What's wrong with being racist anyway? like, who cares.......?

some on the right prefer to disbelieve, that Hominidae is our kind.

 

The term 'racist' was masterminded for clearly only one reason, to spread emotion like wild fire through a multicultural society, to cause opposition, separation or unity (result is always the same, a rise in emotional level)
It is ofcource free to be a 'racist', but why do 'racists' want to end their own freedom, and by that help the powers that be. So 'racism' is emotion based indoctrination (used as political revolutionary weapon to get control over a society)
Indoctrinated hate is a very strong emotion-weapon.

 

That's some really stupid and ill-informed commentary up there. You haven't made any significantly valid point.

I'm not wasting my time; you're 'ignored'.

Goodbye.

 

Wow. What mound of BS.

You're 'ignored'.

Goodbye.

 

Typical liberal reaction when you're handed the truth (not to mention your butt) on a platter.

How do you explain all the black men who are law-abiding, have jobs, etc., who have never been harassed by the police?

Again, if someone calls the cops on someone and gives the description of a black man, the cops are going to look for someone who matches that description. You liberals misplace your anger. Instead of being angry at the police, you should be angry at all those men committing crimes that match your description.

 

Yes I agree. The biggest problem is blacks thinking whites are the biggest problem. Not the other way around.

 

"Black man" is not a usable description.

 

In Russia and Poland many people have prejudice against Germany -- but that prejudice is weaker due to the fact that Germany was defeated.

In Armenia, many people do not like Turkey -- the same way people in North Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia do not like USA.

 

They don't actually oppose racism. Just a certain kind of racism... the kind that goes from whites to non-whites. Non-white minorities who are racists are not only tolerated by white liberals, they are validated and encouraged by them, due to their political usefulness in causing conflict within the society.

 

If someone is mugged, calls the cops and describes a tall black man with a hoody and sagged pants, who are they supposed to look for? A blonde?

 

Work on your reading comprehension

 

Your post is either a delusional lie or delusional myth. It merely depends on whether you know whether it's true or not. Because it's not. That was the point DeBlasio was trying to make to his son. It's also the same thing most black males in this country would tell you.

 

Nope, I didn't say that at all. What's with the poor reading comprehension by the right wing these days? Did you attend the same (*)(*)(*)(*)ty schools the blacks are forced to attend?

 

You mean those (*)(*)(*)(*)ty public schools that Democrats and unions force them to attend, because of their long opposition to vouchers?

This has to be one of the most ironic posts I've ever seen, here. Great job, buddy.

 

Essentially, the group you describe does not exist.

 

This country has educational apartheid and your vouchers are nothing more than an excuse to funnel funds into religious-based schools rather than actually working to improve the public school system. Using unions as the excuse is nothing more than another trite, right wing smokescreen.

 

Racism is nothing more than biological programming so in and of itself its not "wrong" or "right". The actions that result from it are what can be harmful. If you were raised among one specific ethnic group you tend to favor that group. That is just biology. If you went to school with kids of various backgrounds and ethnicities then you are programmed at a young age to be more comfortable with them. Most people are able to overcome that programming and see people on an individual level. However, some people are simply incapable of that. The also works the other way as well. You can get an entire group of people to hate another group with enough propaganda. We saw this in the Soviet Union and in Nazi Germany and Pol Pot's Cambodia and so on. We see this today in this country with how the liberals are constantly inflaming differences between the races.

 

It's just very ironic that you would complain about people being forced to attend (*)(*)(*)(*)ty schools, when Democrats are the ones forcing those people to attend those schools.

 

What a churlish attempt to deflect your own racism. I haven't met many racists that had the guts to actually admit to their racism publically, weasely attempts at justification notwithstanding.

Idiotic expressions of biased partyism also seem to indicate a proclivity for bigotry. Batting a "thousand" I see.

 

I was referring to the (*)(*)(*)(*)ty black inner city schools, not your affluent white suburban schools. Certainly, even you know the difference.

Some time ago, I watched an interesting interview of M.Night Shyamalan by Ali Veshli. MNS was investigating schools in Philadelphia for a film location. He went to two only miles apart and they were vastly different, but both public. The main difference is that one was inner city black and the other suburban white. Here is his take on the entire institution:

"You know how everyone says America is behind in education, compared to all the countries? Technically, right now, we're a little bit behind Poland and a little bit ahead of Liechtenstein, right? So that's where we land in the list, right? So that's actually not the truth. The truth is actually bizarrely black and white, literally, which is, if you pulled out the inner-city schools —just pull out the inner-city, low-income schools, just pull that group out of the United States, put them to the side — and just took every other public school in the United States, we lead the world in public-school education by a lot."

 

You're missing the point. I'm not disagreeing that the inner city black schools are the worst... they are. We can argue over causation (in my opinion, the worst kids in dangerous areas are not going to get the best teachers because those teachers will want to teach elsewhere for obvious reasons), but the point is that because of progressive policies and union membership, the people who live in these areas have no choice but to send their kids to these schools. Under vouchers, parents would be able to pull their kids out and send them elsewhere, preferably to superior private schools where a teacher can actually be fired for molesting kids and not teaching them anything. But, of course, progressives oppose that idea, vehemently.

 

and if you were short of money or your insurance had expired, do you seriously expect me to believe that you would get the same rates as a local, at the regular hospitals in Laos? I think not - it would be white man's price for sure

talk about dodging!

so what, never mind the 'reason' - the fact is, a white man cannot legally have sex with a local woman unless married - that is racism! or do you think if fine for black Australians not to be allowed sex with white Oz women?

sure, she loves foreigners because they pay more rent , and have more money.

try renting a small room, like the locals do , in a side street - see if you get the same rental price as a local - no chance!

 

yep, Munter speaks his mind, thanks for the compliment

 

I am saying that the local people in those areas at least the same, if not more, racist than supposed racists back home. So, why aren't the libs complaining about this - it is a two way street you know

 

Perhaps not, but no self respecting lib ever criticises the foreign local for doing the same thing, Iow: hypocrisy.

but even so, having been subjected to more than 10 years worth of racism, through being a white man in a brown country , then to hell with being PC to any Mod edit,,flounder,, that comes over to my country and acts like one