Democrats Are No Longer the Racist Party – If They Ever Really Were

[BasicHumanUnit]

It's hilarious that Republicans now fly the Confederate Flag and then insist it's Democrats who are racist.

What's hilarious is you see ONE person displaying a flag and generalize that "if one, then ALL".

And another thing.....
The Confederate Flag stood for more than Slavery.....but then your liberal "teachers" probably taught you all about being a drag queen but never mentioned history or math....

 

[Rambunctious]

dems group people into color groups...economic groups...gender groups...sexual groups....religious groups...and education level groups....

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

The Democratic Party is fighting against racism, hate and violence…..well except for the racist Nation of Islam Democrats, racist Klan Democrats, racist La Raza Democrats, racist BLM Democrats, Muslim Brotherhood bigots, racist LULAC Democrats, CAIR bigots, racist Black Panther Democrats, racist Aztlan Nationalist Democrats, racist Affirmative Action Democrats, racist Sanctuary City Democrats, violent Antifa bigots, and all of the nasty racist demagogue Democrat Politicians, Pundits, Entertainers and Athletes who work to divide us.

The Democrats make politics about race because they are racist.

 

[Weatherman2020]

dems group people into color groups...economic groups...gender groups...sexual groups....religious groups...and education level groups....

Yep. And they insist on skin color to deny people equal access to basic things.

 

[IM2]

I'm an old white guy that has seen a lot in my time and have not problem with anything that you're saying.


CC Ghost
Correll

I'm a 54 year old white guy myself and I'm betting you've only seen the tip of the iceberg of the things he's said. Besides, there are at least two falsehoods in this post.

1.) He calls me a racist when I'm not.

2.) In the second paragraph he claims that I said that blacks were more racist when that is not at all what I said.

You'll have to take that up with him. For my part I try not to call anyone a racist but I will call them on anything racist that they say.

I did take it up with him. I'm telling you this because you said you didn't have a problem with anything he was saying so I felt that you should know that he made two false claims in that one post.

I must have missed something. I would be curious to know exactly what you found objectionable

1.) He calls me a racist when I'm not. "When called on your racism..."

2.) In the second paragraph he claims that I said that blacks were more racist when that is not at all what I said. I told him in another thread that some blacks were racist, that's it. I've had to correct him on this like three or four times already.

I object to being labeled as a racist simply for disagreeing with a black person and I object to having my words twisted to where it appears I said something I did not say.

I've called you a racist because you've taken the same position on things as racists and have not one time chosen to rebut any comment that has been made that has been blatantly racist. I called you a racist for accusing blacks of being racists in the 1960's while ignoring everything blacks had endured up to that time to point out how whites sacrificed. Everything you have argued has been trying to deny he fact that blacks have faced a racism you have not ever seen. You posted in the section blacks are not racist than whites by pointing out that blacks are racists which supported the topic of the thread and denied every instance you were shown or asked to prove how blacks are more racist after being shown comparisons of what whites have dine. .

And what is your disagreement based on ghostrider? Because you haven't been called a racist for disagreeing with me any mother fucking more that the claim you made whereby I want you to pay because you are white. You say things like that then can't understand why you get called a racist. You see ghostrider you don't get to tell us blacks what we need to do. You don't get to post bullshit from some lawn jockey black conservative because you think maybe I'll listen to him tell me what blacks need to do because he is telling us what whites think we need to do and we must listen to what whites tell us since they have been so "successful". When you decide to try that, when you try telling us what we face, then it's time that whites face things too. And what you have to face is at least 241 years of racist laws, policies and acts of individual evil done by whites to people of color. You will face how these laws/policies excluded blacks and made it so whites are where they are today.

You will face the lie where those like you claim how hard whites worked because the truth is whites have been handed almost everything they have got. You white folks don't like that being said about you, but you sure are glad to put that on others. After whites were given land as part of the Homestead Act, I am sure they worked very hard to farm that land. After whites were given low cost loans in the 50's by the government to buy homes, I am quite sure they worked hard to make the payments. While blacks could not get certain jobs because of their race, I'm sure whites who were hired because they were white worked hard to remain employed. I'm sure that the whites who got admitted into colleges that did not allow blacks worked hard to get those degrees. I'm sure that white person who got that business loan blacks were denied only because of race, worked hard to make sure that business was successful.

The issue is not how hard whites worked after they got the opportunity. It is the fact they got the opportunity while others couldn’t because of skin color. If your ass is white and you did not make it, it will probably be because you chose not to. Blacks cannot say the same thing. So each and every time your white ass even starts to think you have the right to tell us blacks how to do things, start thinking about what whites have done and understand that because if what whites have dine you have NOTHING to say. That until you take responsibility for those things like other whites in here have, it is better you stay quiet and stop trying to get every white person to be on your side.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

I'm a 54 year old white guy myself and I'm betting you've only seen the tip of the iceberg of the things he's said. Besides, there are at least two falsehoods in this post.

1.) He calls me a racist when I'm not.

2.) In the second paragraph he claims that I said that blacks were more racist when that is not at all what I said.

You'll have to take that up with him. For my part I try not to call anyone a racist but I will call them on anything racist that they say.

I did take it up with him. I'm telling you this because you said you didn't have a problem with anything he was saying so I felt that you should know that he made two false claims in that one post.

I must have missed something. I would be curious to know exactly what you found objectionable

1.) He calls me a racist when I'm not. "When called on your racism..."

2.) In the second paragraph he claims that I said that blacks were more racist when that is not at all what I said. I told him in another thread that some blacks were racist, that's it. I've had to correct him on this like three or four times already.

I object to being labeled as a racist simply for disagreeing with a black person and I object to having my words twisted to where it appears I said something I did not say.

I've called you a racist because you've taken the same position on things as racists and have not one time chosen to rebut any comment that has been made that has been blatantly racist. I called you a racist for accusing blacks of being racists in the 1960's while ignoring everything blacks had endured up to that time to point out how whites sacrificed.

Have you been conversing with another poster with the same username as me? I never said diddly shit about blacks being racist in the 60s or anything about how whites sacrificed. This is now the fourth time you've confused me with someone else.

Everything you have argued has been trying to deny he fact that blacks have faced a racism you have not ever seen. You posted in the section blacks are not racist than whites by pointing out that blacks are racists which supported the topic of the thread and denied every instance you were shown or asked to prove how blacks are more racist after being shown comparisons of what whites have dine. .

For the umpteenth time, I have never compared black racism to white racism. I never made any comparisons at all. All I ever said was that some blacks are racist. And that's about the tenth time I've had to remind you of that.

And what is your disagreement based on ghostrider?

What is my disagreement? You don't know? You were there for Christ's sake. Are you telling me that you are calling me racist based on arguments you don't even remember?

The biggest disagreement we had was the one about the definition of racism. Another big one was whether or not they had renewed the black right to vote when they renewed the provisions of the Voting Rights Act.

Because you haven't been called a racist for disagreeing with me any mother fucking more that the claim you made whereby I want you to pay because you are white. You say things like that then can't understand why you get called a racist.

Okay, so I'll ask once again: When you said "You will pay us what you owe. Spiritual law says so", who were you talking about?

You see ghostrider you don't get to tell us blacks what we need to do. You don't get to post bullshit from some lawn jockey black conservative because you think maybe I'll listen to him tell me what blacks need to do because he is telling us what whites think we need to do and we must listen to what whites tell us since they have been so "successful".

He didn't say anything in the article about white people telling him anything. As far as I'm concerned, they were his own ideas and I have no reason to assume otherwise.

When you decide to try that, when you try telling us what we face, then it's time that whites face things too. And what you have to face is at least 241 years of racist laws, policies and acts of individual evil done by whites to people of color. You will face how these laws/policies excluded blacks and made it so whites are where they are today.

I've never said anything about what blacks face.

You will face the lie where those like you claim how hard whites worked because the truth is whites have been handed almost everything they have got. You white folks don't like that being said about you, but you sure are glad to put that on others. After whites were given land as part of the Homestead Act, I am sure they worked very hard to farm that land. After whites were given low cost loans in the 50's by the government to buy homes, I am quite sure they worked hard to make the payments. While blacks could not get certain jobs because of their race, I'm sure whites who were hired because they were white worked hard to remain employed. I'm sure that the whites who got admitted into colleges that did not allow blacks worked hard to get those degrees. I'm sure that white person who got that business loan blacks were denied only because of race, worked hard to make sure that business was successful.

The issue is not how hard whites worked after they got the opportunity. It is the fact they got the opportunity while others couldn’t because of skin color. If your ass is white and you did not make it, it will probably be because you chose not to. Blacks cannot say the same thing. So each and every time your white ass even starts to think you have the right to tell us blacks how to do things, start thinking about what whites have done and understand that because if what whites have dine you have NOTHING to say. That until you take responsibility for those things like other whites in here have, it is better you stay quiet and stop trying to get every white person to be on your side.

Great. So if you don't want my input or any input or help from whites in general and blacks can stand on their own two feet, what do you need reparations for?

By the way, I would love to meet this other fictional Ghost of a Rider you keep citing, he sounds like an interesting person.

 

[toobfreak]

It's hilarious that Republicans now fly the Confederate Flag and then insist it's Democrats who are racist.

You a funny guy. One guy holds up a Confederate Flag at a rally somewhere and suddenly it becomes the entire fricking party in your mind, like Trump personally PAID the guy to carry it. Like its on Airforce One and Trump wears it on his ballcap. You are so fucking intellectually dishonest, you literally STINK. Meantime, there is nothing inherently racist about that flag or any other flag. Its a piece of cloth. That flag merely associates with the south, and YOU people have made it into a racial symbol. I remember back in the 70s the TV show 'The Dukes of Hazard' being on TV for years and years---- hugely popular the nation over with the "General Lee" car and the Confed Flag on its roof and no one ever called the show racist. And it wasn't.

Just another false issue manufactured by the idiot drones of the Left constantly trying to rewrite history made to be used to try to manipulate people's attitudes and votes.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

You're a lying and depraved shit bag. You are reported again, this time for stalking me and trolling

 

[Correll]

Well, if you completely blind hate filled partisans are the judge, then no, I can't.


And all you have to do to "prove" your vile smear is make it.


In your own little, and utterly closed minds.


His "Facts"? LOL!!!

Thank you for admitting that you can't refute a damned thing that I said

Wow.

By just completely misrepresenting what I just said, you just proved my point, that you are completely dishonest and would stone wall any argument, no matter how well presented or supported.


Liberals: All the self awareness of a potted plant.

Horseshit. How did I misrepresent you?. You did not even make a case for whatever it is that your trying to covey. All that you do is spew vitriol about liberals. You could not refute my points and I called you on it. How the fuck is that misrepresentation? Learn how to have an adult conversation or stop wasting my time.

My point was obviously that you and your ilk are too dishonest to admit when/if I were to prove something.


You dishonestly pretended that I "admitted" that I could not prove anything.


In doing that, you demonstrated the dishonesty that I claimed you have.

BOOM, IN YOUR FACE.



It was stupid of you to not see that coming. THis is you with your complete lack of self awareness.



Y

You talk a lot but say nothing. You admitted that you could not prove anything by posting crap that says nothing except to claim that you proved something. Lets take it from the top.

1. What exactly do you think that you have proven and how?

2. How did I not make my case ? Be specific.

1. I said that I could not "prove" anything, if dishonest stone wallers like you were the judge of if I proved something.

2. You dishonestly pretended that I said that I admitted that I could not prove anything.


3. In doing so, you demonstrated the dishonesty that I was accusing you of.


4. And I stone cold busted you on it.


5. EVERY post where you continue to stone wall on that, demonstrates more and more just how incredibly fucking dishonest you libs are.



6. Now you will continue to stone wall.

 

[Correll]

I answered your question as you asked it.

What was that quest, and answer again? You blow so much smoke that I can't see

Says the man that cut everything from the post.

 

[miketx]

Few things annoy me more than when people who want to stick a thumb in the eye of Democrats resort to tactics such as pointing out they founded the Ku Klux Klan or pushed through Jim Crow laws following the Civil War. The intent seems to be to draw attention away from the party that harbors the racists of today by shaming the Democrats for the sins of our forefathers.

It’s a sleazy tactic that doesn’t work, and It is time to set the record straight. First of all, Democrats- for the most part- do not deny or try to hide the parties past. Second, I will show how, when and why the racists fled from the Democratic Party and found a new home and lastly, I will present evidence that shows how, during the civil rights era, support for civil right legislation was split, not by party affiliation but by regional loyalty-specifically the old Confederacy and the Union. Let’s begin by talking about the civil war era

https://classroom.synonym.com/civil-warera-political-parties-north-vs-south-8901.html

Democratic Party

The Democratic Party was formed by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in 1792 and held considerable power in the years leading up to the Civil War. The Democratic Party became divided in the 1850s over the issue of slavery, with some factions in the north supporting abolitionist causes, some northern factions supporting accommodation of the South and Southern Democrats supporting the continuation and expansion of slavery. During the elections of 1860, Southern and Northern Democrats nominated separate candidates for president. After the Civil War broke out, former Southern Democrats held considerable clout in the Confederate Congress. Northern Democrats lost much of their political power in the North during the Civil War.

Republican Party

The Republican Party was founded in the 1850s by northerners who wanted to abolish slavery. The demise of the Whig Party and the split in the Democratic Party in the years leading up to the 1860 elections gave the Republicans an opportunity to advance. Republican candidate Abraham Lincoln won the U.S. Presidential election in 1860 and Republicans gained control of Congress, leading to the secession of eleven Southern states. The Republican Party had very little support in the South before the war and virtually none after war broke out. In 1864, the Republican Party joined with Democrats who favored the war effort to form the National Union Party. Other Republicans, who were in favor of pressing the war more forcefully, left the Republican Party to form the Radical Democracy Party. The National Union Party won the 1864 presidential election.

The truth about Republicans and civil rights even then was not as clear cut as some would like us to believe:

https://medium.com/everyvote/how-the-republicans-and-democrats-switched-on-civil-rights-in-5-racist-steps-92c1b41480b


Republicans and Democrats after the Civil War

It’s true that many of the first Ku Klux Klan members were Democrats. It’s also true that the early Democratic Party opposed civil rights. But there’s more to it.

In the Civil War-era GOP wasn’t that into civil rights. They were more interested in punishing the South for seceding and monopolizing the new black vote.
In any event, by the 1890s, Republicans had begun to distance themselves from civil rights.

As for the democrats

Democrats v Republicans on Jim Crow
Segregation and Jim Crow lasted for 100 years after the end of the Civil War.

During this time, African Americans were largely disenfranchised. There was no African-American voting bloc. Neither party pursued civil rights policies — it wasn’t worth their while.

Democrats dominated Southern politics throughout the Jim Crow Era. It’s fair to say that Democratic governors and legislatures are responsible for creating and upholding white supremacist policies.

Southern Democrats were truly awful.

Then things began to change

President Truman Integrates the Troops: 1948

Fast forward about sixty shitty years. Black people are still living in segregation under Jim Crow. Nonetheless, African Americans agree to serve in World War II. At war’s end, President Harry Truman, a Democrat, used an Executive Order to integrate the troops. (That order was not executed until 1963, however because: racism.)

The Party of Kennedy v the Party of Nixon in the Civil Rights Era

Two things started happening at the same time:

· Racist Democrats were getting antsy

· Neither party could afford to ignore civil rights anymore

In 1960 Kennedy defeated Nixon. At the time of his election, the both parties unevenly supported civil rights. But President Kennedy decided to move forward.

After Kennedy’s assassination in 1963, Johnson continued Kennedy’s civil rights focus.

As you can imagine, that did not sit particularly well with most Southern Democrats. This is when Strom Thurmond flew the coop for good.

In fact, a greater percentage of Congressional Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than did Democrats. Support for the Act followed geographic, not party, lines. ( More on that later)

Get that? Support for civil rights was along geographic, not party lines. Now we get to the meat of the matter:

Soon after, the Republicans came up with their Southern Strategy — a plan to woo white Southern voters to the party for the 1968 election.

The Kennedy and Johnson administrations had advanced civil rights, largely through national legislation and direct executive actions. So, the Southern Strategy was the opposite — states’ rights and no integration.

As in the Civil War, the concepts of “states’ rights” and “tradition,” were codes for “maintaining white supremacy.”

The divide between the north and the south vs the Democrats and the Republicans can be easily illustrated:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/28/republicans-party-of-civil-rights

As we saw earlier more Republicans than Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act, but that is not the whole story
View attachment 193443
You don't need to know too much history to understand that the South from the civil war to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 tended to be opposed to minority rights. This factor was separate from party identification or ideology. We can easily control for this variable by breaking up the voting by those states that were part of the confederacy and those that were not.
View attachment 193444
But what happens when we control for both party affiliation and region? As Sean Trende noted earlier this year, "sometimes relationships become apparent only after you control for other factors".

View attachment 193445

In conclusion, maligning the entire Democratic Party as the historical racist party without regard to regional loyalties or the fact that the racists fled from the Democrats ranks in the 60’s is just dumbed down revisionist history, and patently dishonest. I have to wonder, which party will be remembered as the party of racists in another 150 years or so. Any guesses?

One thing you can never do is tell queer loving crime promoting racist dems the truth.

 

[Correll]

If you wanted to exempt black and hispanics racists from consideration, then you should have specified that you only care about WHITE racists, and do not consider other racists to be a problem. Because you like them.

I care about and condemn all racism but

BUT, you only talk about whit racism.


BUT, you only attack the GOP for what small amount of support it draws from racists, without any serving of their interests, while not being concerned about the support the Dems get from minority racists, which you guys repay handsomely.

I also recognize that racism on the part of minorities is largely born of the discrimination and marginalization that they have historically been subjected to.

A person does not get to claim to be racist because of something that happened before he was born. That is a bullshit excuse for racists you like.

All racism is not equal. OK, go a head and have your little shit fit over that- coming from a white guy.

Correct.


Anti-white racism has the force of law behind it, SUPPORTING it, while the government and society is constantly on the look out for even the APPEARANCE of white racism, to attack it.

Having said that , this thread is about white racism which you seem to want to sweep under the rug but bringing up anything and every thing else that you can in order to derail the topic

The thread title is "dems no longer party of racism".


Pointing out that they are now the party of anti-white racism, and thus racism, is completely on topic.


D'uh.

 

[squeeze berry]

Which party insists skin color be used to see who gets a job or gets into a university?

Claiming that affirmative action is racism is a right wing talking point and opinion. Secondly, even if it is racism, it does not negate the arguments being made. Rather it is nothing more than an appeal to hypocrisy and a red herring logical fallacy.

affirmative action gives advantage of one or more races over another. It is systemic racism and you are being hypocritical again

ps

to state either party is "racist" does not hold water

I did not actually say that the Republican party is racist. It is more accurate so say that the head of the party and many racists have found a home and even jobs there.

In my view, affirmative action levels the playing field and ensure that the racial make up of places of business and institutions of learning reflect that of the community. I am not going to argue the racism issue

you will not argue because you have no proof

 

[squeeze berry]

I think that some whites are far too quick to use the "everyone is a racist" line. Why would blacks today not like whites? Is there any white republican here who can honestly answer that question?

this white Republican does not care if blacks do not like me because I'm white.

why should any white republican care?

 

[Correll]

Well, a lot of racists blacks and hispanics love them some dems. YOu ever talk to IM2, or Katstevie on this site? Or Paul E what ever shit? They are the worst racists on this site and they vote for you.

I never said that there were no minority racists who have a problem with whites. But what you are doing is just to try to create a smoke screen to deflect away from the human detritus that is Trump and his supporters.

I answered your question as you asked it.


If you wanted to exempt black and hispanics racists from consideration, then you should have specified that you only care about WHITE racists, and do not consider other racists to be a problem. Because you like them.



White supremacists are a marginalized and irrelevant fringe in our society.


You are an asshole for suggesting that Trump and his supporters are them.

They are not "marginalized" dumbass. When #45, first spoke about the incident in North Carolina, when that Trumptard ran over people who were counterprotesting a
.

They are completely marginalized.


When President TRump spoke about the incident, he was completely right to condemn the violence on both sides.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Thank you for admitting that you can't refute a damned thing that I said

Wow.

By just completely misrepresenting what I just said, you just proved my point, that you are completely dishonest and would stone wall any argument, no matter how well presented or supported.


Liberals: All the self awareness of a potted plant.

Horseshit. How did I misrepresent you?. You did not even make a case for whatever it is that your trying to covey. All that you do is spew vitriol about liberals. You could not refute my points and I called you on it. How the fuck is that misrepresentation? Learn how to have an adult conversation or stop wasting my time.

My point was obviously that you and your ilk are too dishonest to admit when/if I were to prove something.


You dishonestly pretended that I "admitted" that I could not prove anything.


In doing that, you demonstrated the dishonesty that I claimed you have.

BOOM, IN YOUR FACE.



It was stupid of you to not see that coming. THis is you with your complete lack of self awareness.



Y

You talk a lot but say nothing. You admitted that you could not prove anything by posting crap that says nothing except to claim that you proved something. Lets take it from the top.

1. What exactly do you think that you have proven and how?

2. How did I not make my case ? Be specific.

1. I said that I could not "prove" anything, if dishonest stone wallers like you were the judge of if I proved something.

2. You dishonestly pretended that I said that I admitted that I could not prove anything.


3. In doing so, you demonstrated the dishonesty that I was accusing you of.


4. And I stone cold busted you on it.


5. EVERY post where you continue to stone wall on that, demonstrates more and more just how incredibly fucking dishonest you libs are.



6. Now you will continue to stone wall.

Still a whole bunch of nothing except bull shit. I'm not playing any more.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Which party insists skin color be used to see who gets a job or gets into a university?

Claiming that affirmative action is racism is a right wing talking point and opinion. Secondly, even if it is racism, it does not negate the arguments being made. Rather it is nothing more than an appeal to hypocrisy and a red herring logical fallacy.

affirmative action gives advantage of one or more races over another. It is systemic racism and you are being hypocritical again

ps

to state either party is "racist" does not hold water

I did not actually say that the Republican party is racist. It is more accurate so say that the head of the party and many racists have found a home and even jobs there.

In my view, affirmative action levels the playing field and ensure that the racial make up of places of business and institutions of learning reflect that of the community. I am not going to argue the racism issue

you will not argue because you have no proof

Proof of what? I am offering an opinion. I'm not arguing it because it is not something that can be proven or disproven. It's a matter of perspective and it is also off topic.

 

[squeeze berry]

Which party insists skin color be used to see who gets a job or gets into a university?

Claiming that affirmative action is racism is a right wing talking point and opinion. Secondly, even if it is racism, it does not negate the arguments being made. Rather it is nothing more than an appeal to hypocrisy and a red herring logical fallacy.

affirmative action gives advantage of one or more races over another. It is systemic racism and you are being hypocritical again

ps

to state either party is "racist" does not hold water

I did not actually say that the Republican party is racist. It is more accurate so say that the head of the party and many racists have found a home and even jobs there.

In my view, affirmative action levels the playing field and ensure that the racial make up of places of business and institutions of learning reflect that of the community. I am not going to argue the racism issue

you will not argue because you have no proof

Proof of what? I am offering an opinion. I'm not arguing it because it is not something that can be proven or disproven. It's a matter of perspective and it is also off topic.

how can it be off topic if I am responding to your claim?

 

[squeeze berry]

I've never fucking said ANYONE owes me ANYTHING for being white. I have said that blacks are fucking owed and we are owed by the mother fucking government of ths nation at very fucking level of that government for the creation, enacting and implementation of racist laws and policies, allowing humam rights violations and continuing human rights violations against the black citizens of this nation. Now where in the FUCK you and these other dumb ass no brained white racists get this idea that we are saying you owe us just because you are fucking white is the figment your ignorant asses have made up in your own mind.

I am not here to please you. This naion has done wrong by blacks. Whites where in charge of setting the mother fucking policies and committing the human rights violations. I don't care how much that bothers your ass to hear it. This should not have been done in the nation you whites so proudly declare to have been established by god himself to give every man the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That has been a lie and you are just going to have to face that lie if you want to post in threads that are abuot race and racism.

You say some blacks are racists but some blacks have done nothing like what whites done for you to be making that comparison. I am taking abouot a system created where whites control the resources needed and can decide who gets them. And when I say that, I include the rich white political donors who control politics that decide where the resources will go in cities, states and federally. Your ass is taking about being called names by some black people. If white racism was just name calling and we controlled almost all the wealth, owned almost all the property, businesses , had the most executives, the highest income, the lowest rate of poverty, unemployment always lower than the national average and everything whites have today, I would not be complaining about racism.

In your complaining about how you went to school with racist backs, you were bussed from a more affluent neighborhood to get there. When you were bussed home at night you could leave that racism you claimed to face, but those blacks could not. Yet you are here now trying to make it all the same. When you complained about the black dude on the job you claimed was racist, you got him fired and kept your job. On that job you were paid more and held a higher position. And we don't know if you were the best qualified for it, or was a black person passed over because of racism and you got the promotion. But you and those like you choose be victims in order to dismiss the things we go through.

Powerful...POWERFUL!!!!

well, if you had not been sold by your own kind or had done more to prevent your so called oppression, we would not be having this discussion, would we?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Claiming that affirmative action is racism is a right wing talking point and opinion. Secondly, even if it is racism, it does not negate the arguments being made. Rather it is nothing more than an appeal to hypocrisy and a red herring logical fallacy.

affirmative action gives advantage of one or more races over another. It is systemic racism and you are being hypocritical again

ps

to state either party is "racist" does not hold water

I did not actually say that the Republican party is racist. It is more accurate so say that the head of the party and many racists have found a home and even jobs there.

In my view, affirmative action levels the playing field and ensure that the racial make up of places of business and institutions of learning reflect that of the community. I am not going to argue the racism issue

you will not argue because you have no proof

Proof of what? I am offering an opinion. I'm not arguing it because it is not something that can be proven or disproven. It's a matter of perspective and it is also off topic.

how can it be off topic if I am responding to your claim?

You or someone else brought up the topic of AA. This topic is about who the racists were and who they are now. If you want to talk about the effects of, and remedies for racism, start your own topic,