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.
And when you Google the OPs name, you find out, in short order that she is much the same. Angling for a $lice of the pie by perpetuating the belief in victimhood amongst blacks. And from what I've read, she really takes it to the extremes. But hey... Gotta get paid...!After looking up this 'author' and his blogs and the like, he's just another race hustler fishing for gigs at NPR and marketing himself as 'The Voice of Black America' and shilling for Democratic Party racists; even has the cute lil Farrakhan bow tie to announce he's a fashion victim and pandering to the PC nazis. I seriously doubt his 'history' book is anything but the usual tired collection of old memes and sloganeering rubbish and nothing new to add to the genuine historical record.
he states true facts and you question his intelligence? why??We should be judged as individuals. Since you apparently don't think so, it calls into question your intelligence.Taken as a whole, Blacks STILL aren't the intellectual equals to Asians and Whites.
Like they did in South Africa, when whites handed them the keys to a prosperous, up, and running, fully functional 1rst world nation?.
Had the Europeans decided to help Africa reach the next stage of development instead of exploiting them, things would have turned out differently.
I read The Underdevelopment of Africa by Walter Rodney. He is deceased.After looking up this 'author' and his blogs and the like, he's just another race hustler fishing for gigs at NPR and marketing himself as 'The Voice of Black America' and shilling for Democratic Party racists; even has the cute lil Farrakhan bow tie to announce he's a fashion victim and pandering to the PC nazis. I seriously doubt his 'history' book is anything but the usual tired collection of old memes and sloganeering rubbish and nothing new to add to the genuine historical record.
I read The Underdevelopment of Africa by Walter Rodney. He is deceased.After looking up this 'author' and his blogs and the like, he's just another race hustler fishing for gigs at NPR and marketing himself as 'The Voice of Black America' and shilling for Democratic Party racists; even has the cute lil Farrakhan bow tie to announce he's a fashion victim and pandering to the PC nazis. I seriously doubt his 'history' book is anything but the usual tired collection of old memes and sloganeering rubbish and nothing new to add to the genuine historical record.
The lily-white movement was an anti-civil-rights movement within the Republican Party in the United States in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The movement was a response to the political and socioeconomic gains made by African-Americans following the Civil War and the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which eliminated slavery. Black leaders gained increasing influence in the party by organizing blacks as an important voting bloc. Conservative white groups attempted to eliminate this influence and recover white voters who had defected to the Democratic Party.
The term lily-white movement is generally attributed to Texas Republican leader Norris Wright Cuney who used the term in an 1888 Republican convention to describe efforts by white conservatives to oust blacks from positions of Texas party leadership and incite riots to divide the party. The term came to be used nationally to describe this ongoing movement as it further developed in the early 20th century. Localized movements began immediately after the war but by the beginning of the 20th century the effort had become national.
According to author and professor Michael K. Fauntroy,
The lily white movement is one of the darkest and underexamined eras of US Republicanism.
—Michael K. Fauntroy, The Huffington Post
This movement is largely credited with driving blacks out of the Republican party during the early 20th century, setting the stage for their eventual support of the Democrats.
Lily-white movement
You republicans have lied long enough. You might be the party of Lincoln but then again here's Lincoln:
The lily-white movement was an anti-civil-rights movement within the Republican Party in the United States in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The movement was a response to the political and socioeconomic gains made by African-Americans following the Civil War and the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which eliminated slavery. Black leaders gained increasing influence in the party by organizing blacks as an important voting bloc. Conservative white groups attempted to eliminate this influence and recover white voters who had defected to the Democratic Party.
The term lily-white movement is generally attributed to Texas Republican leader Norris Wright Cuney who used the term in an 1888 Republican convention to describe efforts by white conservatives to oust blacks from positions of Texas party leadership and incite riots to divide the party. The term came to be used nationally to describe this ongoing movement as it further developed in the early 20th century. Localized movements began immediately after the war but by the beginning of the 20th century the effort had become national.
According to author and professor Michael K. Fauntroy,
The lily white movement is one of the darkest and underexamined eras of US Republicanism.
—Michael K. Fauntroy, The Huffington Post
This movement is largely credited with driving blacks out of the Republican party during the early 20th century, setting the stage for their eventual support of the Democrats.
Lily-white movement
You republicans have lied long enough. You might be the party of Lincoln but then again here's Lincoln:
I'm struggling to get your point.
The United States was founded on the notion that the signers of the Constitution were establishing a nation for a specific people. The Preamble states (in part):
"...secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.."
My 1828 Webster's Dictionary (the first dictionary published in the United States AND by a founder) defines posterity as:
"Descendants; children, children's children, etc. indefinitely; the race that proceeds from a progenitor."
As unpopular as it is, Roger Taney, the Chief Justice in the Dred Scott v Sanford decision (which said blacks could not be citizens) spent a lot of time explaining the laws. Wikipedia puts it this way:
"Taney spent pages 407–421 of his decision chronicling the history of slave and negro law in the British colonies and American states to decide if federal law could recognize Scott as a citizen of any state within the meaning of Article III."
Dred Scott v. Sandford - Wikipedia
Insofar as political parties are concerned, both the Ds and the Rs have been racist (sic) in the past (Democrats representing the KKK and segregationists before the Rs did.) If you're trying to claim the Democrats have some right to the loyalty of blacks would be disingenuous at best.
I read The Underdevelopment of Africa by Walter Rodney. He is deceased.After looking up this 'author' and his blogs and the like, he's just another race hustler fishing for gigs at NPR and marketing himself as 'The Voice of Black America' and shilling for Democratic Party racists; even has the cute lil Farrakhan bow tie to announce he's a fashion victim and pandering to the PC nazis. I seriously doubt his 'history' book is anything but the usual tired collection of old memes and sloganeering rubbish and nothing new to add to the genuine historical record.
These are about some ignorant white people.
Since I am the OP I will state that posted these facts because republicans today want to give themselves credit for being a party of racial equality when they never have been and are not now.. The only race hustling that has gone on in this country is by whites. And whites like these idiots are the ones who have gotten hustled and pimped. What we see in these replies are a group of people with low intelligence who have been left far behind even as they proclaim superiority. They are a hindrance to the white race and when we look at American history, the white race without the laws they made to exclude all who were not white, would still be eating each other some where in Virginia.
The lily-white movement was an anti-civil-rights movement within the Republican Party in the United States in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The movement was a response to the political and socioeconomic gains made by African-Americans following the Civil War and the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which eliminated slavery. Black leaders gained increasing influence in the party by organizing blacks as an important voting bloc. Conservative white groups attempted to eliminate this influence and recover white voters who had defected to the Democratic Party.
The term lily-white movement is generally attributed to Texas Republican leader Norris Wright Cuney who used the term in an 1888 Republican convention to describe efforts by white conservatives to oust blacks from positions of Texas party leadership and incite riots to divide the party. The term came to be used nationally to describe this ongoing movement as it further developed in the early 20th century. Localized movements began immediately after the war but by the beginning of the 20th century the effort had become national.
According to author and professor Michael K. Fauntroy,
The lily white movement is one of the darkest and underexamined eras of US Republicanism.
—Michael K. Fauntroy, The Huffington Post
This movement is largely credited with driving blacks out of the Republican party during the early 20th century, setting the stage for their eventual support of the Democrats.
Lily-white movement
You republicans have lied long enough. You might be the party of Lincoln but then again here's Lincoln:
I'm struggling to get your point.
The United States was founded on the notion that the signers of the Constitution were establishing a nation for a specific people. The Preamble states (in part):
"...secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.."
My 1828 Webster's Dictionary (the first dictionary published in the United States AND by a founder) defines posterity as:
"Descendants; children, children's children, etc. indefinitely; the race that proceeds from a progenitor."
As unpopular as it is, Roger Taney, the Chief Justice in the Dred Scott v Sanford decision (which said blacks could not be citizens) spent a lot of time explaining the laws. Wikipedia puts it this way:
"Taney spent pages 407–421 of his decision chronicling the history of slave and negro law in the British colonies and American states to decide if federal law could recognize Scott as a citizen of any state within the meaning of Article III."
Dred Scott v. Sandford - Wikipedia
Insofar as political parties are concerned, both the Ds and the Rs have been racist (sic) in the past (Democrats representing the KKK and segregationists before the Rs did.) If you're trying to claim the Democrats have some right to the loyalty of blacks would be disingenuous at best.
I know all of this crap you posted up and there is no defense or justification for any of it. The united states was founded upon the principle that all men were created equal. I did not see any racial designation stated in the wording. So again, there is no defense and you really should not try presenting that weak shit to someone of color like it's an actual logical defense. As far as I am concerned, if this nation was supposed to be for a specific people then that specific people should have been the ones working the fucking fields, building the buildings and serving the masters and the wealthy. But they were not, therefore this nation was not just for that specific group. On top of that some 500 nations were already here so then using your logic this land was meant for them and the whites who invaded had no right to be here.
My point is this and you need to understand it. Todays republicans want to pawn themselves off as the party of always being the ones for racial equality. They are not. The democrats have been honest and never stated they always have been for racial equality. What we see I todays republican is that in the same days republicans today are talking about how republicans fought against slavery and fought for the freedom of blacks that they actually moved towards a whites only government and power structure. Therefore they did not stand for equality of the races ever.
As for today, the reality is that the democratic party is the party blacks should put our loyalty into as it was a democrat who ended racial segregation, the lily white movement, separate but equal, and all of the things that were preventing us fro a chance at whatever equality we have today. That's not disingenuous, it is fact. So unless Lyndon Johnson was a republican then to state that blacks should have ANY loyalty to a party whose leader signed a piece of paper not freeing anyone in the United States but only in the states that had seceded and did believe that blacks were inferior is what's disingenuous.
Last and most importantly, the same types of people who want to give themselves credit for something that happened before they were born want to dismiss the truth of how they benefitted from a racist system claiming that the same time period in which they tell us how the democrats supported slavery and how we should be republicans because of that, say should not be held responsible for the racism they benefited from during that time because et was before they were born. So they want credit for something that happened before they were born, but don't want to be held accountable for anything else that occurred during that same time.
That's what we here ca a bunch of bullshit. So when you want to use the word disingenuous, know what it means. Because that's exactly what republicans are as it pertains to the issue of race.
This is why you scum should be wiped out. You live a lie. It's proven time and again blacks are at the low end of the brain power.We should be judged as individuals. Since you apparently don't think so, it calls into question your intelligence.Taken as a whole, Blacks STILL aren't the intellectual equals to Asians and Whites.
What about what I said is a lie? You're the one that's living in a fantasy world, since the only way your thesis true is if the stupidest white man is smarter than the most intelligent black man. Every day you prove that's not true.This is why you scum should be wiped out. You live a lie. It's proven time and again blacks are at the low end of the brain power.We should be judged as individuals. Since you apparently don't think so, it calls into question your intelligence.
I've worked with them in tech jobs and NONE of them were competent! To answer your stupid question, everything you said was a lie.What about what I said is a lie? You're the one that's living in a fantasy world, since the only way your thesis true is if the stupidest white man is smarter than the most intelligent black man. Every day you prove that's not true.This is why you scum should be wiped out. You live a lie. It's proven time and again blacks are at the low end of the brain power.We should be judged as individuals. Since you apparently don't think so, it calls into question your intelligence.
Two words, Ben Carson.I've worked with them in tech jobs and NONE of them were competent! To answer your stupid question, everything you said was a lie.What about what I said is a lie? You're the one that's living in a fantasy world, since the only way your thesis true is if the stupidest white man is smarter than the most intelligent black man. Every day you prove that's not true.This is why you scum should be wiped out. You live a lie. It's proven time and again blacks are at the low end of the brain power.We should be judged as individuals. Since you apparently don't think so, it calls into question your intelligence.
