Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Exactly. Black comedians get away with doing this all day long. I don't mind though; I find it funny. I just wish white comedians could get away with it. Too many people just instantly assume that a white person is viciously evil and racist if they do. Carlos Mencia (hispanic) is actually pretty funny about being an equal-opportunity racial stereotyping comedian.dmp said:I suppose I'd just never bring it up. It's not a vital factoid. I see how it could amount to 'You People drink fruity drinks...'
The ClayTaurus said:Now, why would one group be lagging behind back then? Hey, if you want to think whites are inherently superior to blacks, and that MLK's efforts to make all races equal was unfair, just be up front about it. I can't really think of any other reason as to why you wouldn't understand the need for blacks to catch up to whites before a collective step could be taken forward.
Plenty of white people understand his message just fine. YOU don't. Don't drag our common race down with you. MLK wanted all groups to be made equal, and then for all to take a step forward.
His mentioning of negroes was merely to prove his point. Blacks were the glaring example of inequity in the country at that time. It is logical to use the glaring example to prove your overall point. And his overall point was, all men should be equal.
What were the non-discriminatory reasons back in the 60's?dilloduck said:Buy the liberal garbage if you like but blacks were lagging behind for several reasons--some of which were laws that prevented blacks from equal access to opportunity.
Was there another example of inequity to use? What, you want him to start making them up?dilloduck said:Black inequality was just mentioned as an "example" of inequity?? It was the ONLY example of inequity he gave. Was that merely an omission on his part?
MLK wanted equality for all people for the betterment of society. You want him to have individual ways of elevating each race, so you can quantify them against each other. You fail to undestand how raising blacks to equality in this country bettered everyone as a whole. This isn't about what he did for blacks or didn't do for whites. Blacks did not have equal opportunity at the time. By fighting for the resolution of that problem, he was fighting for the elevation of our society as a whole. You can't see the forest for the trees, friend.dilloduck said:Seriously, lose the idealism. Kings' efforts were to give BLACKS the same opportunites as whites and to get them to stop blaming whitey for all of thier problems, get off their asses and work for their integrity. He made NO effort to elevate ANY other race.
The ClayTaurus said:Now, why would one group be lagging behind back then? Hey, if you want to think whites are inherently superior to blacks, and that MLK's efforts to make all races equal was unfair, just be up front about it. I can't really think of any other reason as to why you wouldn't understand the need for blacks to catch up to whites before a collective step could be taken forward.
Plenty of white people understand his message just fine. YOU don't. Don't drag our common race down with you. MLK wanted all groups to be made equal, and then for all to take a step forward.
His mentioning of negroes was merely to prove his point. Blacks were the glaring example of inequity in the country at that time. It is logical to use the glaring example to prove your overall point. And his overall point was, all men should be equal.
People feel guilty towards blacks. Sorry about that slavery, have a social program!GotZoom said:The, if African-Americans follow MLKs teachings and thoughts, why are there so many "programs" and "things" geared soley for the African-Americans.
And why, if the U.S. Government took those things and made them "white" or "hispanic" or....whatever....they would be called racist.
I thought things geared soley for ONE race was.....discriminatory/racist....and totally against what MLK stood for.
The ClayTaurus said:People feel guilty towards blacks. Sorry about that slavery, have a social program!
Few today follow King's teachings. Many claim to, but in reality, they bastardize them.
Things geared solely for one race are discriminatory when all races have equal access in society to success.
I never said people should feel guilty. Just that they do. You're mildly attributing beliefs to me that are incorrect.GotZoom said:People feel guilty toward blacks because that is the black agenda. I don't feel the least bit guilty. My ancestors never owned any slaves. Never sold them, used them, etc.
If anyone should feel guilty about slavery, it should be the African-Americans themselves. Who sold them into slavery?
Agree about his teachings. They use his name and face to further their own economic cause. Jesse, Al, etc.
If you are in this country legally (and illegally as some cases will show), you have just as much access to success as the next person.
It's called: Hard Work.
GotZoom said:People feel guilty toward blacks because that is the black agenda. I don't feel the least bit guilty. My ancestors never owned any slaves. Never sold them, used them, etc.
If anyone should feel guilty about slavery, it should be the African-Americans themselves. Who sold them into slavery?
Agree about his teachings. They use his name and face to further their own economic cause. Jesse, Al, etc.
If you are in this country legally (and illegally as some cases will show), you have just as much access to success as the next person.
It's called: Hard Work.
The ClayTaurus said:What were the non-discriminatory reasons back in the 60's?Was there another example of inequity to use? What, you want him to start making them up?
MLK wanted equality for all people for the betterment of society. You want him to have individual ways of elevating each race, so you can quantify them against each other. You fail to undestand how raising blacks to equality in this country bettered everyone as a whole. This isn't about what he did for blacks or didn't do for whites. Blacks did not have equal opportunity at the time. By fighting for the resolution of that problem, he was fighting for the elevation of our society as a whole. You can't see the forest for the trees, friend.
Do you understand how the equality of blacks elevates society as a whole?dilloduck said:YOU were the one claiming he had more in mind than elevating blacks--don't turn this shit around on me.He started his effort at equality by helping blacks attain equal rights. He may have had a Utopian dream of some sort but never acted on anything other just helping blacks. You are trying to attribute some "feel-good" actions to him that just aren't there. He did a good job at doing what he did. Don't push into the twilight zone.
The ClayTaurus said:Do you understand how the equality of blacks elevates society as a whole?
How about some of those reasons why blacks were lagging behind back in the 60's. That answer was conveniently missing from your response...
Gee, it sure sounded like you thought there were non-slavery related issues as to why blacks were lagging behind whites.dilloduck said:I would think that even you could come up with the impact of slavery.
What's liberal garbage, and what's not?you said:Buy the liberal garbage if you like but blacks were lagging behind for several reasons--some of which were laws that prevented blacks from equal access to opportunity.
The ClayTaurus said:Gee, it sure sounded like you thought there were non-slavery related issues as to why blacks were lagging behind whites.What's liberal garbage, and what's not?
.Plenty of white people understand his message just fine. YOU don't. Don't drag our common race down with you. MLK wanted all groups to be made equal, and then for all to take a step forward
You're running away from this what-were-the-reasons-black-lagged-behind-whites-in-the-50's-and-60's question with great speed. The effects of slavery were discrimination against blacks, resulting in their lack of access to equal resources. What OTHER reasons are there? You're the one who said there were several reasons... pony up!dilloduck said:Must be your biased against the truth. If you didn't leap to conclusions you may understand what I'm saying. Liberal garbarge is that MLK actively tried to make all races equal. He tried to liberate ONE RACE.
You generalized that white people don't understand what MLK did. That's not true, and speaks poorly for the white race if it's true (which it's not, and why I asked you not to drag an entire race down into the muck with you).dilloduck said:How can I drag down a whole race with one comment? Are you afraid some black racist is gonna say " All crackers are the same."?
The ClayTaurus said:You're running away from this what-were-the-reasons-black-lagged-behind-whites-in-the-50's-and-60's question with great speed. The effects of slavery were discrimination against blacks, resulting in their lack of access to equal resources. What OTHER reasons are there? You're the one who said there were several reasons... pony up!
You generalized that white people don't understand what MLK did. That's not true, and speaks poorly for the white race if it's true (which it's not, and why I asked you not to drag an entire race down into the muck with you).
You over-simplify the work of MLK because you're unhappy with the current entitlement mentality many blacks currently espouse. You're unable to see that his focus on equality for blacks was a big-picture idea. Don't let Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton jade your views so much.
Riiiiiight. If that was the case, you would have said it 5 deflections, I mean posts, ago.dilloduck said:I'm running from nothing. You are trying in vain to get me to say that I think that blacks are inherently inferior to whites. Give up. That's WJs forte--bug him about it. "Several" reason"s" refers to the combined effect"s" of slavery on blacks.
When you generalize incorrectly about my race, I intend to nitpick you. Now, can you see the solution as to how to get my to stop nitpicking?dilloduck said:Get over the generalizations, dude. Do you intend to nit-pick every damn thing anyone says with exceptions to the rule? I know EVERYTHING I SAY doesn't apply TO EVERY SOB IN THE WORLD.
Post after post, and you still don't get it. If you don't understand how equality for all was the higher dream, I don't know what to tell you. The plight of blacks made Dr. King yearn to promote equality for all, because he understood the pain of being discriminated against. If he was only interested in the wellbeing of blacks, his name would have been Malcolm X.dilloduck said:You try to make MLKs' work all encompassing so you can get some feel goods out of it. If you can show me a picture of MLK marching along with a large crowd of Indians, Hispanics or Whites in effort to make us all achieve some higher "dream", I'll take another look. ( no--token march participants don't count)
The ClayTaurus said:Riiiiiight. If that was the case, you would have said it 5 deflections, I mean posts, ago.When you generalize incorrectly about my race, I intend to nitpick you. Now, can you see the solution as to how to get my to stop nitpicking?Post after post, and you still don't get it. If you don't understand how equality for all was the higher dream, I don't know what to tell you. The plight of blacks made Dr. King yearn to promote equality for all, because he understood the pain of being discriminated against. If he was only interested in the wellbeing of blacks, his name would have been Malcolm X.
The only people who back your position are either white supremists or separatists, or are just plain ignorant. I don't know which, if any, of the three you fall under, but I'd submit that you should take a look around at who's in your camp. It's not flattering.
What was the point of this post:dilloduck said:I don't belong to a "camp", you have no idea at exactly which post I began to tire of your implications that I thought blacks were inherently inferior,
If you go back and look at the context surrounding it, my implications don't seem that far fetched. Combine that with the tireless repetition I had to employ in order to get clarification from you about it, and my implications are logical.you said:Buy the liberal garbage if you like but blacks were lagging behind for several reasons--some of which were laws that prevented blacks from equal access to opportunity.
I can't tell you that because you're unwilling to listen. You're unwilling to understand how his work bettered society as a whole. You've gone multiple posts without conceding it. You just want him to be "some guy who helped black folks out." He was more than that, and a picture of him marching with other races isn't needed to prove it.dilloduck said:nit-pick away if you think exceptions diminish the truth of the rule and your right, you cannot tell me that MLK was promoting anything but black equality because you have no evidence of fact. ...MLKs' cause was the advancement of colored people only. I eagerly await those pictures of him marching with other races. There's no emotion attached--it's just the truth.
Yes, it is. You think Malcom X and MLK were basically the same in principle.dilloduck said:My position is very simple.
The ClayTaurus said:What was the point of this post:
If you go back and look at the context surrounding it, my implications don't seem that far fetched. Combine that with the tireless repetition I had to employ in order to get clarification from you about it, and my implications are logical.I can't tell you that because you're unwilling to listen. You're unwilling to understand how his work bettered society as a whole. You've gone multiple posts without conceding it. You just want him to be "some guy who helped black folks out." He was more than that, and a picture of him marching with other races isn't needed to prove it.Yes, it is. You think Malcom X and MLK were basically the same in principle.
The utopia he wanted to lead people to was a land of equality. Having all races equal benefits all races, and betters them all. You're quibbling over the fact that more focus had to be placed upon blacks in order to accomplish it. Did raising blacks up to a level that allowed them to compete better society?dilloduck said:The point of the post was that slavery caused blacks to be behind in SEVERAL categories when compared to whites. Implying that I meant that blacks are inherently inferior is YOUR shit--own it. You aren't constantly babbling for a clarification--you're constant tiresome repetetion is an attempt to portray me as something that I'm not.
I have listened to all you have offered in your attempt to get me to believe that MLK had some huge Utopia that he was going lead all the races to but you have failed to show me any instance that he "led" anyone but colored people. His intentions as evidenced by his actions clearly show his agenda was to advance colored people.
Now you have decided that I now think that Malcom X and MLK were the same in principle. I supposed I have to waste a bunch of time to make you think otherwise ? NOT.
He worked very hard for colored people----his methods were peaceful---he was courageous--his efforts resulted in the changing of many unfair laws.
