LOL

The Civil Rights Act was a PC law. The government has no right to tell private business who they can serve. The people that discriminate would be weeded out by customers that would refuse to buy at those establishments. Smokers have tried to have their own airplanes, didn’t work. The marketplace will decide.

I totally support teabaggers being honest. Nothing would suit me more than to shine the light of truth under the slimy rock that they crawl out of.

Here’s some teabagger “truth”….

“A free society will abide unofficial, private discrimination – even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to exclude people based on the color of their skin.” –Teabagger Paul

gordonbloyershow says:
May 22, 2010 at 5:26 pm
Sorry to disappoint your fantasy world, but that didn’t happen before, and it won’t happen now. Nice try though, dumb@$$.

When is the last time a white student was given money for college from the united negro college fund? Discrimination?

make that from the united negro college fund

In a utopia, the populace would rightously shun a restaurant that serves all races.

However, in the real, pre-Civil Rights world, whites would have largely shunned the first whites-only restaurant to up and decide to serve colored people, same goes for colored-only establishments. Speculation? Yes. Well-grounded? You’ll say you disagree in order to support your own point of view, but you know damn well it is.

To count on the marketplace, or the population at large, to reverse social injustice is to ignore the lessons of history. The idiom “tyranny of the majority” was coined for a reason. Even today, I suggest you talk to one of the handful of black families who managed to actually find a willing landlord (despite all the laws) to let them rent in the white enclave of Levittown, NY… and find out how much their rights were “embraced” by their neighbors… and you’ll see how the “free market” really works to “strengthen” civil rights all on its own.

Eesh. Make that “righteously shun a restaurant that doesn’t serve all races. (looks around for Edit key)

He should have learned from BHO- he never spoke about hiring a Communist as an adviser or a Commie admirer as the Dir. of Communications.

It is a waste of time trying to educate liberals, they only react on emotion, not brains.

BR writes:

“When is the last time a white student was given money for college from the united negro college fund? Discrimination?”

“Q: Does UNCF only support African American education?
A:UNCF was founded to address inequities in the educational opportunities afforded to African Americans. UNCF believes in higher education opportunities for all Americans. UNCF-member schools do not discriminate and UNCF-administered scholarships are open to all.”

http://www.uncf.org/aboutus/faqs.asp

Clear things up, BR?

gordonblower writes:

“It is a waste of time trying to educate liberals, they only react on emotion, not brains.”

Right, because it takes “brains” to believe that after 400 years of slavery, oppression, segregation and injustice in America, the “free market” would quickly balance the scales and eliminate the need for government intervention like the Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act or Fair Housing Act.

Like I said before, gordon…when I need a good laugh, I just log in your You Tube channel. Will Farrell ain’t got NUTHIN’ on you.

–Cobra

One last time dumbasses! Discrimination is against the law in this country! If you want to discriminate in your private business you’ll have to open it in another country. Now, the UNC was created because while you idiots haven’t noticed, most blacks still can’t afford college. We’re still way behind most whites who are able to go to college. All of us aren’t criminals. Some of us do manage to go to college but, need the financial help. We don’t have fathers who are alumnists from Yale like Bush did to get into Yale. Obama certainly didn’t have that. Paul is also a product of nepotism, which is a form of affirmative action. He’s also a bigoted little prick with a bad rug who got where he is in part, because of his father who is also a raving lunatic who ran for President and lost badly because his views are out of the mainstream. Those idiots on faux news are actually suggesting that he do what all Republicans and Conservatives do. Which is to lie about who they really are and what they really believe to fool the stupid ass people who vote for them. Once they’re in office, that whole “limited government” bullshit is gone. (See The Dick that is Cheney) meeting in secret with big oil companies and shady deals which have brought us to where we are. Fox is basically saying out loud that Paul should hide who he really is until you stupid bastards vote for him. Then, it’s back to tax cuts for the rich which has done nothing for job growth and everything for the wealthy. It’s great for them but, not so much for the ignorant folks like you who vote for them. We Liberals are laughing at Paul and the morons who support this clown who has now gone into the GOP protection program. Here Kitty, Kitty, Kitty!

roxsteady says:
“Those idiots on faux news are actually suggesting that he do what all Republicans and Conservatives do. Which is to lie about who they really are and what they really believe to fool the stupid ass people who vote for them.”
__________________________________________________

And of course a Democrat would never lie about who they really are, right?

roxsteady says:
May 22, 2010 at 11:16 pm

Has anyone else noticed that the first thing to go (besides civility, commonsense, respect, and honesty) when Roxy gets angry, is her use of the “Enter” key. Apparently, her anger interrupts her usage of paragraphs.

One last time dumbasses! Discrimination is against the law in this country!

Be honest… this isn’t the last time you’ll post an ignorant rant which doesn’t address the actual issues. Oh, and as has already been pointed out, discrimination ISN’T against the law. Some is, some isn’t, and some isn’t call “discrimination” as to make the people doing it appear to be doing something else.

Oh, and of course this has NOTHING to do with anything.

If you want to discriminate in your private business you’ll have to open it in another country. Now, the UNC was created because while you idiots haven’t noticed, most blacks still can’t afford college. We’re still way behind most whites who are able to go to college. All of us aren’t criminals. Some of us do manage to go to college but, need the financial help. We don’t have fathers who are alumnists from Yale like Bush did to get into Yale. Obama certainly didn’t have that.

Wow… that was pretty racist… even for you Roxy.

Paul is also a product of nepotism, which is a form of affirmative action.

Yes… without his father’s political position, he would have never became a doctor, or run for congress in a different state than his father. Wait… that doesn’t make any sense. Nevermind.

He’s also a bigoted little prick with a bad rug who got where he is in part, because of his father who is also a raving lunatic who ran for President and lost badly because his views are out of the mainstream.

ROXY ANGRY! Oh, and even the folks on MSNBC don’t think he’s a bigot.

Those idiots on faux news are actually suggesting that he do what all Republicans and Conservatives do. Which is to lie about who they really are and what they really believe to fool the stupid ass people who vote for them.

Actually, they’re saying the same thing that the folks on the other networks have been saying (even Bill Maher), which is, “The guy said what he really feels, but since he’s not a career politician, he’s not polished enough to know that knuckleheads will take it out of context, distort his meaning, and lie to make political points.” Hardly a new concept, as there have already been many Mediaite articles pointing out other anchors saying the same thing.

And it would be much better if the Republicans told the truth… like the Richard Blumenthal of the Democrats. Much better.

Once they’re in office, that whole “limited government” bullshit is gone. (See The Dick that is Cheney) meeting in secret with big oil companies and shady deals which have brought us to where we are.

Who did BP contribute most of their money too? Oh that’s right… Obama. Nevermind… not important.

Fox is basically saying out loud that Paul should hide who he really is until you stupid bastards vote for him.

Same as the other stations… which you were happy about when they said it.

Then, it’s back to tax cuts for the rich which has done nothing for job growth and everything for the wealthy. It’s great for them but, not so much for the ignorant folks like you who vote for them.

Factually inaccurate.

We Liberals are laughing at Paul and the morons who support this clown who has now gone into the GOP protection program. Here Kitty, Kitty, Kitty!

Laughter is often a sign of ignorance, and an inability to understand… but still wanting to look like you know what you’re doing.

Thanks Roxy! This was fun! Next time you’re really really angry (should be about 3 minutes from now), please post again. Oh, and sprinkle more “idiots” and other clever name calling throughout your post… it makes you look all the more balanced.

If liberals want to continue arguing that we’re back in 1964, let’s discuss how the Civil Rights act was filibustered by 18 southern DEMOCRATIC senators and only 1 republican. Let’s also discuss why the Republican Party is called the party of Lincoln.

Also, if we want to dissect every thing Paul says, how about we turn the microscope on Harry “he doesn’t have a negro dialect” Reid?

I posted this on a previous thread.

Emancipation? Republican President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation during the Civil War. In 1865, the 13th Amendment emancipating the slaves was passed with 100 percent of Republicans (88 of 88 in the House, 30 of 30 in the Senate) voting for it. Only 23 percent of Democrats (16 of 66 in the House, 3 of 8 in the Senate) voted for it.

Civil rights laws? In 1868, the 14th Amendment was passed giving the newly emancipated blacks full civil rights and federal guarantee of those rights, superseding any state laws. Every single voting Republican (128 of 134 — with 6 not voting — in the House, and 30 of 32 — with 2 not voting — in the Senate) voted for the 14th Amendment. Not a single Democrat (zero of 36 in the House, zero of 6 in the Senate) voted for it.

Right to vote? When Southern states balked at implementing the 14th Amendment, Congress came back and passed the 15th Amendment in 1870, guaranteeing blacks the right to vote. Every single Republican voted for it, with every Democrat voting against it.

Ku Klux Klan? In 1872 congressional investigations, Democrats admitted beginning the Klan as an effort to stop the spread of the Republican Party and to re-establish Democratic control in Southern states. As PBS’ “American Experience” notes, “In outright defiance of the Republican-led federal government, Southern Democrats formed organizations that violently intimidated blacks and Republicans who tried to win political power. The most prominent of these, the Ku Klux Klan, was formed in Pulaski, Tenn., in 1865.” Blacks, who were all Republican at that time, became the primary targets of violence.

Jim Crow laws? Between 1870 and 1875, the Republican Congress passed many pro-black civil rights laws. But in 1876, Democrats took control of the House, and no further race-based civil rights laws passed until 1957. In 1892, Democrats gained control of the House, the Senate and the White House, and repealed all the Republican-passed civil rights laws. That enabled the Southern Democrats to pass the Jim Crow laws, poll taxes, literacy tests, and so on, in their individual states.

Civil rights in the ’60s? Only 64 percent of Democrats in Congress voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act (153 for, 91 against in the House; and 46 for, 21 against in the Senate). But 80 percent of Republicans (136 for, 35 against in the House; and 27 for, 6 against in the Senate) voted for the 1964 Act.

What about the reviled, allegedly anti-black, Republican “Southern strategy”? Pat Buchanan, writing for Richard Nixon (who became the Republican Party candidate two years later) coined the term “Southern strategy.” They expected the “strategy” to ultimately result in the complete marginalization of racist Southern Democrats. “We would build our Republican Party on a foundation of states’ rights, human rights, small government, and a strong national defense,” said Buchanan, “and leave it to the ‘party of [Democratic Georgia Gov. Lester] Maddox, [1966 Democratic challenger against Spiro Agnew for Maryland governor George] Mahoney, and [Democratic Alabama Gov. George] Wallace to squeeze the last ounces of political juice out of the rotting fruit of racial injustice.’” And President Richard Nixon, Republican, implemented the first federal affirmative action (race-based preference) laws with goals and timetables.

April 9, 1866 Republican Congress overrides Democrat President Johnson’s veto; Civil Rights Act of 1866, conferring rights of citizenship on African-Americans, becomes law

January 8, 1867 Republicans override Democrat President Andrew Johnson’s veto of law granting voting rights to African-Americans in D.C.

January 26, 1922 House passes bill authored by U.S. Rep. Leonidas Dyer (R-MO) making lynching a federal crime; Senate Democrats block it with filibuster

August 17, 1937 Republicans organize opposition to former Ku Klux Klansman and Democrat U.S. Senator Hugo Black, appointed to U.S. Supreme Court by FDR; his Klan background was hidden until after confirmation

June 24, 1940 Republican Party platform calls for integration of the armed forces; for the balance of his terms in office, FDR refuses to order it

February 18, 1946 Appointed by Republican President Calvin Coolidge, federal judge Paul McCormick ends segregation of Mexican-American children in California public schools

May 17, 1954 Chief Justice Earl Warren, three-term Republican Governor (CA) and Republican vice presidential nominee in 1948, wins unanimous support of Supreme Court for school desegregation in Brown v. Board of Education

September 9, 1957 President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republican Party’s 1957 Civil Rights Act

September 24, 1957 Sparking criticism from Democrats such as Senators John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, President Dwight Eisenhower deploys the 82nd Airborne Division to Little Rock, AR to force Democrat Governor Orval Faubus to integrate public schools

June 23, 1958 President Dwight Eisenhower meets with Martin Luther King and other African-American leaders to discuss plans to advance civil rights

February 4, 1959 President Eisenhower informs Republican leaders of his plan to introduce 1960 Civil Rights Act, despite staunch opposition from many Democrats

June 9, 1964 Republicans condemn 14-hour filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act by U.S. Senator and former Ku Klux Klansman Robert Byrd (D-WV), who still serves in the Senate

June 10, 1964 Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) criticizes Democrat filibuster against 1964 Civil Rights Act, calls on Democrats to stop opposing racial equality

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was introduced and approved by a staggering majority of Republicans in the Senate. The Act was opposed by most southern Democrat senators, several of whom were proud segregationists—one of them being Al Gore Sr. Democrat President Lyndon B. Johnson relied on Illinois Senator Everett Dirkson, the Republican leader from Illinois, to get the Act passed.

August 4, 1965 Senate Republican Leader Everett Dirksen (R-IL) overcomes Democrat attempts to block 1965 Voting Rights Act; 94% of Senate Republicans vote for landmark civil right legislation, while 27% of Democrats oppose

August 6, 1965 Voting Rights Act of 1965, abolishing literacy tests and other measures devised by Democrats to prevent African-Americans from voting, signed into law; higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats vote in favor

‘It’s Hard To Campaign And Be Completely Honest’ – see Blumenthal as prime example. Stolen Valor indeed.

Going to a church for twenty years, then claiming you had no idea of the pastor’s views is a good example.

Who cares!!! My boyfriend thinks the same with me. He- is eight years older than me, lol. We met online at an age gap dating site [A_g_e_m_i_n_g_l_e @ c.//o.//m]—a nice and free place for Younger- Women and Older Men, or Older Women and Younger Men, to interact with each other. Maybe you wanna check out or- tell your friends

trolling4libs, roguecomics- democrat and republican don’t mean the same thing that they’ve always meant. historical fact. trying to comment on the racial inclusiveness of today’s republicans or democrats by commenting on the party’s voting record from 50 – 100 years ago doesn’t say anything about today’s political scene. k thanks!

also, imnotblue- you have too many words up there for me to respond to, but i just want to point out that you did nothing but present the alternative half-truth to what roxsteady said. she’s not right. you’re not right. example- yeah, obama got the most campaign money from bp… so what? they’re a huge company with lots of money to give. they gave him $77,000. but the top 10 contributions to seated congressmen add up to about $300,000 for republicans, and $60,000 for democrats. so… bp pretty much has everyone in their pocket. so on this point- roxsteady is right in that cheney (and republicans, more often) protect big oil. and you’re right in that obama got the most contributions from bp. but you’re also right- it’s not that important at this point.

Cobra, that “400 years of slavery and oppression” mantra of the left is a bit dated, considering we have a black president and the civil rights bill was passed almost half a century ago. You might want to be more specific when including slavery in that four hundred year period, too. The first settlement by Europeans in America was at Jamestown in 1607. In order to have four hundred years of slavery, that would mean that slavery ended in 2007.

And Cobra, for a four hundred year old man, you’re holding up remarkably well. LOL

writer- what exactly are you arguing here? how is that mantra (read as: historical fact) “dated”? it’s still true. we have a black president, yes, but that doesn’t mean there wasn’t 400 years of enslavement and further oppression in the americas. your arbitrary selection of dates is just… wrong. no, slavery didn’t end in 2007, just like slavery didn’t start over here in 1607.

Yeah, hate. And my ancestors are Irish. But I don’t feel that the potato famine in 1840 is still affecting me.

for the record- you’re comparing the potato famine with slavery. do you still want to proceed with this argument? because if so, we have a loooot of ground to cover before we even start having an intelligent conversation.

Yes, I do. Cobra was complaining about slavery. I’m perfectly willing to see your evidence that Cobra is a slave.

cobra wasn’t a slave. the potato famine isn’t the same as slavery. i can’t believe i have to spell these things out for you.

And I can’t believe that you on the left keep clinging to things that happened in the past, pretending that there has been virtually no change. My point was that blacks using the excuse of slavery for not getting ahead would be like an Irish person saying he can’t get ahead because of the famine. It’s in the past. Virtually every group has been enslaved by some other group at some time in history. Blacks seem to be the only group that claim they can never get over it.

there was federally and state-mandated racism against blacks that was spawned directly from their centuries of enslavement, and it was still institutionalized in the lifetimes many who are still alive.

“blacks using the excuse of slavery for not getting ahead would be like an Irish person saying he can’t get ahead because of the famine”

you are just so stupid! you really are! the potato famine is an extremely inappropriate and inaccurate comparison. i hate having to do this! *laugh track*
if you really think that the effects of white on black oppression aren’t still being felt by more african americans than non-african americans, than you’re more ignorant than racist, and that says something.

Temper, temper. I thought you wanted to have an intelligent conversation. Okay, let’s grant that since some evil white Americans kept blacks as slaves, then that’s it. It will affect every generation from then on, and its effects will never end. Blacks have no control over their own success and will always be held down by the white man. If that’s so, could you point out which African country that blacks would be better off in? There are virtually no evil white people in countries such as Chad, Sudan, Niger, Ethiopia, etc. How are they getting along? Things just rosy, since there aren’t any white people there holding them back? The real racism is yours, against white people.

how am i racist against white people?

and i do want to have an intelligent conversation, but your analogy shows such a fundamentally flawed understanding of racism and slavery that i don’t think i can have it with you.
some evil white americans kept blacks as slaves. plenty more non-evil white americans kept blacks as slaves. and slavery’s effects won’t “never end”- they just haven’t ended.

“could you point out which African country that blacks would be better off in?” – i’d rather not. because that’s completely off point.

“There are virtually no evil white people in countries such as Chad, Sudan, Niger, Ethiopia, etc. How are they getting along? Things just rosy, since there aren’t any white people there holding them back?” – again, totally not on point here. at no point was africa itself relevant to this discussion. (but i hear that imperial system worked out just swell for the natives, eh?)

Africa is totally relevant. Your argument is that blacks in America are at a permanent disadvantage that it’s virtually impossible to overcome. So to be fair, we need to look at countries where blacks rule themselves to give it perspective. Yes, there was imperialism in some African countries such as the (Belgian) Congo, but again, that was long ago, and most African countries were and continue to be controlled by blacks only. So how are blacks doing when left totally to their own devices, as compared to America where black success or failure, according to the left, is totally in the hands of the white man? Again, if you’re going to argue that whites are holding blacks back in America, we need to look at places where whites aren’t holding them back to give it some perspective.

me, 11:28 am: “slavery’s effects won’t “never end”- they just haven’t ended.”
you, 11:42 am: “Your argument is that blacks in America are at a permanent disadvantage that it’s virtually impossible to overcome”
wanna try again?

“So how are blacks doing when left totally to their own devices, as compared to America where black success or failure, according to the left, is totally in the hands of the white man?”
what?? no. no no no no no. first- uh huh, yeah, whites looked down at africa over history and said “you’re doing fine! let’s not interfere!”. no! and second- black success or failure in america is not totally in the hands of the white man.

“if you’re going to argue that whites are holding blacks back in America, we need to look at places where whites aren’t holding them back to give it some perspective.” again, this is just soooooo wrong that i don’t know where to begin. how about- africa isn’t america and the economic and social struggles going on over there are basically incomparable, for the sake of this discussion.

you’re 0 for 4 here bud.

Care to explain why I’m ’0 for 4′?

i guess it’s more 0 for 3, because 2 points were related:

1) your complete inability to correctly understand my argument, in the first quote.
2) false analogy drawn to africa as being an exemplar of african american activity
3) falsely assuming i (and other liberals) think that black success or failure is “totally in the hands of the white man”

In other words, no matter which country they’re in, no matter who is in charge, black misfortunes are always the white man’s fault. Like amoebas in a pond, blacks simply float on the water and await whatever bumps into them, having no control over their own fate. At least you’re sticking to the far left mantra that whites are always to blame. This has been fascinating and not surprising, but gotta go for a while. Later.

Again, you show a total willful misunderstanding of what I’ve been saying.

Actually, it may not be willful. You are truly stupid.

“they gave him $77,000. but the top 10 contributions to seated congressmen add up to about $300,000 for republicans,”

But HE is the president, child.

but that doesn’t mean there wasn’t 400 years of enslavement and further oppression in the americas. ”

Says the black apologist for his failure.

hatehavingtodothis

Did no other country have slavery in their histories?

Was the US the last country to abolish slavery?

I mean, the USA was the last country to outlaw this abomination, correct? All others had outlawed slavery hundreds of years before the USA did, right?

Oh, gees, Britain only outlawed slavery 31 years before the USA did. “When slaves were emancipated by Act of the British Parliament in 1834 the British government paid compensation to slave owners.”

And the Arabs? Surely they were way ahead of us hateful Americans, right?

Oh, no!

“As recently as the 1950s, the Saudi Arabia’s slave population was estimated at 450,000 — approximately 20% of the population.] It is estimated that as many as 200,000 black Sudanese children and women had been taken into slavery in Sudan during the Second Sudanese Civil War.] Slavery in Mauritania was legally abolished by laws passed in 1905, 1961, and 1981.It was finally criminalized in August 2007. It is estimated that up to 600,000 black Mauritanians, or 20% of the Mauritania’s population, are currently enslaved, many of them used as bonded labor.”

Brazil? I’m sure they were way ahead of us. But wait:

In Brazil In 1995, 288 farmworkers were freed from what was officially described as slavery, a total which rose to 583 in 2000. In 2001, however, the Brazilian government freed more than 1,400 slave laborers. Most cases probably go undetected. A national survey conducted in 2000 by the Pastoral Land Commission, a Roman Catholic Church group, estimated that there were more than 25,000 forced workers and slaves in Brazil.

In 2004 the Brazilian government acknowledged to the United Nations that 25,000-40,000 Brazilians work under work conditions “analogous to slavery.” The top anti-slavery official in Brasília, nation’s capital, estimates the number of modern slaves at 50,000. More than 1,000 slave laborers were freed from a sugar cane plantation in 2007 by the Brazilian government, in the largest anti-slavery raid in modern times in Brazil.

And in Africa, where it all started? Surely they outlawed it way before the USA did?

Oh, no, again!

Slavery in Africa continues today. Slavery existed in Africa before the arrival of Europeans – as did a slave trade that exported millions of Africans to North Africa, the Middle East, and the Persian Gulf.

• 1 Chad
• 2 Mali
• 3 Mauritania
• 4 Niger
• 5 Sudan
• 6 Child slave trade
o 6.1 Ghana, Togo, Benin
o 6.2 Ethiopia

Next time you want to condemn this country for the slavery abomination, put it in perspective.

Next time I want to talk about slavery’s lasting effects in America, I will keep it in the American perspective. What you’re saying isn’t wrong, it’s just not the right that makes me wrong.

And I condemn slavery, but not America. I never condemned America. America is awesome. Ignorance ain’t.

Yes, and a 70% out of wedlock birth rate and 50% HS dropout rate has no affect on one’s success, eh?

Do you know which race in America has the highest median income? Whites?

No, Asians.

“Yes, and a 70% out of wedlock birth rate and 50% HS dropout rate has no affect on one’s success, eh?”
Well, you took the percentages of a population and applied them on a personal level, so I’m not sure exactly what you’re saying. But yes, I would say that having an out of wedlock birth and dropping out of high school would lower the probability of “success”.

And yes, I did know asians have the highest medium income. Thanks for that fun fact!

Well, you took the percentages of a population and applied them on a personal level, so I’m not sure exactly what you’re saying.”

No you were complaining about the oppression of blacks.

These statistics are those of blacks.

How in the world can you be success in today’s world if you are having kids when you are a kid or when you drop out of HS- not college, but HS??

Black males’ Rampant Joblessness, high drop-out rate, incarceration dooming black community: study
Jet, March 26, 2007

Seven out of every 10 African-American children are born out of wedlock, according to testimony given by a leading social policy researcher during a Joint Economic Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C.
In what is being called “the nation’s worst crisis in the history of the Black family,” hearing participants attributed the degenerating situation to the particularly disturbing plight of young African-American men, half of whom are now unemployed, and have 30 percent chance of serving time in prison before age 30.”

National Graduation Rates By Race and Gender
________________________________________
By Race/Ethnicity Nation Female Male
________________________________________
American Indian/AK Nat 51.1 51.4† 47.0†
Asian/Pacific Islander 76.8 80.0† 72.6†
Hispanic 53.2 58.5 48
Black 50.2 56.2 42.8
White 74.9 77 70.8

Report: Michigan Black High School Graduation Rate Lowest in Nation
January 7th, 2010

A recent report released by University of Michigan education researchers indicates only 33 percent of African-American males in the state of Michigan graduate from high school compared to 74 percent of their Caucasian counterparts.

You can not be successful when you are a HS drop out, unless you are a genius who has a great master plan.

Um, Munch. I agreed with you. I think this is a very important issue that you’re talking about and I would love for it to be addressed more rigorously. These stats are in themselves, oppressive.

word!

Munch,

What is your argument here? Are you telling ME as an African-American that I should:

1) Celebrate the American Chattel Slavery system that resulted in the deaths of MILLIONS of Blacks, mass rape, forced labor, destruction of culture, and separation of families…because “other countries did it, too?”"

2) Celebrate the FACT that White politicians in America designed laws that oppressed minorities for centuries?

3) Celebrate the FACT that racial segregation still exists to the point in America where you can have stratified reports on graduation rates…that aren’t available for White ethnic groups that many on this board claim are “comparable” to the Black American experience?

Now Munch, unlike hatehavingtodothis (whose posts I thoroughly enjoy reading), I have absolutely no problem detailing the origins of advantages Whites have legislated for THEMSELVES in America throughout history. My question for you, if you want to have this discussion of White Supremacy Ideology here, on a thread where White posters are openly calling for private businesses to have the right to discriminate against Blacks, or offline via email?

–Cobra

Word!! I’m so happy we have common ground! I’m really not an angry person.

But really, to put this all together:\ this is the kind of abstract, statistical oppression that I feel is one of the “lasting effects of slavery”. You may disagree with that last part, ok. How it came to be is a harrowing road, one that we may (?) at least agree has roots in racist practices from the past, but that’s less important than figuring out how we go and make this all better. I want higher graduation rates and lower out of wedlock birth rates for everyone, not just blacks. But looking at numbers like that, how can one not see that they’re statistically disadvantaged? One may respond- “Oh, but if any one person tries hard enough, he or she can rise above.” Yes, that also is true. But have you visited inner city public schools? It’s just not that simple. That mentality doesn’t help or reach as many people as it needs to.

OK, tried not to step on any toes there. Does that make sense though? Am I being too idealistic for thinking that the government can help? Are others being too idealistic for thinking that the American spirit will suddenly rain on those down-and-out, wholly lost kids? Probably yes, for both. But can we agree that not addressing this problem and waiting, fingers crossed, hoping those numbers get closer together, is worse than trying to address it? I guess (to bring it allllllll around!) that’s my problem with what Rand said. I feel he’s not looking forward on this issue. It’s not his fault either. He’s never been one who feels the weight of those odds against him, and that’s not bad in and of itself. So I understand why he’s comfortable with a system from the past that works out just fine for him, and for most people, but just… doesn’t help.

Second Munch,

Be careful about your “Asians are the model minority” arguments. Not ALL Asian Immigrants are successful.
For example:

“Similar to the low socioeconomic levels previously cited for Southeast Asian immigrants, the data show 66% Hmong, 58% Laotian, and 56% of Cambodians have less than a high school degree, placing them below all major racial and ethnic groups. Cambodians and Laotians also share below U.S. averages in both high school and college graduation rates.”

http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/9/7/7/0/pages97700/p97700-16.php

–Cobra

Cobra- that’s why “median” was the word to pay attention to.

Cobra – your angry racism is palpable as is your failure .

I guess you missed BHO’s speech to the NAACP-”you have no more excuses.”

You be repeating this crap for thousands of years to come and guess what? You will be no further along.

You live to blame, you want to go backwards and that is why you will always fail.

66% Hmong, 58% Laotian, and 56% of Cambodians have less than a high school degree, placing them below all major racial and ethnic groups. Cambodians and Laotians also share below U.S. averages in both high school and college graduation rates.””

My point which went right over your racist head!

Cobra- In your America, with its 10% unemployment rate and some say acual 17% unemployment rate, employers who have their choice of employees are wrong to not hire the HS drop outs.

Back in the ’70s , you would see in some manufacturing companies a Plant Manager who had worked his way to that position with only a 9th grade education.

Not today!

They want a MBA plus experience.

HS drop outs? You are “slaves.”

Hi everyone, or at least anyone who missed me! I’m back from following in Anonymous Finch’s footsteps b/c frankly they are much to big for me.

Hater, first could you provide a citation for your statistics re BP contributions? Trust but verify.

The following is from Politico by Erika Lovely:

“BP and its employees have given more than $3.5 million to federal candidates over the past 20 years, with the largest chunk of their money going to Obama, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Donations come from a mix of employees and the company’s political action committees — $2.89 million flowed to campaigns from BP-related PACs and about $638,000 came from individuals.”

So, over the last 20 years BP has contributed about 7 million dollars to both parties and two years after the Dems regained control of the House and the Senate contributions to the two parties were about equal.

“During his time in the Senate and while running for president, Obama received a total of $77,051 from the oil giant and is the top recipient of BP PAC and individual money over the past 20 years, according to financial disclosure records.”

BHO became the junior Senator from IL in 2005. So, that means that in just 5 years his contributions exceeded all others, even those who were federal office holders for the entire 20 year period. See the article for this: Senator Mary Landrieu D-LA (14 years ) is second only to BHO in 2008 and one of the all time high recipients and Senator John McCain R-AZ (28 years) falls in the substantial category for 2008 (no mention for the entire time frame).

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.html

hatehavingtodothis:

One of the problems I see with the Rand Paul/”angry white posters on Mediaite” argument is that they want it both ways.
They want the right to racially segregate while demanding absolute acceptance, allegience and loyalty from the group that is negatively affected by the segregation.

The American Revolution, many historians say, was caused for the most part, because of taxation without representation, and the colonists not being able to further displace Native Americans west of the Appalachians to settle. (Notice Munch isn’t attacking Native Americans for THEIR current graduation rates? Curious, huh?)

Given the abominable, catastrophic treatment of non-whites in America, can anybody here tell me why a non-white revolution in America wouldn’t have been justified? Not that I’m arguing for one, mind you…but ol’ GordonBlower and company thinks corporate Jim Crow should be brought back and he’s getting high-fived in here.

–Cobra

Hey grammie- no problem. http://blog.sunlightfoundation.com/2010/05/04/connections-in-congress-may-aid-bp-lobby-effort/

Interesting though, the article I have says they’ve donated over $6 million in 20 years. I don’t want to go digging through sources and figure all this out. But regardless, we can agree that both parties are in BP’s pocket? I’m not sure how much that will hinder clean-up attempts and future legislation, but it’s something to always keep in the back of the ol’ noodle.

Cobra-

“Notice Munch isn’t attacking Native Americans for THEIR current graduation rates? Curious, huh?) ”

Right lib- stating facts is now an attack.

And Cobra, while slavery was an abomination , your LIE that slavery “resulted in the deaths of MILLIONS of Blacks” doesn’t fly!!

My point is that NO ONE will make it as a HS drop out, including YOU.

Munch writes:

“Back in the ’70s , you would see in some manufacturing companies a Plant Manager who had worked his way to that position with only a 9th grade education.

HS drop outs? You are “slaves.”

Not today, because manufacturing companies are shipping labor overseas for cheap labor, primarily in ASIAN COUNTRIES, where the exploited, underpaid, and oppressed toil for dirt. It’s simply American GREED.

Is that the system you’re defending?

–Cobra

Hate, there is a lot to read so for now all I did was the quick math in my head for the three categories and amounts given, which added up to 7 million.

Tks for the link.

Oh, and Cobra-

President Obama to NAACP: “No Excuses”

July 17, 2009 9:39 AM

The President gave an impassioned address to the NAACP in New York City last night.

“We’ve got to say to our children,” the president said, “‘Yes, if you’re African American, the odds of growing up amid crime and gangs are higher, yes, if you live in a poor neighborhood, you will face challenges that somebody in a wealthy suburb does not have to face. But that’s not a reason to get bad grades, that’s not a reason to cut class, that’s not a reason to give up on your education and drop out of school. No one has written your destiny for you. Your destiny is in your hands — you cannot forget that.’

“That’s what we have to teach all of our children,” the president said to applause. “No excuses. No excuses.”

At another point in the speech he said, “when I drive through Harlem or I drive through the South Side of Chicago and I see young men on the corners, I say, there but for the grace of God go I. “

Cobra- I’m not sure exactly what the right wants here. They certainly don’t all want the same thing, at least in the same way. Yes, it is now necessary (or I thought it was, until Mr. Paul was put front and center) to demand racial acceptance, but I’m not sure I follow how they’re trying to get minorities to pledge their allegiance and loyalty. I feel like they’re just always in damage-control mode, and it gives off that “see, we’re hip!” vibe. Or did I miss your point?

Also, and Munch will have to back this up, but I at least hope he wasn’t “attacking” african americans for their lower graduation rates (right, Munch?).

And we can all agree that Gordon’s worldview is terrifying. :-)

Not today, because manufacturing companies are shipping labor overseas for cheap labor, primarily in ASIAN COUNTRIES, where the exploited, underpaid, and oppressed toil for dirt. It’s simply American GREED.”

But then if that is happening, then it’s Asian greed too!

I guess you hate Asians, eh?

LOL

hatehavingtodothis says:

My point is that NO ONE will make it as a HS drop out.

And Cobra wants to blame all the ills black see on white people and not lack of education, out of wedlock births.

It can only be explained by slavery- which ASIANS suffered from also!

Let’s see, Cobra hates whites and asians.

How about Latino’s ?

Munch,

“In Slavery A World History, Milton Meltzer estimates that 10 million slaves arrived in the Americas. This would be the residue after 12.5% of those shipped out from Africa died on the ocean, 4-5% died while waiting in harbor, and 33% died during the first year of seasoning.

No year-by-year stats, but by piecing together scattered decade stats, I figure that 5M slaves were shipped in the 18th Century.
Shipboard mortality among slaves:
Mercado in 1569 estimated an average shipboard mortality of 20%
Brazilian historians: 15-20% in 16th C; 10% in 19th C.
English trade:
1680s: 24%
early 18th C: 10%
1780s: 5.65%
Hugh Thomas: 9% reasonable est. for 18th C.
19th C
Cliffe: 35%
House of Commons: 9.1%
Thomson: 9%
Hotham: 5%
In the chapter on African population in the Atlas of World Population History (1978), Colin McEvedy estimates that 9.5 million African slaves were imported into the Americas between 1500 and 1880. He also suggests a 15% mortality rate on the ocean.”

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstatv.htm

Your ridiculous assertion about Slavery is not supported by numerous historians, Munch. Second, use your own LOGIC, about exactly how the slave trade worked? Acquisition and resistance….transportation…forced labor…discipline…access to nutrition…health care…climate exposure…disease…HELLO?
Hating me shouldn’t short-circuit your cognitive mental processes that much, man.

hatetohavetodothis,

Now you know the reason I wanted to discuss this with Munch offline.

–Cobra

Hating me shouldn’t short-circuit your cognitive mental processes that much, man.”

You are the only person showing hate, Cobra- and exactly how are these statistics going to help you in 2010?

Munch- please stop inappropriately and inaccurately summarizing Cobra’s position. It’s really unflattering for you. Stick to what you think, not what you want Cobra to think.

Seymour Drescher estimates that 21M were enslaved, 1700-1850, ”

4M died “as a direct result of enslavement”

That’s 150 years.

And 6 million Jews were killed in less than 10 years between 1936-1945.

And I don’t hear Jews blaming this for any ills they experience.

hatehavingtodothis says:
May 23, 2010 at 2:19 pm

Munch- please stop inappropriately and inaccurately summarizing Cobra’s position. It’s really unflattering for you. Stick to what you think, not what you want Cobra to think.”

So repeating his words is inaccurate?

LOL

And Cobra-

President Obama to NAACP: “No Excuses”

July 17, 2009 9:39 AM

The President gave an impassioned address to the NAACP in New York City last night.

“We’ve got to say to our children,” the president said, “‘Yes, if you’re African American, the odds of growing up amid crime and gangs are higher, yes, if you live in a poor neighborhood, you will face challenges that somebody in a wealthy suburb does not have to face. But that’s not a reason to get bad grades, that’s not a reason to cut class, that’s not a reason to give up on your education and drop out of school. No one has written your destiny for you. Your destiny is in your hands — you cannot forget that.’

“That’s what we have to teach all of our children,” the president said to applause. “No excuses. No excuses.”

At another point in the speech he said, “when I drive through Harlem or I drive through the South Side of Chicago and I see young men on the corners, I say, there but for the grace of God go I. “

Hatehavingtodothis:

GordonBlower is a no brainer. So is Rand Paul and his dad. Munch is different. I’m still trying to figure out, Munch.

When Munch quotes Obama, what is Munch getting at? Does he believe that I as a Black man disagree with what he’s saying, and am in favor of seeing Black students fail? Why on earth would I do that? Obama was addressing the reality of the situation that people in poor neighborhoods face, and trying to inspire them to rise above the challenges.

Now, in discussing this with Munch, do I have to go back in history to explain how poor WHITE immigrants moved up in America, and what pathways were available to them that WEREN’T to Blacks? I think Munch is smarter than that, and already knows. But here, on a blog where White Nationalism is in such favor, would he dare say so?

I don’t know what Munch’s opinion is of the Naturalization Act of 1790, Homestead Act of 1862 or Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. I do know that he seems to have a problem with African-Americans like ME who dare to challenge White Conservatives and Libertarians who want to roll back the clock on Civil Rights.

That doesn’t bother me. I see folks like that around a LOT lately.

–Cobra

Munch- “So repeating [Cobra's] words is inaccurate?”, no, but doing it inaccurately is.

Evidence: “Cobra wants to blame all the ills black see on white people and not lack of education, out of wedlock births.”, “Cobra hates whites and asians.”, and arguably “your angry racism is palpable as is your failure.”

I don’t know what Munch’s opinion is of the Naturalization Act of 1790, Homestead Act of 1862 or Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882″

And how are those affecting people today?

Munch writes:

“And Cobra, while slavery was an abomination , your LIE that slavery “resulted in the deaths of MILLIONS of Blacks” doesn’t fly!!”

And then Munch writes 24 minutes later:

“Seymour Drescher estimates that 21M were enslaved, 1700-1850, ”

And I don’t hear Jews blaming this for any ills they experience.”

A little advice, Munch…you really need to get off THIS train at the next stop. The “whose genocide was worse” Station is NOT a great place to travel all the way to.

But that’s the PROBLEM with blog threads. You’re not even debating a point anymore. You’re just trying to agitate ME. And you’re the one who’s looking worse with every post.

–Cobra

I don’t know what Munch’s opinion is of the Naturalization Act of 1790, Homestead Act of 1862 or Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882″

And how are those affecting people today?

Slow clap.

I’m debating what is more causative factor of lack of success in today’s world and I say it’s lack of education and you say it’s the remnants of discrimination, and yet you dismiss the discrimination others faced.

The lack of education is (as I argued earlier) a remnant of discrimination, and by your own statistics, the lack of education is disproportionally affecting blacks. Can we just talk about this then?

Munch writes:

“I don’t know what Munch’s opinion is of the Naturalization Act of 1790, Homestead Act of 1862 or Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882″

And how are those affecting people today?”

They affect people today because wealth and social stratification are generational conditions. The Homestead Act of 1862 was one of the greatest social welfare boons in the history of America (if not the world) where, for the most part, Lincoln gave away acres of land for free. Most of that free land went to White people. Real Estate is wealth, and 246 Million acres were handed out. (The 40 Acres and a Mule reparations, in contrast, never happened.) That land was developed, sold, resold, leveraged, collateralized, etc–and much of it PASSED DOWN throughout the generations. How much is 246 million acres worth in 2010 dollars, Munch?
Some of the other acts deal with citizenship, and the ability to have political access or power. That’s how the “dominant” group created wealth–by creating government systems both local and nationally, that self-perpetuated their dominance–a dominance White immigrants assimilated into.

Go to TODAY, Munch. African-Americans only achieved civil rights (which some people here are arguing against) and voting rights within the past 50 years. So you ask, how do the laws and acts of yesterday, affect people today…America didn’t start last week.

Munch writes:

“I’m debating what is more causative factor of lack of success in today’s world and I say it’s lack of education and you say it’s the remnants of discrimination, and yet you dismiss the discrimination others faced.”>

Moreover, no…I will agree with you that dropping out of high school is NOT a recipe for success in America, but denying the affects of historic White racial preferences in America by just saying…”Hey, what’s wrong with Blacks? White people made it just fine”….is simply ignorant.

–Cobra

“You are stupid.” Thanks, hatehavingtodo, for proving that the left cannot debate without name calling. But back to the earlier discussion. In their history, Jews were held in slavery and survived the holocaust. Ever heard of a successful Jew? Or did a past history of oppression permanently doom them to an eternity of failure? You on the left keep looking to the past because you’re locked into political correctness. 70% of black households are single parent, and black crime rates per capita are way above any other group. (Even native Americans, which puts a dent in your ‘oppression causes it’ argument. No group has been more oppressed than native Americans, yet their crime rates are much lower than those for blacks.) But the left cannot and will never say that maybe, just maybe, a good portion of the black community’s problems are self-inflicted. You’d rather keep blaming things that happened fifty or a hundred or two hundred years ago.

Writer-
“the left cannot debate without name calling” – yeah we can. After you left, Cobra, Munch and I had a dandy discussion. And I call you “stupid” like I call you “writer”. It just fits. You are incapable of debating on this forum without overgeneralizing “the left” and bringing up irrelevant topics, like this jew thing. What happened to the jews can not be accurately compared to what happened to african americans. They’re different. Very different. Oh, another one, I’m “locked into political correctness”. Um. Nope. Not at all. I dislike “political correctness” in a lot of forms. And one more irrelevant analogy you bring up- native americans v african americans. They have very different histories in this country.

How about YOU get over this blame thing. Is institutionalized, legislated racism a generation ago not enough for you to feel like maybe there is overall a disadvantage to being black? No? Ok. Well, moving on- blacks have disproportionately way too high out of wedlock birth rates and way too low graduation rates. There are many factors that contribute to this. In some communities, for some people, it’s self afflicted. But as a whole, their modern position is the sum of their history (such is the forward-moving nature of time), and it weighs on them, whether you care to acknowledge it or not.

No one is doomed to an eternity of failure. I don’t keep looking to the past. I just understand how it has shaped the present more than you.

I don’t know what Munch’s opinion is of the Naturalization Act of 1790, Homestead Act of 1862 or Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882″”

This shows you are consumed by the past and refuse to live in the present.

Many, many people have overcome adversity, but rather than try to live in the present and prepare for the future, you are content to live in the past and lay blame. And every day, the future is passing by while you live in your dystopian hate for the past.

As BHO said:”“No excuses. No excuses.”

Is institutionalized, legislated racism a generation ago not enough for you to feel like maybe there is overall a disadvantage to being black?”

Nice lie, liar- a generation ago was 1980.

White racial preferences in America by just saying…”Hey, what’s wrong with Blacks? White people made it just fine”….is simply ignorant.”

White, white- it’s all about white, isnt it?

So, to sum writer’s points-

the left cannot debate without name calling.” – yes we can. I just called you stupid twice after you were ignorant and wrong twice. Until you show me every argument ever made by the left and show me where there is name calling- you’re wrong.

“Ever heard of a successful Jew? Or did a past history of oppression permanently doom them to an eternity of failure?” Yes I’ve heard of successful jews. No, their past did not doom them to failure.

“You on the left keep looking to the past because you’re locked into political correctness.” – Nope. Just nope.

“70% of black households are single parent, and black crime rates per capita are way above any other group. (Even native Americans, which puts a dent in your ‘oppression causes it’ argument. No group has been more oppressed than native Americans, yet their crime rates are much lower than those for blacks.)” Who has historically been more oppressed than whom is not a legitimate point. There was specific legislature and more recent, more robust racism against blacks. Slavery, civil rights, all that stuff, remember? My argument isn’t “oppression causes it”, it is more that “x, y, and z have put blacks statistically in a worse off position”, x y and z being any of a number of oppressive elements from the past.

“But the left cannot and will never say that maybe, just maybe, a good portion of the black community’s problems are self-inflicted.” The left can, will, and has said it. Obama said it, if you read a little higher up. So you’re wrong again there. And on a micro level, you’re right. But I don’t think they have one collective consciousness that told them to all move and stay in the ghettos. I’m pretty sure there were historical forces at work there. Hm….

“You’d rather keep blaming things that happened fifty or a hundred or two hundred years ago.” I would rather not assign blame at all. Is studying history to understand the path that brought the black population to where they are today assigning blame? What’s the point? Why are you so effortfully trying to remain ignorant of the past here? All of your inappropriate analogies and whatnot just get further and further from the true debate here and I really don’t understand why you keep doing it.

http://www.fashionclothe.com/index.asp

Munch writes:

“Many, many people have overcome adversity, but rather than try to live in the present and prepare for the future, you are content to live in the past and lay blame. And every day, the future is passing by while you live in your dystopian hate for the past.”

“Living in the past” is when Rand Paul disagrees with a 46 year old settled piece of legislation, and states on national television that private businesses have the right to discriminate based on race.

THAT’S why this is an issue, Munch, and it will continue to be an issue as long as Rand Paul is running for Senate and in a position to affect legislation.

Tyler Durdin writes:

“White, white- it’s all about white, isnt it?”

If Rand Paul says that resturaunts should be allowed to post “Blacks Not Served Here” signs in 2010…damn right.

Do you agree with Rand Paul, Tyler?

Be honest now…

–Cobra

Hatehavingtodothis, evidently you are the stupid one, since nothing gets through your head. Your argument is that because of past injustices such as slavery, segregation, and Jim Crow, that blacks are still being affected by it today. Can you explain exactly how? Slavery has been long gone, and segregation and Jim Crow were outlawed almost half a century ago. That means that any black person under fifty has never experienced these things. So how are they still being affected? Can you name the businesses or institutions which are still practicing these things? If they are, it’s against the law and you should report them. I also realize that if I try comparing any other group to blacks, you get totally lost and start screaming, “I’m not talking about them! This is only about American blacks!” It’s probably hopeless since your mind was already made up before we started, but I’ll try using an example again. The reason I mentioned Jews is because they too have faced slavery, discrimination, and even the holocaust. While the current generation of Jews certainly know of these things, is past mistreatment still holding them back? Are there any successful Jewish people? Now I know you’ll start crying that the two situations are completely different. You can see no connection in any other group overcoming adversity. You’ll stick to your claims that since blacks have encountered adversity in the past, they are unique in being the only group of people who will never be able to overcome it.

Cobra, I have never met anyone who is living off the 160 acres they got from the Homestead Act- I’m sure in your “time machine” world, you have.

Your psychosis about the past helps you not in the present or future.

And how do you explain the successful blacks? There should be no reason that they are success in YOUR America . And just why do you thing that more people want to immigrate to the USA than to any other country?

Some quotes :

“People who live in the past generally are afraid to compete in the present. I’ve got my faults, but living in the past is not one of them. There’s no future in it.”

“Losers live in the past. Winners learn from the past and enjoy working in the present toward the future.”

Hatehavingtodothis, one of the biggest problems in the black community is single parent households. Here are some census figures.

The percentage of births to single women varies across race. In 1995, 20 percent of all births to Asian and Pacific Islanders were to single women, compared to 25 percent for white women; 41 percent for women of Hispanic origin; 57 percent for Native American, Eskimo, and Aleut women; and 70 percent for African-American families.

Can you please explain to us how a black guy impregnating his girlfriend, then walking out and leaving her and the kids to fend for themselves, is the white man’s fault?

“You’ll stick to your claims that since blacks have encountered adversity in the past, they are unique in being the only group of people who will never be able to overcome it.”

This. Is. Not. My. Claim.

And the fact that this all happened only 50 years ago is exactly what I’m talking about! We’re talking about the parents of adults who are still alive who weren’t allowed to get married, who didn’t have access to the same education, who didn’t have the same economic opportunities, who weren’t able to pass these benefits on to their kids who are now adults who are now raising kids who are equally more likely to be disadvantaged. Blacks are coming from a disadvantage that jews and american indians didn’t face in this country, and there are people still alive today who had to live with such discrimination (and who enforced such discrimination). Why did blacks end up primarily in urban environments and stay there? Not wholly by choice. And it’s been a perpetual cycle, some factors of which (like where they live, parent education levels, etc.) is from the past, some of which is snowballing form present circumstances, that keeps them statistically disadvantaged (see: stats above). I’m not saying that businesses are overtly discriminating against blacks (although if Rand Paul had his way, they could), but that hasn’t been my point. All I’m saying is that oppression and discrimination from my grandparents generation and before has put more blacks than whites in a disadvantaged position. I’d like to hope that if we just let the wheels of time turn, by the time I’m a grandparent everyone will have equal opportunities, but that they’re still as disadvantaged as they are now doesn’t give me great hope for how these stats will look in 20, 30, and 40 years if the cycle isn’t broken and there are better opportunities provided to our most disadvantaged kids (yes, I’m talking about poor, urban, white kids here too). History, intentionally at times and unintentionally, has established a system in which more white kids than black kids have real opportunities for advancement. What I’m saying here is really in no way radical.

“Can you please explain to us how a black guy impregnating his girlfriend, then walking out and leaving her and the kids to fend for themselves, is the white man’s fault?”

So, what, blacks are genetically predisposed to walk out on their wives?
Or is it a cultural thing?
And if it is a cultural thing- how did it get that way? It just, happened yesterday?

No, on a personal level, it is the fault of whoever walks out on his baby’s mother for walking out, but what I’m trying to get at is how did it get that way? Why does it happen more in black communities?

No. Actually, in the worst days of Jim Crow and segregation, the numbers for single parent black households was lower than than for whites. Care to explain that one?

And hate, if a ‘history of oppression’ is your excuse, why are the numbers lower for native Americans? They haven’t been oppressed quite as much, I guess.

I’d rather hear you try to explain that one actually.

“Can you please explain to us how a black guy impregnating his girlfriend, then walking out and leaving her and the kids to fend for themselves, is the white man’s fault?”

Won’t answer. Already did.

whoops, copied and pasted the wrong thing:

“And hate, if a ‘history of oppression’ is your excuse, why are the numbers lower for native Americans? They haven’t been oppressed quite as much, I guess.”

That one I already answered.

Here’s the thing, hate. Why are the current generation of black men behaving as they do? I don’t know, and neither do you. Their grandfathers didn’t walk out on their women like that, and they certainly had it harder than today’s generation. If oppression was the answer, then that generation would’ve been doing it, not the current generation. So blaming the past does nothing, and making for excuses for the current generation does nothing. Just look at it for what it is, and admit that many of today’s generation of young black men need to clean up their act. That 70% figure is horrendous, no matter how many excuses you try to make for it.

“Why are the current generation of black men behaving as they do? I don’t know, and neither do you.”

A lot of people are studying this actually. People have an understanding of it. Just because you don’t want to learn doesn’t mean you’re right. Read a book. Take a class. Or blame the individual without context. One requires effortful thinking, the other does not. I have a feeling I know what you’ll do.

Hate, if you had any common sense and would quit going purely on your left wing ideology, you would realize that any race which has 70% of the kids being raised by one parent is shooting itself in the foot. No matter what the reasons are. Okay, look for causes. But in the meantime, is it really so wrong to tell that 70% of young black men that if they don’t intend to raise kids, then quit getting their girlfriends pregnant? Even Bill Cosby (a black man) has blasted the current generation of black men for acting that way, and has said there’s no excuse for it. And as usual, you on the left blast him for saying it. So let’s all keep pretending that young black men should never be criticized for their behavior and let things go on as they are.

Please stop pretending to know my position!

“So let’s all keep pretending that young black men should never be criticized for their behavior and let things go on as they are.”

No, let’s not! It’s not good behavior.

“Is it really so wrong to tell that 70% of young black men that if they don’t intend to raise kids, then quit getting their girlfriends pregnant?”

No, it’s the right thing to do. Remember when Obama did it?

“any race which has 70% of the kids being raised by one parent is shooting itself in the foot”

Totally agree with you again. I’ve never argued anything different.

I really don’t want to keep this going in an angry tone. We clearly have common ground here. By looking at the historical context for the modern predicament, I’m not looking to assign blame. I just think it’s important to have a full understanding of how things are the way they are so issues like low graduation rates can be more comprehensively addressed. Blacks didn’t wake up and think “ya know, let’s stop graduating”. History has put them in this position, and by understanding it, maybe we will know how to better help them? It’s not as easy as just going into schools and saying “stay in school, y’all. Stop walking out on your kids.” There has to be a broader social change, which I think requires a broader social awareness.

Part of that ‘social change’ is kids going home after school and having a parent there to look out for them. If mom has to be at work because there is no dad, then what are these latch key kids going to do? Buckle down and do their homework? Or roam the streets? Again, if oppression and discrimination was causing this, then the older generation of black men would’ve been the ones walking out on their women. And they didn’t. Even Jesse Jackson has advised “You’re not a man when you can make a baby. You’re a man when you can raise one.” I haven’t heard anyone calling Jesse a racist for saying it. But if a white person says the same thing, they get the racist label.

“If oppression and discrimination was causing this, then the older generation of black men would’ve been the ones walking out on their women”

No, not really, but that’s what I’ve been trying to say. Times have changed between then and now. That’s the whole “history leads to the present” thing. That’s the history. This is the present. Discrimination directly, then, didn’t cause black fathers to walk out on their kids, it just put into motion a series of events that led to the modern culture we’re speaking of.

And for the record, I’m pretty sure it’s not racist to say a father should raise his kids. If you could also stop speaking in hypotheticals like that, that would also be really helpful, thanks.

“I have a feeling I know what you’ll do.”

Wasn’t that hypothetical? And what exactly is this ‘culture’ you’re talking about? If the older generation of black men stayed with their women, wasn’t that part of their culture? And don’t parents pass their culture on to their kids? I can’t believe that an eighty year old black man would see his twenty year old grandson walk out on his pregnant girlfriend and grant his approval. So whatever this ‘culture’ is, I don’t think it was inherited and it’s not a good thing, no matter how you spin it.

Yea, you’re right, I can’t help but keep jabbing at your willful approach to not giving context more thought. But that was more of a joke towards you (sorry!) than a sweeping social statement.

And I am in no way spinning it to be good.

How do you think this culture happened? I’m still waiting to hear your historical explanation.

Yes, parents pass culture on to their kids.

But you know what is more important? Where the kids are raised. The education available to them. The education level of their parents. Things beyond the control of children who are raised in a disadvantaged environment, the forces of which help keep them disadvantaged.

I don’t know why this culture happened. And neither do you. And again, if being disadvantaged causes it, why didn’t the earlier generations, who were certainly more disadvantaged, behave that way? And the reason the current generation of black kids is disadvantaged isn’t because of segregated schools, Jim Crow, or any of the things that happened in the past. Bottom line, it’s because 70% of them are left to run the streets after school because mom is out working and dad is in the wind. It’s not racism, it’s not culture, it’s not Jim Crow. It’s because 70% of young black men are refusing to take responsibility for their own actions. Period.

“And the reason the current generation of black kids is disadvantaged isn’t because of segregated schools, Jim Crow, or any of the things that happened in the past”

I would LOVE to see your source for that.

Or how about you just TRY to understand what is going on outside of the present on an individual level. There’s more out there and you’re not looking at the big picture. Lots of people are. I do have some understanding of what happened, but my formal education is more science oriented. Again- YOU don’t understand what is happening, but it is not unknowable. You just don’t know. You are ignorant of the historical context of the problems in the African American community we are talking about. And I don’t mean that as an insult, clearly you have interest in understanding, and that’s OK, but it’s wrongheaded of you to assume that you know best when… you know nothing.

Typo in that last sentence: “… clearly you have NO interest in understanding …”

Okay, then. You know it all. I must have missed it. If a history of oppression, slavery, discrimination, Jim Crow, and so on, all figures into today’s problems in the black community, then why is it causing 70% of the current generation of black men to leave their women, but it didn’t affect their grandparents the same way? Does it skip generations? The grandparents actually experienced Jim Crow, segregated schools, and so on, and yet that generation of men stayed with their women. The younger generation, who weren’t even born when the civil rights act was passed outlawing all the things their grandparents went through, behave much worse. So as conditions got better, behavior got worse. Since you know best, why is that?

I’m not an authority on it. I don’t know it all. I don’t know it best. I studied it a little bit as an undergraduate and have some understanding of African American history. You actually raise some interesting academic questions that I’m sure sociologists and historians are and have been pouring over for some time. Because we are getting into more specifics now I’m going to see what I can find and get back to you in a few. But why don’t you look it up and try to understand yourself if you’re interested? What is your basis for believing that there is no historical factor?

Doesn’t make sense that if it’s the history, it would be affecting the current generation more than it did the past ones. Past generations of black men didn’t desert their women, and they had it worse. Conditions are much betters now, and black men are behaving worse. Don’t pretend to have all the answers, but history doesn’t explain it.

better, not betters. Typo.

It’s not “conditions now” verse “conditions then”, as I have said before. It’s conditions then leading to conditions now.

Black families tried to stay together historically, but were often, ya know, sold off. In the 20th century, driven by disenfranchisement, lynching, depression, and sexual exploitations in the South and economic opportunity in the North, hundreds and thousands of black families trekked there to urban cities. … The North, with its fickle and discriminatory employment practices, housing convenants, and violent response to economic competition from blacks, was not the mecca prophesied in earlier years. The integrity of black families would be challenged again during the Depression, when, based on the principle that black families needed less to live on than whites, they received less in relief payments.

Move forward in time a few decades, but still a few decades ago, and black families were still more close knit, but poorer, urban, less educated, and relying, more than white families, on two incomes, which kept women and mothers out of the home more.

Compared to teens who grow up with 2 parents, adolescents living apart from their parents are twice as likely to drop out of high school and twice as likely to have kids before the age of 20, and one and half time more likely to be out of school and work by their late teens. Marital issues aside, just being more poor decreases one’s well being and life prospects.

There are many, many, many, many factors, many of which have roots in the past, that have led to what is going on now. I have to go now, but I’ve downloaded a lot more articles to read and I’ll be getting back to you soon.

Or look it up. This is interesting stuff that you’ve raised. There are novels devoted to it. For some reason, I don’t think a blog comment or two will suffice. You have to actually want and try to learn about it, and I think you’re satisfied remaining ignorant.

Always gotta get that dig in at the end, huh? Bottom line is, don’t keep knocking up your girlfriends if you have no intention of staying with them and supporting the kids. No matter how you spin and dance, that comes down to a matter of personal responsibility and nothing else. Segregated schools, or the KKK, or all white diners, or lynching, or none of your other excuses explain why today’s generation of young black males can’t keep it in their pants. I’m just guessing here, but I’d say if 70% of young white guys were getting their gals pregnant and abandoning them, you wouldn’t be so sympathetic and bending over backwards to make excuses for them. Perhaps you are one of those young black men with a dozen kids running the streets and that’s why you keep making excuses, rather than be willing to just come out and say that young black men are behaving irresponsibly. And if you’re not black, you are at least a die hard leftie, which means that while white people can be blamed for all the world’s ills, minorities can never, ever be criticized for their own behavior.

writer writes:

” I’m just guessing here, but I’d say if 70% of young white guys were getting their gals pregnant and abandoning them, you wouldn’t be so sympathetic and bending over backwards to make excuses for them.”

And I’m just guessing here, but I would wager that MORE than 70% of young white guys were having SEX with their “gals”, which is the act your indicting young blacks males with as some sort of “irresponsible” behavior. Unless your argument is that White males do NOT engage in pre or extramarital sex, then you’re making a statement about birth control, which has absolutely NOTHING to do with race, as people in Ireland and the Phillipines can attest to.
Also…given that the majority of the million plus abortions in this country are by Whites, are you REALLY going to argue the race/sex moral high ground position?

Really?

–Cobra

That 70% figure was from the census figures. Not saying premarital sex is wrong. Saying it’s wrong to get a girl pregnant , then leave her holding the bag. Blacks are doing that in numbers far greater than any other group. Census figures, not mine.

Writer writes:

“Not saying premarital sex is wrong.”

Write wrote before:

“Segregated schools, or the KKK, or all white diners, or lynching, or none of your other excuses explain why today’s generation of young black males can’t keep it in their pants.”

You can’t have it both ways, Writer.

–Cobra