The 2nd Amendment Lives! Shot Heard Round The World. FREEDOM WINS.

[sirs]

So, there you are folks.....it's the residual feelings, not just left over from slavery, from Jim Crow, but handed down, to each generation.  And Tee's answer in dealing with it.......DON'T.  Instead embrace the very antithesis of MLK's dream, and push policies that place 1 race over another, discriminate 1 race over another, because.........people have feelings.  And apparently they need to remain of the angry sort.  And if someone fails, it's "the white man's fault", or in this case, Bush's

Pretty sad, if not pathetic

[Plane]

The presence of white racist elements in the Republican Party is well-known. 

No I challenge the reality of this absolutely, the racist element has been treated as disposable ever since George Wallace made them stand and be counted , they didn't amount to much then and no one has been willing to do them any favors ever since

The need for any Republican President for support from the most racist wing of his party is obvious. 

  No, it is the Democrats that had this element locked up as their own until the middle sixties , when the Democrats began to abandon them they found no home with the Republicans . Richard Nixon in particular made certain that his appointment of Black persons would break any record set by his predecessors .

    I find this amusing that I, a Son of the Confederacy and You a proud Semitic Canadian are holding court on the character and the cultural authenticity of a man who has struggled out from under obstacles we measure with borrowed yardsticks.

[Xavier_Onassis]

You assume that because Nixon gladly catered to the racist vote, that this was contradicted by his appointment of Black people to various public offices.

These are not contradictory. Indeed, they were typically savvy political moves.

Some good ol' boy in Alabama would perhaps see appointing a Black judge in NY would be just givin' them damyankees what they deserved. He would be happy so long as the appointments were not given to some radical Black guy in his own beloved Tallahatchiefalootchmatawpha County.

It was not difficult for Nixon to make more appointments of Blacks in 1969, as there were so few at that time.

Carter's Black appointees were more numerous than Nixon's, too.
=============================
Many favors have been done for racists, like the end of the busing issue in many parts of the country. Observe that schools are still largely segregated, and busing students for integration purposes is no longer an issue.Even when the dead vote, they are not too concerned with issues.

Observe how the GOP consistently kowtowed to Senators Thurman, Helms and East




The most fervent of the racists are now all deceased or over 90, so this is less and less a concern.

[Michael Tee]

  <<I find this amuseing that I, a Son of the Confederacy and You a proud Semitic Canadian are holding court onthe caricter and the cultural authinticity of a man who has struggled out from under obsticles we measure with borrowed yardsticks.>>

Unfortunately the Jews don't have to borrow anyone's yardsticks to measure racism and persecution and oppression.  That's why there were so many Jewish activists in the Civil Rights struggles of the Sixties, we knew in our guts what the blacks had gone through.

<<No, it is the Democrats that had this element [southern white racists] locked up as their own untill the middle sixtys , when the Democrats began to abandon them . . . >>

True

<< . . .  they found no home with the Republicans . >>

False

Strom Thurmond, Trent Lott, Jesse Helms, George Allen, etc., these were squatters in Nixonland?  Come on, Nixon knew how to keep white racists on board, so did every Republican since Goldwater's Southern Strategy roped them in.   Appointment of token blacks to an anti-black party is the easiest and cheapest way for a national party to diffuse charges of racism by concentrating on a tiny number of favoured Toms while the black masses of the nation were getting the shaft.  Believe me, Strom Thurmond might have gagged at the thought of black appointees but he understood the necessity.  These guys, after all, are politicians.  They know how to count.

[Michael Tee]

<<So, there you are folks.....it's the residual feelings, not just left over from slavery, from Jim Crow, but handed down, to each generation.  >>

I appreciate the sarcasm, but have you anything factual to indicate that this description is not accurate for large numbers of black families?  Is there something illogical in suggesting that racism, Jim Crow, lynch law and de jure segregation are harmful to one's development as a person?  Or that damaged parents can produce damaged chilren?  Or that this can cycle down through the generations?  Really, sirs, if you see any flaws in those arguments, I would appreciate your pointing them out for me and for the millions of others who find this all very reasonable and in fact predicatble.

<<And Tee's answer in dealing with it.......DON'T.  Instead embrace the very antithesis of MLK's dream, and push policies that place 1 race over another, discriminate 1 race over another, because.........people have feelings.>>

This might be an excellent time to address the current right-wing bullshit that Martin Luther King would have - - based on one phrase in one speech -- opposed affirmative action.  A giant lie that has often passed uncontradicted in one right-wing racist diatribe after another.  In fact King advocated, more than once, affirmative action to even out the playing field and redress to some extent the persisting injustices of white American racism.

The following is but one of many articles which tell the truth about King and affirmative action:
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/04needs/affirm25.htm

[sirs]

<<So, there you are folks.....it's the residual feelings, not just left over from slavery, from Jim Crow, but handed down, to each generation.  >>

I appreciate the sarcasm, but have you anything factual to indicate that this description is not accurate for large numbers of black families? 

See?, that's the point.  It wasn't sarcasm, that is your foundation to this whole debate....feelings.  Since there are no longer actualy widespread tangible avenues of racist actions (outside of AA currently), all you have to hang your hat on our the residuals feelings of an era long gone. 

Sure there are still pockets of racism, and not just the south, but as Ami and Bt have referenced on numerous occasiona, all over, including metropolitan areas of Liberal land.  Point being, where racism does try to stand out, it's condemned by pretty much everyone, left and right.  Racist practices are condemned by nearly everyone left and right.  So, all that's left for folks like yourself, is to try and focus everyone on the residual feelings of Jim Crow, of Slavery, and claim that those feelings are enough to "damage" a child, and then that's child's child, and so on and so on.  Ironically then, to justify precisely the opposite of MLK's dream.

Dr. King would be rolling in his grave if he saw how mutated his message had been made

[Michael Tee]

<<See?, that's the point.  It wasn't sarcasm, that is your foundation to this whole debate....feelings.  Since there are no longer actualy widespread tangible avenues of racist actions (outside of AA currently), all you have to hang your hat on our the residuals feelings of an era long gone. >>

You keep talking about "feelings" when I am talking about damaged people.  People who have been told they're worthless by so many people in so many ways for so long a time that they internalized that judgment and felt themselves to be worthless.  They gave up on hope.  They lost the motivation to improve, to learn.  Lost motivation is more than a "feeling."  Something's been killed in them and it is not coming back.

My point was that some of that damage had to be permanent and that some of those damaged persons had to be bad parents, incapable of instilling feelings of self-respect or self-worth in their own kids. 

Your point seems to be that when the cause of the original damage is removed, the damage done will also go away.  Like Joe has polio that he got as a kid, but now polio's been eradicated through vaccination.  So if polio's gone, Joe must be cured, right?  Wrong.  My point was that the damage, once done, is not so easily undone.  You don't just tell a woman after thirty years of racist abuse dunning a non-step message of inferiority into her head, "Hey it's OK now, you can drink from this water fountain after all," and expect that she will suddenly turn into a great parent, filled with newfound pride and self-respect and suddenly capable of imparting her new-found self-respect to her kids.

I am not saying that EVERY black family proved unable to escape from the cycle of inter-generational transfers of the "lessons" of racism.  Many, to their everlasting credit, DID break free of the effects, went on despite everything to develop pride, self-esteem, academic and other distinctions and transmitted their values successfuly to their progeny.  Many others were not able to do so - - it is for them that programs like affirmative action are needed.

[sirs]

<<See?, that's the point.  It wasn't sarcasm, that is your foundation to this whole debate....feelings.  Since there are no longer actualy widespread tangible avenues of racist actions (outside of AA currently), all you have to hang your hat on our the residuals feelings of an era long gone. >>

You keep talking about "feelings" when I am talking about damaged people. 

How convenient....unmeasurable, unseen, mystic "damage".  That only happens by the "passing on" of such earlier "damage".   Nothing to actually say, "See?, racist!!, right there".  In other words, feelings that one has been "damaged".  I actually work with "damaged" people, every day, both physically and emotionally.  Their damage was brought on by ACTUAL events, and not talked into.

What a scary world you live in, where depending on one's pigment, you could be born damaged.  And to make sure, we'll remind you over and over and over again.  Again, the absolute antithesis of MLK Jr's Dream

[Michael Tee]

<<How convenient....unmeasurable, unseen, mystic "damage". >>

Unseen, unmeasurable mystic damage?  There's nothing unseen or unmeasurable or mystic about rates of incarceration, rates of school dropouts, rates of mental illness, disease, etc. 

<< That only happens by the "passing on" of such earlier "damage".  >>

Silly, eh?  How could psychologically damaged parents produce damaged kids?  What a crazy radical concept. 

<<Nothing to actually say, "See?, racist!!, right there".  In other words, feelings that one has been "damaged".  I actually work with "damaged" people, every day, both physically and emotionally.  Their damage was brought on by ACTUAL events . . . >>

ah, I see, ACTUAL events, not like lynchings, publicly segregated facilities and schools, Jim Crow laws and customs.  Actual events.  Like whiplash.  Never saw an emotionally traumatized patient that didn't get the trauma from an auto accident, right, sirs?  Nothing but whiplash produces emotional trauma, sez so right here in the DSM-IV, doesn't it?

<<What a scary world you live in, where depending on one's pigment, you could be born damaged.>>

No, you'd probably be born OK, but you stand a good chance of being raised in a way that you'll never reach your full potential, because your parents or parent just aren't capable of doing that for you.  I don't know if you are deliberately misrepresenting my argument here, or just didn't get it,

<<  And to make sure, we'll remind you over and over and over again.  >>

Honestly, sirs, I don't think too many of them are following this newsgroups.  Just so you don't misrepresent my ideas again, I'll take the pro-active step of reminding you I am not talking about all black children or all black families, just a significant number of them, the ones who weren't able to shake off the legacy of white American racism and the negative effects it had on their family.

<<Again, the absolute antithesis of MLK Jr's Dream>>

Just to correct your misleading bullshit once again, MLK DID recognize the NEED for affirmative action and the JUSTICE of it, as the article I cited made perfectly clear.  It contained excerpts from MLK's speeches and writings where he argued in favour of affirmative action, one particularly in which he told white America that it could not, after hundreds of years of special abuse to the Negro, decide now that for reasons of equality the Negro could not receive special accommodation to make up for the earlier abuse.  That is just plain common sense and justice, it shouldn't need MLK's or anyone else's endorsement, but since you are so fixated on the bullshit idea that affirmative action is the "antithesis" of MLK's dream, I thought it was a fact that you should be aware of.

[sirs]

"I have a dream that my 4 childrent will 1 day live in a nation, where they will NOT by judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their Character"

Yea, that's REALLY a push for policies that push 1 color of race over another, and the support of passing down generation after generation of how bad you supposedly have it.  Screw individual responsibility, it's the white man's fault for anything that goes bad in your life.

As I said, he's rolling in his grave at the mutation of his message

[Michael Tee]

"I have a dream that my 4 childrent will 1 day live in a nation, where they will NOT by judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their Character"

As the article pointed out, that ONE statement is the ONLY thing MLK ever said that the the opponents of affirmative action can interpret as being against affirmative action.  And it's obviously a dream of an ideal future, not a recipe for the policies that the nation requires to implement in order to get there.

The article points out the specific support that MLK gave to affirmative action initiatives, in fact, points out that MLK developed the first active program of affirmative action.  So to say that MLK opposed affirmative action, which he not only defended but actively put into practice, on the basis of his dream of an idealized future, is both dishonest and misleading.

Instead of selectively quoting from one single sentence of MLK's, which is not specifically dealing with policies but with long-range objectives, why don't you consider the specific words of support that MLK gave to the notion of affirmative action, and why don't you consider the specific affirmative action plan, referred to in the article, that MLK actually promoted himself?  Why don't you, in fact, read the article, which deals with King's lifetime work, rather than promoting your own absurd view of MLK's beliefs, based on one single sentence that he spoke?

[sirs]

"I have a dream that my 4 childrent will 1 day live in a nation, where they will NOT by judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their Character"

As the article pointed out, that ONE statement is the ONLY thing MLK ever said that the the opponents of affirmative action can interpret as being against affirmative action.  

By all means, demonstrate some quotes of MLK where he advocates policies of pushing his race over any others.  Please.

And it's obviously a dream of an ideal future, not a recipe for the policies that the nation requires to implement in order to get there.

And repeating the mantra of how terrible your life is, generation after generation, and that you can only accomplish getting out of it, NOT by your abilities, but only by policies that place your race ahead of others, is the opposite of of trying to "get us there".  It's an absolutely accomplishible goal, WHEN we start stopping treating and judging others by their skin pigment.  AA judges a person precisely by their race, and NOT by their character or abilities

[Plane]

http://academic.udayton.edu/race/04needs/affirm25.htm

Like Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, King viewed affirmative action as a means to achieving a truly egalitarian and color";blind society.

So the establishment in law of color lines is the path to a color blind society?


Some people like their illogic raw.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Brazil and Mexico were two societies in which there were unequal minorities. In both countries, until recently, it was illegal to identify people by race. There is no indication on a Mexican or Brazilian ID (carnet) or driver's license that a citizen is White, Black, Indian, Sambo, Mestizo or any other such classification.

The result?

Indians are overwhelmingly poor in Mexico, and Blacks are overwhelmingly poor in Brazil. The richest Mexicans and Brazilians, with the exception of the odd sports star or recording artist, and all pretty much white European.

Turn on Latino TV and you will see no Black, Mulatto, Sambo, Indian or dark Mestizo announcers.

The richest Mexican is Carlos Slim. The best known TV host is Don Francisco, a Chilean Jew.

There is no EEOC in Mexico or Brazil. That is the result.

The only attempts to reward competent Blacks with high profile jobs has taken place under Fidel Castro in Cuba and i Puerto Rico under the US EEOC.

It is logical to do that which works.

[Michael Tee]

sirs:  <<By all means, demonstrate some quotes of MLK where he advocates policies of pushing his race over any others.  Please.>>

I am happy to oblige.

1.  Martin Luther King's involvement in the first known affirmative action program is dealt with here:

<<The term "affirmative action" did not come into currency until after King's death--but it was King himself, as chair of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, who initiated the first successful national affirmative action campaign: "Operation Breadbasket."

<<In Atlanta, Philadelphia, Chicago and other cities, King staffers gathered data on the hiring patterns of corporations doing business in black communities, and called on companies to rectify disparities. "At present, SCLC has Operation Breadbasket functioning in some 12 cities, and the results have been remarkable," King wrote (quoted in Testament of Hope, James Washington, ed.), boasting of "800 new and upgraded jobs [and] several covenants with major industries."

2.  <<As far back as 1964, he was writing in Why We Can't Wait: "Whenever the issue of compensatory treatment for the Negro is raised, some of our friends recoil in horror. The Negro should be granted equality, they agree; but he should ask nothing more. On the surface, this appears reasonable, but it is not realistic.">>

3.  <<As he [King] put it, "A society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something special for the Negro" to compete on a just and equal basis (quoted in Let the Trumpet Sound, by Stephen Oates).>>

4.  <<In a 1965 Playboy interview, King compared affirmative action-style policies to the GI Bill: "Within common law we have ample precedents for special compensatory programs.... And you will remember that America adopted a policy of special treatment for her millions of veterans after the war.">>

see http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1292 for the article from which the above was taken.

sirs:  <<And repeating the mantra of how terrible your life is, generation after generation, and that you can only accomplish getting out of it, NOT by your abilities, but only by policies that place your race ahead of others, is the opposite of of trying to "get us there". >>

sirs, you are obviously very confused.  NOBODY is "repeating" any "mantras" to black kids to explain anything.  The "mantras" that you hear are probably white people arguing against white people over matters that concern black people.  If current anti-poverty theory is correct, a large part of the permanent underclass is hard-wired for lifetime failure somewhere between their second and fourth or fifth birthdays.  This did not happen because somebody was reciting mantras at them.  It was due to inadequate parenting, caused by inadequate parenting in the generation before, caused by inadequate parenting in the generation before, . . . all the way back to slavery. 

Most people seem to have no difficulty accepting the fact or the theory that slavery can seriously mess up a person's head, cause difficulties in self-esteem, submissiveness, hopelessness etc.  Most people have no difficulty accepting the fact or theory that persons so damaged are not likely to be ideal parents, that they can fail miserably in creating self-respecting, resourceful, optimistic, well-adjusted children.  Most people have no difficulty with the concept that the abolition of slavery will not cure the damage that slavery has already done to the psyches of many former slaves and will not stop them from being bad parents once they were already damaged psychologically.  And most people seem to have no difficulty accepting the fact or theory that the children of damaged slaves will themselves not be ideal parents of the next generation, will not have the parenting skills to break the cycle of inadequate parenting ==> kids who will be themselves inadequate parents = = > another generation of kids who will not be adequate parents = => more damaged children etc.

You for some unfathomable reason or reasons seem to be unable to grasp these simple concepts.  I give up on getting you to see this.  I am only setting it out one more time as clearly as I can, NOT so as to persuade you, but merely in the hopes that if you wish to pursue the thread, you will at least get my ideas down straight without any more misrepresentation of them.