Why I Support Segregation

[Marion Morrison]

Ultimately, you are clearly intent on blaming whites for all racism. You largely deny racism existing in other cultures or if there are acts of racism, it’s all American white / Western European fault. American whites did not start trading African slaves. Africans started it and some Africans continue the practice to this day. American whites evolved by stopping African slave trade. But, there is a new modern day form of slave trade.... human sex trafficking with many of the victims being non-white and oppressed by non whites.

I am intent on not giving white Americans a pass for the racism they practjce here right now.

Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
African Resistance - The Abolition of The Slave Trade
Defensive Strategies - African Resistance - The Abolition of The Slave Trade
Armed Struggle in Africa and in the Middle Passage - African Resistance - The Abolition of The Slave Trade
U.S. Slave Trade - The Abolition of The Slave Trade
The Growth in Arrivals - U.S. Slave Trade - The Abolition of The Slave Trade

Whites did have slaves in Europe and the American whites did not stop the African slave trade. Furthermore American whites evolved by implementing apartheid. And today whites practice aversive racism. There are millions of white sex slaves but the problem is not limited to slavery. The western nations through what they have done due to colonization and modern foreign policy still rob non white nations of wealth, destabilize governments, install puppet leaders to help carry out the will of multi national corporations.

Somalia: How Colonial Powers drove a Country into Chaos - Global Research

You are not going to guilt me into not holding whites accountable for what they have done and keep doing. Understand that I have studied and researched these things for well over 30 years. So when you make a statement like:

" Ultimately, you are clearly intent on blaming whites for all racism. You largely deny racism existing in other cultures or if there are acts of racism, it’s all American white / Western European fault. American whites did not start trading African slaves. Africans started it and some Africans continue the practice to this day."

That to me shows a pretty simplistic opinion about a complex set of issues. For example how was slavery done in Africa before the whites showed up? And do you not understand that slavery existed in Europe at the same time and in fact exists there today? But my argument does just include slavery and I 'm not talking about events that occurred during the Pleistocene epoch. I'm talking about the modern era and on top of that I have agreed with much of what you have said. But I'm not going to make non whites equally racist as whites. I have not seen a non white country colonize another one. But I have seen severe ethnocentrism and that's just as bad.

Slavery is practiced in African nations to this day! The face of the human traffic oppressor is largely brown,not white. You choose not to hold non-whites equally accountable for current and legacy racism but reality and facts state otherwise.

Oh no, I hold blacks just as accountable. But there is no equivalence between a black person calling an asian a racial slur and electing white racists to make laws. You seem unable to see the difference.

And slavery is practiced in European nations to this day. The face of human trafficking is a rainbow. Reality and facts say that. Reality shows us that Asians sent sex slaves to white America. That Eastern European whites are selling humans also. So the face of that trafficking is not just brown. But in typical white fashion you want to stay stuck on slavery and ignore the legacy of racist foreign polices by whites that are at the root of many of todays worlds problems.

You mention the rainbow and holding non-whites accountable yet in a “yes-but” typical fashion, ultimately, what lies between your ears, it’s always whitey’s fault.

The truth is what lies in me. And the truth is that the root cause of the problems blacks and other non whites face is white racism. Now that doesn't mean I am for any kind of prejudice, but until whites have the capacity to stop imagining a racial symmetry that has never existed, people like you will not understand my position. You will assume just like you are doing now but you will not understand.

Not much truth lies between your ears.

 

[gtopa1]

The Elephant in the room: AFRICA!! Why won't Africa take its people home??

Greg

 

[LeftofLeft]

I am intent on not giving white Americans a pass for the racism they practjce here right now.

Africans did NOT sell their own people into slavery
African Resistance - The Abolition of The Slave Trade
Defensive Strategies - African Resistance - The Abolition of The Slave Trade
Armed Struggle in Africa and in the Middle Passage - African Resistance - The Abolition of The Slave Trade
U.S. Slave Trade - The Abolition of The Slave Trade
The Growth in Arrivals - U.S. Slave Trade - The Abolition of The Slave Trade

Whites did have slaves in Europe and the American whites did not stop the African slave trade. Furthermore American whites evolved by implementing apartheid. And today whites practice aversive racism. There are millions of white sex slaves but the problem is not limited to slavery. The western nations through what they have done due to colonization and modern foreign policy still rob non white nations of wealth, destabilize governments, install puppet leaders to help carry out the will of multi national corporations.

Somalia: How Colonial Powers drove a Country into Chaos - Global Research

You are not going to guilt me into not holding whites accountable for what they have done and keep doing. Understand that I have studied and researched these things for well over 30 years. So when you make a statement like:

" Ultimately, you are clearly intent on blaming whites for all racism. You largely deny racism existing in other cultures or if there are acts of racism, it’s all American white / Western European fault. American whites did not start trading African slaves. Africans started it and some Africans continue the practice to this day."

That to me shows a pretty simplistic opinion about a complex set of issues. For example how was slavery done in Africa before the whites showed up? And do you not understand that slavery existed in Europe at the same time and in fact exists there today? But my argument does just include slavery and I 'm not talking about events that occurred during the Pleistocene epoch. I'm talking about the modern era and on top of that I have agreed with much of what you have said. But I'm not going to make non whites equally racist as whites. I have not seen a non white country colonize another one. But I have seen severe ethnocentrism and that's just as bad.

Slavery is practiced in African nations to this day! The face of the human traffic oppressor is largely brown,not white. You choose not to hold non-whites equally accountable for current and legacy racism but reality and facts state otherwise.

Oh no, I hold blacks just as accountable. But there is no equivalence between a black person calling an asian a racial slur and electing white racists to make laws. You seem unable to see the difference.

And slavery is practiced in European nations to this day. The face of human trafficking is a rainbow. Reality and facts say that. Reality shows us that Asians sent sex slaves to white America. That Eastern European whites are selling humans also. So the face of that trafficking is not just brown. But in typical white fashion you want to stay stuck on slavery and ignore the legacy of racist foreign polices by whites that are at the root of many of todays worlds problems.

You mention the rainbow and holding non-whites accountable yet in a “yes-but” typical fashion, ultimately, what lies between your ears, it’s always whitey’s fault.

The truth is what lies in me. And the truth is that the root cause of the problems blacks and other non whites face is white racism. Now that doesn't mean I am for any kind of prejudice, but until whites have the capacity to stop imagining a racial symmetry that has never existed, people like you will not understand my position. You will assume just like you are doing now but you will not understand.

Not much truth lies between your ears.

It’s his truth.

 

[Hellbilly]

There is no way that there can be coexistence with black people.

Now unless they are slaves hey?

Today’s Republicans want to bring slavery back.

Wow! that is a fucking ignorant statement.

From the it's inception, the Republican party has always opposed slavery and supported equal rights for women and minorities. Republicans are and have always been morally outraged by the institution of slavery.

The Republicans ended slavery and Jim Crow. They fought for, and, despite vehement and often extremely vicious, bloody, and cruel opposition from the Democrats, won the hard fought battle to emancipate the slaves and empower blacks with the right to vote.

Despite the just plain evil efforts by scumbag Democrats to derail their agenda, the Republicans, (often losing their lives in the process), eventually were victorious over the racist, sexist Democrats and obtained equal rights for minorities and women.

The Democratic party is the party of slavery. The Republican party was created to end slavery and will always be opposed to slavery.

Blacks who vote Democrat are idiotic political chumps. Anyone who votes Democrat is an immoral piece of shit.

So you think blacks are treated as equals in this country?
Take a look at the posts made by Republicans on this message board.
Republicans support segregation, they think that whites built this country, as well as being convinced that the white race is superior to all others.
Republicans are racists.
That’s the truth, Ruth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Vastator]

It’s what all races do left to their own devices.

Bullshit.

While I condemn the racism of Tipsy, she is correct that the demands for the "black only lunch counter" is coming purely from the racist black populations at our institutions of perverted learning.

Call bullshit all you want. The facts don’t support your position. Overwhelmingly when left to their own devices people consistently self segregate. From prison populations to lunch rooms, even communities. Overwhelmingly, repeatedly, and demonstrably the majority of people tend to prefer the company of their own kind unless other factors intercede.
No single race is “guilty” of this behavior. There’s nothing to be guilty about. It’s human nature and all people’s do it. It’s natural human behavior.

Bunk.

When left to their own devices people ignore artificial constructs like race. Only when those seeking power get involved does piddly shit like race become a factor.

Genetics is an artificial construct now eh..?

You obviously know ZILCH about genetics.

One thing mapping the human genome proved beyond all doubt, there is no difference between the so called races. Humans are humans.

Educate yourself. You're making a fool of yourself. Here. Let me help you.


Race, Evolution, and Behavior

The Biological Reality of Race

Race, genetics, and human reproductive strategies

Review of Race: The Reality of Human Differences.

Race and Physical Differences

Tracing the Genetic History of Modern Man

The Reality of Racial Differences

Let me know if you desire, or require any additional education on the topic...

 

[Vastator]

There is no way that there can be coexistence with black people.

Now unless they are slaves hey?

Today’s Republicans want to bring slavery back.

Wow! that is a fucking ignorant statement.

From the it's inception, the Republican party has always opposed slavery and supported equal rights for women and minorities. Republicans are and have always been morally outraged by the institution of slavery.

The Republicans ended slavery and Jim Crow. They fought for, and, despite vehement and often extremely vicious, bloody, and cruel opposition from the Democrats, won the hard fought battle to emancipate the slaves and empower blacks with the right to vote.

Despite the just plain evil efforts by scumbag Democrats to derail their agenda, the Republicans, (often losing their lives in the process), eventually were victorious over the racist, sexist Democrats and obtained equal rights for minorities and women.

The Democratic party is the party of slavery. The Republican party was created to end slavery and will always be opposed to slavery.

Blacks who vote Democrat are idiotic political chumps. Anyone who votes Democrat is an immoral piece of shit.

So you think blacks are treated as equals in this country?
Take a look at the posts made by Republicans on this message board.
Republicans support segregation, they think that whites built this country, as well as being convinced that the white race is superior to all others.
Republicans are racists.
That’s the truth, Ruth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nonsense. The great mistake of the multiculti's and their adherence is that they conflate freedom of association, with forced segregation.

 

[Penelope]

There is no way that there can be coexistence with black people.

Now unless they are slaves hey?

Today’s Republicans want to bring slavery back.

Wow! that is a fucking ignorant statement.

From the it's inception, the Republican party has always opposed slavery and supported equal rights for women and minorities. Republicans are and have always been morally outraged by the institution of slavery.

The Republicans ended slavery and Jim Crow. They fought for, and, despite vehement and often extremely vicious, bloody, and cruel opposition from the Democrats, won the hard fought battle to emancipate the slaves and empower blacks with the right to vote.

Despite the just plain evil efforts by scumbag Democrats to derail their agenda, the Republicans, (often losing their lives in the process), eventually were victorious over the racist, sexist Democrats and obtained equal rights for minorities and women.

The Democratic party is the party of slavery. The Republican party was created to end slavery and will always be opposed to slavery.

Blacks who vote Democrat are idiotic political chumps. Anyone who votes Democrat is an immoral piece of shit.

Why not read something:
Wilmot Proviso - Wikipedia It was the South verses North and still is today.

Bullshit. Today the south is chock full of Republicans who abhor the institution of slavery, Jim Crow and other fucked up 100% Democrat policies.

Republicans have never supported slavery. You party of slavery supporters are disgusting.

The south did, and ABE was the first republican president. You are unaware of the political parties in the 1800's.

 

[Muhammed]

There is no way that there can be coexistence with black people.

Now unless they are slaves hey?

Today’s Republicans want to bring slavery back.

Wow! that is a fucking ignorant statement.

From the it's inception, the Republican party has always opposed slavery and supported equal rights for women and minorities. Republicans are and have always been morally outraged by the institution of slavery.

The Republicans ended slavery and Jim Crow. They fought for, and, despite vehement and often extremely vicious, bloody, and cruel opposition from the Democrats, won the hard fought battle to emancipate the slaves and empower blacks with the right to vote.

Despite the just plain evil efforts by scumbag Democrats to derail their agenda, the Republicans, (often losing their lives in the process), eventually were victorious over the racist, sexist Democrats and obtained equal rights for minorities and women.

The Democratic party is the party of slavery. The Republican party was created to end slavery and will always be opposed to slavery.

Blacks who vote Democrat are idiotic political chumps. Anyone who votes Democrat is an immoral piece of shit.

So you think blacks are treated as equals in this country?
Take a look at the posts made by Republicans on this message board.
Republicans support segregation, they think that whites built this country, as well as being convinced that the white race is superior to all others.
Republicans are racists.
That’s the truth, Ruth.

Wrong, that's a lie Clyde.

I'm a registered Republican by default because I abhor racism and slavery, you disgusting immoral party of slavery supporter.

Democrats drafted, passed and enforced a system of segregation laws in America which were then presented in legal argument as a precedent for implementation of the the Nuremberg laws in 1930's Germany by radical National Socialist German Workers party attorneys. (Note that what the Germans considered radical and extreme in 1930s Nazi Germany, was the norm in Democrat-controlled states in the USA).

"Jim Crow" is a Democratic party system of segregation, a watered down version of which was later adopted by the Nazis.

The Republican party has always opposed Democrat/Nazi segregation laws.

 

[LeftofLeft]

There is no way that there can be coexistence with black people.

Now unless they are slaves hey?

Today’s Republicans want to bring slavery back.

Wow! that is a fucking ignorant statement.

From the it's inception, the Republican party has always opposed slavery and supported equal rights for women and minorities. Republicans are and have always been morally outraged by the institution of slavery.

The Republicans ended slavery and Jim Crow. They fought for, and, despite vehement and often extremely vicious, bloody, and cruel opposition from the Democrats, won the hard fought battle to emancipate the slaves and empower blacks with the right to vote.

Despite the just plain evil efforts by scumbag Democrats to derail their agenda, the Republicans, (often losing their lives in the process), eventually were victorious over the racist, sexist Democrats and obtained equal rights for minorities and women.

The Democratic party is the party of slavery. The Republican party was created to end slavery and will always be opposed to slavery.

Blacks who vote Democrat are idiotic political chumps. Anyone who votes Democrat is an immoral piece of shit.

So you think blacks are treated as equals in this country?
Take a look at the posts made by Republicans on this message board.
Republicans support segregation, they think that whites built this country, as well as being convinced that the white race is superior to all others.
Republicans are racists.
That’s the truth, Ruth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Blacks support segregation. That was the premise of the post as well. Republicans think Blacks are inferior? It is the Democrats who don’t have faith and confidence that Blacks can get their own State-issued voting card. Democrats also perpetuate that colleges and professional schools must have lower test scores and grade requirements for Blacks. Republicans are fully confident Blacks can get IDs and can get high test scores.

 

[Hellbilly]

The Elephant in the room: AFRICA!! Why won't Africa take its people home??

Greg

Why won’t Europe take it’s people home?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Porter Rockwell]

Major trait of racists is how wrong the information they distribute really is.. Never talked with white racist that EVER had accurate links or information.. And your GUESS about moonshining is just as bad...

Wendell Scott online

Wendell Oliver Scott was a race car driver who won over 128 races in his career in various divisions including a win in the Grand National series, now known as the NASCAR Sprint Cup series. He finished as high as sixth in points in NASCAR’s top series, numerous times in the top-15 in points. Scott won the Richmond track championship and the Virginia State Sportsman title. What makes his accomplishments more intriguing is Scott did this one of the lowest budgets of any team. While many teams had manufacturer backing Scott did nearly all the work on the car himself using mainly used parts and second-hand cars. His sons served often as his pit crew and even Wendell himself pitted his own car. Scott did not even start racing until the age of 30. A former moonshine hauler, Scott developed his driving style on the backroads of Virginia doing his own hot-rodding of his car.

After that 1st win where he was screwed out of the trophy -- it was SCOTT who SAID those that.. Not an admission that what was NASCAR was thinking.. And Scott was PROBABLY CORRECT... But your source makes it a "done deal" that was the intent... That was in the Stone Age when it required individual "lap counters' people to tally a win.. No GPS sensors, no automatic scoring.. So people fucked up all the time.. And MANY races ended in contention and brawls...


Wendell Scott online

When Scott won in the NASCAR Grand National race at Jacksonville, Florida in 1963 they did not wave the checkered flag for him but initially gave the win to Buck Baker. NASCAR officials said a scoring error was responsible for allowing Baker to accept the winner’s trophy. Scott doubted that explanation. “Everybody in the place knew I had won the race,” he said years later, “but the promoters and NASCAR officials didn’t want me out there kissing any beauty queens or accepting any awards.” While NASCAR did later give the win to Scott, he did not receive the trophy which was reportedly misplaced. 47 years later in 2010 the Scott family was presented a replica trophy. Through all the prejudice he endured, Wendell never retaliated.

Doubt this ever happened that way.. Even the top teams have no guaranteed performance under race day conditions.. And there's no such thing as a "phony" car.. They all have to meet qualifying speeds. They ALL are tightly regulated by NASCAR.. He got an opportunity to get in a seat on a "rich team" because their driver was injured/sick/suspended or something.. And maybe it was a last minute thing so that THAT TEAM wouldn't lose points. Without the adequate practice time in the seat, they can't set it up properly for the driver..

This is all BULLSHIT to create the impression that "he was set up for embarrassment".. He had NOTHIHG to be embarrassed about....

Go argue that with the NASCAR historian that wrote the story.

He ain't no NASCAR historian.. If he does not know there are NO spare "phony" race cars to prank people with at a NASCAR event.. You don't get to drive another team's car UNLESS there's a last minute or day problem with the driver..

You go read his book and tell me WHAT race, WHAT year and I'll prove it...

NASCAR’s darkest chapter is its racism

Published Thursday, January 15, 2009
by Brian Donovan, Special To The Post

As we move toward Martin Luther King Day, Barack Obama’s inauguration and the Daytona 500, it’s an appropriate moment to consider the unusual life of another remarkable racial pioneer: NASCAR’s first black driver, the late Wendell Scott.

A talented racer, Scott began banging fenders with roughneck competitors on Dixie dirt tracks in 1952, during an era when he couldn’t use a white restroom or drinking fountain. The story of his frustrating struggle, little known outside of the racing world, offers a reminder of how much our country has changed – but also of how NASCAR’s progress toward diversity still seems stuck in the past.

Scott’s dream of becoming a competitive national-level racer depended on support from NASCAR’s celebrated founder and czar, the late Bill France Sr. At first, Scott’s prospects looked promising. Early on, France assured him he’d always be treated without prejudice. In the minor leagues Scott won dozens of races and a Virginia state championship.

Like Obama, Scott, who lived in Danville, Va., and often raced in Charlotte, developed surprising numbers of admirers among ordinary white folks in the South. He became one of NASCAR’s most popular drivers, even as an underdog without the corporate sponsorship for a competitive racecar. His passionate determination inspired fans to reconsider racial stereotypes. Unfortunately, his support in the grandstands wasn’t matched in NASCAR’s executive suites.

As the growing civil rights struggle in the ‘60s inflamed racial tensions, France reneged on his promise, and a pattern of unfair treatment by NASCAR followed. France denied Scott the rookie-of-the-year award for his first major-league season, even though Scott was the top rookie in the standings. When Scott won his only national race, NASCAR officials, fearing he’d kiss the white trophy queen, declared another driver the victor.

Long after the crowd and the queen had left, NASCAR grudgingly admitted that Scott had won.

For years South Carolina’s major track, Darlington Raceway, banned Scott because he was black. This cost him any chance for sponsorship. France addressed the problem with inaction and silence. When Scott finally asked for help, he said France told him that Darlington was important to NASCAR’s success and Scott should just be patient.

When senior NASCAR officials and major promoters mistreated Scott, France continued his hands-off neutrality. One official abused his authority and excluded Scott from an important race at Charlotte. Others did the same thing at the speedways in Daytona Beach, Fla., and Martinsville, Va. – facilities in which France owned major financial interests. Repeatedly, officials harassed Scott over trivial issues: his son’s beards, minor blemishes in his car’s paint.

At one prestigious NASCAR event, Scott was exploited in a bogus promotional scheme. A record crowd packed Charlotte’s speedway after the promoter announced he’d give Scott his first chance to drive a competitive car. But the car was a phony; its weak performance embarrassed Scott in front of 81,000 spectators.

France helped other drivers obtain sponsorship for competitive cars, but not Scott. The pattern of unfairness persisted, insiders say, largely because France and other influential executives in the NASCAR world believed that a competitive black driver would be bad for business. At the time France was cultivating alliances with leading segregationist politicians such as Alabama Governor George Wallace, and those relationships helped NASCAR to grow into today’s multi-billion-dollar enterprise.

Many of the biased actions toward Scott took place as France was negotiating successfully with Wallace for millions of dollars in state subsidies for a huge new speedway at Talladega. Wallace never would have approved that money if NASCAR’s lone black driver had any chance of winning.

Today, more than 35 years after Scott’s last race, America’s racial situation has improved drastically. But NASCAR remains the country’s least diverse major sport, despite a diversity program launched eight years ago. Every regular driver in NASCAR’s three national series is still a white male.

Some of Scott’s admirers feel that some official recognition for him from NASCAR is long overdue – perhaps at the new hall of fame NASCAR is opening this year, perhaps even a public apology for the bigotry he suffered. Others believe an apology would be quite unlikely, since NASCAR, still owned by the France family, says it knows nothing about any unfair treatment of Scott.

BRIAN DONOVAN, a Pulitzer-Prize winning journalist, is the author of “Hard Driving: The American Odyssey of NASCAR’s First Black Driver.”

NASCAR’s darkest chapter is its racism

You got a problem? Argue with him about it.

So I tell you this guy doesn't know jack shit about NASCAR and you just REPOST the article?? Holy shit..

You highlighted the evidence.. He wrote ONE BOOK about ONE Black NASCAR driver... That does not make him "a NASCAR historian"... In fact -- it was his ONLY book and he had ZERO background in motor sports of any kind...

This is why you FLOCK to tales of woes that you can add to that treasure trove of racism that you deny you create and fling onto this forum weekly... You DO collect a lot of stuff that is marginally truthful or even vetted.. Like the white people who AGREE with you that Hallmark Cards, and Princess Hair and Dance Team make-up are examples of racism....

From the Wiki on Brian Donovan --

Career[edit]
He first worked for three years at the Rochester Democrat & Chronicle, and was then hired by Newsday in 1967. He retired from Newsday in 2002 to focus on a book, "Hard Driving" about Wendell Scott.[4]

One of the SHORTEST bios I've ever read on a "Pulitzer Prize winning journalist"...

I post the truth. You can't dispute it. This is the only place you can get away with your stupidity. I never said hall mark cards were racist and if you have a problem with the article or the bio contact the writer. You're a dumb ass flacaltenn and the only reason you are trying to argue with me is because there are other idiots here just like you. I and a few other blacks are here outnumbered and you guys can't out debate us. You want to talk shit, but you are too scared to take your try to gaslight ass to a majority black forum. So you're just a bunch of hot air wrapped up in pink skin. I have been right about things I have said here son and I know it. You know it also.

From what I've seen everybody is able to out-debate you. In a debate, the first to start name calling loses the debate. Go to any thread you've participated in. No matter how civil the conversation, you're the one that starts slinging skeet first.

I'm sure if you had a point, you'd make it. Insofar as who is afraid to you - or anyone else, I recall back in the 1980s that I went to WSB radio in Atlanta and "debated" Ike Newkirk (a black man) and he commended me on having the courage to show up and allow the listeners to get both sides. He gave me equal time to state my case and respond to his points, plus allowed me to bring up points of my own. The listeners "won" because they got to hear the issues, not the personalities.

I'm pretty sure IF any whites changed their mind on this, they thought about what it would be like to have you as a neighbor and decided that maybe segregation IS a viable option.

 

[Hellbilly]

There is no way that there can be coexistence with black people.

Now unless they are slaves hey?

Today’s Republicans want to bring slavery back.

Wow! that is a fucking ignorant statement.

From the it's inception, the Republican party has always opposed slavery and supported equal rights for women and minorities. Republicans are and have always been morally outraged by the institution of slavery.

The Republicans ended slavery and Jim Crow. They fought for, and, despite vehement and often extremely vicious, bloody, and cruel opposition from the Democrats, won the hard fought battle to emancipate the slaves and empower blacks with the right to vote.

Despite the just plain evil efforts by scumbag Democrats to derail their agenda, the Republicans, (often losing their lives in the process), eventually were victorious over the racist, sexist Democrats and obtained equal rights for minorities and women.

The Democratic party is the party of slavery. The Republican party was created to end slavery and will always be opposed to slavery.

Blacks who vote Democrat are idiotic political chumps. Anyone who votes Democrat is an immoral piece of shit.

So you think blacks are treated as equals in this country?
Take a look at the posts made by Republicans on this message board.
Republicans support segregation, they think that whites built this country, as well as being convinced that the white race is superior to all others.
Republicans are racists.
That’s the truth, Ruth.

Wrong, that's a lie Clyde.

I'm a registered Republican by default because I abhor racism and slavery, you disgusting immoral party of slavery supporter.

Democrats drafted, passed and enforced a system of segregation laws in America which were then presented in legal argument as a precedent for implementation of the the Nuremberg laws in 1930's Germany by radical National Socialist German Workers party attorneys. (Note that what the Germans considered radical and extreme in 1930s Nazi Germany, was the norm in Democrat-controlled states in the USA).

"Jim Crow" is a Democratic party system of segregation, a watered down version of which was later adopted by the Nazis.

The Republican party has always opposed Democrat/Nazi segregation laws.

You are an idiot.
Get therapy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Muhammed]

Now unless they are slaves hey?

Today’s Republicans want to bring slavery back.

Wow! that is a fucking ignorant statement.

From the it's inception, the Republican party has always opposed slavery and supported equal rights for women and minorities. Republicans are and have always been morally outraged by the institution of slavery.

The Republicans ended slavery and Jim Crow. They fought for, and, despite vehement and often extremely vicious, bloody, and cruel opposition from the Democrats, won the hard fought battle to emancipate the slaves and empower blacks with the right to vote.

Despite the just plain evil efforts by scumbag Democrats to derail their agenda, the Republicans, (often losing their lives in the process), eventually were victorious over the racist, sexist Democrats and obtained equal rights for minorities and women.

The Democratic party is the party of slavery. The Republican party was created to end slavery and will always be opposed to slavery.

Blacks who vote Democrat are idiotic political chumps. Anyone who votes Democrat is an immoral piece of shit.

So you think blacks are treated as equals in this country?
Take a look at the posts made by Republicans on this message board.
Republicans support segregation, they think that whites built this country, as well as being convinced that the white race is superior to all others.
Republicans are racists.
That’s the truth, Ruth.

Wrong, that's a lie Clyde.

I'm a registered Republican by default because I abhor racism and slavery, you disgusting immoral party of slavery supporter.

Democrats drafted, passed and enforced a system of segregation laws in America which were then presented in legal argument as a precedent for implementation of the the Nuremberg laws in 1930's Germany by radical National Socialist German Workers party attorneys. (Note that what the Germans considered radical and extreme in 1930s Nazi Germany, was the norm in Democrat-controlled states in the USA).

"Jim Crow" is a Democratic party system of segregation, a watered down version of which was later adopted by the Nazis.

The Republican party has always opposed Democrat/Nazi segregation laws.

You are an idiot.
Get therapy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Your concession is accepted.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Call bullshit all you want. The facts don’t support your position. Overwhelmingly when left to their own devices people consistently self segregate. From prison populations to lunch rooms, even communities. Overwhelmingly, repeatedly, and demonstrably the majority of people tend to prefer the company of their own kind unless other factors intercede.
No single race is “guilty” of this behavior. There’s nothing to be guilty about. It’s human nature and all people’s do it. It’s natural human behavior.

Well here’s what’s fascinating about this whole idea of the naturalness of racial separatism: if indeed it were so natural for folks to do this on their own then why would it be necessary to encourage whites to do this or to form a groups to push that notion?

If it were natural, it would be impossible to move whites from that natural species instinct. No ?

Whites wouldn’t have needed segregation laws to force separation. Whites wouldn’t have needed anti-miscegenation laws to require separation.

Those laws were passed for the very reason that white people weren’t so sure that they weren’t prepared to stray, weren’t so sure that indeed it was natural to separate.

The ones pushing segregation these days are overwhelmingly black.

{Although many people will be celebrating Black History Month as a time for appreciating cultural diversity, a NC activist is asking the African American community to reconsider racial segregation.

"We need to build a wall around black culture," says Durham NC minister and activist Paul Scott.

Scott states that during the era of segregation, black people were better off socially, politically and
economically. He argues that black history has been whitewashed to make white people feel
comfortable and that the black movement for social equality has been hijacked by other groups.

"Everyone has benefited from our pain except us," he says.

Scott is asking that African Americans take the 28 days of February to get their collective act together by supporting black businesses, working towards black unity and educating black youth about unsung black heroes.

Scott gained national attention in 2018 after being featured in a NY Times article about the gentrification of Durham NC and how it is becoming too white.}

No Warning Shots Fired !: Black Activist Calls for Return to Segregation
Black Lives Matter protest leader calls for racial segregation during demonstration | Daily Mail Online
Farrakhan Calls For Segregation

We are not calling for segregation.

Black radicals are, they are the ONLY ones calling for segregation.

They are not calling for segregation fool. What blacks on college campuses are asking for are safe spaces where they don't have to face racism from whites. I know you guys want to deny the existence of white racism today even while forums like this are full of it, but there are some places in this country where blacks are unsafe. And that preacher apparently did not live during segregation. But what he was saying also was that blacks should spend more money in black businesses so those businesses can grow and create jobs in the black community. Despite your opinion as a white, this is what needs to be done.

Finally, you have racist whites in real estate/landlords working to keep communities segregated.

That is segregation, retard. You are such a flaming racist that you think none of the rules you hold for whites apply to you. Because you are of the master race....

 

[IM2]

Well here’s what’s fascinating about this whole idea of the naturalness of racial separatism: if indeed it were so natural for folks to do this on their own then why would it be necessary to encourage whites to do this or to form a groups to push that notion?

If it were natural, it would be impossible to move whites from that natural species instinct. No ?

Whites wouldn’t have needed segregation laws to force separation. Whites wouldn’t have needed anti-miscegenation laws to require separation.

Those laws were passed for the very reason that white people weren’t so sure that they weren’t prepared to stray, weren’t so sure that indeed it was natural to separate.

The ones pushing segregation these days are overwhelmingly black.

{Although many people will be celebrating Black History Month as a time for appreciating cultural diversity, a NC activist is asking the African American community to reconsider racial segregation.

"We need to build a wall around black culture," says Durham NC minister and activist Paul Scott.

Scott states that during the era of segregation, black people were better off socially, politically and
economically. He argues that black history has been whitewashed to make white people feel
comfortable and that the black movement for social equality has been hijacked by other groups.

"Everyone has benefited from our pain except us," he says.

Scott is asking that African Americans take the 28 days of February to get their collective act together by supporting black businesses, working towards black unity and educating black youth about unsung black heroes.

Scott gained national attention in 2018 after being featured in a NY Times article about the gentrification of Durham NC and how it is becoming too white.}

No Warning Shots Fired !: Black Activist Calls for Return to Segregation
Black Lives Matter protest leader calls for racial segregation during demonstration | Daily Mail Online
Farrakhan Calls For Segregation

We are not calling for segregation.

Black radicals are, they are the ONLY ones calling for segregation.

They are not calling for segregation fool. What blacks on college campuses are asking for are safe spaces where they don't have to face racism from whites. I know you guys want to deny the existence of white racism today even while forums like this are full of it, but there are some places in this country where blacks are unsafe. And that preacher apparently did not live during segregation. But what he was saying also was that blacks should spend more money in black businesses so those businesses can grow and create jobs in the black community. Despite your opinion as a white, this is what needs to be done.

Finally, you have racist whites in real estate/landlords working to keep communities segregated.

That is segregation, retard. You are such a flaming racist that you think none of the rules you hold for whites apply to you. Because you are of the master race....

Not segregation and your imagination allows you to believe in a racial symmetry that does not exist. Whites like you crack me up. You're ignorant and delusional then when someone blacks says something that gives you a case of butthurt because you know it's true, your retard ass wants to call them a racist.

 

[IM2]

Go argue that with the NASCAR historian that wrote the story.

He ain't no NASCAR historian.. If he does not know there are NO spare "phony" race cars to prank people with at a NASCAR event.. You don't get to drive another team's car UNLESS there's a last minute or day problem with the driver..

You go read his book and tell me WHAT race, WHAT year and I'll prove it...

NASCAR’s darkest chapter is its racism

Published Thursday, January 15, 2009
by Brian Donovan, Special To The Post

As we move toward Martin Luther King Day, Barack Obama’s inauguration and the Daytona 500, it’s an appropriate moment to consider the unusual life of another remarkable racial pioneer: NASCAR’s first black driver, the late Wendell Scott.

A talented racer, Scott began banging fenders with roughneck competitors on Dixie dirt tracks in 1952, during an era when he couldn’t use a white restroom or drinking fountain. The story of his frustrating struggle, little known outside of the racing world, offers a reminder of how much our country has changed – but also of how NASCAR’s progress toward diversity still seems stuck in the past.

Scott’s dream of becoming a competitive national-level racer depended on support from NASCAR’s celebrated founder and czar, the late Bill France Sr. At first, Scott’s prospects looked promising. Early on, France assured him he’d always be treated without prejudice. In the minor leagues Scott won dozens of races and a Virginia state championship.

Like Obama, Scott, who lived in Danville, Va., and often raced in Charlotte, developed surprising numbers of admirers among ordinary white folks in the South. He became one of NASCAR’s most popular drivers, even as an underdog without the corporate sponsorship for a competitive racecar. His passionate determination inspired fans to reconsider racial stereotypes. Unfortunately, his support in the grandstands wasn’t matched in NASCAR’s executive suites.

As the growing civil rights struggle in the ‘60s inflamed racial tensions, France reneged on his promise, and a pattern of unfair treatment by NASCAR followed. France denied Scott the rookie-of-the-year award for his first major-league season, even though Scott was the top rookie in the standings. When Scott won his only national race, NASCAR officials, fearing he’d kiss the white trophy queen, declared another driver the victor.

Long after the crowd and the queen had left, NASCAR grudgingly admitted that Scott had won.

For years South Carolina’s major track, Darlington Raceway, banned Scott because he was black. This cost him any chance for sponsorship. France addressed the problem with inaction and silence. When Scott finally asked for help, he said France told him that Darlington was important to NASCAR’s success and Scott should just be patient.

When senior NASCAR officials and major promoters mistreated Scott, France continued his hands-off neutrality. One official abused his authority and excluded Scott from an important race at Charlotte. Others did the same thing at the speedways in Daytona Beach, Fla., and Martinsville, Va. – facilities in which France owned major financial interests. Repeatedly, officials harassed Scott over trivial issues: his son’s beards, minor blemishes in his car’s paint.

At one prestigious NASCAR event, Scott was exploited in a bogus promotional scheme. A record crowd packed Charlotte’s speedway after the promoter announced he’d give Scott his first chance to drive a competitive car. But the car was a phony; its weak performance embarrassed Scott in front of 81,000 spectators.

France helped other drivers obtain sponsorship for competitive cars, but not Scott. The pattern of unfairness persisted, insiders say, largely because France and other influential executives in the NASCAR world believed that a competitive black driver would be bad for business. At the time France was cultivating alliances with leading segregationist politicians such as Alabama Governor George Wallace, and those relationships helped NASCAR to grow into today’s multi-billion-dollar enterprise.

Many of the biased actions toward Scott took place as France was negotiating successfully with Wallace for millions of dollars in state subsidies for a huge new speedway at Talladega. Wallace never would have approved that money if NASCAR’s lone black driver had any chance of winning.

Today, more than 35 years after Scott’s last race, America’s racial situation has improved drastically. But NASCAR remains the country’s least diverse major sport, despite a diversity program launched eight years ago. Every regular driver in NASCAR’s three national series is still a white male.

Some of Scott’s admirers feel that some official recognition for him from NASCAR is long overdue – perhaps at the new hall of fame NASCAR is opening this year, perhaps even a public apology for the bigotry he suffered. Others believe an apology would be quite unlikely, since NASCAR, still owned by the France family, says it knows nothing about any unfair treatment of Scott.

BRIAN DONOVAN, a Pulitzer-Prize winning journalist, is the author of “Hard Driving: The American Odyssey of NASCAR’s First Black Driver.”

NASCAR’s darkest chapter is its racism

You got a problem? Argue with him about it.

So I tell you this guy doesn't know jack shit about NASCAR and you just REPOST the article?? Holy shit..

You highlighted the evidence.. He wrote ONE BOOK about ONE Black NASCAR driver... That does not make him "a NASCAR historian"... In fact -- it was his ONLY book and he had ZERO background in motor sports of any kind...

This is why you FLOCK to tales of woes that you can add to that treasure trove of racism that you deny you create and fling onto this forum weekly... You DO collect a lot of stuff that is marginally truthful or even vetted.. Like the white people who AGREE with you that Hallmark Cards, and Princess Hair and Dance Team make-up are examples of racism....

From the Wiki on Brian Donovan --

Career[edit]
He first worked for three years at the Rochester Democrat & Chronicle, and was then hired by Newsday in 1967. He retired from Newsday in 2002 to focus on a book, "Hard Driving" about Wendell Scott.[4]

One of the SHORTEST bios I've ever read on a "Pulitzer Prize winning journalist"...

I post the truth. You can't dispute it. This is the only place you can get away with your stupidity. I never said hall mark cards were racist and if you have a problem with the article or the bio contact the writer. You're a dumb ass flacaltenn and the only reason you are trying to argue with me is because there are other idiots here just like you. I and a few other blacks are here outnumbered and you guys can't out debate us. You want to talk shit, but you are too scared to take your try to gaslight ass to a majority black forum. So you're just a bunch of hot air wrapped up in pink skin. I have been right about things I have said here son and I know it. You know it also.

From what I've seen everybody is able to out-debate you. In a debate, the first to start name calling loses the debate. Go to any thread you've participated in. No matter how civil the conversation, you're the one that starts slinging skeet first.

I'm sure if you had a point, you'd make it. Insofar as who is afraid to you - or anyone else, I recall back in the 1980s that I went to WSB radio in Atlanta and "debated" Ike Newkirk (a black man) and he commended me on having the courage to show up and allow the listeners to get both sides. He gave me equal time to state my case and respond to his points, plus allowed me to bring up points of my own. The listeners "won" because they got to hear the issues, not the personalities.

I'm pretty sure IF any whites changed their mind on this, they thought about what it would be like to have you as a neighbor and decided that maybe segregation IS a viable option.

You are wrong and the attempt to tone police won't work.

You can't out debate me and this place is the only place aside from the blatant white supremacist forums where your opinion gets any validation. You see WB, I'm right and I know it. I don't need you or any of the rest of you punk ass stormfront troopers to agree with me. What whites like you here think don't mean shit. Whites who I have worked with would spit on your ignorant 14th amendment is illegal ass.

 

[toobfreak]

This stuff will never end. When will we learn they HATE us.

Reverse the roles and have white women screaming at and ganging up on a black woman and her child like this and this would be a national event with BLM marching in the streets rioting and looting, black leaders demanding a referendum and Nancy Pelosi or Liz Warren calling for Congress to have a national dialog. Whites are no longer safe in their own country.

 

[keepitreal]

There is no way that there can be coexistence with black people.

Looks like you’re up shit creek.
Black, brown and red people are here to stay.
Get fucking used to it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually negro birth rates are in decline...

Mixed races will end racism.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mixed races will end racism

ROFLMFAO

What color is the sky on your planet?

Why is so much energy wasted on ending,
what no one can do away with?

Hatred will never cease to exist, until Jesus returns...
people need to accept the fact that hatred exists

 

[Vastator]

There is no way that there can be coexistence with black people.

Looks like you’re up shit creek.
Black, brown and red people are here to stay.
Get fucking used to it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually negro birth rates are in decline...

Mixed races will end racism.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mixed races will end racism

ROFLMFAO

What color is the sky on your planet?

Why is so much energy wasted on ending,
what no one can do away with?

Hatred will never cease to exist, until Jesus returns...
people need to accept the fact that hatred exists

It is rather insidious isn’t it? Stripped to its core; many like this seek, and look forward to not just the extinction of a particular race. But all races. So much for the value, and appreciation of diversity. As I’ve said for decades; the “diversity cults” ultimate aim is to eliminate diversity. While the separatists are the only ones who appreciate, and offer a method to ensure the continuance of, diversity. The multi cult is a fraud. And a dangerous one that is a threat threat to the existence of all of the people’s of earth.

 

[Porter Rockwell]

He ain't no NASCAR historian.. If he does not know there are NO spare "phony" race cars to prank people with at a NASCAR event.. You don't get to drive another team's car UNLESS there's a last minute or day problem with the driver..

You go read his book and tell me WHAT race, WHAT year and I'll prove it...

NASCAR’s darkest chapter is its racism

Published Thursday, January 15, 2009
by Brian Donovan, Special To The Post

As we move toward Martin Luther King Day, Barack Obama’s inauguration and the Daytona 500, it’s an appropriate moment to consider the unusual life of another remarkable racial pioneer: NASCAR’s first black driver, the late Wendell Scott.

A talented racer, Scott began banging fenders with roughneck competitors on Dixie dirt tracks in 1952, during an era when he couldn’t use a white restroom or drinking fountain. The story of his frustrating struggle, little known outside of the racing world, offers a reminder of how much our country has changed – but also of how NASCAR’s progress toward diversity still seems stuck in the past.

Scott’s dream of becoming a competitive national-level racer depended on support from NASCAR’s celebrated founder and czar, the late Bill France Sr. At first, Scott’s prospects looked promising. Early on, France assured him he’d always be treated without prejudice. In the minor leagues Scott won dozens of races and a Virginia state championship.

Like Obama, Scott, who lived in Danville, Va., and often raced in Charlotte, developed surprising numbers of admirers among ordinary white folks in the South. He became one of NASCAR’s most popular drivers, even as an underdog without the corporate sponsorship for a competitive racecar. His passionate determination inspired fans to reconsider racial stereotypes. Unfortunately, his support in the grandstands wasn’t matched in NASCAR’s executive suites.

As the growing civil rights struggle in the ‘60s inflamed racial tensions, France reneged on his promise, and a pattern of unfair treatment by NASCAR followed. France denied Scott the rookie-of-the-year award for his first major-league season, even though Scott was the top rookie in the standings. When Scott won his only national race, NASCAR officials, fearing he’d kiss the white trophy queen, declared another driver the victor.

Long after the crowd and the queen had left, NASCAR grudgingly admitted that Scott had won.

For years South Carolina’s major track, Darlington Raceway, banned Scott because he was black. This cost him any chance for sponsorship. France addressed the problem with inaction and silence. When Scott finally asked for help, he said France told him that Darlington was important to NASCAR’s success and Scott should just be patient.

When senior NASCAR officials and major promoters mistreated Scott, France continued his hands-off neutrality. One official abused his authority and excluded Scott from an important race at Charlotte. Others did the same thing at the speedways in Daytona Beach, Fla., and Martinsville, Va. – facilities in which France owned major financial interests. Repeatedly, officials harassed Scott over trivial issues: his son’s beards, minor blemishes in his car’s paint.

At one prestigious NASCAR event, Scott was exploited in a bogus promotional scheme. A record crowd packed Charlotte’s speedway after the promoter announced he’d give Scott his first chance to drive a competitive car. But the car was a phony; its weak performance embarrassed Scott in front of 81,000 spectators.

France helped other drivers obtain sponsorship for competitive cars, but not Scott. The pattern of unfairness persisted, insiders say, largely because France and other influential executives in the NASCAR world believed that a competitive black driver would be bad for business. At the time France was cultivating alliances with leading segregationist politicians such as Alabama Governor George Wallace, and those relationships helped NASCAR to grow into today’s multi-billion-dollar enterprise.

Many of the biased actions toward Scott took place as France was negotiating successfully with Wallace for millions of dollars in state subsidies for a huge new speedway at Talladega. Wallace never would have approved that money if NASCAR’s lone black driver had any chance of winning.

Today, more than 35 years after Scott’s last race, America’s racial situation has improved drastically. But NASCAR remains the country’s least diverse major sport, despite a diversity program launched eight years ago. Every regular driver in NASCAR’s three national series is still a white male.

Some of Scott’s admirers feel that some official recognition for him from NASCAR is long overdue – perhaps at the new hall of fame NASCAR is opening this year, perhaps even a public apology for the bigotry he suffered. Others believe an apology would be quite unlikely, since NASCAR, still owned by the France family, says it knows nothing about any unfair treatment of Scott.

BRIAN DONOVAN, a Pulitzer-Prize winning journalist, is the author of “Hard Driving: The American Odyssey of NASCAR’s First Black Driver.”

NASCAR’s darkest chapter is its racism

You got a problem? Argue with him about it.

So I tell you this guy doesn't know jack shit about NASCAR and you just REPOST the article?? Holy shit..

You highlighted the evidence.. He wrote ONE BOOK about ONE Black NASCAR driver... That does not make him "a NASCAR historian"... In fact -- it was his ONLY book and he had ZERO background in motor sports of any kind...

This is why you FLOCK to tales of woes that you can add to that treasure trove of racism that you deny you create and fling onto this forum weekly... You DO collect a lot of stuff that is marginally truthful or even vetted.. Like the white people who AGREE with you that Hallmark Cards, and Princess Hair and Dance Team make-up are examples of racism....

From the Wiki on Brian Donovan --

Career[edit]
He first worked for three years at the Rochester Democrat & Chronicle, and was then hired by Newsday in 1967. He retired from Newsday in 2002 to focus on a book, "Hard Driving" about Wendell Scott.[4]

One of the SHORTEST bios I've ever read on a "Pulitzer Prize winning journalist"...

I post the truth. You can't dispute it. This is the only place you can get away with your stupidity. I never said hall mark cards were racist and if you have a problem with the article or the bio contact the writer. You're a dumb ass flacaltenn and the only reason you are trying to argue with me is because there are other idiots here just like you. I and a few other blacks are here outnumbered and you guys can't out debate us. You want to talk shit, but you are too scared to take your try to gaslight ass to a majority black forum. So you're just a bunch of hot air wrapped up in pink skin. I have been right about things I have said here son and I know it. You know it also.

From what I've seen everybody is able to out-debate you. In a debate, the first to start name calling loses the debate. Go to any thread you've participated in. No matter how civil the conversation, you're the one that starts slinging skeet first.

I'm sure if you had a point, you'd make it. Insofar as who is afraid to you - or anyone else, I recall back in the 1980s that I went to WSB radio in Atlanta and "debated" Ike Newkirk (a black man) and he commended me on having the courage to show up and allow the listeners to get both sides. He gave me equal time to state my case and respond to his points, plus allowed me to bring up points of my own. The listeners "won" because they got to hear the issues, not the personalities.

I'm pretty sure IF any whites changed their mind on this, they thought about what it would be like to have you as a neighbor and decided that maybe segregation IS a viable option.

You are wrong and the attempt to tone police won't work.

You can't out debate me and this place is the only place aside from the blatant white supremacist forums where your opinion gets any validation. You see WB, I'm right and I know it. I don't need you or any of the rest of you punk ass stormfront troopers to agree with me. What whites like you here think don't mean shit. Whites who I have worked with would spit on your ignorant 14th amendment is illegal ass.

Now you sound like the moron you are.

I would submit that you have never tried your hand at a debate, but when you try debating me, you would lose your ass.

But, again, if you're so unhappy here, planes leave for Nigeria every day.