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.
Okay. Peace. Yes, it's gone off topic and I apologize. What I see from your posts is a disagreement with the NAACP for not supporting and/or embracing Rachel as a leader in their organization. Is that correct? Asking this specifically because sometimes subtle nuance escapes me. If that is the case (criticism of their reluctance to keeping her on), my question is, why should they?
IMO, the leadership of the NAACP privately supports Ms. Dolezal and the work she did running that NAACP office. By any measure, that office was well run and respected. I'm sure there were many personal relationships too. It's not unreasonable to assume they even knew her parents were White. It didn't matter as it was a private matter.
But the NAACP is a public organization and they know there are many in the Black community who simply won't accept her simply because she is White. After the MSM "drive-by" which exposed her, she had to go. Thus they asked her to fall on the sword. To Ms. Dolezal's credit, this exactly what she did. And apparently she did it to protect the NAACP.
People of course miss this sacrifice and instead focus on every bad thing she has done or said since she was born. They defend her ouster by making character assassination arguments and/or attacking anyone who supports her. This has been demonstrated in this topic many times. They have to do this lest they admit that her ouster was simply due to her skin color.
IMO, the leadership of the NAACP privately supports Ms. Dolezal and the work she did running that NAACP office. By any measure, that office was well run and respected. I'm sure there were many personal relationships too. It's not unreasonable to assume they even knew her parents were White. It didn't matter as it was a private matter.
But the NAACP is a public organization and they know there are many in the Black community who simply won't accept her simply because she is White. After the MSM "drive-by" which exposed her, she had to go. Thus they asked her to fall on the sword. To Ms. Dolezal's credit, this exactly what she did. And apparently she did it to protect the NAACP.
People of course miss this sacrifice and instead focus on every bad thing she has done or said since she was born. They defend her ouster by making character assassination arguments and/or attacking anyone who supports her. This has been demonstrated in this topic many times. They have to do this lest they admit that her ouster was simply due to her skin color.
Thank you for this straight up answer. I get it now. I am not convinced that her ouster was specifically about her skin color though. NAACP supported her at first, didn't they? So it's a little odd that a person has been going out of her way to "pass" as black. Whatever. What disturbs me personally is not how she physically presents herself, it's the fantasy background that she has invented for herself. It's weird, and I think it comes off as odd to most people no matter what their skin color. I don't know if she believes the stories she's telling or not, but I can't imagine an organization keeping her on in a leadership position.
So here's a thought for you. Which post has less point?
A post which you consider pointless but still consider it worthwhile enough to make response anyway.
Or a post of yours where you state there is absolutely no point?
I think you gave award to wrong person.
Your post has less point. Pointing out posts like yours has the possibility of discouraging others from making irrelevant points and increasing the quality of the forum. So I'd say his post has some value.
Why is this even still in the news. At first, yes it was weird and kind of funny...but now we know the woman is clearly insane. Why still give this attention? Trying to turn this into a wedge issue is wasteful and wrong.
Thank you for this straight up answer. I get it now. I am not convinced that her ouster was specifically about her skin color though. NAACP supported her at first, didn't they? So it's a little odd that a person has been going out of her way to "pass" as black. Whatever. What disturbs me personally is not how she physically presents herself, it's the fantasy background that she has invented for herself. It's weird, and I think it comes off as odd to most people no matter what their skin color. I don't know if she believes the stories she's telling or not, but I can't imagine an organization keeping her on in a leadership position.
Of course you're right. I don't see why this is so hard to understand, or why some people insist on chalking it up to "pressure from a few black people" or "white outrage."
The NAACP made the right call. They often do. They are a well respected, effective organization overall in my opinion, even when I occasionally question their position on things.
Why doesn't she submit to a DNA test if she is so sure these people are not her biological parents? Why did none of the "interviewers" pose that question to her? That was the first thing that popped into my mind when she was making accusations about being born in the woods and not having any medical witnesses to the birth.
Why doesn't she submit to a DNA test if she is so sure these people are not her biological parents? Why did none of the "interviewers" pose that question to her? That was the first thing that popped into my mind when she was making accusations about being born in the woods and not having any medical witnesses to the birth.
The parents have publicly stated they will take a DNA test to prove their side of the story.
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.
