Activism Discussion: Why Do Liberals Celebrate A Negro Lying Cheating And Stealing On MLK Day?

Why Do Liberals Celebrate A Negro Lying Cheating And Stealing On MLK Day?
Posts: 11

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)

Ronny Koch
2014-01-20 22:59:55 EST
Guest column by Gerry Harbison HARBISON is a professor of
chemistry.

"... plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize - only be sure always to
call it please 'research.'" "Lobachevsky," by Tom Lehrer

In 1988, the Martin Luther King Jr. Papers Project made a
discovery that shocked it to its core.

The Project, a group of academics and students, had been
entrusted by Coretta Scott King with the task of editing King's
papers for publication. As they examined King's student essays
and his dissertation, they gradually became aware that King was
guilty of massive plagiarism - that is, he had copied the words
of other authors word-for-word, without making it clear that
what he was writing was not his own.

The Project spent years uncovering the full extent of King's
plagiarism. In November 1990, word leaked to the press, and they
had to go public. The revelations caused a minor scandal and
then were promptly forgotten.

Indeed, I had never heard of them until I read a student letter
to the Daily Nebraskan three weeks ago. That letter sent me in
search of the truth about Martin Luther King Jr.'s student
career.

Like most graduate students, King spent the first half of his
doctoral work taking courses in his degree area, theology. His
surviving papers from that period show that from the very
beginning he was transcribing articles by eminent theologians,
often word for word, and representing them as his own work.

After completing his course work, graduate students usually
write a dissertation or thesis, supposedly an independent and
original contribution to scholarship. King's thesis was anything
but original. In fact, the sheer extent of his plagiarism is
breathtaking.

Page after page contains nothing but direct, verbatim
transcriptions of the work of others. In 1990, the King Project
estimated that less than half of some chapters was actually
written by King himself. Since then, even more of his
"borrowings" have been traced.

Calculating the exact extent of his plagiarism will require a
computer analysis, but having looked over Chapter III in detail,
I estimate that at least three quarters of it was stolen from
other authors.

King stole from the subjects of his dissertation, the
theologians Tillich and Wieman. He copied the writings of other
theologians - passages from philosophy textbooks. But most
unforgivably of all, thousands of words in paragraph-sized
chunks, were taken from the thesis of a fellow student, Jack
Boozer, an ex-army chaplain who returned to Boston University
after the war to get his degree.

We even know how he did it, for King was systematic in his
plagiarism. He copied significant phrases, sentences or whole
paragraphs from the books he was consulting onto a set of index
cards. "Writing" a thesis was then a matter of arranging these
cards into a meaningful order.

Sometimes he linked the stolen parts together with an occasional
phrase of his own, but as often as not he left the words
completely unchanged. The index cards still survive, with their
damning evidence intact.

King fooled everybody: his adviser, his thesis reader and King
scholars for more than 30 years. Nor did he stop after
graduation; as early as the 1970s, King scholar Ira Zepp noticed
that sections of King's first published book Striding Towards
Freedom were taken verbatim from Anders Nygren's Agape and Eros
and Paul Ramsay's Basic Christian Ethics (sheesh!).

Zepp, as so many have done since then, remained silent.

Everything I've written above can easily be verified in a couple
of hours in Love Library. None of it comes from right-wing
scandalmongers who might have a vested interest in damaging
King's reputation.

But if King's plagiarism is so serious and so extensive, why do
we so rarely hear about it? Partly it is because the American
public thinks of plagiarism as an obscure issue that only an
egghead professor could get steamed up about.

And to some extent they're right. King's academic dishonesty is
after all mostly irrelevant to his life's work. The Civil Rights
movement of the 1950s and 1960s did us all a great good by
ending the greatest social evil of mid-20th century America -
legally sanctioned segregation and racial discrimination. That
movement is not in the least diminished by the ethical
shortcomings of one of its leaders.

But more than that, American culture has personified the virtues
of the Civil Rights movement - tolerance, nonviolence, and
insistence on the integrity of the individual - in Martin Luther
King Jr. That mythic King bears little resemblance to the real,
the historical Martin Luther King Jr.

It would be safe and easy for UNL to play along with this
comfortable myth.

But we shouldn't.

Plagiarism isn't a mere peccadillo. It is a direct threat to our
academic integrity. When a student plagiarizes, he undermines
academic standards by receiving a grade for ideas or expression
that are not his own, and he cheats other students who have
earned their grades honestly.

When a scholar plagiarizes, he defrauds other scholars of due
credit for their work, and he contaminates scholarship by making
it difficult or impossible to trace the evolution of ideas.

Remember how major-league baseball banned Pete Rose? Rose
gambled on games, a minor transgression to most, but one that
baseball felt undermined its the very integrity. In the same
way, plagiarism subverts our integrity. Surely UNL can at least
aspire to the same standards as organized baseball?

More than this, as scholars we have a responsibility to separate
myth from truth. For example, we insist on making a distinction
between creation myths and the scientific truth of evolution.
Even though some of our students adhere to the biblical story of
creation - and when we teach evolution we may cause offense and
do violence to their beliefs - we can't fail to teach and
research the truth out of a misplaced 'sensitivity.'

In the same way, we have a responsibility to confront Martin
Luther King Jr. as the man he was, not the icon some of us
revere.

Our chancellor insists we can diversify UNL without compromising
academic standards. But if so, how can we, in the name of
diversity, declare an academic holiday to honor a man whose
entire career was marred by the most blatant academic dishonesty?

I personally have had one student expelled, and flunked several
others, for turning in plagiarized papers. Can we really look
those students in the face, insist that what they did was
seriously wrong, and then in good conscience vote for a King
holiday?

I don't think so.

http://setanta.unl.edu/mlk/dn_column.html

\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd


Freedom Man
2014-01-21 13:45:32 EST
CONSERVATIVES VS. LIBERALS: THE NATURE OF THE BEAST

It all began a hundred thousand years ago on a ledge in front of a
cave. A female homo sapiens walked by, attracting the attention of
a male. The male stepped forward and smacked her over the head with
his club. WHACK! He then dragged the unconscious female into his
cave for sex.

One day there were two males standing in front of a cave when a
female walked by. The first raised his arm to club the female, but
the second male communicated to him that clubbing females over the
head to have sex was not nice. WHACK! WHACK! The first male stepped
over the unconscious second male and proceeded to rape the female.
On that day the first liberal paid the price for expressing a new
idea.

Things didn't change much for thousands of years until the advent
of projectile weapons. This was first symbolized by the David and
Goliath story in the Bible, where the big strong brute was laid
flat by the small but smarter boy. Once brute strength was no
longer the controlling factor in social interaction, liberal ideas
slowly gained a foothold in human culture, and civilization began.

Throughout human history, the price for advocating tolerance and
progressive change has been paid in threats, beatings,
excommunication, incarceration, torture, murder, assassination, and
execution. Countless liberals have paid the ultimate price for
their humanity. Though Jesus Christ is the most famous, names in
recent history that come to mind are Gandhi, Martin Luther King
Jr., John Lennon, and Robert Kennedy.

Today there are many conservatives - individuals, groups, and
nations - who use threats and violence to silence the voices of
reason, tolerance, and progress. Here in America it is seen in
racists and homophobes beating blacks and gays, sometimes to death,
not for money or out of anger generated by interactive cause, but
because of religious or racial intolerance and secular bigotry.

Alan Berg on talk radio was a strong voice against a conservative
organization called the Aryan Nation. For thus exercising his
freedom of speech, he was shot dead while walking his dog in front
of his house.

David Rice is a man on death row in Washington State who has no
remorse whatsoever for entering the home of a family of four and
carving out their living hearts only because he heard they were
"liberals." He got their names from a Democratic Party membership
list.

Right-wingers Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols killed 168 men,
women, and children as an act of protest. What liberals have ever
committed such an abominable atrocity?

The most abominable atrocity in several decades is the 9/11
terrorist attacks in which thousands of innocent civilians were
murdered. The alleged perpetrators, Osama Bin Laden and the al
Qaeda-Taliban terrorists, epitomize the right-wing religious
fundamentalist mentality.

Some believe that the 9/11 attacks were deliberately allowed to happen,
exacerbated, or even perpetrated by radical right-wing elements within
our own government to further their fascistic agenda. Two buildings
were hit by planes, but THREE collapsed. The evidence that the three
collapsed buildings were brought down with demolition explosives put in
place BEFORE the attacks is very strong.

Arguing that such horrendous crimes are not political in nature or
that they are not done primarily by conservatives is utter
nonsense. Look back:

Who nailed who to a cross?

Who were the Loyalists to the totalitarian monarchy of King George?

Who started our Civil War to defend slavery?

Who fought to keep women as property, and now fights their
sovereignty over their own bodies in the freedom to choose
abortion?

Who fought against child labor statutes?

Who fought against the concept of free public education?

Who fought against the right of women to vote?

Who fought against anti-trust and anti-monopoly legislation?

Who fought against workers organizing?

Who fought against government controls on manufacturers of cars
"unsafe at any speed?"

Who killed several thousand innocent civilians in the 9/11
terrorist attacks?

Who started WW2, murdered 13 million and caused the death of 40
million more?

Who defended Jim Crow for a hundred years?

Who fought against voting rights, civil rights, social security,
health care for the elderly, and minimum wages?

Who fights against environmental protection statutes?

Who opposes equal rights for gays and other free-lifestyle
minorities?

Who cruelly opposes physician-assisted dying for suffering,
terminally ill patients soon to die anyway?

Who is sabotaging the separation of Church and State, and all our
other Constitutional rights, freedoms, and protections?

Who are the moralizing hypocrites forcing their puritanical
inhibitions and prohibitions on ALL Americans via legislation and
draconian, police-state enforcement practices?

Who always puts personal gain and corporate wealth and power above
the common good?

CONSERVATIVES OR LIBERALS?

The historic, undeniable truth is that these evils are THE NATURE
OF THE CONSERVATIVE BEAST!

Conservatives have distorted and demonized the word "liberal,"
whose true political meaning is favoring progressive change,
humanistic values, and opposition to authoritarianism. They
identify it with governmental waste and tolerance of criminality,
when in fact they themselves are guilty of abuses such as corporate
welfare bail-outs and tax evasion, fraud against investors, and
other white-collar crime. Conservatives fear and oppose all change
and progress beyond "what's in it for me?"

At the core of conservatism is the Machiavellian bully - the
despotic practitioner of "might makes right," craving wealth and
power, and willing to use any and all means to get them.
Conservatism is the philosophy of the caveman wearing a business
suit.

AND THE CAVEMENS' CLUBS CAN NOW DESTROY OUR EARTH!




CC Rider
2014-01-22 15:21:56 EST
On Tue, 21 Jan 2014 13:45:32 -0500, Freedom Man wrote:

> CONSERVATIVES VS. LIBERALS: THE NATURE OF THE BEAST


Liberal racists, both white and black, focused on separatism and racial
difference. Instead of subscribing to King’s belief in a colorblind
society, they wanted government policies that were color-coded. The further
America progressed from the dark days of slavery, the more they insisted
that slavery was present in America’s social institutions and its personal
interrelationships. The U.S., they asserted, was steeped in blood and
guilt: it must pay for its crimes against “people of color.”

The extent to which such views have not only entered but dominated the
intellectual mainstream of America in the past three decades can be seen in
the degree to which King’s notion that people should be judged by the
content of their character rather than the color of their skin has become
marginalized as quaint and naive. The racism in the left’s view primarily
of blacks themselves, but also of whites, has been clear in the policies
the left has pursued. Some, like the demand for reparations for slavery,
have not yet prevailed. Others, like the demand for affirmative action,
have become part of America’s way of doing business as a society. Although
claiming to be an equitable “leveling of the playing field,” this policy
has actually tilted the social landscape. It has nothing to do with
equality of opportunity, and everything to do with establishing a regime
that will produce an equality of results. It is a zero sum game in which
some win because of skin color and others lose because of skin color.
Ultimately, affirmative action has put government back into the business of
playing racial favorites — even after the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the
summary achievement of the civil rights movement, banned such action.

Liberal racists believe that neutral and objective tests for college
admissions are actually rigged in favor of whites. When Asians, many of
them recent immigrants with little or no cultural experience, refute this
notion by outscoring whites on these tests, liberal racists say that these
Asians are not really a minority at all but inauthentic, imitation whites.

Liberal racists bear a heavy burden for having helped destroy the black
family and create a black underclass by their romanticization of ghetto
behavior, and their insistence that blacks are victims who cannot be held
responsible for what they do. They reject the idea that culture rather than
race may help explain the disadvantages those in the black underclass face.
It is true, as they point out, that some 40 percent of America’s black
children are born poor, and that this fact affects their life chances. But
it is also true that 85 percent of these poor children come from
single-parent homes. It is this circumstance—studies show that children
born into single-parent families are more likely to be poor, regardless of
race, than children with two parents—rather than “institutional racism”
that actually handicaps them. Yet in the liberal view, any policy aimed at
countering illegitimacy and single parenthood among the black underclass is
“blaming the victim.”

The effects of liberal racism can be seen in the way black students taunt
those among them who strive for achievement as sellouts who are “acting
white.” Liberal racism can be seen in the unholy alliance between the
Democrat Party, the National Education Association and other teachers’
unions, and black spokesmen such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, to
maintain their power by opposing school choice for black children trapped
in violent and failing public schools. Liberal racism can be seen in the
way black voters are kept on the proverbial “liberal plantation” through
scare tactics and attacks on “race traitors” such as Colin Powell and
Condoleezza Rice, who have defied the party line. Liberal racism can be
seen, paradoxically, most clearly in the way anyone straying from its
premises is immediately branded as a “racist.” This is a powerful sanction
that liberal racists use like a bludgeon to control the public discussion
about race.

















> It all began a hundred thousand years ago on a ledge in front of a
> cave. A female homo sapiens walked by, attracting the attention of
> a male. The male stepped forward and smacked her over the head with
> his club. WHACK! He then dragged the unconscious female into his
> cave for sex.
>
> One day there were two males standing in front of a cave when a
> female walked by. The first raised his arm to club the female, but
> the second male communicated to him that clubbing females over the
> head to have sex was not nice. WHACK! WHACK! The first male stepped
> over the unconscious second male and proceeded to rape the female.
> On that day the first liberal paid the price for expressing a new
> idea.
>
> Things didn't change much for thousands of years until the advent
> of projectile weapons. This was first symbolized by the David and
> Goliath story in the Bible, where the big strong brute was laid
> flat by the small but smarter boy. Once brute strength was no
> longer the controlling factor in social interaction, liberal ideas
> slowly gained a foothold in human culture, and civilization began.
>
> Throughout human history, the price for advocating tolerance and
> progressive change has been paid in threats, beatings,
> excommunication, incarceration, torture, murder, assassination, and
> execution. Countless liberals have paid the ultimate price for
> their humanity. Though Jesus Christ is the most famous, names in
> recent history that come to mind are Gandhi, Martin Luther King
> Jr., John Lennon, and Robert Kennedy.
>
> Today there are many conservatives - individuals, groups, and
> nations - who use threats and violence to silence the voices of
> reason, tolerance, and progress. Here in America it is seen in
> racists and homophobes beating blacks and gays, sometimes to death,
> not for money or out of anger generated by interactive cause, but
> because of religious or racial intolerance and secular bigotry.
>
> Alan Berg on talk radio was a strong voice against a conservative
> organization called the Aryan Nation. For thus exercising his
> freedom of speech, he was shot dead while walking his dog in front
> of his house.
>
> David Rice is a man on death row in Washington State who has no
> remorse whatsoever for entering the home of a family of four and
> carving out their living hearts only because he heard they were
> "liberals." He got their names from a Democratic Party membership
> list.
>
> Right-wingers Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols killed 168 men,
> women, and children as an act of protest. What liberals have ever
> committed such an abominable atrocity?
>
> The most abominable atrocity in several decades is the 9/11
> terrorist attacks in which thousands of innocent civilians were
> murdered. The alleged perpetrators, Osama Bin Laden and the al
> Qaeda-Taliban terrorists, epitomize the right-wing religious
> fundamentalist mentality.
>
> Some believe that the 9/11 attacks were deliberately allowed to happen,
> exacerbated, or even perpetrated by radical right-wing elements within
> our own government to further their fascistic agenda. Two buildings
> were hit by planes, but THREE collapsed. The evidence that the three
> collapsed buildings were brought down with demolition explosives put in
> place BEFORE the attacks is very strong.
>
> Arguing that such horrendous crimes are not political in nature or
> that they are not done primarily by conservatives is utter
> nonsense. Look back:
>
> Who nailed who to a cross?
>
> Who were the Loyalists to the totalitarian monarchy of King George?
>
> Who started our Civil War to defend slavery?
>
> Who fought to keep women as property, and now fights their
> sovereignty over their own bodies in the freedom to choose
> abortion?
>
> Who fought against child labor statutes?
>
> Who fought against the concept of free public education?
>
> Who fought against the right of women to vote?
>
> Who fought against anti-trust and anti-monopoly legislation?
>
> Who fought against workers organizing?
>
> Who fought against government controls on manufacturers of cars
> "unsafe at any speed?"
>
> Who killed several thousand innocent civilians in the 9/11
> terrorist attacks?
>
> Who started WW2, murdered 13 million and caused the death of 40
> million more?
>
> Who defended Jim Crow for a hundred years?
>
> Who fought against voting rights, civil rights, social security,
> health care for the elderly, and minimum wages?
>
> Who fights against environmental protection statutes?
>
> Who opposes equal rights for gays and other free-lifestyle
> minorities?
>
> Who cruelly opposes physician-assisted dying for suffering,
> terminally ill patients soon to die anyway?
>
> Who is sabotaging the separation of Church and State, and all our
> other Constitutional rights, freedoms, and protections?
>
> Who are the moralizing hypocrites forcing their puritanical
> inhibitions and prohibitions on ALL Americans via legislation and
> draconian, police-state enforcement practices?
>
> Who always puts personal gain and corporate wealth and power above
> the common good?
>
> CONSERVATIVES OR LIBERALS?
>
> The historic, undeniable truth is that these evils are THE NATURE
> OF THE CONSERVATIVE BEAST!
>
> Conservatives have distorted and demonized the word "liberal,"
> whose true political meaning is favoring progressive change,
> humanistic values, and opposition to authoritarianism. They
> identify it with governmental waste and tolerance of criminality,
> when in fact they themselves are guilty of abuses such as corporate
> welfare bail-outs and tax evasion, fraud against investors, and
> other white-collar crime. Conservatives fear and oppose all change
> and progress beyond "what's in it for me?"
>
> At the core of conservatism is the Machiavellian bully - the
> despotic practitioner of "might makes right," craving wealth and
> power, and willing to use any and all means to get them.
> Conservatism is the philosophy of the caveman wearing a business
> suit.
>
> AND THE CAVEMENS' CLUBS CAN NOW DESTROY OUR EARTH!

.

Topaz
2014-01-22 17:59:15 EST

"I was listening to a speech that he gave in Sweden. You can listen at
the Url below if ya want. http://www.davidduke.com/

Anyway, the guy made an analogy that sums it all up.

He said, lets look at Iceland. They have one of the worlds lowest
crime rates, and have some of the worlds highest test scores.

He then went on to say: Haiti is rich in natural resources, they have
great weather, beaches etc.. Yet its a murder, rape capital of the
world. etc, etc.

He went on to say: If we were to take all of the people from Haiti &
Move them to Iceland, Well, they would soon die.

Take those from Iceland and move them to Haiti and within one
generation Haiti would be paradise on earth.

He explained it better than I did. But you should get the gist of the
Iceland / Haiti analogy. Better yet, listen to the Stockholm speech
and hear it for yourself.."

Tommy

http://www.ihr.org/ http://nationalvanguard.org/ http://heretical.com/

http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com

Freedom Man
2014-01-23 13:49:32 EST
"Liberal racist" is an oxymoron. There are people labelled as liberals that
bear the scars of racism or other forms of discrimination, and as a result
act out accordingly, but they are not truly liberal. They often are
radicals - to an irrational degree. The scars of slavery and other abuses
"trickle down" (to use a favored KKKon$ervative term) for generations.



CC Rider
2014-01-23 14:32:57 EST
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 13:49:32 -0500, Freedom Man wrote:

> "Liberal racist" is an oxymoron. There are people labelled as liberals that
> bear the scars of racism or other forms of discrimination, and as a result
> act out accordingly, but they are not truly liberal. They often are
> radicals - to an irrational degree. The scars of slavery and other abuses
> "trickle down" (to use a favored KKKon$ervative term) for generations.

Don't confuse today's moonbat liberals with the classic liberals, i.e., the
Founders to whom today's conservatives bear a close resemblance. They
embrace freedom and personal responsibility vis-a-vis the big, controlling
govt., dependency, and sense of entitlement that today's libs worship.

The scars of slavery are pure bullshit, just a card for you folks to keep
reaping the preferential treatment policies you have enjoyed since the 60s.
The only institutional racism today is directed toward the white man in the
form of those preferential treatment policies for you folks, e,g,
dumbed-down stds. for "protected" minorities, double-std. in prosecuting
hate crimes, set asides, quotas .... under the generic name "affirmative
action."

Freedom Man
2014-01-24 14:11:09 EST
"CC Rider" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:4ytg0eie7nh7$.106y31tji49bm$.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 13:49:32 -0500, Freedom Man wrote:
>
>> "Liberal racist" is an oxymoron. There are people labelled as liberals
>> that
>> bear the scars of racism or other forms of discrimination, and as a
>> result
>> act out accordingly, but they are not truly liberal. They often are
>> radicals - to an irrational degree. The scars of slavery and other abuses
>> "trickle down" (to use a favored KKKon$ervative term) for generations.
>
> Don't confuse today's moonbat liberals with the classic liberals, i.e.,
> the
> Founders to whom today's conservatives bear a close resemblance. They
> embrace freedom and personal responsibility vis-a-vis the big, controlling
> govt., dependency, and sense of entitlement that today's libs worship.

People tend to define things to fit their prejudices -

> The scars of slavery are pure bullshit, just a card for you folks to keep
> reaping the preferential treatment policies you have enjoyed since the
> 60s.
> The only institutional racism today is directed toward the white man in
> the
> form of those preferential treatment policies for you folks, e,g,
> dumbed-down stds. for "protected" minorities, double-std. in prosecuting
> hate crimes, set asides, quotas .... under the generic name "affirmative
> action."

Bullshit? Though my skin is white, I grew up in the South Bronx.
Psychological scars are just as real as physical ones. I suspect you have
ZERO experience with such an environment and history, and are pontificating
from a very priveleged position. I agree there are injustices in
"affirmative action," and there has been reverse discrimination, but these
are understandable reactions to the past horrors of slavery and Jim Crow.



CC Rider
2014-01-24 14:34:31 EST
On Fri, 24 Jan 2014 14:11:09 -0500, Freedom Man wrote:

> "CC Rider" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:4ytg0eie7nh7$.106y31tji49bm$.dlg@40tude.net...
>> On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 13:49:32 -0500, Freedom Man wrote:
>>
>>> "Liberal racist" is an oxymoron. There are people labelled as liberals
>>> that
>>> bear the scars of racism or other forms of discrimination, and as a
>>> result
>>> act out accordingly, but they are not truly liberal. They often are
>>> radicals - to an irrational degree. The scars of slavery and other abuses
>>> "trickle down" (to use a favored KKKon$ervative term) for generations.
>>
>> Don't confuse today's moonbat liberals with the classic liberals, i.e.,
>> the
>> Founders to whom today's conservatives bear a close resemblance. They
>> embrace freedom and personal responsibility vis-a-vis the big, controlling
>> govt., dependency, and sense of entitlement that today's libs worship.
>
> People tend to define things to fit their prejudices -
>
>> The scars of slavery are pure bullshit, just a card for you folks to keep
>> reaping the preferential treatment policies you have enjoyed since the
>> 60s.
>> The only institutional racism today is directed toward the white man in
>> the
>> form of those preferential treatment policies for you folks, e,g,
>> dumbed-down stds. for "protected" minorities, double-std. in prosecuting
>> hate crimes, set asides, quotas .... under the generic name "affirmative
>> action."
>
> Bullshit? Though my skin is white, I grew up in the South Bronx.

As the blacks would call you .... whigger.

South Bronx? That doesn't have anything on Bawlmer (Baltimore).

I grew up in a zoo too.


> Psychological scars are just as real as physical ones. I suspect you have
> ZERO experience with such an environment and history, and are pontificating
> from a very priveleged position. I agree there are injustices in
> "affirmative action," and there has been reverse discrimination, but these
> are understandable reactions to the past horrors of slavery and Jim Crow.

Then answer this moonbat: why is it that despite a half century of Civil
Rights and "affirmative reverse discrimination" black crime, STDs, and out
of wedlock/single parent rates are worse today than during Jim Crow when
blacks were truly oppressed and their anti-social behavior could be at
least understood? E.g., in 1963, black out of wedlocks were 25%, today
70%.

Freedom Man
2014-01-25 13:38:24 EST
"CC Rider" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:1xim3d1p2dpns$.fj6eh9vqcrgp.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Fri, 24 Jan 2014 14:11:09 -0500, Freedom Man wrote:
>
>> "CC Rider" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message
>> news:4ytg0eie7nh7$.106y31tji49bm$.dlg@40tude.net...
>>> On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 13:49:32 -0500, Freedom Man wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Liberal racist" is an oxymoron. There are people labelled as liberals
>>>> that
>>>> bear the scars of racism or other forms of discrimination, and as a
>>>> result
>>>> act out accordingly, but they are not truly liberal. They often are
>>>> radicals - to an irrational degree. The scars of slavery and other
>>>> abuses
>>>> "trickle down" (to use a favored KKKon$ervative term) for generations.
>>>
>>> Don't confuse today's moonbat liberals with the classic liberals, i.e.,
>>> the
>>> Founders to whom today's conservatives bear a close resemblance. They
>>> embrace freedom and personal responsibility vis-a-vis the big,
>>> controlling
>>> govt., dependency, and sense of entitlement that today's libs worship.
>>
>> People tend to define things to fit their prejudices -
>>
>>> The scars of slavery are pure bullshit, just a card for you folks to
>>> keep
>>> reaping the preferential treatment policies you have enjoyed since the
>>> 60s.
>>> The only institutional racism today is directed toward the white man in
>>> the
>>> form of those preferential treatment policies for you folks, e,g,
>>> dumbed-down stds. for "protected" minorities, double-std. in prosecuting
>>> hate crimes, set asides, quotas .... under the generic name "affirmative
>>> action."

>> Bullshit? Though my skin is white, I grew up in the South Bronx.
>
> As the blacks would call you .... whigger.

The blacks I know would never say that. Only YOU are saying it.

> South Bronx? That doesn't have anything on Bawlmer (Baltimore).
>
> I grew up in a zoo too.

It shows.

>> Psychological scars are just as real as physical ones. I suspect you have
>> ZERO experience with such an environment and history, and are
>> pontificating
>> from a very priveleged position. I agree there are injustices in
>> "affirmative action," and there has been reverse discrimination, but
>> these
>> are understandable reactions to the past horrors of slavery and Jim Crow.

> Then answer this moonbat: why is it that despite a half century of Civil
> Rights and "affirmative reverse discrimination" black crime, STDs, and out
> of wedlock/single parent rates are worse today than during Jim Crow when
> blacks were truly oppressed and their anti-social behavior could be at
> least understood? E.g., in 1963, black out of wedlocks were 25%, today
> 70%.

Not true, Nazi. There is no crime in having a kid out of wedlock if it is
taken care of responsibly.
People are not naturally monogamous, but through marriage society tries to
force them to be.

Welcome to my killfile, bigoted asshole KKKon$ervative!
PLONK!



CC Rider
2014-01-25 14:28:40 EST
On Sat, 25 Jan 2014 13:38:24 -0500, Freedom Man wrote:

> "CC Rider" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:1xim3d1p2dpns$.fj6eh9vqcrgp.dlg@40tude.net...
>> On Fri, 24 Jan 2014 14:11:09 -0500, Freedom Man wrote:
>>
>>> "CC Rider" <invalid@invalid.com> wrote in message
>>> news:4ytg0eie7nh7$.106y31tji49bm$.dlg@40tude.net...
>>>> On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 13:49:32 -0500, Freedom Man wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Liberal racist" is an oxymoron. There are people labelled as liberals
>>>>> that
>>>>> bear the scars of racism or other forms of discrimination, and as a
>>>>> result
>>>>> act out accordingly, but they are not truly liberal. They often are
>>>>> radicals - to an irrational degree. The scars of slavery and other
>>>>> abuses
>>>>> "trickle down" (to use a favored KKKon$ervative term) for generations.
>>>>
>>>> Don't confuse today's moonbat liberals with the classic liberals, i.e.,
>>>> the
>>>> Founders to whom today's conservatives bear a close resemblance. They
>>>> embrace freedom and personal responsibility vis-a-vis the big,
>>>> controlling
>>>> govt., dependency, and sense of entitlement that today's libs worship.
>>>
>>> People tend to define things to fit their prejudices -
>>>
>>>> The scars of slavery are pure bullshit, just a card for you folks to
>>>> keep
>>>> reaping the preferential treatment policies you have enjoyed since the
>>>> 60s.
>>>> The only institutional racism today is directed toward the white man in
>>>> the
>>>> form of those preferential treatment policies for you folks, e,g,
>>>> dumbed-down stds. for "protected" minorities, double-std. in prosecuting
>>>> hate crimes, set asides, quotas .... under the generic name "affirmative
>>>> action."
>
>>> Bullshit? Though my skin is white, I grew up in the South Bronx.
>>
>> As the blacks would call you .... whigger.
>
> The blacks I know would never say that. Only YOU are saying it.
>
>> South Bronx? That doesn't have anything on Bawlmer (Baltimore).
>>
>> I grew up in a zoo too.
>
> It shows.
>
>>> Psychological scars are just as real as physical ones. I suspect you have
>>> ZERO experience with such an environment and history, and are
>>> pontificating
>>> from a very priveleged position. I agree there are injustices in
>>> "affirmative action," and there has been reverse discrimination, but
>>> these
>>> are understandable reactions to the past horrors of slavery and Jim Crow.
>
>> Then answer this moonbat: why is it that despite a half century of Civil
>> Rights and "affirmative reverse discrimination" black crime, STDs, and out
>> of wedlock/single parent rates are worse today than during Jim Crow when
>> blacks were truly oppressed and their anti-social behavior could be at
>> least understood? E.g., in 1963, black out of wedlocks were 25%, today
>> 70%.
>
> Not true, Nazi. There is no crime in having a kid out of wedlock if it is
> taken care of responsibly.

That's the problem, moonbat, they aren't.

> People are not naturally monogamous, but through marriage society tries to
> force them to be.

Even the black leaders of the Civil Rights industry bemoan single-parent
households and the lack of father figures. If blacks had more than
two-digit IQs they'd realize that liberals have kept them on the victim
plantation of self-pity, anger and a continuing sense of entitlement, all
for votes of course, and they would rise up and kill all of you.. It all
began when LBJ told the mammies not to chase down the baby daddies for
support because the govt. would support them. That got the welfare state
ball rolling. And it has been all downhill ever since.

"I'll have them niggers voting democrat for 200 years," -- LBJ



> Welcome to my killfile, bigoted asshole KKKon$ervative!
> PLONK!
.
Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)


2021 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron