Guess who attends funeral of KKK member?

[Pogo]

There are TWO black Senators. Tim Scott from South Carolina, a Republican and Cory Booker from New Jersey. One is a Republican and one is a Democrat. You would think the self proclaimed party of diversity would have more black Senators. Last time I looked, 1:1 is a tie.

Actually if you think about it, blacks are 9 times more likely to be a Democrat. That means if you're a black democrat, you have 1/9 the chance to be a senator than if you're a black republican. Sounds like another left wing race problem

My point was that Democrats claims to be so diverse yet they have the same number of black senators as the Republicans.

I wasn't arguing with you, I was just pointing out that if you're a black and you're a Democrat it's far worse for you than if you're a Republican in terms of the odds of you being in the Senate. 90% of blacks are Democrat, yet they still have one Senator. 10% of blacks are Republican, and they have one senator. See what I'm saying?

"Blacks" don't have senators. "Whites" don't have senators. Residents of a particular state have senators.

I don't know that that is supposed to mean, I didn't say they did.

I just pointed out if you are a black Democrat, you have about 1/10th the shot of being a US senator as if you are a black Republican.

What's up with the racism? Why don't Democrats give a fair shot to blacks to be Senators? Switch to Republican and you're ten times as likely to become a senator if you are black? That's pretty sad that Democrats are so wrapped up in the skin color of the people running for office

Ten times, think about that

I'm gonna go out on the same limb and guess you don't work in anything having to do with statistics either. That's a complete non sequitur.

 

[kaz]

Actually if you think about it, blacks are 9 times more likely to be a Democrat. That means if you're a black democrat, you have 1/9 the chance to be a senator than if you're a black republican. Sounds like another left wing race problem

My point was that Democrats claims to be so diverse yet they have the same number of black senators as the Republicans.

I wasn't arguing with you, I was just pointing out that if you're a black and you're a Democrat it's far worse for you than if you're a Republican in terms of the odds of you being in the Senate. 90% of blacks are Democrat, yet they still have one Senator. 10% of blacks are Republican, and they have one senator. See what I'm saying?

"Blacks" don't have senators. "Whites" don't have senators. Residents of a particular state have senators.

I don't know that that is supposed to mean, I didn't say they did.

I just pointed out if you are a black Democrat, you have about 1/10th the shot of being a US senator as if you are a black Republican.

What's up with the racism? Why don't Democrats give a fair shot to blacks to be Senators? Switch to Republican and you're ten times as likely to become a senator if you are black? That's pretty sad that Democrats are so wrapped up in the skin color of the people running for office

Ten times, think about that

I'm gonna go out on the same limb and guess you don't work in anything having to do with statistics either. That's a complete non sequitur.

I'm gonna go out on the same limb and guess you don't have any professional writing or editing skills. You didn't mean it's a non-sequitur, you meant it's not a statistically significant sample size ...

BTW, I was a math major at Maryland and a six sigma black belt at GE. So you're going o fer right now

 

[Pogo]

We all know Robert Byrd's past. He repudiated it, David Duke hasn't.

if he did it was because of political necessity as blacks were asserting their right to vote in the south.

How many black senators does the south have? 1?

There are TWO black Senators. Tim Scott from South Carolina, a Republican and Cory Booker from New Jersey. One is a Republican and one is a Democrat. You would think the self proclaimed party of diversity would have more black Senators. Last time I looked, 1:1 is a tie.

Ah, so you believe in artificial quotas. Good to know.

Drawing conclusions on a group of two units huh. I'm gonna go out on a limb and hazard a guess that you don't work as an actuary, in baseball or in anything that has to do with statistics.

Yes, racists always go to that first, well, I'm against quotas. That's why if you're a black Republican you have 10 times the chance to be a US senator than if you're Democrat. It's just that we don't have quotas, that's why.

Ssssuuuuurrrreeeeeee, that's why. Wink

Read his post. He's expecting "the party of diversity" to have X number of black senators. Not only is he hung up on race but he seems to believe Senators are chosen from some kind of menu rather than elected by the electorate. The only way to accomplish his expectation WOULD BE a quota.

He must live in Tanganyika or sump'm to be that ignorant.

 

[Pogo]

My point was that Democrats claims to be so diverse yet they have the same number of black senators as the Republicans.

I wasn't arguing with you, I was just pointing out that if you're a black and you're a Democrat it's far worse for you than if you're a Republican in terms of the odds of you being in the Senate. 90% of blacks are Democrat, yet they still have one Senator. 10% of blacks are Republican, and they have one senator. See what I'm saying?

"Blacks" don't have senators. "Whites" don't have senators. Residents of a particular state have senators.

I don't know that that is supposed to mean, I didn't say they did.

I just pointed out if you are a black Democrat, you have about 1/10th the shot of being a US senator as if you are a black Republican.

What's up with the racism? Why don't Democrats give a fair shot to blacks to be Senators? Switch to Republican and you're ten times as likely to become a senator if you are black? That's pretty sad that Democrats are so wrapped up in the skin color of the people running for office

Ten times, think about that

I'm gonna go out on the same limb and guess you don't work in anything having to do with statistics either. That's a complete non sequitur.

I'm gonna go out on the same limb and guess you don't have any professional writing or editing skills. You didn't mean it's a non-sequitur, you meant it's not a statistically significant sample size ...

BTW, I was a math major at Maryland and a six sigma black belt at GE. So you're going o fer right now

No, I meant exactly what I typed. Non sequitur = "does not follow". Yes you drew a conclusion based on an insignificant sample; I chose to note the result. The process was already noted. I acknowledge your concession though. And I really don't give a shit how many people you karate chopped at General Electric.

 

[kaz]

if he did it was because of political necessity as blacks were asserting their right to vote in the south.

How many black senators does the south have? 1?

There are TWO black Senators. Tim Scott from South Carolina, a Republican and Cory Booker from New Jersey. One is a Republican and one is a Democrat. You would think the self proclaimed party of diversity would have more black Senators. Last time I looked, 1:1 is a tie.

Ah, so you believe in artificial quotas. Good to know.

Drawing conclusions on a group of two units huh. I'm gonna go out on a limb and hazard a guess that you don't work as an actuary, in baseball or in anything that has to do with statistics.

Yes, racists always go to that first, well, I'm against quotas. That's why if you're a black Republican you have 10 times the chance to be a US senator than if you're Democrat. It's just that we don't have quotas, that's why.

Ssssuuuuurrrreeeeeee, that's why. Wink

Read his post. He's expecting "the party of diversity" to have X number of black senators. Not only is he hung up on race but he seems to believe Senators are chosen from some kind of menu rather than elected by the electorate. The only way to accomplish his expectation WOULD BE a quota.

He must live in Tanganyika or sump'm to be that ignorant.

Read my post. I just pointed out that if you are a black Republican, you are 10 times as likely to be a US Senator than if you are a black Democrat. Here's how you know that's what I meant. That's what I said

 

[Pogo]

How many black senators does the south have? 1?

There are TWO black Senators. Tim Scott from South Carolina, a Republican and Cory Booker from New Jersey. One is a Republican and one is a Democrat. You would think the self proclaimed party of diversity would have more black Senators. Last time I looked, 1:1 is a tie.

Ah, so you believe in artificial quotas. Good to know.

Drawing conclusions on a group of two units huh. I'm gonna go out on a limb and hazard a guess that you don't work as an actuary, in baseball or in anything that has to do with statistics.

Yes, racists always go to that first, well, I'm against quotas. That's why if you're a black Republican you have 10 times the chance to be a US senator than if you're Democrat. It's just that we don't have quotas, that's why.

Ssssuuuuurrrreeeeeee, that's why. Wink

Read his post. He's expecting "the party of diversity" to have X number of black senators. Not only is he hung up on race but he seems to believe Senators are chosen from some kind of menu rather than elected by the electorate. The only way to accomplish his expectation WOULD BE a quota.

He must live in Tanganyika or sump'm to be that ignorant.

Read my post. I just pointed out that if you are a black Republican, you are 10 times as likely to be a US Senator than if you are a black Democrat. Here's how you know that's what I meant. That's what I said

I done read your post. It's a non sequitur. You have no basis to conclude that.
Ask your teacher what that means; I'm not gonna sit here and repeat the same thing over and over until it sinks in .

 

[kaz]

I wasn't arguing with you, I was just pointing out that if you're a black and you're a Democrat it's far worse for you than if you're a Republican in terms of the odds of you being in the Senate. 90% of blacks are Democrat, yet they still have one Senator. 10% of blacks are Republican, and they have one senator. See what I'm saying?

"Blacks" don't have senators. "Whites" don't have senators. Residents of a particular state have senators.

I don't know that that is supposed to mean, I didn't say they did.

I just pointed out if you are a black Democrat, you have about 1/10th the shot of being a US senator as if you are a black Republican.

What's up with the racism? Why don't Democrats give a fair shot to blacks to be Senators? Switch to Republican and you're ten times as likely to become a senator if you are black? That's pretty sad that Democrats are so wrapped up in the skin color of the people running for office

Ten times, think about that

I'm gonna go out on the same limb and guess you don't work in anything having to do with statistics either. That's a complete non sequitur.

I'm gonna go out on the same limb and guess you don't have any professional writing or editing skills. You didn't mean it's a non-sequitur, you meant it's not a statistically significant sample size ...

BTW, I was a math major at Maryland and a six sigma black belt at GE. So you're going o fer right now

No, I meant exactly what I typed. Non sequitur = "does not follow". Yes you drew a conclusion based on an insignificant sample; I chose to note the result. The process was already noted. I acknowledge your concession though. And I really don't give a shit how many people you karate chopped at General Electric.

I didn't say you didn't mean what you typed, I said you don't know what the words mean. Can you read at all?

Your argument is based on statistical significance. If there were a statistical significant sample size, of course it would be a valid conclusion to draw

 

[Pogo]

"Blacks" don't have senators. "Whites" don't have senators. Residents of a particular state have senators.

I don't know that that is supposed to mean, I didn't say they did.

I just pointed out if you are a black Democrat, you have about 1/10th the shot of being a US senator as if you are a black Republican.

What's up with the racism? Why don't Democrats give a fair shot to blacks to be Senators? Switch to Republican and you're ten times as likely to become a senator if you are black? That's pretty sad that Democrats are so wrapped up in the skin color of the people running for office

Ten times, think about that

I'm gonna go out on the same limb and guess you don't work in anything having to do with statistics either. That's a complete non sequitur.

I'm gonna go out on the same limb and guess you don't have any professional writing or editing skills. You didn't mean it's a non-sequitur, you meant it's not a statistically significant sample size ...

BTW, I was a math major at Maryland and a six sigma black belt at GE. So you're going o fer right now

No, I meant exactly what I typed. Non sequitur = "does not follow". Yes you drew a conclusion based on an insignificant sample; I chose to note the result. The process was already noted. I acknowledge your concession though. And I really don't give a shit how many people you karate chopped at General Electric.

I didn't say you didn't mean what you typed, I said you don't know what the words mean. Can you read at all?

Your argument is based on statistical significance. If there were a statistical significant sample size, of course it would be a valid conclusion to draw

But there isn't. So it ain't. The end.
Ain't rocket surgery.

 

[kaz]

There are TWO black Senators. Tim Scott from South Carolina, a Republican and Cory Booker from New Jersey. One is a Republican and one is a Democrat. You would think the self proclaimed party of diversity would have more black Senators. Last time I looked, 1:1 is a tie.

Ah, so you believe in artificial quotas. Good to know.

Drawing conclusions on a group of two units huh. I'm gonna go out on a limb and hazard a guess that you don't work as an actuary, in baseball or in anything that has to do with statistics.

Yes, racists always go to that first, well, I'm against quotas. That's why if you're a black Republican you have 10 times the chance to be a US senator than if you're Democrat. It's just that we don't have quotas, that's why.

Ssssuuuuurrrreeeeeee, that's why. Wink

Read his post. He's expecting "the party of diversity" to have X number of black senators. Not only is he hung up on race but he seems to believe Senators are chosen from some kind of menu rather than elected by the electorate. The only way to accomplish his expectation WOULD BE a quota.

He must live in Tanganyika or sump'm to be that ignorant.

Read my post. I just pointed out that if you are a black Republican, you are 10 times as likely to be a US Senator than if you are a black Democrat. Here's how you know that's what I meant. That's what I said

I done read your post. It's a non sequitur. You have no basis to conclude that.
Ask your teacher what that means; I'm not gonna sit here and repeat the same thing over and over until it sinks in .

So you think that if there were a statistically significant sample, then it still wouldn't logically flow? Seriously? That's pretty funny

 

[kaz]

I don't know that that is supposed to mean, I didn't say they did.

I just pointed out if you are a black Democrat, you have about 1/10th the shot of being a US senator as if you are a black Republican.

What's up with the racism? Why don't Democrats give a fair shot to blacks to be Senators? Switch to Republican and you're ten times as likely to become a senator if you are black? That's pretty sad that Democrats are so wrapped up in the skin color of the people running for office

Ten times, think about that

I'm gonna go out on the same limb and guess you don't work in anything having to do with statistics either. That's a complete non sequitur.

I'm gonna go out on the same limb and guess you don't have any professional writing or editing skills. You didn't mean it's a non-sequitur, you meant it's not a statistically significant sample size ...

BTW, I was a math major at Maryland and a six sigma black belt at GE. So you're going o fer right now

No, I meant exactly what I typed. Non sequitur = "does not follow". Yes you drew a conclusion based on an insignificant sample; I chose to note the result. The process was already noted. I acknowledge your concession though. And I really don't give a shit how many people you karate chopped at General Electric.

I didn't say you didn't mean what you typed, I said you don't know what the words mean. Can you read at all?

Your argument is based on statistical significance. If there were a statistical significant sample size, of course it would be a valid conclusion to draw

But there isn't. So it ain't. The end.
Ain't rocket surgery.

That's not what non-sequitur means. God you're a hoot. There are stupid people all around us. They don't know they are stupid ...

 

[HappyJoy]

I was just thinking to myself. We need another thread hell bent on torturing the truth.

WHich is Bill Clinton attended funeral of KKK wizard. The picture is right there.

We all know Robert Byrd's past. He repudiated it, David Duke hasn't.

if he did it was because of political necessity as blacks were asserting their right to vote in the south.

How many black senators does the south have? 1?

There are TWO black Senators. Tim Scott from South Carolina, a Republican and Cory Booker from New Jersey. One is a Republican and one is a Democrat. You would think the self proclaimed party of diversity would have more black Senators. Last time I looked, 1:1 is a tie.

There are way more people of color in Congress on the Democratic side of the aisle, but that has nothing to do with the post you replied to.

 

[Pogo]

Ah, so you believe in artificial quotas. Good to know.

Drawing conclusions on a group of two units huh. I'm gonna go out on a limb and hazard a guess that you don't work as an actuary, in baseball or in anything that has to do with statistics.

Yes, racists always go to that first, well, I'm against quotas. That's why if you're a black Republican you have 10 times the chance to be a US senator than if you're Democrat. It's just that we don't have quotas, that's why.

Ssssuuuuurrrreeeeeee, that's why. Wink

Read his post. He's expecting "the party of diversity" to have X number of black senators. Not only is he hung up on race but he seems to believe Senators are chosen from some kind of menu rather than elected by the electorate. The only way to accomplish his expectation WOULD BE a quota.

He must live in Tanganyika or sump'm to be that ignorant.

Read my post. I just pointed out that if you are a black Republican, you are 10 times as likely to be a US Senator than if you are a black Democrat. Here's how you know that's what I meant. That's what I said

I done read your post. It's a non sequitur. You have no basis to conclude that.
Ask your teacher what that means; I'm not gonna sit here and repeat the same thing over and over until it sinks in .

So you think that if there were a statistically significant sample, then it still wouldn't logically flow? Seriously? That's pretty funny

No, it means you have no statistical basis, therefore your conclusion is bogus. It means exactly what it says --- not what you plug in later.

Perhaps you should have spent more time on reading comprehension and less on karate-chopping electrical engineers.

Why don't you essplain to the class, using this math-you-do-as-a-pretend-not-Republican-to-make-yourself-feel-better, given the stats you have, what are the relative chances that a President would be a Democrat or Republican?

How 'bout a woman?

 

[HappyJoy]

I was just thinking to myself. We need another thread hell bent on torturing the truth.

WHich is Bill Clinton attended funeral of KKK wizard. The picture is right there.

Uh, nnnnnnope. When Byrd was in the Klan, Clinton wasn't even BORN yet.

Doesn't change the fact that Byrd was in the Klan and Clinton went to his funeral.

Clinton attended the funeral of the longest serving senator in the history of this county and someone with a 100% NAACP approval rating. Decades ago, he was in the klan, it's a nice footnote to someone who overcame their prejudices, perhaps the GOP should try it.

 

[Pogo]

I was just thinking to myself. We need another thread hell bent on torturing the truth.

WHich is Bill Clinton attended funeral of KKK wizard. The picture is right there.

Uh, nnnnnnope. When Byrd was in the Klan, Clinton wasn't even BORN yet.

Doesn't change the fact that Byrd was in the Klan and Clinton went to his funeral.

Clinton attended the funeral of the longest serving senator in the history of this county and someone with a 100% NAACP approval rating. Decades ago, he was in the klan, it's a nice footnote to someone who overcame their prejudices, perhaps the GOP should try it.

The OP must believe rehabilitation is some kind of myth. Parking violation -- lock 'em up for life.

Wonder what the OP has done in the past that could be used as the sole definition of his life. I bet he wet his diaper as a toddler. Give 'im the Chair.

 

[kaz]

Yes, racists always go to that first, well, I'm against quotas. That's why if you're a black Republican you have 10 times the chance to be a US senator than if you're Democrat. It's just that we don't have quotas, that's why.

Ssssuuuuurrrreeeeeee, that's why. Wink

Read his post. He's expecting "the party of diversity" to have X number of black senators. Not only is he hung up on race but he seems to believe Senators are chosen from some kind of menu rather than elected by the electorate. The only way to accomplish his expectation WOULD BE a quota.

He must live in Tanganyika or sump'm to be that ignorant.

Read my post. I just pointed out that if you are a black Republican, you are 10 times as likely to be a US Senator than if you are a black Democrat. Here's how you know that's what I meant. That's what I said

I done read your post. It's a non sequitur. You have no basis to conclude that.
Ask your teacher what that means; I'm not gonna sit here and repeat the same thing over and over until it sinks in .

So you think that if there were a statistically significant sample, then it still wouldn't logically flow? Seriously? That's pretty funny

No, it means you have no statistical basis, therefore your conclusion is bogus. It means exactly what it says --- not what you plug in later.

Perhaps you should have spent more time on reading comprehension and less on karate-chopping electrical engineers.

Why don't you essplain to the class, using this math-you-do-as-a-pretend-not-Republican-to-make-yourself-feel-better, given the stats you have, what are the relative chances that a President would be a Democrat or Republican?

How 'bout a woman?

Sure there's a statistical basis. Fact, if you are a black in this country, you are 10 more times likely to be a US senator if you are a Republican than a Democrat.

Democrats have a real racism issue, they vote and see a black man, not a Democrat, and they are a lot less likely to pull the lever for them

 

[Pogo]

Read his post. He's expecting "the party of diversity" to have X number of black senators. Not only is he hung up on race but he seems to believe Senators are chosen from some kind of menu rather than elected by the electorate. The only way to accomplish his expectation WOULD BE a quota.

He must live in Tanganyika or sump'm to be that ignorant.

Read my post. I just pointed out that if you are a black Republican, you are 10 times as likely to be a US Senator than if you are a black Democrat. Here's how you know that's what I meant. That's what I said

I done read your post. It's a non sequitur. You have no basis to conclude that.
Ask your teacher what that means; I'm not gonna sit here and repeat the same thing over and over until it sinks in .

So you think that if there were a statistically significant sample, then it still wouldn't logically flow? Seriously? That's pretty funny

No, it means you have no statistical basis, therefore your conclusion is bogus. It means exactly what it says --- not what you plug in later.

Perhaps you should have spent more time on reading comprehension and less on karate-chopping electrical engineers.

Why don't you essplain to the class, using this math-you-do-as-a-pretend-not-Republican-to-make-yourself-feel-better, given the stats you have, what are the relative chances that a President would be a Democrat or Republican?

How 'bout a woman?

Sure there's a statistical basis. Fact, if you are a black in this country, you are 10 more times likely to be a US senator if you are a Republican than a Democrat.

So you can't answer.
Wassamatta? Was the probability too high for a number? Couldn't find an infinity symbol?

Democrats have a real racism issue, they vote and see a black man, not a Democrat, and they are a lot less likely to pull the lever for them.

"They" do huh?
What, do "they" all just gather on a street corner and decide what the Borg do that day? Zat how it works?

And what do Republicans do? "They" gather on the opposite street corner, do "they"?

 

[Conservative65]

I was just thinking to myself. We need another thread hell bent on torturing the truth.

WHich is Bill Clinton attended funeral of KKK wizard. The picture is right there.

Uh, nnnnnnope. When Byrd was in the Klan, Clinton wasn't even BORN yet.

Doesn't change the fact that Byrd was in the Klan and Clinton went to his funeral.

Clinton attended the funeral of the longest serving senator in the history of this county and someone with a 100% NAACP approval rating. Decades ago, he was in the klan, it's a nice footnote to someone who overcame their prejudices, perhaps the GOP should try it.

The OP must believe rehabilitation is some kind of myth. Parking violation -- lock 'em up for life.

Wonder what the OP has done in the past that could be used as the sole definition of his life. I bet he wet his diaper as a toddler. Give 'im the Chair.

I can't speak for the OP but I can speak for me. It's the double standard applied by Democrats to their own. A Democrat like Byrd can do what he does, say he's sorry, and because he's a Democrat all is well with Democrats. However, let someone that isn't a Democrat do something as a young person and not only are they labeled for life, Democrats label all those that believe like him/her as that way.

 

[Conservative65]

I was just thinking to myself. We need another thread hell bent on torturing the truth.

WHich is Bill Clinton attended funeral of KKK wizard. The picture is right there.

Uh, nnnnnnope. When Byrd was in the Klan, Clinton wasn't even BORN yet.

Doesn't change the fact that Byrd was in the Klan and Clinton went to his funeral.

Clinton attended the funeral of the longest serving senator in the history of this county and someone with a 100% NAACP approval rating. Decades ago, he was in the klan, it's a nice footnote to someone who overcame their prejudices, perhaps the GOP should try it.

Perhaps Democrats should apply the same standards to their own that they do to Republicans.

 

[Pogo]

WHich is Bill Clinton attended funeral of KKK wizard. The picture is right there.

Uh, nnnnnnope. When Byrd was in the Klan, Clinton wasn't even BORN yet.

Doesn't change the fact that Byrd was in the Klan and Clinton went to his funeral.

Clinton attended the funeral of the longest serving senator in the history of this county and someone with a 100% NAACP approval rating. Decades ago, he was in the klan, it's a nice footnote to someone who overcame their prejudices, perhaps the GOP should try it.

The OP must believe rehabilitation is some kind of myth. Parking violation -- lock 'em up for life.

Wonder what the OP has done in the past that could be used as the sole definition of his life. I bet he wet his diaper as a toddler. Give 'im the Chair.

I can't speak for the OP but I can speak for me. It's the double standard applied by Democrats to their own. A Democrat like Byrd can do what he does, say he's sorry, and because he's a Democrat all is well with Democrats. However, let someone that isn't a Democrat do something as a young person and not only are they labeled for life, Democrats label all those that believe like him/her as that way.

Yuh huh.

Link?

{label} label all those that believe like him/her as that way.

​

You don't even get what you just did, do you?

 

[Conservative65]

WHich is Bill Clinton attended funeral of KKK wizard. The picture is right there.

We all know Robert Byrd's past. He repudiated it, David Duke hasn't.

if he did it was because of political necessity as blacks were asserting their right to vote in the south.

How many black senators does the south have? 1?

There are TWO black Senators. Tim Scott from South Carolina, a Republican and Cory Booker from New Jersey. One is a Republican and one is a Democrat. You would think the self proclaimed party of diversity would have more black Senators. Last time I looked, 1:1 is a tie.

There are way more people of color in Congress on the Democratic side of the aisle, but that has nothing to do with the post you replied to.

The statement was specifically about Senators not Congress as a whole. Pay attention.

I've looked that the District of a House member from my State that is black. What I found is that the District was purposely created with an over 60% majority black population in order that a black get elected.