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.
What progress? I don't call more crime in your neighborhoods and being denied opportunities despite merit due to affirmative action based on skin color, and the entire white race being insulted with accusations all day everyday being progress.
And as far as "discrimination" people are trying to explain to you liberals how and why they are just judging people by the content of their character but liberals just won't hear of it. You liberals ostensibly want equal outcomes in every possible measure of black and Hispanic group vs white but for some odd reason ignore the Asian group and Jewish who are above whites. Your premises are false and your goals are very questionable.
I'm not one of the "you liberals" group (registered Independent), so I'm confused by your phrase "the Asian group and Jewish who are above whites". What on earth do you mean by that description?
I'm not one of the "you liberals" group (registered Independent), so I'm confused by your phrase "the Asian group and Jewish who are above whites". What on earth do you mean by that description?
They have better than white average outcome measures that liberals use to "prove" black and Hispanic inequality vs whites such as education obtainment, median income, household wealth, incarceration rates etc.
But Hillary enabled Bill Clinton's bad behavior, and we all know he got caught up in a sexual scandal or two. All this attention on Roy Moore just makes absolutely no sense to me when Bill Clinton was such a scandalous philanderer.
WHAT a LOAD of cr@p.. Blaming the partner in any situations ( VICTIM) speaks more about YOU than whatever point your are trying to make!!
Oh yeah because people dont care about "dead people" , unless they are dead white men. No I have no doubt that roy moore or swaggart or jim baker is any different than martin luther king in that they were all hypocrites and degenerates, only one has a national holiday
If they are religious right they are hypocrites , if its a black leftist reverend like King or Jackson and they are adulterers and hang out with prostitutes and drinking thats fine, for leftists we all fall short of the glory of god" if their politics fits their own
If they are right wing and white they are hypocritical religious bastards, black leftist reverends that are hypocrites are ok
Who would want a revered leading their local church who had children out of wedlock. parties with hookers w and was taped with hookers and whiskey like king was and saying stuff " ‘I’m f*****g for God! I’m not a negro tonight!’
Swaggert and baker are far different than MLK. If you can’t see how I can’t help you. Who would want an adulterer for a church leader. We have one as potus that’s an adulterous and has what 5 kids with 3 different women? Settling for cash with porn stars. He likes porn stars his current wife did soft core. He has no moral ground but the right are hypocritical when it comes to their leader. No outrage
So are the religious hypocrites only bad if they are white religious right people whose political views dont match our own?
If leftist reverends are adulterers and have children out of wedlock like Jesse Jackson and King , they arent hypocrites because because they are Black Reverends with leftist views?
King isn't running for office, nor is he ever going to. If he were running for office, his private life would be opened for public review like everyone else's.
Notice that nobody cares about James Dobson's private life, either.
MLK would often tell women to go get the group a cup of coffee if they would offer strategic advice during a SCLC meeting.
MLK told a physically abused housewife seeking advice on what to do - to look at her own personality to see if that is why the husband was beating her.
MLK told sexist jokes - even at JFK's funeral about Jackie and JFK.
I could go on, but I don't want to bag too much on the man.
Because 1. He’s been dead for 50 years, and 2. He’s not running for The Senate.
Lot's of dead people are having their records judged on 2018 morals.
The Girl Scouts are in the process of convincing a Georgia city to rename a bridge after the founder of their organization - because the guy the bridge was named after supported segregation.
Well, FDR supported segregation and racism too -- MLK was a sexist. Should we take down their memorials too? Those two certainly did more for the country as a whole, but I am curious as to where the line is in monument removal as people are already removing Washington memorials.
Quote:
Franklin Delano Roosevelt: Let us first examine that nightmare to many Americans, especially our friends in California, the growing population of Japanese on the Pacific slope. It is undoubtedly true that in the past many thousands of Japanese have legally or otherwise got into the United States, settled her and raised up children who became American citizens. Californians have properly objected on the sound basic ground that Japanese immigrants are not capable of assimilation into the American population. If this had throughout the discussion been made the sole ground for the American attitude all would have been well, and the people of Japan would today understand and accept our decision.
Anyone who has traveled in the Far East knows that the mingling of Asiatic blood with European or American blood produces, in nine cases out of ten, the most unfortunate results. There are throughout the East many thousands of so-called Eurasians—men and women and children partly of Asiatic blood and partly of European or American blood. These Eurasians are, as a common thing, looked down on and despised, both by the European and American who reside there, and by the pure Asiatic who lives there.
The argument works both ways. I know a great many cultivated, highly educated and delightful Japanese. They have all told me that they would feel the same repugnance and objection to having thousands of Americans settle in Japan and intermarry with the Japanese as I would feel in having large numbers of Japanese come over here and intermarry with the American population.
In this question, then, of Japanese exclusion from the United States, it is necessary only to advance the true reason—the undesirability of mixing the blood of the two peoples. This attitude would be fully understood in Japan, as they would have the same objection to Americans migrating to Japan in large numbers.
Unfortunately, Japanese exclusion has been urged for many other reasons—their ability to work for and live on much smaller wages than Americans—their willingness to work for longer hours, their driving out of native Americans from certain fruit growing or agricultural areas. The Japanese themselves do not understand these arguments and are offended by them.
Why isn't Rev. MLK Jr. under the same sort of scrutiny as Roy Moore?
Well he will be if he tries to run for office.
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.
