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.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,585,101 times
Reputation: 9169
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez
She says blacks have a harder time doing something than other races. She feels blacks aren't as capable. She is a racist.
How did you get there? It has to do with poverty, not race. I mean, I am capable of going to a Bentley dealer and asking for a Continental GT, but I can't get it due to lack of $200,000. Do you see the point?
How did you get there? It has to do with poverty, not race. I mean, I am capable of going to a Bentley dealer and asking for a Continental GT, but I can't get it due to lack of $200,000. Do you see the point?
I agree with you that it absolutely about poverty and economics.
That is why any leftist (or anyone else) who uses the term "white privilege" is a racist. Are you really claiming that some meth-head's child in Appalachia has had a better shot at life than an African American born to wealthy parents and given a world class education?
I watched her speech and watched McConnell give her the slap-down.
Why read an article about something I saw with my own eyes?
If Coretta Scott King is who you're referring to, and you're saying the reading of her letter should be allowed, then I would ask you this: Should another Senator be allowed to read a letter from me impugning the reputation of Senator Warren by calling her the lying fraud and cheat that she undoubtedly is?
Apparently there are rules against that sort of thing in the Senate.
Furthermore, there aren't two sides to the story about Warren. She is a liar, period.
There ARE two sides to the story about Sessions. He has been defended by blacks in Alabama regarding the very case CSK complained about in her letter, and he has been defended by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
The debate isn't about Warren...it's about Sessions.
What's in that letter that scares you all so much?
How did you get there? It has to do with poverty, not race. I mean, I am capable of going to a Bentley dealer and asking for a Continental GT, but I can't get it due to lack of $200,000. Do you see the point?
She didn't say poor people, she said blacks.
Sessions represented Alabama. In Alabama, Hispanics have a higher rate of poverty than blacks.
If she wanted to discuss which group represents the poor in Alabama, since Hispanics have a greater problem with poverty in Alabama, that would have been the group to pick.
Obviously, if you want to discuss the poor, you discuss the poor. She chose blacks, because her racist tendencies slipped out.
Why was she dicussing civil rights in regards to his nomination?
Because he's being nominated for attorney general, genius! The chief law enforcement officer of the country.
He's already been rejected before for a judgeship based on his record in Alabama. Are we supposed to forget that? He's an Alabama Republican that has a long record of hostility towards African Americans.
Some of us know about the Marion 3 case, and find his involvement in it to be highly problematic. You know...the way you all found Reverend Wright to be a problem when he wasn't even being nominated for anything and wasn't a public figure.
But now, impugning a white man is a bad thing, even though he clearly doesn't like blacks at best...hates blacks at worst.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,585,101 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez
She didn't say poor people, she said blacks.
Sessions represented Alabama. In Alabama, Hispanics have a higher rate of poverty than blacks.
If she wanted to discuss which group represents the poor in Alabama, since Hispanics have a greater problem with poverty in Alabama, that would have been the group to pick.
Obviously, if you want to discuss the poor, you discuss the poor. She chose blacks, because her racist tendencies slipped out.
When politicians speak about "blacks", I am smart enough to assume they mean inner city blacks and not all black people. They aren't referring to people like Herman Cain or Ben Carson, at least that's my assumption
The debate isn't about Warren...it's about Sessions.
What's in that letter that scares you all so much?
She was attempting to paint Sessions as a racist by reading a civil rights letter during the nominyprocess of an appointee from Alabama.
I'd say it would have been just as relevant for a person to read a letter from a Holocaust survivor when Timothy Geitner was going through the process.
She was attempting to paint Sessions as a racist by reading a civil rights letter during the nominyprocess of an appointee from Alabama.
I'd say it would have been just as relevant for a person to read a letter from a Holocaust survivor when Timothy Geitner was going through the process.
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.
