Lets Say, Trump Chooses Tim Scott For Vice President. How Would The Far Left React?

[IM2]

Of course not, just like, for you, when all you have on your toolbelt is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. IOW, the only discussion point you're willing to talk about is white racism, so anyone opposed to you in any way is, in your mind, a racist or is motivated by racism. I am, however, willing to listen. Obviously, you've had a very different experience in life than I have, and it's worth hearing what you've experienced. Let's be honest though. If you don't want actual discussion and just want to rail against white people, say so and you'll get white racists riled up, no one will discuss racism constructively with you, and the rest of us will ignore the whole thing. That sounds like a lot of useless handwaving to me, but sometimes that's all people actually want.

You can't see the racism in your opinions. There are whites here who I disagree with and don't say this to. So...

Because it's trifling and irritating to keep reading that we have to be on a plantation or some other racially derogatory comment just because we do not support the handpicked black puppets republicans offer as leaders. Until there are black republicans who can forcefully stand up to the racist element in the party, there will be little black support no matter what.

You're using a broad generalization to define the argument while I think it's more nuanced than that. Here's my take on it and note that I'm not outright rejecting the IDEA of reparations. Blacks were undoubtedly harmed by then-legal mistreatment, and no one can pretend it didn't happen.

1. The very way you put it, "reparations for blacks" makes it a skin-color-based payout, which violates federal anti-discrimination laws. We're going to have to do something about that, or the laws will become meaningless.
2. Based on 1, you'd have to focus reparations on actual mistreatment of blacks in history, so let's start with slavery. Now, we have white people who have slaves or former slaves in their family trees, so if you want to prevent white descendant of slaves from collecting payments, you're stuck with someone visually inspecting applicants to ensure that only black people get payments, which again violates federal anti-discrimination laws.
3. Jim Crow. There you have the most solid argument for reparations, pure and simple because it's recent and relatively easy for people to prove they or their immediate ancestors suffered from them, and you should focus on that. You would, of course, need to ensure that only those blacks who can prove they or their family members suffered under those laws got reparations. A black man whose family lived in states without Jim Crow laws, for example, should not be able to collect based on them. A black family that immigrated from Africa after those laws were struck down would not be able to collect. IOW, skin color would not be the determining factor. Again, though, you have white people with black relatives who suffered under Jim Crow. A white man or woman who married a black person in some places suffered along with their loved one because of racism. Should not they and their family members also receive reparations?

This is what I mean when I say we need to dig into the details and make some hard decisions instead of just saying, "All black people get payments because reasons and feelz and stuff". Does that make sense? If we are going to atone for the mistreatments of the past, let's atone for actual mistreatment, not just throw a lot of money in the air and call it a day.

The problem with your argument is that other groups have received reparations for harms caused to them based on race and for things that have occurred long before anyone today was born. You seem to think that blacks have not considered any details and you are so busy looking for ways to disqualify that you cannot see how your argument makes no sense. For example, the Africans who have immigrated here face the same human rights violations as American born blacks, so do blacks who have immigrated here from South America and the Caribbean. Therefore, they should be eligible for reparations.

You keep trying to put whites into reparations but whites have received numerous amounts of financial assistance from the government that blacks were denied. So whites would not be eligible for reparations, it is just that simple. So let me make this short, until you do the research, you really need to stop trying to argue, because you miss all the federal assistance whites have been given in order to argue. Once you see what whites have been given that blacks have been excluded from as I have, you should then stop trying to make the arguments you try here.

 

[scruffy]

You can't see the racism in your opinions. There are whites here who I disagree with and don't say this to. So...

Because it's trifling and irritating to keep reading that we have to be on a plantation or some other racially derogatory comment just because we do not support the handpicked black puppets republicans offer as leaders. Until there are black republicans who can forcefully stand up to the racist element in the party, there will be little black support no matter what.


The problem with your argument is that other groups have received reparations for harms caused to them based on race and for things that have occurred long before anyone today was born. You seem to think that blacks have not considered any details and you are so busy looking for ways to disqualify that you cannot see how your argument makes no sense. For example, the Africans who have immigrated here face the same human rights violations as American born blacks, so do blacks who have immigrated here from South America and the Caribbean. Therefore, they should be eligible for reparations.

You keep trying to put whites into reparations but whites have received numerous amounts of financial assistance from the government that blacks were denied. So whites would not be eligible for reparations, it is just that simple. So let me make this short, until you do the research, you really need to stop trying to argue, because you miss all the federal assistance whites have been given in order to argue. Once you see what whites have been given that blacks have been excluded from as I have, you should then stop trying to make the arguments you try here.

I don't think YOU know what racism is.

I don't think YOU have ever experienced real racism.

Calling someone an N-word is not racism. Hell, y'all do that to yourselves, every single day.

I have encountered exactly ONE white racist, in my 60+ years on this planet.

Truth be told, brown skinned racists outnumber black racists 100 to 1.

 

[IM2]

I don't think YOU know what racism is.

I don't think YOU have ever experienced real racism.

Calling someone an N-word is not racism. Hell, y'all do that to yourselves, every single day.

I have encountered exactly ONE white racist, in my 60+ years on this planet.

Truth be told, brown skinned racists outnumber black racists 100 to 1.

Shut the hell up ignoramous. You look at a white racist every day you look in the mirror.

 

[hadit]

You can't see the racism in your opinions. There are whites here who I disagree with and don't say this to. So...

Of course you don't, because they are not offering up reasoned opposition to some of your ideas the way I do. The fact that you ignore most of what I write so you can yell, "racist!" is telling.

Because it's trifling and irritating to keep reading that we have to be on a plantation or some other racially derogatory comment just because we do not support the handpicked black puppets republicans offer as leaders.

Did you simply ignore what I wrote about that? It would seem that you have. Go back and read it, then return.

Until there are black republicans who can forcefully stand up to the racist element in the party, there will be little black support no matter what.

And until there are black democrats who can forcefully stand up to the paternalistic contempt in the party, there will be little black advancement, only empty promises. You do not seem to realize that you are making little progress and are ignoring those who make empty promises in your churches only during campaign season then ignore you the rest of the time, while you scream at those who simply want to treat you like everybody else.

The problem with your argument is that other groups have received reparations for harms caused to them based on race and for things that have occurred long before anyone today was born. You seem to think that blacks have not considered any details and you are so busy looking for ways to disqualify that you cannot see how your argument makes no sense. For example, the Africans who have immigrated here face the same human rights violations as American born blacks, so do blacks who have immigrated here from South America and the Caribbean. Therefore, they should be eligible for reparations.

Not if they came here after Jim Crow was eliminated. That was the last legal discrimination based on skin color. "Whites only" and separate facilities for black and white people disappeared. You can't change opinions and hearts overnight, but those have been changing as well, and real racists are being driven further and further from the public square. If you want the government to pay reparations based on the government's actions of the past, then the end of Jim Crow is where it should stop.

You keep trying to put whites into reparations but whites have received numerous amounts of financial assistance from the government that blacks were denied. So whites would not be eligible for reparations, it is just that simple. So let me make this short, until you do the research, you really need to stop trying to argue, because you miss all the federal assistance whites have been given in order to argue. Once you see what whites have been given that blacks have been excluded from as I have, you should then stop trying to make the arguments you try here.

See, here's where I know you did not read what I wrote. Go back and read it again, and see if you can find where I talked about what I oppose and do not oppose.

I never said whites should receive reparations, I'm simply pointing out the practical holes in your argument. I put whites into it because I know human nature, and there will be unprincipled white people who will try to get in on the cash. How will you stop them without a visual inspection? Rachel Dolezel had you fooled for years.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Trump should appoint former Columbo Captain Michael Franzese as VP

Playtime is over

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Shut the hell up ignoramous. You look at a white racist every day you look in the mirror.

Tim Scott is an Uncle Tom!!!

 

[IM2]

Tim Scott is an Uncle Tom!!!

You finally figured it out.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You finally figured it out.

Malcolm X finds your love of the democrat Party most disturbing

 

[FredVegbarfuss]

I have encountered exactly ONE white racist, in my 60+ years on this planet.

Truth be told, brown skinned racists outnumber black racists 100 to 1.

Are there statistics to show that? My experience is showing there is racism from any side, yet not all are racist, and education has helped for that, though there was no adequate solution yet to racism.