View Single Post
KevinTheOmnivore KevinTheOmnivore is offline
KevinTheOmnivore's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Old Jun 22nd, 2003, 03:06 AM       
Originally Posted by O71394658
I can understand whay you're saying, but I disagree. The professor was telling a black man what it was like to be black. That's like walking up to an Auschwitz victim and saying the Holocaust never happened.
No, it isn't. According to the jackass who wrote this op-ed, the "liberal professor" was telling him what it means to be black. We unfortunately weren't privy to this conversation, and we don't know what the actual context was.

Furthermore, what if this "white, liberal professor" was in fact a PhD in African studies?? What if he has studied Africa for many years? What if he had spent years there doing research and conducting studies?? We'll never know. But if he did, and he was quite knowledgable, would you still say that the "white, liberal professor" has no right to discuss what it "means to be black"?

why does the Republican White House tend to be full of corporate millionares??
John Kerry D 550
Amo Houghton R 350
Herb Kohl D 300
Jay Rockerfeller D 300
Diane Feinstein D 50
Frank Lautenberg D 40
Teddy Kennedy D 35
Rob Bennett R 30
Rodney Frelinghuysen R 30
Norm Sisisky D 30

The above are the 10 wealthiest Congressmen. 7 are Democrats.
Out of 535 U.S. Congressman, you found seven wealthy Democrats. And there's a difference between being wealthy and being a corporate player. Certainly Democrats are just as involved and financed by corporations, but that's why I'm not a Democrat.

Also, check out which Party is the most indebted to corporate donors, which Party tends to accept the most corporate campaign contributions, and you'd see it was the Republican Party (Center for Responsive Politics works,

completely different Party dynamics
You have to give more than that if you want me to take your argument seriously.
I frankly don't care how seriously you take my argument, but anyway....

General history overview: Democrats were the party of the south, Republicans of Lincoln tried to stop expansion of slave states, blah blah, Southerners swing towards the Dems, post-civil war, Dems. use segregation models set by North on blacks in the South, Jim Crow laws, etc.,....20th Century, Democrats remain segregationists in the South, blah, blah, blah, but the conservatism remains primarily reserved to the South, (for example, even in many states today, registered Democrats vote Republican. There are more registered Democrats in Florida, but that is misleading due to the northern Floridians who are still registered Democrats, despite their conservatism).

This of course was a grand over-simplification, but it's almost 2:30 am, and I am exhausted. Lets put it this way, saying that modern Democrats are the same as late 19th Century Democrats is kind of like saying that Republicans are the real "pro-black" Party, b/c Lincoln freed the slaves (sort of, kind of, too late).

I wonder what this clown has to say about the 90,000 voters in Florida, most of whom were not guilty of any crimes, and most of whom were BLACK, were relinquished of their right to vote in 2000 by namely, among others, Jeb Bush (who happens to be a Republican, btw, AND, the presidents brother, btw).
Interesting. I have no knowledge of this. I might have to look into it and get back to you.[/quote]

No, what has me worked up is that this condescending twit thinks he knows better than the vast majority of blacks in America.
Just because the majority accepts it doesn't make it right.[/quote]

Ok, but because this ONE black guy says so, it must be the case....

your assertion about deer population is in fact a popular falacy
I strongly disagree here, but to stay on topic, will leave it alone...
Reply With Quote