Democrats Are No Longer the Racist Party – If They Ever Really Were

[katsteve2012]

I don't give a fuck about her being the first black whatever.


I do care about the way such obsession with race is tearing this nation apart.


I do hope she gets her ass kicked.

"Obsession with race"?

WTF are you smoking? It has not been that long ago that she could not even get served in a public establishment there.

Other races and genders are frequently celebrated for being "the first Asian, Hispanic, and female"achievers of anything, you racist fuck.

Correll needs to shut the fuck up. This nation is built on and has maintained a system based on the white racist obsession with race.

I, and people like me, will always be here. We will call you and people like you, on your racist bullshit.


I do not care if she is the first black whatever.


I hope she gets her ass kicked.

"You and people like you" are the reason that even now in 2018, we still have the "first minorities" in many areas of achievement.

That's bullshit.

And hearing about it, forces "people like you" to accept social change.
ROFLMAO.

No, it doesn't. It bores us.


What it does to blacks and libs is keep them focused on racial differences instead of healing them.

It "bores you"?

There are a plethora of postings here daily that say otherwise.

What makes you think that black people or liberals need to be healed?

Healed from what? If you want to talk about "healing" go find and talk to some of these people:

All The White Supremacists Running For Office In 2018 | HuffPost

 

[katsteve2012]

Obviously YOU "give a fuck". Because you wasted your time pointing out that you don't.

I don't give a fuck about her being the first black whatever.


I do care about the way such obsession with race is tearing this nation apart.


I do hope she gets her ass kicked.

"Obsession with race"?

WTF are you smoking? It has not been that long ago that she could not even get served in a public establishment there.

Other races and genders are frequently celebrated for being "the first Asian, Hispanic, and female"achievers of anything, you racist fuck.

HOw old is she? Was she even alive when "she" could not get served?


I don't give a fuck about her being the first black whatever.


You calling me a "racist" is just you admitting that you lose the argument.


And that you are an asshole.


I hope she gets her ass kicked.

Calling you a "racist" is like calling a bird who quacks, a duck. And if you want to know her age, look it up yourself, I am not your tutor.

NO, calling me that, is just you being a fucking asshole.

The point is that in the context of the history of the south, it was not that long ago that she as a black female would not have had an opportunity run for ANY office.

Yes, it was. You are lying in order to keep the flames of racial division burning.

The fact that you, an avowed racist says "you don't not give a fuck", is a dead giveaway that you actually do.

It's a dead give away that I bored with hearing this shit, and desiring that we heal racial division.


[/\QUOTE]
Because if you didn't, you would have ignored the post, and found something else here to land and vomit on.

NO, it doesn't. Obviously.

There is no argument to lose as far as those facts go.

Says the lib that can't tell the difference between opinions, and made up bullshit and facts.[/QUOTE]

Point out what "lie" I told. Or what was made up.

*It is a FACT that she is the first black female to run for that office

*It is a FACT that she could not have run for that office not very long ago

*It is a FACT that Georgia was a slave state

*It is a FACT that what I stated is true

*It is a fact that her opportunity to run is not racially divisive by default, just for reporting the FACT that she is "a first".

*It is a FACT that YOU not wanting to hear about it is irrelevant.

 

[Correll]

"Obsession with race"?

WTF are you smoking? It has not been that long ago that she could not even get served in a public establishment there.

Other races and genders are frequently celebrated for being "the first Asian, Hispanic, and female"achievers of anything, you racist fuck.

Correll needs to shut the fuck up. This nation is built on and has maintained a system based on the white racist obsession with race.

I, and people like me, will always be here. We will call you and people like you, on your racist bullshit.


I do not care if she is the first black whatever.


I hope she gets her ass kicked.

"You and people like you" are the reason that even now in 2018, we still have the "first minorities" in many areas of achievement.

That's bullshit.

And hearing about it, forces "people like you" to accept social change.
ROFLMAO.

No, it doesn't. It bores us.


What it does to blacks and libs is keep them focused on racial differences instead of healing them.

It "bores you"?

There are a plethora of postings here daily that say otherwise.

What makes you think that black people or liberals need to be healed?

Healed from what? If you want to talk about "healing" go find and talk to some of these people:

All The White Supremacists Running For Office In 2018 | HuffPost

1. Yes "Bores". What part of that did you fail to understand?

2. My point was not the blacks and libs need healing. That the nation does. From the wounds you race baiters are constantly inflicting on US.

 

[katsteve2012]

Correll needs to shut the fuck up. This nation is built on and has maintained a system based on the white racist obsession with race.

I, and people like me, will always be here. We will call you and people like you, on your racist bullshit.


I do not care if she is the first black whatever.


I hope she gets her ass kicked.

"You and people like you" are the reason that even now in 2018, we still have the "first minorities" in many areas of achievement.

That's bullshit.

And hearing about it, forces "people like you" to accept social change.
ROFLMAO.

No, it doesn't. It bores us.


What it does to blacks and libs is keep them focused on racial differences instead of healing them.

It "bores you"?

There are a plethora of postings here daily that say otherwise.

What makes you think that black people or liberals need to be healed?

Healed from what? If you want to talk about "healing" go find and talk to some of these people:

All The White Supremacists Running For Office In 2018 | HuffPost

1. Yes "Bores". What part of that did you fail to understand?

2. My point was not the blacks and libs need healing. That the nation does. From the wounds you race baiters are constantly inflicting on US.

It's a public race relations forum in case you did not notice.

You do not get to set your own rules here.

If you're bored, there are other forums out there, and if you "constantly feel wounded", maybe you are your own problem.

From the perspective of some here, you are in fact, one of the most offensive race baiters/racist in this forum, so you get in return what you put out there.

See how that works?

 

[Correll]

I don't give a fuck about her being the first black whatever.


I do care about the way such obsession with race is tearing this nation apart.


I do hope she gets her ass kicked.

"Obsession with race"?

WTF are you smoking? It has not been that long ago that she could not even get served in a public establishment there.

Other races and genders are frequently celebrated for being "the first Asian, Hispanic, and female"achievers of anything, you racist fuck.

HOw old is she? Was she even alive when "she" could not get served?


I don't give a fuck about her being the first black whatever.


You calling me a "racist" is just you admitting that you lose the argument.


And that you are an asshole.


I hope she gets her ass kicked.

Calling you a "racist" is like calling a bird who quacks, a duck. And if you want to know her age, look it up yourself, I am not your tutor.

NO, calling me that, is just you being a fucking asshole.

The point is that in the context of the history of the south, it was not that long ago that she as a black female would not have had an opportunity run for ANY office.

Yes, it was. You are lying in order to keep the flames of racial division burning.

The fact that you, an avowed racist says "you don't not give a fuck", is a dead giveaway that you actually do.

It's a dead give away that I bored with hearing this shit, and desiring that we heal racial division.


[/\QUOTE]
Because if you didn't, you would have ignored the post, and found something else here to land and vomit on.

NO, it doesn't. Obviously.

There is no argument to lose as far as those facts go.

Says the lib that can't tell the difference between opinions, and made up bullshit and facts.

Point out what "lie" I told. Or what was made up.

*It is a FACT that she is the first black female to run for that office

*It is a FACT that she could not have run for that office not very long ago

*It is a FACT that Georgia was a slave state

It is not a "Fact" that should could not have run for that office not very long ago.

That your very next claim, is that Georgian was a slave state, shows how far back you are reaching to support your claim of Georgia as soooooo horribly racist.


Do you think that white democrats in Georgia, descended from Confederates, are going to be voting for her, or do you think that they will turn to the white republican in outrage?

*It is a FACT that what I stated is true

*It is a fact that her opportunity to run is not racially divisive by default, just for reporting the FACT that she is "a first".

*It is a FACT that YOU not wanting to hear about it is irrelevant.

Reporting it as though it is a significant milestone, is divisive.


It communicates to blacks the false impression that until today, Georgia was sooooo racist that a black could not run for this office.


It communicates to whites that you are a racist if you don't support this dem for office.



Both are divisive. VERY.

 

[katsteve2012]

"Obsession with race"?

WTF are you smoking? It has not been that long ago that she could not even get served in a public establishment there.

Other races and genders are frequently celebrated for being "the first Asian, Hispanic, and female"achievers of anything, you racist fuck.

HOw old is she? Was she even alive when "she" could not get served?


I don't give a fuck about her being the first black whatever.


You calling me a "racist" is just you admitting that you lose the argument.


And that you are an asshole.


I hope she gets her ass kicked.

Calling you a "racist" is like calling a bird who quacks, a duck. And if you want to know her age, look it up yourself, I am not your tutor.

NO, calling me that, is just you being a fucking asshole.

The point is that in the context of the history of the south, it was not that long ago that she as a black female would not have had an opportunity run for ANY office.

Yes, it was. You are lying in order to keep the flames of racial division burning.

The fact that you, an avowed racist says "you don't not give a fuck", is a dead giveaway that you actually do.

It's a dead give away that I bored with hearing this shit, and desiring that we heal racial division.


[/\QUOTE]
Because if you didn't, you would have ignored the post, and found something else here to land and vomit on.

NO, it doesn't. Obviously.

There is no argument to lose as far as those facts go.

Says the lib that can't tell the difference between opinions, and made up bullshit and facts.

Point out what "lie" I told. Or what was made up.

*It is a FACT that she is the first black female to run for that office

*It is a FACT that she could not have run for that office not very long ago

*It is a FACT that Georgia was a slave state

It is not a "Fact" that should could not have run for that office not very long ago.

That your very next claim, is that Georgian was a slave state, shows how far back you are reaching to support your claim of Georgia as soooooo horribly racist.


Do you think that white democrats in Georgia, descended from Confederates, are going to be voting for her, or do you think that they will turn to the white republican in outrage?

*It is a FACT that what I stated is true

*It is a fact that her opportunity to run is not racially divisive by default, just for reporting the FACT that she is "a first".

*It is a FACT that YOU not wanting to hear about it is irrelevant.

Reporting it as though it is a significant milestone, is divisive.


It communicates to blacks the false impression that until today, Georgia was sooooo racist that a black could not run for this office.


It communicates to whites that you are a racist if you don't support this dem for office.



Both are divisive. VERY.

That's your opinion as well as an extreme state of ignorance.

You are obviously an immature and very insecure individual if you are bothered by something as trivial as this.

 

[Correll]

I, and people like me, will always be here. We will call you and people like you, on your racist bullshit.


I do not care if she is the first black whatever.


I hope she gets her ass kicked.

"You and people like you" are the reason that even now in 2018, we still have the "first minorities" in many areas of achievement.

That's bullshit.

And hearing about it, forces "people like you" to accept social change.
ROFLMAO.

No, it doesn't. It bores us.


What it does to blacks and libs is keep them focused on racial differences instead of healing them.

It "bores you"?

There are a plethora of postings here daily that say otherwise.

What makes you think that black people or liberals need to be healed?

Healed from what? If you want to talk about "healing" go find and talk to some of these people:

All The White Supremacists Running For Office In 2018 | HuffPost

1. Yes "Bores". What part of that did you fail to understand?

2. My point was not the blacks and libs need healing. That the nation does. From the wounds you race baiters are constantly inflicting on US.

It's a public race relations forum in case you not notice. You do not get to set your own rules here. If you're bored, there are other forums out there, and if you "constantly feel wounded", maybe you are your own problem.

I said nothing about wanting to deny you the ability to post about it. I was just rejecting the idea that it was relevant or interesting.

From the perspective of some here, you are in fact, one of the most offensive race baiters/racist in this forum, so you get in return what you put out there.

See how that works?

No one who uses the term "Racist" based on it's actual definition would find any of my posts racist.

 

[katsteve2012]

"You and people like you" are the reason that even now in 2018, we still have the "first minorities" in many areas of achievement.

That's bullshit.

And hearing about it, forces "people like you" to accept social change.
ROFLMAO.

No, it doesn't. It bores us.


What it does to blacks and libs is keep them focused on racial differences instead of healing them.

It "bores you"?

There are a plethora of postings here daily that say otherwise.

What makes you think that black people or liberals need to be healed?

Healed from what? If you want to talk about "healing" go find and talk to some of these people:

All The White Supremacists Running For Office In 2018 | HuffPost

1. Yes "Bores". What part of that did you fail to understand?

2. My point was not the blacks and libs need healing. That the nation does. From the wounds you race baiters are constantly inflicting on US.

It's a public race relations forum in case you not notice. You do not get to set your own rules here. If you're bored, there are other forums out there, and if you "constantly feel wounded", maybe you are your own problem.

I said nothing about wanting to deny you the ability to post about it. I was just rejecting the idea that it was relevant or interesting.

From the perspective of some here, you are in fact, one of the most offensive race baiters/racist in this forum, so you get in return what you put out there.

See how that works?

No one who uses the term "Racist" based on it's actual definition would find any of my posts racist.

That is questionable. Suppose the candidate who you are "hoping gets her ass kicked" was a hispanic female or an Asian female and it was reported in a news story that she was the "First: Asian or hispanic female to be nominated?

I seriously doubt that you would have even commented. Or referred to it as "divisive".

It is appears to.be that you view any public acknowledgment of a black person for being the "first" in probably anything is somehow detrimental to the well being of the white population as a whole.

Even more interesting, in the same instance you become quickly offended if a long dead white politician is not revered by the black population.

 

[IM2]

You are a racist Correll. Everything you say is racist. By the definition of the term you are a racist. The only people who think you are not are other white racists.

 

[katsteve2012]

"Obsession with race"?

WTF are you smoking? It has not been that long ago that she could not even get served in a public establishment there.

Other races and genders are frequently celebrated for being "the first Asian, Hispanic, and female"achievers of anything, you racist fuck.

HOw old is she? Was she even alive when "she" could not get served?


I don't give a fuck about her being the first black whatever.


You calling me a "racist" is just you admitting that you lose the argument.


And that you are an asshole.


I hope she gets her ass kicked.

Calling you a "racist" is like calling a bird who quacks, a duck. And if you want to know her age, look it up yourself, I am not your tutor.

NO, calling me that, is just you being a fucking asshole.

The point is that in the context of the history of the south, it was not that long ago that she as a black female would not have had an opportunity run for ANY office.

Yes, it was. You are lying in order to keep the flames of racial division burning.

The fact that you, an avowed racist says "you don't not give a fuck", is a dead giveaway that you actually do.

It's a dead give away that I bored with hearing this shit, and desiring that we heal racial division.


[/\QUOTE]
Because if you didn't, you would have ignored the post, and found something else here to land and vomit on.

NO, it doesn't. Obviously.

There is no argument to lose as far as those facts go.

Says the lib that can't tell the difference between opinions, and made up bullshit and facts.

Point out what "lie" I told. Or what was made up.

*It is a FACT that she is the first black female to run for that office

*It is a FACT that she could not have run for that office not very long ago

*It is a FACT that Georgia was a slave state

It is not a "Fact" that should could not have run for that office not very long ago.

That your very next claim, is that Georgian was a slave state, shows how far back you are reaching to support your claim of Georgia as soooooo horribly racist.


Do you think that white democrats in Georgia, descended from Confederates, are going to be voting for her, or do you think that they will turn to the white republican in outrage?

*It is a FACT that what I stated is true

*It is a fact that her opportunity to run is not racially divisive by default, just for reporting the FACT that she is "a first".

*It is a FACT that YOU not wanting to hear about it is irrelevant.

Reporting it as though it is a significant milestone, is divisive.


It communicates to blacks the false impression that until today, Georgia was sooooo racist that a black could not run for this office.


It communicates to whites that you are a racist if you don't support this dem for office.


Both are divisive. VERY.

It is only "divisive" to those that likely harbor a quiet objection to the the candidate even being nominated.

And it in fact is a significant milestone considering that in the 241 year history of this nation, it was only about 50 years ago that Jim Crow laws in Georgia were abolished.

Your refusal to acknowledge history because it happens to offend you is childish.

Your statements that it "communicates to blacks that until TODAY, the state was so racist, that she couldn't have run for office, and that it communicates to white people that you are racist if you don't vote this Democrat" is actually insulting to intelligent people of both races and is ridiculous "chicken little", alarmist, race baiting in itself.

You are implying that black people in general are too stupid to pick up a history book and possibly learn WHY she is the first black female candidate for governor, and then you imply that white voters are gullible and incapable of voting for who they want to support because ONE black female is acknowledged for being the first ever nominated?

That's a new low...even for you.

 

[Correll]

HOw old is she? Was she even alive when "she" could not get served?


I don't give a fuck about her being the first black whatever.


You calling me a "racist" is just you admitting that you lose the argument.


And that you are an asshole.


I hope she gets her ass kicked.

Calling you a "racist" is like calling a bird who quacks, a duck. And if you want to know her age, look it up yourself, I am not your tutor.

NO, calling me that, is just you being a fucking asshole.

The point is that in the context of the history of the south, it was not that long ago that she as a black female would not have had an opportunity run for ANY office.

Yes, it was. You are lying in order to keep the flames of racial division burning.

The fact that you, an avowed racist says "you don't not give a fuck", is a dead giveaway that you actually do.

It's a dead give away that I bored with hearing this shit, and desiring that we heal racial division.


[/\QUOTE]
Because if you didn't, you would have ignored the post, and found something else here to land and vomit on.

NO, it doesn't. Obviously.

There is no argument to lose as far as those facts go.

Says the lib that can't tell the difference between opinions, and made up bullshit and facts.

Point out what "lie" I told. Or what was made up.

*It is a FACT that she is the first black female to run for that office

*It is a FACT that she could not have run for that office not very long ago

*It is a FACT that Georgia was a slave state

It is not a "Fact" that should could not have run for that office not very long ago.

That your very next claim, is that Georgian was a slave state, shows how far back you are reaching to support your claim of Georgia as soooooo horribly racist.


Do you think that white democrats in Georgia, descended from Confederates, are going to be voting for her, or do you think that they will turn to the white republican in outrage?

*It is a FACT that what I stated is true

*It is a fact that her opportunity to run is not racially divisive by default, just for reporting the FACT that she is "a first".

*It is a FACT that YOU not wanting to hear about it is irrelevant.

Reporting it as though it is a significant milestone, is divisive.


It communicates to blacks the false impression that until today, Georgia was sooooo racist that a black could not run for this office.


It communicates to whites that you are a racist if you don't support this dem for office.



Both are divisive. VERY.

That's your opinion as well as an extreme state of ignorance

You are obviously an immature and very insecure individual if you are bothered by something as trivial as this.

I am bothered by race baiters using vile lies to tear this nation apart.


That is the exact opposite of trivial.

 

[Correll]

That's bullshit.



No, it doesn't. It bores us.


What it does to blacks and libs is keep them focused on racial differences instead of healing them.

It "bores you"?

There are a plethora of postings here daily that say otherwise.

What makes you think that black people or liberals need to be healed?

Healed from what? If you want to talk about "healing" go find and talk to some of these people:

All The White Supremacists Running For Office In 2018 | HuffPost

1. Yes "Bores". What part of that did you fail to understand?

2. My point was not the blacks and libs need healing. That the nation does. From the wounds you race baiters are constantly inflicting on US.

It's a public race relations forum in case you not notice. You do not get to set your own rules here. If you're bored, there are other forums out there, and if you "constantly feel wounded", maybe you are your own problem.

I said nothing about wanting to deny you the ability to post about it. I was just rejecting the idea that it was relevant or interesting.

From the perspective of some here, you are in fact, one of the most offensive race baiters/racist in this forum, so you get in return what you put out there.

See how that works?

No one who uses the term "Racist" based on it's actual definition would find any of my posts racist.

That is questionable. Suppose the candidate who you are "hoping gets her ass kicked" was a hispanic female or an Asian female and it was reported in a news story that she was the "First: Asian or hispanic female to be nominated?

I seriously doubt that you would have even commented. Or referred to it as "divisive".

It is appears to.be that you view any public acknowledgment of a black person for being the "first" in probably anything is somehow detrimental to the well being of the white population as a whole.

Even more interesting, in the same instance you become quickly offended if a long dead white politician is not revered by the black population.

1. You are incorrect about not commenting on "First asian" or "First woman". Both are part of the same paradigm, ie Identity Politics. My point stands, no one who uses the term "Racist" based on it's actual definition would find any of my posts racist.


2. It is telling that you heard me talk about Lincoln's political positions and historical accomplishments for weeks, and to you, he is defined primarily by his skin color. If he were a President, who's primary accomplishment was having a certain skin color, I would certainly NOT be expecting that anyone should be grateful for THAT.

 

[Correll]

You are a racist Correll. Everything you say is racist. By the definition of the term you are a racist. The only people who think you are not are other white racists.

You make a claim, an very insulting claim.

To support that, you make another unsupported claim.


And then another unsupported claim. You cite the "Definition" but don't give it, nor any example of anything I say, meeting it.



Then you make another unsupported claim.



You are so dim that you don't even understand that you just said nothing.


All you did there was make an personal attack.




You cited the "Definition" of the word.


I challenge you to post the definition of the word, and then show something I have said that meets it.



This is a rhetorical challenge.


We both know that you cannot do it, because what you claim is a vile liar. As you are a vile liar.

 

[Correll]

HOw old is she? Was she even alive when "she" could not get served?


I don't give a fuck about her being the first black whatever.


You calling me a "racist" is just you admitting that you lose the argument.


And that you are an asshole.


I hope she gets her ass kicked.

Calling you a "racist" is like calling a bird who quacks, a duck. And if you want to know her age, look it up yourself, I am not your tutor.

NO, calling me that, is just you being a fucking asshole.

The point is that in the context of the history of the south, it was not that long ago that she as a black female would not have had an opportunity run for ANY office.

Yes, it was. You are lying in order to keep the flames of racial division burning.

The fact that you, an avowed racist says "you don't not give a fuck", is a dead giveaway that you actually do.

It's a dead give away that I bored with hearing this shit, and desiring that we heal racial division.


[/\QUOTE]
Because if you didn't, you would have ignored the post, and found something else here to land and vomit on.

NO, it doesn't. Obviously.

There is no argument to lose as far as those facts go.

Says the lib that can't tell the difference between opinions, and made up bullshit and facts.

Point out what "lie" I told. Or what was made up.

*It is a FACT that she is the first black female to run for that office

*It is a FACT that she could not have run for that office not very long ago

*It is a FACT that Georgia was a slave state

It is not a "Fact" that should could not have run for that office not very long ago.

That your very next claim, is that Georgian was a slave state, shows how far back you are reaching to support your claim of Georgia as soooooo horribly racist.


Do you think that white democrats in Georgia, descended from Confederates, are going to be voting for her, or do you think that they will turn to the white republican in outrage?

*It is a FACT that what I stated is true

*It is a fact that her opportunity to run is not racially divisive by default, just for reporting the FACT that she is "a first".

*It is a FACT that YOU not wanting to hear about it is irrelevant.

Reporting it as though it is a significant milestone, is divisive.


It communicates to blacks the false impression that until today, Georgia was sooooo racist that a black could not run for this office.


It communicates to whites that you are a racist if you don't support this dem for office.


Both are divisive. VERY.

It is only "divisive" to those that likely harbor a quiet objection to the the candidate even being nominated.

And it in fact is a significant milestone considering that in the 241 year history of this nation, it was only about 50 years ago that Jim Crow laws in Georgia were abolished.

Your refusal to acknowledge history because it happens to offend you is childish.

Your statements that it "communicates to blacks that until TODAY, the state was so racist, that she couldn't have run for office, and that it communicates to white people that you are racist if you don't vote this Democrat" is actually insulting to intelligent people of both races and is ridiculous "chicken little", alarmist, race baiting in itself.

You are implying that black people in general are too stupid to pick up a history book and possibly learn WHY she is the first black female candidate for governor, and then you imply that white voters are gullible and incapable of voting for who they want to support because ONE black female is acknowledged for being the first ever nominated?

That's a new low...even for you.

Pointing out that someone is targeted with racially divisive demagoguery does not imply that those targeted are stupid or gullible.


That is shit you just made up in your head, and I am not responsible for it.



My point stands.



Reporting it as though it is a significant milestone, is divisive.


It communicates to blacks the false impression that until today, Georgia was sooooo racist that a black could not run for this office.


It communicates to whites that you are a racist if you don't support this dem for office.


Both are divisive. VERY.

 

[katsteve2012]

Calling you a "racist" is like calling a bird who quacks, a duck. And if you want to know her age, look it up yourself, I am not your tutor.

NO, calling me that, is just you being a fucking asshole.

The point is that in the context of the history of the south, it was not that long ago that she as a black female would not have had an opportunity run for ANY office.

Yes, it was. You are lying in order to keep the flames of racial division burning.

The fact that you, an avowed racist says "you don't not give a fuck", is a dead giveaway that you actually do.

It's a dead give away that I bored with hearing this shit, and desiring that we heal racial division.


[/\QUOTE]
Because if you didn't, you would have ignored the post, and found something else here to land and vomit on.

NO, it doesn't. Obviously.

There is no argument to lose as far as those facts go.

Says the lib that can't tell the difference between opinions, and made up bullshit and facts.

Point out what "lie" I told. Or what was made up.

*It is a FACT that she is the first black female to run for that office

*It is a FACT that she could not have run for that office not very long ago

*It is a FACT that Georgia was a slave state

It is not a "Fact" that should could not have run for that office not very long ago.

That your very next claim, is that Georgian was a slave state, shows how far back you are reaching to support your claim of Georgia as soooooo horribly racist.


Do you think that white democrats in Georgia, descended from Confederates, are going to be voting for her, or do you think that they will turn to the white republican in outrage?

*It is a FACT that what I stated is true

*It is a fact that her opportunity to run is not racially divisive by default, just for reporting the FACT that she is "a first".

*It is a FACT that YOU not wanting to hear about it is irrelevant.

Reporting it as though it is a significant milestone, is divisive.


It communicates to blacks the false impression that until today, Georgia was sooooo racist that a black could not run for this office.


It communicates to whites that you are a racist if you don't support this dem for office.


Both are divisive. VERY.

It is only "divisive" to those that likely harbor a quiet objection to the the candidate even being nominated.

And it in fact is a significant milestone considering that in the 241 year history of this nation, it was only about 50 years ago that Jim Crow laws in Georgia were abolished.

Your refusal to acknowledge history because it happens to offend you is childish.

Your statements that it "communicates to blacks that until TODAY, the state was so racist, that she couldn't have run for office, and that it communicates to white people that you are racist if you don't vote this Democrat" is actually insulting to intelligent people of both races and is ridiculous "chicken little", alarmist, race baiting in itself.

You are implying that black people in general are too stupid to pick up a history book and possibly learn WHY she is the first black female candidate for governor, and then you imply that white voters are gullible and incapable of voting for who they want to support because ONE black female is acknowledged for being the first ever nominated?

That's a new low...even for you.

Pointing out that someone is targeted with racially divisive demagoguery does not imply that those targeted are stupid or gullible.


That is shit you just made up in your head, and I am not responsible for it.



My point stands.



Reporting it as though it is a significant milestone, is divisive.


It communicates to blacks the false impression that until today, Georgia was sooooo racist that a black could not run for this office.


It communicates to whites that you are a racist if you don't support this dem for office.


Both are divisive. VERY.

D

It "bores you"?

There are a plethora of postings here daily that say otherwise.

What makes you think that black people or liberals need to be healed?

Healed from what? If you want to talk about "healing" go find and talk to some of these people:

All The White Supremacists Running For Office In 2018 | HuffPost

1. Yes "Bores". What part of that did you fail to understand?

2. My point was not the blacks and libs need healing. That the nation does. From the wounds you race baiters are constantly inflicting on US.

It's a public race relations forum in case you not notice. You do not get to set your own rules here. If you're bored, there are other forums out there, and if you "constantly feel wounded", maybe you are your own problem.

I said nothing about wanting to deny you the ability to post about it. I was just rejecting the idea that it was relevant or interesting.

From the perspective of some here, you are in fact, one of the most offensive race baiters/racist in this forum, so you get in return what you put out there.

See how that works?

No one who uses the term "Racist" based on it's actual definition would find any of my posts racist.

That is questionable. Suppose the candidate who you are "hoping gets her ass kicked" was a hispanic female or an Asian female and it was reported in a news story that she was the "First: Asian or hispanic female to b

It is appears to.be that you view any public acknowledgment of a black person for being the "first" in probably anything is somehow detrimental to the well being of the white population as a whole.

Even more interesting, in the same instance you become quickly offended if a long dead white politician is not revered by the black population.

1. You are incorrect about not commenting on "First asian" or "First woman". Both are part of the same paradigm, ie Identity Politics. My point stands, no one who uses the term "Racist" based on it's actual definition would find any of my posts racist.


2. It is telling that you heard me talk about Lincoln's political positions and historical accomplishments for weeks, and to you, he is defined primarily by his skin color. If he were a President, who's primary accomplishment was having a certain skin color, I would certainly NOT be expecting that anyone should be grateful for THAT.

You are an unhinged, racist idiot.

Lincolns "skin color" was never a point of contention with me at all.

How could he be? A non white person in that era would have automatically been denied of even being human.

The fact is that YOU, being the racist asswipe that YOU are, vigorously objects to ANY recognition of ANY black person for ANY accomplishment.

In your tiny little pea brain, in some way it infringes on your psychic comfort.

Fuck You. You low life racist dick.

 

[Correll]

NO, calling me that, is just you being a fucking asshole.


Yes, it was. You are lying in order to keep the flames of racial division burning.

It's a dead give away that I bored with hearing this shit, and desiring that we heal racial division.


[/\QUOTE]
Because if you didn't, you would have ignored the post, and found something else here to land and vomit on.

NO, it doesn't. Obviously.

There is no argument to lose as far as those facts go.

Says the lib that can't tell the difference between opinions, and made up bullshit and facts.

Point out what "lie" I told. Or what was made up.

*It is a FACT that she is the first black female to run for that office

*It is a FACT that she could not have run for that office not very long ago

*It is a FACT that Georgia was a slave state

It is not a "Fact" that should could not have run for that office not very long ago.

That your very next claim, is that Georgian was a slave state, shows how far back you are reaching to support your claim of Georgia as soooooo horribly racist.


Do you think that white democrats in Georgia, descended from Confederates, are going to be voting for her, or do you think that they will turn to the white republican in outrage?

*It is a FACT that what I stated is true

*It is a fact that her opportunity to run is not racially divisive by default, just for reporting the FACT that she is "a first".

*It is a FACT that YOU not wanting to hear about it is irrelevant.

Reporting it as though it is a significant milestone, is divisive.


It communicates to blacks the false impression that until today, Georgia was sooooo racist that a black could not run for this office.


It communicates to whites that you are a racist if you don't support this dem for office.


Both are divisive. VERY.

It is only "divisive" to those that likely harbor a quiet objection to the the candidate even being nominated.

And it in fact is a significant milestone considering that in the 241 year history of this nation, it was only about 50 years ago that Jim Crow laws in Georgia were abolished.

Your refusal to acknowledge history because it happens to offend you is childish.

Your statements that it "communicates to blacks that until TODAY, the state was so racist, that she couldn't have run for office, and that it communicates to white people that you are racist if you don't vote this Democrat" is actually insulting to intelligent people of both races and is ridiculous "chicken little", alarmist, race baiting in itself.

You are implying that black people in general are too stupid to pick up a history book and possibly learn WHY she is the first black female candidate for governor, and then you imply that white voters are gullible and incapable of voting for who they want to support because ONE black female is acknowledged for being the first ever nominated?

That's a new low...even for you.

Pointing out that someone is targeted with racially divisive demagoguery does not imply that those targeted are stupid or gullible.


That is shit you just made up in your head, and I am not responsible for it.



My point stands.



Reporting it as though it is a significant milestone, is divisive.


It communicates to blacks the false impression that until today, Georgia was sooooo racist that a black could not run for this office.


It communicates to whites that you are a racist if you don't support this dem for office.


Both are divisive. VERY.

D

1. Yes "Bores". What part of that did you fail to understand?

2. My point was not the blacks and libs need healing. That the nation does. From the wounds you race baiters are constantly inflicting on US.

It's a public race relations forum in case you not notice. You do not get to set your own rules here. If you're bored, there are other forums out there, and if you "constantly feel wounded", maybe you are your own problem.

I said nothing about wanting to deny you the ability to post about it. I was just rejecting the idea that it was relevant or interesting.

From the perspective of some here, you are in fact, one of the most offensive race baiters/racist in this forum, so you get in return what you put out there.

See how that works?

No one who uses the term "Racist" based on it's actual definition would find any of my posts racist.

That is questionable. Suppose the candidate who you are "hoping gets her ass kicked" was a hispanic female or an Asian female and it was reported in a news story that she was the "First: Asian or hispanic female to b

It is appears to.be that you view any public acknowledgment of a black person for being the "first" in probably anything is somehow detrimental to the well being of the white population as a whole.

Even more interesting, in the same instance you become quickly offended if a long dead white politician is not revered by the black population.

1. You are incorrect about not commenting on "First asian" or "First woman". Both are part of the same paradigm, ie Identity Politics. My point stands, no one who uses the term "Racist" based on it's actual definition would find any of my posts racist.


2. It is telling that you heard me talk about Lincoln's political positions and historical accomplishments for weeks, and to you, he is defined primarily by his skin color. If he were a President, who's primary accomplishment was having a certain skin color, I would certainly NOT be expecting that anyone should be grateful for THAT.

You are an unhinged, racist idiot.

Lincolns "skin color" was never a point of contention with me at all.

How could he be? A non white person in that era would have automatically been denied of even being human.

The fact is that YOU, being the racist asswipe that YOU are, vigorously objects to ANY recognition of ANY black person for ANY accomplishment.

In your tiny little pea brain, in some way it infringes on your psychic comfort.

Fuck You. You low life racist dick.

I objected to making a big issue out of the "first" black person to do any specific thing, as though every time it happens, it is some huge milestone, (and I explained why)



Your interpretation of that, to mean, "vigorously objects to ANY recognition of ANY black person for ANY accomplishment."

shows that you are the one with the "pea brain".


So, in your words, "Fuck you".