Beneath their vast moral and ideological differences, George W. Bush and Ralph Nader have something in common: difficulty attracting black voters. A mid-September CBS News poll of African-Americans found that zero percent support Nader, 8 percent prefer Bush, and 80 percent plan to vote for John Kerry. According to a recent article in the New York Times, many black Americans see… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (41)Page 1 of 1 pagesget used to it rerter. both puppets are big fat liars.
Posted by cyberella2002 on Oct 28, 2004 at 7:16 PM Wow. I knew the levels were disproportionate, but I had no idea 12 percent of African-American males between ages 20 and 34 were locked up in prisons. That’s scary. Hmmm, maybe if we ignore the problem it will go away? It does seem to be the solution of choice afterall…
Posted by tomkins on Oct 28, 2004 at 7:43 PM Affirmative action is not the right way to go but there are other less obvious factors in American society that tries to tip the balance against minorities. In the case of the University of Michigan, the claim is that the higher sat score is solid as rock in determining success in college and intelligence. As we know the SAT’s is composed of a verbal and a math section. Obviously minority families are going to have less proper usage of grammar and writing in the household either through the language barrier as immigants or historial tendencies that will naturally put them at a disadvantage for language parts of the exam. On the other hand math is a universal language that transcends culture and puts everyone in a more equal setting. However recently the college board has announced that the SAT’s will be adding another verbal writing section to the test for 2006. This move will obviously create more barriers against minority students in favor of caucasian students, an example of formulated favoritism.
Affirmative action is so blatantly flawed that many people will try to eradicate it, usually on the premise of higher SAT scores. On the other hand this formulated favoritism is considered a “standardized test” it tries to hide the fact that it’s discriminatory, which makes it many times worse than affirmative action.
Posted by Dan on Oct 28, 2004 at 9:31 PM Ralph Nader has touched on many of institutional reasons for the historic and continued disparities between whites and others, but I think most blacks feel they need to give as much of their support to a candidate they feel has a chance of redeating Bush.
Kerry and the Democratic party aren’t considering the substantive and radical changes needed to address centuries of maltreatment, and the fact that non-whites (blacks in particular) are disadvantaged in almost every measurable way imaginable (wealth, education, employment, the justice system, etc.) is still largely considered mainly “cultural” problems. The trap of the two-party system is that the debate is kept within certain comfortable parameters that fail to challenge the current situation, so the situation continues to worsen.
I’m just wondering how much longer African Americans are collectively willing to endure life as it is in the US. We’ve been getting screwed over for so many years that we’ve almost developed a masochistic comfort with it, while ignoring the obvious long term implications. How much longer are we supposed to suffer while trying to make this “melting pot” impediment-free and non-discriminatory?
To me, it’s high time to reconsider the forty acres and a mule principle: An independent state of and for African Americans in which the caustic effects of racism are removed completely and our true worth can be realized without such unnecessary distractions. This is the only sort of reparations worth considering as it is plainly clear that as long as the US is racially heterogenous, color-based racial hierarchy will continue to reign supreme.
Posted by Shawn on Oct 29, 2004 at 4:07 AM I am an African-American political scientist who has lived in the Massachusetts for fifteen years. If you want to measure the hypocrisy of Senator Kerry’s rhetoric about treating our people fairly, take a good look at the intensifying oppression of the masses of Afro-Descendant youth in Roxbury, Dorchester and Mattapan. These areas have become killing fields where youth increasingly suffer from mal-education, high unemployment, environmental racism and rising influx of drugs and weapons.
City, state and national officials (including of course Kerry and Kennedy) have all failed to address the roots of these problems. Like President Bush, Senator Kerry also has the arrogance to fiercely oppose Reparations for Afro-Descendants while fiercely supporting both Reparations and massive military aid to Israel.
Thanks to the diligent work of Black scholars and activists in the United Nations, the U.S. government will soon be brought to justice in the international legal arena. By continuing to practice ethnocide and forced assimilation against Afro-Descendants, the USA is blatantly violating U.N. Covenants. Whichever rich, corrupt Caucasian wins the election he will be required to bow his head to the just demands of the Reparations Movement.
Sincerely,
Minister Malik Al-Arkam
www.AllForReparations.org
Posted by Malik Al-Arkam on Oct 29, 2004 at 10:54 AM “I’m just wondering how much longer African Americans are collectively willing to endure life as it is in the US.”
Go ahead and leave. Do you think blacks (specifically descendents of slaves) would be better off in the land of their ancestors? Blacks in the U.S. have a much higher standard of living, even if they do have to contend with the evil white man. If you want to start an independent state and take all black Americans with you, best of luck. That would certainly make life easier for us taxpayers because we would no longer have to foot the bill for black crimes, governments handouts to blacks, and the blacks in prison.
And I’m glad to see that Malik is back and crazier than ever. Here’s an offer for reparations, Malik: we can send every descendent of a slave to the part of Africa his ancestor was taken from. How does that sound?
And how exactly is the U.N. going to force the United States to go along with your plan? I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but the government doesn’t give a shit about the U.N.
Posted by Ted on Oct 29, 2004 at 2:53 PM The dimes worth of difference between Kerry and Bush becomes a dollars worth only because Black folks have been politically boxed in a corner by our marriage with the Democratice party. Our agenda will never be heard until we dissolve this union. However, now is not the time to walk out, after this election Black Americans have to demand that the Democrats put up or shut up. After we show the Democrats that we can elect their candidates into office, they have to know we can elect them out as well. And if we can’t elect anyone that will promote our agenda to any meaningful effect maybe we need to abandon trying to achieve “equality” through politics and let the Democrats become an endangered species then pursue real power through cooperative economics, since it’s all about the almighty dollar anyway.
Posted by theloneous on Oct 29, 2004 at 2:58 PM I think it is ridiculous to base an ethnic group’s success or short-comings on an elected official. I am an American, who happens to be black, and the day I trust a politician or lawyer is the day I will give up my life. Politico’s do not care about anything that they are not told to care about(local government members are good people, though). I have been fairly successful in my life for these reasons: because I am not dead, have never been arrested, i can read and write(a little), and I earn a good living. Is that because of President Nixon, or my parents teaching me that no one is smarter or better than me just because of the color of my or their skin. The day an elected official can change the state of living for people of color, as a whole, will be the day we discover Elvis is still alive.
Posted by Ernest on Oct 29, 2004 at 7:21 PM In response to Ted:
I see that you didn’t understand the gist of my comments on reparations for African Americans, so let me elaborate for you.
The forty acres and a mule principle that I mentioned will be on North American soil, Ted, not African. We’ve worked, toiled, and contributed too much to the immense wealth of this country to up and leave. Most African Americans have lived here much longer than many whites (especially those who arrived in the early 1900s), so Africa is as much oru home as Europe would be yours.
This independent state would naturally comprise five or six southern states, since the majority of African Americans still reside in the south. All taxes being paid into the US treasury by African Americans should be removed and used to help fund relocation (which would be completed within a 10-20 year span). Any whites choosing to remain in the southern states would be free to do so, but they will be living under black laws under a black government.
This is an idea I think many whites of your mentality would fully back; we’ll be released from having to deal with your problems, you will be free of ours. All Africans held in your prisons would be released and placed in comprehensive rehabilitation centers, and drug addicts will be offered free treatment for their addictions, so white people won’t be burdened in the least. The whole point is that anywhere in the world in which non-whites live in proximity with whites, the non-whites are marginalized and exploited.
Don’t think you’ll get as easily as having all blacks leave for Africa, Ted! To “repair” the centuries of damage done to America’s blacks, you’ll necessarily have to sacrifice as well!
Posted by Shawn on Oct 30, 2004 at 6:26 AM Good luck on that one. Do you really think the government is going to give away states? Take a look at the Constitution, Shawn. I’m pretty sure it doesn’t give the federal government the authority to dissolve states and replace them with an independent nation. Blacks have “contributed too much to the immense wealth of this country?” Maybe you should factor in what blacks have cost this country in crime and government handouts and see who comes out ahead.
Posted by Ted on Oct 30, 2004 at 2:56 PM People like Ted, who go on about African-Americans costing this country in “crime and goverment handouts” are proof positive that many white folks live in a bubble called white supremacy. Truth be told, Ted there are more whites getting “goverment handouts” in my state of Oregon, and nationwide then those pesky black folks comming out “ahead”. Perhaps you should seek out other white folks who are supposedly stealing your hard earned wages thru those “handouts” you talk about!
The recent issue of Black Commentator: http://www.blackcommentator.com/111/111_moral_universe.html reveals the moral compass of a significant number of white folks: No injustice is too brazen for any of these individuals to dismiss as just something black folks like myself, as “making shit up”
Posted by Eric on Oct 30, 2004 at 7:45 PM Enough already!!!! It has to do with taxes. Kerry voted AGAINST the 1000.00 you & I get for each child on on taxes -every year. It’s not just last year, it is this year & the next & next. I have 3 children. I get 3000.00 in my pocket every year. NOT a deduction, but a CREDIT!!!- cash in my pocket. Kerry voted against the bill. In JUly, Kerry rushed back for a vote in the Senate on a bill which makes it a FEDERAL crime if a pregnant woman is hurt so badly thru violence that her baby dies.. KERRY VOTED AGAINST THIS BILL. Go to VOTE-SMART.ORG. You click on whatever issue concerns you & see how Kerry & Edwards voted- actually any Senator across the country. Laura Bush worked in inner-city Houston schools (black schools) as a teacher. She was sickened how black students were told they couldn’t learn & that there was no use trying. That is why she started no child left behind. EVERY CHILD CAN LEARN it is a start- something we’ve been promised by Democrats for years & they never follow thru. I am a Democrat, but Bush gets my vote this year. Remember Kerry & his wife own 38 Heinz companies around the world and 8 mansions.
Posted by anne on Oct 31, 2004 at 10:23 AM Anne you are so easily mislead. Leave No Child Behind was passed into law and then immediately underfunded by your precious Bush. Pell Grants( the primary funding for black higher education) has been and will continue to be beaten into nonexistence by your precious Bush. Senator Kerry voted against the violence against pregnant women bill for the simple reason that it is unconstitutional. You neither understand law nor do you understand when an assault is being made upon your pocket since that $3000.00 credit is eaten up by local taxes that you incur because federal funding to states has been slashed. Read something more involved than the “newspaper” and you might get a clue.
Posted by Raoul on Oct 31, 2004 at 11:11 AM I don’t know where you live, but sales tax in my county in SC is 5%. And the taxes would have been the same with or without the $3000.00 in my pocket that Kerry voted against. Why did he vote against this huge tax cut for parents and then says he is for the middle class????He’s had 20yrs to do something for us.
If we had put someone else on the ticket I would have voted for them,,, but this guy ,,,,uh huh.
Also, I am not concerned about why or why Kerry voted against unborn victims act, fact is his vote says NO problem to abusers of Women who kill our unborn babies.
Why, when Australia has 2000 troops in Iraq did Kerry’s sister (Diana Kerry) try to get the President of Australia ousted??? She campaigned hard for the opposition who said they wouldn’t support the US. I thought he would form a better coilition in IRAQ. Do an internet search yourself.
Posted by anne on Oct 31, 2004 at 12:13 PM http://www.ctj.org/pdf/gwbsc.pdf
In this report, CTJ reports that most South Carolinians won’t benefit from the vaunted tax
credit for children Anne talks about. But then confronted with information to the contrary, she changes the subject. And fyi I saw NONE of these supposed tax cuts you go on about. Like every thing else in the supposed “land of the free”, the election has everything to do with race, the big elephant in the room no one wants to talk about, least of all Anne.
Posted by Eric on Oct 31, 2004 at 8:11 PM Eric, I hope there are more whites on welfare in Oregon, considering the state about 90% white. Am I supposed to be impressed? And I’m no white supremacist, by the way. I’m only pointing out the fact that blacks have cost this country a lot of money, something that people need to account for when they get started on how much money this country owes to the black population. As long as 75% of black children are being born out of wedlock, blacks have no business blaming their problems on whites.
Posted by Ted on Oct 31, 2004 at 8:51 PM Ted you are the most ignorant person I’ve never met. “blacks cost americans money”? That’s the most racist thing i’ve ever heard. Social programs are meant to help the poor regardless of race. It just happens to be that blacks are unproportionally poor in this country, but it has more to do with social ills rather than just because they are black.
Posted by Dan on Nov 1, 2004 at 2:03 AM Dan, get a hold of yourself. What I said is not racist, nor is it ignorant. It’s a fact and it’s no more racist than pointing out that 75% of black children are born bastards (if you want to blame poverty on “social ills” then you can start with that one). The government pays a disproporionate amount in handouts to blacks and because of black crime, there’s no denying that. If you think recognizing that fact is racist then you’re the ignorant one. All I’m saying is that when people like Shawn and Minister Malik Al-Arkam are sitting around trying to calculate how much money the government owes blacks they need to account for how much blacks have cost the government. I’m not trying to get into the business of figuring that out. All I’m saying is that people calling for “reparations” need to keep in mind that blacks could end up getting a bill instead of a check. If you think considering that possibility is racist then you need a thicker skin.
Posted by Ted on Nov 1, 2004 at 4:23 AM Putting the straw man arguments aside for one moment, are you intimating that other ethnic minorites have not cost the U.S. money in “social programs”? Are you seriously suggesting that only blacks have sucked at the tit of Govt. handouts? To describe your argument as undeveloped is to grant it a charity that no logician would ever dream.
How can we calculate the profits that Black Americans and other ethnic minorites have contributed to the USA? How much are the inventions of Dr. Carter, Lewis Lattimore and Dr. Drew worth? or Garrett Morgan and Elijah McCoy? Do you even know who these men are? How much tax revenue and investment capital did southern states and plantations owners generate from slavery? Did planters benefit from wage depression during Jim Crow?
All questions that must be considered for any meaningful analysis along the lines of thought you have presented. You are confusing causal relationships.
Perhaps if Black Americans were not guided into such a complete dysfunction by racism and Jim Crow, they would not be in any need of Govt. “handouts”.
William
Posted by William on Nov 1, 2004 at 12:43 PM William
You make an excellent point, this country needs to learn its history, not the “in 1492 Columbus sailed the ocean blue” myth, but the real history. Lerone Bennet Jr.s’ They Came Before The Mayflower should be mandatory reading for every American. Also, the issue of reparations is one between African Americans and the federal government, not the American people. Black folks have had a relationship with the governing powers in this country dating back the 1600’s, way before mass European immigration. In fact, Black people were the majority of the population in most of the southern states when this country fought for and won its independence. Prior to the civil war most of the capital generated by the American economy derived in the south from the export of agricultural products. That capital financed America’s “manifest destiny” expansion, built the railroads which helped “settle” the territories and spurred the industrial revolution. Opportunities made possible by expansion and settlement of the country’s interior and development of the industrial infrastructure spurred European immigration to America. If not for free Black labor this country would not have been able to develop to a point that it would have drawn the ancestors of current day white Americans to come here. And that’s just the economic side of our contribution to this country. Culturally Black contributions are even more significant and prevalent. Americans, especially white Americans need to learn real American history before they stick their noses into Black folks business.
Posted by theloneous on Nov 1, 2004 at 3:56 PM William, I’m not suggesting that we should try to calculate whether the U.S. has profited from or paid for blacks (or any other group) in this country. I know that’s impossible, not to mention useless. I’m not denying the contribution of blacks or any of the factors you cite. I’m only reminding people like Shawn and Al-Arkam to account for the costs as well.
And Theloneous: I’m not sticking my “nose into Black folks business,” I’m responding to the futile, time-worn argument that we (whites, the federal government, etc.) owe them something. I’m white and I don’t a red cent to you, Shawn, Malik, or any other person because of their race.
Posted by Ted on Nov 1, 2004 at 7:08 PM Simplistic answers to complicated problems not only don’t work, but make the person spoting them out look a bit foolish. But glad to see that at least some of you agree that reparations is a non-starter practicality-wise. The solution, it seems to me, is simply to wait. The fastest growing population group is composed of those who are of mixed raced. And as whites (and blacks and hispanics and…) see and relate to a mixed race grandson, grandaughter, niece/nephew, etc. attitudes will slowly change. It’s hard to hate what is is fundementally a part of yourself.
That’s not to say we should ignore the current situation. On the contrary, but in order to do that we need to start by changing the framework, our perception of the problem. For example, instead of looking at it as a black/white/minority issue, look at it from an economic one, i.e., replace racial criteria with economic criteria. Treat education as if it really is the silver bullet so many say it is. And most importantly, start talking with, not at each other. It shouldn’t be, “the person who yells the loudest wins.” That not only does not help the cause, but has become really boring, ya know?
Posted by tomkins on Nov 1, 2004 at 10:05 PM <I’m only reminding people like Shawn and Al-Arkam to account for the costs as well.>
Sir, lets be clear. Do you believe for one moment that the sundry financial, agricultural, and industrial profits that this slave labor produced for America is in deficit to the “social programs” that black americans have ostensibly used?
Every social program you can name that has professed to give “handouts” to Black Americans has been used by Whites as well, even affirmative action ( and yes, whites have attended and graduated from historically (sp) black colleges).
Certainly whites have benifited from welfare, WIC, Head Start, Medicare and Medicaid. White women have most certainly benefited from affirmative action.
Have you ever heard of the Tuskegee Airmen Ted? Another “program / handout” for blacks i suppose. these men are the only fighter wing in aviation warfare history to never loose a bomber escort during a sortie in WWII. should we calculate the cost of B-17 and B-24 bombers saved during their tenure as aviators versus their training cost? should we calculate the value of the white pilots and flight engineers saved versus the black pilots?
if your arguments are a commentary on the absurdity of such cost / benefit evaluations we are in agreement.
Ted, what are we discussing and or arguing at this point?
Posted by William on Nov 1, 2004 at 10:38 PM Just one Question, not so off topic, but yah, kinda.
America liberates what it wants from others. we see it everday and its going on now. America sells “Legal” drugs and makes illegal the drugs that can be made by the common man. America boasts its the biggest and the best. WE have always done this. Rosevelt sent the Battleship fleet sailing just to baost. USA proudly tells the UN to fuck off when it gets the chance. And though i don’t disagree, which is to say i don’t completely agree, let’s not forget that stealing from one person is a crime, and stealing from everyone is taxation! How can we be so appalled from any rapper stealing, selling drugs or grabbing his penis on stage when the government and politicians have been modeling this for us for so long?
Posted by Homer Carroll "That Frustrated Ranting Liberal Guy on Nov 1, 2004 at 10:56 PM HA! I missed anne’s first post. Lets say I agree with you…
Now check out this website and prepare to be astonished! http://www.bushrelativesforkerry.com/pages/1/index.htm
Posted by Homer Carroll "That Frustrated Ranting Liberal Guy on Nov 1, 2004 at 11:07 PM Although I voted for Nader in 1996 and 2000, and fully support his right to run this time too, I
did vote absentee for Kerry the other week because
of church-state separation issues, abortion being
the most prominent but not the only one.
Bush does have the neocon gang and the Texas confederates so I think most blacks will vote
for Kerry. The GOP is using abortion, gay marriage
and some other wedge issues to appeal to the social conservatism of blacks who otherwise would
be opposed to the GOP socio-economic platform.
I think we need to put aside reparations and other divisive issues for the election tomorrow
and vote for Kerry as the best way to stop Bush’s
extreme fundamentalism here at home and to put
a brake on the neocon empire-building in the Middle East. Kerry, though no great liberal, is
going to be more receptive to black concerns
and more New Dealish than Bush could ever be.
I’m quite irritated at the disgraceful Nader bashing done by Norman Solomon, Chomsky, the
Eric Alterman cretin at The Nation and many,
many other left-liberals. They would have been
better off ignoring Nader than this stupid and
unceasing bashing. Nader being in the race does
put some left pressure on Kerry.
Bush is just going to continue prison building
and repression. I urge those of you here in California to vote Yes on 66, to amend this
fascistic Taliban-like Three strikes law.
Kerry would be more susceptible to pressure
from blacks and other progressive constituencies
than Bush/Cheney.
Posted by Michael Hardesty on Nov 1, 2004 at 11:43 PM Ted—you are continuously MISLED by the media’s manipulative efforts, (which are the BIASES of rich, WHITE CEO’s that OWN them), to believe that SINGLE unwed mothers, criminal blacks, and WELFARE recipients are to blame for societal ills or their own predicaments. Because you have had the privilege of being born white and not having to deal with discrimination and prejudice on the basis of your skin, you are completely OBLIVIOUS to the realities, plights and TRIBULATIONS of the people of color in this society.
Those same ideas and stereotypes that you harbor towards blacks, is the same reason why blacks have a hard time finding housing and securing jobs (where 42-58% of black women do NOT receive interview calls back—STRICTLY on the basis of their names!!)
This RIDICULOUS “American ideal” that all one has to do is pull themselves up by the bootstraps and succeed is NONSENSE @ best!! The reason why people push so hard for reparations affirmative action is not because each individual white person of today’s society PERSONALLY wronged blacks—but because as people of color in this society there has been unfair opportunities and preferential treatment given towards whites, ESPECIALLY over blacks, in almost every facet imaginable. (JUST BECAUSE THEY’RE WHITE.)
Posted by Cali on Nov 2, 2004 at 1:04 AM Hello Ted. I read your comments with great trepidation. Here’s why: Blacks are unfairly treated in this country. That is fact. To deny that is just like the current Bush administration’s continual denial that everything is proceeding very badly in Iraq and that Saddam and Osama are not and never were collaborators. You speak of crime and imprisonment as though they were genuine measures of success of a group of people instead of recognizing that crimes are a construct of society that changes with the whim and will of the voters. Tomorrow, I’m voting against you.
And Anne, I feel much anger and hatred from you. If you truly despised Kerry, and then decided to vote for Bush because of tax breaks, then please consider the following. Since we all live and participate in this so-called American society, we have a duty to participate in it, be it paying taxes, voting, sitting on a jury, etc. In a word, a member in a society is responsible. If you have three children, maybe you should pay for those three children instead of piggy-backing on government credits. Be responsible. Tomorrow, my vote negates yours.
Cheers!
Posted by hoan on Nov 2, 2004 at 4:44 AM Hoan, what is your point? Are you suggesting that because the voters ultimately determine the laws then criminals aren’t really culpable for breaking them? You sound pretty impressed with yourself for being able to point out the obvious fact that the voters determine what is and what isn’t a crime, but if you’re going to quote a civics book then at least get your theories in line. Like “paying taxes, voting, sitting on a jury, etc.,” obeying the law is part of living in a society. People who can’t live within the law are not “successful.”
Posted by Ted on Nov 2, 2004 at 6:01 PM Thoroux, Al Sharpton, MLK, MLK Jr, Malcom X, even freakin Harriet Tubman (though success with her is of a slightly diferent nature) all at some point lived outside the law and were successful.
Snoop Dogg, Eminem, Dr Dre. Basketball players who choke their coach even all seem to live outside the law, would they be unssuccessful do you say? Many of these people are disruptive and many are constructive, did living outside the law change this?
Ted I agree with portions of the things you say, but my God man, you sound so racist. Have you been accused of this before, I wonder.
Posted by Homer Carroll "That Frustrated Ranting Liberal Guy on Nov 2, 2004 at 6:48 PM Hello Ted. To answer your question: I am not suggesting anything. I state only facts. I have a question for you: Do you obey a law because it’s a law or because the law is sensible? Here, “sensible” means reasonable within the time and place of obeying the law. Forgive my list of societal features in the U.S. It will differ from place to place and time to time. But society is not a static thing as you imply. It changes; and with it such things as legal laws. Take what you will from this. Enjoy!
Posted by hoan on Nov 3, 2004 at 3:42 AM I’m disappointed by not only the presidential election results, but the election itself. Bush vs. Kerry? Ugh! Two very rich men who have little in common with the common person.
When will we get to choose candidates for high office who know what it’s like to actually have to work a job, raise a family, pay a mortgage, deal with an ill loved one, regardless of race or ethnicity? In short, someone who knows struggle?
I’m a black American pushing 45 and I want to see Godly people running for office, not for personal gain or power, but for the idea of truly serving people. I want to vote for a candidate who truly sees the military as a Department of “Defense,” not one of aggression. I want a candidate who will take care of home first, then spread goodwill throughout the rest of the world as a shining example of what a nation can be.
I want a candidate who is not afraid to show his warts, reminding the voters that no one is perfect. I long to vote for candidates who will encourage both capitalism but also leave the safety net in place for those who cannot make it on their own.
I’d love to pull the lever for a person, regardless of color, who stands firm on God-centered convictions and not on the latest poll results.
But alas, I also know that man is a fallen creature, and our political system is only reflective that that simple fact. But a person can dream, right?
Posted by LW on Nov 3, 2004 at 6:59 AM KERRY IS DUMB!!! ANd he is a big fat liar
Posted by rerter on October 28, 2004 at 10:37 AM
Perhaps he is, perhaps he is not (he’s smart enough to have lots of money and a shot at the Presidency).
However, he isn’t as dumb as those people who voted for Bush. And all those blue collar workers who voted for him??
You are about to get your just reward in the next 4 years!!!
Ha, ha!!!
Posted by AJ on Nov 3, 2004 at 11:26 PM Ted:
You didn’t see anything in my posts suggesting that whites “give” African Americans anything; that is your (and many other whites) assertion based on the racist assumption that African Americans want something for nothing. I am suggesting that this “multicultural” experiment has been a colossal failure from the black perspective, and that it is futile to suffer trying to make it work. It is painfully obvious that the two groups can’t live together without one group feeling it needs to maintain its historically establishment position of advantage.
I suggested that any tax money paid by African Americans be removed into a separate treasury to support the establishment of an independent nation (black people do pay taxes too, Ted). Actually, we don’t need the government’s approval; if thousands of blacks began relocating voluntarily, white flight would insure the development of a black, North American nation.
I don’t understand your sort of hostility to even the mention of reparations to African Americans, when it is easily considered and granted to others. This sort of instant animosity suggests a deep sense of guilt from past indiscretions, but also hints at some other issues white Americans have yet to confront within themselves.
Posted by Shawn on Nov 4, 2004 at 5:45 AM Okay, Shawn, you have me pegged. I oppose paying people for wrongs done their ancestors for the sole reason that I harbor a deep sense of guilt from past indiscretions, not to mention other issues that I, as a white American, have yet to confront within myself.
Posted by Ted on Nov 5, 2004 at 1:38 AM I know you’re being sarcastic, Ted, but you know that what I said was the truth. Maybe you’ve never thought about why you think the way you do, but it would do you some good.
Posted by Shawn on Nov 5, 2004 at 4:57 AM Shawn, I have a better idea. Why don’t you just tell me what I think or, better yet, what to think? I apologize for disagreeing with you and look forward to you keeping me in line from now on. Or at least I’m pretty sure that’s what I’m thinking. Let me know.
Posted by Ted on Nov 5, 2004 at 9:22 PM Ted your and idiot, so get over it, and for those who reply to such an idiot should realize they are just wasting their time..Thanks!!
Posted by whatever on Nov 5, 2004 at 10:00 PM i THINK THIS IS A GOOD THING TI DO WHEN YOU U POST THIS ON THE INTERNET FOR PEOPLE TO SEE. IT MAY HELP THE THEM WITH THERE CULTERE
Posted by TEVIN on Feb 8, 2005 at 7:48 PM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Paul Street
- Saving a Public Park
Benton Harbor citizens fight to stop Whirlpool's luxury golf course - Brother, Can You Spare a Dime?
Despite the claims of some leftists, there’s a dire difference between Bush and Kerry for African-Americans. - The Kids Aren’t All Right
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1979 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
427 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2004 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
