╌>

Oklahoma's anti-critical race theory law violates free speech rights, ACLU suit says

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  perrie-halpern  •  3 years ago  •  516 comments

By:   Tyler Kingkade and Antonia Hylton (NBC News)

Oklahoma's anti-critical race theory law violates free speech rights, ACLU suit says
The ACLU federal lawsuit in Oklahoma is the first to challenge a state law implemented to prevent the teaching of critical race theory.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



OKLAHOMA CITY — A coalition of civil rights groups sued the state of Oklahoma on Tuesday over a law limiting instruction about race and gender in public schools. It is the first federal lawsuit to challenge a state statute implemented to prevent the teaching of critical race theory.

The suit, backed by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, argues that HB 1775, which took effect in May, violates students' and teachers' free speech rights and denies people of color, LGBTQ students and girls the chance to learn their history.

The Oklahoma law bans teaching that anyone is "inherently racist, sexist or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously," or that they should feel "discomfort, guilt, anguish or any other form of psychological distress" because of their race or sex. Under rules imposed by the state, teachers or administrators found in violation of the law can lose their licenses, and schools can lose accreditation.

The lawsuit asks a federal judge to immediately halt enforcement of the law and declare it unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth amendments.

"HB 1775 is a direct affront to the constitutional rights of teachers and students across Oklahoma by restricting conversations around race and gender at all levels of education," said Megan Lambert, the legal director of the ACLU of Oklahoma.

Gov. Kevin Stitt, a Republican, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. He has said previously that the law would ensure that no taxpayer money would be used "to define and divide young Oklahomans about their race or sex."

Over the past year, conservative activists have accused public and private schools of teaching critical race theory, an academic concept examining the way institutions perpetuate racism that is typically taught in graduate schools. School district leaders across the country have said they do not teach critical race theory, but conservative activists have added the label to any discussions about race that they consider too progressive.

Oklahoma is one of five Republican-controlled states to have passed laws limiting how schools teach race and gender this year. Other states, including Alabama, Georgia and Florida, have limited discussions of race in schools through decrees by education officials, while states such as Texas approved measures requiring schools to present contrasting viewpoints on contentious issues.

Legislators in Oklahoma defended HB 1775 when it passed in the spring as a measure that would prevent teachers from making white students feel personally responsible for past racism. They also said it would protect students of color from racial stereotyping. The law's backers said they intended to prohibit classroom conversations about concepts like "systemic racism" and "intersectionality" to prevent "indoctrination" of students.

"The law ensures that all history is taught in schools without shaming the children of today into blaming themselves for problems of the past, as radical leftists would prefer," state Rep. Kevin West, a Republican and chief sponsor of HB 1775, said in reaction to the lawsuit.

Genevieve Bonadies Torres, a attorney with the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, said the group has received reports of Oklahoma schools striking classic literature that deals with racial conflict from the curriculum in response to the law, including "To Kill a Mockingbird" by Harper Lee, "A Raisin in the Sun," a play by Lorraine Hansberry, and "Their Eyes Were Watching God" by Zora Neale Hurston. Districts have also instructed teachers to stop using terms like "diversity" and "white privilege" in class, according to the lawsuit.

"I felt like it was a shot at teachers like me who really want to see Black and brown kids really do something with their lives," said Anthony Crawford, a high school English teacher in Oklahoma City. "Because they need this part of history. They need to understand what happened to their people."

Anthony Crawford teaching at Millwood High School in Oklahoma City.NBC News

Donovan Chaney, 17, a high school senior in Crawford's class, who is Black, said he sees the law as "the way to censor our next generation, so they don't know all the horrible things that went on before they were born."

The suit was filed on behalf of the University of Oklahoma chapter of the American Association of University Professors, the state chapter of the NAACP, the activist group American Indian Movement-Indian Territory and high school teacher Regan Killackey. Also among the plaintiffs are the Black Emergency Response Team, a group formed by University of Oklahoma students to combat racism after Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity members were captured on video in 2015 singing a song about lynching that included the N-word.

The fraternity racism scandal prompted the University of Oklahoma to take several steps to improve the campus climate, including requiring all first-year students to take part in a Freshman Diversity Experience, a one-day diversity training. The university said that because of the new law, it will now allow students to opt out of the program, as well as sexual harassment training.

"Not having these trainings and not giving incoming freshmen these tools has had a tangible impact on our clients, who say that they feel less safe on campus knowing that not only have people not been trained on these important and complicated and difficult questions, but they don't feel supported by the university, either," said Emerson Sykes, a staff attorney with the ACLU.

Oklahoma's law is particularly egregious, the suit says, because it limits discussion of dark periods of the state's history by preventing students and teachers from asking uncomfortable questions. The suit lists several moments that are difficult for educators to cover: the 1889 Land Runs, in which settlers raced to claim land in Oklahoma's Indian Territory; the 1921 Tulsa Massacre, when a white mob attacked a community known as Black Wall Street, killing hundreds of people and destroying homes and businesses; and the state's constitutional provision that required racially segregated schools until the U.S. Supreme Court outlawed them in 1954.

When Stitt signed HB 1775 in May, he said that educators "can and should teach this history without labeling a young child an 'oppressor'" and that the law would not prevent that.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
1  Ed-NavDoc    3 years ago

Somehow, that the ACLU (American Civil Leftist Union) has taken this up is not surprising at all./s 

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
1.1  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1    3 years ago

The American Civil Liberties Union stands up for your rights, as well.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
1.1.1  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1.1    3 years ago

They've never stood for mine personally, but then again I had bad experience with them years ago so my feelings may be somewhat biased. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
1.1.2  XXJefferson51  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1.1    3 years ago

I prefer the ACLJ to protect my rights as well as ADF. 

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
1.1.3  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  XXJefferson51 @1.1.2    3 years ago
I prefer the ACLJ to protect my rights  (emphasis mine)

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.1.4  Trout Giggles  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1.1.3    3 years ago

jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
1.1.5  XXJefferson51  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1.1.3    3 years ago

ACLJ and Alliance Defending Freedom are very effective in defending the freedom, rights, and liberty of the clients they have represented in court and other law making bodies. 

 
 
 
squiggy
Junior Silent
1.1.6  squiggy  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1.1    3 years ago

They can’t count to two.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
1.2  XXJefferson51  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1    3 years ago

Why would they take it up if as our secular progressives here say that it’s not being taught K-12.Why would the ACLU take up a moot case?  

 
 
 
MsMarple
Freshman Silent
1.2.1  MsMarple  replied to  XXJefferson51 @1.2    3 years ago

Why did the ACLU defended the right of the Nazis to march in Skokie? Talk about a moot case, lol

Something to do with "civil liberties", "the First AMendment"? - I dunno. That's the ACLU for you. I am a card carrying member....Pay my dues every year. Cuz you never know when you are gonna need them, in case I feel like a Nazi...

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
1.3  Jack_TX  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @1    3 years ago
Somehow, that the ACLU (American Civil Leftist Union) has taken this up is not surprising at all./s 

It's a stupid lawsuit against a stupid law.  

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
1.3.1  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Jack_TX @1.3    3 years ago

Yep.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2  Tessylo    3 years ago

It's not being taught so I don't get what the problem is here.  

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.1  Ronin2  replied to  Tessylo @2    3 years ago

Then it is a frivolous lawsuit by the ACLU.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
2.1.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ronin2 @2.1    3 years ago

BING-FUCKING-O!

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
2.1.2  Dulay  replied to  Ronin2 @2.1    3 years ago

It's the law that frivolous. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ronin2 @2.1    3 years ago
Then it is a frivolous lawsuit by the ACLU.

Absolutely!  How does one equate freedom of speech (which btw is denied on most leftist universities) with a curriculum?

Furthermore, we are repeatedly being told that CRT is not being taught in the public schools, so what is the problem with this law? The law does not prevent the teaching of US history, which CRT proponents claim that's all they are doing, it only prevents teachers from making white students feel personally responsible for past racism or black students feel like they can't succeed in life because of their race.

The ACLU has become an outspoken advocate for CRT and is now actively aiding the American left in imposing their radical beliefs on the rest of American society and the culture, including the education of young children, the United States armed forces as well as higher education and the federal government.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
2.1.4  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.3    3 years ago
How does one equate freedom of speech (which btw is denied on most leftist universities) with a curriculum?

The same way you equate it with a religion. 

Furthermore, we are repeatedly being told that CRT is not being taught in the public schools, so what is the problem with this law?

The problem is that it penalizes teachers for holding open, inclusive discussions on multiple topics. There is NOTHING to stop a parent from attacking a teacher for being in the classroom when a STUDENT speaks on the prohibited topics. 

Secondly, the 8 banned "concepts" are copied and pasted directly from a 2020 Trump EO that was blocked by the Federal court for being 'impermissibly vague".

The law does not prevent the teaching of US history, which CRT proponents claim that's all they are doing, it only prevents teachers from making white students feel personally responsible for past racism or black students feel like they can't succeed in life because of their race.

You're making an uninformed assumption Vic. 

The ACLU has become an outspoken advocate for CRT and is now actively aiding the American left in imposing their radical beliefs on the rest of American society and the culture, including the education of young children, the United States armed forces as well as higher education and the federal government.

Your compatriots here have insisted that one needs to READ the law to understand it. Following that logic, READING the lawsuit would help dissuade ridiculous comments like yours. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.5  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dulay @2.1.4    3 years ago
The same way you equate it with a religion. 

Wrong. Freedom of Religion is spelled out as a seperate right: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof:"

It's called the First Amendment.


The problem is that it penalizes teachers for holding open, inclusive discussions on multiple topics. There is NOTHING to stop a parent from attacking a teacher for being in the classroom when a STUDENT speaks on the prohibited topics. 

Parents are not in the classroom, however they did get a good look at what is being taught when the damn Teacher's union had kids trying to learn from home.


You're making an uninformed assumption Vic. 

I'm not making any assumption. There has been a widening of ideologically driven course work and textbooks in government-run primary and secondary schools. And as we are all so well aware there has long been a war on true academic freedom and free speech at the university level.


Your compatriots here have insisted that one needs to READ the law to understand it. 

And "free speech" has NOTHING to do with curriculum. We don't embellish historical facts, nor do we use racism to fight a percieved racism.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.6  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.3    3 years ago

If white students feel guilty for past deeds and even now present deeds of mean, and down-right evil, white people or any other people for that matter, then guilt is appropriate. We will not permit some conservatives to hide from their past mistreatment of minorities in this country.  Call it CRT or whatever the hell you wish. Your cruelty will be known and reckoned with even though you try to be shameless.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.7  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.5    3 years ago

Keep up the conservative effort to undermine progress in this country. It's a living for sure! Hell, it is a full-career move. The country will simply crawl forward or stall until we all are dead and gone.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.8  Vic Eldred  replied to  CB @2.1.6    3 years ago
If white students feel guilty

You mean if hate filled teachers convince them to feel that way.

You don't fight racism with hate & racism.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.1.9  Vic Eldred  replied to  CB @2.1.7    3 years ago
effort to undermine progress in this country

There is little support for what you call progress or the ideology behind it. It is like the revolution of the Bolshevics - nobody really supported them yet they took over the country. We are not going to let it happen here.

Sorry!

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
2.1.10  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.5    3 years ago
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof:"

WTF does speech have to do with exercising religion Vic? 

Parents are not in the classroom, however they did get a good look at what is being taught when the damn Teacher's union had kids trying to learn from home.

Do you have something to say that actually addresses my comment Vic? 

I'm not making any assumption.

Yes you did Vic. You made false assumptions about the effect of the law. 

There has been a widening of ideologically driven course work and textbooks in government-run primary and secondary schools. And as we are all so well aware there has long been a war on true academic freedom and free speech at the university level.

Seriously, that blather has nothing to do with what the law says Vic. 

And "free speech" has NOTHING to do with curriculum. We don't embellish historical facts, nor do we use racism to fight a percieved racism.

That's pretty fucking funny since you started your comment with religion Vic. Many private schools curriculum includes religious instruction based on that same 1st Amendment thingy you cited. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.11  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.8    3 years ago
You don't fight racism with hate & racism.

If there are hate-filled teachers out there then I see a problem. But calling teachers "hate-filled" as a matter of opinion and not fact won't get us anywhere.

Pray tell, Vic, with what do YOU fight racism and hate?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.12  Trout Giggles  replied to  CB @2.1.11    3 years ago

You don't talk about it....

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.13  CB  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.9    3 years ago

That comment not deserve a sincere reply.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.14  CB  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.12    3 years ago

Please elaborate, dear TG. I don't follow your meaning quite yet.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1.15  XXJefferson51  replied to  CB @2.1.7    3 years ago

CRT, Anti-racism, BLM: Legacies Of A Slave Mentality

Opinion

Oct 21, 2021 12:01 AM
52d472b0-e8fa-4b89-8f25-5a9248a537f5-500x250.jpg

Source: AP Photo/Markus Schreiber

These days, “black oppression” is a tactic used in dirty politics. But in my early life, it was very real. The Jim Crow days were a landscaped wilderness between slavery and freedom – a mirage of freedom.  

But I’ll spare the stories. It’s over. Holding on to that stuff is like walking around with a corpse on your back. Drag it around for too long and your soul rots from moral gangrene – a spirit of revenge if you have power; a spirit of resentment if you don’t.  If you have both, you become Maxine Waters. So, no. 

During the civil rights days, any time MLK wanted to give Southern blacks hope that freedom would come someday, he used the imagery of the Hebrew slaves escaping Egypt, enduring the wilderness, and finally reaching the Promised Land.  

“We’ve got some difficult days ahead,” said this modern-day Moses. “But it doesn’t matter with me now.  Because I’ve been to the mountaintop.  … And I’ve seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight that we, as a people, will get to the Promised Land.”

Today, 156 years after the death of slavery and after Jim Crow’s been a corpse for 56 years, the question of whether American blacks have reached the “Promised Land,” remarkably, depends on whom you ask. 

It reminds me of the real Moses who was famous for his headaches while leading ex-slaves with two different attitudes toward their predicament.  Most saw the glass as half empty; a few, half full…

read more:

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1.16  XXJefferson51  replied to  CB @2.1.11    3 years ago
Small victories are still victories, and worth celebrating. So, as we — all Americans — come to realize just how much critical race theory has come to permeate our discourse and our dialogues, we are fighting back. We are reclaiming that most self-evident of truths— all men are created equal.

Last week, the Ohio State Board of Education repealed an “anti-racism” resolution and replaced it with something far more meaningful. Gone was the language of division, blame, and condemnation; in its place was offered something more hopeful.

The Board stood against teachings that “seek to ascribe circumstances or qualities, such as collective guilt, moral deficiency, or racial bias, to a whole race or group of people.” The Board also expressed “its unwavering commitment to excellence in education for all, education that empowers each student to reach his or her full potential” not as a member of a particular race – as was woven throughout Resolution 20 – but simply “as a member of the next great generation of Ohioans.”

As a native Ohioan and a former mayor of Cincinnati, it pains me to see how critical race theory is used to both reframe our history, our conversations and even alter the courses of action we must take to improve the lives of all of our children. 

I denounce this educational fad, not as a Black man, but as an American.

Allow me to explain just one way in which critical race theory undermines — rather than upholds — educational aspirations in Ohio and in the United States.

Leading critical race theorist Ibram X. Kendi declares that “Racial discrimination is the sole cause of racial disparities in this country and in the world at large.” That statement was written in his book, “Stamped From the Beginning,” and is also prevalent in the version of the book he put out for kids: “STAMPED: Racism, Anti-Racism and You.” That version also makes clear to our children that “Racist ideas, along with economic greed, are central to the formation of this nation, its laws, policies, and practices. Meritocracy and the American Dream narrative are rooted in whiteness.”

And here is the great injustice of this insidious belief: it lets too many of us off the hook...

read more: https://townhall.com/columnists/kenblackwell/2021/10/21/the-existential-threat-of-crt-statesponsored-racism-n2597765
 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1.17  XXJefferson51  replied to  CB @2.1.13    3 years ago

I gave you highlights of the opinions of two African American writers opposed to CRT while defending MLK Jr. and America.  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.18  CB  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.1.16    3 years ago

Okay. It's late. And I ain't in the mood to read a Townhall "perspective." Good night, Jefferson (and "company").

Good night, 'Family.' Sleep tight! Until we meet again! Peace out.

 
 
 
MsMarple
Freshman Silent
2.1.19  MsMarple  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1.5    3 years ago
And "free speech" has NOTHING to do with curriculum.

why not?
I'd hate my children being taught by Bible thumpers, although BT's have the right to yakk. BT's already yakking everywhere regardless - the news, the schools, the 4th of July Parades.

thank the LORD we don't live in the Bible Belt, where creationism is superior to evolution in the schools. 
Just saying. One can believe in God but not in your organized Evangelical religion/Churchy/TVevangelist stuff.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.20  Trout Giggles  replied to  CB @2.1.14    3 years ago

If one does not talk about racism there is no racism to be overcome...amiright?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.21  CB  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.20    3 years ago

Not so. 'Young Jedi'! (Giggle bot!)

Reminds me of the one about a tree falling in the woods: Does it create a sound if no one hears it?!  (Yes, it acts according to its routine when crashing.)

Additionally, an act of racism need not verbalize at all. Actions 'speak' louder, it has been observed.  jrSmiley_9_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.22  CB  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.1.15    3 years ago

Yeah, well, I am going to dismiss anything Townhall has to offer about race. BTW, your link in the comment is non-functional.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.23  CB  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.1.16    3 years ago

But are all men in the United States treated equally? As to the whole rigamarole about CRT, I have yet to fully understand what is going on East Coast/Mid-west wise. From California, we do not have the "hic-cups' that plague some people - rightly or wrongly. That makes it hard to comprehend and 'complex' in piecing together.

One thing I know, Black conservatives don't have much more validity with me than other some conservatives - especially (you guessed it) if they are silent onTrump or supporters of that one. All such people I keep at 'arm-length' as a rule. Until I have time to properly vet what they write and say.

That's all on this one for now anyway.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
2.1.24  CB  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.1.17    3 years ago

Whatever, "Brandon!"

 
 
 
Duck Hawk
Freshman Silent
3  Duck Hawk    3 years ago

It's not being taught. So why did Oklahoma pass this law? It would appear that they want to hide their racist past, in regards to their treatment of Native Americans and their role in the Civil War (yet another State the fought to preserve the right to enslave another human being.)

 So not a frivolous lawsuit.

 
 
 
Colour Me Free
Senior Quiet
3.1  Colour Me Free  replied to  Duck Hawk @3    3 years ago
It would appear that they want to hide their racist past, in regards to their treatment of Native Americans and their role in the Civil War (yet another State the fought to preserve the right to enslave another human being.) 

Oklahoma was non existent during the Civil War .. it was considered 'Indian Territory' .. sooo 'um .. nope NOT "yet another State that fought to preserve the right to enslave another human being"

Critical Race Theory  .. do you know what it is?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
3.2  Jack_TX  replied to  Duck Hawk @3    3 years ago
It's not being taught. So why did Oklahoma pass this law?

Probably for the same reason they've outlawed Sharia Law, despite the fact it's not happening either.

 
 
 
Colour Me Free
Senior Quiet
3.2.1  Colour Me Free  replied to  Jack_TX @3.2    3 years ago

Excellent point .. Oklahoma did outlaw Sharia law .. it was deemed unconstitutional due to the separation of church and state .. although Sharia is the law of Islam which is a religion...

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
4  Sean Treacy    3 years ago

This is a political lawsuit, it has no legal merit.  One  need only look at the law itself to know there is no attempt to forbid teaching subjects or coverup anything .

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
5  Greg Jones    3 years ago

What's the present day value of wallowing in the sins of the past?

This is pure political posturing.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
5.1  Ozzwald  replied to  Greg Jones @5    3 years ago
What's the present day value of wallowing in the sins of the past?

284320-George-Santayana-Quote-Those-who-do-not-remember-the-past-are.jpg

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
5.1.1  XXJefferson51  replied to  Ozzwald @5.1    3 years ago

Remember yes, wallow no.  

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
5.1.2  Ozzwald  replied to  XXJefferson51 @5.1.1    3 years ago
Remember yes, wallow no.  

Question asked, and answered, you may continue your spinning now.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
5.1.3  XXJefferson51  replied to  Ozzwald @5.1.2    3 years ago

I made the point I intended to make. I stand with the Oklahoma law.  

 
 
 
Sunshine
Professor Quiet
5.2  Sunshine  replied to  Greg Jones @5    3 years ago
What's the present day value of wallowing in the sins of the past?

White guilt and reparations.  Start it young so by the time they are old enough to vote the seeds will be planted.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
5.2.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Sunshine @5.2    3 years ago

Perfect example

jrSmiley_28_smiley_image.gif jrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.2  CB  replied to  Sunshine @5.2    3 years ago

Noone gives a damn about guilt-tripping Whites. Run from your history all you wish some conservatives! This won't be the first time, you've shitted on people and tried to hide from the "shitty deals" done!

It will always be an anchor gripping the souls of your 'generations' if only as myth and legend. Because once again, some conservatives (always the 'spoilers') want to deny truths and instead delude themselves into thinking "Ain't I Great?"

Hell no, some conservatives! You all ain't Great! In fact, some conservatives are the vexations and boiling bumps on the butt of history, because from day to day, issue to issue, y'all never miss any opportunity to pretend to be leaders of people who simply want you to go tell the truth, let it stand as truth, and generally just fall silent in the face of truth!

 
 
 
Sunshine
Professor Quiet
5.2.3  Sunshine  replied to  CB @5.2.2    3 years ago

Nothing in this law prevents teaching the truth.

Educate yourself on the topic before flying into an irrational rant.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
5.2.4  Sean Treacy  replied to  Sunshine @5.2.3    3 years ago

Educate yourself on the topic before flying into an irrational rant.

Then there would be no objections to the statute. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.5  CB  replied to  Sunshine @5.2.3    3 years ago

I will not be patronized today.

As to some conservatives looking to run into the future by hiding from the past: It won't be allowed to happen. Some conservatives, our laws will reflect the truths about all activities in red-states which occurred. There will be little or nothing of importance to be known that won't be known. Even if some conservatives write it out of local books, your children will have it explained to them by a truthful nation all around and on every side!

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
5.2.6  Jack_TX  replied to  Sunshine @5.2    3 years ago
White guilt and reparations.

Reparations are certainly the end goal.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.2.7  JohnRussell  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.6    3 years ago

Do you believe that black families in this country lost generational wealth due to segregation and racial prejudice? 

The banking system of this country funneled black home buyers into less lucrative properties. I read a story about a black ww2 vet and his wife who wanted to buy a home in Leavittown, the post ww2 Long Island development. 

Levittown - US History Scene

Before the sale of Levittown homes began, the sales agents were aware that no applications from black families would be accepted. As a result, American veterans who wished to purchase a home in Levittown were unable to do so if they were black.

The home values in Leavittown rose dramatically, in some cases providing "generational wealth" to the families of owners.  The black vet and those like him were left out.

Who is going to pay for these injustices? No one?  Tough luck, eh? 

By the theories of the case you propose, no past injustices can ever be addressed. 

The banking system in America redlined black home buyers and prevented them from buying in certain areas and neighborhoods, areas where property values increased, and kept these blacks in areas where property values decreased. Who is going to right these injustices? No one?

Of course there should be collective "white guilt". 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.2.8  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.7    3 years ago
Of course there should be collective "white guilt". 

Of course, many won't feel guilt over something they had no control over, never participated in, and might not have even been alive for.

Good for them for sane thinking.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.2.9  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @5.2.8    3 years ago

If a group of people were systematically disadvantaged by the institutions of the United States, then the United States should make amends. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.10  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.6    3 years ago

So what? Was red-lining, block-busting, and government programs designed and implemented to hold minorities out of the wealth stream of this country occurring or not?  Jack_Tx please proceed!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.11  CB  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.7    3 years ago
Of course there should be collective "white guilt"

I don't need white guilt from innocent people whose hands are actually clean of racial practices. We simply need some conservatives to stop all deceptive practices that won't and don't make life work for all the citizens of this country!

Guilt derives from those who have in history and those individuals, companies, and institutions presently benefitting from blocking wealth creation, equality, and equity in minority communities.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
5.2.12  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @5.2.10    3 years ago
So what? Was red-lining, block-busting, and government programs designed and implemented to hold minorities out of the wealth stream of this country occurring or not?  Jack_Tx please proceed!

They happened and they stopped decades ago.  

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
5.2.13  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.9    3 years ago

Maybe you can start by throwing some cash at them.

Leave the rest of us alone.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.14  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.12    3 years ago

It happened within our life time, Jack. People who were red-lined against are alive today and have not been properly dealt with under the law, Jack. "Block-busting" (or lying on minorities for profit) still happens. And "cheating" minorities out of their property sell values is happening right now.

Sorry, that you think that because they are minorities that they should just "get along now." For the record, White Americans bring 'cases' of injustice to court and get restitution, Jack (as a consequence of "whiteness" it's a given.)

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.2.15  JohnRussell  replied to  bugsy @5.2.13    3 years ago

If reparations were ever to be given, you would have no choice in the matter, you would pay up just like everyone else, unless you became a tax cheat.

I think that eventually some form of reparations will go forward, but it is very complicated and would also have to include Native Americans, and it is a long way off most likely. We will probably all be dead and gone by the time something gets done. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.16  CB  replied to  bugsy @5.2.13    3 years ago

Caustic remark, aside. Maybe we (all) can keep going to court and applying for justice under the Rule of Law!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.17  CB  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.15    3 years ago

That is the problem. Some conservatives don't want to do what is right by minorities. Greedy clutchers of other people rights and privileges and benefits. It's sickeningly indefensible, and yet they try as the day is long.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.2.18  JohnRussell  replied to  CB @5.2.14    3 years ago

Many white people are personally insulted when the long lived institutional racism of America is pointed out to them. 

They think they are being individually blamed, which is not the case. 

There are people in this country, most likely in the millions, who think that white responsibility for racism ended on the day the slaves were freed in 1865. To them, whatever happened to blacks and other people of color after 1865 was their own fault. They ignore the 150 years since, most of which was an era of harsh segregation and discrimination which was almost as damaging to the hopes of people of color as slavery was. 

We are awash in willful ignorance. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
5.2.19  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.7    3 years ago
Of course there should be collective "white guilt". 

Why?

We've been through this, John.  I don't feel guilty for stuff I had zero control over.  Most of the shit you describe stopped before I was born.  

You also don't give a tinker's damn about black people, or you'd be talking about the active discrimination that goes on today instead of wallowing in misplaced self-loathing for sins of a bygone era.  But examining what's happening today might mean you actually have to change your behavior instead of just spending somebody else's money.

I'm not going to agree to finance your crusade so you can give yourself some fleeting relief from your own neurotic emotions.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.2.20  JohnRussell  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.19    3 years ago

I havent insulted you much, but if you want I will be happy to start. 

Your own individual "guilt'' , or not, over racism and discrimination is irrelevant to whether or not past injustices need to be corrected.   Get that through your thick head. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.21  CB  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.18    3 years ago

It is willful ignorance borne out of benefiting off others - in this case minorities. These whites (conservatives) are not dumb, they hear from their white (liberals) counterparts - and I know for a fact white people value other white people points of view more than some minorities. That is, white people listen to other white people in large part.

But what this is, is some conservatives letting their 'race' flag fly high and their "wilding out" to say we don't give a shit; we did it and we won't apologize or plan to ever make it equal or equitable. And so - get over it.

We will not. We will not forget and they will not either!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.2.22  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.20    3 years ago

please describe how you can correct past injustices.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
5.2.23  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @5.2.14    3 years ago
It happened within our life time, Jack.

Decades ago.  I was 2 years old when redlining was outlawed.

In the 50+ years since, the median net worth of black families has barely moved.  Why is that?

Sorry, that you think that 

Don't try to tell me what I think. You absolutely have no idea.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
5.2.24  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.20    3 years ago
I havent insulted you much, but if you want I will be happy to start. 

The hell you haven't.

Your own individual "guilt'' , or not, over racism and discrimination is irrelevant to whether or not past injustices need to be corrected.

As is yours.  Was the irony intentional?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
5.2.25  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @5.2.11    3 years ago
We simply need some conservatives to stop all deceptive practices that won't and don't make life work for all the citizens of this country!

What do you propose?

Which practices, specifically?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.26  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.23    3 years ago
Decades ago.  I was 2 years old when redlining was outlawed.

You? It's the collective "our," Jack. Moreover, it should never happen again! We will not let the collective "us" forget or whitewash red-lining out of history. And Americans need to be compensated for what was stolen from them by institutional racism, Jack. 

Did you watch the video @8.3.13, Jack. It's not a joke, or satire.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.2.27  JohnRussell  replied to  CB @5.2.21    3 years ago

www.marketwatch.com   /story/heres-why-black-families-have-struggled-for-decades-to-gain-wealth-2019-02-28

Here’s why black families have struggled for decades to gain wealth

Darrick Hamilton, , Trevon Logan 7-8 minutes

DOI:   10.1093/qje/qjw014 ,   Show   Details

Black History Month has become the time to reflect on all the progress black Americans have made, but the sobering reality is that when it comes to wealth — the paramount indicator of economic security — there has been virtually no progress in the last 50 years.

While there is no magic bullet for racism, access to wealth, and the security to pass it down from one generation to the next, would go a long way toward changing the economic trajectory for blacks.

As researchers who study   historical and contemporary racial inequality, we mostly conceive of wealth as a maker of success, but its true value is functional: the independence and economic security that it provides.

Out of slavery

Until the end of legal slavery in the U.S., enslaved people were considered valuable assets and a form of wealth. In the South, entrepreneurs and slave owners took loans out against the collateral value of their property in the form of people to fund new businesses.

The U.S. government has a long history of facilitating wealth for white Americans. From at least   the Land Act of 1785 , Congress sought to transfer wealth to citizens on terms that were quite favorable. In some instances, land could be attained by the luck of the draw —   but only if you were a white man .

It was never the case that a white asset-based middle class simply emerged. Rather, it was government policy, and to some extent literal government giveaways, that provided whites the finance, education, land and infrastructure to accumulate and pass down wealth.

While   the 1866 Homestead Act   sought to include blacks specifically in the transfer of public lands to private farmers,   discrimination and poor implementation doomed the policy . Black politicians during Reconstruction attempted to use tax policy   to force land on the market , but this was met with violent resistance.

While blacks did make gains in wealth acquisition after chattel slavery ended, the pace was slow and started from a base of essentially nothing. Whites could use violence to force blacks from their property via   the terrorism of whitecapping , where blacks were literally run out of town and their possessions stolen. This includes the race riots, as   in Memphis in 1866   and   Tulsa in 1921 , which systematically destroyed or stole the wealth blacks had acquired, and   lowered the rate of black innovation . Black wealth was tenuous without the rule of law to prevent unlawful seizures.

By 1915,   black property owners in the South   had   less than one-tenth of the wealth of white landowners .

This trend remained stable for the next 50 years. In 1965, 100 years after Emancipation, blacks were more than 10% of the population, but held less than 2% of the wealth in the U.S., and   less than 0.1% of the wealth in stocks . Wealth had remained fundamentally unchanged and structurally out of reach of the vast majority of blacks.

Housing assistance and education

These racially exclusionary systems endured well into the 20th century.

A complicit Federal Housing Administration permitted the use of restrictive covenants, which forbade home sales to blacks; redlining, which defined black communities as hazardous areas, directly reducing property values and increasing rates; and general housing and lending discrimination against African-Americans   through the 20th   and   21st centuries .

Moreover, blacks were largely excluded from the New Deal and World War II public policies, which were responsible for the asset creation of an American middle class.

The GI Bill is one example of several postwar policies in which the federal government invested heavily in the greatest growth of a white asset-based American middle class, to the exclusion of blacks.   Historian Ira Katznelson   documents that, by 1950, via the GI Bill, the American government spent more on education than the Marshall Plan that rebuilt Europe. But most American colleges and universities were closed to blacks, or open to only but a few in token numbers.

Meanwhile, GI benefits in education, employment, entrepreneurship and housing assistance were all distributed overwhelmingly toward whites. In the Jim Crow segregated South, there was a truncated housing supply. These factors limited the ability of historically black colleges and universities to   accommodate the education and housing needs of black veterans .

It is important to note that it was never the case that a white asset-based middle class simply emerged. Rather, it was government policy, and to some extent literal government giveaways, that provided whites the finance, education, land and infrastructure to accumulate and pass down wealth. In contrast, blacks were largely excluded from these wealth generating benefits. When they were able to accumulate land and enterprise, it was often stolen, destroyed or seized by government complicit theft, fraud and terror.

Building new wealth

Nonetheless, blacks have still been able to overcome tremendous odds, particularly in acquiring education. Social science research indicates that   blacks attain more years of schooling and education credentials than whites from families with comparable resources . In other words, blacks place a premium on education as a means of mobility.

Despite this investment, the racial wealth gap expands at higher levels of education. Black families where the head graduated from college have less wealth than white families where the   head dropped out of high school .

Rather than education leading to wealth, it is wealth that facilitates the acquisition of an expensive education. The essential value of wealth is its functional role; the financial security to take risks and the financial agency that wealth affords is transformative.

In our view, education alone cannot address the centuries-long exclusion of blacks from the benefits of wealth-generating policies and the extraction of whatever wealth they may have. The most just approach would be a comprehensive reparation program that acknowledges these grievances and offers compensatory restitution, including ownership of land and other means of production.

Darrick Hamilton is executive director of the Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity at The Ohio State University. Trevon Logan is the Hazel C. Youngberg Distinguished Professor of Economics at The Ohio State University. This was first published by   The Conversation   — “ Why wealth equality remains out of reach for black Americans ”.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.28  CB  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.20    3 years ago

Emphatically.

@5.2.23 Don't try to tell me what I think. You absolutely have no idea.

And so, Jack_Tx tries to tell you what he thinks you think and give a damn about!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.29  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.25    3 years ago

Jack_Tx, I am not about to consume my energy to placate you and some others here for shit that is obvious to blind people with functioning brains and common-sense.

Moreover, a list of what is wrong with some conservatives is beyond the scope of this article.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.30  CB  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.27    3 years ago
In contrast, blacks were largely excluded from these wealth generating benefits. When they were able to accumulate land and enterprise, it was often stolen, destroyed or seized by government complicit theft, fraud and terror.

Yes. And that is what some conservatives want to avoid discussing. Even when government programs were finally allowed to provide aid, some conservatives would bitch and moan (like they do about abortion, women wage equality, affirmative action, and damn near all progress) about it until they could make it ineffective or atrophied. For example: Reagan and his anecdotal "sensational telling about the welfare queen. Find one or two instances of some deed and blow it out of proportions as the new norm.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.31  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.23    3 years ago

Redlining caused a loss of generational wealth, Jack. It was a firm 'set-back,' Jack. While we were oppressed, some conservatives enjoyed "American pie, flag-waving, American 'Way,' and liberty and justice" for some conservatives, Jack!

But you see to have this idea that some conservatives have been playing 'nice' with minorities since red-lining ended. That has not been the whole story, Jack. Indeed, we have had all kinds of national and cultural hurdles to climb since then, Jack. Again, beyond the scope of this discussion. You will just have to go look into it yourself.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.32  CB  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.27    3 years ago
While blacks did make gains in wealth acquisition after chattel slavery ended, the pace was slow and started from a base of essentially nothing. Whites could use violence to force blacks from their property via   the terrorism of whitecapping , where blacks were literally run out of town and their possessions stolen.

Minorities, with Black Americans at point, have caught a great deal of hell in our country. And we still do. Just look at Mitch McConnell, "whitecapping" the vote in D.C. with the aid of other some conservatives in congress and in governorships. Yet, they SAY they want justice and equality for all with their lying lips.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
5.2.33  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.15    3 years ago

They are already being given...in the form of affirmative action, welfare benefits, subsidies for many things. What more do you think should be given?

I say nothing.

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
5.2.34  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.20    3 years ago
I havent insulted you much

John, seriously....

It's your forte'

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
5.2.35  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @5.2.29    3 years ago
Jack_Tx, I am not about to consume my energy to placate you and some others here for shit that is obvious to blind people with functioning brains and common-sense.

What shit is that exactly?   And why would you imagine I care whether you placate anyone or not?

Moreover, a list of what is wrong with some conservatives is beyond the scope of this article.

So you continue to claim.

In the context of this discussion, it appears as though you consider that horrible, evil, nefarious group to include anyone who doesn't agree to hand out free money based on race. 

Do correct me if I've misread that.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.36  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.35    3 years ago

Let's not waste time with 'unhelpful back and forth.' I choose not to lecture you on commonsense, American history, racial inequality, or politics of the past. If that makes you feel "bigger" and "stronger" than me—it's not my fault (and it's highly probable not truth), nevertheless.

I thank for the distraction, but I can't accept the invitation this time.

As for "free money" - here comes that old canard again. Tell me, just how much money do you think you have earned and benefits you have received because of of minorities living, working, and striving in this country, Jack? 

Just how much money accumulated in this country belongs to just some conservatives in your 'guesstimation,' Jack_Tx. Give me a 'ball-park' amount. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
5.2.37  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @5.2.31    3 years ago
Redlining caused a loss of generational wealth, Jack. It was a firm 'set-back,' Jack. While we were oppressed, some conservatives enjoyed "American pie, flag-waving, American 'Way,' and liberty and justice" for some conservatives, Jack! But you see to have this idea that some conservatives have been playing 'nice' with minorities since red-lining ended. That has not been the whole story, Jack. Indeed, we have had all kinds of national and cultural hurdles to climb since then, Jack. Again, beyond the scope of this discussion. You will just have to go look into it yourself.

You have yet to set out a suggestion for resolution.

You also have yet to mention any of the current, ongoing issues destroying the ability of black Americans to build wealth, like the vast disparity in the quality of education available in white public schools vs black ones....or how our public schools convince young black men that their primary value to society is as gladiators on a gridiron so we can watch them crush their skulls on Friday night while we pretend to teach them math on Tuesday morning. 

You've been sucked into John's vortex of past offenses, which always ends with complete non-solutions that extend and cement the underclass status of black Americans.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
5.2.38  Jack_TX  replied to  bugsy @5.2.33    3 years ago
They are already being given...in the form of affirmative action, welfare benefits, subsidies for many things. What more do you think should be given? I say nothing.

I'd say a decent education, for starters.  Which they don't get now.

Public high schools rubber stamp their diplomas and send them into the world without a chance in hell to compete.  Look at the ridiculous discrepancy in SAT scores between black kids and white kids.  It's criminal.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
5.2.39  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.18    3 years ago
They ignore the 150 years since, m

And you ignore the billions of dollars and decades worth of affirmative action benefits, minority set asides for contractors, community development grants etc etc.....

I

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.40  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.37    3 years ago

Resolutions? Some conservatives are the problem, Jack. Not "team remedy!"  We don't need some conservatives to fix black education: just get the hell out of the way, Jack!

How dare you insult black athletes! We have numerous black intellectuals throughout our history in this country; granted we would have more such inventors and high achievers if we did not have to confront and strive with some conservatives for the duration of our lives.

But you just showed me something that is in your head and yes, I got the visual, Jack. You're bitter. We've heard that canard about the black performers before: "singing and jivin."

Well, you know what Jack. It kept us alive and ultimately we clothe and feed our families (and started record labels too) in a country that tried to pigeon-hole us and staple minorities to beneath the wage floor. Oops! We have black and other minority millionaires and billionaires. Hell, our rappers are doing quite well too - they 'eat' sufficiency in our society for 'poorly educated' —"negroes."

As for the "underclass" status, don't fret. When some conservatives get out of the way with our help; we will see who is permanently 'down and out' finally for real.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.41  CB  replied to  Sean Treacy @5.2.39    3 years ago

How many billions of dollar programs were instituted to help some conservatives built wealth (off the hard work of minorities), Sean? Remember, you did not need to manipulate the programs, as a supreme court justice once put it, blacks (and other minorities) have no rights and privileges that a white man has to respect! Thus, som conservatives did not respect us then and did not respect us during the benefit programs, contract set-asides, or development grants.

Oh, you think we did not know? (We did!) Yes,we watched and endured these 'tests, trials, and tribulations' of some conservatives doing all they could to minimize, evaluate, 'cut the heart out of,' and bad-mouth the good meant to build minorities up.

Oh and btw the way; it was not just some conservative money involved! It was state, federal, and local funds-which comes from the whole of society. Some conservatives got/get their share too (and a lot of it at that)!

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
5.2.42  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @5.2.40    3 years ago
Resolutions? Some conservatives are the problem, Jack. Not "team remedy!"  We don't need some conservatives to fix black education: just get the hell out of the way, Jack!

Tell us what they're stopping you from doing?

How dare you insult black athletes!

I didn't.  I accused the institutions that exploit them.  Read it again.  I coached black athletes for 30 years.  I've seen the exploitation first hand, hundreds of times.

Well, you know what Jack. It kept us alive and ultimately we clothe and feed our families (and started record labels too) in a country that tried to pigeon-hole us and staple minorities to beneath the wage floor. Oops! We have black and other minority millionaires and billionaires. Hell, our rappers are doing quite well too - they 'eat' sufficiency in our society for 'poorly educated' —"negroes."

So black millionaires are either athletes or rappers....   Niiiiiice.  I'm guessing we can throw comedians and actors in, as well, yes?   Thank you for making my point.  

By contrast, white millionaires are investment bankers or business owners or cardiac surgeons or orthodontists or car dealers or real estate agents.  But as often, they're just ordinary people who worked a pretty good job and understood money enough to put it to work in their 401(k) or IRA or maybe the rent house they bought.

And then we teach our kids how to do that.

As for the "underclass" status, don't fret. When some conservatives get out of the way with our help; we will see who is permanently 'down and out' finally for real.

When we start to educate your kids the same way we educated mine, and we start to put the same expectations on your kids as we do mine, the underclass status will disappear very quickly.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.43  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.42    3 years ago
So black millionaires are either athletes or rappers....   Niiiiiice.  I'm guessing we can throw comedians and actors in, as well, yes?   Thank you for making my point.

Have I made your point, Jack. Is say, Oprah Winfrey; a 'rapper' or athlete? I will let you decide. Furthermore, don't ever confront me with your ridiculous criticism of how good people who are not thugs, robbers, liars, pimps, and 'hos," and so forth provide food, shelter, clothing, and prosperity for themselves in a society where they diligently are trying to live under the rules of the game developed and kept in place by a majority of white male domination.  Domination of recent which is reverting to power-grabs, insularity, and insincerity as a means to control and setback 'Others.'

Other than that, you are just about to piss me off with your "better than thou" comparisons of unequal realities - as though you can't understand what the hell goes on in this country.

As for the rest of your comment; one might get an impression there are no poor, miserable, uneducated 'Whites' in this country; is that true, Jack?

Lastly, where do you get off implying that the good in this country stems from White people alone? Where in this country are those lines of distinction on ideas, concepts, and discoveries - care to point them out to me, us?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.2.44  JohnRussell  replied to  CB @5.2.26    3 years ago

www.businessinsider.com   /welfare-policy-created-white-wealth-largely-leaving-black-americans-behind-2020-8

How decades of US welfare policies lifted up the white middle class and largely excluded Black Americans

Marguerite Ward 19-24 minutes   8/11/2020


  • Financiers, business leaders , and   regular folks   are increasingly calling on political leaders to reshape capitalism and address rampant racial inequality in the US.
  • As policymakers try to address the coronavirus pandemic, experts point to the ways past US policies boosted quality of life for white Americans while leaving Black Americans behind.
  • Researchers agree that white Americans greatly benefited from New Deal programs and post-World War II p olicy, while Black Americans were discriminated against; t hen, when Black Americans started to access welfare benefits at a higher rate starting in the 1970s, there was backlash among conservatives.
  • These policies have had a cumulative effect over generations and help explain the massive wealth gap between Black and white Americans and the reason   Black Americans are overrepresented in welfare programs.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories .

When President Donald Trump met with the Congressional Black Caucus in 2018, the topic of welfare reform came up. One member of the caucus told Trump that enforcing stricter rules would be detrimental to her constituents, "Not all of whom are Black," according to   NBC News .

The president is said to have replied, "Really? Then what are they?" apparently assuming that a welfare recipient couldn't be white.

In fact, far more white people have benefited from US welfare programs over the years — reflecting their greater share of the population — while Black people and other people of color have been denied them in various ways, multiple historians and researchers tell Business Insider.

The coronavirus pandemic has exposed the underbelly of American inequality in many ways, with people of color disproportionately likely to be   laid off, to be on the financial brink , and to   die from the virus . That has helped prompt a growing chorus of   financiers, business leaders , and   regular folks   to call for a reimagining of American capitalism and for moves to end racial inequality. Some top economists are calling for a " New New Deal " specifically targeting inequality, a platform to which the Democratic presidential candidate   Joe Biden   seems open.

If the country is to move forward in trying to lift Americans out of unemployment and poverty, policymakers might consider who has benefited most from past welfare policies and how such policies have helped produce today's world.

Business Insider talked to four economic researchers and historians, and analyzed the past 90 years of welfare policy, when considering the question of who the status quo actually benefits.

For you

Sanford Schram , a political-science professor at CUNY Hunter, who wrote "Disciplining the Poor" and "Hard White," puts it bluntly: "I do think the federal government has been complicit in the perpetuation of race-based discrimination that has led to African Americans lagging behind whites. No question about it."

The New Deal brought jobs to Americans, but different kinds of jobs for different races

The US government has spent trillions of dollars trying to prop up its economy during the coronavirus pandemic, but it has stopped short of a " wartime economy "-style mobilization or the kind of massive public-works program that   some experts have said is badly needed   to stem double-digit unemployment.

But the Black Lives Matter movement — given new urgency after George Floyd's killing by the police in Minneapolis in late May — has exposed   a separate problematic legacy   of the New Deal, the series of policies enacted by President Franklin D. Roosevelt to get the US out of the Great Depression of the 1930s. It was introduced in an era defined by segregation and explicit racism.

It's true that Roosevelt appointed several Black leaders to prominent leadership positions within his administration, known as the "Black Cabinet," and his policies helped make thousands of jobs newly available to Black Americans, but as Ibram X. Kendi points out in "Stamped from the Beginning," policies enacted at the time reflected a racist culture.

When the New Deal got Americans back to work, white Americans got the first pick at jobs, and when Black Americans did get jobs, they were given lower wages, according to the   University of Houston's Digital History Project .

"State and local governments administered almost all federal New Deal programs, and many of these state and local government leaders, especially in the South, were virtually all white ... and racist,"   Gary Orfield , a professor of education, law, political science, and urban planning at the University of California at Los Angeles, told Business Insider.

For you

5f2c34734e52b73195251d77?width=700&format=jpeg&auto=webp

State and local governments administered New Deal program benefits — an obvious problem in the South, which was segregated at the time. Bettmann/Getty Images

Also, Black people were   excluded   from key   benefits   created during this period. The Social Security Act of 1935, for instance, prohibited domestic and agricultural workers (an outsize number of whom were Black or Latino) from receiving benefits.

Black workers were also excluded from progressive labor regulations passed during that time,   Paul Moreno , a history professor who is the dean of social sciences at Hillsdale College, told Business Insider.

Many unions had explicit clauses in their constitutions that said that only whites could be members. So you could have a situation where an employer was forced to bargain with an exclusively white union and he'd have to fire all of his Black employees.

The National Labor Relations Act of 1935 — commonly known as the Wagner Act for Sen. Robert Wagner, who proposed it — bolstered the strength of worker unions, but many major unions of this era either excluded Black workers or discriminated against them.

"Many unions had explicit clauses in their constitutions that said that only whites could be members," Moreno said. "So you could have a situation where an employer was forced to bargain with an exclusively white union and he'd have to fire all of his Black employees."

Because discrimination was still legal when it came to jobs, Black Americans were routinely denied well-paying positions and were much more likely to be hired for low-wage work, according to Orfield, the professor at UCLA.

"A lot of policies were designed that simply left out Black Americans who were sharecroppers and were doing low-wage work, which was excluded from some of the labor regulations," he said.

For you

5f2c35aff34d055a8e791ecc?width=700&format=jpeg&auto=webp

A young boy in Greendale, Wisconsin, a greenbelt community constructed by the US Department of Agriculture as part of President Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal. Universal History Archive/Getty Images

Elsewhere in the economy, interpretation of New Deal policies wound up hurting Black Americans. The Federal Housing Administration was created in this era, with the goal of creating affordable housing for as many Americans as possible. But local interpretation of this mission resulted in "redlining," a policy in which mortgage credit was denied in majority-Black neighborhoods.

The FHA continued to encourage racist policies into the postwar era, when the American suburbs were being built. In 1948, the Supreme Court outlawed " restrictive covenants " — a clause that essentially prevented Black Americans from buying property from white owners — yet the FHA still encouraged builders to write them into their agreements well past 1948, according to Orfield.

5f2c372d3ad86144675c2e7c?width=700&format=jpeg&auto=webp

White tenants protesting African Americans moving into the Sojourner Truth Homes, a federal governmental housing project, in Detroit in February 1942. Corbis via Getty Images

White veterans of World War II were given zero-down-payment, 30-year guaranteed mortgages under the GI Bill.

"With zero cash, you, white veterans, could get into owning a brand-new home," Orfield told Business Insider. "That door was not open for Black and Latinos."

A house someone bought at the time for $12,000 or $15,000 in mortgage payments, he said, might be worth $300,000 decades later.

"That's a gigantic wealth creator and a gigantic middle-class escalator," he said, one Black Americans missed out on and couldn't pass along to their children.

For you

Welfare reform greatly benefited Black Americans — and was almost immediately unpopular for it

One of the largest government programs in the post-New Deal era, President Lyndon B. Johnson's " Great Society " sought to remedy the racial wealth gap. During the 1960s, the median Black family income rose 53%, while Black employment doubled in professional, technical, and clerical occupations, and average Black educational attainment increased by four years, University of Houston history professors   write . The proportion of Black people below the poverty line went from 55% in 1960 to just 27% by 1968.

5f2c3f085fa9a43427742dc6?width=700&format=jpeg&auto=webp

President Lyndon Johnson speaking with students from Public School 192 who were beneficiaries of his Head Start program, in Harlem, New York, in 1968. Afro American Newspapers/Gado/Getty Images

Even at the height of the Great Society, Black Americans constituted only about 27% of all welfare recipients, according to   Sundiata Keita Cha-Jua , an associate history professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Most recipients were white Americans.

"From the Great Society moving forward, one could say that white people, because of their numbers and percentage of the population, have always constituted the largest number of people" on welfare, Cha-Jua told Business Insider, adding that "Black people, Latinx, American Indians, because of their oppressed condition, have constituted a much greater percentage than their percent of the population."

But as the anti-discriminatory practices from Johnson's presidency were enforced and Black Americans were allowed to participate in new benefit programs, there was a dramatic shift in public perception about government subsidies — to the negative.

"Public assistance was not as demonized until African Americans began to exercise their right to use it, ironically," Schram said. "And that's when welfare started to be seen as this inferior program for nonwhite people who didn't play by the white middle-class rules of work and family."

This shift was propelled forward by President Ronald Reagan, whose campaign speeches about the   now-debunked   " welfare queen " stoked racist fear among white Americans.

original

President Ronald Reagan ushered in a new era of welfare reform. REUTERS/Joe Marquette

"He really tightened the eligibility requirements," Schram said. "He made it more difficult for you to get welfare even after you started to work."

For example, Reagan   cut spending   to the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program, which provided cash assistance to low-income children whose father or mother was absent from the home, incapacitated, deceased, or unemployed. This forced struggling mothers and families further into poverty,   research funded by The Ford Foundation found .

The social-welfare-policy researcher   Sandra Edmonds Crewe , who is the dean of Howard University's School of Social Work, described such policies by conservative policymakers as a direct response to Black participation in the system.

"There is always a backlash that comes after progression — always," Crewe told Business Insider, likening the backlash against welfare expansion to the resurgence of white nationalism in response to Barack Obama's presidency.

Instead of receiving an opportunity to be lifted out of poverty, many Black Americans remained disenfranchised.

Reagan's legacy, however, was solidified by a Democratic president, Bill Clinton, who promised to "change welfare as we have come to know it." By   replacing   the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program with a Temporary Assistance for Needy Families block grant, he dramatically reduced the size of welfare programs. "TANF really did change welfare as we knew it," Schram said.

original

President Bill Clinton promised to change welfare "as we have come to know it" — and he did. Ralph Alswang/Getty Images

Before Clinton, about 75% of people who were eligible for welfare were receiving it. But by 2000, four years after Clinton's program was enacted, only about 25% were, Schram's research found.

In other words, at a time when Black Americans were given significantly more access to public assistance, measures were enacted to make assistance harder to access.

"When we do get included in the welfare state, in the Great Society programs, we are stigmatized for it," Cha-Jua, who is Black, said.

How this legacy is playing out today

The racial wealth gap in the US not only persists — it's   growing . For every $100 in wealth held by a white family today, a Black family has just $10, per research from   the Federal Reserve's 2017 "Survey of Consumer Finances."

A recent analysis of homeownership by the   Fed   noted that homeownership by race seemed similar to the   wealth distribution by race .

The difference in homeownership can also be seen at the geographic level, per research from the   Urban Institute .

Today, white people still make up a plurality of those on welfare programs such as TANF or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. A Department of Agriculture report from November estimated that   35.7% of SNAP recipients in the 2018 fiscal year were white , 25.1% were Black, 16.7% were Hispanic, 3% were Asian, and 1.5% were Native American (0.8% were listed as multiple races, while 17.4% were listed as "race unknown").

Enrollment by race for Medicaid and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children show similar enrollment as those in SNAP.

Black people make up just 13.4% of the US population and are therefore overrepresented in welfare programs. When asked why this was the case, Crewe of Howard University had a simple answer: "systemic inequality."

Without more intervention, inequality will continue to reproduce itself, Crewe said. Orfield of UCLA agreed.

This is especially true today, as Congress decides whether to give Americans cash assistance after the temporary $600 increase weekly unemployment benefits expired July 31.

Black and brown workers are more likely to report being in financial hardship right now.

A   survey   by the organization Lean In with Survey Monkey in early April people found that Black women were twice as likely as white men to say they were laid off or furloughed during the pandemic. New   analysis   by the global advisory firm   Stout Risius Ross   found that only 26% of African American tenants said they felt highly confident they could pay their mortgage payments on time right now, compared with almost half of white Americans,   CNBC   reports.

"My view of this," Orfield said, "is if you're in a society that's completely stratified by race and ethnicity, basically what you've got is a system that guarantees inequality unless you specifically decide to change it."

For you

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.45  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.42    3 years ago
white millionaires are investment bankers or business owners or cardiac surgeons or orthodontists or car dealers or real estate agents.  But as often, they're just ordinary people who worked a pretty good job and understood money enough to put it to work in their 401(k) or IRA or maybe the rent house they bought. And then we teach our kids how to do that

Again, one could get the impression that there are no 'poor Whites' or unemployed Whites (some with high-end degrees), or white-collar 'thugs' and criminals. Yet, all of those narratives are beyond the scope of this discussion (I keep telling you that, because it would require an expansion were we to dwell deeply and widely into relevant materials.)

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.46  CB  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.44    3 years ago

'They' know it. If not, it's not our fault because we can read what they dare not allow themselves to 'ingest.'

John, I want to 'pour' over your links slowly when I have some time (don't right now). Thank you for the information and good looking out! (Smile.)

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
5.2.47  Sean Treacy  replied to  CB @5.2.41    3 years ago
Remember, you did not need to manipulate the programs, as a supreme court justice once put it, blacks (and other minorities) have no rights and privileges that a white man has to respect!

Which Justice said that? I'll bet it's not from the last 50 plus years of  the welfare era. 

 it was not just some conservative money involved! It was state, federal, and local funds-which comes from the whole of society.

Good thing I never claimed it was. Again, the idea that the US, state and local governments haven't spent billions in trying to help black people in the last 50 years is preposterous.   If you want to claim all the racist acts from generations go matter, than you have to stop pretending that nothing has been done in the last 50 years to remedy them. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
5.2.48  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.44    3 years ago
with people of color disproportionately likely to be   laid off, to be on the financial brink , and to   die from the virus

That's impossible. According to newstalkers it's clear that only white republicans died from Covid and that those deaths should be celebrated because they cost Republicans vote. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
5.2.49  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.44    3 years ago
Black people make up just 13.4% of the US population and are therefore overrepresented in welfare programs.

That little sentence, buried at the end, undercuts the entire premise  of the article.  

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
5.2.50  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @5.2.43    3 years ago
Have I made your point, Jack.

Absolutely.  Doubled down on it.

Is say, Oprah Winfrey; a 'rapper' or athlete?

She falls under the "comedians and actors" tag.

I'm not sure how you don't understand what a shining example of racism this is.  Do you not see that there can only be a very limited number of entertainers and athletes who get wealthy?  Do you not understand that Kevin Hart is rich because he's unusual? How is this path possibly scalable?  It's not.  

Do you not understand that a Div I university can only award 12 basketball scholarships...but an unlimited number of academic ones?  Who do you think is getting those?  Do you imagine that black high school students are hearing about how their grades can pay for college, or do you realize that all the attention is on the athletes?  At least until they get hurt and they're of no use anymore.

Do you realize that of the black male athletes that do manage to get scholarships, nearly HALF don't graduate?  Do you know how they're steered into the easiest classes available, often without regard to degree requirements, because their eligibility to play is more important than their education? 

That's is happening today.  2021.  It didn't stop in 1968.

provide food, shelter, clothing, and prosperity for themselves

Are they?  The statistics say otherwise.  You've made extensive arguments that they're not able to provide prosperity for themselves because of institutional and individual racism.  So which is it?

Other than that, you are just about to piss me off with your "better than thou" comparisons of unequal realities - as though you can't understand what the hell goes on in this country.

Your anger level is your choice.  That doesn't change the fact that a huge amount of racism that goes on in this country is right under your nose, yet you don't see it, and apparently don't want to know.

As for the rest of your comment; one might get the impression there are no poor, miserable, uneducated 'Whites' in this country; is that true, Jack?

There are hundreds of millions of them.  Most have better opportunities than black people, and won't take them. 

How is that pertinent to this conversation?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.2.51  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @5.2.49    3 years ago

Generally speaking , "welfare" eligibility is entirely based on income. If more blacks per capita receive "welfare" it is because more blacks per capita are poor. 

Sean, is it your position that the only thing that has left us with a too large black poverty rate is the failure of blacks to pull themselves up by their bootstraps ? 

How many black kids have a direct path into a trades union job when they turn 18 or 19.  I have multiple members in my white extended family who wanted to join a trades union when they finished high school, and because of "connections" through the family or through the neighborhood they were able to do so. 

How many black teenagers have that pathway?  My guess would be damn few. 

Your theory is "if only black people wouldnt be so black anymore they would get somewhere". 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
5.2.52  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.51    3 years ago
f more blacks per capita receive "welfare" it is because more blacks per capita are poor. 

I agree John and that hasn't changed since the programs started..  The claim is that the US is "systematically racist" yet it's designed  massive governmental programs and set asides  that disproportionally benefit black people, the group that the government is supposedly oppressing. And welfare is just one such example.   Do you think an actual systematically racist government would design programs to disproportionally benefit the oppressed race?

our position that the only thing that has left us with a too large black poverty rate is the failure of blacks to pull themselves up by their bootstraps 

 If, as CRT tells us, white people designed our government to benefit themselves and oppress other races, how come Asians and Jews make more money per capita than any other racial groups?  The US has spent 50 plus years and billions of dollars to help black people and remove that excess poverty rate. 

ow many black teenagers have that pathway?  My guess would be damn few. 

But that's a vanishingly small sector of our economy and not how other marginalized and discriminated groups succeeded.  Blacks have access to affirmative actions programs in school and in the white collar workplace, not to mention minority set asides in contracting. Chicago  and cities like it has made sure black owned  businesses get a large chunk of their famously profitable city contracts even if they aren't the low bidder.  What is that if not a handout to generate wealth? 

Not to mention civil service jobs like police.  It's a very easy job to get and is a ticket to the middle class with a nice pension in most big cities. 

theory is "if only black people wouldnt be so black anymore they would get somewhere".

And your theory is black people are incapable of doing anything on their own and can only succeed if paternalistic white men give them things. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.53  CB  replied to  Sean Treacy @5.2.47    3 years ago

It was Chief Justice Taney of the Supreme Court 1857 (Dred Scott Decision). Of course, he would come off sounding like a complete fool, tone-deaf and blind, were he to say it today. However, he wrote it down and published it denoting how foundationally conservatives viewed Africans (Blacks) -enslaved or free- as not privy to the rights and privileges of a White man in our country.

Some conservatives have not been on the "solutions" team of history. Such people, as today, withhold themselves from remedies for minorities, or if they do participate in or out of legislation, they 'bolt' on it in the next 'cycle. Sean, don't give yourselves any or much credit for helping made minorities whole!

And I don't see you complaining about all the money and wealth some conservatives have amassed supplied by this country's government from its minorities. Or, simply lying on tax returns. Greedy for gain.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.54  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.50    3 years ago
Is say, Oprah Winfrey; a 'rapper' or athlete?
She falls under the "comedians and actors" tag.

Meaning: Not a rapper or athlete, eh?  Next, produce a comedian segment starring Oprah!

Yes, I am confident that Oprah can act, but it's nice work if you can get it and she need not apologize for doing so. This "discussion" comes across petty and stupid. Actually, discounting how a large population make wealth. Unbelievable, Jack_Tx. Unreal.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.2.55  Texan1211  replied to  CB @5.2.26    3 years ago
And Americans need to be compensated for what was stolen from them by institutional racism, Jack. 

And do you have a price in mind, and what is the criteria to receive it?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.56  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.50    3 years ago
Do you not understand that a Div I university can only award 12 basketball scholarships...but an unlimited number of academic ones?  Who do you think is getting those?  Do you imagine that black high school students are hearing about how their grades can pay for college, or do you realize that all the attention is on the athletes?  At least until they get hurt and they're of no use anymore.

I will defer to "coach" experience since that is your area of expertise. Good for you. Maybe sports gave you the life you hoped? I wish you well. Now then, is it your contention that only black athletes achieve success in our community? Or, are you aware that we are steadily achieving success despite the meddlesome obstruction of some conservatives in our paths to progress?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.57  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.50    3 years ago
You've made extensive arguments that they're not able to provide prosperity for themselves because of institutional and individual racism.  So which is it?

One thing that is exceedingly clear is some conservatives are standing in the way; get out of the way! More striving with nature's problems and less striving with some conservatives non-stop manufactured obstacles would be a big step forward in itself!  Black America succeeds in-spite of real-time hindrances and manufactured set-backs.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.2.58  Texan1211  replied to  CB @5.2.57    3 years ago
More striving with nature's problems and less striving with some conservatives non-stop manufactured obstacles would be a big step forward in itself! 

So what obstacles are placed by conservatives that inhibit success?

And how do those "obstacles" actually prevent success?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.2.59  Texan1211  replied to  CB @5.2.53    3 years ago
Or, simply lying on tax returns. Greedy for gain.

Should I assume you have not an iota of proof for that bizarre claim?

No need to answer, it is strictly a rhetorical question.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.60  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.50    3 years ago
As for the rest of your comment; one might get the impression there are no poor, miserable, uneducated 'Whites' in this country; is that true, Jack?
There are hundreds of millions of them.  Most have better opportunities than black people, and won't take them. How is that pertinent to this conversation?

How do you think, Jack_Tx. You are the one making comparisons to people-groups - struggling and pampered alike! 

Moreover, with all the favor, indulgences, education, and achievements of high achievers one would think there would not exist any thieves, cheaters, and white-collar criminals amongst their ranks: Why do you think harmful attitudes exist among 'successful people,' Jack_Tx?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.61  CB  replied to  Sean Treacy @5.2.52    3 years ago
Do you think an actual systematically racist government would design programs to disproportionally benefit the oppressed race?

Do you really think Black Americans are not smart enough to know who supports programs designed and in practice (not theory) are working (without being diluted, refocus, or terminated too soon)? We're pretty astute at times, Sean.

Incidentally, I am only half-heartedly engaging this section of the thread, because it really is beyond the scope of the article. I can't help thinking 'the plug' will be pulled out without notice.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.62  CB  replied to  Sean Treacy @5.2.52    3 years ago
The US has spent 50 plus years and billions of dollars to help black people and remove that excess poverty rate. 

Some conservatives have "helped" handicapped programs, just like they are HANDICAPPING unfettered voting with the stroke of pens (upcoming) in state capitals. The federal government 'giveth' to the people and (red) states "f-k" it up with devastatingly watered down and deliberate impotent executions. We know this, Sean.

It happens all the time. Again, people of color are voting their butts off and all it takes is one White man and his confederates to institute policies to "F" it up. Some conservatives tried to kill the ACA that helps people of this country, but only succeeded in diluting it, fortunately. But the intent to 'kill' was real.

Let's get real. Some conservatives do not see minorities as a "good fit" for "their" country. They are not working for the benefit of the whole population. They just are not.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.2.63  Texan1211  replied to  CB @5.2.62    3 years ago
Some conservatives have "helped" handicapped programs, just like they are HANDICAPPING unfettered voting with the stroke of pens (upcoming) in state capitals.

Utter nonsense.

You can't name one single thing in any new law that prohibits anyone from voting. You can't name anything in the new laws that is prejudicial to voters of any color or sex.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
5.2.64  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @5.2.57    3 years ago
One thing that is exceedingly clear is some conservatives are standing in the way;

If they're so exceedingly clear, you should have no difficulty outlining several examples.  Do regale us.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.2.65  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @5.2.52    3 years ago
And your theory is black people are incapable of doing anything on their own and can only succeed if paternalistic white men give them things. 

I have never said any such thing . You and Jack Tx in particular like to try and explain what other people mean. 

A subset of inner city, black, culture is 'oppositional' to the mainstream culture. This is the group that resists assimilation. 

Of all the ethnic groups that were that were out of the mainstream in the late 19th and early 20th century immigration fueled American society (Jews, Irish, Italian, Slav, etc) only African Americans have kept a subset of their group that never assimilated. (You could add Native Americans as unassimilated although there are different circumstances with NA related to tribal sovereignty) Why? 

There is a hundreds of years long history of African Americans being rejected and abused by the "mainstream" society of America. Does it really surprise anyone that there remains an oppositional element in black culture? 

To this minute there are white supremacists who insist America is and should continue to be a white country.  I believe that if this was all gone we would see a change of attitudes among oppositional blacks within a generation. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.2.66  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.65    3 years ago

You mean they like to put words in other peoples' mouths and make up shit as they go along . . . . 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.67  CB  replied to  Texan1211 @5.2.55    3 years ago

See Congress. What do you think is a good 'offer,' Texan? And yes, I fully expect you to waste time sputtering.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.68  CB  replied to  Texan1211 @5.2.58    3 years ago

Spend more time familiarizing yourself with past history and current events. I have no interest in time-consuming reprobate minds.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.69  CB  replied to  Texan1211 @5.2.59    3 years ago

Rhetorical answer. No need to answer:

Some conservatives lie on their tax returns in order to not pay taxes that will aid the 'libs.'  And they call that 'smart.'

Trump Brags About Not Paying Taxes: "That Makes Me Smart"

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
5.2.70  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.65    3 years ago
g . You and Jack Tx in particular like to try and explain what other people mean. 

You literally did that to me in the post I replied to. 

Why? 

I think you answered it here.  "A subset of inner city, black, culture is 'oppositional' to the mainstream culture"  They've adopted a culture that makes financial success almost impossible and teaching kids from the get go that the system is rigged against them, they are victims who can't succeed in America will only makes things a thousands times worse. Teaching kids they are victims from birth and that they can't succeed because of their skin color is about the worst form of abuse possible. 

 

oes it really surprise anyone that there remains an oppositional element in black culture?

The results are clear. It's a poisonous culture and enabling it is a grave disservice. 

his minute there are white supremacists who insist America is and should continue to be a white country

America isn't a white country, those who claim it are on the fringes and the actual people who run this country's government, the economy and culture have by and large adopted extremist views in the other direction and racial relations have gotten worse. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.71  CB  replied to  Texan1211 @5.2.63    3 years ago

IMPASSE.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.72  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.64    3 years ago

Do your own research. Moreover, I view this willful ignorance as a ploy. If you have no understanding of the political environment that we are operating in, then maybe you should leave and return when caught up. I am not wasting myself supplying information to reprobates.Obfuscate that!

With that, I am moving on.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
5.2.73  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @5.2.72    3 years ago
Do your own research.

So there aren't any.  OK.

Moreover, I view this willful ignorance as a ploy.

Asking you to back up your outlandish assertions with an example or a fact or some piece of data is definitely a ploy to either engage in an intelligent discussion or expose a wild and unfounded accusation.  Looks like it's the latter.

If you have no understanding of the political environment that we are operating in, then maybe you should leave and return when caught up. I am not wasting myself supplying information to reprobates.Obfuscate that!

You don't need my help to obfuscate anything.  You're quite expert at it.

With that, I am moving on.

I doubt it, but if you say so, OK.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.74  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.37    3 years ago

Well Jack, "modern day redlining" is being discussed by AG Merrick Garland on television right now. There are several cases of red-lining being worked presently, and several settlements of Black and Hispanic red-lining. AG Merrick Garland says more cases are forthcoming.

Jack_Tx. . . you were saying??

(C-Span link to video on AG Garland deals with modern red-lining: )

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.75  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.73    3 years ago

Do you own research. Oh and see 'current events' @5.2.74 - Jack_Tx.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
5.2.76  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.51    3 years ago
Generally speaking , "welfare" eligibility is entirely based on income. If more blacks per capita receive "welfare" it is because more blacks per capita are poor. 

Yes.  We need to emphasize that "more blacks per capita are poor" has not changed.  Ever.  Civil Rights Act, Fair Housing Act, Affirmative Action....none of it has moved the needle.

How many black kids have a direct path into a trades union job when they turn 18 or 19.  I have multiple members in my white extended family who wanted to join a trades union when they finished high school, and because of "connections" through the family or through the neighborhood they were able to do so.  How many black teenagers have that pathway?  My guess would be damn few. 

Your guess would also be damn accurate.

My question to left-leaning folks would be:  At what point will you be willing to hold the American educational system...including classroom teachers.... accountable?  At what point are you willing to force them to change behaviors?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
5.2.77  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @5.2.74    3 years ago
Well Jack, "modern day redlining" is being discussed by AG Merrick Garland on television right now. There are several cases of red-lining being worked presently, and several settlements of Black and Hispanic red-lining occurring. AG Merrick Garland says more cases are forthcoming. Jack_Tx. . . you were saying??

I was saying "give us an example".  

Turns out it wasn't so difficult, was it?  Maybe you could just lead with that next time.

I do hope we're getting ready to shift this conversation from shit that happened 50 years ago that we can't do anything about to shit that's happening today that we CAN do something about.  

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
5.2.78  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Texan1211 @5.2.8    3 years ago

Right on the money! And my ethnic background is far too convoluted to go into here. Suffice it to say that my genealogist that once studied my family tree looked me in the face and said, "Ed, the only way I can truly describe your ethnic background in your family tree is with the word mutt!" I cracked up then and laugh about it to this day.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.79  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.77    3 years ago
I do hope we're getting ready to shift this conversation from shit that happened 50 years ago that we can't do anything about to shit that's happening today that we CAN do something about.  

You can hope anything your heart desires. We will discuss history and life in hopes to make the future better. That you 'want' to shunt some "shit" off to the recesses is your problem: not histories, not Blacks, minorities, or "Others.'

History not recognized is history doomed to be repeated! You don't get to select the relevant facts to suit your 'fancy,' because facts are facts. Comfortable or uncomfortable, you dig?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.2.80  Texan1211  replied to  CB @5.2.67    3 years ago
See Congress. What do you think is a good 'offer,' Texan?

So Congress does your thinking for you? I asked you, not Congress.

I think a good offer is nothing. Not a person in America has been enslaved by me. Slavery ended quite some time ago.

And yes, I fully expect you to waste time sputtering.

And I expected a better argument from you.

I see we are both disappointed.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.2.81  Texan1211  replied to  CB @5.2.68    3 years ago
Spend more time familiarizing yourself with past history and current events.

I know history. Spend more time in formulating your arguments.

I have no interest in time-consuming reprobate minds.

Yes, that is obvious because too much of your time is wasted on petty, childish insults.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.2.82  Texan1211  replied to  CB @5.2.69    3 years ago
Rhetorical answer. No need to answer:

No, there has never been a need to answer what isn't a question. Probably why they call it a "rhetorical question". something you didn't ask.

Tax cheats come in all colors and political persuasions.

If you have evidence that Trump actually cheated on his taxes (assuming you aren't just parroting what you have been told to say), I suggest that you let Biden's IRS know along with the Justice Dept. 

They may even give you a reward or something!!!

However, if this is like usual, don't alert the authorities because they usually don't take kindly to people filing false reports.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.2.83  CB  replied to  Texan1211 @5.2.82    3 years ago

I am going to let you have 'all of that' because it is worthless to me and my time today! Bye.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.2.84  Texan1211  replied to  CB @5.2.83    3 years ago
I am going to let you have 'all of that' because it is worthless to me and my time today! Bye.

No sense in acting magnanimous with me, you "gave" me nothing.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
5.2.85  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Jack_TX @5.2.19    3 years ago

John, you regularly keep talking about "white guilt". The one thing you or anyone else here has not stated is what constitutes being "white"? Is it anyone who is 1/4 caucasian, 1/2, 3/4, or what? If you decide to answer this, think very carefully before doing so.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.2.86  Texan1211  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @5.2.85    3 years ago
John, you regularly keep talking about "white guilt". The one thing you or anyone else here has not stated is what constitutes being "white"? Is it anyone who is 1/4 caucasian, 1/2, 3/4, or what? If you decide to answer this, think very carefully before doing so.

Reparations for everyone!! Don't the very vast majority of people have mixed races in them?

How about if someone "identifies" as black?

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
5.2.87  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Texan1211 @5.2.86    3 years ago

"How about if someone "identifies" as black?"

You mean like Democrat Rachel Dolezal? Former NAACP chapter president in Spokane, WA.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
5.2.88  Jack_TX  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @5.2.85    3 years ago
John, you regularly keep talking about "white guilt". The one thing you or anyone else here has not stated is what constitutes being "white"? Is it anyone who is 1/4 caucasian, 1/2, 3/4, or what? If you decide to answer this, think very carefully before doing so.

I'm talking about people who see themselves as white, regardless of actual ancestry.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
5.3  MrFrost  replied to  Greg Jones @5    3 years ago

800

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.3.1  CB  replied to  MrFrost @5.3    3 years ago

It's all in the Trump doctrine, under: "Make me." At the same time these some conservatives want to shout: "It ain't me!"

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
5.3.2  Sean Treacy  replied to  MrFrost @5.3    3 years ago

It's amazing how aggressive progressive  ignorance is about this law. 

[Deleted]

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.3.3  JohnRussell  replied to  MrFrost @5.3    3 years ago

Of course.

This woman doesnt want her grandchildren or great-grandchildren to see what she was up to back in the day

800

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
5.3.4  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  MrFrost @5.3    3 years ago

Funny. I was taught about that when I was in school a long time ago. There are a lot of things not taught now that were taught when I was young. Cursive writing ring a bell?

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
5.3.5  Dulay  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @5.3.4    3 years ago
Funny. I was taught about that when I was in school a long time ago.

As was I but I don't remember being prohibited from discussing Jim Crow laws or Brown v. Board of Education or the motivation of the white woman in that photo or the actions of the state that caused the need for the Little Rock Nine to be escorted by the National Guard.

I judge it to be impossible to discuss those events without recognizing and voicing their racial motivation and their effects. 

'To Kill a Mockingbird' is always ranked at the top of polls for 'Great American Reads' but it is being removed from the curriculum all over the country because of this bullshit. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
5.3.7  CB  replied to  Dulay @5.3.5    3 years ago

And it can be put back in the curriculum after these "obstructionists" in the 21st century are themselves moved out of positions of power. That is the task ahead. Talk to proper republicans and conservatives and leave some conservatives 'rocks' to float off into the sunset horizons.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
5.3.8  MrFrost  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @5.3.4    3 years ago

Funny. I was taught about that when I was in school a long time ago. There are a lot of things not taught now that were taught when I was young. Cursive writing ring a bell?

CRT and cursive writing....not really the same thing, Jim. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.3.9  Tessylo  replied to  MrFrost @5.3.8    3 years ago

jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
5.3.10  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  MrFrost @5.3.8    3 years ago

I said, in case you missed it, I was taught about that stuff above when I was in school. Point was, which I guess you did miss it, that a lot of things aren't taught in school any more as they are evidently deemed unimportant. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
5.3.11  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  MrFrost @5.3    3 years ago

that's quite a condundrum for Democrats ins't it.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
5.3.12  Sean Treacy  replied to  Dulay @5.3.5    3 years ago
ut I don't remember being prohibited from discussing Jim Crow laws or Brown v. Board of Education or the motivation of the white woman in that photo or the actions of the state that caused the need for the Little Rock Nine to be escorted by the National Guard.

The fact that after months of enlightenment, all too many still post bullshit, like your comment, that has NOTHING to do with the law in question..

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
5.3.13  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @5.3.12    3 years ago

Well gee Sean, since my comment was in direct reply to a comment by Jim.

I can't help but wonder why you didn't whine to HIM that HIS comment had NOTHING to do with the law.  

Oh wait, I get it. Trolling...

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
5.3.14  Sean Treacy  replied to  Dulay @5.3.13    3 years ago

Lol.. You claimed something prevents you from discussing Jim Crow laws. If it not's the law, [deleted]

My bad to assume you were talking about the law, in a post about the law, in a thread about the law. [deleted]

[deleted]

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
5.3.15  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @5.3.14    3 years ago
Lol.. You claimed something prevents you from discussing Jim Crow laws.

This is the comment I posted: 

As was I but I don't remember being prohibited from discussing Jim Crow laws

YOU actually block quoted the full comment Sean so it's isn't credible for you to claim that you didn't READ it. 

Yet here you are, insisting that I said JUST THE OPPOSITE.

Posting lies about what I said diminishes your credibility.  

But hey Sean, you be you. 

If it not's the law, is it a wizard who put a hex on you? 

Jim's comment was about his educational experience as was my reply. It had NOTHING to do with the content of the law Sean. AGAIN, Jim's comment set the predicate for mine. THAT'S how this shit works. 

My bad to assume you were talking about the law, in a post about the law, in a thread about the law. My bad for assuming you were paying attention to context or logic in your war against imaginary strawman.

No Sean, it's clear from your comment that you aren't 'assuming' but instead you are intentionally FABRICATING. 

I hear if you hop on one foot for an hour, the wizard allows you to discuss Jim Crow laws at sunrise. Try it out. 

I KNOW that when a member READS another member's comment for comprehension that there is a far less likelihood of making fallacious allegations about it's content.  

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
6  Trout Giggles    3 years ago
"HB 1775 is a direct affront to the constitutional rights of teachers and students across Oklahoma by restricting conversations around race and gender at all levels of education," said Megan Lambert, the legal director of the ACLU of Oklahoma.

YES!!! That's it exactly! It keeps students from discussing race/gender/religion and getting their opinions/feelings out in the open. The only way we can defeat "isms" is by discussing it rationally and openly

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
6.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  Trout Giggles @6    3 years ago
keeps students from discussing race/gender/religion and getting their opinions/feelings out in the open. T

Of course it doesn't. Read the law.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
6.1.1  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1    3 years ago

I have. 

I particularly like the part about revoking the licenses of teachers that teach something 'unconsciously'. /s

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
6.1.2  Sean Treacy  replied to  Dulay @6.1.1    3 years ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
6.1.3  Sean Treacy  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.2    3 years ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
6.1.4  Jack_TX  replied to  Dulay @6.1.1    3 years ago
I particularly like the part about revoking the licenses of teachers that teach something 'unconsciously'.

Cite?

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
6.1.5  Dulay  replied to  Jack_TX @6.1.4    3 years ago

Did you miss the sarcasm tag Jack? 

BTW, the law is cited in full in the comments in this seed. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
6.1.6  CB  replied to  Dulay @6.1.5    3 years ago

@12.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
6.1.7  Jack_TX  replied to  Dulay @6.1.5    3 years ago
Did you miss the sarcasm tag Jack? 

Sorta, yeah. 

I wasn't sure which part you were being sarcastic about, (there is a lot of worthy material) and there has been a shitload of misrepresentation about what's actually in this law throughout the entire seed, so I wasn't sure where you were going with that.  

I think I've got it now.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
6.2  Ender  replied to  Trout Giggles @6    3 years ago

The law is bullshit. The way the right goes on and on about some theory, I am beginning to think they just use it as a catch all to everything they don't like.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
6.2.1  XXJefferson51  replied to  Ender @6.2    3 years ago

The law prevents parents having to go to their school boards and debating it there It also shields parents from being labeled domestic terrorists by let’s go bran dons AG whose son in law profits from selling CRT materials to school districts.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
6.2.2  Ender  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.2.1    3 years ago

So in your words, a law designed to get parents out of school board meetings.

And that is somehow better?

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
6.2.3  Dulay  replied to  Ender @6.2.2    3 years ago

The irony is that the law mandates that the school board 'promulgate rules to
implement the provisions'. 

Opps.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.2.4  Tessylo  replied to  XXJefferson51 @6.2.1    3 years ago
"AG whose son in law profits from selling CRT materials to school districts."

That's not true no matter how many times you repeat the lie.  

 
 
 
Sunshine
Professor Quiet
7  Sunshine    3 years ago

After school groups can be formed for any CRT discussions with students.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.1  Tessylo  replied to  Sunshine @7    3 years ago

But it's not being taught in public schools K-12, so there's that.  

 
 
 
Sunshine
Professor Quiet
7.1.1  Sunshine  replied to  Tessylo @7.1    3 years ago
But it's not being taught in public schools K-12, so there's that.  

Well good.  It shouldn't be, and new laws are aimed at preventing it in the future..

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.1.2  Tessylo  replied to  Sunshine @7.1.1    3 years ago

Completely unnecessary because it would never be taught in public schools K-12.

 
 
 
Sunshine
Professor Quiet
7.1.3  Sunshine  replied to  Tessylo @7.1.2    3 years ago

Well I would rather trust the law than your word.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  Sunshine @7.1.3    3 years ago

Completely unnecessary to create a law for something that isn't happening.  

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
7.1.5  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Sunshine @7.1.1    3 years ago

Exactly and they, if not already, are sure leaning that way. Otherwise, why would it come up in any discussion. Our Lieutenant Governor is hell bent on getting it out of the schools it IS in now, which some say isn't happening.........errantly I may add, and preventing it in the future. 

 
 
 
Sunshine
Professor Quiet
7.1.6  Sunshine  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @7.1.5    3 years ago
Exactly and they, if not already, are sure leaning that way.

Definitely, best to prevent it now before causing harm to a child. 

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
7.1.7  Ronin2  replied to  Tessylo @7.1.4    3 years ago

We have thousands of laws on the books "for something that isn't happening". The laws being there are usually a big reason that it isn't happening now.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
7.1.8  Ozzwald  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @7.1.5    3 years ago
Exactly and they, if not already, are sure leaning that way.

Who is leaning that way?  Specifically...

Otherwise, why would it come up in any discussion.

It's the latest republican dog whistle.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.1.9  Tessylo  replied to  Ronin2 @7.1.7    3 years ago

[removed]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.10  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @7.1.8    3 years ago
It's the latest republican dog whistle.

So funny!

Strangely enough, only certain posters come a-running when they hear these imagined "whistles"!!

 
 
 
Duck Hawk
Freshman Silent
7.1.11  Duck Hawk  replied to  Sunshine @7.1.1    3 years ago

Why do we need new laws for a problem that doesn't exist? 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
7.1.12  Trout Giggles  replied to  Duck Hawk @7.1.11    3 years ago

jest coz!!!!

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
7.1.13  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @7.1.10    3 years ago
Strangely enough, only certain posters come a-running when they hear these imagined "whistles"!!

Completely ignored my question huh.  Okay.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.14  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @7.1.13    3 years ago
Completely ignored my question

Not at all, sir!!

I gave it every consideration I felt it warranted.

BTW, I didn't comment on your question. I commented on your declaration, please get it straight next time.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
7.1.15  Ozzwald  replied to  Texan1211 @7.1.14    3 years ago

BTW, I didn't comment on your question. 

Which is exactly why I pointed out that you'd ignored the question.  You like to keep repeating the obvious, don't you?

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
7.1.16  XXJefferson51  replied to  Tessylo @7.1.2    3 years ago

Let’s go Brandon’s AG disagrees.  His son sells that curriculum to school districts.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
7.1.17  XXJefferson51  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @7.1.5    3 years ago

I really like your Lt. Governor! A great person in my opinion. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
7.1.18  XXJefferson51  replied to  Duck Hawk @7.1.11    3 years ago

To make sure the problem never does exist!  

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.20  Texan1211  replied to  Ozzwald @7.1.15    3 years ago
Which is exactly why I pointed out that you'd ignored the question.  You like to keep repeating the obvious, don't you?

I have already explained this to you.

Do you need to read it again?

Here--I gave your question every consideration I felt it warranted.

That's twice now I have posted it, but let me know if I need to repeat it again for you.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
7.1.21  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Duck Hawk @7.1.11    3 years ago

If the problem doesn't exist, it matters not. And if it doesn't exist and there are no plans for it to exist, WHY THE FUCKING LAW SUIT?

Think man...........................someone(s) knows what's coming........in both cases.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.1.22  Tessylo  replied to  XXJefferson51 @7.1.16    3 years ago
"His son sells that curriculum to school districts." 

NO, HE DOESN'T.

Who is Brandon?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1.23  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @7.1.22    3 years ago
Who is Brandon?

Google it.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
7.1.24  CB  replied to  Tessylo @7.1.22    3 years ago

"Let's Go Brandon" is a bull-patty phrase used to cover its real intent: "Fuck Joe Biden!"

It originated in a routine interview of three youths at a NASCAR show where during the interview some conservatives in the stands were yelling, "Fuck Joe Biden" (which was picked up by the mics) and near the tail-end of curt interview, occurring at the same time, one of the boys yelled, "Let's Go Brandon!" to awkwardly cap off the segment.

Yes, it's stupid. But some conservatives like. . . that kind of patty.

 
 
 
Moose Knuckle
Freshman Quiet
7.1.25  Moose Knuckle  replied to  CB @7.1.24    3 years ago

It's really not cool because I have a friend named Brandon and every 5 minutes at Walmart they page him, "Let's go Brandon" I think they tell customer service they need to page their kid named "Lesco Brandon". He has gone to customer service so many times he can't go shopping anymore.

That is an abuse of paging systems. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.1.26  Tessylo  replied to  CB @7.1.24    3 years ago

I knew what it was - it's so fucking lame - which is all they got - lame fucking bullshit.  

 
 
 
Moose Knuckle
Freshman Quiet
7.1.27  Moose Knuckle  replied to  Tessylo @7.1.26    3 years ago

It's better though than when people would call places and have Myra Mains paged all the time. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
7.1.28  Tessylo  replied to  Moose Knuckle @7.1.27    3 years ago

Or Mike Hunt

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
7.1.29  XXJefferson51  replied to  Sunshine @7.1.3    3 years ago

Me too!  

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
7.1.30  XXJefferson51  replied to  CB @7.1.24    3 years ago

Actually it was the nbc reporter interviewing the winner Brandon ??? who upon hearing the chants said on air it was “let’s go Brandon” instead of f—k Joe Biden and it took off from there as a shot at both Biden and the msm covering for him.  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
7.1.31  CB  replied to  XXJefferson51 @7.1.30    3 years ago

Yada.  (Details, really?!) original

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
Professor Quiet
7.1.32  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Moose Knuckle @7.1.27    3 years ago

Or when you go to a lab and they page I.P. Freely. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
8  Tessylo    3 years ago

243723512_10225158875232819_6054690302579791901_n.jpg?_nc_cat=101&_nc_rgb565=1&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=VJp9To4t_Y0AX957ljK&_nc_ht=scontent-iad3-1.xx&oh=6d5c399f82e814fdfbbe41ad99ed911d&oe=61946AB2

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
8.1  Greg Jones  replied to  Tessylo @8    3 years ago

The Democrats were in charge back then.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
8.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @8.1    3 years ago

removed

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
8.1.2  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Greg Jones @8.1    3 years ago

Gotta love people on Twitter who use an alias so as not to be identified and vilified for their ignorance LOL

 
 
 
Duck Hawk
Freshman Silent
8.2  Duck Hawk  replied to  Tessylo @8    3 years ago

Well said!! jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
8.2.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  Duck Hawk @8.2    3 years ago

It's really something to see you guys flip flop from claiming "it's not taught" to justifying that it's taught. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
8.2.2  Tessylo  replied to  Sean Treacy @8.2.1    3 years ago

'through the lens of critical race theory'

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
8.2.3  Sean Treacy  replied to  Tessylo @8.2.2    3 years ago

And that's what people are talking about when they use the term CRT.  Do you get it yet? 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
8.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tessylo @8    3 years ago

Why would anyone have a problem with that being taught. It's the true history. They ought to teach how WWII vets came home and the white GIs got VA loans to buy homes but the black GIs didn't

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
8.3.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Trout Giggles @8.3    3 years ago

I just saw this. It is critical race theory to teach that blacks were excluded in many cases from the full extent of GI benefits? 

That is a good one , lol. 

It is true that some blacks were given home loans through the GI bill but they were not given loans for homes of their choice. They were given loans based on racial segregation for the lesser desired properties. 

The same with education.  The GI bill paid for college but what is the total worth of that when you couldnt get into "white" schools? 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
8.3.2  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @8.3.1    3 years ago

There are many, millions, of white people in this country who have no intention of admitting all that racism entailed. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.3.3  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @8.3.1    3 years ago
It is critical race theory to teach that blacks were excluded in many cases from the full extent of GI benefits?

Where did you read that at?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.3.4  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @8.3.2    3 years ago
There are many, millions, of white people in this country who have no intention of admitting all that racism entailed. 

There are also many millions of people who have no intention of feeling any "white guilt" over things which happened before they were born and which they had absolutely no responsibility for.

Some people who admit to racism in the past just aren't as vocal as you  about it.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
8.3.5  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @8.3.3    3 years ago

www.snopes.com   /fact-check/black-world-war-ii-vets-gi-bill/

Were Black World War II Veterans Excluded from GI Bill Benefits?

6-7 minutes


The GI Bill of Rights for returning World War II veterans in 1944 was   heralded   at the time as a significant piece of legislation that helped propel millions of servicemen into the middle class. The bill—which was   promoted   as race neutral—provided veterans with unemployment insurance, tuition assistance, job placement, and guaranteed loans for home ownership, farms, and businesses.

And the bill did that—just not for most of the roughly   1.2 million   Black men who enlisted in the war. On paper they all could have received access to education and home ownership, but they had to contend with racism ingrained into systems around the country, not just in the southern states.

A   New York Times   report described how the civil rights group the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) encouraged more Black men to sign up for the military because of the transformative possibilities the benefits could offer to them. But discrimination found its way into the bill’s implementation, partly because states were responsible for distributing the benefits.

Rep. John Rankin, an   openly racist   Mississippi Democrat, was among those who drafted the bill. He had   previously criticized   a proposal that the American Red Cross abandon the practice of labelling blood to indicate whether it came from Black or white donors, calling it a conspiracy to “mongrelize the nation.” Rankin ensured that states were responsible for distributing benefits.

The disparity in implementation of the GI Bill   increased   the gaps in wealth and education between Black and white Americans.

A 1998 report, “ First a Negro… Incidentally a Veteran ” published by Oxford University Press, looked at what happened to Black veterans in the Deep South, when they tried to obtain their entitlements from 1944 through 1948. The report found that former Black servicemen in Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi could not get the promised unemployment compensation, educational opportunities, housing and job loans needed to improve their socioeconomic conditions because of discrimination and poor implementation. Southern Black veterans “had to return home to the lowest rung of the socioeconomic ladder.”

And this was not limited to the South. According to the book, “ The GI Bill: The New Deal for Veterans ,” Black veterans from the South could not benefit from the historically white educational institutions, and were limited to studying at underfunded, overcrowded, and small historically Black colleges. Journalist and historian Edward Humes   wrote   in his article, “How the G.I. Bill Shunted Blacks Into Vocational Training,” that tens of thousands of Black veterans were also turned away from historically Black colleges because of limited capacity.

Theoretically , Black veterans in northern states could use their education vouchers to go to colleges, but few actually did. In the late 1940s, annual enrollment of Black students in colleges did not exceed 5,000. These veterans were overwhelmingly channeled into vocational training programs, manual training, and agriculture programs, instead of liberal arts.

A   small number   of Black veterans did manage to get what they were promised. Humes wrote about how 12 percent of Black veterans did go to college on the GI Bill, compared with 28 percent of white veterans. But out of that 12 percent, 90 percent went to the underfunded historically Black colleges.

The   New York Times   report detailed how Black veterans were routinely denied mortgages, alongside Black people in general. Across the country, Black home ownership remained extremely low. In 1947, Ebony magazine surveyed 13 Mississippi cities and discovered that of the 3,229 Veterans Affairs (VA) home loans given to veterans, only two went to Black veterans.

In an interview with   NPR , Richard Rothstein, the author of the book “The Color Of Law: A Forgotten History Of How Our Government Segregated America,” described in more detail how entrenched racism in other government agencies affected Black people:

The Veterans Administration, established under the GI Bill, adopted all of the [Federal Housing Administration’s] racial exclusion programs. […] Big developments like Levittown or south of San Francisco, Daly City, or many other large subdivisions like that that were built after World War II were financed by the Veterans Administration, not necessarily the Federal Housing Administration, with the same racial restrictions. In the book, I talk of one family of a returning war veteran who – a very ambitious man. He formed a trucking company, hired a number of people for his trucking company. He was a successful businessman. He got a contract – an African-American. He got a contract from Levitt when he was building Levittown to deliver sheet rock to Levittown. But he and his family members were prohibited from buying homes in Levittown because of the FHA requirement. So the Veterans Administration, which did provide benefits in the area of education to African-Americans – but when it came to housing, they were not permitted to move into areas that the Federal Housing Administration and the Veterans Administration had designated for whites.

Furthermore, white job counselors at local employment offices across the country   refused   to refer Black veterans for skilled or semi-skilled jobs, even though many of them came back from the war as fully trained mechanics, welders, electricians, and more.

Given that an overwhelming majority of Black veterans who fought in World War II were not able to benefit from the GI Bill of Rights, and were excluded from accessing it through a combination of racism, exclusionary federal and state law, and poor implementation, we rate this claim as “Mostly True.”

Were Black World War II Veterans Excluded from GI Bill Benefits? | Snopes.com

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.6  CB  replied to  JohnRussell @8.3.5    3 years ago

And they, some conservatives, are at it yet again. These are dirty, underhanded, folks! And their deeds are 'legion' against the people of this country. If there is a God: Give them miserably due, Lord!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.3.7  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @8.3.5    3 years ago

Uh, where did you read that "It is critical race theory to teach that blacks were excluded in many cases from the full extent of GI benefits?"??????????

No sense, really, in posting hundreds of words that don't answer what was asked.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
8.3.8  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @8.3.1    3 years ago

John Oliver did a segment on this - unreal, it's still going on to this day - where blacks are excluded from buying homes in 'certain areas' - it's still on the 'books'.

It's all true John yet you still have some denying it outright - and asking 'where did you read that at'?

Truth/reality has a liberal bias.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.3.9  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @8.3.8    3 years ago
Truth/reality has a liberal bias.  

Said no one truthfully---ever.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
8.3.10  Tessylo  replied to  Tessylo @8.3.8    3 years ago

Not worth a penny

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
8.3.11  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @8.3.10    3 years ago
Not worth a penny

So you are actually saying that your post 8.3.8 is not worth a penny.

Well, I have to admit, when you're right, you're right!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.12  CB  replied to  Tessylo @8.3.8    3 years ago

Give us the segment please. I would love to see it. John, though British, has his finger on the American way of bullpatty-ing itself!

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
8.3.13  Tessylo  replied to  CB @8.3.12    3 years ago

I believe this is it.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.14  CB  replied to  Tessylo @8.3.13    3 years ago

Watching and its breaking my heart! I didn't know the half of this! And it's notable that a British-American is laying it out straight and plain: no chaser!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
8.3.15  CB  replied to  CB @8.3.14    3 years ago

John Oliver: Drop the mic (moment)! I encourage everybody to watch this video from start to finish. Make the time!

 
 
 
Freewill
Junior Quiet
8.4  Freewill  replied to  Tessylo @8    3 years ago

They were not excluded from the bill per se, but they were denied many of it's benefits when they tried to use them, which was indeed a travesty.

History Channel story on that HERE

While the GI Bill’s language did not specifically exclude African-American veterans from its benefits, it was structured in a way that ultimately shut doors for the  1.2 million Black veterans  who had bravely served their country during World War II, in segregated ranks.
When lawmakers began drafting the GI Bill in 1944, some Southern Democrats feared that returning Black veterans would use public sympathy for veterans to advocate against  Jim Crow laws . To make sure the GI Bill largely benefited white people, the southern Democrats drew on tactics they had previously used to  ensure  that the  New Deal  helped as few Black people as possible.

That is the sad and unfortunate history through the lens of truth, no CRT required.  Teaching this would not be in violation of AB 1775.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
9  JohnRussell    3 years ago

I doubt if red state school boards or pta groups can be trusted to handle this issue appropriately.  The state of Texas created a board or commission to whitewash the racist history of that state through something called the 1836 commission begun to promote the "values" of the founders of Texas. 

The founders of Texas were mainly racists and slaveowners, and the constitution of the Republic of Texas banned free blacks and Indians from living in that "nation". 

I wouldnt trust there will be honesty about race from their schools. 

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
9.1  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @9    3 years ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
9.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Ronin2 @9.1    3 years ago

[removed]

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
9.1.2  JohnRussell  replied to  Ronin2 @9.1    3 years ago

i guess you are not capable of staying on topic

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
9.1.3  Ronin2  replied to  Tessylo @9.1.1    3 years ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
9.1.4  Ronin2  replied to  JohnRussell @9.1.2    3 years ago

You are the one that brought up PTA and school boards. I simply proved that blue states school boards are just as moronic when it comes to policies.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
9.1.5  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @9.1.1    3 years ago

And when did he/she tell you that?

 
 
 
Hallux
Masters Principal
9.1.6  Hallux  replied to  Ronin2 @9.1.3    3 years ago

removed for context

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
9.1.7  XXJefferson51  replied to  JohnRussell @9.1.2    3 years ago

He is.  Red states and county school systems don’t need any supervision or outside group to manage how we educate our kids.  Kendi has no place in the education of children.  MLK Jr. on the other hand clearly does.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
9.1.8  JohnRussell  replied to  XXJefferson51 @9.1.7    3 years ago

I have a feeling that if MLK had to choose between critical race theory and you he would choose critical race theory every time. 

 
 
 
Duck Hawk
Freshman Silent
9.2  Duck Hawk  replied to  JohnRussell @9    3 years ago

Their original constitution says it all. Texas was founded by a bunch of rich racist pigs. If Americans hadn't come to their aid (see Pres. Polk and the Mexican-American War) they would still be part of Mexico.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
9.2.1  Texan1211  replied to  Duck Hawk @9.2    3 years ago

Texas has moved on. I suggest you do the same.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
9.2.3  Trout Giggles  replied to    3 years ago

It has not only not moved on but it  did a 180 and is heading for 1836 at warp speed

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
9.2.4  Texan1211  replied to    3 years ago

No, progressive liberals can't seem to move on.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
9.2.5  XXJefferson51  replied to  Duck Hawk @9.2    3 years ago

That is just so wrong on so many levels. Texas won its independence in 1836 and became a nation.  There is no evidence that Texas would have fallen back into Mexico.  Texas wanted more than independence to be a part of the USA.  Polk made that happen.  Polk and Jefferson are my two favorite democrat Presidents.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
9.2.6  JohnRussell  replied to  XXJefferson51 @9.2.5    3 years ago

XX, was the Republic Of Texas a racist nation? 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
9.2.7  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @9.2.6    3 years ago
It is critical race theory to teach that blacks were excluded in many cases from the full extent of GI benefits?

Besides you, who the hell cares about that crap over 150 fucking years later?

Wil it change anything?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
9.2.8  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Texan1211 @9.2.1    3 years ago
I doubt if red state school boards or pta groups can be trusted to handle this issue appropriately.

Now you're asking for miracles.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
9.2.9  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @9.2.7    3 years ago
It is critical race theory to teach that blacks were excluded in many cases from the full extent of GI benefits?
Besides you, who the hell cares about that crap over 150 fucking years later?

The GI Bill after ww2 was not 150 years ago. These were our parents and grandparents. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
9.2.10  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @9.2.9    3 years ago

Still living in the past, are you?

Welcome to 2021.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
9.2.11  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @9.2.10    3 years ago

The next time you actually construct an argument to support one of your "points" will be the first time. I'm not sure NT needs so much filler. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
9.2.12  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @9.2.11    3 years ago

And the first time you comprehend one of my posts will be a fucking miracle.

Hallelujah!

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
10  Jeremy Retired in NC    3 years ago

We're being told over and over again that CRT isn't being taught.  If that's the case then why go to court over a ban on something that isn't being taught?

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
10.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @10    3 years ago

jrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif     jrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif       jrSmiley_28_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
10.2  Ronin2  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @10    3 years ago

Because the left continuously has to manufacture rage over something. Like not being able to teach CRT to children.

 
 
 
Duck Hawk
Freshman Silent
11  Duck Hawk    3 years ago

It could be that SOME of us feel that level of censorship is wrong. To intentionally lie and deceive our children is in my view a crime. When we cover up our past we present an unrealistic view of our country to our children. I would rather have my children proud of themselves and their country while acknowledging that it is not perfect and does indeed have some warts. I raised my children to believe in the Constitution with all the freedoms AND responsibilities that go with it. WE understand that America is not perfect and never has been. 

"We the people in order to form a more perfect union...." This implies that we are not a perfect nation but work towards improving our nation for "ourselves and our posterity..." We need to be able to see ourselves as we are not some imaginary image from a past that never was. 

WILL SOMEONE TELL ME WHEN AMERICA WAS GREAT? What do you mean by make America great again? What are you want tin to go back to? Jim Crow, slavery, indentured servitude which is it?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
11.1  Texan1211  replied to  Duck Hawk @11    3 years ago

No one I know wants to return to the Democratic glory days of slavery and Jim Crow. 

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
11.1.1  XXJefferson51  replied to  Texan1211 @11.1    3 years ago

Not at all.  I’ve got an article up about that very topic today.  They can’t shake off their roots and history.  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
11.1.2  CB  replied to  XXJefferson51 @11.1.1    3 years ago

Just keep talking bull patty. We're bringing 'tons' of yellow gear!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
11.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  CB @11.1.2    3 years ago
We're bringing 'tons' of yellow gear!

Probably necessary for progressive liberals who like to piss into the wind.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
11.2  Jack_TX  replied to  Duck Hawk @11    3 years ago

Have you read the law?

 
 
 
Duck Hawk
Freshman Silent
11.2.1  Duck Hawk  replied to  Jack_TX @11.2    3 years ago

why yes I have. jrSmiley_123_smiley_image.gif Have you? And do you understand that what I wrote is exactly what the law is trying to suppress.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
11.2.2  Jack_TX  replied to  Duck Hawk @11.2.1    3 years ago
why yes I have. Have you? 

I have.

To what clause or clauses do you object, specifically?

And do you understand that what I wrote is exactly what the law is trying to suppress.

I understand that you think that, but I don't think that's what the law says.  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12  CB    3 years ago
An Act
ENROLLED HOUSE

BILL NO. 1775 By: West (Kevin) , Stearman,
Stark, Caldwell (Chad),
Crosswhite Hader, Williams,
Olsen, West (Rick), Gann,
Bashore, Kendrix, Smith,
Grego, Pfeiffer, Martinez,
Roe, Sneed, Marti,
Steagall, Russ and Conley
of the House


and


Bullard, Hamilton, Jett
Standridge, Dahm, Weaver,
Bergstrom, Merrick,
Pederson, Rogers, Burns and
Stephens of the Senate






An Act relating to education; prohibiting certain
students within certain institutions from being
required to engage in certain tr aining or counseling;
allowing for voluntary counseling; prohibiting
orientation or requirement that presents any form of
certain stereotyping or bias; directing promulgation
of rules pursuant to certain act and subject to
certain approval; prohibiting cer tain application;
prohibiting employees of certain schools from
requiring certain concepts to be part of a course;
specifying concepts; directing promulgation of rules
pursuant to certain act and subject to certain
approval; providing for codification; pro viding an
effective date; and declaring an emergency.




SUBJECT: Education


BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA:  
ENR. H. B. NO. 1775 Page 2
SECTION 1 . NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified
in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 24 - 157 of Title 70, unless there
is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:


A. 1. No enrolled student of an institution of higher
education within The Oklahoma State System of Higher Education shall
be required to engage in any form of mandatory gender or sexual
diversity training or counseling; provided, voluntary counseling
shall not be prohibited. Any orientation or requirement that
presents any form of race or sex stereotyping or a bias on the basis
of race or sex shall be prohibited.


2. P ursuant to the provisions of the Administrative Procedures
Act, the Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education shall
promulgate rules, subject to approval by the Legislature, to
implement the provisions of this subsection.


B. The provisions of this subs ection shall not prohibit the
teaching of concepts that align to the Oklahoma Academic Standards.


1. No teacher, administrator or other employee of a school
district, charter school or virtual charter school shall require or
make part of a course the fol lowing concepts:


a. one race or sex is inherently superior to another race
or sex,


b. an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, is
inherently racist, sexist or oppressive, whether
consciously or unconsciously,


c. an individual should be discri minated against or
receive adverse treatment solely or partly because of
his or her race or sex,


d. members of one race or sex cannot and should not
attempt to treat others without respect to race or
sex,


e. an individual’s moral character is necessarily
determined by his or her race or sex,


f. an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex,
bears responsibility for actions committed in the past
by other members of the same race or sex, 

g. any individual should feel discomfort, guilt, anguish
or any other form of psychological distress on account
of his or her race or sex, or


h. meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are
racist or sexist or were created by members of a
particular race to oppress members of another race.


2. The State Board of Education shall promulgate rules, subject
to approval by the Legislature, to implement the provisions of this
subsection.


SECTION 2 . This act shall become effective July 1, 2021.


SECTION 3 . It being immediately neces sary for the preservation
of the public peace, health or safety, an emergency is hereby
declared to exist, by reason whereof this act shall take effect and
be in full force from and after its passage and approval.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.1  CB  replied to  CB @12    3 years ago

Ain't that rich. Now some conservatives want to be a model of good race-relations! Of course, they could not 'counsel' that old 'snake' in Kentucky, Mitch McConnell to support better 'race-relations' vis-a-vis voting rights in congress! That would have been too much like speaking up for right and wholesome!

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
12.1.1  XXJefferson51  replied to  CB @12.1    3 years ago

Did you notice the AG of that state who will be appointed to the senate when Mc Connell retires?  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.1.2  CB  replied to  XXJefferson51 @12.1.1    3 years ago

I did not. And so what? The impression I get is old Mitch literally plans to have them bring his polished skeleton out from the capitol!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
12.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  CB @12.1    3 years ago
they could not 'counsel' that old 'snake' in Kentucky, Mitch McConnell to support better 'race-relations' vis-a-vis voting rights in congress

Perhaps because he recognizes that people already have voting rights in America, and won't fall for all the Chicken Little bullshit some progressive liberals like to fling about.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.1.4  CB  replied to  Texan1211 @12.1.3    3 years ago

"Not falling for a banana in your tail-pipe, eh?" Perhaps? Perhaps? Perrrrhapppss, Kentucky is home of betta race-relations too? Mitch is 'pale-shelter' and 'frigid-hands.'

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
12.1.5  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson51 @12.1.1    3 years ago

He'll have to move to Kentucky FIRST Xx. 

jrSmiley_84_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
12.1.6  Texan1211  replied to  CB @12.1.4    3 years ago

Not falling for progressive liberal Chicken Little bullshit.

Was that really unclear to you after reading my post stating exactly that???

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.1.7  CB  replied to  Texan1211 @12.1.6    3 years ago

IMPASSE.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
12.1.8  XXJefferson51  replied to  Dulay @12.1.5    3 years ago

The AG of Kentucky doesn’t live in Kentucky? Really?  

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
12.1.9  Dulay  replied to  XXJefferson51 @12.1.8    3 years ago

Oh so by 'that state' you meant Kentucky rather than Arkansas, which is the topic of the seed.

Mitch stepping down would be a reason for celebration, no matter who replaces him. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
12.2  Sean Treacy  replied to  CB @12    3 years ago

Which part do you object to?

Do you want to teach kids that that character is determined by their race? That kids are guilty for the crimes of their ancestors? That a kids should feel guilt because of their race? Or do you think it's okay for teachers to advocate that members of certain races should be discriminated against?  What, specifically, causes you such outrage? 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
12.2.2  Sean Treacy  replied to    3 years ago
t us simply teach the history.

I don't think anyone disagrees with that goal. But what in this law prevents that from happening? 

Do teachers need to teach that students' race determine their character? Or teach kids that they should feel guilty because of their race? Is that necessary to teach history? 

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
12.2.3  Ronin2  replied to    3 years ago

I agree with you, with the caveat that the past is the past and needs to remain such.

No trying to transfer the crimes of those in the past to those in the present that had nothing to do with them. No one is inherently racist, period.

I swear the government should issue real race cards denoting the full lineage and DNA testing of the holder. Mine would need to be the size of a tablet since I am such an American mutt. I would also like mine to be razor sharp around all the edges so that every time the race card is played it will cut the offenders hands to shreds. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.2.4  CB  replied to  Sean Treacy @12.2    3 years ago

Off-base questions. My point is where was all this 'support' for other races "a thousand years" ago. Now, "suddenly" Oklahoma is interested in making the case, for equality and equity? How come? And dare I say, demanding others join them either to or against their interests.

Well, Sean, we will do what is in our best interests similarly to some conservatives. We will evaluate the 'situation' and delve into what is behind the push for equality when it sprang up unsolicited.

I am not outraged as you state: I am observant.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
12.2.5  Sean Treacy  replied to  CB @12.2.4    3 years ago
Off-base questions.

Asking what actual provision of the law that is the subject of this seed  you object to is off base? 

So I'll put you down as a supporter of the law than. 

There's a lot of hysteria over this law, yet no one can point to an actual provision that causes it. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.2.6  CB  replied to    3 years ago

Let me call it what it is. Some conservatives are basically saying they can't defend their ancestors, so they are attempting to legislate them out of the historical record. That way, once forgotten (or swept away), they think, mind you think, they can get on with the business of resetting a new round of conservative policies not beholden to how generational wealth was accomplished for many historical White families and all that it entails (at the expense of minorities).

All while creating a new beginning of the same old attitudes that cause this country's shameful past.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
12.2.7  Texan1211  replied to  Sean Treacy @12.2.5    3 years ago

Most don't know what is in the law and are merely parroting what they have heard on tv.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
12.2.8  Sean Treacy  replied to  CB @12.2.6    3 years ago
so they are attempting to legislate them out of the historical record

That's 100% false. You are just making things up and projecting them onto the law regardless of reality at this point. 

But by all means, read the text of the law and point to the actual  provision that "legislates" conservatives' ancestors out of the record.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
12.2.9  Texan1211  replied to  CB @12.2.6    3 years ago

You posted the law above.

What specifically in it do you object to, and why?

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
12.2.10  Ronin2  replied to  CB @12.2.4    3 years ago
My point is where was all this 'support' for other races "a thousand years" ago.

Were any of us alive a thousand years ago? Unless you believe in reincarnation, we had no control over what was done then.

Now, "suddenly" Oklahoma is interested in making thecase, for equality and equity?

Why not now? Has to start somewhere doesn't it? 

 How come?And dare I say, demanding others join them either to or against their interests.

They learned well from watching the Democrats and left. It is either get on board or get run over. Find it rather humorous that the racist card is now being played against the left. Can't find anything to object to in the bill that calls for complete equality; but still bitching over it, and taking it to court no less.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
12.2.11  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @12.2    3 years ago
What, specifically, causes you such outrage?

The fact that after months of enlightenment, all too many still post bullshit, like your comment, that has NOTHING to do with CRT. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
12.2.12  Sean Treacy  replied to  Dulay @12.2.11    3 years ago

Ah, yes. Now we are that part where you just  throw words together, ignore context, reality and the English language  and make unsupported declarations to attack strawmen. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.2.13  CB  replied to  Sean Treacy @12.2.5    3 years ago

Whatever floats your boat. Still, going to resolve all matters and issues accordingly, nevertheless. And if that means Oklahoma's "preemptive" law needs repealing or tossed out so be it. Oklahoma will have its true story told voluntarily or through force-feeding! Get ready, Oklahomans!

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
12.2.14  Jack_TX  replied to    3 years ago
Let us simply teach the history. An entire race was subjugated to a horrific fate…the consequences of which are being felt to this moment.

I don't think you'd find much disagreement on this.

acknowledge the ramifications in creating  subjective policy, educationally, judicially and politically going forward. 

This part is gonna be the problem. 

Whether it's CRT or the 1619 Project or whatever the nonsense du jour happens to be currently, the long-term goal of these guilty white liberals and a number of black activists is reparations.  They want to pretend that's not what they're talking about, all the while they slowly try to weasel their way through a complicated series of rationalizations like some teenage boy trying to make a case for why his curfew should be 4 am.  They're transparent as hell, and telling them that also makes them angry.

But that shit just isn't going to fly.  No matter how emotional these people are or how angry it makes them, most of us are just not ever going to accept responsibility for shit that happened decades or centuries before we were born.  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.2.15  CB  replied to  Sean Treacy @12.2.5    3 years ago

@12.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.2.16  CB  replied to  Sean Treacy @12.2.8    3 years ago

Stop already. You're insulting our intelligence.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
12.2.17  Sean Treacy  replied to  CB @12.2.16    3 years ago
Stop already. You're insulting our intelligence.

 I'm doing my best to get you to make a rational argument about this law. I see I've failed. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.2.18  CB  replied to  Texan1211 @12.2.9    3 years ago

IMPASSE.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.2.19  CB  replied to  Ronin2 @12.2.10    3 years ago

Ronin, what a snooze, do I really have to indicate that "a thousand years ago" is a figure of speech? Really, you commented against that phrase without getting its usage from the context?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.2.20  CB  replied to  Ronin2 @12.2.10    3 years ago

I could care less what you find "humourous" Ronin2. Pay for what was done in the past and not attempt to rhetorically blow smoke up. . . us.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.2.21  CB  replied to  Sean Treacy @12.2.17    3 years ago

The law per se is not problematic, unless practical considerations can be found to exist that causes problems. My concern is this: Why NOW is Oklahoma keen to resolve bias and prejudice (remains to be judged if they will be successful) by just 'moving on.' And its laughable, that some conservatives think they can just summarily declare "the matter is closed."

They can not pile all the wealth of that state and this nation on conservative or white majority sides of the 'ledger' and then declare we want equality for all! It does not work that way, Sean.

equality-equity-reality-17189800.png

A tad dramatic (or is it)? But worthy of honest reflection.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
12.2.22  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @12.2.12    3 years ago

Actually, it looks like the part where your comments turn into utter argle-bargle that merely throw insults together while pretending to make a point. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
12.2.23  Dulay  replied to  Jack_TX @12.2.14    3 years ago
Whether it's CRT or the 1619 Project or whatever the nonsense du jour happens to be currently, the long-term goal of these guilty white liberals and a number of black activists is reparations. 

Please post a link that supports you claim that CRT's goal of reparations. I'll wait...

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
12.2.24  Jack_TX  replied to  Dulay @12.2.23    3 years ago
Please post a link that supports you claim that CRT's goal of reparations.

I never said it was.  Read carefully.

I'll wait...

[deleted]

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
12.2.25  Dulay  replied to  Jack_TX @12.2.24    3 years ago
I never said it was.  Read carefully.

I DID read your comment carefully Jack and you did make that claim. Perhaps you should re-read your comment carefully. 

Here, I'll clarify for you:

Whether it's CRT...or whatever... the long-term goal...is reparations. 

Of course I AM presuming that the ' guilty white liberals and a number of black activists' you cite are proponents of CRT 'or whatever' but it sure as fuck isn't a stretch. 

No you won't.  You're doing that thing where you pretend you're making a point with some horseshit demand for documentation that you wouldn't accept anyway.

In a few days you'll make some ridiculous comment about "crickets", because you're either too inept or too lazy to add anything of your own to the discussion.

If somebody provides actual proof that you're full of shit, you'll change the subject and try to convince yourself you're clever.

Seen it too many times.

That's a load of bullshit allegations Jack.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt about your demand for a link re my sarcastic comment. I see that it was undeserving. You reverted all too quickly to form. 

jrSmiley_84_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
12.2.26  XXJefferson51  replied to  CB @12.2.21    3 years ago

Or they could pay and sit in the stands to watch the game instead of trying to free load from outside the stands.  

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
12.2.27  Ronin2  replied to  CB @12.2.20    3 years ago
Pay for what was done in the past 

Now we get down to it you want payment. Well hell, count me in! Will need that full race card I was mentioning earlier. I have Native American blood, Japanese blood, African American blood (might be just African as depending on when one of my ancestors decided to extend the family lineage), and Latino (meaning Mexican) blood in me. All that encased in a blue eyed, blond haired, European shell that has German, Dutch, English, and French in it. Several parts of my lineage have been hurt by racism and abuse; so where is the damn money at?

Can I also claim abuse against my German side? In Minnesota I was bullied by Nords- you would think that all blonde haired blue eyed people of European decent would be one big happy family; but no. Did you know that there is such a thing as a German nose? I got to learn to spot the differences really well. Seems the Germanic tribes were a bunch of assholes (Germany as country- even bigger assholes) in the past; not that I had anything to do with either. Being bullied because of your race is grounds for reparation right? Then when my father stupidly moved us to Detroit for several months I was bullied by African Americans for the audacity of being white and living in their neighborhood; like I had any damn choice! Racism is racism after all. A hate crime is a hate crime.

Of course with that race card some very nasty surprises are going to come out for a lot of people. Some of those White Supremacists are going to find out they aren't nearly as white as they like to think they are. Of course some reparation money should sooth their newfound pain (might be both emotional and physical if their brethren hold to their purist beliefs). Of course the same will apply to the other side. Wonder how many "pure bloods" there really are in the US?  

So let me know when I will be getting paid!

and not attempt to rhetorically blow smoke up. . . us.

Be careful with that "us" comment. Never know who you who you are conversing with. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.2.28  CB  replied to  XXJefferson51 @12.2.26    3 years ago

Yeah, that just happened everybody. State of the discussion.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.2.29  CB  replied to  Ronin2 @12.2.27    3 years ago

What the ???? Do you really think to diminish this 'issue' with stupid anecdotes? This is why I gaff off some comment! Complete and utter nonsense. Nobody gives a rat's ass about your 'mix' - classifications don't pour over minuscule proportionalities and unless you want to end up 'mental'—stay focus up 'here'!

I should not have to address this kind of patty. (Some things should not have to be said or written down to be considered and possibly stricken out by mods!)

As to the "us" in this case it was a reference to NT liberals. Nobody is interested in your 'breeding' per se.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
12.2.30  Ronin2  replied to  CB @12.2.29    3 years ago

I didn't diminish anything. This is your statement "Pay for what was done in the past".

Why do you deserve payment over me? Better still why should anyone have to pay for anything that was done when they weren't even born yet! 

As to the "us" in this case it was a reference to NTliberals. Nobody is interested in your 'breeding' per se.

Two problems there. NT liberals still haven't stated what is wrong with the law. So how about pointing out the direct sections of the law you are against; instead of the general leftist BS we always get? 

As for my "breeding"- that sounds very racist to me. My lineage may not be the greatest; but I am still proud of it- warts and all. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
12.2.31  Dulay  replied to  Ronin2 @12.2.30    3 years ago
NT liberals still haven't stated what is wrong with the law.

Actually, I did, yesterday. 

Care to refute my critique? 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
12.2.32  Jack_TX  replied to  Dulay @12.2.25    3 years ago

Now you've stooped to intentionally misquoting people.  Niiiice.  It would be sad if it weren't predictable.  

My actual statement:

the long-term goal of these guilty white liberals and a number of black activists is reparations.

These people will use whatever batshit rationalization they can to try to weasel their way into either assuaging their guilt or enriching themselves using other people's money.  It doesn't matter if CRT or anything else calls for reparations or not, they're going to use it to claim their position is justified.

That's a load of bullshit allegations Jack.

Which you've just proven true.  Again.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.2.33  CB  replied to  Ronin2 @12.2.30    3 years ago

Whatever. Talk to you later when and if it may matter.  Yeah, do love yourself, best believe I love myself too!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.2.34  CB  replied to  Ronin2 @12.2.30    3 years ago

Yes, the country should pay- and it that involves you - so be it. I am done with this argument for argument sake. I am not amused with being dazzled by bull-patty overlong exchanges. We should come here to encourage or at least 'grow' each other through communication. If you simply want to insult and be abrasive (for its own sake), I am not interested.

As to your heritage, what matters is how you are classified and that weighs heavily on appearances, don't you know. Clearly, I am considered a Black American from my outward features alone! I don't need a lecture on human classifications today, Ronin2.

Oh, and reparations, if they come about won't have a damn thing to do with 'bullying' - it would be more along the lines of resolving terrorism in America by the White Majority against People of Color for past transgressions.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
12.2.35  Dulay  replied to  Jack_TX @12.2.32    3 years ago
Now you've stooped to intentionally misquoting people.

I didn't misquote you Jack. I diagramed your sentence. 

It doesn't matter if CRT or anything else calls for reparations or not, they're going to use it to claim their position is justified.

Great. Then prove that 'guilty white liberals and a number of black activists' are using CRT or the 1619 project to justify reparations. 

Oh and it would be great if you show HOW they are using it if it doesn't call for reparations. 

Which you've just proven true.  Again.

You see what you want Jack. 

Carry on. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.2.36  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @12.2.32    3 years ago
other people's money.

So it's "other people money" and getting to a point: it's some conservatives' money, you really mean to say. Amazing how 'middle of the road' you don't write, for a moderate. Even liberatarian-sounding.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
12.2.37  Jack_TX  replied to  Dulay @12.2.35    3 years ago
I didn't misquote you Jack. I diagramed your sentence. 

Riiiight.  Because sentence diagrams normally change the fundamental information of the sentence. *eyeroll*

So basically you misread the first post, tried to rewrite it in the second hoping you could get away with it and nobody would notice, and now you're even more pathetically trying to pretend your lie wasn't really a lie.  Apparently you think sticking with this series of lies is less embarrassing than just admitting you misread the first post.  Good luck with that.

Oh and it would be great if you show HOW they are using it if it doesn't call for reparations. 

Why? So you can intentionally misquote that, too?   

John and CB have demonstrated what you claim you're looking for at least a dozen times on this very seed.  Misrepresent their shit for a while.

Out of curiosity, do you ever intend to add an original thought to a seed?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
12.2.38  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @12.2.36    3 years ago
So it's "other people money"

Well it sure as hell isn't going to be theirs.  White liberals in general have a long, well-documented history of demanding that other people pay for things they want.

The point here being that they never seem to care enough about any of these issues to change their lives in any substantive way.  It's other people who should change.

and getting to a point: it's some conservatives' money, you really mean to say.

I tend to say what I mean.  You tend to assume I don't, which is mildly puzzing.  But you have yet to infer anything accurately.....

Amazing how 'middle of the road' you don't write, for a moderate. Even liberatarian-sounding.

... and you have missed again.   

A libertarian would make the case that government should dramatically reduce its role in every area of American life, and racial equality programs would be very high up on the list of things that need to go.  

I have already stated several times that I believe government action should be taken to improve economic opportunities (specifically the earning power) for black Americans.  We need to do things like overhauling our public education system, combined with aggressive adult vocational training, financial instruction, business management education, and much more.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
12.2.39  JohnRussell  replied to  Jack_TX @12.2.38    3 years ago
Well it sure as hell isn't going to be theirs.  White liberals in general have a long, well-documented history of demanding that other people pay for things they want.

I , and a lot of other people, dont want to pay a trillion dollars a year to make defense contractors rich. Where do we go to get that stopped?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
12.2.40  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @12.2.39    3 years ago
I , and a lot of other people, dont want to pay a trillion dollars a year to make defense contractors rich. Where do we go to get that stopped?

Let me know if you find out, I'll go with you.  

Especially when most of that spending is directed toward 20th-century thinking.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.2.41  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @12.2.38    3 years ago

Well, you know what Jack_Tx we all have our (private) 'wish-lists.'

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.2.42  CB  replied to  JohnRussell @12.2.39    3 years ago

HA!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
12.2.43  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @12.2.39    3 years ago
Where do we go to get that stopped?

Your representatives in Congress.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
12.3  Ronin2  replied to  CB @12    3 years ago

So what specifically does the left have against this law? Please point it out; because from what I am reading it sounds as antidiscrimination as it can get. Unless the left is now for discrimination?

I have a good idea; but want to see someone from the left point them out for sure and explain why.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
12.3.1  Tessylo  replied to  Ronin2 @12.3    3 years ago

What law?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
12.3.2  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @12.3.1    3 years ago
What law?

Well, the LAW that the article is all about!!!

Seriously, you really need to read the articles!!!!!!!!!!!

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
12.3.3  Sean Treacy  replied to  Tessylo @12.3.1    3 years ago
What law?

That might be my favorite question asked on this site. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.3.4  CB  replied to  Ronin2 @12.3    3 years ago

See @12.2. 4.

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Silent
12.4  charger 383  replied to  CB @12    3 years ago

Looks like a good law

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
12.4.1  Split Personality  replied to  charger 383 @12.4    3 years ago

By any yardstick it's a gag order with legal consequences.  Not a good law.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
12.4.2  Texan1211  replied to  Split Personality @12.4.1    3 years ago
By any yardstick it's a gag order with legal consequences.  Not a good law.

GAG ORDER????????????????????????????????????

LMAO!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.4.3  CB  replied to  Split Personality @12.4.1    3 years ago

Secondarily, I am thinking similarly. It is meant to confuse, "chill," and stymie teachers who want to offer some version or "degree" of a specific subject matter to students.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
12.4.4  Texan1211  replied to  CB @12.4.3    3 years ago
It is meant to confuse, "chill," and stymie teachers who want to offer some version or "degree" of a specific subject matter to students.

If what you claim is true, it should be very easy for you to post the section of the law that does what you claim.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
12.4.5  XXJefferson51  replied to  Texan1211 @12.4.2    3 years ago

Exactly!  Long and loudly too!  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.4.6  CB  replied to  Texan1211 @12.4.4    3 years ago

Read a book, several books even. I know. I know. You want a list. Well, start at the National Archives. If you wait for me to 'school' you: Heaven will arrive front and center any day now.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
12.4.7  Texan1211  replied to  CB @12.4.6    3 years ago

Sure would be a whole lot quicker and more accurate to say "I don't have a clue" than it is to deflect.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
12.4.8  CB  replied to  Texan1211 @12.4.7    3 years ago

Not interested.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
12.4.9  Texan1211  replied to  CB @12.4.8    3 years ago
Not interested.

Let me finish the sentence for you:

"Not interested.......................in facts to support my theories and I resent being asked to support them over and over again with facts."

There!

 
 
 
Moose Knuckle
Freshman Quiet
13  Moose Knuckle    3 years ago

Critical Race theory is very true, I know this because George Washington chose wooden teeth as opposed to getting his grill pimped out with gold.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
13.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Moose Knuckle @13    3 years ago

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif     jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Moose Knuckle
Freshman Quiet
13.1.1  Moose Knuckle  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @13.1    3 years ago

It's really no laughing matter, Benjamin Franklin had tons of hemp in his basement and was scared the Black man would be able to move more hemp than he could so he racist.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
13.2  Tessylo  replied to  Moose Knuckle @13    3 years ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Moose Knuckle
Freshman Quiet
13.2.1  Moose Knuckle  replied to  Tessylo @13.2    3 years ago

We are not best friends yet but you can submit a resume to me? Do you like to square dance or bowling?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
13.2.2  Tessylo  replied to  Moose Knuckle @13.2.1    3 years ago

You know exactly what I'm talking about!  I already have a BF

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
13.2.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tessylo @13.2.2    3 years ago

Do you mean you have a best friend or a bad fish?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
13.2.4  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @13.2.3    3 years ago

A best friend - for over 30 years now jrSmiley_82_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
13.2.5  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tessylo @13.2.4    3 years ago

I do think you have a bad fish nipping at your heels, too

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
13.2.6  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @13.2.5    3 years ago

LOL!  Just like a piranha.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
13.2.7  XXJefferson51  replied to  Trout Giggles @13.2.5    3 years ago

He’s back?  

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
13.3  Dulay  replied to  Moose Knuckle @13    3 years ago

Washington's teeth were HUMAN teeth. 

Care to guess WHOSE? 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
13.3.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Dulay @13.3    3 years ago

Nope. Not always and not when President.

Nevertheless, by the time he was inaugurated as president in 1789, Washington only had a single natural tooth left. He took the oath of office while wearing a special set of dentures made from ivory, brass and gold built for him by dentist John Greenwood. After Washington lost his sole surviving tooth, he gifted it to Greenwood as a keepsake.

The ivory ones stained easily and thus the confusion with wood. But I know where you think you were going. And this explains it............

Rather than wood, Washington’s many false choppers were made out of varying combinations of rare hippopotamus ivory, human teeth and metal fasteners. He got his fist set before the Revolutionary War , and may have also undergone a “tooth transplantation” procedure— perhaps even using teeth purchased from his own slaves —in the mid-1780s with the help of his personal dentist and friend, Jean-Pierre Le Mayeur. 

Key word, perhaps. Gotta throw in that slave card. But it wasn't like he stole them. per the above "purchased  from".

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
13.3.2  Dulay  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @13.3.1    3 years ago
Nope. 

Yep.

Not always and not when President.

Strawman fallacy. 

Key word, perhaps. Gotta throw in that slave card. But it wasn't like he stole them. per the above "purchased  from".

Actually Jim, there is DOCUMENTATION in Washington's papers that he 'paid for' the teeth from 'negroes'. Washington made a note of it on his calendar, it reads: By Cash pd Negroes for 9 Teeth on Acct of Dr Lemoin. 

Is it your posit that the 'negroes' were not slaves Jim?

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
13.3.3  Gsquared  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @13.3.1    3 years ago

So, they took teeth out of his slaves' mouths.  Do you think they had any choice?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
13.3.4  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @13.3.2    3 years ago
Is it your posit that the 'negroes' were not slaves Jim?

Yeah, THAT must have been exactly what he meant.

SMMFH

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
13.3.5  Texan1211  replied to  Gsquared @13.3.3    3 years ago
So, they took teeth out of his slaves' mouths.  Do you think they had any choice?

Seems rather pointless to pay them if they didn't have a choice.

 
 
 
MsMarple
Freshman Silent
13.3.6  MsMarple  replied to  Texan1211 @13.3.5    3 years ago

I dare you to say it to us Jews here in the US. You know Jews didn't have a choice when the Nazis rounded us up and pulled our gold teeth in the 1930's and 1940's. The Nazis pulled out gold teeth out of every Jew (and non-Jew) that they saw - ALIVE - no anestisia.
So, you saying we should not be complaining, because the Nazis overpowered us, or what? My fam didn't have a choice, they perished in Buchenwald. AFTER their gold teeth were pulled out, and they were starved to death, basically. Then they were burned in the ovens because they couldn't contribute as slaves. They were just skeletons.
So, you saying the Jews in the Holocaust should've just taken it because "they didn't have a choice"? 
Yes, they didn't have a choice. All 6 mln of them. 
Please, tell me again. How an American in 2021 can say things like this 
SMFHO

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
13.3.7  Texan1211  replied to  MsMarple @13.3.6    3 years ago
I dare you to say it to us Jews here in the US.

Now, why on earth would I do that?

You know Jews didn't have a choice when the Nazis rounded us up and pulled our gold teeth in the 1930's and 1940's. The Nazis pulled out gold teeth out of every Jew (and non-Jew) that they saw - ALIVE - no anestisia.

Yes, I know the sickening history. Why would you assume I didn't?

So, you saying we should not be complaining, because the Nazis overpowered us, or what?

Oh, definitely what. You might want to go back and read what I stated rather clearly so you can ask meaningful questions.

So, you saying the Jews in the Holocaust should've just taken it because "they didn't have a choice"? 

No, I certainly didn't say anything of the sort. Are you sure you are responding to the right post?

Yes, they didn't have a choice. All 6 mln of them.

It is sickening what man is capable of.

Please, tell me again. How an American in 2021 can say things like this 

Tell you what again? Say things like what? The stuff you imagined I said, or what I actually said?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
13.3.8  Tessylo  replied to  MsMarple @13.3.6    3 years ago
"Please, tell me again. How an American in 2021 can say things like this"

Complete and utter ignorance.

Some folks 'opinions' among other things, aren't worth a penny.  

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
13.3.9  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @13.3.8    3 years ago
Some folks 'opinions' among other things, aren't worth a penny. 

Irony??

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
13.3.11  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @13.3.8    3 years ago

Why so angry this morning?

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
13.3.12  Gsquared  replied to  Texan1211 @13.3.5    3 years ago

Get real.  Although, I know that's asking for too much.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
13.3.13  Texan1211  replied to  Gsquared @13.3.12    3 years ago
Get real

Already did, which is why I assume you are posting that nonsense. Otherwise, you would merely address what I wrote.

I know that's asking for too much.

I still hold out a little hope for you.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
13.3.14  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @13.3.8    3 years ago
Some folks 'opinions' among other things, aren't worth a penny.  

You are special. You are valued. You are important.

 
 
 
Gsquared
Professor Principal
13.3.15  Gsquared  replied to  Texan1211 @13.3.13    3 years ago
Already did

Not anywhere on here.  What you wrote was a joke and received the response it deserved.

Apparently, you need further education regarding the disparity of power between slaveholders and their slaves. 

Maybe you hold with the nonsense theory about "happy" slaves.  That's very popular among Confederate flag-waving Republicans these days.

I still hold out a little hope for you.

I'm increasingly less inclined to say the same about you.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
13.3.16  Texan1211  replied to  Gsquared @13.3.15    3 years ago

I think it fairly odd that a man who owned slaves would pay them for their teeth. Why would he pay for what he could take?

What others responded to me was nothing more than a bunch of fucking bullshit, and now you know it too.

Apparently, you need further education regarding the disparity of power between slaveholders and their slaves. 

Gee, how much power did a slave have to charge his owner for his teeth? My whole fucking point is that a slave had NO power, the owner had it all. I wish people would actually spend 2 seconds comprehending what they can read.

Maybe you hold with the nonsense theory about "happy" slaves. 

What a fucking asinine thing to assume. To be clear, I don't. Spin that now.

That's very popular among Confederate flag-waving Republicans these days.

You certainly sound like you know far more about that sort of thing than I do, so I will bow to your obvious expertise.

I'm increasingly less inclined to say the same about you.

I'll try to get over my acute disappointment.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
13.3.17  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @13.3.8    3 years ago
Some folks 'opinions' among other things, aren't worth a penny.

It's okay, you are still allowed to post.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
14  Texan1211    3 years ago

The usual suspects have shown up to grouse about the new law.

Funny thing is, every single time they are asked what in the law is upsetting or not to their liking, no one can say a word about it.

All we hear is crap about how the law is unfair and stifles free speech, which, of course, it does not.

Well that, and the usual nonsense about how conservatives are keeping people down.

 
 
 
MsMarple
Freshman Silent
14.1  MsMarple  replied to  Texan1211 @14    3 years ago

what is upsetting about the "law" is that it is batchit crazy. It'd be like enacting a law against the Death Star. The problem of the Death-Star is NON-EXISTENT, just as CRT in schools. Jeez

Where is your mind, Texan? 

We have SO MANY problems to focus our national attention on.
Let's see:

Healthcare - people still dying because they can't afford healthcare

Climate Change - I get it you think it's a hoax, but us on the West Coast know it is bad, bad, BAD

People get banned from voting, if they are people of color

And you, YOU, ALL OF YOU right-wingers want to focus on CRT???
I am as liberal as they come, never ever seen CRT in MY LIFE until you and Fux News

Get a life. Focus on what's important. CRT ain't it.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
14.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  MsMarple @14.1    3 years ago
We have SO MANY problems to focus our national attention on.Let's see:

Certainly seems weird to get all worked up about a law in Oklahoma that only applies to the approximately 4 million Oklahomans then, doesn't it?

Climate Change - I get it you think it's a hoax, but us on the West Coast know it is bad, bad, BAD

I have no idea where you "get" your information from, but you might consider getting a new source.

People get banned from voting, if they are people of color

I would love to see some sources for that claim.

Get a life.

I have one.

Focus on what's important.

You're right.

Bye!

 
 
 
MsMarple
Freshman Silent
14.1.2  MsMarple  replied to  Texan1211 @14.1.1    3 years ago

ok, ok, I hear you. 
Maybe you should read the news I read (and I should read the news YOU read), maybe then we'd understand each other?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
14.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  MsMarple @14.1.2    3 years ago
ok, ok, I hear you. 

I almost wish I could believe that.

 
 
 
MsMarple
Freshman Silent
14.1.4  MsMarple  replied to  Texan1211 @14.1.3    3 years ago

I did hear you. We just chatted! So, yes, I hear you.

It just kills me you would even say this without giving me the benefit of the doubt.
Let's be kind to each other, OK?

No hate on my part. No scoring points. I am just trying to reach out to you and another troublesome Confederate gentleman LOL
All my love, stay safe Texan

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
14.1.5  Jack_TX  replied to  MsMarple @14.1    3 years ago
what is upsetting about the "law" is that it is batchit crazy. It'd be like enacting a law against the Death Star. The problem of the Death-Star is NON-EXISTENT, just as CRT in schools. Jeez

Yeah.  It's what's known as a "solution looking for a problem".  That said, there isn't anything in it that's actually objectionable.

We have SO MANY problems to focus our national attention on.Let's see:
Healthcare - people still dying because they can't afford healthcare

To be fair, the State of Oklahoma has incredibly little control or even influence on most national problems.  And we're talking about a law that took a few weeks to adopt.  It's not like they could have solved healthcare if they hadn't spent time on it.

People get banned from voting, if they are people of color

Is the irony intentional here?  Are you specifically referencing a left-wing ridiculous nonsensical assertion to show how stupid the right-wing one is? 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
14.1.6  Texan1211  replied to  MsMarple @14.1.4    3 years ago
I did hear you.

My mistake. Hearing is a far cry from comprehending.

It just kills me you would even say this without giving me the benefit of the doubt.

But basically accusing me of not knowing history and almost of being supportive of the Holocaust is giving me the benefit of the doubt??

Let's be kind to each other, OK?

I'll be waiting for you to start.

I am just trying to reach out to you and another troublesome Confederate gentleman LOL

I really don't believe you have a clue what a Confederate gentleman is.

 
 
 
MsMarple
Freshman Silent
14.1.7  MsMarple  replied to  Texan1211 @14.1.6    3 years ago
I really don't believe you have a clue what a Confederate gentleman is.

Well, I read "Gone with the wind" 40 years ago, when I was a 10yo girl in Soviet Russia. My "clue of what a Confederate gentleman is" is basically confined to Ashley and Rhett, so... They seemed pretty gentlemanly to me then...
Are you saying I am wrong? Then please do clue me on what a Confederate gentleman actually is.

I'll be waiting for you to start.

I already started, thus my goofy entendres to you. Your turn?
Seriously, I am trying to be "kinder to one another". This is me being kind, don't judge me harshly, baby steps, ok? 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
14.1.8  Texan1211  replied to  MsMarple @14.1.7    3 years ago
Are you saying I am wrong? Then please do clue me on what a Confederate gentleman actually is.

Well, first off, they are all dead.

The Confederacy was defeated by the Union Army, and then ceased to exist.

Movies and fiction books are not always very good sources.

 
 
 
MsMarple
Freshman Silent
14.1.9  MsMarple  replied to  Texan1211 @14.1.8    3 years ago

True dat.

My bad for calling you a "Confederate gentleman". I suppose I meant a "Southern gentleman", you being a Texan. I apologize - they mean the same in my mind. But, like you said, Confederacy is non-existent anymore, theoretically, but you'd never think that if you went to Texas, or Mississippi or Louisiana, the three states I personally been to myself, and seen all those Confederate flags and "Jefferson is my President" banners. EVERYWHERE. Forgive this impressionable girl going by sight, since I've only been to them Southern states once or twice. 

Not trying to piss you off, btw, "Confederate gentleman" was my way of a goofy compliment - poorly landed, obviously.

Take "Yes" for an answer, ok? I am trying to find a common ground with you and few others on here...

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Quiet
14.2  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Texan1211 @14    3 years ago
Funny thing is, every single time they are asked what in the law is upsetting or not to their liking, no one can say a word about it.

The law isn't just about preventing any CRT being taught, it is much broader than that which is likely why the ACLU is fighting it.

It bans schools from requiring any teachers to go through "any form of mandatory gender or sexual diversity training or counseling". This means schools are not allowed to require teachers to learn how to teach, interact with and make feel welcome lgtbq students. It effectively creates a shield for teachers and staff who want to continue discriminating against lgtbq students.
It bans teachers from teaching anything that might make "any individual" "feel discomfort, guilt, anguish or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race or sex".
How can we teach factual American history without making any white students potentially "feel discomfort" when learning about what their ancestors did to native Americans, black Americans and other minorities? You can't even teach about how hard women had to fight for their right to vote or their fight for equal pay for fear of making some male students feel "discomfort" about our male dominated society.

This law clearly goes too far and will effectively silence teachers. And this law may end up cutting both ways as I can see it potentially being used by lgtbq students or other minorities who can claim that the white Christian conservative curriculum being taught in Oklahoma schools and the supposed Christian morality being pushed that labels lgtbq Americans "sinners" makes them "feel discomfort" "anguish or any other form of psychological distress".
So while CRT isn't actually being taught in schools, this law is a muzzle on teachers for even bringing up any subjects relating to race or gender. Since white Christian conservatives now know they can't just be openly racist as they have in the past, their new tactic is to simply act like they're blind to race which also lets them feel justified in taking no responsibility for the past. They make comments about how that stuff should just "stay in the past" as if those who were discriminated against for centuries aren't still living with the aftereffects and legacy of both the open rampant racism and discrimination of the last 400 years on this continent but also the systemic racism we're still dealing with to this day. Many white Christian conservative bigots want to maintain their prejudices even if they're not allowed to act on them as openly as they had before by simply acting as if they don't even notice race anymore while the facts show that their deep seated prejudices still effect the outcomes in society and our justice system whether they are named or not.
Just because a white bank manager doesn't openly say why they gave a large loan to a white family with exactly the same financial status as a black family that was denied doesn't mean race didn't play a factor in their decision making. Just because there isn't a question about race on the rental application doesn't mean the apartment manager didn't discriminate when choosing who they would rent to. Just because race is not mentioned when a judge is handing out a far harsher sentence to a black felon than a white felon guilty of the same thing doesn't mean race wasn't a factor.
The facts clearly shows that many Americans continue to cling to indoctrinated prejudices against independent women, minorities and lgtbq Americans. All the Oklahoma law does is try and sweep that fact under the rug by banning any discussion of reality for fear it's going to make some white Christian conservative child "feel discomfort, guilt, anguish" for embracing the indoctrinated prejudices their parents or pastors are forcing on them.
 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
14.2.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @14.2    3 years ago

Good comments.

We are now in the stage where they deny racism happened, and if it did happened it wasnt that big of a deal, and if it was a big deal all the people who did it are dead now, and if all the people who did it are dead now who cares ? 

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Quiet
14.2.2  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  JohnRussell @14.2.1    3 years ago

It's like saying "Okay, we know our white Christian conservative ancestors enslaved, beat, murdered and robbed many of your black ancestors of their money, work, wealth, health and prosperity, and that the legacies they stole are now almost all owned by we their white Christian conservative ancestors which has made our lives wealthier, healthier and more prosperous, but we owe black descendants nothing, we refuse to acknowledge any remnants of systemic racism since we stopped talking about it and don't you dare tell our children and grandchildren what their parents and grandparents did because it might cause them discomfort, guilt or anguish. Causing them discomfort might make them grow up aware of where the legacy they enjoy comes from and cause them to reject the indoctrination and prejudices we are still stuffing down their throats and they might even, God forbid, become a highly educated academic, progressive or worse, a bi-coastal elitist that believes in evolution, diversity and justice for all!".

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
14.2.3  CB  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @14.2    3 years ago

Emphatically. Thank you for such fine articulation into this discussion. Sometimes I just 'despair' of the caliber of ignorance that comes from the other side as it plays dumb to politics and tries to make discussion tedious and 'bookish.' These people are not dumb, as evidence by their dedication to their 'themes' upon entry into a thread.

Thank you. Quite refreshing as always, DP! You make us better!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
14.2.4  CB  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @14.2.2    3 years ago

It's even more "piggish" than that! It's "in yo face" defiance: "We did it, and so now what?" We don't want to talk about it. We will "man-handle" legislation to make sure we don't have to be pricked in our hearing about it. Dumb smucks! We're not going to be man-handled by some conservatives.

Tremendous framing contribution to this discussion, DP!

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Quiet
14.2.5  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  CB @14.2.4    3 years ago
"We did it, and so now what?"

It is rather sad at how easily so many dismiss the idea of reparations without accepting or even acknowledging the gravity of their ancestors actions. To simply say "I didn't do anything to you so its not my problem", to divorce themselves entirely from the issue because in their minds they've never openly been seen being racist, or they might even have befriended a black co-worker or two, that doesn't address the underlying issue of racial disparity in America and the aftereffects of centuries of slavery, abuse, segregation, discrimination and prejudice. It's kind of like the family of a mob boss who is found to have stolen/embezzled hundreds of millions of dollars but then dies and his family says it would be unfair for them to give back any of the hundreds of millions to their victims because they weren't the ones who robbed them, it was their father, so tough luck suckers.

Now, the descendants of those white Christian conservative racists are very concerned with 'justice' and 'fairness', and how it wouldn't be 'fair' for them to have to pay reparations for a crime they didn't commit. Sure, their ancestors spent the last few hundred years spitting on the very idea of 'justice' or 'fairness' for black Americans, but to suggest that their descendants today might be forced to give up a college acceptance spot, job or seat in a decent public school to someone else's child because they're black or native American, well that's just not fair to the white Christian conservative descendants. /s

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
14.2.6  Sean Treacy  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @14.2.5    3 years ago
s rather sad at how easily so many dismiss the idea of reparations without accepting or even acknowledging the gravity of their ancestors actions.

The only ancestor I had here during the civil war  1861 joined the Union Army upon his arrival and fought with the Fighting 69th as part of the Irish Brigade. What apologies do I owe on his behalf?  That privileged  white Christian survived a famine that depopulated his homeland,  a cross Atlantic journey on  a coffin ship and  joined the Union Army.   Disgusting! The shame I feel  over that monster who risked his life to bring freedom to people enslaved by democrats! ]Can you also tell me who I need to  apologize and give money to on behalf of my ancestors who were tenant farmers on land stolen from their ancestors during the time period the Democratic Party inflicted Jim Crow on  blacks? Bastards living in one room thatched cottages have a lot to answer for because of things happening on a different continent! 

None of my ancestors owned slaves. None lived below the Mason Dixon line. Must I perform ritual penance for my ancestors who were part of Richard Daley's democratic machine?

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
14.2.7  Sean Treacy  replied to  Sean Treacy @14.2.6    3 years ago

It's also funny to see the same people who claim it's absurd to hold the Democratic Party accountable for its actions to protect slavery and implement Jim Crow claim all white people are responsible and should pay reoperations for those same actions. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
14.2.8  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @14.2.7    3 years ago

If anyone is responsible , it is the United States government.  Who the heck thinks a political party is responsible?

You will say anything to try and avoid societal responsibility for hundreds of years of racism. 

It is what it is. White people are the ones who fucked all this up for hundreds of years. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
14.2.9  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @14.2.8    3 years ago
Who the heck thinks a political party is responsible?

Who the heck thinks people are responsible for the crimes  of dead people because they share the same skin tone?  At least one voluntarily joins the democratic party. 

 
 
 
GregTx
PhD Guide
14.2.10  GregTx  replied to  Sean Treacy @14.2.9    3 years ago

The hypocrisy is humorous at least.....

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
14.2.11  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @14.2.9    3 years ago
Who the heck thinks people are responsible for the crimes  of dead people because they share the same skin tone? 

You are not personally responsible, but there is collective guilt. 

 
 
 
GregTx
PhD Guide
14.2.12  GregTx  replied to  JohnRussell @14.2.11    3 years ago

Collective?.... 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
14.2.13  Jack_TX  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @14.2    3 years ago
This means schools are not allowed to require teachers to learn how to teach, interact with and make feel welcome lgtbq students.

Why would we think professional educators don't already know how to interact with these kids?  Why do we think LGBT kids need some sort of different type of instruction?  You act like they're special needs.

It effectively creates a shield for teachers and staff who want to continue discriminating against lgtbq students.

Why do we think this discrimination is so widespread that we should mandate training for every teacher?  Why do we think people who do intentionally discriminate against LGBT kids will be dissuaded by attending some training?  What exactly happens at this training, electric shock therapy?

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
14.2.14  Dulay  replied to  JohnRussell @14.2.11    3 years ago

Seriously, just stop John.

They will NEVER get it. It requires a depth of empathy that they are incapable of and a sense of societal responsibility that they will never accept. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
14.2.15  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @14.2.11    3 years ago
You are not personally responsible, but there is collective guilt.

Hmmmm.....

So are the great-grandchildren of Gestapo agents collectively guilty of incinerating Jews?  Are current Danes collectively guilty of pillaging England in the 9th century?  Are Meyer Lanksy's great-grandkids collectively guilty of racketeering?  

Just exactly how widespread is this supposed "collective guilt" and how far back does it go?

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
14.2.16  Ender  replied to  Dulay @14.2.14    3 years ago

I would say, they don't want to.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
14.2.17  Dulay  replied to  Jack_TX @14.2.13    3 years ago
Why would we think professional educators don't already know how to interact with these kids? 

Because they ARE professional EDUCATORS, but NOT necessarily sociologists.

Because many 'professional' educators haven't actually MET or taught OR interacted with an out LGBT student. 

Why do we think LGBT kids need some sort of different type of instruction? 

Perhaps because the whole 'all men are created equal' thingy STILL doesn't include them. 

You act like they're special needs.

Those who have bullied and marginalized may indeed have special needs. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
14.2.18  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @14.2.11    3 years ago
but there is collective guilt. 

I thought we fought WWII to end that pernicious belief.  Help a Jewish person in Nazi Germany, and your whole family was collectively guilty of the crime. 

No thanks. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
14.2.19  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @14.2.18    3 years ago

What lead you to that ridiculous conclusion Sean? 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
14.2.20  Sean Treacy  replied to  Dulay @14.2.19    3 years ago
What lead you to that ridiculous conclusion Sean? 

What lead you to that ridiculous question? Or did you not know Nazis applied punishments on the theory of collective guilt?  By all means, tell us how compassionate it is to punish innocent people for the acts of others. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
14.2.22  JohnRussell  replied to  Dulay @14.2.14    3 years ago

Racism in terms of the Africans began in the first half of the 17th century in Virginia. We are now roughly 500 years later.  Although it is quite fair to say that racism has lessened in recent decades , it is also fair to say that we have had 500 years of racism in America. 

Now we are told it is no one's fault that this happened and everyone should just forget about everything but the last 20 years or so.  We are told this even though it is known that generations of blacks were left behind, more or less deliberately, by the American economic system.  In 2014 Ta-nehisi Coates went into this in great detail in a landmark article for The Atlantic

The Case for Reparations - Wikipedia

500 years, are supposed to just be forgotten and all the damage it did to generation after generation of people is supposed to just be forgotten because "so and so" wasnt born yet when it all happened. 

I dont think it's gonna work that way. 

==================================================

The American Indians have their own case for reparations from the US government and I am totally behind it, but I feel like that case is best made by Native Americans themselves because of their unique circumstances and history. 

 
 
 
GregTx
PhD Guide
14.2.23  GregTx  replied to  Dulay @14.2.14    3 years ago

Who is they?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
14.2.24  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @14.2.22    3 years ago
We are now roughly 500 years later.  Although it is quite fair to say that racism has lessened in recent decades , it is also fair to say that we have had 500 years of racism in America. 

Should be 400 years, not 500. My mistake. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
14.2.25  CB  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @14.2.5    3 years ago

Say on. . . .

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
14.2.26  CB  replied to  Sean Treacy @14.2.9    3 years ago

Well, you're party to a political party that is 'bout to set itself up to lose the people of color vote yet again. We do not take kindly to being told what to do, how to do it, and when to do it by republicans anymore than we do democrats! We don't want any damn "paternal" race or political party, Sean.

"Whose yo,' daddy?Yeah, no. People of color are all done with that!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
14.2.27  Texan1211  replied to  CB @14.2.26    3 years ago
Well, you're party to a political party that is 'bout to set itself up to lose the people of color vote yet again.

And you are a party to a political party that is about to set itself up to lose the white people vote.

We do not take kindly to being told what to do, how to do it, and when to do it by republicans anymore than we do democrats!

Who is telling you what to do? What are they telling you to do?

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
14.2.28  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @14.2.20    3 years ago
What lead you to that ridiculous question? 

Your statement. You said:

I thought we fought WWII to end that pernicious belief. 

WWII had NOTHING to do with 'collective guilt' based on 'the acts of others' Sean. 

Or did you not know Nazis applied punishments on the theory of collective guilt?  By all means, tell us how compassionate it is to punish innocent people for the acts of others. 

Sean, the Nazi's 'applied punishments on the theory' that antisemitism, anti-communism and scientific racism justified extermination and/or the use of eugenics to ensure Aryan 'racial hierarchy'.

The Nazi's 'punishment' had NOTHING to do with the 'acts of others' but rather on ethnicity, religion or ideology of the victim. 

Your comment is an utter failure. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
14.2.29  Dulay  replied to  GregTx @14.2.23    3 years ago
Who is they?

They ARE those who will never get it Greg. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Expert
14.2.30  Dulay  replied to  Sean Treacy @14.2.9    3 years ago
Who the heck thinks people are responsible for the crimes  of dead people because they share the same skin tone? 

You seem to think that were reparations paid by the US government, only the taxes of the white population would be appropriated. What lead you to that conclusion Sean? 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
14.2.31  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @14.2.11    3 years ago
You are not personally responsible, but there is collective guilt.

A collective guilt felt by progressive liberals perhaps.

I had nothing to do with slavery.

I am sorry slavery was allowed in the US.

I feel no personal guilt because I wasn't a party to it.

People who feel guilty should give their possessions to some random black people to assuage their guilt.

And then seek counseling.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
14.2.32  Texan1211  replied to  Dulay @14.2.30    3 years ago
You seem to think that were reparations paid by the US government, only the taxes of the white population would be appropriated. What lead you to that conclusion Sean?

he said nothing even close to that in his post you replied to.

What led YOU to believe that is what he said? It couldn't have possibly been what you read in his post.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
14.2.34  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @14.2.6    3 years ago
What apologies do I owe on his behalf? 

No one gives a shit about what apologies you owe on anyone's behalf. No one gives a shit that none of your ancestors owned slaves.  

You condemn black culture in 2021 on a collective basis , dont you? Or do you just call out individual black ne'er do wells by name ? 

We have overwhelming evidence of 400 years of racism and racial exploitation in America. 400 years. You want that to be forgotten completely because none of your ancestors owned slaves.  It is absurd. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
14.2.35  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @14.2.34    3 years ago
We have overwhelming evidence of 400 years of racism and racial exploitation in America. 400 years. You want that to be forgotten completely because none of your ancestors owned slaves.  It is absurd. 

What we really have is you assuming facts not in evidence.

Instead of "thinking" you know what he means, why not try this for a change of pace?

READ WHAT THE FUCK HE POSTED AND RESPOND ACCORDINGLY

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
14.2.36  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @14.2.31    3 years ago

If reparations are ever passed into law you will pay your tiny share. The law doesnt care that you dont like it. I dont like paying for a bloated military budget. I dont like corporate welfare. I dont like giving money to the oil industry. 

If it is proven that blacks and other people of color were systematically deprived of taking part in the economic system of the United States then reparations may be in order , and your opinion of it wont fucking matter a bit. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
14.2.37  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @14.2.35    3 years ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
14.2.38  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @14.2.37    3 years ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
14.2.39  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @14.2.36    3 years ago
If reparations are ever passed into law you will pay your tiny share.

That's a mighty big IF. Personally, I owe no reparations to anyone for anything I have done.

The law doesnt care that you dont like it. I dont like paying for a bloated military budget. I dont like corporate welfare. I dont like giving money to the oil industry. 

What you like or don't like is immaterial to me.

If it is proven that blacks and other people of color were systematically deprived of taking part in the economic system of the United States then reparations may be in order , and your opinion of it wont fucking matter a bit. 

And neither will your opinion. Funny how that shit works two ways, huh?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
14.2.40  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @14.2.39    3 years ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
14.2.41  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @14.2.40    3 years ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
14.2.42  Vic Eldred  replied to  Texan1211 @14.2.38    3 years ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
14.2.43  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @14.2.42    3 years ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
14.2.44  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @14.2.42    3 years ago

Vic, although you are 99% wrong, at least you present actual ideas and comments with [content .deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
14.2.45  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @14.2.44    3 years ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
14.2.46  Vic Eldred  replied to  Vic Eldred @14.2.42    3 years ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
14.2.47  XXJefferson51  replied to  Vic Eldred @14.2.42    3 years ago

Removed for context

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
14.2.48  XXJefferson51  replied to  JohnRussell @14.2.24    3 years ago

America is no where near 400 years old.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
14.2.49  XXJefferson51  replied to  CB @14.2.26    3 years ago
hqdefault.jpg

Former Secretary Of State Condoleezza Rice Calls Out CRT On "The View" | Eric Bolling The Balance

 

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
14.2.50  Split Personality  replied to  XXJefferson51 @14.2.48    3 years ago

The current North American continent, formerly known as Laurentia is about 200 million years young.

The current name of America applies to both the North and South continents

explored by Amerigo Vespucci in 1505.

Making the "Americas" label about 500 years old.

If you MEAN  the USA, than state it so.

There are 35 different countries in the Americas.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
14.2.51  XXJefferson51  replied to  JohnRussell @14.2.34    3 years ago
TtrAXbnA_x96.jpg
Rep. Jim Jordan
@Jim_Jordan
Americans have had enough.
Watch again
5:55 / 5:55
The congressman is exactly right.  Particularly about the creation of snitches to report parents opposed to CRT by the regime.The congressional committee comments are in the date link.
 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
14.2.52  XXJefferson51  replied to  JohnRussell @14.2.36    3 years ago

Our opinion will matter as in leading the opposition to it ever passing in the 1st place.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
14.2.53  XXJefferson51  replied to  Texan1211 @14.2.43    3 years ago

That’s for sure.  There’s nothing less important here than what conservative members think about things here.  

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
14.2.54  Split Personality  replied to  XXJefferson51 @14.2.49    3 years ago
Condoleezza Rice ’s recent appearance on   The View   was offensive and disgusting for many reasons but she was who we thought she was: a soldier for white supremacy. Her thoughts on Critical Race Theory are completely white centric, as in, they revolve around the thoughts and needs of white people.

Her primary argument against Critical Race Theory is that history should not be taught in a way that makes white kids feel bad. What? We should whitewash U.S. history to protect the feelings of white children? Excuse me, I misspoke — we should whitewash U.S. history even more than we already do in order to protect the feelings of white children?

First of all, what about the feelings of Black children? What would their feelings be if they knew they were being taught a version of American history that was distorted to protect white kids? What message does that send to them? And what about the feelings they have when learning about the real American history?

Condoleezza Rice’s CRT stance proves she’s a foot solider for white supremacy (yahoo.com)
 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
14.2.55  XXJefferson51  replied to  Split Personality @14.2.50    3 years ago

I’m not going to play word games with you.  Everyone else knew exactly what I was talking about.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
14.2.56  XXJefferson51  replied to  Split Personality @14.2.54    3 years ago

Here’s another for you: 

The Existential Threat of CRT: State-Sponsored Racism

Opinion

| Oct 21, 2021 12:01 AM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

1f9548d5-4ee3-4225-8e09-afa69b7ff9ce-500x250.jpg

Source: AP Photo/Marta Lavandier, File

Small victories are still victories, and worth celebrating. So, as we — all Americans — come to realize just how much critical race theory has come to permeate our discourse and our dialogues, we are fighting back. We are reclaiming that most self-evident of truths— all men are created equal.

Last week, the Ohio State Board of Education repealed an “anti-racism” resolution and replaced it with something far more meaningful. Gone was the language of division, blame, and condemnation; in its place was offered something more hopeful.

The Board stood against teachings that “seek to ascribe circumstances or qualities, such as collective guilt, moral deficiency, or racial bias, to a whole race or group of people.” The Board also expressed “its unwavering commitment to excellence in education for all, education that empowers each student to reach his or her full potential” not as a member of a particular race – as was woven throughout Resolution 20 – but simply “as a member of the next great generation of Ohioans.”

As a native Ohioan and a former mayor of Cincinnati, it pains me to see how critical race theory is used to both reframe our history, our conversations and even alter the courses of action we must take to improve the lives of all of our children. 

I denounce this educational fad, not as a Black man, but as an American.

Allow me to explain just one way in which critical race theory undermines — rather than upholds — educational aspirations in Ohio and in the United States.

Leading critical race theorist Ibram X. Kendi declares that “Racial discrimination is the sole cause of racial disparities in this country and in the world at large.” That statement was written in his book, “Stamped From the Beginning,” and is also prevalent in the version of the book he put out for kids: “STAMPED: Racism, Anti-Racism and You.” That version also makes clear to our children that “Racist ideas, along with economic greed, are central to the formation of this nation, its laws, policies, and practices. Meritocracy and the American Dream narrative are rooted in whiteness.”

And here is the great injustice of this insidious belief: it lets too many of us off the hook….

read more: 

https://townhall.com/columnists/kenblackwell/2021/10/21/the-existential-threat-of-crt-statesponsored-racism-n2597765

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
14.2.57  Split Personality  replied to  XXJefferson51 @14.2.55    3 years ago

Well you never fail to disappoint.

I was going to say, sure you will 

if not today, then tomorrow

if not tomorrow then next week or three weeks from now.

You didn't even wait one minute,

smh

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
14.2.58  XXJefferson51  replied to  Split Personality @14.2.57    3 years ago

Here’s another African American that Touré can call a foot soldier for white supremacy…

CRT, Anti-racism, BLM: Legacies Of A Slave Mentality

Opinion

| Oct 21, 2021 12:01 AM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

52d472b0-e8fa-4b89-8f25-5a9248a537f5-500x250.jpg

Source: AP Photo/Markus Schreiber

These days, “black oppression” is a tactic used in dirty politics. But in my early life, it was very real. The Jim Crow days were a landscaped wilderness between slavery and freedom – a mirage of freedom.  

But I’ll spare the stories. It’s over. Holding on to that stuff is like walking around with a corpse on your back. Drag it around for too long and your soul rots from moral gangrene – a spirit of revenge if you have power; a spirit of resentment if you don’t.  If you have both, you become Maxine Waters. So, no. 

During the civil rights days, any time MLK wanted to give Southern blacks hope that freedom would come someday, he used the imagery of the Hebrew slaves escaping Egypt, enduring the wilderness, and finally reaching the Promised Land.  

“We’ve got some difficult days ahead,” said this modern-day Moses. “But it doesn’t matter with me now.  Because I’ve been to the mountaintop.  … And I’ve seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight that we, as a people, will get to the Promised Land.”

Today, 156 years after the death of slavery and after Jim Crow’s been a corpse for 56 years, the question of whether American blacks have reached the “Promised Land,” remarkably, depends on whom you ask. 

It reminds me of the real Moses who was famous for his headaches while leading ex-slaves with two different attitudes toward their predicament.  Most saw the glass as half empty; a few, half full.  

Ex-slaves who saw the glass as half empty died in the wilderness. All of them. God Himself wouldn’t put up with their incessant complaining and protests. For the rest, a trip that could’ve taken 11 days, took 40 years. Why?  Because too many of them, although free, still thought and acted like slaves.  

In Numbers 13:21, the Hebrews were on the outskirts of Canaan, the Promised Land, a land “flowing with milk and honey.” Moses sent spies to check it out and bring word back.  Discouraged men, after seeing the gargantuan challenges, brought back an “evil report” – fake news from the Canaan News Network (CNN).

 “We be not able to go up against the people,” they said. “For they are stronger than we.”  The people of that land are giants and “we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so were we in their sight.”

Caleb and Joshua disagreed.  With God on their side, the Hebrews were the real giants, they said.

“Let us go up at once, and possess it,” said Caleb, “for we are well able to overcome it.”

But the people – distracted by uncertainty, suffering without luxuries, enough water only to stay alive, and monotonous food – surrendered to a slave’s mentality.  So the “we be not able” crowd split from the “we are well able” crowd.  

They complained against Moses, protested against God, and picketed for the Hebrews to “make a captain” who could lead them back to the government that enslaved them.  That wasn’t an option.  They died in the wilderness between Egypt and the Promised Land.  

Hebrews who refused to give in to the slave mentality went on to clumsily influence the course of history. To this day, the progeny of these Hebrew ex-slaves – the Jewish people – prosper far beyond their numbers while facing down deep hatred.  And they prosper without the incessant complaining, protesting, and excuse-making that got their ancestors stuck in the wilderness. Lesson learned.

Blacks are in a similar predicament today – the discouraged ones. But it’s much stranger. They’re stuck in a self-imposed wilderness inside a “Promised Land” flowing with more milk and honey than any nation in history.  And they’re free.  

But they’ve “made captains” who create imaginary impediments that they say still enslave blacks in America. “You be not able,” they say.  These are critical race theorists, anti-racists, and BLMers who have no incentive to give up the slave mentality because, rather than being punished, their bickering gets rewarded.  

So they’ve built a Wilderness Industry – people and organizations skilled at making complaints, protests, and excuses bloom in the desert. There are workshops, degrees, jobs and careers, how-to books, political and social acclaim, and big money. Worse, they’re using the Wilderness Industry to put the rest of us in slavery.

“Antiracism is a transformative concept that reorients and reenergizes the conversation about racism,” writes Ibram X. Kendi in How To Be An Antiracist,” (2019), whose speeches earn $20,000.  “At its core, racism is a powerful system that creates false hierarchies of human value; its warped logic extends beyond race, from the way we regard people of different ethnicities or skin colors to the way we treat people of different sexes, gender identities, and body types.”

Get that? Me either. But I think he’s saying: “All whites are racists. The ‘system’ is racist. It always will be.  So we must dismantle it.”  

The Wilderness Industry has created new terms and tactics, not to solve problems, but to dignify resentment, hide the real causes of disparities, and spread the slave (victim) mentality to as many discouraged groups as possible.

Here’s a morsel you’ll find in Critical Race Theory (Third Edition), by Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic (2017):

Critical race theorists “urge jury nullification to combat the disproportionate incarceration of young black men,” the authors write.  “If the jury believes that the police system is racist or that the young man is of more use to the community free than behind bars, it will vote to acquit.”

Never mind that the crime, especially violent crime, that young black men commit is wildly disproportionate.  But facts don’t matter. These people are not paid to solve problems; they’re paid to come up with flatulent terms that make complaining sound intelligent. Like, internal colonialism, interest convergence, language rights, Anglo-centric standards, counterstorytelling, differential racialization, blah, blah. 

Meanwhile, in troubled black neighborhoods, cultural cancer metastasizes to Stage IV.  Since it’s become unfixable, these new overseers stay busy building towers of racial babel using jerry-rigged words that cover up the real mess.

Yet, no matter how many people suffer, they are somehow insulated from accountability as they deliberately wander in a fake wilderness advocating for hordes of discouraged blacks to be shipped onto government doles – the new slavery…

read more:  

https://townhall.com/columnists/willalexander/2021/10/21/crt-antiracism-blm-legacies-of-a-slave-mentality-n2597788

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
14.2.59  CB  replied to  XXJefferson51 @14.2.49    3 years ago

I saw the segment (Live!), believe it or not. Though, I am not a fan or regular show watcher. Condoleeza Rice is true to her conservativism. I applause where she has risen to in life and their is a lot to like about her as a person. However, no one is doing anything to White people by simply telling them their past. Maybe she knows something about CRT that I have not been privileged to hear or read about.

It is no reason to think that you or whatever his name is (Fox anchor) can exploit her statements to influence or sway me (or many others). We see through the attempt to the other side, Jefferson.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
14.2.60  Split Personality  replied to  XXJefferson51 @14.2.56    3 years ago

Fortunately I was educated by Christian Brothers and Jesuit lawyers and priests.

They tended to focus on man's atrocities to other men whether it was slavery of blacks or the States'

treatments of Native Americans, Japanese atrocities or the internment of our own citizens of Japanese

decent. 

So I just see CRT as properly educating our kids.  There's no white guilt or making kid's hate themselves,

just ignorant parents and adults afraid of having their ancestors, long dead, criticized.

Racists tend to defend racism, no matter when it happened.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
14.2.61  CB  replied to  XXJefferson51 @14.2.56    3 years ago

The betrayal will be the worst.

Jefferson, do you realize that kids are not stupid ("little people")? They will resent their parents for lying to them. Literally, resent them! It will be like coming to a point where you realize that "Santa Claus" is mommy and daddy, or the realization that Jesus was not borne in a "winter wonderland of sorts," or that Noah did not just take two of each kind of animals on the ark!

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
14.2.62  XXJefferson51  replied to  CB @14.2.59    3 years ago

There are plenty of African American parents at these school board meetings opposing 1619 propaganda and CRT that the AG and let’s go Brandon want to label domestic terrorists.  The governor race in Virginia may well turn on the issue. I’ve added two other African American authors here opposed to CRT after she (CR) was accused of being a foot soldier for white supremacy.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
14.2.63  XXJefferson51  replied to  CB @14.2.61    3 years ago

Check out Will Alexander above…14.2.58

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
14.2.64  Split Personality  replied to  XXJefferson51 @14.2.62    3 years ago
There are plenty of African American parents at these school board meetings opposing 1619 propaganda and CRT

Proof that ignorance and conservatism are becoming color blind.

Parity is good for all us.

I’ve added two other African American authors

out of 44 million black people?

jrSmiley_84_smiley_image.gif

Let's see, CR said she had no intention of making White kids feel guilty ( which isn't CRT)

and of course we can always count on Candy Owens, Ben Carson and Allen West for the standard

conservative agenda.

They represent black people who have achieved high levels education and high levels of government

all proof of progress against racism.

It doesn't automatically award them any grace of infallibility,

it just makes the same whites who are attacking their version of CRT feel better about themselves.

Nothing more, nothing less.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
14.2.65  CB  replied to  XXJefferson51 @14.2.62    3 years ago

Well, y'all play the fools then. That's all I can do is tell you, the collective, what the Lord loves!

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
14.2.66  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @14.2.34    3 years ago
. No one gives a shit that none of your ancestors owned slaves. 

Great.  I agree it doesn't matter what anyone's ancestors did or didn't do in the 19th century bears any relevance to American in 2021. Imagine believing your ancestors travails  hundreds of years ago somehow keep anyone from doing something in 2021.

I only brought it up to counter the bigoted claim that the only people who oppose race based reparations are descendants of conservative Christians who owned slaves. Take up your ancestor talk with those who think it matters.

You  condemn black culture in 2021 on a collective basis , dont you?

I agreed with what you wrote. I don't agree with treating any  person, black or otherwise, different because of their culture. I believe in equality. 

It's simple really. Treat individuals as individuals and you avoid race based discrimination like you champion.

 You want that to be forgotten completely because none of your ancestors owned slaves.  It is absurd.

Where do you get this stuff from? It's absurd  and not even vaguely related to what I wrote.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
14.2.67  XXJefferson51  replied to  Texan1211 @14.2.31    3 years ago

It’s all my fault!  I’m guilty of slavery!  My moms parents came to America separately from Italy/Austria in 1920 and travelled straight to California.  My dads great … grandparents came from Great Britain (England and Northern Ireland) in the early 1700’s and mid 1800’s Massachusetts and New York before finding their way to California before those grandparents were born.  So, I and my ancestors were/are totally responsible for the institution of slavery imported here from the Spanish colonies and the slaves from Africa.  I personally am responsible for slavery because….

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
14.2.68  Sean Treacy  replied to  Split Personality @14.2.54    3 years ago
Condoleezza Rice ’s recent appearance on   The View   was offensive and disgusting for many reasons but she was who we thought she was: a soldier for white supremacy.

You never fail to disappoint. 

Citing a 9/11 truther and one of the biggest race baiting idiots out there as an authority. Couldn't find a Farrakhan hot take? 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
14.2.69  CB  replied to  XXJefferson51 @14.2.62    3 years ago

Black people are not immune to stupid, lying, cheating, and stealing, eh?

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
14.2.70  XXJefferson51  replied to  CB @14.2.59    3 years ago

Actually the You Tube clip is not from Fox News.  He’s a NewsMaxTV program host.  

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
14.2.71  Sean Treacy  replied to  XXJefferson51 @14.2.67    3 years ago
 My dads great … grandparents came from Great Britain (England and Northern Ireland)

Well you owe me reparations now. It's your fault I don't have Jeff Bezos wealth.  Please venmo me a billion dollars. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
14.2.72  CB  replied to  XXJefferson51 @14.2.63    3 years ago

Wow. I can see why you see value in it, at least. jrSmiley_89_smiley_image.gif   Psst.  Got any James Baldwin on your reading list?

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
14.2.73  XXJefferson51  replied to  CB @14.2.61    3 years ago

I as a Christian do not deny the virgin birth of the Messiah in a manger or creation or the global flood.  There were a great many animals and birds that entered the Ark in groups of 7 instead of 2.   

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
14.2.74  CB  replied to  Sean Treacy @14.2.66    3 years ago
I believe in equality

For liberals?

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
14.2.75  Split Personality  replied to  Sean Treacy @14.2.68    3 years ago
You never fail to disappoint. 

Unlike yourself?

jrSmiley_82_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
14.2.76  CB  replied to  XXJefferson51 @14.2.67    3 years ago

So comical. When you get to represent the whole of government; look me, us, up!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
14.2.77  CB  replied to  XXJefferson51 @14.2.70    3 years ago

Okay. And?

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
14.2.78  Split Personality  replied to  XXJefferson51 @14.2.67    3 years ago

800

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
14.2.79  CB  replied to  XXJefferson51 @14.2.73    3 years ago

I no longer trust my faith to your 'care,' Jefferson. And, I will not discuss it further with you.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
14.2.80  XXJefferson51  replied to  Sean Treacy @14.2.71    3 years ago

If only I had them, I’d send them to my Italian half as the part of Austria my Italian speaking grandfather came from became part of Italy after WWI.  

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
14.2.81  XXJefferson51  replied to  CB @14.2.72    3 years ago

I saw great value in it and in quoting African Americans opposed to CRT and 1619 to you

 
 
 
Moose Knuckle
Freshman Quiet
15  Moose Knuckle    3 years ago

It's really weird to see colleges segregating and schools wanting to teach racist crap. Somehow this is going to help minorities? We live in a complete clown world right now.

Why is the southern border being flooded with migrants? Could it be that as awful as we are we are better than everywhere else?  Clown world!

 
 
 
GregTx
PhD Guide
15.1  GregTx  replied to  Moose Knuckle @15    3 years ago

It certainly seems to be more regressive than progressive, doesn't it?

 
 
 
Moose Knuckle
Freshman Quiet
15.1.1  Moose Knuckle  replied to  GregTx @15.1    3 years ago

Reviving Jim Crow era bs and calling it progress is going to be an epic fail.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
15.1.2  XXJefferson51  replied to  Moose Knuckle @15.1.1    3 years ago

Progressives and Jim Crow were one and the same at the beginning and they are reverting to form.  

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
15.1.3  Split Personality  replied to  XXJefferson51 @15.1.2    3 years ago

More broken logic?  Progressives cannot be conservative at the same time.

Go Fish.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
15.1.4  CB  replied to  Split Personality @15.1.3    3 years ago

It's all so sad and empty. We will simply have to keep the 'dumbing-down" to a minimum (as best we can). SP, "Thank you for your service."

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
15.2  Texan1211  replied to  Moose Knuckle @15    3 years ago
Why is the southern border being flooded with migrants?

Because of the policies of the Biden/Harris Administration.

Well, that and the fact that Biden put Harris in charge, practically gauranteeing nothing will get fixed.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
15.2.1  XXJefferson51  replied to  Texan1211 @15.2    3 years ago

But if America is such an irredeemably systemic racist nation full of white supremacy and they being the number one domestic terror threat besides anti CRT parents at school boards, why are so many people of color scrambling to get here and live in such a place? 

 
 
 
Moose Knuckle
Freshman Quiet
15.2.2  Moose Knuckle  replied to  XXJefferson51 @15.2.1    3 years ago

The new breed of red fascist thinks teaching kids everyone is racist will help them create more red fascists.

Everyone is racist,  men can be women, and unicorns are real. In actuality the unicorn is just another red fascist obsessed with dicks.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
16  Split Personality    3 years ago

I don't know of anyone who thinks that we are an "irredeemably systemic" racist nation,

but if the whole CRT misunderstanding has done nothing else, it has raised awareness on previously ignored atrocities 

and behaviors, particularly like JR has revealed, SCOTUS defended racial discrimination as late as the 1960's.

We are far from perfect.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
16.1  XXJefferson51  replied to  Split Personality @16    3 years ago

Nobody claimed we are perfect.  That was never an issue or ever claimed.  We believe the glass is half full regarding America and our history and present while CRT and 1619 proponents see it as more than half empty and need to navel gaze at the half empty glass while denying any progress to get it half full. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
16.1.1  Split Personality  replied to  XXJefferson51 @16.1    3 years ago
Nobody claimed we are perfect.  That was never an issue or ever claimed.  

Then why the white outrage with several States banning theories and books?  Is that what you want? 

Free speech but only with the states approval of the topics Doesn't sound like the USA,

more like North Korea.

We believe the glass is half full regarding America and our history

"We"?  Still speaking for yourself and the mice in your pockets?

and present while CRT and 1619 proponents see it as more than half empty

A lack of understanding always leads to the wrong conclusions,  CRT is a legal theory more about the FHA and

redlining and protecting racist behavior, multiple times by the Levitts and Trumps and other real estate people

which was protected all the way to the SCOTUS refusal to hear cases challenging the relators or the FHA.

It was shamefully illegal especially when it affected WWII, Korean and Vietnam veterans who happened to be

nonwhites.  1619 is a charged POV by black people, rightfully still outraged about the past and present. 

Just another book like Malcomb X by Alex Hailey which was banned in many states. 

Because it was banned and DoubleDay was fearful for it's own safety and that of it's own (white) employees

DoubleDay canceled their first release, a disastrous decision for them economically.

The book remains one of the most influential small best selling books. ( be careful what you "cancel")

and need to navel gaze at the half empty glass while denying any progress to get it half full.

I would suggest proof reading within the ten minute window so that your comments make sense to others.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
16.1.2  Jack_TX  replied to  Split Personality @16.1.1    3 years ago
Then why the white outrage with several States banning theories and books?  Is that what you want?  Free speech but only with the states approval of the topics Doesn't sound like the USA, more like North Korea.

Surely you are not attempting to claim that free speech is violated simply because something is excluded from public school curriculum.  

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
16.1.3  Split Personality  replied to  Jack_TX @16.1.2    3 years ago

When states ban talking about/ teaching a subject to the financial jeopardy or employment of the teacher?

C'mon Jack. That's infringement.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
16.1.4  XXJefferson51  replied to  Split Personality @16.1.1    3 years ago

I no longer give a darn about the post content of what you express or think about any issue any time anywhere. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
16.1.5  Split Personality  replied to  XXJefferson51 @16.1.4    3 years ago

Have you ever given a darn about anything other than your own navel-gazing?

Trump the greatest, Jefferson State a reality, Dems, progs, libs all bad, the rapture is real and all will be forgiven?

navel-gazing
[ˈnāvəl ɡāziNG]
NOUN
  1. self-indulgent or excessive contemplation of oneself or a single issue, at the expense of a wider view.
 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
16.1.6  Jack_TX  replied to  Split Personality @16.1.3    3 years ago
When states ban talking about/ teaching a subject to the financial jeopardy or employment of the teacher? C'mon Jack. That's infringement.

Not at all.  Protected speech does not mean that speech is appropriate or allowed in school.  That's been well established in the courts.  There are thousands of things that are absolutely allowed in society and will absolutely get a teacher fired, and rightfully so.

It could be anything as extreme as a teacher talking to students about "how to succeed in the porn industry" to a teacher who insists girls aren't good at math to one who won't stop demanding kids accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior.  

It can be something as simple as foul language.  Firing you for saying "fuck" a dozen times while you're teaching your algebra class is not an infringement on your right to say it in other places.

If somebody was teaching kids that black people were inherently racist because they were black, everybody would want that stopped, and rightfully so.  This is no different.  It's not OK just because it agrees with left-wing politics.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
16.1.7  Split Personality  replied to  Jack_TX @16.1.6    3 years ago
Not at all.  Protected speech does not mean that speech is appropriate or allowed in school.  That's been well established in the courts.  There are thousands of things that are absolutely allowed in society and will absolutely get a teacher fired, and rightfully so.

OK

It could be anything as extreme as a teacher talking to students about "how to succeed in the porn industry" to a teacher who insists girls aren't good at math to one who won't stop demanding kids accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior.  

OK

It can be something as simple as foul language.  Firing you for saying "fuck" a dozen times while you're teaching your algebra class is not an infringement on your right to say it in other places.

Agreed

If somebody was teaching kids that black people were inherently racist because they were black, everybody would want that stopped, and rightfully so.

ok

  This is no different. 

Um, yes it is.  Can you show us any curriculum 0r evidence that any teachers are proposing that white

children are being told to feel guilty they are white?  CRT is a legal theory with sound evidence.

Inconvenient if you worked for the FHA or SCOTUS from 1940 through 1980's.

It's not OK just because it agrees with left-wing politics.

Historical facts should not be seen as a left/right issue of truth.

The "dust up" is actually educating more people, the more vociferous the objections, the more people pay

attention.

My clients and neighbors insist they aren't racist, then proceed to try to get into the Grapevine School board

meetings to give them a piece of their minds.

If people can't be honest with themselves, how can they be honest with others (rhetorically speaking).

Levittown PA, still 97% white 70 years later. 

Grapevine TX, embarrassing school board meetings and TV exposes of racism in the classrooms and texts 

and email harassments.

(unless you are a star football player on the Dragons, and even then, the kids accept it as a matter of fact

but at least they don't live in Keller or some lesser ISD.

Ok, I'm done.

SNF is starting...

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
16.1.8  Jack_TX  replied to  Split Personality @16.1.7    3 years ago
Um, yes it is.  Can you show us any curriculum 0r evidence that any teachers are proposing that white children are being told to feel guilty they are white? 

Hang on.  We're not going to do this thing where we pretend that people with exceedingly obvious motivations somehow don't have them because they were smart enough not to declare them outright.   

Why don't we just pretend that stockbrokers are all really public servants who have no interest in making money?  It's like an LSU frat boy pretending there won't be drinking because the flyer for the party makes no mention of the kegs.   It's just silly.

We've got a thousand posts in this very seed demanding that white people feel guilty and take responsibility...... and then getting furious when some of us don't.  Who are we trying to kid, here?

It has happened before... in Oklahoma....it does happen in lots of places, and will continue to happen, even with these laws.

CRT is a legal theory with sound evidence.

The problem is the people who do want it in the curriculum will go completely overboard and everybody knows it.  They can't stop themselves.  

Historical facts should not be seen as a left/right issue of truth.

They're not.  The left-right issue is created by what set of facts a person selects to include or exclude when they tell or teach that history.

The "dust up" is actually educating more people, the more vociferous the objections, the more people pay attention.

I think you're more optimistic than I am.  People are only actually educated when they look at something with an open mind, and political zealots of any tribe never do that.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
16.1.9  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @16.1.8    3 years ago
The problem is the people who do want it in the curriculum will go completely overboard and everybody knows it.  They can't stop themselves. 

So says you. Some conservatives are so-called "qualified" to stomp and demand curriculum deletion and oppression (of truths)? Oh, the hubris, arrogance, and abuse of position!

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
16.1.10  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @16.1.9    3 years ago
So says you.

And you support me with statements like:

Some conservatives are so-called "qualified" to stomp and demand curriculum deletion and oppression (of truths)? Oh, the hubris, arrogance, and abuse of position!

You've posted the text of the law.  Which clause demands the deletion of factual data from any curriculum?

Further, do you intend to assert that if something is not in the public high school curriculum, that's "deletion" or "oppression"?

How about money market accounts?   We don't teach about those in public schools.  Is that "oppressive"?  How about stock options?  1031 exchanges?  Roth IRAs?  529 plans?  The difference between form 1120 and form 1120s?

How about obesity trends in America and the cost to our economy and our society?  We don't teach kids about that.  Are we "oppressing" or "deleting"?  Is that hubris? 

If we have kids read sonnets instead of "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner" or Khayyam instead of Kipling, how exactly is that "hubris"?

Millions of American kids graduate high school every year not knowing the difference between Beethoven's 5th and 9th symphonies, or don't know Monet from Manet.  Whom do we arrest for "abuse of position"?  

Or have you gone completely overboard?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
16.1.11  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @16.1.10    3 years ago

Talk about going "overboard"! None of that has to do with some conservatives and CRT. If so, please inform us by pointing out its connections.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
16.1.12  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @16.1.10    3 years ago
Which clause demands the deletion of factual data from any curriculum?

The resulting confusion and ambiguity when teachers don't know what is considered appropriate to say and thus, they say less where 'more' conveys true meaning.  But, I am not going to play games with you Jack_Tx.  Some conservatives think they are slick to write dumb-ass laws for which they can play stupid about; but we see through the fog of "bull patty" equal to the writers of law.

(As of now, I have no intention of rereading last week's thread to inform you of what it entails. Read it (once or again) yourself!

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
16.1.13  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @16.1.11    3 years ago
Talk about going "overboard"! None of that has to do with some conservatives and CRT. If so, please inform us by pointing out its connections.

*sigh*

No....it has to do with what gets included in public school curriculum and what doesn't.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
16.1.14  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @16.1.12    3 years ago
The resulting confusion and ambiguity when teachers don't know what is considered appropriate to say and thus, they say less where 'more' conveys true meaning. But, I am not going to play games with you Jack_Tx.  Some conservatives think they are slick to write dumb-ass laws for which they can play stupid about; but we see through the fog of "bull patty" equal to the writers of law.

So your entire objection to this law is that conservatives support it. 

(As of now, I have no intention of rereading last week's thread to inform you of what it entails. Read it (once or again) yourself!

Let me help you.  It says no teacher or school may teach any of the following concepts:

  1. One race or sex is inherently superior to another.
  2. Any individual is inherently racist because of their skin color.
  3. Any individual should be discriminated against because of race or sex.
  4. Members of one race should treat another race without respect.
  5. Moral character is determined by race or sex.
  6. Any individual of a race or sex is responsible for past actions committed by other people of that race or sex.

Now....which of these ideas do you support so strongly that you believe keeping it out of the school curriculum is an "oppression of the truth"?  

Do you believe that one race should treat another without respect?  Do you believe one race is superior to another?  Is that what you think we should be teaching?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
16.1.15  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @16.1.13    3 years ago

And we are discussing activism against CRT and a lawsuit. So, focus.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
16.1.16  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @16.1.14    3 years ago

I have no objection to the law, per se, Jack_Tx. For the present it is sufficient and good.

I am not bringing the law suit (ACLU is). Let me help you: Teachers of history wish to teach truth about what occurred formerly, nevertheless!  They do not wish to invoke some political whimsical past or lack thereof!

Do you have a damn problem with teachers teaching actual History?

And now you've pissed me off!

History has informed us slaves, freedmen, and people of color were legally not allowed to learn to read and write

Why shouldn't white kids today know this about their white family members in slave-holding states (in slave states) of yesterday?

A possible question (for curriculum purposes):

  1. If White slave-owners thought enslaved people, especially Africans, were "unteachable" what was the motivating factor in codifying in law fines for trying to teach such people?
  2. Was it morally right for white slave-owners to "dummy-down" a whole class of people simply to serve as human 'beast' for the pleasure and profit of another class of people?

We need to process what happened in the past, so that when dumb-ass conservatives try it again, like potentially right now, we can remember how we diffused, remedied, and terminated such ridiculous activities before!

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
16.1.17  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @16.1.16    3 years ago
I have no objection to the law, per se, Jack_Tx. For the present it is sufficient and good.

OK......

I am not bringing the law suit (ACLU is). Let me help you: Teachers of history wish to teach truth about what occurred formerly, 

What part of the law do you believe prevents that?

Do you have a damn problem with teachers teaching actual History?

What part of the law do you believe prevents that?  

History has informed us slaves, freedmen, and people of color were legally not allowed to learn to read and write Why shouldn't white kids today know this about their white family members in slave-holding states (in slave states) of yesterday?

What makes you think they don't?  What makes you think it isn't taught already?  Why would you think this law will prevent that?

We need to process what happened in the past, so that when dumb-ass conservatives try it again, like potentially right now, we can remember how we diffused, remedied, and terminated such ridiculous activities before!

You are actually attempting to equate "what happened in the past" with "potentially right now"?  Which "what happened in the past" are you talking about, specifically?  

  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
16.1.18  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @16.1.17    3 years ago

Okay, miss me with the bull patty. Don't screw my comment over and then try to hold a discussion on pretense. Moving on. (Don't answer the history question/s I drafted.) It's your loss.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
16.1.19  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @16.1.18    3 years ago
Okay, miss me with the bull patty. Don't screw my comment over and then try to hold a discussion on pretense. Moving on. 

What in the hell are you talking about?  

(Don't answer the history question/s I drafted.) It's your loss.

Your history questions are a bit ridiculous.  Slaves were not thought to be unteachable.  Quite the opposite.   It was illegal to teach them to read because educated slaves were more capable of rebellion or escape.  As for the second, do you really imagine we need to debate the morality of slavery at this point?  

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
16.1.20  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @16.1.19    3 years ago

Of course, the thinking goes let's keep Africans 'dumbed down' and they won't know enough to compete or be a threat. "UNTEACHABLE." (Do note the quotation marks, Jack_TX). Of course, Africans would be able to learn, if allowed to be. They were not allowed to be 'taught' by states' law!

Yet, there were morally righteous Whites who taught enslaved peoples of the period to read and write, nevertheless. Young White generations need to learn about such (historical) figures and organizations serving the 'underclasses' too!

It was morally "ridiculous" to not teach slaves to read and write and kids today need to know this (because it failed) and so that it does not happen again at some future point!

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
16.1.21  Jack_TX  replied to  CB @16.1.20    3 years ago
Of course, Africans would be able to learn, if allowed to be. They were not allowed to be 'taught' by states' law!

Well, here in Dallas, our public schools have been integrated for over 50 years.  Yet black students have lower academic achievement by almost every metric.  Yet that doesn't seem to make you even pause to wonder.

Now either black students are somehow inherently less capable (which my experience tells me is utterly not the case).....or.....the supposedly integrated public school institution treats them differently (which I have seen first hand for decades).

It was morally "ridiculous" to not teach slaves to read and write and kids today need to know this (because it failed) and so that it does not happen again at some future point!

I don't know how many times or ways I can say this.  It. Is. Happening. Now.   TODAY.  

Look at the numbers.  They are teaching black kids less than they teach white kids.  

Egregious, systemic, institutionalized racism runs rampant under your very nose, and you utterly refuse to see it.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
16.1.22  CB  replied to  Jack_TX @16.1.21    3 years ago

I am not even sure what you are "lecturing" about anymore. A reset is needed. Because you've lost me. And I do not have time to revisit the threads plural above! Or we can just move on. . . .

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
16.2  Texan1211  replied to  Split Personality @16    3 years ago
I don't know of anyone who thinks that we are an "irredeemably systemic" racist nation,

Really?

You can't think of anyone who is always saying we are a racist country and always have been?

I know one for sure.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
16.2.1  Split Personality  replied to  Texan1211 @16.2    3 years ago
I don't know of anyone who thinks that we are an "irredeemably systemic" racist nation,
Really?

I believe the key words were "irredeemably systemic"

But  keep on complaining about others misquoting YOU,

it's amusing in an ironic sort of way. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
17  CB    3 years ago
We Still Feel the Impact of Racial Covenants and Redlining in 2020
Redlining became illegal in 1968. Even so, Minnesota has the highest racial disparity in the country when it comes to home ownership: 75% of white families own a home, while only 25% black families own a home. Mapping Prejudice has found links between racially-covenanted houses and home prices, as well as neighborhood make-up and home ownership rates.
 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
17.1  CB  replied to  CB @17    3 years ago

original

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
17.1.1  Split Personality  replied to  CB @17.1    3 years ago

Levittown PA one of Jr's focal points had some ugly moments in the 60's and 70;s 

is still 97% white, 3% black.

Hardly representative of the racial makeup of the five County Philadelphia area,

just the 4 outside of Philly proper.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
18  CB    3 years ago

01470599-1.png

Example deed that contains a racial covenant clause   Third (Clause) above is quite interesting. 

 
 
 
MsMarple
Freshman Silent
18.1  MsMarple  replied to  CB @18    3 years ago

Please tell me they changed this language for NC deeds in 2021? I am horrified to say I would not be surprised if they didn't, but I sure hope they did?

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
18.1.1  CB  replied to  MsMarple @18.1    3 years ago

This group of people help transcribe racial covenant clauses into something more "accommodating" in this new American century. It is laborious work to my understanding, in the sense that they have to find the myriad 'offending documents' and get permission to make reasonable changes in cases where the offensive can not be lifted out whole from the documents.

 
 
 
MsMarple
Freshman Silent
18.1.2  MsMarple  replied to  CB @18.1.1    3 years ago

I'll be damned. Seattle and King County is in your link, too! This is where I live! I thought, since we were the bluest of the blue, we'd be not racist - but apparently, there is still much racist language in our CCRs.
I live on the Eastside (one of the suburbs east of Seattle), King County, we always vote blue, but it seems my little subdivision is just full-on white racist. We have a number of Chinese here now, Chinese investors, that is, they don't actually live here, and they don't rent, but this is where they park their money. So, white suburbanite racists are somewhat diluted now. But still, not enough non-racists of us to counter them, and of course our CCRs haven't changed since the neighborhood was built 15 years ago. No overt racist language in the CCRs that I have seen, though. Just secondary racist language - "no loud parties. No many family cars. No cars parked in the driveways overnight. No rowdy children. No basketball nets in yards. No loudness when children playing basketball in the neighborhood park. No loud music after 7pm" ETC

My neighbor complained to me that Bob Marley's "Legend" I was playing when I was gardening sounded "violent". FFS! That was about 10 years ago, he humbled a lot since then, but still - Bob Marley "violent" in 2012?!

Talk about racist privileged white people. It's 2021,and they are all still racist and privileged, just more covert now.

 
 
 
Freewill
Junior Quiet
18.1.3  Freewill  replied to  MsMarple @18.1.2    3 years ago
I live on the Eastside (one of the suburbs east of Seattle), King County, we always vote blue, but it seems my little subdivision is just full-on white racist.

Really?  You bought or rent there so you must have agreed to those CCRs.  So how are you any less racist or less responsible for perpetrating the racism you see in the CCRs than the rest of your neighbors?

Or maybe, just maybe, rules about noise after a certain hour and too many cars in the street aren’t racist at all.  Perhaps they’re just pledges to exercise common neighborly courtesy presented in writing?  Maybe they are there to prevent my racist white neighbor from putting a basketball hoop up in front of their house so close to our driveway that it blew over in a wind storm and hit my car.  I don’t know about your neighborhood, but our CCRs are pretty toothless.  I find it better to talk to the neighbor and build a rapport.  That hoop has now been removed and comes out only when the kids want to play.  No problem and certainly no cause for assuming an underlying racist intent.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
18.1.4  Kavika   replied to  Freewill @18.1.3    3 years ago

The area does have a long and ugly history of discrimination and violence, especially against Native Americans. The ''Fish Wars'' of the 1960s and 70s is the most obvious. The state of Washington declared war on the Muckleshoot, Nisqually, and Puyallup tribes over fishing rights which were granted to the tribes by the US government under treaty. The intimidation and violence by the state were long, ugly, costly, and completely illegal. Tribal members and their supporters were beaten, arrested, and jailed illegally and convicted of crimes that did not exist, their criminal records were never expunged so for the rest of their lives they carried that burden. 

“Once somebody stood up to the state of Washington, the gaming department, the state fisheries—you knew you were going to get beat up. You knew you were going to go to jail. You knew this was going to happen.”
—Don McCloud (Puyallup), NMAI Interview, 2016.

That is only one case/incident but it had long-lasting effects. 

Of course, the restrictive deeds and segregated neighborhoods were active until the 2000s. 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
18.1.5  CB  replied to  MsMarple @18.1.2    3 years ago

Thanks for being open, sharing, and helpful to growing this discussion MsMarple.  In any manner you perceive it. The  links are deeply interesting, in-depth, and involved. (Smile.)

My understanding up to this point is these 'covenants" are tied to the land and not to people, making them hard to lift out of deeds. However, new buyers are being encouraged to read their deeds closely and if they wish come in to have these (now) illegal clauses "enhanced"-not removed-to allow for Blacks and Others to dwell on the property/ies.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
18.1.6  CB  replied to  Freewill @18.1.3    3 years ago

Interesting. Thank you for this perspective too! (Smile.)

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
18.1.7  CB  replied to  Kavika @18.1.4    3 years ago

Thanks! I am going to read both of your links through! (Smile.)

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
18.1.8  CB  replied to  Kavika @18.1.4    3 years ago

Really good stuff, Kavika!  A keeper!

 
 
 
MsMarple
Freshman Silent
18.1.9  MsMarple  replied to  Freewill @18.1.3    3 years ago
Really?  You bought or rent there so you must have agreed to those CCRs.

True dat, Freewill, and Mea Culpa. My husband and I were just emerging from the Great Recession bankruptcy, living paycheck to paycheck, renting the whole time. We managed to save a few bucks, than this estate came on our radar. Just barely removed from unemployment and homelessness - we jumped on it. We did NOT read any CCRs, and if we did, it wouldn't have made a difference from where we were coming from.

I know, we didn't even read the CCRs - we were not in a position to agree or disagree with them then.

We were made aware of the CCRs basically 3 months after we moved in:

No Barack Obama signs - too divisive. Yet Mitt Romney signs were OK somehow ?

BTW, us having a basketball net on our property would not cause the kinda damage you describe. We are not living here like sardines boxed in. These are estates, with ample room. You'd never see  basketball on your property from another property, but you'd hear it - maybe. These are multi-million-dollar estates, ok?

"pledges to exercise common neighborly courtesy"

Well, here is the thing. My neighbor heard Bob Marley "The Legend" at 7pm in the middle of July - and he complained that the music was "too violent". "I shot the Sheriff" set him off, you see

I have a garden (instead of industrial landscaping), and a couple of neighbors keep complaining that my Shasta daisies and foxgloves and peonies are "not uniform" with their manicured boxwood shrubs. So, they want me to remove my flowers and just go to boxwoods. And I FIGHT them. Because freedom, you see?

So, is it my fault not reading the CCRs when we bought this property?

Yes, yes it is. We didn't read the CCRs, we were going basically on an investment hunt at that point. Too little money, too little time until we get too old to be employed.

Our property went up 300% since we bought it in 2012, and it will pay for our retirement. So, I say "F-U" to the old retired white creeps who are trying to police me, my music, my garden and a basketball net they can't even see. 

Where is their "neighborly courtesy". huh?

 
 
 
Freewill
Junior Quiet
18.1.10  Freewill  replied to  MsMarple @18.1.9    3 years ago
Where is their "neighborly courtesy". huh?

Good point.  And good question.  I would have insisted that you to turn up the volume on anything by Marley (Bob or Ziggy or Damian or Ky-Mani).  I think they are all great! 

No Barack Obama signs - too divisive. Yet Mitt Romney signs were OK somehow ?

Funny you mention the political signs.  Our next door neighbor, a very nice black family, had Obama signs in their yard during that time and nobody had any issue with it.  They were our favorite neighbors in the house next door which has changed hands 4 times since we have been here.  Their son was quite a bit younger than my boys so they didn't hang out too much, but what a great kid!  Unfortunately, they moved to a nicer neighborhood and our new neighbors are OK but it just isn't the same.

Fast forward to 2016, Trump signs were torn up immediately along with graffiti and other defacing of the homes that displayed the sign, while Hillary signs were all over the place and for the most part left alone.  Nary a sign to be seen in 2020, I wonder why?!  People have lost their freaking minds!

And I FIGHT them. Because freedom, you see?

Yes, I do see and I'd support you in that fight.

By the way, congratulations on your investment!  We are sitting on ours now too after 20 years, just waiting for the right time to get the best return.

 
 
 
MsMarple
Freshman Silent
18.1.11  MsMarple  replied to  Freewill @18.1.10    3 years ago
I would have insisted that you to turn up the volume on anything by Marley (Bob or Ziggy or Damian or Ky-Mani). 

You a reggae fan???? OMG, I found a kindred spirit on here!

Wish you were my neighbor :) No, Jerry the Neighbor is all upset about my music. 
But he really mellowed out in just the last year. His wife and him both have cancer. I guess that reset their perspectives as to what's important...
Last August they all went to their daughter's wedding on Lake Chelan for a week - and guess who watched their house, watered their plants and took care of their cat? Me. Also my daughter and my mom (cuz we left for Hawaii 2 days before they came home, so mom watched our house, and theirs, our cats and theirs, also my brother's cats, cuz my brother and his wife joined us in Hawaii for a few days. Mom was watching FIVE CATS in 3 houses!)

My favorite is Damian and Stephen, they usually collaborate. Was just listening to this song today:
Stand a Chance -



The Marley "kids" are wicked talented! Just listen to their lyrics!
Here is a pic from Damian/Stephen concert in 2015, I went to their concerts three times, but this is the only concert I can find pix from.

Sorry, copy/paste not working for some reason

I'll try in a new post

 
 
 
MsMarple
Freshman Silent
18.1.12  MsMarple  replied to  MsMarple @18.1.11    3 years ago

Hmm, no luck still. How do I attach a picture to my post? This other guy, McArthur, does it all the time?

Sorry. I am too clueless for this site!

 
 
 
Freewill
Junior Quiet
18.1.13  Freewill  replied to  MsMarple @18.1.11    3 years ago
The Marley "kids" are wicked talented! Just listen to their lyrics! Here is a pic from Damian/Stephen concert in 2015, I went to their concerts three times, but this is the only concert I can find pix from.

Awesome!  Love it!  Bob Marley's music, actually reggae and ska in general, was always among my favorite sounds!  And I see that his kids are carrying on his talent while at the same time making it their own. It is a sound that is impossible not to move and sway to!  Among my favorite Marley songs is "Three Little Birds", came out when I was in high school in the late 70's.  I'd listen to that over and over again.  Reggae had a big influence on another of my favorite bands at that time The Clash.  I've had quite an eclectic taste for music over the years.  I've lost track of it a bit as I've grown older but this was really cool to hear.  Thanks MsMarple!

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
18.1.14  CB  replied to  MsMarple @18.1.12    3 years ago

Hi! Just bee-bopping along and saw this:

Well, you can try this:

  1. "Copy and paste" on a picture you want to put in your comment.

  2. "Drag and drop" on a picture you want put into your comment (careful with this technique, because if you are not using the 'proper' image - instead a facsimile version - you will LOSE anything in the comment when the fascicle populates your comment! This can be remedied by being sure you have clicked through to a 'hard-copy' of the pic before dragging and dropping!)

  3. "Embed Local Media" >>> (on toolbar when writing/editing comment) >>> "Upload An Image" >>> Size. Position. Margin. (if desired or use defaults) >>> IMAGE: "Upload and Insert A New Image."

Upload and Insert A New Image.

CAUTION: Be sure to select the proper image saved on your computer, because WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get). If you accidentally upload the wrong image, delete from your comment before posting and use "Embed Local Media" to return and "X" out the wrong image from the server!)

Safe and sound! Hope this helps.

Questions? Ask!

 
 
 
MsMarple
Freshman Silent
18.1.15  MsMarple  replied to  Freewill @18.1.13    3 years ago

Damian Marley in rocking it in a local park. LOVE HIM
256

 
 
 
MsMarple
Freshman Silent
18.1.16  MsMarple  replied to  CB @18.1.14    3 years ago

Thank you CB!

The first two didn't work, but the last one did - thank you so much. That's what I love about this community - folks don't shun newcomers.

Happy Halloween!

 
 
 
MsMarple
Freshman Silent
18.1.17  MsMarple  replied to  Freewill @18.1.13    3 years ago
Among my favorite Marley songs is "Three Little Birds",

I went to Japan with my SIL in 2014, it was all very strange to me.

We drove for almost 8 hours to get to Sapporo that was just a little over 300 mi away. (50km an hour was the highest speed). In the car we played Bob Marley and "Three Little Birds" came on, and me and my SIL were just screaming the lyrics, we were so goddamn tired! LOZ, that was good times!
On the way back to her mom's house I said: "F- it, just go on the highways (toll highways), I'll pay". 
The highway was EMPTY. NOBODY on it. We zoomed it home. Guess what we had to pay when we got off the empty highway - $80 in tolls!

Crazy. I never paid $80 in tolls in America, no matter where I drove. 

The Three Little Birds made it all worth it :) 

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
18.1.18  CB  replied to  MsMarple @18.1.16    3 years ago

original

"Spooky 'Ween." 

See what I did there? I "copy and paste" -d your image and flipped it directionally.  And then I "dragged and dropped" it below from your comment too -without losing other parts of my comment (because it is the original image and not a copy)!

256

I am glad you succeeded in your efforts to use the 'uploader' window!

Now just try this: (How do you get to Carnegie Hall: " Practice ," " Practice ," Practice ."):

Copy and Paste technique: Hover over an image >> right click on it >> " Copy " >> go to location >> right click again >> " Paste" (this time).

Drag and Drop technique : Hover over an image >> click AND hold  (do not let go of it) >> drag (all the way to destination) >> drop (release).

 
 
 
MsMarple
Freshman Silent
18.1.19  MsMarple  replied to  CB @18.1.18    3 years ago

ok, ok, rub it in!jrSmiley_4_smiley_image.png

1. The Copy/Paste technique didn't work for me. I click "copy" on the image, then go to my post on here, click "Paste" or "Ctrl-V" - nothing happens.

2. "Drag and Drop" - not happened, either. I can drag, but the "drop" not working. And I was one of those people at MSFT who INVENTED "Drag and Drop".

Maybe I need some "seniority" or something to do it easy like that? I don't know. I am a newbie here. Everything is hard for me jrSmiley_99_smiley_image.jpg

 
 
 
Raven Wing
Professor Guide
18.1.20  Raven Wing  replied to  MsMarple @18.1.19    3 years ago

Copy the image and save it to your hard drive. Save is as a .jpg or .png format

Then go to the comment window where you want to post them image to

Click on the box with the arrow in it on the comment window tool bar, next to the round smiley face

When the window opens, click on the Upload Image tab

Then navigate to where you saved to image you want to post and click on it

It should then copy the image into the comment window

Once to see the image in the comment window, click the Post Your Comment tab at the bottom of the comment window. 

That will save the image in the window and post it to the in the comment window.

Hope this helps.

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
18.1.21  CB  replied to  MsMarple @18.1.19    3 years ago

Oh my! (Smile.)

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
18.1.22  CB  replied to  CB @18.1.18    3 years ago

I am so sorry you are having a time of it with "Copy/Paste" and "Drag/Drop" techniques. I use them absent-mindedly these days. Props to your MSFT training, btw.

 
 
 
Freewill
Junior Quiet
18.1.23  Freewill  replied to  MsMarple @18.1.15    3 years ago

Nice MsMarple!

I just watched a new movie called " The Harder They Fall ".  Great movie, and the soundtrack is among the best of any movie I have seen in a long time.  Check out the movie and let me know what you think!  I think you will like it, especially the soundtrack toward the beginning of the film.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
19  XXJefferson51    3 years ago

I saw great value in it and in quoting African Americans opposed to CRT and 1619 to you

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
19.1  CB  replied to  XXJefferson51 @19    3 years ago

Of course, "Trump-fanciers" drive-by all substantive comments that might 'straighten out' their individual bull-patty commentary. Yeah. Keep it moving there.

 
 
 
MsMarple
Freshman Silent
19.2  MsMarple  replied to  XXJefferson51 @19    3 years ago

There is only ONE reference to an "African American" in this article, and it was this:

 "Donovan Chaney, 17, a high school senior in Crawford's class, who is Black, said he sees the law as "the way to censor our next generation, so they don't know all the horrible things that went on before they were born."

And he is right!

So, what do you mean by 

"I saw great value in it and in quoting African Americans opposed to CRT and 1619"

Which "African American" opposed to CRT? I must've missed it. 

Please elaborate. And cite.

thank you

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
19.2.1  Split Personality  replied to  MsMarple @19.2    3 years ago

He quotes Condoleezza Rice, Candice Owens or seeds Allen West and Ben Carson as conservative AA

propaganda as if they speak for more than themselves

and thinks they are great trophies of some sort all the while telling us he isn't biased against anyone.

 
 
 
MsMarple
Freshman Silent
19.2.2  MsMarple  replied to  Split Personality @19.2.1    3 years ago

"propaganda as if they speak for more than themselves"

hah, thank you. 

Maybe he should quote Herman Cane and his "9-9-9" campaign next time, it'd be even more FORCEFULL as far as "conservative  propaganda" goes.
Herman Cane was a "conservative AA" and also very old, and he went to Trumps Tulsa Rally - un-vaxxed and unmasked. He caught Covid and died within two weeks.

The end.  


 
 

Who is online



59 visitors