Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
during that time YES THEY/you WERE!! ethnocentric maniacs in many areas of the country where there were some or no contact with blacks...typical can be another word for stereotypical
Yes, typical can mean stereotypical, but only if we wish to rationalize its obvious intended meaning and excuse its use.
For example, I would say excusing blatant black racism while condemning innocent behavior by whites is stereotypical black behavior, but I would never call it typical.
I think he 's being highly presumptuous but hey, this IS Donald Trump we're talking about here.
He may indeed have a great relationship with some Black Americans. But there are plenty of Black American voters that are being alienated by his Birther rants. John McCain was actually born outside the United States in Panama yet nary a question is raised about his American citizenship. The distinct impression many Black Americans get when it comes to the whole Birther issue is that it's really just another way for people to say they don't accept Barack Obama's legitimacy to the White House because they simply don't accept a non-White American as President of the United States.
McCain's citizenship has been questioned in the past, especially when he ran in 2008. Just google it, you'll find plenty of articles about it.
Nobody has the power to do "all things." A good leader has the ability to lead. And in either case, Donald Trump doesn't fill the bill.
Come to New York City, where a billionaire happens to be the incumbent Mayor. Those of us who call this city home know just what an awful idea a President Trump would be.
You can't produce a shred of evidence to prove that Wright even has an ounce of antipathy against whites. He's outspoken, which to you should be taken as hating whites.
Of course, i'm not surprised. Anytime we black folks aren't doing the Stepin Fetchit, it means that we hate whites.
Yes he called Harvard attending white people ignorant and not 2 minutes before that he was telling them about how he was fittin' to help all of his congregation out as he helped them understand how bad white people are, and have been, all the way back to Pilate.
Yes he called Harvard attending white people ignorant and not 2 minutes before that he was telling them about how he was fittin' to help all of his congregation out as he helped them understand how bad white people are, and have been, all the way back to Pilate.
Good luck with your blind allegiance.
I'm not supporting Rev. Wright but he didn't say what you are quoting. He said he denounces "White Supremacy" not "White People". You missed one word, and clearly the one word changes the context of the quote dramatically.
Location: Charlotte,NC, US, North America, Earth, Alpha Quadrant,Milky Way Galaxy
3,770 posts, read 7,547,554 times
Reputation: 2118
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475
Umm... his comment about the white people running your lives that are from Harvard and Yale... He's referring to Bush. Are you saying he was also saying Bush was a white supremacist?
If you missed it he named the entire SC and Thomas Jefferson. Are you also saying that Wright is claiming Thomas Jefferson and the entire SC are white supremacist?
That just proves the fact that he hates white people in general. Nothing more because he has zero facts to back up his claims.
But Reverend Wright is okay because his ideology is Black Liberation Theology. Trump's ideology is money and the only color he sees is green.
I don't even like Trump but he damn sure wouldn't go around the world apologizing for America and he can't be any more fascist acting than Obama-Immelt.
Jon, I will explicitly say exactly what I mean- you won't need to infer anything from it (and I'm impressed that you came up with 2 incorrect inferences from my response).
I simply said he didn't say what you quoted, that's it.
Yes he called Harvard attending white people ignorant and not 2 minutes before that he was telling them about how he was fittin' to help all of his congregation out as he helped them understand how bad white people are, and have been, all the way back to Pilate.
Good luck with your blind allegiance.
He was talking about white supremacists. Not whites in general. Do you understand the view points of the people he referenced?
Just came across this article by another person using a similar list.
It is no mere specter that has besieged black people. Besides chattel slavery, colonialism, apartheid, and Jim Crow, there are the scholarly smears penned by the West’s greatest minds [Which includes graduates of Yale and Harvard].
For centuries, white European and American historians, philosophers, and commentators--William Bosman, David Hume, Immanuel Kant, Thomas Jefferson, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Arnold J. Toynbee, Martin Heidegger, Ulrich B. Phillips, Frances Galton, John Fiske, James Henry Hammond, Theodore Roosevelt, Thomas Nelson Page, Woodrow Wilson, and others--insisted that Africans, blacks, and Negroes did not have any history or were inferior in both mental and physical endowments.
Such arguments epitomize the distorted and delusional reality fabricated and lived by so many human beings, regardless of ethnicity. The extended and perennial fantasies entertained about the status of blacks on the world’s stage speak for and belie themselves.
Believe it or not I understand every single point of view in this thread, I just disagree with them and can't possibly see how it could enrage someone so much as to write 16 paragraphs about the word "the" and seems like there is much a deeper problem with that poster, IMO.
If you missed it he named the entire SC and Thomas Jefferson. Are you also saying that Wright is claiming Thomas Jefferson and the entire SC are white supremacist?
Rev. Wright was referencing Supreme Court justices like Roger Taney who wrote in a majority opinion that:
The question before us is, whether the class of persons described in the plea in abatement [people of Aftican ancestry] compose a portion of this people, and are constituent members of this sovereignty? We think they are not, and that they are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States. On the contrary, they were at that time considered as a subordinate and inferior class of beings, who had been subjugated by the dominant race, and, whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their authority, and had no rights or privileges but such as those who held the power and the Government might choose to grant them. ...
They had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations; and so far inferior, that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery ...
The language of the Declaration of Independence is equally Conclusive: ...
We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among them is life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, Governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
The general words above quoted would seem to embrace the whole human family, and if they were used in a similar instrument at this day would be so understood. But it is too clear for dispute, that the enslaved African race were not intended to be included, and formed no part of the people who framed and adopted this declaration; for if the language, as understood in that day, would embrace them, the conduct of the distinguished men who framed the Declaration of Independence would have been utterly and flagrantly inconsistent with the principles they asserted; and instead of the sympathy of mankind, to which they so confidently appeared, they would have deserved and received universal rebuke and reprobation.
Yet the men who framed this declaration were great men -- high in literary acquirements -- high in their sense of honor, and incapable of asserting principles inconsistent with those on which they were acting. They perfectly understood the meaning of the language they used, and how it would be understood by others; and they knew that it would not in any part of the civilized world be supposed to embrace the negro race, which, by common consent, had been excluded from civilized Governments and the family of nations, and doomed to slavery. They spoke and acted according to the then established doctrines and principles, and in the ordinary language of the day, no one misunderstood them. The unhappy black race were separate from white by indelible marks, and laws long before established, and were never thought of or spoken of except as property, and when the claims of the owner or the profit of the trader were supposed to need protection.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
