1 edit
@Metal-Brain saidYour cavalier and ignorant dismissal of the historical fact that white racists reacted with violence to integration and that was a reasonable fear in the 1970s and beyond is noted.
So segregation was the right policy back then to make blacks safe from white people. Got it. That is why Trump denied housing to blacks. For their own good. He just wanted to prevent explosions. He cares about blacks.
So Biden had to limit desegregation to protect black people from the KKK?
Dude, you would let the KKK determine segregation policy with violence?????
No, it wasn't a sufficient reason for favoring segregation and Joe Biden didn't do so. In fact, he has supported affirmative action programs for many years.
@no1marauder saidOhhh, I am very accepting that the KKK did those things just as the article you posted said. So giving the terrorists what they want is acceptable policy? Biden wanted to limit integration because the KKK made desegregation unsafe for black people.
Your cavalier and ignorant dismissal of the historical fact that white racists reacted with violence to integration and that was a reasonable fear in the 1970s and beyond is noted.
No, it wasn't a sufficient reason for favoring segregation and Joe Biden didn't do so.
Listen to yourself. You sound like George Wallace!
Wallace was the governor of that state at the time too. No wonder the KKK thought they could get away with murder. They could!
@Metal-Brain saidYou are grossly distorting his position and you know it. Opposing court mandated busing of school children does not equal support for segregation per se nor make one a "racist".
Ohhh, I am very accepting that the KKK did those things just as the article you posted said. So giving the terrorists what they want is acceptable policy? Biden wanted to limit integration because the KKK made desegregation unsafe for black people.
Listen to yourself. You sound like George Wallace!
Wallace was the governor of that state at the time too. No wonder the KKK thought they could get away with murder. They could!
If it did, a strong majority of Americans were racist supporters of segregation in the 1970s and beyond:
". A 1972 Harris Poll found that only 20 percent of Americans favored “busing schoolchildren to achieve racial balance,” with 73 percent against it. A 1978 Washington Post poll found that 25 percent agreed that “racial integration of the schools should be achieved even if it requires busing.”
https://opiniontoday.com/2019/07/07/effective-but-never-popular-court-ordered-busing-is-a-relic-few-would-revive/
No, that doesn't mean they were all closet supporters of the KKK.
@no1marauder saidThe purpose of busing was to coerce the increase of funding to black schools. Instead of supporting the increase of funding he fought it by fighting busing instead of black school equality. Then he wanted mandatory minimums that put mostly blacks in prison for drugs. Good thing Hunter wasn't smoking crack back then.
You are grossly distorting his position and you know it. Opposing court mandated busing of school children does not equal support for segregation per se nor make one a "racist".
If it did, a strong majority of Americans were racist supporters of segregation in the 1970s and beyond:
". A 1972 Harris Poll found that only 20 percent of Americans favored “busing ...[text shortened]... ng-is-a-relic-few-would-revive/
No, that doesn't mean they were all closet supporters of the KKK.
Why are you defending Biden anyway? He cannot win and you know it.
A vote for Biden is a vote for Trump. Joe is damaged goods. I warned you about this too, but you hated Kennedy because you heard rumors and you couldn't vote for Marianne Williamson for whatever reason so now you have to choose between Kennedy or Trump.
Are you going to let Trump win or vote for Kennedy?
@Metal-Brain saidI'm correcting your untruths because they are lies. I have no love for Biden; I didn't vote for him in 2020 and have no intention of voting for him, Trump or Kennedy. I didn't bother to vote in NY's Democratic primary because no one but Biden was still running.
The purpose of busing was to coerce the increase of funding to black schools. Instead of supporting the increase of funding he fought it by fighting busing instead of black school equality. Then he wanted mandatory minimums that put mostly blacks in prison for drugs. Good thing Hunter wasn't smoking crack back then.
Why are you defending Biden anyway? He cannot win an ...[text shortened]... you have to choose between Kennedy or Trump.
Are you going to let Trump win or vote for Kennedy?
Because of the ridiculous present Electoral College system, my vote doesn't matter anyway.
@no1marauder saidAlso known as racism.
In fact, he has supported affirmative action programs for many years.
"prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group"
@Wajoma saidNo, known as an antidote to the effects of pernicious racism and discrimination.
Also known as racism.
"prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group"
Those programs are not based on any "prejudice, discrimination or antagonism" against anyone, so you continue to make this foolish error.
@no1marauder saidWhat lies? Be specific.
I'm correcting your untruths because they are lies. I have no love for Biden; I didn't vote for him in 2020 and have no intention of voting for him, Trump or Kennedy. I didn't bother to vote in NY's Democratic primary because no one but Biden was still running.
Because of the ridiculous present Electoral College system, my vote doesn't matter anyway.
6 edits
@no1marauder saidIt is prejudice on the basis of race i.e. racism.
No, known as an antidote to the effects of pernicious racism and discrimination.
Those programs are not based on any "prejudice, discrimination or antagonism" against anyone, so you continue to make this foolish error.
You cannot discriminate for someone without discriminating against another, and when that discrimination occurs on the basis of race that is racism.
That is a 100% black and white fact.
You either call it what it is or you need to find some other cover to hide behind. It's been exposed for what it is.
Edit: Advice - Rather than hiding, slithering, stuttering, bending the truth you might consider sub headings, example: 'Good racism', 'Bad racism' or 'Justified racism', 'Unjustified racism'.
@sh76 saidSo...
I'd really prefer none of them, but given that doesn't seem to be an option, I have strictly professional reasons that I cannot afford another Democratic administration.
Kennedy is certainly impressive physically for his age, but he has never impressed me intellectually, dating back to the early 2000s when I heard him "lecture" in law school. Anyway, while some of his ideas a ...[text shortened]... Or maybe I'll vote a fourth party. I wrote in Evan McMullin in 2016 (he wasn't on the ballot in NY).
Trump successfully bought your vote then?
1 edit
@Wajoma saidNope, it isn't any prejudice at all. Quite the contrary; the programs were to alleviate the effects of prejudice and discrimination - something you openly oppose having the government do.
It is prejudice on the basis of race i.e. racism.
You cannot discriminate for someone without discriminating against another, and when that discrimination occurs on the basis of race that is racism.
That is a 100% black and white fact.
You either call it what it is or you need to find some other cover to hide behind. It's been exposed for what it is.
Edit: Advice ...[text shortened]... ider sub headings, example: 'Good racism', 'Bad racism' or 'Justified racism', 'Unjustified racism'.
And no thanks - I don't feel like altering the accepted dictionary definition of racism to fit your incorrect one.
2 edits
@no1marauder saidNo.1 said:
Nope, it isn't any prejudice at all. Quite the contrary; the programs were to alleviate the effects of prejudice and discrimination - something you openly oppose having the government do.
And no thanks - I don't feel like altering the accepted dictionary definition of racism to fit your incorrect one.
"I don't feel like altering the accepted dictionary definition of racism to fit your incorrect one."
Google said:
"Google’s English dictionary is provided by Oxford Languages.
Oxford Languages is the world’s leading dictionary publisher, with over 150 years of experience creating and delivering authoritative dictionaries globally in more than 50 languages. Oxford’s English dictionaries are widely regarded as the world’s most authoritative sources on current English.
Oxford Dictionary said:
"...discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group.
BTW not all persons of race A were discriminated against by persons of race B, therefore persons from group B should not be discriminated against for any position in a political party. That the dims do this should be denounced by yourself and every rational person.
@Metal-Brain saidWajoma and Metal Brain: same person?
@Phranny
"a convicted rapist"
You sir are a liar.
Seems more than likely. They make the same errors.
@Metal-Brain saidThe irony here is palpable.
Just because you want something to be true does not make it so.
@Wajoma saidAffirmative Action is not racism. It's a reaction to racism.
Also known as racism.
"prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group"
Are you stupid?