Real Racism!

[Frannie]

Coulter's newest article points out that, far too often, not only is the truth the very opposite of what the Left claims it to be.....but it is right there, staring us in the face.



1. “…race discrimination against whites is de rigueur. Forget being embarrassed, this is race discrimination with attitude. And it’s all justified by the nonsensical phrase: “white privilege.”


2.The lie of “white privilege” is treated as an implacable fact throughout our cultural institutions, no matter how manifestly absurd it is. Thus, in the discredited book “The Education of Brett Kavanaugh,” authors Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly act as if a half-Puerto Rican girl entering Yale in the 1980s deserves a place in the civil rights pantheon along with the Little Rock Nine.

If Ramirez had applied to Yale Law School after college, she would have had a five times better chance of being admitted than a white applicant like Kavanaugh -- simply because she had one Puerto Rican parent.


…the only group discriminated against in college admissions is white people.


With the same grades and scores, Puerto Ricans were 5.3 times more likely to be admitted to a top-tier law school like Yale than a white applicant. Every ethnic group except whites got a boost -- African Americans, Asians, Mexicans, Puerto Ricans and “Other Hispanic.” The more prestigious the law school, the stronger the preferences.



3. Asians are SO lucky they’re not white! Otherwise, America’s leading hate group, the Southern Poverty Law Center, would be churning out reports on the worrying rise in Asian Supremacy.




4. In fact, however, a recent study by Georgetown University (probably White Nationalist), funded by the Bill and Melissa Gates Foundation (presumed hate group), found that if colleges admitted students based solely on SAT scores, every single ethnic group would decline, except one: whites.

Yes, even fewer Asian students would be admitted on an SAT-only admission standard.




5. Affirmative action is supposed to be for the descendants of American slaves. See? We owe them something. Nobody else.
Without the legacy of slavery, affirmative action is just institutionalized anti-white racism.”
Are Facts White Nationalist?




College admission based on merit, rather than race, is to the benefit of America.

Denying white privilege is just plain retarded.

Let's put everything on the SATs. The SATs are not a perfect test. A kid from an inner city school or from a different culture may not grasp the meanings. Rich kids who have SAT tutoring would have an advantage. That is why we have affirmative action. That is why colleges use other metrics & not just SATs.

Wrong because minorities from rich neighborhoods get the same SAT scores as those from poor ones...…………..

Kanye West George Forman and Alveda King are all voting for Trump

Sorry to bust your bubble

Liar. Family income is a factor for both whites & blacks.

Exactly, that said all is equal

 

[Pete7469]

Hey, I'm just trying to help by listing off a bunch of racist lefties!

You're welcome, sweetie!
.

What about the systemic and backed by law discrimination mentioned and documented in the OP?

It's labeled as "racism" when there is no indication that those exercising those tactics are claiming that whites are inferior - the actual definition of the word.

Instead, it's just another intellectually dishonest exercise by the OP in an attempt to deflect from the REAL racism that we know still exists.

This is one of her dishonest tactics - she provides actual facts completely out of context, trying transparently to control definitions, while avoiding and ignoring other obvious facts that are contrary to her phony premise. And, since she is actually providing facts (and using them dishonestly), she defends her intellectual dishonesty by daring people to prove her facts wrong. Facts are but one part of an argument. Distortion is another.

This is the same crap sprayed by wingers from Hannity to Maddow. Clearly the OP fancies herself on that level, in some weird, internet message board way. I'm not going to pee on her little fantasy, but I don't have to buy it, either.

Those who enable racism aren't much better than racists, in my estimation.
.

I'll stop being a racist when the Negroes get off welfare, stop committing crimes, start taking care of their children and stop electing filthy Democrats. Oh yea, and stop listening to that obnoxious rap music.

Your racism is inbred into you very being.

What is 'racism'?

Unless you can document an act physically or financially injurious to one of another race, why is his opinion, or statements any concern of yours?

Have you ever heard of the first amendment?

REAL RACISTS are pieces of leftist shit like Mac, who point to even the most obscure insult, critical observation or disagreement leveled at someone in a democrook victim category by someone who isn't a pillow biting bed wetter like himself, for the purpose of dividing people along racial lines.

As I have pointed out many times, humanity is ONE RACE. The human race, and those who use physical traits and ethnic history of people to separate people into groups do so for their own self interests.

Being critical of cultural differences, ridiculing people based on how they look, or not wanting to even be associated with different people is not racism.

The belief that you're superior to someone based on the bogus racial divisions given to us by egg head bed wetters is what makes you a "racist" and an asshole.

It's a bullshit term, and it's only useful to people who seek to do harm to our society, and Mac being the bigoted leftist piece of shit he is seeks to do exactly that.

Then he wants to piss and moan about the "divisiveness" he helps instigate.

Fucking cock sucker.


.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I've never used vulgarity.


That's because I am more articulate and educated than you are....

...and because I'm never wrong.

You were wrong about the king of england not being considered divine

Let's leave that up to readers of this post.


You wrote this:
"Besides the founding fathers were members of the Church of England of which the King was God."

Does A Religion Need A God?




I, shocked that any not an inmate of a hospital for the criminally insane, could actually contend that the Church claimed the king to be god, wrote this:
THE KING OF ENGLAND WAS NOT GOD, YOU IMBECILE!!!!!!!



QED....I'm never wrong.

Again I was correct, the king was considered God in the church of England. Nothing you can say will disprove this.

LOL

You're an imbecile.....that's why "Nothing you can say will disprove this."


The Church never, at any time, proclaimed the king to be god.

You are changing history to suit your own needs

divine right of kings | Definition, History, & Facts

You wrote this:
"Besides the founding fathers were members of the Church of England of which the King was God."

Does A Religion Need A God?




I, shocked that any not an inmate of a hospital for the criminally insane, could actually contend that the Church claimed the king to be god, wrote this:
THE KING OF ENGLAND WAS NOT GOD, YOU IMBECILE!!!!!!!



QED....I'm never wrong.



'Divine right' does not mean the Church proclaimed the kind to be god.....you imbecile.

 

[Mac1958]

Okay, I sure will!
.

You will what? Insist on your definition of the word, as an excuse to not address massive and widespread racial discrimination?

I don't know, I was just trying to close out the conversation!
.

Yep. You insisted on your definition of the word, ignored the actual real racism we both know is going on, and you have accomplished all you want to, in this thread.


Just like you described. In your post.

Funny, you Trumpsters have had no problem during my thousands of squabbles with Regressive Lefties here about their dishonest and counter-productive tactics on race, including PC and Identity Politics.

But suddenly, when I shine the light in the OTHER direction, that's not so good. That's DIFFERENT.

I can see, understand and appreciate both sides of this. People like you (on both ends, of course) steadfastly refuse to. I'm tired of these asymmetrical conversations, so I don't bother much any more. Play with someone who will.
.
.

That sounds very reasonable.


But, your action was to control the definition of the word and to use it to dismiss the institutional racism mentioned in the post you replied to.


AS YOU DESCRIBED.


I did not do that. I just think that widespread programs and policies that effect millions and millions of people, trump a couple of random people on the internet saying words.

I thought my answer was clear, but I'll clarify: The actions described by the OP are absolutely, positively not racism.

They are different crappy, counterproductive, politically motivated & corrosive actions and tactics.

The game that the OP and others in her tribe try is: "What WE do isn't racism, but what the OTHER guys do IS racism".

What a weak, transparent attempt to avoid just being honest and holding your own tribe accountable.
.

 

[Mac1958]

What about the systemic and backed by law discrimination mentioned and documented in the OP?

It's labeled as "racism" when there is no indication that those exercising those tactics are claiming that whites are inferior - the actual definition of the word.

Instead, it's just another intellectually dishonest exercise by the OP in an attempt to deflect from the REAL racism that we know still exists.

This is one of her dishonest tactics - she provides actual facts completely out of context, trying transparently to control definitions, while avoiding and ignoring other obvious facts that are contrary to her phony premise. And, since she is actually providing facts (and using them dishonestly), she defends her intellectual dishonesty by daring people to prove her facts wrong. Facts are but one part of an argument. Distortion is another.

This is the same crap sprayed by wingers from Hannity to Maddow. Clearly the OP fancies herself on that level, in some weird, internet message board way. I'm not going to pee on her little fantasy, but I don't have to buy it, either.

Those who enable racism aren't much better than racists, in my estimation.
.

I'll stop being a racist when the Negroes get off welfare, stop committing crimes, start taking care of their children and stop electing filthy Democrats. Oh yea, and stop listening to that obnoxious rap music.

Your racism is inbred into you very being.

What is 'racism'?

Unless you can document an act physically or financially injurious to one of another race, why is his opinion, or statements any concern of yours?

Have you ever heard of the first amendment?

REAL RACISTS are pieces of leftist shit like Mac, who point to even the most obscure insult, critical observation or disagreement leveled at someone in a democrook victim category by someone who isn't a pillow biting bed wetter like himself, for the purpose of dividing people along racial lines.

As I have pointed out many times, humanity is ONE RACE. The human race, and those who use physical traits and ethnic history of people to separate people into groups do so for their own self interests.

Being critical of cultural differences, ridiculing people based on how they look, or not wanting to even be associated with different people is not racism.

The belief that you're superior to someone based on the bogus racial divisions given to us by egg head bed wetters is what makes you a "racist" and an asshole.

It's a bullshit term, and it's only useful to people who seek to do harm to our society, and Mac being the bigoted leftist piece of shit he is seeks to do exactly that.

Then he wants to piss and moan about the "divisiveness" he helps instigate.

Fucking cock sucker.


.

Wow. Look at that. I merely quoted you.

Your own words really turn you into a drama queen, huh?


.

 

[JoeB131]

Coulter's newest article points out that, far too often, not only is the truth the very opposite of what the Left claims it to be.....but it is right there, staring us in the face.

1. “…race discrimination against whites is de rigueur. Forget being embarrassed, this is race discrimination with attitude. And it’s all justified by the nonsensical phrase: “white privilege.”

Funny, I've never been discriminated against because I was white.

In fact, the first time I ever encountered discrimination was when I was into my late forties, and encountered age discrimination... and realized how much discrimination sucked.

 

[Hellbilly]

Horse shit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Says the brainwashed socialist moron.

You can thank trump for that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[PoliticalChic]

Coulter's newest article points out that, far too often, not only is the truth the very opposite of what the Left claims it to be.....but it is right there, staring us in the face.

1. “…race discrimination against whites is de rigueur. Forget being embarrassed, this is race discrimination with attitude. And it’s all justified by the nonsensical phrase: “white privilege.”

Funny, I've never been discriminated against because I was white.

In fact, the first time I ever encountered discrimination was when I was into my late forties, and encountered age discrimination... and realized how much discrimination sucked.

You know why people take an instant dislike to you? ‘Cause it saves time.

 

[alang1216]

Race isn't my be all and end all.....

I'm not a Liberal.

You sure? You seem to post quite a lot on the topic.

 

[Correll]

You will what? Insist on your definition of the word, as an excuse to not address massive and widespread racial discrimination?

I don't know, I was just trying to close out the conversation!
.

Yep. You insisted on your definition of the word, ignored the actual real racism we both know is going on, and you have accomplished all you want to, in this thread.


Just like you described. In your post.

Funny, you Trumpsters have had no problem during my thousands of squabbles with Regressive Lefties here about their dishonest and counter-productive tactics on race, including PC and Identity Politics.

But suddenly, when I shine the light in the OTHER direction, that's not so good. That's DIFFERENT.

I can see, understand and appreciate both sides of this. People like you (on both ends, of course) steadfastly refuse to. I'm tired of these asymmetrical conversations, so I don't bother much any more. Play with someone who will.
.
.

That sounds very reasonable.


But, your action was to control the definition of the word and to use it to dismiss the institutional racism mentioned in the post you replied to.


AS YOU DESCRIBED.


I did not do that. I just think that widespread programs and policies that effect millions and millions of people, trump a couple of random people on the internet saying words.

I thought my answer was clear, but I'll clarify: The actions described by the OP are absolutely, positively not racism.

They are different crappy, counterproductive, politically motivated & corrosive actions and tactics.

The game that the OP and others in her tribe try is: "What WE do isn't racism, but what the OTHER guys do IS racism".

What a weak, transparent attempt to avoid just being honest and holding your own tribe accountable.
.

They are discriminating against people, in very real ways, with very serious consequences for these people,


based on race.


And you are ignoring it, because of the lack of a formal statement that the discriminators, believe that the whites are racially inferior.



That is you playing a transparent game to avoid holding your tribe accountable.

 

[Mac1958]

I don't know, I was just trying to close out the conversation!
.

Yep. You insisted on your definition of the word, ignored the actual real racism we both know is going on, and you have accomplished all you want to, in this thread.


Just like you described. In your post.

Funny, you Trumpsters have had no problem during my thousands of squabbles with Regressive Lefties here about their dishonest and counter-productive tactics on race, including PC and Identity Politics.

But suddenly, when I shine the light in the OTHER direction, that's not so good. That's DIFFERENT.

I can see, understand and appreciate both sides of this. People like you (on both ends, of course) steadfastly refuse to. I'm tired of these asymmetrical conversations, so I don't bother much any more. Play with someone who will.
.
.

That sounds very reasonable.


But, your action was to control the definition of the word and to use it to dismiss the institutional racism mentioned in the post you replied to.


AS YOU DESCRIBED.


I did not do that. I just think that widespread programs and policies that effect millions and millions of people, trump a couple of random people on the internet saying words.

I thought my answer was clear, but I'll clarify: The actions described by the OP are absolutely, positively not racism.

They are different crappy, counterproductive, politically motivated & corrosive actions and tactics.

The game that the OP and others in her tribe try is: "What WE do isn't racism, but what the OTHER guys do IS racism".

What a weak, transparent attempt to avoid just being honest and holding your own tribe accountable.
.

They are discriminating against people, in very real ways, with very serious consequences for these people,


based on race.


And you are ignoring it, because of the lack of a formal statement that the discriminators, believe that the whites are racially inferior.



That is you playing a transparent game to avoid holding your tribe accountable.

You know that isn't true.

End of conversation.
.

 

[Correll]

Yep. You insisted on your definition of the word, ignored the actual real racism we both know is going on, and you have accomplished all you want to, in this thread.


Just like you described. In your post.

Funny, you Trumpsters have had no problem during my thousands of squabbles with Regressive Lefties here about their dishonest and counter-productive tactics on race, including PC and Identity Politics.

But suddenly, when I shine the light in the OTHER direction, that's not so good. That's DIFFERENT.

I can see, understand and appreciate both sides of this. People like you (on both ends, of course) steadfastly refuse to. I'm tired of these asymmetrical conversations, so I don't bother much any more. Play with someone who will.
.
.

That sounds very reasonable.


But, your action was to control the definition of the word and to use it to dismiss the institutional racism mentioned in the post you replied to.


AS YOU DESCRIBED.


I did not do that. I just think that widespread programs and policies that effect millions and millions of people, trump a couple of random people on the internet saying words.

I thought my answer was clear, but I'll clarify: The actions described by the OP are absolutely, positively not racism.

They are different crappy, counterproductive, politically motivated & corrosive actions and tactics.

The game that the OP and others in her tribe try is: "What WE do isn't racism, but what the OTHER guys do IS racism".

What a weak, transparent attempt to avoid just being honest and holding your own tribe accountable.
.

They are discriminating against people, in very real ways, with very serious consequences for these people,


based on race.


And you are ignoring it, because of the lack of a formal statement that the discriminators, believe that the whites are racially inferior.



That is you playing a transparent game to avoid holding your tribe accountable.

You know that isn't true.

End of conversation.
.

You are willing to go so far, but no further. When it comes down to it, you are loyal to your tribe.

And you are the most reasonable liberal on this site, or that I have seen in some time.


And yet, even you, are not open to any real healing or bridge building.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

I have never been discriminated against either. Where are all these white victims ?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I have never been discriminated against either. Where are all these white victims ?

When you apply to college it ill be evident.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

I have never been discriminated against either. Where are all these white victims ?

When you apply to college it ill be evident.

My kids are all in college, despite being white.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I have never been discriminated against either. Where are all these white victims ?

When you apply to college it ill be evident.

My kids are all in college, despite being white.

I said when you get to that level.

You might even learn this: the plural of anecdote isn't 'data.'


I hope your kids aren't too ashamed of you......

 

[Tommy Tainant]

I have never been discriminated against either. Where are all these white victims ?

When you apply to college it ill be evident.

My kids are all in college, despite being white.

I said when you get to that level.

You might even learn this: the plural of anecdote isn't 'data.'


I hope your kids aren't too ashamed of you......

Why would they be? I am not a bigoted piece of shit like yourself.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I have never been discriminated against either. Where are all these white victims ?

When you apply to college it ill be evident.

My kids are all in college, despite being white.

I said when you get to that level.

You might even learn this: the plural of anecdote isn't 'data.'


I hope your kids aren't too ashamed of you......

Why would they be? I am not a bigoted piece of shit like yourself.

When one is injured by the truth, and lets the cat out of the bag via the uncontrollable voluntary Tourette's Syndrom that you evince, you show yourself to be what you attempted to say about moi.....

And your post has become a boomerang....



Glad it was painful.

 

[Frannie]

You were wrong about the king of england not being considered divine

Let's leave that up to readers of this post.


You wrote this:
"Besides the founding fathers were members of the Church of England of which the King was God."

Does A Religion Need A God?




I, shocked that any not an inmate of a hospital for the criminally insane, could actually contend that the Church claimed the king to be god, wrote this:
THE KING OF ENGLAND WAS NOT GOD, YOU IMBECILE!!!!!!!



QED....I'm never wrong.

Again I was correct, the king was considered God in the church of England. Nothing you can say will disprove this.

LOL

You're an imbecile.....that's why "Nothing you can say will disprove this."


The Church never, at any time, proclaimed the king to be god.

You are changing history to suit your own needs

divine right of kings | Definition, History, & Facts

You wrote this:
"Besides the founding fathers were members of the Church of England of which the King was God."

Does A Religion Need A God?




I, shocked that any not an inmate of a hospital for the criminally insane, could actually contend that the Church claimed the king to be god, wrote this:
THE KING OF ENGLAND WAS NOT GOD, YOU IMBECILE!!!!!!!



QED....I'm never wrong.



'Divine right' does not mean the Church proclaimed the kind to be god.....you imbecile.

What part eludes you, the king declared himself god and everyone called him lord.

Are you really stupid oar u stubdying to be a rock doctor

 

[PoliticalChic]

Let's leave that up to readers of this post.


You wrote this:
"Besides the founding fathers were members of the Church of England of which the King was God."

Does A Religion Need A God?




I, shocked that any not an inmate of a hospital for the criminally insane, could actually contend that the Church claimed the king to be god, wrote this:
THE KING OF ENGLAND WAS NOT GOD, YOU IMBECILE!!!!!!!



QED....I'm never wrong.

Again I was correct, the king was considered God in the church of England. Nothing you can say will disprove this.

LOL

You're an imbecile.....that's why "Nothing you can say will disprove this."


The Church never, at any time, proclaimed the king to be god.

You are changing history to suit your own needs

divine right of kings | Definition, History, & Facts

You wrote this:
"Besides the founding fathers were members of the Church of England of which the King was God."

Does A Religion Need A God?




I, shocked that any not an inmate of a hospital for the criminally insane, could actually contend that the Church claimed the king to be god, wrote this:
THE KING OF ENGLAND WAS NOT GOD, YOU IMBECILE!!!!!!!



QED....I'm never wrong.



'Divine right' does not mean the Church proclaimed the kind to be god.....you imbecile.

What part eludes you, the king declared himself god and everyone called him lord.

Are you really stupid oar u stubdying to be a rock doctor

You wrote this:
"Besides the founding fathers were members of the Church of England of which the King was God."

Does A Religion Need A God?




I, shocked that any not an inmate of a hospital for the criminally insane, could actually contend that the Church claimed the king to be god, wrote this:
THE KING OF ENGLAND WAS NOT GOD, YOU IMBECILE!!!!!!!

The Church never, at any time, proclaimed the king to be god.