• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Only black reporters allowed in Mayoral race event

OlNate said:
*sigh*...and here I thought I was doing the right thing by taking you off of ignore. You can stop stalking now, you're back on.
Click to expand...

LMAO deflections wont work, just simply make a post based on honesty and itegrty and admit the mistake in your post or continue to deny it and further expose your post for what it was, factually wrong and dishonest,

so here we are in the same spot
here your false claim:
OlNate said:
Racism includes a designation of inferiority. Unless you can prove that the white journalists were not admitted because they were deemed inferior because of their race, it's not racism by definition. :shrug:
Click to expand...

that claim is factually wrong per the dictionary as we see below because an inclusion of inferiority is NOT needed

Definition of racism
Racism | Definition of Racism by Merriam-Webster

1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles
b : a political or social system founded on racism
3 : racial prejudice or discrimination

let us know when you are ready to admit your factual mistake, thanks :)
 
OlNate said:
You get on up here when the nice weather hits, and this Canadian will show you good beer is. ;) :lol:
Click to expand...

Canadian beers? Oh, I like Bradore's, if it's still around. Maybe catch up with me on Untappd - Drink Socially ?

And I prefer to call it fighting, dammit, don't try to romanticize it, if I was looking for passion I'd be with my wife, not here. haha
Click to expand...

LOLz. You had me laughing out loud at this one. OK, 'fighting' it is. :)

Take it easy, bud.
Click to expand...

You take it easy as well, all my best. :thumbs:
 
Last edited:
PoppyCock said:
Wow, this is an incredible display of racism. I thought the end of Jim Crow and the civil rights act, put a stop to this. I bet CNN is all over it. lol, not. More at link: Only black reporters allowed in Georgia mayoral race event
Only black reporters allowed in Georgia mayoral race event


Only black reporters allowed in Georgia mayoral race event - Nation World - Athens Banner-Herald - Athens, GA



SAVANNAH, Ga. | Race was front and center on Wednesday night during a meeting coordinated to garner support for just one black candidate in Savannah’s mayoral election.

With signs stating “Black press only” on the doors of the church where the meeting was held, white reporters were barred from entry, while black reporters for at least two television stations were permitted inside.

The event was coordinated by the Rev. Clarence Teddy Williams, owner of the consulting firm, The Trigon Group, who declined to discuss the entry policy.

Former Savannah Mayor Edna Jackson declined to comment before going inside, as did Chatham County Commissioner Chester Ellis.

“This is not my idea,” Ellis said.
Click to expand...

Additional information concerning this Mayor election news story.

The current Mayor of Savannah, Georgia

List of mayors of Savannah, Georgia - Wikipedia

Eddie Deloach 2016 Incumbent Republican (first term)

Eddie Deloach - Wikipedia

When he won the election for Mayor of Savannah in 2015, he became the first conservative Mayor in the city in more than 20 years. After becoming Mayor Of Savannah, DeLoach was voted "Best Conservative" by Connect Savannah in 2016

City votes for change: DeLoach defeats Jackson to become new Savannah mayor - News - Savannah Morning News - Savannah, GA

Savannah will have a new mayor and three new city aldermen next year.

Eddie DeLoach defeated Savannah Mayor Edna Jackson in Tuesday’s municipal runoff after running a campaign centered largely on the rise in crime in the city during her administration.

DeLoach received 53 percent of the vote to unseat Jackson and earn his place as the head of the Savannah City Council, with all precincts reporting.

In addition, Bill Durrence defeated Savannah Alderwoman Mary Osborne to secure the District 2 seat with 63 percent of the vote. Brian Foster will also join the council after receiving 53 percent of the vote in his run against Alicia Blakely for the alderman at-large, post 2 seat.

Roseann:)
 
OlNate said:
Man, you guys must have gotten a different article than I got, to have this all figured out. The one I read said no one commented...
Click to expand...

not sure what you mean here, I was talking about a misinterpretation of a definition. If you only include people of one color that is racism. by the definition.
 
Grokmaster said:
Unless it's a predominantly WHITE CHURCH BANNING BLACK MEDIA from a PUBLIC OFFICE-RELEATED EVENT...I'm sure you'd be "just fine" with that, right? :roll:
Click to expand...

They should be able to as well... in fact we need more .white only. stuff.

White Only NBA for one...
 
PTF said:
Who ever said racism no longer exists they caught the wrong bus. All of us aren't racists but this one has moved racism in another direction.
Click to expand...

Systemic racism is a myth.... that is the right bus.
 
daeler said:
not sure what you mean here, I was talking about a misinterpretation of a definition. If you only include people of one color that is racism. by the definition.
Click to expand...

OK, I did a bit of work for you, check this out:

How to Use a Dictionary: 12 Steps (with Pictures) - wikiHow

Please especially read section four, entitled "Looking Up A Word", where it states:

Once you've located the word it will tell you exactly what it means (and if it has more than one meaning, it will tell you the most common one first), how to pronounce it, how to capitalize it (if it's a proper noun), what part of speech it is and so on
Click to expand...

So...how far down the list do you have to go to find a definition that justifies your outrage? The very last one? Dang...that's motivation. :)
 
I frankly don't care about it but this is yet another demonstration of the double standards held by the left. Imagine "White Press Only". Uh huh...
 
OlNate said:
OK, I did a bit of work for you, check this out:

How to Use a Dictionary: 12 Steps (with Pictures) - wikiHow

Please especially read section four, entitled "Looking Up A Word", where it states:



So...how far down the list do you have to go to find a definition that justifies your outrage? The very last one? Dang...that's motivation. :)
Click to expand...

I never understand why people resort to personal attacks, I understand perfectly well how to use a dictionary.

There is no outrage, I was just pointing out that if you only use one part of a definition and ignore the rest you are wrong. If any part of the definition works it is valid.

There are so many words now to express prejudice, or racism, or bigotry, it makes communication difficult. if all you want to argue is semantics we can go that route.

as a personal aside I always find the idea of racism funny as when you look at it there is only one race, everyone just wants to argue about color, or lines on a map like it makes any real difference. Take people as they act not for how they look.
 
OlNate said:
Man, you guys must have gotten a different article than I got, to have this all figured out. The one I read said no one commented...
Click to expand...

the article has nothing to do with your factual false statment lol . . nice try but that strawman wont work and its VERY transparent.
 
OlNate said:
OK, I did a bit of work for you, check this out:

How to Use a Dictionary: 12 Steps (with Pictures) - wikiHow

Please especially read section four, entitled "Looking Up A Word", where it states:



So...how far down the list do you have to go to find a definition that justifies your outrage? The very last one? Dang...that's motivation. :)
Click to expand...

what outrage? now you are just making up more lies and retarded strawmen LMAO
what do you think you posted that changes the fact your statment was wrong? NOTHING

here your false claim:
OlNate said:
Racism includes a designation of inferiority. Unless you can prove that the white journalists were not admitted because they were deemed inferior because of their race, it's not racism by definition. :shrug:
Click to expand...

that claim is factually wrong per the dictionary as we see below because an inclusion of inferiority is NOT needed

Definition of racism
Racism | Definition of Racism by Merriam-Webster

1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles
b : a political or social system founded on racism
3 : racial prejudice or discrimination

let us know when you are ready to admit your factual mistake, thanks :)
 
veritas1 said:
I frankly don't care about it but this is yet another demonstration of the double standards held by the left. Imagine "White Press Only". Uh huh...
Click to expand...

LOL

the left? where?
what double standards?

who here said they think this is OK personally and represents the left .. . .also isnt one of the candidates a republican?

ive seen people right left and center point out they dont agree and personally think this is wrong but understand the fact that a CHURCH can do this just like white churches deny black members or sometimes wont marry thier black members . . the CHURCH has that right :shrug:
 
daeler said:
I never understand why people resort to personal attacks, I understand perfectly well how to use a dictionary.

There is no outrage, I was just pointing out that if you only use one part of a definition and ignore the rest you are wrong. If any part of the definition works it is valid.

There are so many words now to express prejudice, or racism, or bigotry, it makes communication difficult. if all you want to argue is semantics we can go that route.

as a personal aside I always find the idea of racism funny as when you look at it there is only one race, everyone just wants to argue about color, or lines on a map like it makes any real difference. Take people as they act not for how they look.
Click to expand...

This is not a personal attack, this is explaining why my answer is more right than yours. I should have apologized in advance in case you took it as condescension, but there was no other way to explain this. My assertion is that you cannot know if it was racism, since a designation of inferiority, which is the most common definition, cannot be established due to lack of facts. If one wishes to split hairs, my knife is sharper in this case.

That said, this is an anonymous debate forum...it tends to get spicy. I see you're new...welcome. I'm actually pretty tame... hehe...

As far as there being only one race, disparity statistics would seem to suggest otherwise. It's a nice thought, though, and genetically speaking accurate.
 
OlNate said:
This is not a personal attack, this is explaining why my answer is more right than yours. I should have apologized in advance in case you took it as condescension, but there was no other way to explain this. My assertion is that you cannot know if it was racism, since a designation of inferiority, which is the most common definition, cannot be established due to lack of facts. If one wishes to split hairs, my knife is sharper in this case.

That said, this is an anonymous debate forum...it tends to get spicy. I see you're new...welcome. I'm actually pretty tame... hehe...

As far as there being only one race, disparity statistics would seem to suggest otherwise. It's a nice thought, though, and genetically speaking accurate.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the welcome, I get how your using the definition and while I disagree on the splitting hairs part, it is just semantics.

Out of curiosity which word would you use to describe discrimination based on skin color? if said discrimination is from the minority?
 
OlNate said:
This is not a personal attack, this is explaining why my answer is more right than yours. I should have apologized in advance in case you took it as condescension, but there was no other way to explain this. My assertion is that you cannot know if it was racism, since a designation of inferiority, which is the most common definition, cannot be established due to lack of facts. If one wishes to split hairs, my knife is sharper in this case.
Click to expand...

your answer is not more right because he didnt give you an answer to anything he simply pointed out the fact that your statment was wrong and it still is. Its funny watching you try to move the goal posts and deflect though since your claims failed at every turn. No designation of inferiority is needed that fact wont change. AGain why post so many lies?
 
daeler said:
Thanks for the welcome, I get how your using the definition and while I disagree on the splitting hairs part, it is just semantics.

Out of curiosity which word would you use to describe discrimination based on skin color? if said discrimination is from the minority?
Click to expand...

I'd probably use discrimination based on skin color. :) After establishing that it's actually discrimination based on skin color, of course.
 
OlNate said:
Racism includes a designation of inferiority. Unless you can prove that the white journalists were not admitted because they were deemed inferior because of their race, it's not racism by definition. :shrug:
Click to expand...

NOTE: Equal Profession: Reporters

Does this particular Church have any strong religious doctrinal convictions concerning white reporters?


Superior | Definition of Superior by Merriam-Webster

superior 1 : situated higher up : upper

Upper | Definition of Upper by Merriam-Webster

upper : located above another or others of the same kind (human reporter)

Inferior | Definition of Inferior by Merriam-Webster

inferior 1 : situated lower down : lower

Lower | Definition of Lower by Merriam-Webster

lower : located below another or others of the same kind (human reporter)

Humankind | Definition of Humankind by Merriam-Webster

Humankind: the human race : humanity

NOTE: Color of skin seems to be the determining factor for opening the door of the Church to the kind of Reporter being welcomed inside the Church.

NOTE: Equal same kind of Profession: #1. Black Reporters Only (superior) #2. White Reporters no admittance (inferior)

Roseann:)
 
OlNate said:
I'd probably use discrimination based on skin color. :) After establishing that it's actually discrimination based on skin color, of course.
Click to expand...

which by definition is racism :lamo:lamo:lamo

wow talk about totally owning yourself! LMAO
 
CharisRose said:
NOTE: Equal Profession: Reporters

Does this particular Church have any strong religious doctrinal convictions concerning white reporters?


Superior | Definition of Superior by Merriam-Webster

superior 1 : situated higher up : upper

Upper | Definition of Upper by Merriam-Webster

upper : located above another or others of the same kind (human reporter)

Inferior | Definition of Inferior by Merriam-Webster

inferior 1 : situated lower down : lower

Lower | Definition of Lower by Merriam-Webster

lower : located below another or others of the same kind (human reporter)

Humankind | Definition of Humankind by Merriam-Webster

Humankind: the human race : humanity

NOTE: Color of skin seems to be the determining factor for opening the door of the Church to the kind of Reporter being welcomed inside the Church.

NOTE: Equal same kind of Profession: #1. Black Reporters Only (superior) #2. White Reporters no admittance (inferior)

Roseann:)
Click to expand...


:lamo Ok, I lied, YOU actually have the sharpest knife with which to split hairs. (PS: I'm complimenting you).

I will admit, that is a formula that makes total sense. Except you have no idea if that's the correct conclusion in this case, because if you don't know if you have all the variables. Because no one has commented.

Let's get away from the OP for a sec, and dally in something a little less controversial.

Scenario A) Woman A, who has (________________), does not feel comfortable being examined by a male doctor, and insists on a female doctor. Therefore she is sexist.

Ok...that makes sense, given the sentence, if we assume the blank is "a lump in her breast" or "had bad experiences with men" etc.

However, if the blank actually is "just been raped", do we call her sexist? No. Of course not.

This is why smart folks wait for details before making up their mind what happened.
 
AGENT J said:
LMAO somebody just proved they have no idea what AA is:lamo
Click to expand...


Sneering in street-ingorant, hate-filled, contempt to the very voters who used to vote for them, is what 2008--> Democrats do best... and they then wonder why Hillary lost.

Live by Identity Politics, die by Identity Politics.

-
 
Kurmugeon said:
Sneering in street-ingorant, hate-filled, contempt to the very voters who used to vote for them, is what 2008--> Democrats do best... and they then wonder why Hillary lost.

Live by Identity Politics, die by Identity Politics.

-
Click to expand...

:shock::lamo
nothing in that trigger unhinged meltdown you just posted changes the fact you have no idea what AA factually is
 
Barnacle said:
"... Van Johnson, a Savannah city councilman and one of three black mayoral candidates to have announced campaigns so far, attended the Wednesday meeting at Bolton Street Baptist Church. Johnson said afterward he relayed “my vision for an inclusive Savannah, a progressive Savannah.” ..."

Only black reporters allowed in Georgia mayoral race event

:lamo
Click to expand...

Reads just like those asshats in San Antonio over Chick-Fil-A. "We believe in inclusiveness....except when it comes to Chick-Fil-A!"
 
OlNate said:
:lamo Ok, I lied, YOU actually have the sharpest knife with which to split hairs. (PS: I'm complimenting you).

I will admit, that is a formula that makes total sense. Except you have no idea if that's the correct conclusion in this case, because if you don't know if you have all the variables. Because no one has commented.

Let's get away from the OP for a sec, and dally in something a little less controversial.

Scenario A) Woman A, who has (________________), does not feel comfortable being examined by a male doctor, and insists on a female doctor. Therefore she is sexist.

Ok...that makes sense, given the sentence, if we assume the blank is "a lump in her breast" or "had bad experiences with men" etc.

However, if the blank actually is "just been raped", do we call her sexist? No. Of course not.

This is why smart folks wait for details before making up their mind what happened.
Click to expand...
:shock::lamo

thank you for this gift that totally owns your false claims and you dont even realize it LMAO

actually "smart folks" understand what definitions mean and facts and she would in fact still have done something sexist . . . . . you should probably SERIOUSLY stop posting about this topic because you keep owning yourself over and over again.

REASONING/ DETAILS doesnt matter to the definition in this case thats what you are not getting and you keep proving it, its awesome!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom