachelor's degrees awarded. In 2014 5.1 million were awarded.

Imagine how many lives are changed by that!

One more thought; if you think there is no role for government, try to imagine this outcome without government's involvement.
Jump to: