- Joined
- Sep 9, 2005
- Messages
- 34,932
- Reaction score
- 12,326
- Location
- Pennsylvania
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
If I told them, wouldn't I be assuming they didn't have said volition?What do blacks have to do to win that right?
If I told them, wouldn't I be assuming they didn't have said volition?What do blacks have to do to win that right?
What part? You indicated nothing in your reply with quote.
Here is what I said, again:
I will try for you: have complete free will or be held personally accountable. Did you understand the preceding sentence in the OP link? We are constantly being told to hold minorities to different (usually lower) standards of behavior, speech or eductional levels often without realizing just how rediculously offensive/demeaning that really is.
I do not have a clue who Rachel Jeantel is, nor is anything you say proving your claim. Hint: once is not the same as constantly.
R
The part I highlighted. No one has ever followed me no matter where I have walked. No police officer ever assumed I was or might be guilty of anything. Women have never crossed the street when I walked near them. Explaining this and the effects if this is not holding minorities to a different let alone lower standard. This is largely a false narrative put forth my whites, often white males.
Thank you. Redress has raised similar doubts, let me refer you to my posts #75 and #78 in this thread for examples that I have linked to.
If I told them, wouldn't I be assuming they didn't have said volition?
I gave you an ample and recent example of my point. Either accept it or ignore it, but do not attempt to dismiss it because you do not know who the subject is. Surely you remember seeing many discussions about "black English", ebonics and "urban culture". Allow me try to give you more examples (to ignore or dismiss):
Florida's Race-based Goals For Students Spark Debate
Why It's Time to Get Rid of Standardized Tests | TIME.com
http://www.fairtest.org/sites/default/files/racial_justice_and_testing_12-10.pdf
Not much there that is really helpful. I remember one very smart young lady who asked me once how could the way she spoke be wrong when everyone she knew spoke that way. She has a point. What we call proper is largely arbitrary. And nothing is more useless than a standardized test. Explaining a problem is not lowering standards. Nor is questioning the arbitrary standard. It is factually that blacks experience our country differently than whites do. We as whites are lucky that everything fits in mostly with how we experience the country. Believing that there is a neutral, objective standard is largely false.
So now we learn you do not understand your own sources, and that you don't understand what constantly means, and that you exaggerate some into all. Well done!
Here is the statement:
Here is the context, the editorial it was taken from: To Avoid Looking Like a Criminal, Don't Commit a Crime - Ann Coulter - Page full
So, you do agree with the above quoted statement?
Here is the statement:
Here is the context, the editorial it was taken from: http://townhall.com/columnists/annc...iminal-dont-commit-a-crime-n1643187/page/full
So, you do agree with the above quoted statement?
Perhaps, someday, blacks will win the right to be treated like volitional human beings. But not yet.
Nonsense. We are a nation of immigrants yet expect assimilation not a continuous multilingual stew of ghettos. How is it that Asians, European and middle eastern folks have not remained largely separate? Most immigrants have no difficulty assimilating after, at most, two generations.
Here is the statement:
Here is the context, the editorial it was taken from: To Avoid Looking Like a Criminal, Don't Commit a Crime - Ann Coulter - Page full
So, you do agree with the above quoted statement?
Said from someone not having to do it. We've never been a melting pot. We have many different languages and customs and behaviors. And in a free country, that's fine.
However, that's not really what I'm talking about. They came here as slaves, then as discriminated citizens, and the expectation that just saying you're free will make all that history nil is silly. There was no history to draw on, no blue print, no stories. You really must understand the real and tangible differences.
She told West she altered her story about Martin because his mom was in the room during the state attorney interview. Jeantel said she didn't want his mother to hear Martin use words such as "cracker." She also said she didn't originally tell Fulton she overheard Martin saying, "get off, get off."
Yet even the most extreme partisan on either side of the political aisle is correct once-in-awhile, so it would be better to address their point as either correct or incorrect rather than contribute nothing to the conversation by stooping to the standard ad hominem character assassination.
Just about every time that Ann Coulter opens her mouth she reveals to the world exactly what kind of a low-life soulless lizard person she is.
When people tell me what they believe, I believe them.
Here is the statement:
Here is the context, the editorial it was taken from: To Avoid Looking Like a Criminal, Don't Commit a Crime - Ann Coulter - Page full
So, you do agree with the above quoted statement?
You must stop making silly excuses. Take Rachel Jeantel, for example, born in the US, attending free public school and, at age 19, can barely converse, much less read or write English. That argument may have held some sway in 1965, but that was quite a few generations ago. Concepts, such as telling the truth (especially when under oath), should not be strange or foreign to anyone.
Rachel Jeantel faces 2nd day of questioning in George Zimmerman trial | News - Home
Take a simple thing like describing to another person what "creepy ass cracka" means, and yet comming up with many versions, seeming to believe that words mean different things on different days in front of different people:
Patterico's Pontifications » Rachel Jeantel Tells Piers Morgan “Creepy Ass Cracka” Does Not Refer to a White Person, Morgan “Forgets” Her Courtroom Testimony to the Contrary
‘Star witness’ Rachel Jeantel: ‘Creepy-ass cracker’ means ‘pervert’ in my culture | Twitchy
First, you're talking entertainers picking rare events and trying to make it look larger. Redress was trying to point this out to you earlier. You just can't take so few and try to make it huge. Secondly, much of this is based in real issues, even today. The sixties only seem long ago. It really was just yesterday in terms of the problem. A bit arrogant for the priviledge group to tell minorities to get over it. Seriously.
She's often right on the mark, so she's right AND she gets the attention. How cool is that??It means Coulter is very intentionally trying to be a provocative jackass to get people talking about her.
Success.
That's the Left you're thinking of. Coulter's just brutally honest.Just about every time that Ann Coulter opens her mouth she reveals to the world exactly what kind of a low-life soulless lizard person she is.
If Ann Coulter came on TV and told me that the sky was blue, I'd call her a liar and check for myself. She's a horrid person who has done more damage to the right than anybody in the last 10 years combined.
Y'all seriously need to get her off your side.