Understanding the bitter black mindset

Since: Jan 12

Columbus, OH

#194 Nov 23, 2012
GOP folding like a old worn out tent:

(CNN)– A top Republican U.S. senator brushed off the anti-tax pledge pushed by activist Grover Norquist and embraced widely for years by GOP lawmakers.

"I care more about my country than I do about a 20-year-old pledge," Sen. Saxby Chambliss told Georgia television station WMAZ, a CNN affiliate, on Wednesday. "If we do it his way, then we'll continue in debt and I just have a disagreement with him about that."

– Follow the Ticker on Twitter:@PoliticalTicker

Congress faces a year-end deadline to reach agreement on taming the U.S. budget deficit or take other steps to avert the so-called fiscal cliff of mandatory tax increases and spending cuts that experts say would push the country back into recession.

At the heart of budget standoff is disagreement over how to raise new revenues to help reduce red ink.

President Barack Obama and Senate Democrats call for an increase in tax rates for the wealthiest Americans, while House Republicans, who control that chamber's majority, favor other approaches for bringing in money, such as closing certain tax loopholes and eliminating deductions.

Norquist, who heads the conservative group Americans for Tax Reform, has been successful over the years in lobbying a strong majority of congressional Republicans to sign his pledge to not raise taxes.

Many GOP candidates who ran for office also signed the promise, but earlier this year, a small number of freshman lawmakers rejected the idea that they were bound to the document.

Chambliss, along with 38 other senators and 219 House members entering the next Congress, have signed the pledge, according to the website for Americans for Tax Reform.
Enzyte Bob

Powell, OH

#196 Nov 23, 2012
WISE AMERICAN wrote:
<quoted text> As you would have it, blacks should vote in 'herds' for republicans who outwardly call them racist names and use bigoted innuendo describing their poor grand parents and family members who are less financially stable than most whites, right? Vote for a party that calls your sister or cousin a 'welfare queen' and your nephew or friends son a ghetto bastard and a leech! Do I have it right, Bobble head? Ok. We give! Come 2014, 95 percent of blacks will vote for an entire Republican ticket. Were sorry that we mistook your words as encouragement to better ourselves and not a put down as we mistakenly understood it. Our bad! We'll do better next election!
Holmes, it has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the ONLY people using racial imagery are YOUR MASSAS trying to keep you on the plantation of bastard babies, ObamaPhones and $400 checks.

The fact that you blame the 5% who are willing to go against the grain by calling them Uncle Toms, while 95% of you are like blind little sheep and do whatever your MASSAS tell you, shows what a warped, brainwashed version of reality you people have been fed!

Be thankful this Thanksgiving because you have ME to set you straight. Read this article and read it closely again:

Here on Topix:

Why an Honest Russian Immigrant Hates Obama

http://www.topix.com/forum/columbus/TL5B2O5QS...

And in it's original venue:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/11/why_a_...

==========

SPECIFICALLY PAY ATTENTION here. IT'S HOW THE DUMBOCRATS -- YOUR MASSAS KEEP YOU ON THE PLANTATION!

In America, everything was new to us, from the abundance of food and bathroom etiquette -- we never had toilet paper in Russia back then; we used newspapers -- to the American work ethic. We saw that Americans had to work a lot harder than the average Russian. That was a real bummer. Americans had to work for real! Employees had to come to work on time; some had only 30 minutes for lunch and just one week's vacation -- maybe two or more after some years of employment. In Russia, a month was typical! An hour for lunch (called dinner hour) was spent in stores standing on long lines demanding things that were always in short supply in a socialist society -- shoes, items of clothing, food. It's a whole different world in America, with an over-abundance of material goods that posed quite the opposite problem: how to sell it -- how to create the demand for things.

That's how things were in so-called "developed socialism." Why work harder if your life and your earnings were pretty much predetermined for you? An average secretary, an office worker, an engineer, a teacher were making around 120 rubles a month. I know -- one might wonder, How much is that in dollars? But nobody was thinking in dollars back then, and the possession of foreign currency was severely punishable by law. Let's just say it was barely enough to put meager food on a table, but no more than that. Meanwhile, a pair of winter boots cost 80 rubles, and a pair of American Wrangler jeans was the very same 120. In the meantime even a Soviet car -- a clanking tin can -- was about 3,000 rubles. Do the math. One could save money all his life and not have enough for it.

The majority of the population remained pretty poor under the watchful eye of the KGB. Living an honest life meant being doomed to this 120-plus-minus for the rest of their lives. So why kill yourself working? In socialism, people are pretty much equal! That's the whole point of it.

..

The Soviet Union was a very poor country with a very proud people living under a "successful socialism," officially "building a bright communist future," with a military system equal to that of the USA, if not better, with a finger always on a red button, claiming everything is hunky-dory, while people didn't have a pot to piss in, but the bosses in the Russian White House (oops, Kremlin) lived like Tsars.
Karl

Dalton, OH

#197 Nov 23, 2012
WISE AMERICAN wrote:
<quoted text> you are spitting on the constitution and the spirit of it for what it intended.
I thought that leftists usually say that the constitution was written by racists and therefore it is outmoded and can be changed by judicial fiat
Karl

Dalton, OH

#198 Nov 23, 2012
WISE AMERICAN wrote:
<quoted text> How many blacks voted for Clinton? For Gore? Were Blacks voting for them because they ( Clinton, Gore) are white??? You don't know what you're talking about! I explained why a majority of blacks don't like 'Toms' but you won't listen. Furthermore, I never said ALL whites are racist, just you uber rightwing teabagger conferderate types.
There's a California serial killer who claims he murdered Nichole and Ron. Blacks were seeing the detective (Fuhrman) as the bigoted liar that he is, and didn't believe OJ was guilty by the "evidence" that was presented.
Mark Fuhrman (born February 5, 1952), former detective of the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), is known for his part in the investigation of the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman and his subsequent felony conviction for perjury. He has subsequently written books and hosted talk radio.
Like I said, since you believe that we are illegitimate by default, I give no respect to your Marxism either, the electoral game is soon to end, the military game starts next.
Karl

Dalton, OH

#199 Nov 23, 2012
WISE AMERICAN wrote:
<quoted text> Any thought that doesn't agree with your white bigoted conservative mindset is considered Marxist. Do you even know or understand what Marx wrote and believed, or are all your ideological rants about it come from Beck and Hannity? And what does it have to do with blacks wanting to be treated with the same dignity and respect whites give to each other?
When whites like you support the Rick Perry's and the Santorum's of the world, you are spitting on the constitution and the spirit of it for what it intended. You cannot justify wanting to berate an entire race and culture because of the actions of a small number of poor urban blacks who commit a crime.
10 points of the Communist Manifesto

1. Abolition of property and land and application of all rents of land to public purposes
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax
3. Abolition of all right to inheritance
4. Confiscation of all property of all emigrants and rebels
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6.Centraliztion of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State, the bringing of cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of label. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of the population over the country,
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination with education and industrial production."
Karl

Dalton, OH

#200 Nov 23, 2012
WISE AMERICAN wrote:
<quoted text>
BINGO!!!!! His skin color won't be a "badge of honor" that it has been in America since the founding of this nation. The "content of one's character" will be the "first" thing people see, and not color is where the future is heading. In his paranoid racist conservative mindset, the very first thought for people like him, Rush, and the Fox talking heads is violence ( hunting down one by one) against those like himself. That's his perception.
Bullets will be in your skull before your Dream World ever becomes reality.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#201 Nov 23, 2012
Karl wrote:
<quoted text>
It's Marxist, anything that stems from Marxism, is rotten at its core and must be militantly opposed.
Like I said... what you don't know ...

You really have to look beyond the first sentence in wikipedia to understand anything about major schools of thought.

CRT is not, as you suppose, about black people blaming white people for everything. It is an analytic point of view uilized in qualitative research in order to understand behavioral tendancies.

Folks like you keep running into a wall in explaining things like the failure of black people, as a group, to thrive and merge more effectively with society as a whole despite such events as the Civil Rights Act and its enforcement. You pose this as a rhetorical question at least daily, implying perhaps that blacks are genetically inferior. Science tends to reject this explantion--finding greater differences between individuals than between the racial groups--genetically speaking.

In fact, you then actually apply similar methodology to that of CRT in assuming cultural or moral inferiority. Where you err, however, is in failing to account for a larger culure and morality that encompasses Americans of all varieties. You refuse to see any interactions between those who succeed and those who do not (or those who are white an those who are black). Your tendancy, if you account for culture at all, is to assume that the "black community" is able to fix some kinds of internal failings that will result in raising up blacks but having no impact on whites.

I realize that that this is deeper thinking than you enjoy. But, since you do not, it would be better to simply admit that you don't know enough about CRT to have an intelligent discussion and then leave it at that.
Karl

Dalton, OH

#202 Nov 23, 2012
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
Like I said... what you don't know ...
You really have to look beyond the first sentence in wikipedia to understand anything about major schools of thought.
CRT is not, as you suppose, about black people blaming white people for everything. It is an analytic point of view uilized in qualitative research in order to understand behavioral tendancies.
Folks like you keep running into a wall in explaining things like the failure of black people, as a group, to thrive and merge more effectively with society as a whole despite such events as the Civil Rights Act and its enforcement. You pose this as a rhetorical question at least daily, implying perhaps that blacks are genetically inferior. Science tends to reject this explantion--finding greater differences between individuals than between the racial groups--genetically speaking.
In fact, you then actually apply similar methodology to that of CRT in assuming cultural or moral inferiority. Where you err, however, is in failing to account for a larger culure and morality that encompasses Americans of all varieties. You refuse to see any interactions between those who succeed and those who do not (or those who are white an those who are black). Your tendancy, if you account for culture at all, is to assume that the "black community" is able to fix some kinds of internal failings that will result in raising up blacks but having no impact on whites.
I realize that that this is deeper thinking than you enjoy. But, since you do not, it would be better to simply admit that you don't know enough about CRT to have an intelligent discussion and then leave it at that.
It down the line supports the left wing agenda to deny the idea of a white identity other than that of an oppressor. It always presumes that minorities cannot be racist since they are not in the majority.

It tries to disguise the fact that a culture of rampant illegitimacy that blames racism that only they can see, is not going to get a single drop of respect from a non-liberal, but if it gets the majority on raw tribal politics, war is going to be the result.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#203 Nov 23, 2012
Karl wrote:
<quoted text>
Bullets will be in your skull before your Dream World ever becomes reality.
Are you threatening WA?
Karl

Dalton, OH

#204 Nov 23, 2012
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you threatening WA?
No, I never said that I would be committing acts of violence, I am saying that from a logical historical progression that demonizing white conservatives is going to lead to Lebanese Civil War type violence.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#205 Nov 23, 2012
Enzyte Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
And I REPEAT: Half of what comes out of the mouths of you leftists is PROJECTION!
People who vote in herds, at a rate of 95%? Especially given how much your MASSAS have DESTROYED you people by treating you as their FERAL PETS!!!
Can't think independently and not allowed to vote against your MASSA - especially when your DUMBOCRAT MASSAS GAVE YOU A RACE OF 71% BASTARDS? YOU are the real UNCLE TOMS.
I understand that in parts of the Old South the white vote for Romney was in the range of 80-90%. Is this herd behavior as well?

Who are the "massas" that they are following?

Were you following as well?

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#206 Nov 23, 2012
Karl wrote:
<quoted text>
I thought that leftists usually say that the constitution was written by racists and therefore it is outmoded and can be changed by judicial fiat
While the Constitution was undisputably written by a bunch of white men of the landowning class, I defy you to find a leftist of any repute who claims that the Constitution is outmoded and can be changed by judicial fiat.

It is the Constitutionally defined role of the Supreme Court to apply the principles of the Constitution to situations that could not have been dreamed of by the founders. This is not fiat. The principles remain unchanged. This disturbs some folks who want to go back and insert things (like Christianity) that were never there to begin with.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#207 Nov 23, 2012
Karl wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I never said that I would be committing acts of violence, I am saying that from a logical historical progression that demonizing white conservatives is going to lead to Lebanese Civil War type violence.
Oh, so you are just the prophet, foreseeing an unavoidable future event, eh?

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#208 Nov 23, 2012
Karl wrote:
<quoted text>
It down the line supports the left wing agenda to deny the idea of a white identity other than that of an oppressor. It always presumes that minorities cannot be racist since they are not in the majority.
It tries to disguise the fact that a culture of rampant illegitimacy that blames racism that only they can see, is not going to get a single drop of respect from a non-liberal, but if it gets the majority on raw tribal politics, war is going to be the result.
Not true. Blacks were historically oppressed in South Africa, despite being in the majority. I suspect that this may have been the case in the American slave south, as well.

The US has Constitutionally sought to protect the rights of the minority from the oppression of the majority--however, sheer numbers are not the only means by which oppression occurs. If we consider the institution of slavery and its ability to hold a group of people in subservience, there was considerable power vested in the hands of a few, including the ability to earn from one's labor, the right to learn and better one's self (recall that it was illegal to teach blacks to read), the right to own property, the right to sign contracts, the right to travel freely, etc. For the record, many of these rights were withheld from women as well. Oh, and then there was the right to vote.

Each of these denials served to keep those large numbers of persons from gaining any power to overthrow the legally-santioned tyranny of those at the top. As a result, the end of the Civil War, emancipation and the downfall of the plantation system left many blacks both penniless and powerless. However, the institution of Jim Crow laws served to ensure that even the most diligent, honest and respectful of former slaves would be severely hampered in any attempt to raise themselves up through their work to become educated, to compete in the labor force, to purchase property or to amass wealth.

The Civil Rights laws of the 1960s did strike down the last of these legal prohibitions on the exercise of rights. However, this did not signal an immediate change in circumstances. While there has been a slow growth of a black middle class, able to hand down to their children opportunities, change has occured most profoundly during times of economic growth for the country as a whole. When the economy contracts, it is always those in the most tenuous positions that are knocked off.
Karl

Sharon Center, OH

#209 Nov 23, 2012
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, so you are just the prophet, foreseeing an unavoidable future event, eh?
Uh,no

I have proposed three likely scenarios:

Ulster
Lebanon
Rwanda

Look, there is gonna be blood one way or another, multi-culti always leads to it.
Karl

Sharon Center, OH

#210 Nov 23, 2012
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
While the Constitution was undisputably written by a bunch of white men of the landowning class, I defy you to find a leftist of any repute who claims that the Constitution is outmoded and can be changed by judicial fiat.
It is the Constitutionally defined role of the Supreme Court to apply the principles of the Constitution to situations that could not have been dreamed of by the founders. This is not fiat. The principles remain unchanged. This disturbs some folks who want to go back and insert things (like Christianity) that were never there to begin with.
At the time of the Constitution's ratification, there were still denominations given official status by a few states.
Karl

Sharon Center, OH

#211 Nov 23, 2012
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand that in parts of the Old South the white vote for Romney was in the range of 80-90%. Is this herd behavior as well?
Who are the "massas" that they are following?
Were you following as well?
As Lee Kuan Yew said, in a multi-racial system, people vote their ethnic interests, not economic interests.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#212 Nov 23, 2012
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand that in parts of the Old South the white vote for Romney was in the range of 80-90%. Is this herd behavior as well?
Who are the "massas" that they are following?
Were you following as well?
You understand?????? Where are those links?

Romney received 59% of the white vote by most accounts.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/romney-wins-whi...

In 1980, Reagan won white voters by 56% percent with no ethnic candidate in the mix......

Hardly a herd mentality......

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#213 Nov 23, 2012
Karl wrote:
<quoted text>
At the time of the Constitution's ratification, there were still denominations given official status by a few states.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Denominations of...?
Karl

Sharon Center, OH

#214 Nov 23, 2012
tranpsosition wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Denominations of...?
Connecticut afforded the Congregational Church official status as the denomination of the state of Connecticut. This was at the time of the ratification of the Constitution.

Most of the colonies had an official denomination, Pennsylvania did not, the last to remove the official denomination was Rhode Island in 1840.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Obama's worst decision by far 8 min jonjedi 98
What Do You Think of Donald Trump Now? 11 min Really 300
White Nationalists losing faith in Trump 29 min Reality Speaks 72
Trump plans to Remove WH Press Corps, hide TRUTH 46 min Reality Speaks 165
Trump just isn't ready 1 hr Anonymous 1
Get Trump Inaugural coin set......hurry while ... 2 hr They cannot kill ... 79
News Megabus no longer serving Columbus 2 hr They cannot kill ... 12
Does anyone know why Yolanda Harris is leaving ... 5 hr 404 not found 86

Columbus Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Columbus Mortgages