Yet another fatal case of police brutality

[uncboy10]

I admit lack of opportunity is one of the major reasons for black neighborhoods being in the state that they are. However, can this reason be attested to white people, white privilege or white supremacy? I can admit that these are issues I want to see solved, what I don't want is a finger obnoxiously jabbed in my face demanding I cede my "privilege" or whatever the hell that means.

There is no historical precedent of any tribe, ethnic group, or nation purposefully conceding its advantages for the sake of another. It's not going to happen here either.

It actually can largely be attributed to historical white advantages. Black people didn't choose to live in those neighborhoods in the first place. Most of them were gentrified in to those neighborhoods. That was a government action that directly benefited white businesses and homeowners. Which created an advantage for white folks. Then the government started insuring mortgages which made it possible for the middle class to actually own homes. Except up until the mid 80's (if you can believe that) their was no actual mechanism in place to ensure that their were no discriminatory practices. For decades, over 95% of those loans went to white families. Home ownership is the cornerstone of building wealth in the American economy. I shouldn't have to tell any of you the value of owning a home. That was another government action that created a distinct advantage for white folks. Those are historical facts. The notion that we have just suddenly erased that advantage because we elected a black president boggles my brain.

It can also be largely be attested to white denial of these issues. I mean they aren't that hard to solve really. The schools need more funding. That would be a huge game changer in those communities. Instead of looking at it like conceding privilege, just think of it as providing others with the same opportunities that you had. I mean isn't America supposed to be the land of equal opportunity? I mean you have to realize that quite a lot of people would deny those problems even exist. Getting past that point is the first hurdle. Unfortunately that means a lot of people like yourself inadvertently "get a finger jabbed in their face." But I mean if you really compare your annoyance with the struggles some of those kids are growing up in...

 

[uncboy10]

Yup. Students in today's public schools are definitely bred to be dependent on big government. Since the government is what is funding the education, I guess I'm not surprised, but it'd be nice if they didn't stack the deck in their own favor.

Big government and big corporations are pretty much the same thing. Government may pay for the education, but who do you think pays for the government? Who controls the decisions made by the government? The people writing the checks. The people who don't want to see the American people learn how to manage money, or eat healthy, or take care of themselves in any way shape or form. Because then they wouldn't be a good little consumer.

 

[strummingram]

Focusing on only yourself is very much micro-level. Even if you want to call it macro it doesn't change that.

Who said I was doing that "too much." I'm just emphasizing how you have more of an impact on yourself. That's not abandoning the collective.

 

[uncboy10]

And I'd like it to be noted that you continue to back off the tough guy act after I pulled your skirt up.

I'll be in Atlanta if you really want to embarrass yourself. We can get it on video and charge PPV to stream it for the other "poasters." Maybe that'll offset some of your medical bills.

 

[strummingram]

Big government and big corporations are pretty much the same thing. Government may pay for the education, but who do you think pays for the government? Who controls the decisions made by the government? The people writing the checks. The people who don't want to see the American people learn how to manage money, or eat healthy, or take care of themselves in any way shape or form. Because then they wouldn't be a good little consumer.

We live in an Oligarchy. It's not even really debatable. That's why these elections, especially on a national level, don't amount to shit.

 

[gunslingerdick]

.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

Home ownership is the cornerstone of building wealth in the American economy. I shouldn't have to tell any of you the value of owning a home.

I see the point you were making in the rest of the poast - but the above I definitely disagree with. Home ownership is in no way a necessity, or cornerstone, in order to build wealth. As someone who rallies against big corporations, I would have assumed you realized that the myth of home ownership being a necessity was created and spread by banks looking to make money off of mortgages.

 

[carolinablue34]

It actually can largely be attributed to historical white advantages. Black people didn't choose to live in those neighborhoods in the first place. Most of them were gentrified in to those neighborhoods. That was a government action that directly benefited white businesses and homeowners. Which created an advantage for white folks. Then the government started insuring mortgages which made it possible for the middle class to actually own homes. Except up until the mid 80's (if you can believe that) their was no actual mechanism in place to ensure that their were no discriminatory practices. For decades, over 95% of those loans went to white families. Home ownership is the cornerstone of building wealth in the American economy. I shouldn't have to tell any of you the value of owning a home. That was another government action that created a distinct advantage for white folks. Those are historical facts. The notion that we have just suddenly erased that advantage because we elected a black president boggles my brain.

It can also be largely be attested to white denial of these issues. I mean they aren't that hard to solve really. The schools need more funding. That would be a huge game changer in those communities. Instead of looking at it like conceding privilege, just think of it as providing others with the same opportunities that you had. I mean isn't America supposed to be the land of equal opportunity? I mean you have to realize that quite a lot of people would deny those problems even exist. Getting past that point is the first hurdle. Unfortunately that means a lot of people like yourself inadvertently "get a finger jabbed in their face." But I mean if you really compare your annoyance with the struggles some of those kids are growing up in...

Key word here is historical. Not necessarily present. I want to see personal responsibility not the same victim complex that seems almost insurmountable.

There needs to be a desire for the schooling, education and the drive to do better. It's a two way street. You don't think there haven't been attempts to do what you suggested?

You are correct in assuming I want to give the the black community the same opportunities as me, I don't feel threatened by that prospect. I feel threatened when they demand quotas, numbers, diversity training, and other shit like that. That's cultural Marxism and irrelevant to the larger topic of how to aid the African American populace.

And what's more, I'm a big proponent of "if you teach a man to fish, he can do it for a lifetime." It can't simply be another massive government program. In some ways, LBJ's attempt to combat those problems backfired massively.

 

[carolinablue34]

I see the point you were making in the rest of the poast - but the above I definitely disagree with. Home ownership is in no way a necessity, or cornerstone, in order to build wealth. As someone who rallies against big corporations, I would have assumed you realized that the myth of home ownership being a necessity was created and spread by banks looking to make money off of mortgages.

In addition, the housing bubble, largely brought forth when the Clinton Administration repeated the Glass-Steagal Act, targeted those who otherwise could't afford the home. Blacks were especially screwed over because the Federal government encouraged those kinds of loans to minority groups.

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

Plenty of dates for football games where I could easily make it to Chapel Hill. And despite a possible charge for child abuse, I wouldn't have any problem smacking you around to get pumped up for a football game. Like I said, you call the date, Jr. I suspect you'll continue to back away though. Because as we all figured, you're a pu$$y.

Tisk, tisk you're showing how tiny you are again!!!! You might be kicked down to micro P if you don't stop threatening people with bodily harm!!!

 

[carolinablue34]

Guys can we please have this conversation intelligently rather than make fun of each other's dicks? I'm sure you guys are all tiny haha

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

Hmm... maybe everyone was wrong all along with Chick and Strum being the same person. uncboy is the only other poaster trying to guess dick sizes other than Chick... maybe they're one in the same?

Oh gunslinger is already at micro penis level now. That's like embryo size if he's lucky! lol

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

Guys can we please have this conversation intelligently rather than make fun of each other's dicks? I'm sure you guys are all tiny haha

My money is on strum having a monster though lol

 

[carolinablue34]

My money is on strum having a monster though lol

This isn't a Republican debate here lol.

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

Awww, c'mon. I'm willing to drive to CH. You're not? I mean, it's an easier decision for me seeing that I'll be driving back while you'll need an ambulance to carry you back. Does Obamacare cover that?

Like I said, Jr., you pick the date. But once again, you'll back away with your tail between your legs. But if you are man enough, get your affairs in order.

And furthermore if y'all want to bitch slap each other at least be decent and do out in coach K's yard. Don't tarnish our beloved campus with that stupid crap!

 

[prlyles]

In addition, the housing bubble, largely brought forth when the Clinton Administration repeated the Glass-Steagal Act, targeted those who otherwise could't afford the home. Blacks were especially screwed over because the Federal government encouraged those kinds of loans to minority groups.

Anyone old enough to own a home should be able to determine if they can afford said home and that includes black people.

 

[uncboy10]

I see the point you were making in the rest of the poast - but the above I definitely disagree with. Home ownership is in no way a necessity, or cornerstone, in order to build wealth. As someone who rallies against big corporations, I would have assumed you realized that the myth of home ownership being a necessity was created and spread by banks looking to make money off of mortgages.

I didn't mean for it to sound like I though it was necessary. But historically speaking home ownership basically created the middle class. Paying money into something you actually own instead of just flushing rent down the toilet makes a huge difference for the working class with regards to building wealth. Once you have enough equity in your home you can use that for all kinds of other things too.

Key word here is historical. Not necessarily present. I want to see personal responsibility not the same victim complex that seems almost insurmountable.

There needs to be a desire for the schooling, education and the drive to do better. It's a two way street. You don't think there haven't been attempts to do what you suggested?

You are correct in assuming I want to give the the black community the same opportunities as me, I don't feel threatened by that prospect. I feel threatened when they demand quotas, numbers, diversity training, and other shit like that. That's cultural Marxism and irrelevant to the larger topic of how to aid the African American populace.

And what's more, I'm a big proponent of "if you teach a man to fish, he can do it for a lifetime." It can't simply be another massive government program. In some ways, LBJ's attempt to combat those problems backfired massively.

When you have a long history of white advantages they don't just suddenly disappear over night. That's the issue. It wasn't like white people got ahead fair and square. It was preferential government treatment. That discrimination is still paying dividends to this day. That's really my entire point. You can go back way further than the fair credit lending act if you care to and you see that white folks have obviously had huge advantages in this country for several hundred years. And while its easy to think that discrimination on a large scale ended in the '60's that would be naive to the extreme. Like I said there was no actual method of enforcement for fair housing rights until well in to the 80's. There is no way that we can overcome that kind of inequity in just a few decades.

The desire gets killed in those kids when they show up and the teachers have zero confidence or interest in seeing them graduate. Listen to some of the stories of inner city kids being told they're too stupid and wont graduate anyways so they might as well just drop out. Its important to remember we're talking about children. People who can afford the luxury, shop around when buying a house specifically trying to get their kids in the best possible schools. Its not a secret that it has a huge impact on shaping a child's life. We can't have a double standard and expect inner city kids and kids from poor neighborhoods and broken family homes to be able to overcome odds we wouldn't put our own kids through.

As far as affirmative action goes, I'm with you. Equal opportunity is all that you can ask for. We do need to make sure that minorities are protected from the bias of the majority but I don't think that's the way to do it.

 

[DeanFor President]

I am not sure any psychology course could help people like GSD or dean. GSD thinks he is king of this here OOTB board and is on a crazy power-ego trip all the dang time around here!

We are wasting our time thinking some of these guys could understand anything we are trying to tell them. They don't want to because they know they'd would see reflections of themselves and they wouldn't like what they would see.

Absolutely astounded by the misplaced arrogance. Exactly who the hell do you think you are? You know less than nothing about me.

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

Absolutely astounded by the misplaced arrogance. Exactly who the hell do you think you are? You know less than nothing about me.

You're correct, all I know is the way you respond and "voice" yourself on here. It says a lot about your character, IN MY OPINION.

Who the hell do I think I am? I am someone that is open to understanding, someone who does have opinions but realizes that I can be wrong sometimes and if I feel that I am wrong, I am willing to admit it, someone who cares about other people, someone that is happy that I am not stuck in ONE belief and is open to others, and also I am someone with a very, very deep intuition and ability (that we all have) to "see" things beyond what's just on the surface.

Arrogant? Sure, we all have a degree of that in us, some more than others. If I offended you with my observation, I apologize.

 

[Archer2]

The desire gets killed in those kids when they show up and the teachers have zero confidence or interest in seeing them graduate. Listen to some of the stories of inner city kids being told they're too stupid and wont graduate anyways so they might as well just drop out. Its important to remember we're talking about children.

Do you really think teachers are telling kids they're "too stupid and won't graduate anyway so they might as well drop out"? Exactly what incentive would there be for teachers to do this, especially when they're evaluated on the academic progress and graduation rates of their kids? Most teachers choose that profession because they want to help kids be successful in life, they certainly don't do it for the meager pay. Your statement is ludicrous, much like Obama's statement that it's easier for teens to buy a Glock than a book. Utter nonsense.

A much more logical reason for the high dropout rate would be a lack of support from black parents. This is another issue that is directly related to 70% of their kids being born out of wedlock, and not being raised properly as a result. Ask most teachers and they will tell you a lack of positive male role models is a huge issue for young black kids. Many grow up without a father figure and don't learn discipline at a young age. So they act out in school and resort to violence to settle disputes. Fully 50% of black males are not graduating from high school as a result. How are they going to make a positive contribution to society with no education and no job skills?

I have many, many friends who have been in education all their lives. I've been told over and over again about young black kids who make good grades being called "Uncle Toms" and ridiculed by other black kids. I'd be willing to bet that happens far more than teachers telling kids they should drop out. And many talk about the difficulty of getting the parent(s) involved with the child's schooling(ensuring the child has done his homework, attends regularly, and behaves while in class). They say the only time they see many parent(s) is when their child has been disciplined, and that is to complain about the disciplinary actions. That lack of participation by the parent(s) is largely responsible for the dropout rates and achievement gap we see.

.[/QUOTE]

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

I've been told over and over again about young black kids who make good grades being called "Uncle Toms" and ridiculed by other black kids. I'd be willing to bet that happens far more than teachers telling kids they should drop out.

Ya, but pointing the finger at the actual problem like that doesn't get the same outcry, and more importantly votes, as pandering to the bleeding heart angle.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Do you really think teachers are telling kids they're "too stupid and won't graduate anyway so they might as well drop out"? Exactly what incentive would there be for teachers to do this, especially when they're evaluated on the academic progress and graduation rates of their kids? Most teachers choose that profession because they want to help kids be successful in life, they certainly don't do it for the meager pay. Your statement is ludicrous, much like Obama's statement that it's easier for teens to buy a Glock than a book. Utter nonsense.

As someone that works closely with 5 different school systems in VA and with children and families of low socioeconomic status (and has for almost 13 years), you are correct Archer. The notion that teachers encourage students to drop out is absurd. In fact, they bend over backwards to make sure minorities get through. Hell, they're pushing minority students through in record numbers when they don't deserve it But that kind of rhetoric is right from the liberal playbook. No surprise. Obama must have told him that.

 

[Archer2]

Yep, the "No Child Left Behind" movement has just resulted in the dumbing down of our schools. Meanwhile, other advanced countries are constantly raising the level of expectancy from their schools, not lowering it. Ergo, why we're falling farther behind in education, despite spending far more money per student per year than any other country in the world.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Yep, the "No Child Left Behind" movement has just resulted in the dumbing down of our schools. Meanwhile, other advanced countries are constantly raising the level of expectancy from their schools, not lowering it. Ergo, why we're falling farther behind in education, despite spending far more money per student per year than any other country in the world.

Liberals don't want those capable of excelling to excel because it creates even more of a gap with those that can't or don't want to. That's why the liberal playbook calls for the top to come down rather than to bring the bottom up. Mediocrity is what liberals want - where no one stands out. That's why students who aren't worthy get shoved into gifted classes. You know, because the gifted classes aren't well represented by minority groups. So let's stick a bunch of disinterested students with behavior problems into the gifted classes and break our necks to give them passing grades so we can say that we have X number of minority students in the gifted curriculum. It's the liberal way. We're all the same. No one is better than anyone else.

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

Liberals don't want those capable of excelling to excel because it creates even more of a gap with those that can't or don't want to. That's why the liberal playbook calls for the top to come down rather than to bring the bottom up. Mediocrity is what liberals want - where no one stands out. That's why students who aren't worthy get shoved into gifted classes. You know, because the gifted classes aren't well represented by minority groups. So let's stick a bunch of disinterested students with behavior problems into the gifted classes and break our necks to give them passing grades so we can say that we have X number of minority students in the gifted curriculum. It's the liberal way. We're all the same. No one is better than anyone else.

That is hands down THE moronic thing I have read so far on these boards.

That's what "liberals" want??? Seriously??? The fact that I have no doubt you honestly believe every bit of that is even more disturbing.

I do understand these things happen but I'm not sure that it's just a "liberal" thing.

Mediocracy LMAO yes, people WANT that. If any one group wants mediocracy or to keep people dumbed down, it would be the elite groups that are really running the show around here....the ones who want to keep the middle class believing just enough of that BS to maintain their control over you little guys. Pftttt you're crazier than I thought!

 

[Archer2]

Liberals don't want those capable of excelling to excel because it creates even more of a gap with those that can't or don't want to. That's why the liberal playbook calls for the top to come down rather than to bring the bottom up. Mediocrity is what liberals want - where no one stands out. That's why students who aren't worthy get shoved into gifted classes. You know, because the gifted classes aren't well represented by minority groups. So let's stick a bunch of disinterested students with behavior problems into the gifted classes and break our necks to give them passing grades so we can say that we have X number of minority students in the gifted curriculum. It's the liberal way. We're all the same. No one is better than anyone else.

You hit the nail on the head.

We're no longer legislating equality of opportunity, we're now trying to legislate equality of outcome. If you put 100 diverse people in the same situation, you will wind up with 100 different outcomes. Why? Because some people will work harder than others and some are just smarter than others. And the ones who work the hardest and the smartest will achieve the most. The only way to legislate equality of outcome is to lower the expectations and make mediocrity the bench mark. It's why some schools have already done away with the valedictorian because "it makes those who didn't get it feel bad".

You can bet your butt that China, Russia, Japan, India, etc... aren't doing this. They're actually rewarding their highest achievers versus maligning them. What a novel concept!

 

[gunslingerdick]

That is hands down THE moronic thing I have read so far on these boards.

That's what "liberals" want??? Seriously??? The fact that I have no doubt you honestly believe every bit of that is even more disturbing.

I do understand these things happen but I'm not sure that it's just a "liberal" thing.

Mediocracy LMAO yes, people WANT that. If any one group wants mediocracy or to keep people dumbed down, it would be the elite groups that are really running the show around here....the ones who want to keep the middle class believing just enough of that BS to maintain their control over you little guys. Pftttt you're crazier than I thought!

Ok. Thanks for paying attention to me some more.

 

[strummingram]

Liberals want people to be as stupid as possible? Which liberals? The rich and powerful liberals, or the poor, uneducated liberals? The minority liberals, or the white liberals? The Catholic liberals, Jewish liberals, or Protestant liberals? The Tar Heel fan liberals, or the dook fan liberals? Or, is it all of them in collusion, who want as many dumb people (aside from themselves) as possible? I think it must be working here.

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

Liberals want people to be as stupid as possible? Which liberals? The rich and powerful liberals, or the poor, uneducated liberals? The minority liberals, or the white liberals? The Catholic liberals, Jewish liberals, or Protestant liberals? The Tar Heel fan liberals, or the dook fan liberals? Or, is it all of them in collusion, who want as many dumb people (aside from themselves) as possible? I think it must be working here.

And they just called me condescending towards conservatives on the other thread.... lol

 

[strummingram]

And they just called me condescending towards conservatives on the other thread.... lol

What is a conservative? Is there ONE kind of conservative? Is there ONE kind of liberal? I'll gladly stay out of these clubs.

 

[Archer2]

The easiest way to maintain power is to keep people uninformed, uneducated, and dependent on the government for their very existence. It's why countries like Russia and China control the media and the schools. Indoctrinate the kids from day one in school and propagandize via the media. We're in the midst of Uber Liberals doing that very thing in the USA.

 

[Archer2]

What is a conservative? Is there ONE kind of conservative? Is there ONE kind of liberal? I'll gladly stay out of these clubs.

Just as there everything is not black and white, there are many varied degrees of Liberalism and Conservatism.

 

[strummingram]

The easiest way to maintain power is to keep people uninformed, uneducated, and dependent on the government for their very existence. It's why countries like Russia and China control the media and the schools. Indoctrinate the kids from day one in school and propagandize via the media. We're in the midst of Liberals doing that very thing in the USA.

You truly believe that "Liberals" are trying to do this? It never occurred to you that Liberals an Conservatives are just an illusion? There IS a deliberate effort to keep people uninformed and stupid and incapable of critical thought. But, it has nothing to do with Liberals or Conservatives... aside from that illusion being part of the process!

Here's a sobering truth for you:

 

[strummingram]

Just as there everything is not black and white, there are many varied degrees of Liberalism and Conservatism.

Exactly... very good. I would encourage everyone to avoid labels and groups when addressing and identifying people WHENEVER POSSIBLE. You make yourself intellectually lazy by doing that.

 

[Archer2]

You truly believe that "Liberals" are trying to do this? It never occurred to you that Liberals an Conservatives are just an illusion? There IS a deliberate effort to keep people uninformed and stupid and incapable of critical thought. But, it has nothing to do with Liberals or Conservatives... aside from that illusion being part of the process!

Here's a sobering truth for you:

View embedded media

Carlin is a funny guy but you'll excuse me if I don't give his political observations much credence.

Words like Republican/Conservative and Democrat/Liberal serve a purpose in that they allow us to have a reference point when discussing politics/candidates. They certainly aren't set in stone and are ever-changing.

Heck, both Hillary and Donald have flipflopped on several of the major issues in the last few years.

 

[strummingram]

Carlin is a funny guy but you'll excuse me if I don't give his political observations much credence.

Words like Republican/Conservative and Democrat/Liberal serve a purpose in that they allow us to have a reference point when discussing politics/candidates. They certainly aren't set in stone and are ever-changing.

What he said wasn't funny. It was just the truth. You live in an Oligarchy. I'm sorry to be the one to break it to you. It's not what you've been led to believe, I know. Think of it as an alcoholic admitting he's an alcoholic. You can start to get better once you admit you know the problem. You can "discuss politics" until you drop dead. This place is owned, and has been for a while now. You might have some say-so over your local and state government. Certainly more so than on a national level. On a national level, it's ALL Oligarchy. And, there's proof just about everywhere. Even the politicians admit to it! Play the game if you want. The game is rigged.

 

[Archer2]

I agree to the extent that there are very few true Conservatives in politics anymore. Most of the main stream Republicans are RINO's. We basically have a one party system now. There are still true Conservatives like Cruz who are trying to fight that one party mentality but he is swimming against the tide.

 

[strummingram]

I have a close friend who is a self-ascribed UBER liberal Socialist, and she is. And, her mom is, too. They are both from PA and Catholic. Kennedy, cradle Catholic liberal Socialists. Anyway, I try to explain to them that this is an oligarchy, and they will agree... but, then they go about their usual political dance hating conservatives- like all the guys here hating liberals, save for UNCboy, BillyL, maybe Julez, too.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

We're no longer legislating equality of opportunity, we're now trying to legislate equality of outcome.

This is everything that is wrong with the "equality" issues in a nutshell. Well put. Everyone deserves equal opportunity; regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. Not everyone deserves the same outcome. The outcomes should be determined on the participants' own merits. Some people are smarter than others, some work harder than others - those are just the facts of life. Those people should be rewarded for their superiority (whether it be natural superiority such as intelligence, or manufactured superiority such as effort). To make all outcomes equal is to take all incentive away from the participants - which makes everything worse off.

 

[Archer2]

This is everything that is wrong with the "equality" issues in a nutshell. Well put. Everyone deserves equal opportunity; regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. Not everyone deserves the same outcome. The outcomes should be determined on the participants' own merits. Some people are smarter than others, some work harder than others - those are just the facts of life. Those people should be rewarded for their superiority (whether it be natural superiority such as intelligence, or manufactured superiority such as effort). To make all outcomes equal is to take all incentive away from the participants - which makes everything worse off.

Nail head, meet hammer.

“The Constitution only guarantees the American people the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself.”

Ben Franklin