Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You don’t believe the unemployment rate lol umm ok hahaNot true.. any evidence??Not what the black unemployment rate says lolReally why has education gone down hill in the black community since the 1970’s?
It hasn't.
The black unemployment rate shows that a white man with a high school education will get hired before a black with a college education.
There is nothing like chewing up dumb whites in debates.
What you said was not true and you presented no evidence. So KMBA!
I don't care what the issue is, if Blumenthal is involved, take the opposite view. DaNang Dick is the worst POS in the Senate, lying about serving in Viet Nam. I saw him in person and he is even worse looking in person-like death on a bad day. His abandonment of principles and truth should sicken all Americans-if we impeach Trump, make sure this turd goes with him.When you have a problem answering a question about your support of a ruling that ended racial discrimination, you kinda give yourself away. But Trump puts her up for a federal judge seat and the colorblind, non racist, anti slavery, republicans in the senate confirmed her.
Trump Judicial Nominee Won't Say If She Supports Brown v. Board of Education
“Do you believe that Brown v. Board of Education was correctly decided,” Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat, asked.
“I don’t mean to be coy,” Vitter responded. “But I think I get into a difficult area when I start commenting on Supreme Court decisions which are correctly decided and which I may disagree with. Again, my personal, political or religious views I would set aside. That is Supreme Court precedent. It is binding. If I were honored to be confirmed I would be bound by it, and of course I would uphold it.”
Trump Judicial Nominee Won't Say If She Supports Brown v. Board of Education
She does not agree with the decision made in Brown v. Board.
Senate confirms Wendy Vitter as federal judge
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...989555e7766_story.html?utm_term=.ad71c329008c
I don't see anything racist in her remarks at all. I couldn't read your wapo article, but I found another on the topic at CNN. All she did was refuse to comment on prior SC cases. Don't I recall Kavanaugh doing the same? Maybe not.When you have a problem answering a question about your support of a ruling that ended racial discrimination, you kinda give yourself away. But Trump puts her up for a federal judge seat and the colorblind, non racist, anti slavery, republicans in the senate confirmed her.
Trump Judicial Nominee Won't Say If She Supports Brown v. Board of Education
“Do you believe that Brown v. Board of Education was correctly decided,” Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat, asked.
“I don’t mean to be coy,” Vitter responded. “But I think I get into a difficult area when I start commenting on Supreme Court decisions which are correctly decided and which I may disagree with. Again, my personal, political or religious views I would set aside. That is Supreme Court precedent. It is binding. If I were honored to be confirmed I would be bound by it, and of course I would uphold it.”
Trump Judicial Nominee Won't Say If She Supports Brown v. Board of Education
She does not agree with the decision made in Brown v. Board.
Senate confirms Wendy Vitter as federal judge
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...989555e7766_story.html?utm_term=.ad71c329008c
Anyway, in a written follow up response, Judge Vitter said this:
In follow-up written questions submitted after the hearing, Vitter would expand upon her answer, saying, "I do not believe that racial segregation in schools is constitutional," and that she abhorred racism.
Senate confirms Wendy Vitter, judicial nominee who refused to say if 'Brown v Board of Education' was correctly decided - CNNPolitics
Not true.. any evidence??Not what the black unemployment rate says lolReally why has education gone down hill in the black community since the 1970’s?
It hasn't.
The black unemployment rate shows that a white man with a high school education will get hired before a black with a college education.
There is nothing like chewing up dumb whites in debates.
What you said was not true and you presented no evidence. So KMBA!
She had no problems answering other questions and was able to cite supreme court decisions as precedent. But here she suddenly struggles.I don't see anything racist in her remarks at all. I couldn't read your wapo article, but I found another on the topic at CNN. All she did was refuse to comment on prior SC cases. Don't I recall Kavanaugh doing the same? Maybe not.When you have a problem answering a question about your support of a ruling that ended racial discrimination, you kinda give yourself away. But Trump puts her up for a federal judge seat and the colorblind, non racist, anti slavery, republicans in the senate confirmed her.
Trump Judicial Nominee Won't Say If She Supports Brown v. Board of Education
“Do you believe that Brown v. Board of Education was correctly decided,” Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat, asked.
“I don’t mean to be coy,” Vitter responded. “But I think I get into a difficult area when I start commenting on Supreme Court decisions which are correctly decided and which I may disagree with. Again, my personal, political or religious views I would set aside. That is Supreme Court precedent. It is binding. If I were honored to be confirmed I would be bound by it, and of course I would uphold it.”
Trump Judicial Nominee Won't Say If She Supports Brown v. Board of Education
She does not agree with the decision made in Brown v. Board.
Senate confirms Wendy Vitter as federal judge
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...989555e7766_story.html?utm_term=.ad71c329008c
Anyway, in a written follow up response, Judge Vitter said this:
In follow-up written questions submitted after the hearing, Vitter would expand upon her answer, saying, "I do not believe that racial segregation in schools is constitutional," and that she abhorred racism.
Senate confirms Wendy Vitter, judicial nominee who refused to say if 'Brown v Board of Education' was correctly decided - CNNPolitics
So let me explain the obvious. She was asked a simple question. All she had to do was say it was a correct decision. She had no problems answering other questions and was able to cite supreme court decisions as precedent. But here she suddenly struggles. So after the hearing and after being told she needs to correct her statement if she wants to be a federal judge, she turns in this expanded answer.
The Kavanaugh hearing was a sham. They were going to force him in no matter what it took.
What’s that got to do with my postReally why has education gone down hill in the black community since the 1970’s?I went to these schools, it was a horrible idea, it’s destroyed black educationWhen you have a problem answering a question about your support of a ruling that ended racial discrimination, you kinda give yourself away. But Trump puts her up for a federal judge seat and the colorblind, non racist, anti slavery, republicans in the senate confirmed her.
Trump Judicial Nominee Won't Say If She Supports Brown v. Board of Education
“Do you believe that Brown v. Board of Education was correctly decided,” Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat, asked.
“I don’t mean to be coy,” Vitter responded. “But I think I get into a difficult area when I start commenting on Supreme Court decisions which are correctly decided and which I may disagree with. Again, my personal, political or religious views I would set aside. That is Supreme Court precedent. It is binding. If I were honored to be confirmed I would be bound by it, and of course I would uphold it.”
Trump Judicial Nominee Won't Say If She Supports Brown v. Board of Education
She does not agree with the decision made in Brown v. Board.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...989555e7766_story.html?utm_term=.ad71c329008c
I'm black and it didn't destroy anything.
Brown V board of education was handed down in 54 dumb ass.
Didnt affect Boston New York Philadelphia Chicago etc until the 70’sWhat’s that got to do with my postReally why has education gone down hill in the black community since the 1970’s?I went to these schools, it was a horrible idea, it’s destroyed black education
I'm black and it didn't destroy anything.
Brown V board of education was handed down in 54 dumb ass.
Your statement blamed decline in schools since the 70s on Brown V Board of education.
Didnt affect Boston New York Philadelphia Chicago etc until the 70’sWhat’s that got to do with my postReally why has education gone down hill in the black community since the 1970’s?I'm black and it didn't destroy anything.
Brown V board of education was handed down in 54 dumb ass.
Your statement blamed decline in schools since the 70s on Brown V Board of education.
Didnt affect Boston New York Philadelphia Chicago etc until the 70’sWhat’s that got to do with my postReally why has education gone down hill in the black community since the 1970’s?
Brown V board of education was handed down in 54 dumb ass.
Your statement blamed decline in schools since the 70s on Brown V Board of education.
Do you even know what B v BoE was about?
Didnt affect Boston New York Philadelphia Chicago etc until the 70’sWhat’s that got to do with my postBrown V board of education was handed down in 54 dumb ass.
Your statement blamed decline in schools since the 70s on Brown V Board of education.
Do you even know what B v BoE was about?
Yep, the Topeka BoE wanted to make seperate, great schools for everybody but SCOTUS said no, you will integrate your schools so they will be crappy for everybody.
Didnt affect Boston New York Philadelphia Chicago etc until the 70’sWhat’s that got to do with my post
Your statement blamed decline in schools since the 70s on Brown V Board of education.
Do you even know what B v BoE was about?
Yep, the Topeka BoE wanted to make seperate, great schools for everybody but SCOTUS said no, you will integrate your schools so they will be crappy for everybody.
They didn't want to make separate schools. They were already separate, and there wasn't anything great about them. Separate is inherently unequal.
Do you?Didnt affect Boston New York Philadelphia Chicago etc until the 70’sWhat’s that got to do with my postReally why has education gone down hill in the black community since the 1970’s?
Brown V board of education was handed down in 54 dumb ass.
Your statement blamed decline in schools since the 70s on Brown V Board of education.
Do you even know what B v BoE was about?
Didnt affect Boston New York Philadelphia Chicago etc until the 70’sYour statement blamed decline in schools since the 70s on Brown V Board of education.
Do you even know what B v BoE was about?
Yep, the Topeka BoE wanted to make seperate, great schools for everybody but SCOTUS said no, you will integrate your schools so they will be crappy for everybody.
They didn't want to make separate schools. They were already separate, and there wasn't anything great about them. Separate is inherently unequal.
What is unequal?
25 classrooms - 25 classrooms
25 teachers - 25 teachers
500 books - 500 books
etc - etc
We have jim Crow laws in Boston today.. it’s alive and well thanks to democratsDidnt affect Boston New York Philadelphia Chicago etc until the 70’s
Do you even know what B v BoE was about?
Yep, the Topeka BoE wanted to make seperate, great schools for everybody but SCOTUS said no, you will integrate your schools so they will be crappy for everybody.
They didn't want to make separate schools. They were already separate, and there wasn't anything great about them. Separate is inherently unequal.
What is unequal?
25 classrooms - 25 classrooms
25 teachers - 25 teachers
500 books - 500 books
etc - etc
Not sure why I should bother trying to explain a decision that was made 65 years ago with a racist idiot who wants to go back to Jim Crow.
Didnt affect Boston New York Philadelphia Chicago etc until the 70’sYour statement blamed decline in schools since the 70s on Brown V Board of education.
Do you even know what B v BoE was about?
Yep, the Topeka BoE wanted to make seperate, great schools for everybody but SCOTUS said no, you will integrate your schools so they will be crappy for everybody.
They didn't want to make separate schools. They were already separate, and there wasn't anything great about them. Separate is inherently unequal.
What is unequal?
25 classrooms - 25 classrooms
25 teachers - 25 teachers
500 books - 500 books
etc - etc
Didnt affect Boston New York Philadelphia Chicago etc until the 70’s
Do you even know what B v BoE was about?
Yep, the Topeka BoE wanted to make seperate, great schools for everybody but SCOTUS said no, you will integrate your schools so they will be crappy for everybody.
They didn't want to make separate schools. They were already separate, and there wasn't anything great about them. Separate is inherently unequal.
What is unequal?
25 classrooms - 25 classrooms
25 teachers - 25 teachers
500 books - 500 books
etc - etc
That's not exactly how things went.
Didnt affect Boston New York Philadelphia Chicago etc until the 70’s
Do you even know what B v BoE was about?
Yep, the Topeka BoE wanted to make seperate, great schools for everybody but SCOTUS said no, you will integrate your schools so they will be crappy for everybody.
They didn't want to make separate schools. They were already separate, and there wasn't anything great about them. Separate is inherently unequal.
What is unequal?
25 classrooms - 25 classrooms
25 teachers - 25 teachers
500 books - 500 books
etc - etc
That's not exactly how things went.
Do you even know what B v BoE was about?
Yep, the Topeka BoE wanted to make seperate, great schools for everybody but SCOTUS said no, you will integrate your schools so they will be crappy for everybody.
They didn't want to make separate schools. They were already separate, and there wasn't anything great about them. Separate is inherently unequal.
What is unequal?
25 classrooms - 25 classrooms
25 teachers - 25 teachers
500 books - 500 books
etc - etc
That's not exactly how things went.
No. That's how it could have gone without interference from SCOTUS.
Regardless democrats have destroyed public schools .. they fight over race not match and scienceYep, the Topeka BoE wanted to make seperate, great schools for everybody but SCOTUS said no, you will integrate your schools so they will be crappy for everybody.
They didn't want to make separate schools. They were already separate, and there wasn't anything great about them. Separate is inherently unequal.
What is unequal?
25 classrooms - 25 classrooms
25 teachers - 25 teachers
500 books - 500 books
etc - etc
That's not exactly how things went.
No. That's how it could have gone without interference from SCOTUS.
That's just goofy. The schools were already separate, and no where near equal. What would make them equal without a SC ruling?
