patrick.net

My Brother's wife is first Generation Cuban American walked out of one of these classes. But that was a college class. There is NO Place in public education for this racism.

CaptainShuddup says

first Generation Cuban American walked out of one of these classes.

All that signifies is that the teacher didn't portray Castro as the devil incarnate.

Here's the kicker... after all the ruminations about Romney's binders full of women and the token racial minorities at the Republican convention what does Obama do? For his 4 open cabinet positions he nominates 4 WHITE MEN!!! With nary a cry from his base. You cannot make this stuff up.

CaptainShuddup says

There is NO Place in public education for this racism.

Do you think we should have prayer in school?

Organized prayer no, but if a child or a group wants to pray that should be THEIR business. I don't see any difference than if a bunch of over achievers got together every day to discuss high level economics. They would be admired and encouraged for it.

But I don't know what prayer has to do with "Whitie he bad" courses being taught in high school. Not in a country were we talk about diversity and have been trying to teach everyone that they are the same. The truth is Liberal policy does more to beat down the minority pysche so they don't feel compelled to compete with Education and Job resources. It's best to convince them they are worthless and get them to live a life on welfare, than to convince them that can be or do anything in this country, and YOU are your only obstacle.

Haitian Americans and Jamaicans certainly aren't waiting for Whittie's permission to over achieve. And as you can tell by one remark here already, Cubans aren't popular with Libs because they refuse to lie down and play Victim.

This isn't one person or one school. Hell most Patnet libs are from the institution of apology.

But how is radical thinking different from religion?

CaptainShuddup says

what does Obama do? For his 4 open cabinet positions he nominates 4 WHITE MEN!!!

JFC! What would Obama have to do in order for you not to bitch about it? If he nominated 4 black men, you'd be complaining about that. If he nominated 4 people of different races, 1 male, 1 female, 1 transgender, and 1 asexual freak that reproduced through mitosis, you'd bitch about that too!

Why can't you bitch about something truly scary about Obama, like this?

Half of Obama is oppressing the other half.
See, He's balanced and fair.

Captain, this is such Fox right winger BS.

For one thing we don't really know how bad this is.

CaptainShuddup says

According to handouts obtained by Fox News, “white privilege” was defined as “a set of advantages that are believed to be enjoyed by white people beyond those commonly experienced by non-white people in the same social, political, and economic spaces (nation, community, workplace, income, etc.”

We all know one person will read something differently or more literally than the next.

I agree that obsessing about it isn't helpful, but it is true that being white is often (not always) an advantage. It's true that for a minority individual, or a woman for that matter to see things stacked against them isn't helpful.

Does that mean that it isn't sometimes true ?

You don't think it's possible to learn the truth without becoming a victim over it ?

CaptainShuddup says

The truth is Liberal policy does more to beat down the minority pysche so they don't feel compelled to compete with Education and Job resources. It's best to convince them they are worthless and get them to live a life on welfare, than to convince them that can be or do anything in this country, and YOU are your only obstacle.

I'm embarrassed for you that you are spouting this BS. Are you literally trying to be a parody of a stupid right winger ?

Plenty of liberals, including every teacher I know in schools dominated by minorities tries to help kids have the attitude that -

CaptainShuddup says

YOU are your only obstacle

You are so grossly full of sh&^, that I wouldn't even know where to start.

Give me a fucking break !

Sure, white liberals are going to be slightly less proud of their aggressive white European ancestors for things like slavery and genocide of native Americans. And right wingers on average are a little more likely to be in denial about some of these things, because it's just as hard to see the faults of your group or your ancestors as it is to see your own personal faults. Hmmmm.

But I'm not apologizing about it, nor am I obsessively focusing on it.

But it is reality. And as you know, reality has a well known liberal bias.

freudian slip....LOLOL....

Dan8267 says

CaptainShuddup says

what does Obama do? For his 4 open cabinet positions he nominates 4 WHITE MEN!!!

JFC! If he nominated 1 asexual freak that reproduced through mitosis, you'd bitch about that too!

marcus says

Give me a fucking break !

Sure, white liberals are going to be slightly less proud of their aggressive white European ancestors for things like slavery and genocide of native Americans. And right wingers on average are a little more likely to be in denial about some of these things, because it's just as hard to see the faults of your group or your ancestors as it is to see your own personal faults. Hmmmm.

How about them aggressive Asian who wiped out half of Europe with their diseases which carried over to killing off the native Americans. Or many be the Africans who sold their countrymen into Slavery... You do realize in this modern time slavery in Africa and South Asia is still a common practice... but its still pinned to Europeans who abolished the practice outside of Africa/Asia.

what are you jackasses on the Left doing to destroy todays Slavery ?

960: Doge of Venice Pietro IV Candiano reconvened the popular assembly and had it approve of a law prohibiting the slave trade
1102: Trade in slaves and serfdom ruled illegal in London: Council of London (1102)
1117: Slavery abolished in Iceland
1214: The Statute of the Town of Korčula (Croatia) abolishes slavery.[5]
1215: Magna Carta signed. Clause 30, commonly known as Habeas Corpus, would form the basis of a law against slavery in English common law.
1256: The Liber Paradisus is promulgated. The Comune di Bologna abolishes slavery and serfdom and releases all the serfs in its territories.
1274: Landslova (Land's Law) in Norway mentions only former slaves, which indicates that slavery was abolished in Norway
1315: Louis X, king of France, publishes a decree proclaiming that "France" signifies freedom and that any slave setting foot on the French ground should be freed[6]
1335: Sweden (including Finland at the time) makes slavery illegal.[7]
1416: Republic of Ragusa (modern day Dubrovnik, Croatia) abolished slavery and slave trading
1435: Papal Encyclical - Sicut Dudum - of Pope Eugene IV banning enslavement on pain of excommunication.

1537: Pope Paul III forbids slavery of the indigenous peoples of the Americas as well as of any other new population that would be discovered, indicating their right to freedom and property.
1542: Spain enacted the first European law abolishing colonial slavery in 1542, but was forced to weaken these laws by 1545.
1569: An English court case involving Cartwright, who had brought a slave from Russia, ruled that English law could not recognise slavery.
1588: The Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth abolishes slavery[8]
1595: A law is passed in Portugal banning the selling and buying of Chinese slaves.[9]
February 19, 1624: The King of Portugal forbids the enslavement of Chinese of either sex.[11][12]
1652: Slavery abolished in Providence Plantations.
1683: The Spanish crown abolishes slavery in Chile

marcus says

And right wingers on average are a little more likely to be in denial about some of these things,

Changing the subject is kind of like denial right ?

thomaswong.1986 says

what are you jackasses on the Left doing to destroy todays Slavery ?

Rot in fucking hell Marcus ..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery#Present_day

In Mauritania, the last country to abolish slavery (in 1981),[161] it is estimated that up to 600,000 men, women and children, or 20% of the population, are enslaved with many used as bonded labour.[162][163][164] Slavery in Mauritania was criminalized in August 2007.[165] The Middle East Quarterly reports that slavery is still endemic in Sudan.[166] In Niger, slavery is also a current phenomenon. A Nigerien study has found that more than 800,000 people are enslaved, almost 8% of the population.[167][168][169] Niger officially abolished slavery in 2003.[170] Many pygmies in the Republic of Congo and Democratic Republic of Congo belong from birth to Bantus in a system of slavery.[171][172] Some tribal sheiks in Iraq still keep blacks, called Abd, which means servant or slave in Arabic, as slaves.

thomaswong.1986 says

February 19, 1624: The King of Portugal forbids the enslavement of Chinese of either sex.[11][12]

Cut and paste much? Doofus, rather than plagiarize how about a simple link :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolition_of_slavery_timeline

rooemoore says

Cut and paste much? Doofus, rather than plagiarize how about a simple link :

what do jackasses on the left know anything about history and facts..

so you rub it into their faces.. for the world to see !

If I understand it correctly, he thinks there is no reason to feel bad about what our ancestors did 170 years ago, if there are still people doing it now.

I guess you could say that about any crime. E.g., my grandfather was a rapist, but that's not so bad,... hell, there are hundreds of thousands of rapists running around even now.

Or, my great grandparents were first cousins. But hey, that's not so bad, there are incestuous relations between siblings that sometimes yield children.

I could go on, but you get my drift...

Great reasoning wrong wong, keep up the great work !

As I said the other day, there's only one thing I have ever seen you prove.

marcus says

If I understand it correctly, he thinks there is no reason to feel bad about what our ancestors did 170 years ago, if there are still people doing it now.

what do you know about anyones ancestors from 50 150 or 200 years ago..
they may have not even been in the US at the time.

you are prejudging anyone who is white and stamping "son of slave owner" on their forehead.

pretty racist of you dont you think... but as long as you created a industry to get money out of people and govt playing the victim .. your OK with being a racist.

thomaswong.1986 says

what do you know about anyones ancestors from 50 150 or 200 years ago..

they may have not even been in the US at the time.

I wasn't talking about anyone specific. I wasn't saying your grandparents are cousins or that your grandfather was a rapist. Jeez. Do I have to explain everything ?

IF I make a generalization about white Americans of European descent
committing genocide against native Americans or owning slaves, and I refer to them loosely as "our ansestors," your current version of denial is, "hey, those weren't my great great great grandparents ?"

Are you drunk wrong ?

thomaswong.1986 says

pretty racist of you dont you think... but as long as you created a industry to get money out of people and govt playing the victim .. your OK with being a racist.

Nominated. Best nonsensical jibberish I've heard in a while.

marcus says

As I said the other day, there's only one thing I have ever seen you prove.

I know that you know what I'm talking about.

CaptainShuddup says

The parent said that’s all well and good – but the teacher only offered students one perspective and were not allowed to debate the theory.

Yeah, what about the perspective that the lord chose white people to take over this country by any means necessary.

marcus says

Captain, this is such Fox right winger BS.

No it's not, my Sister in law talked about this during the 2011 holiday season, she was taking some college course to get her masters. One of the courses she had to take was this exact same shit, talked about in this article. What in fuck really gets me about you folks, isn't that you are hardcore believers of this SHIT, it's that you deny that this shit doesn't even happen. Yet you would have everyone else believe that any white Conservative has a hooded white outfit with two holes cut out hanging in their closet.

CaptainShuddup says

Yet you would have everyone else believe that any white Conservative has a hooded white outfit with two holes cut out hanging in their closet.

MAybe we can agree on this:

1) IF a white American is an extreme apologist for historical white oppression in America, they are a democrat. But a majority of democrats are not in this category.

(note: I do not consider someone like myself who simply does not deny white oppression in the past, or the racism that still exists, to be in this group of "extreme apologists")

2) If a white American is a very racist (in the usual meaning of white racist) they are a republican. But a significant percentage of republican are not racists.

"majority of democrats".... Most democrats
"significant percentage".... ambiguous

Nothing personal, but you are full of shit and biased to the hilt.

marcus says

CaptainShuddup says

Yet you would have everyone else believe that any white Conservative has a hooded white outfit with two holes cut out hanging in their closet.

MAybe we can agree on this:

1) IF a white American is an extreme apologist for historical white oppression in America, they are a democrat. But a majority of democrats are not in this category.

(note: I do not consider someone like myself who simply does not deny white oppression in the past, or the racism that still exists, to be in this group of "extreme apologists")

2) If a white American is a very racist (in the usual meaning of white racist) they are a republican. But a significant percentage of republican are not racists.

SoftShell says

"majority of democrats".... Most democrats

"significant percentage".... ambiguous

Nothing personal, but you are full of shit and biased to the hilt.

My reason for saying "significant percentage" was not just that I don't know how many republicans are racist, it's because we are all racist to some degree. (except Abe (remember him) He doesn't see race and only judges someone by the content of their character, so not including him, we are all racists).

Maybe I'm biased.

Or maybe the kind of beliefs behind a course that takes white oppression generalizations too far is simply not as prevalent as conventional white racism is, in the first place.

marcus says

What I do deny is the exaggerated perception. It's highly unlikely the course in Wisconsin was saying literally that I personally am the oppressor since I am white. Which Fox claimed.

Oh I see, but when someone talks about crime in a town committed by Blacks, then they are encompassing "ALL" Blacks and have singled out Obama, then that person is also a Republican, and further deduction proves that all republicans are racists? How do you guys fit it ALL in there?

SoftShell says

Nothing personal, but you are full of shit and biased to the hilt.

The point of what you quoted from me there was to frame this in a very true non- biased way. Even if you found a very small flaw in the way I said it (I'm not sure), are you sure that that indicates my being totally full of shit ?

I'm pretty sure that there's something else that bothers you about this:

marcus says

1) IF a white American is an extreme apologist for historical white oppression in America, they are a democrat. But a majority of democrats are not in this category.

(note: I do not consider someone like myself who simply does not deny white oppression in the past, or the racism that still exists, to be in this group of "extreme apologists")

2) If a white American is a very racist (in the usual meaning of white racist) they are a republican. But a significant percentage of republican are not racists.

The term "racist" is ambiguous, and not universally agreed upon.

So when you say "we are all racists", that is according to your personal definition of the term.

marcus says

SoftShell says

"majority of democrats".... Most democrats

"significant percentage".... ambiguous

Nothing personal, but you are full of shit and biased to the hilt.

My reason for saying "significant percentage" was not just that I don't know how many republicans are racist, it's because we are all racist to some degree. (except Abe (remember him) He doesn't see race and only judges someone by the content of their character, so not including him, we are all racists).

Maybe I'm biased.

Or maybe the kind of beliefs behind a course that takes white oppression generalizations too far is simply not as prevalent as conventional white racism is, in the first place.

Yes, there is ...
Your political bias shines through...You state that a significant percentage of republicans are "very racist". Yet in the next post you readily admit that you "don't know how many republicans are racist".

So, which is it?? Why don't you put a number on that "significant percentage" so I can become 'unbothered'....

marcus says

SoftShell says

Nothing personal, but you are full of shit and biased to the hilt.

The point of what you quoted from me there was to frame this in a very true non- biased way. Even if you found a very small flaw in the way I said it (I'm not sure), are you sure that that indicates my being totally full of shit ?

I'm pretty sure that there's something else that bothers you about this:

marcus says

SoftShell says

You state that a significant percentage of republicans are "very racist"

Actually I said a significant percentage of republicans are NOT racist (meaning NOT very racist).

Maybe try reading the entire quote again carefully, because only in the context can you get my point (not that you want to (and that's what bothers you)).

I was actually forced to take a class with a similar content when I was a freshman in college over 15 years ago. (God has it been that long?)

Anyway, though my political views have generally changed 180* since then, my views on this particular issue remain the same.

The right is generally unable to see the shitty upward economic mobility potential of the poor in this country. When presented with the facts, they use examples like Steve Jobs or Mark Zuckerberg to argue against it, and blame the individual for not "trying hard enough" or something like that.

Factors in our nations past have put most minorities in the lower income demographic. Liberals recognize that opportunites are fewer for minorities and incorrectly attribute that to race. This is incorrect; the reason why minorites have fewer opportunities than whites is because a hgiher percentage of minorities are poor.

Liberals fail to connect the dots. A poor white kid from the hills of West Virginia has less opportunites than a middle class black kid from surburban Atlanta. Those of Jewish or Asian decent are classified as minority - they are for the most part middle class (or better) and opportunities abound for them (to generally stay middle class, that is)

To the left, I say stop worrying about racism; solve income and wealth inequality and racism will take care of itself.

Racism really only works in one direction - you need to have prejudice against other races and the power to affect other races. The poor old black man who calls me a cracker under his breath as I pass by him is not racist. He is prejudiced yes, but he has no power to use my race to affect me. He can't be racist. If he was my boss and he fired me (or didn't hire me) because I was white, that is racist.

Since the majority of power in this country is held by whites, and it is inevitable that some of the white folks in power are going to be prejudiced against minorites, the majority of racism in this country is white against minority.

If we make it easier and more common for poor folks to attain positions of power, and since a higher percentage of the poor are minorities, we are would improve the lives of minorities in a proportionally greater manner than non-minorites. Therfore, we would limit the opportunites for prejudiced white folks to be racist. If we took all the poor folks and made them rich, and all the rich folks and made them poor, are the white poor folks going to be racist against the rich black folks?

So again, to liberals, connect the dots. Focus on helping poor people.

To conservatives, open your eyes. Poor folks have few opportunities to move up, and the majority of the poor are not poor because they are lazy.

Moderate Infidel says

Yeah, what about the perspective that the lord chose white people to take over this country by any means necessary.

Great. Now you're setting up Dan or some other atheist to say in essence:

"See ?

I rest my case"

david1 says

The right is generally unable to see the shitty upward economic mobility potential of the poor in this country.

When people make that comment I wonder what do they mean.
If I have a warehouse where I make Tchotchkes out of sea shells, and I can only pay minimum wage for the job. And you choose to stay there for 20 years, guess what. You're still going to be making minimum wage, though min wage may have gone up over the years.

Before 2000 at least, anyone that says there is no upward economic mobility in this country, was blaming people for their own personal short comings.

Many people flounder though out their 20's and 30's doing menial trivial jobs, because they haven't figured out their scheme to how make more money, or what they want to do that is more lucrative. I was 30 before I got my first computer. Before that I did flooring and lived hand to mouth for a good solid 14 years. By then I was also married and had a step daughter a baby from my wife, and another in the oven. That computer arrived just in time. It consumed me, it became my passion. I was sitting infront of it every waking hour, learning everything I could about it. This was not my AOL scuttlebut play thing, I was learning. I would only go do a Carpet job to keep the wolf away, turn the lights back on, pay the rent before we got evicted, buy groceries. My wife would ask me "what are you doing sitting at home all day playing on the computer?" I told her...
"People make a lot of money doing this, I'm going to get a job doing this." She told me... "No you have to go to college for that." I replied "NO You just got to know your Shit!".
I got a job three months later from the guy I bartered a tile job that I got the computer from, as a bench tech. Then with in a year after that I got a job as a Sr. VB6 developer. I was a bit of an interloper and it took a lot of Balls for me to have so much faith in my self. But I did it. Before that I couldn't program a VCR or an answering machine for that matter. I was as low tech as they came a complete Luddite.

If were not for that computer I would still be working hand to mouth like several of my friends still are many months through out the year. Flooring is a feast or famine industry. Though perhaps not, maybe if it wouldn't have been the computer that switched that light on, it would have been something else.

I've always noticed that people over 30 have a better command of their finances, career and life than those under 30. The biggest problem today is, everyone wants to be large right out of the gate. Nobody wants to put in time discovering them selves and paying their dues. It's like everyone thinks they are all born with an honorary degree from the school of hard knocks.

You refuse to use the term "majority" when referring to republicans that are 'not racist', even though you self-admittedly state that you can't put any number on it.

* and we are not 'all racist' by the common, most accepted definition of 'racist'

So it would also be fair to assume, by the way you worded your statement, that you also believe "a significant percentage of republicans are 'very racist'"

If you don't want this assumption made, you should

a- not have made the original statement, or

b- stated a number, and backed it up with facts, as opposed to the ambigeous phrase 'a significant percentage', which leaves everything open to interpretation.

also...

Please provide some proof that 'a majority of democrats are not extreme apologists'. Or is that also an assumption?

marcus says

SoftShell says

You state that a significant percentage of republicans are "very racist"

Actually I said a significant percentage of republicans are NOT racist (meaning NOT very racist).

Thedaytoday says

IT IS CLEAR THAT THE republican party platform and thus every REPUBLICAN is against womans health, RACIST and disparaging to minorities.

They have no choice, God told them to.

u sound like 121212 reincarnated...

Thedaytoday says

Such a bunch of idiots moaning and bitching about owning assault rifles and large clips with hardly any background checks.

FOOLS!

CaptainShuddup says

I've always noticed that people over 30 have a better command of their
finances, career and life than those under 30. The biggest problem today is,
everyone wants to be large right out of the gate. Nobody wants to put in time
discovering them selves and paying their dues. It's like everyone thinks they
are all born with an honorary degree from the school of hard knocks.

------------------------------
"That's the truth, Ruth".....

An elementary analysis of your writing style reveals your true identity:

Welcome back, 121212 !!

Thedaytoday says

AverageBear says

So before you dismiss Capt's obvervations as BS, it'd best be for you to open your eyes to the college culture, because it's dominated by white guilt; has been for at least 20 years, and I see no signs of it letting up.....

No you can easily dismiss CptIdiot's arguments as he is a bigoted racist

marcus says

If I understand it correctly, he thinks there is no reason to feel bad about
what our ancestors did 170 years ago, if there are still people doing it now.

-------------------------------------------------
It sounds like you are putting words in Thomas' mouth. There is a HUGE difference between acknowledging the past and perpetuating it. Do you think the average English dude cares, or for that matter, feels bad about me being Irish? I don't think so....I think there's a fine line between acknowledging past atrocities, and perpetuating white guilt, and more often than not, some (not all) liberals run across that line..... I think the most obvious problem facing kids of all colors is those 'household units' without a Dad on the scene. Statistics here in the US for minorities w/o Dads face a harsher reality. I do think that welfare (at this current level and attitude of the general population of elected officials on both sides of the aisle), is perpetuating this sad, sad reality. Welfare/Entitlements is stripping a person's ability to earn their own living, and discover how well they can do things on their own....Fostering white guilt surely won't help the average minority try and understand what it means to bust your ass and enjoy the wealth of your efforts.

CaptainShuddup says

I was 30 before I got my first computer. Before that I did flooring and lived
hand to mouth for a good solid 14 years.

Here we go - this is the perfect example of what I said earlier - Conservatives use an example of one (or a few) in a country of 50 million poor. Even if you can name 100,000 poor who moved into the middle class as you did - that only shows the probability of staying poor if born poor is 99.8%. Not great odds, if you ask me.

Think about how remarkable what you did is, especially in today's context. You were able to afford to accept as payment for labor a computer (and were able to find a barter partner). What if the flooring business didn't allow you to be able to keep the computer - what if you needed to pawn it to feed the family? Then, you were smart enough to see opportunity with the computer, and teach yourself how to use it. The same guy gave you a job repairing computers - maybe he felt he owed you still - but still remarkable considering you were a flooring guy. He is the kicker though - after that, you were lucky (with persistence, I'm sure) to land a job as a Senior BASIC developer with only one year experience fixing computers. That is quite a stretch, I think. This is one of those things where your persistence was combined with being in the right place at the right time.

All of this harkens back to the raw numbers. Children from poor families have less than a 1% chance of ever making it into the top 5% in income. (Economic Mobility Project: Across Generations).

We change that, and since a high percentage of the poor are minorites, and we fix racism.