"Race Relations" and "Race war"

[sangha]

You said that African Americans support the Democrat party at such wildly disproportionate rates "because blacks have been treated differently." I pointed out that as far as I'm aware in the last fifty years the only policies which specify different treatment between African Americans and European Americans have been some limited affirmative action policies. Is that true? It seems so from your list above, since the only points specifying different treatment are the first two, from the 1960s.

Of the rest, all but one clearly relates to low income or poverty programs, or provide the most benefit to those groups. In fact even problems with voting regulations are possibly experienced mostly along low income and education lines - though that's a different type of animal, purely about politicians angling to admit or exclude demographics based on expected voting patterns. But as for the others, do 90% of voters on food stamps or minimum wage etc. vote Democrat? (Hint; it's more like 60%; site only displays <$50k information after 2000.)

We were talking about why black people support the dems. Why do you limit the reason to "only policies which specify different treatment between African Americans and European Americans"? Are those the only reasons why black people can support a party?

Or do you believe that "only policies which specify different treatment between African Americans and European Americans " can result in a racially disparate impact?

 

[sangha]

Making an argument which depends on the assumption that most voters are well-informed and thoroughly research their candidates' policies and voting records is impeccable reasoning, I'm sure :roll:

I said nothing about voters thoroughly researching anything and how "well-informed" (a very subjective standard) does a black voter need to be when the GOP takes the position opposite their own on nearly every issue of importance to them? Does a LGBT voter need to be well-inform or conduct thorough research to know that a GOP candidate opposes SSM?

 

[blaxshep]

I said nothing about voters thoroughly researching anything and how "well-informed" (a very subjective standard) does a black voter need to be when the GOP takes the position opposite their own on nearly every issue of importance to them? Does a LGBT voter need to be well-inform or conduct thorough research to know that a GOP candidate opposes SSM?

What positions does the GOP take which opposite to black voters?

 

[sangha]

I've clearly said that both of your political parties engage in the same sort of practices, so this obsession with the intelligence of "blacks" is your cross to carry, not mine. To a greater or lesser extent all political parties do the same sort of thing, because that's the nature of the game: Rhetoric, pandering, focusing on target constituents whilst taking 'safe' votes for granted, double-speak, demonizing the opposition, wedge politics, flip-flopping, pragmatism and expediency are all valuable parts of the political toolbox. They're not necessarily all bad all the time, but you seem to be living in a world where they don't even exist!

We weren't talking about the "same sort of things". We were talking about something specific - the dems intentionally acting to keep black people down in order to maintain their support - a premise you have provided no evidence to suggest it is actually happening.

And just to be clear - we are not talking about "Rhetoric, pandering, focusing on target constituents whilst taking 'safe' votes for granted, double-speak, demonizing the opposition, wedge politics, flip-flopping, pragmatism and expediency"

we are talking about the specific argument that dems are intentionally keeping black people down in order to maintain their support

The African American community as a political constituency must be almost unique in the world in its combination of:
> Being an overwhelmingly 'safe' vote, to be taken for granted whenever there's a more pressing concern
> Having no credible alternative to the R- and D-teams, to dilute loyalty to the Democrats
> Due to American history and current political demographics, being particularly susceptible to demonizing of the R-team and wedge politics
> That being further compounded by their having generally lower education levels than the national norm and (for whatever reason and as you are utterly determined to keep pointing out) lower average IQs

So you *do* believe that black people are less intelligent!!

This isn't some kind of conspiracy theory we're talking about here. It's a simple description of political strategy and the kind of approaches used, to a greater or lesser extent, by all parties everywhere.

Actually, it is a conspiracy theory you're talking about:

is it not clearly and obviously the case that the D-team has a vested interest in perpetuating those circumstances or perspectives?

I haven't said or even remotely implied that the Democrats are trying to grind black noses into the dirt, nor that discrimination and racism have not been realities. But it is abundantly clear that there is more than just the low income/poverty policies you listed accounting for the overwhelming black support for the D-team; and it seems equally evident that a big part of the reason is the perception of the R-team as a white or even anti-black party.

And yet you're honestly trying to tell me that you believe there is no incentive there for the D-team to encourage those racial divisions, and present themselves as sympathetic to the black cause?

Yes, I am telling you that the dems have no incentive to, as you stated, "perpetuating those circumstances or perspectives" because such a policy has no chance of working

 

[Mithrae]

The links you provided do not contradict my argument.

Are you claiming that politicians' actions always match their rhetoric and their constituents' best interests? You got me with your subtle sarcasm, fair enough; Republicans DO support regulations, higher taxes and more government in various instances, but the Christian thing should have clued me in. That still doesn't change the point at issue.

We were talking about why black people support the dems. Why do you limit the reason to "only policies which specify different treatment between African Americans and European Americans"?

That's the primary reason YOU gave for their overwhelming support: "It's because blacks have been treated differently."

I said nothing about voters thoroughly researching anything

As I said nothing about black people being "too stupid to determine their own best interests." Maybe we can agree that average voters can be and often are misled by political spin and hype?

And just to be clear - we are not talking about "Rhetoric, pandering, focusing on target constituents whilst taking 'safe' votes for granted, double-speak, demonizing the opposition, wedge politics, flip-flopping, pragmatism and expediency"

we are talking about the specific argument that dems are intentionally keeping black people down in order to maintain their support

Maybe that's what you're talking about. Your primary reason given for black support was different treatment (ie racism, which is the subject of the thread) but it seems all along you've been arguing about poverty. Even though poverty (60% D suuport vs. 90% black) doesn't come close to explaining it.

So you *do* believe that black people are less intelligent!!

It is a fact that on average African Americans historically and up to the present "score lower than European Americans on vocabulary, reading, and mathematics tests, as well as on tests that claim to measure scholastic aptitude and intelligence." Why you've been so determined to drag that fact into the discussion is beyond me, since its relevance is minor at best - all groups can be misled by spin and hype - but I hope you're pleased at managing to drag it out?

https://www.nytimes.com/books/first/j/jencks-gap.html

Yes, I am telling you that the dems have no incentive to, as you stated, "perpetuating those circumstances or perspectives" because such a policy has no chance of working

You've already hinted at single-issue voting in the case of SSM, yet you're honestly going to pretend that no votes will be influenced by those 'racists' who insist that all lives matter?

I think we've thrashed this out about as much as we can. It's been an enjoyable discussion, and given me some challenges and opportunities to learn

 

[sangha]

Are you claiming that politicians' actions always match their rhetoric and their constituents' best interests? You got me with your subtle sarcasm, fair enough; Republicans DO support regulations, higher taxes and more government in various instances, but the Christian thing should have clued me in. That still doesn't change the point at issue.

No, I'm not saying that their rhetoric always matches their actions. Politicians of all stripes try to convince people that they are on their side. What I'm rejecting is the notion that they deliberately seek to keep a supporting constituency down

That's the primary reason YOU gave for their overwhelming support: "It's because blacks have been treated differently."

So does that mean that the only factors the cause the different treatment are laws which explicitly treat black people differently than white people? I don't think so.

Take the Voter ID laws, for example. It's widely recognized that such laws will result in black people being disenfranchised to a disproportionate degree, even though the laws do not explicitly apply different rules for black people and white people.

As I said nothing about black people being "too stupid to determine their own best interests." Maybe we can agree that average voters can be and often are misled by political spin and hype?

I am not so sure about that. Certainly, there are voters who can be misled. However, the amount and degree of deception you're talking about does not sound realistic to me. You're talking about decades and decades of deception.

Maybe that's what you're talking about. Your primary reason given for black support was different treatment (ie racism, which is the subject of the thread) but it seems all along you've been arguing about poverty. Even though poverty (60% D suuport vs. 90% black) doesn't come close to explaining it.[/qoute]

Poverty is definitely a part of it, but it's not all of it. Racism also plays a part. So does history and politics and a number of other things.

It is a fact that on average African Americans historically and up to the present "score lower than European Americans on vocabulary, reading, and mathematics tests, as well as on tests that claim to measure scholastic aptitude and intelligence." Why you've been so determined to drag that fact into the discussion is beyond me, since its relevance is minor at best - all groups can be misled by spin and hype - but I hope you're pleased at managing to drag it out?

https://www.nytimes.com/books/first/j/jencks-gap.html

I'm not a fan of Jencks, or of IQ tests in general. I brought up the idea because in order for the deception you speculate to work, it would require an exceptionally dim population of voters.

You've already hinted at single-issue voting in the case of SSM, yet you're honestly going to pretend that no votes will be influenced by those 'racists' who insist that all lives matter?

I really don't understand what you're asking me about here, or what your point is

I think we've thrashed this out about as much as we can. It's been an enjoyable discussion, and given me some challenges and opportunities to learn

Thank you. I always enjoy discussing issues with you. You're one of the more thoughtful posters and you don't flinch at the challenge.

 

[blaxshep]

They continue to keep thier constituency dependent, which in effect keeps them down.

 

[code1211]

1.) if its inaccurate than PLEASE PLEASe post FACTS that support you two factually false claims. We'd love to read them LMAO Come on proof i said what you claimed
2.) now its not, its what you claimed you posting more lies wont help your failed claims
3.) and another failed strawman and lie, nothign was ignore its simply invalid and does not change the fact that your statements are factually wrong and strawmen :shrug: But its awesome you keep proving the OP right, I LOVE IT!
4.) another strawman. How does the question support your false claim rave wars have begun or the lie you claimed that i said "things are as good as they've ever been so that diminishes the possibility of disaster or the presence of huge and growing problems." Your strawman fails again LMAO


Fact remains your statement cant be support with anything honest and factual nor can your strawmen. lets us know when that changes
opcorn2:

The rest of the things you say are as inaccurate as the claim that the words you put in quotes are a quote.

You don't seem to understand the language or the rules of grammar and don't seem to want to.

 

[LowDown]

...Anyway Race Relations in this country are better than they have ever been in the couple decades i've been on this planet and they are better than they have ever been in the history of the nation...

Have you told #BlackLivesMatter about that? Because I don't think they know. And the very existence of such a group puts the lie to what you are saying.

And you might mention something to President Obama, because he seems to be taking a lot of advantage of racial divisiveness. And the Democrats, too. You know, sort of habitually. For years and years.

Also, I may be wrong, but it seems to me that you only find fault with conservatives, like they are the only ones at fault in all this. I don't think you're really interested in putting an end to divisiveness in that case. It's like you're so completely full of crap that you can't even make an appeal against divisiveness without being completely divisive. I'm just sayin'.

Sometimes I think is that if we got rid of the Democrats racial divisiveness would be over on a fortnight. That's probably naive, because racist assholes are always going to rise up. They always have.

 

[AGENT J]

The rest of the things you say are as inaccurate as the claim that the words you put in quotes are a quote.

You don't seem to understand the language or the rules of grammar and don't seem to want to.

Translation: you got nothing to support your claims and continue to dodge and run from supporting them, that's what I thought! LMAO
please let us know when you do. Thanks
opcorn2:

 

[AGENT J]

1.)Have you told #BlackLivesMatter about that? Because I don't think they know. And the very existence of such a group puts the lie to what you are saying.

2.) And you might mention something to President Obama, because he seems to be taking a lot of advantage of racial divisiveness. And the Democrats, too. You know, sort of habitually. For years and years.

3.)Also, I may be wrong, but it seems to me that you only find fault with conservatives, like they are the only ones at fault in all this. I don't think you're really interested in putting an end to divisiveness in that case.

4.) It's like you're so completely full of crap that you can't even make an appeal against divisiveness without being completely divisive. I'm just sayin'.

5.)Sometimes I think is that if we got rid of the Democrats racial divisiveness would be over on a fortnight. That's probably naive, because racist assholes are always going to rise up. They always have.

1.) I dont need to tell them that. First off they arent all the same any more than every tea bagger, rightie, leftie etc are the same. There are white cops that where BLM tshirts :shrug:

The existence of the group proves NOTHING, thats one of the most dishonest illogical retarded things i have ever heard. the KKK still exists too, so do groups that want to deny gays rights, so do pro women's groups, christian groups, minority groups etc etc . . .doesnt change the fact things are better than they have ever been? Thats hilarious and a horrific fail.

2.) yeah Ill tell our first black president ever who got elected by the fact that at the polls (percentage wise) he brought more people together from the right and middle to vote for him that like any left president all the back to kennedy. LMAO thank you for again posting a HUGE fail that actually supports things are better than they have been

3.) yes you would be 100% wrong and the evidence of that is in my post history. Countless times i have posted that the majority of righties, republicans and conservatives support equal rights and i point out when people falsely group them all together. SO yes thats another wrong assumption by you.

4.) well since you are factually wrong and made that up the only thing full of it is your factually wrong post

5.) Thank you for proving my op correct with this too and showing the dishonest and factually untrue hype and fluff that the rest of us laugh at and mock. AWESOME!!

Let me know if theres any other mistakes i can help you with, you're welcome!

 

[plutonium]

I am a black American citizen and yes race relations are better don't let the race haters (black or white) ruin this country an our spirit as American brothers and sisters.

 

[Moot]

I am a black American citizen and yes race relations are better don't let the race haters (black or white) ruin this country an our spirit as American brothers and sisters.

Communication and understanding is key to better racial relations.

 

[code1211]

Translation: you got nothing to support your claims and continue to dodge and run from supporting them, that's what I thought! LMAO
please let us know when you do. Thanks
opcorn2:

Your translations are completely untethered to reality.

I am comforted by the fact that I only need to suffer them rarely.

That comfort is unavailable to you.

 

[LowDown]

1.) I dont need to tell them that. First off they arent all the same any more than every tea bagger, rightie, leftie etc are the same. There are white cops that where BLM tshirts :shrug:

The existence of the group proves NOTHING, thats one of the most dishonest illogical retarded things i have ever heard. the KKK still exists too, so do groups that want to deny gays rights, so do pro women's groups, christian groups, minority groups etc etc . . .doesnt change the fact things are better than they have ever been? Thats hilarious and a horrific fail.

2.) yeah Ill tell our first black president ever who got elected by the fact that at the polls (percentage wise) he brought more people together from the right and middle to vote for him that like any left president all the back to kennedy. LMAO thank you for again posting a HUGE fail that actually supports things are better than they have been

3.) yes you would be 100% wrong and the evidence of that is in my post history. Countless times i have posted that the majority of righties, republicans and conservatives support equal rights and i point out when people falsely group them all together. SO yes thats another wrong assumption by you.

4.) well since you are factually wrong and made that up the only thing full of it is your factually wrong post

5.) Thank you for proving my op correct with this too and showing the dishonest and factually untrue hype and fluff that the rest of us laugh at and mock. AWESOME!!

Let me know if theres any other mistakes i can help you with, you're welcome!

So you are saying that Obama and the Democrats don't foment and don't take advantage of racial conflict and divisiveness. You imply that because there is somewhere a reasonable member of BLM I should not be pointing out the faults of that movement, the vast majority of which, the ones we are hearing about, anyway, are as antagonistic and divisive as anyone gets. (And your counter-example is the KKK? LOL! Yeah, I suppose a dozen of those guys are still around.) And the fact that you only mentioned right wing groups as being at fault for all this isn't indicative of your attitude toward the right wing? That all this discord is just some invention of right wingers?

Yes, good luck with all that, Don Quixote. Polls indicate overwhelming support for the idea that racial relations are bad.

 

[AGENT J]

Your translations are completely untethered to reality.

I am comforted by the fact that I only need to suffer them rarely.

That comfort is unavailable to you.

BOOM!!! and another dodge and more running away!!! AWESOME!!!
Like I said please let us know when you can present one fact that supports your destroyed claims . . . .ONE LMAO Thanks!
opcorn2:

 

[AGENT J]

1.)So you are saying that Obama and the Democrats don't foment and don't take advantage of racial conflict and divisiveness.
2.) You imply that because there is somewhere a reasonable member of BLM I should not be pointing out the faults of that movement, the vast majority of which, the ones we are hearing about, anyway, are as antagonistic and divisive as anyone gets.
3.) (And your counter-example is the KKK? LOL! Yeah, I suppose a dozen of those guys are still around.) And the fact that you only mentioned right wing groups as being at fault for all this isn't indicative of your attitude toward the right wing? That all this discord is just some invention of right wingers?
4.)Yes, good luck with all that, Don Quixote. Polls indicate overwhelming support for the idea that racial relations are bad.

1.) weird can you point out where i said any politician doesn't do that? I wait for that quote. oh thats right it will never appear cause its a lie and strawman you made up LMAO
2.) wrong again I pointed out the fact that you grouped them all together lilke they are the same and that is dishonest and factually wrong. ANother straw man of yours goes down in flames
3.) why do you post so many lies? i posted groups that excist and pointed out the fact that their existence doesnt reflect society.
ALso last i check those are NOT "right wing groups" wow! unlike others i would NEVER judged right wingers or group them together with the KKK. Thank you for totally owning your own posts again though and displaying your biased issues and showing the retarded fluff and hype that people are capable of. Your posts prove the OP right more and more.

you realize that YOU just claimed that
the kkk
groups that want to deny gays rights
groups that deny womans rights
pro christina groups
and pro minority groups


as right wing groups right? you just said I only pointed out right wing groups? and that was my list? can you please quote me doing what you claimed . . thanks!

oh thats right you can't cause you just got caught posting ANOTHER factual lie!! :laughat:

4.) did you really just refer to a poll from the media? the ones i pointed out in the OP that are part of the problem??!?!?!?!? HAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!
Hey look a random poll with no control, reference, direction, conducted in relations to recent high profile FLUFF and HYPE events by the same people that are hyping it:2rofll:


again thank you SO MUCH!!!! owning your posts is so easy when half of it is based on lies and strawmen . . maybe just stop posting on this topic because your post couldnt possible fail anymore . .
maybe i misunderstood, where you TRYING to prove the OP right and show perfect examples of fluff and hype and lies? is so you completely succeeded!!!
Cant wait to see what you post next!!!!!!!

oh yeah dont forget, we need facts and quotes in your next post or it is instantly going to fail again.
you posted the lie those groups are right wing and only I mentioned right wing, prove it
you posted the lie that I claimed politicians don't don't take advantage of divisiveness. prove it
etc etc

 

[code1211]

BOOM!!! and another dodge and more running away!!! AWESOME!!!
Like I said please let us know when you can present one fact that supports your destroyed claims . . . .ONE LMAO Thanks!
opcorn2:

One of the claims I posted is that you don't understand the rules of grammar.

You wrote words that you made up based very loosely on a part of a sentence that I wrote and put them between quotation marks. This is in violation of the rules of grammar.

Were you intentionally lying or do you have no concept of how to write using the rules of grammar? Perhaps both?

That pretty much is a slam dunk that completely exposes your empty, mindless ranting for what it is.

Do you want more? Could you understand them if listed? Do you know HOW to structure a complete sentence? I will breathlessly await your next series of fragments.

 

[AGENT J]

One of the claims I posted is that you don't understand the rules of grammar.

You wrote words that you made up based very loosely on a part of a sentence that I wrote and put them between quotation marks. This is in violation of the rules of grammar.

Were you intentionally lying or do you have no concept of how to write using the rules of grammar? Perhaps both?

That pretty much is a slam dunk that completely exposes your empty, mindless ranting for what it is.

Do you want more? Could you understand them if listed? Do you know HOW to structure a complete sentence? I will breathlessly await your next series of fragments.

LMAO and ANOTHER dodge, I love it!!! Running away, deflecting, posting additional lies and or dodging wont help your wrong claims
THIS IS AWESOME!!!
Like I said please let us know when you can present one fact that supports your destroyed claims . . . .ONE LMAO Thanks!
opcorn2:

 

[Mithrae]

One of the claims I posted is that you don't understand the rules of grammar.

You wrote words that you made up based very loosely on a part of a sentence that I wrote and put them between quotation marks. This is in violation of the rules of grammar.

Were you intentionally lying or do you have no concept of how to write using the rules of grammar? Perhaps both?

That pretty much is a slam dunk that completely exposes your empty, mindless ranting for what it is.

Do you want more? Could you understand them if listed? Do you know HOW to structure a complete sentence? I will breathlessly await your next series of fragments.

You can't win Code. Strike him down and he'll imagine he's more powerful than you can possibly become.

 

[code1211]

LMAO and ANOTHER dodge, I love it!!! Running away, deflecting, posting additional lies and or dodging wont help your wrong claims
THIS IS AWESOME!!!
Like I said please let us know when you can present one fact that supports your destroyed claims . . . .ONE LMAO Thanks!
opcorn2:

Your don't seem to be capable of reading English. Adding run-on sentences to you arsenal of illiteracy. Your are a perfect example of the participation trophy winner. Congratulations!

Punctuation is still mysterious for you. Perhaps additional study could help you.

When I present a fact, such as the FACT that you place imagined words in quotation marks, you fail to see it. I can't help you with your comprehension issues.

By the by, one of the officers in the Baton Rouge presser this afternoon said that the events in Dallas changed the landscape.

In passing, that is how you present an idea that is not an exact quote. This level of learning should have been grasped by you in grade school. It has apparently escaped you.

Glad to help out.

 

[AGENT J]

Your don't seem to be capable of reading English. Adding run-on sentences to you arsenal of illiteracy. Your are a perfect example of the participation trophy winner. Congratulations!

Punctuation is still mysterious for you. Perhaps additional study could help you.

When I present a fact, such as the FACT that you place imagined words in quotation marks, you fail to see it. I can't help you with your comprehension issues.

By the by, one of the officers in the Baton Rouge presser this afternoon said that the events in Dallas changed the landscape.

In passing, that is how you present an idea that is not an exact quote. This level of learning should have been grasped by you in grade school. It has apparently escaped you.

Glad to help out.

LMAO and ANOTHER dodge and more deflections. Awesome! its almost like you think your deflections matter and change the fact you cant back up your factually proven wrong claims?
ike I said please let us know when you can present one fact that supports your destroyed claims . . . .ONE LMAO Thanks!
opcorn2:

 

[AGENT J]

Your don't seem to be capable of reading English. Adding run-on sentences to you arsenal of illiteracy. Your are a perfect example of the participation trophy winner. Congratulations!

Punctuation is still mysterious for you. Perhaps additional study could help you.

When I present a fact, such as the FACT that you place imagined words in quotation marks, you fail to see it. I can't help you with your comprehension issues.

By the by, one of the officers in the Baton Rouge presser this afternoon said that the events in Dallas changed the landscape.

In passing, that is how you present an idea that is not an exact quote. This level of learning should have been grasped by you in grade school. It has apparently escaped you.

Glad to help out.

and ANOTHER dodge and more deflections. Awesome! its almost like you think your deflections matter and change the fact you cant back up your factually proven wrong claims?
ike I said please let us know when you can present one fact that supports your destroyed claims . . . .ONE LMAO Thanks!

who wants to bet another dodge is posted and another post made about me instead of trying to defend the failed claims?
opcorn2:

 

[code1211]

You can't win Code. Strike him down and he'll imagine he's more powerful than you can possibly become.

It's just amusing that he imagined something I didn't say and is bent on arguing that point. I do appreciate your comment, though.

He has no comprehension and no curiosity. The real life example of an ideologue.

What's amusing is that he found a phrase that he took issue with and so stopped reading. If he was reading "A Tale of Two Cities" and felt that this was a pretty troubled era, after he read the first six words, "It was the best of times,..." he would have stopped reading saying that he disagreed with the whole book.

Might be he warms his meals on the flames of disagreeable books.

You are right, though. Perhaps I'll just let it lay. It's obvious that he's not interested in anything beyond fighting and laughing his -ss off. At least he seems to be a happy ideologue.