Starbucks must be getting hammered

[candycorn]

I find it puzzling with all the folks who insist they never go to Starbucks how prevalent Starbucks is.....everywhere.

Yeah, I know it's like the 50 million (or so) copies that Vanilla Ice sold of his album....

Today nobody will admit to buying it.

On another note....isn't it funny how you can tell exactly how people would react to this initiative by Starbucks (more or less) based on their politics? It's like if you hate Obama, you must hate Starbucks as well since....they are both symbols of something that wasn't there when you were growing up....

 

[Stephanie]

I don't think there is one within 50 miles or more of where I live.

I don't think there was one up in Fairbanks Alaska either. Maybe their all white board memebers can't take 50 below zero or something.

frikken hypocrites

 

[hadit]

I believe that the entire effort is packaged dishonestly. Did they REALLY want a discussion on race, or did they just want yet another platform from which to lecture white America about guilt they are supposed to be feeling? The former, a good thing. The latter, not so much.

Why is understanding or enlightenment never the issue with whites. The only options they ever see is

1. Dont talk about race

or

2. Talk about it and a supposed guilt is involved

Instead of you know, increasing awareness and stuff. You act as if information is supposed to have an emotional reaction

Take the recent white cop/black suspect interactions that have everyone hot and bothered. One side wants to talk about how they feel they are unfairly targeted for police scrutiny. That's a fair subject to talk about, and needs to be addressed.

Thats how white people address it tho. They say "Fair point, that should be discussed" and then move to another point lol.

When a white cop, however, has his life destroyed as a racist even though he did things by the book and isn't racist, something's wrong. Even today, if you ask some people if "hands up, don't shoot" actually happened, they will say it did and be very angry about it. So yes, information DOES provoke emotional reactions.

The report never dealt with whether his hands were up or not. I wish you guys would stop saying that because it flat out not true. The only thing you can say is that some witness said his hands werent up but another witness says they were.

Yes, people are very angry about it. You see, you think this is about a slogan. You stepped right over the body to complain about a slogan. People were so offended by stores being looted more than they were by a dead teenager. So yes, people are angry but not from the slogan, from actual events you choose to ignore

Again, is a white barrista allowed to open a racial conversation with a black customer, expressing traditionally "white" views in order to bring understanding and enlightenment to the black customer, or are only white customers supposed to get "understanding and enlightenment"?

Dude, do you want to pretend that whites are some misunderstood people? Or that your plight should be shared with minorties? Ok, thats fine but heres a question for you.

Why? The only answer you can possibly have is revenge.

These are valid questions, and your likely immediate reaction to reading this ought to tell you something about how you're approaching the subject.

Again. The reasons blacks feel this convo is needed is because many whites have no idea the issues or problems that exist in the black community. Tell me, What issues or problems do whites have that blacks dont know exist?

When you cant answer that question that shows how that conversation isnt wanted, needed or required by anyone. Its just a slick comeback. Its like I give a dog a bone and you say "Why cant I have one?"

You dont really want it, you're just complaining

1. Forensics support "hands up, don't shoot" didn't happen.
2. If the Justice Department didn't find those witnesses credible, why should we?
3. It angers me that people will use a false narrative to further a political goal. There IS a dead suspect, and there IS a cop whose life is basically ruined. He can never again be a cop, and will have a difficult time simply living a normal life.
4. Your response illustrates exactly what I was talking about. You DO believe that only whites need to gain understanding and be enlightened. That's not a true conversation, that's a one-way "you did this to me", complaint fest. The better way to do it is to allow both sides to explain why they feel certain ways. White people have attitudes for reasons. It would help them to hear first hand from a black person what issues they have, and it would help the black person to hear why they think they way they do as well. It sounds like you have no intention of looking at that.

When I see my dauther-in-law's family mocking her for acting "white" because she married my son, what do YOU think I should feel? Shame, because she should have married a black man? Anger, because I know how awesome she is and she shouldn't have to put up with that kind of outdated, racist attitude, especially from her own family? Tell you what, here's your chance to contribute to a racial conversation. How do YOU think it should be handled?

 

[candycorn]

I don't think there is one within 50 miles or more of where I live.

I don't think there was one up in Fairbanks Alaska either. Maybe their all white board memebers can't take 50 below zero or something.

frikken hypocrites

Wish my portfolio was getting "hammered" like this

 

[Dot Com]

I've never been so stupid as to buy what SB's charges for what I hear is shit coffee.
If I were to go there and some ******* hipster asshole started getting in my face about 'race' I'd dump the coffee on them and tell them to **** off.

 

[hadit]

And I would say no, because the breakdown in the American family is not restricted to black families. It is WORSE among the black community, but is not exclusive to it. Now, I would love to have these kinds of conversations with individuals, but what happens to a lot of people is the very public and ugly reactions when these kinds of things are voiced. They are then, as intended, silenced on the subject because they rightly think the deck is stacked against them from the start. To even give voice to some of these things is to invite screams of "racist".

I would disagree with your view of the issue and point out that shit rolls downhill which affects the people at the bottom of social ladder more adversely than anyone else even if its not being done intentionally which is still racism.

You do know, don't you, that prior to the Civil Rights era, the black family was much stronger than it is today, even though they were kept at the bottom of the social ladder to a much greater extent than today, and deliberately so?

I find that people talking in public have a tendency to be way more polite as in the case of my talk with the guy that was in the KKK. After talking to him I found out the reason he was in the KKK was because one of his aunts married a Black guy that beat his cousins all the time.

Of course public conversations are more polite, that's not the point. The point is, as I said, it this a real conversation where all viewpoints are valid, or are some more valid than others?

You do know prior to civil rights that the Black population was kept under control legally by Jim Crow? Once Jim Crow was dismantled a new way of controlling the Black population was needed. Fast forward today and you can see the effects of increased policing, discriminatory incarceration rates, introduction of drugs into the Black community etc etc.

Those things would not cause the family to break down. As for incarceration rates, you have to account for the entire panoply of effects, not just assume racism caused it. Of course, there has been residual racism. I wouldn't dispute that because attitudes don't change overnight. BUT, they DO change, and to continually approach white Americans as if they all still have the attitudes of white Americans from decades ago is no better than white Americans assuming every black man they see is a thug.

Actually that was the point. You claimed there would be ugly reactions. Why wouldnt it be a real conversation? I would tell you exactly the same thing I would tell you here online.

Such conversations are necessary, let there be no doubt about that. Having one with a person who has control over the quality of your coffee is not the best place way to accomplish it.

See this is why its important to have these conversations. I am astounded you actually said increased policing, drugs, and higher incarceration rates would not break down families. At this point I would question your intellect and probably assume you were racist.

Its a starting place and you actually have no clue on what is best or not. Some of my best ideas and enlightenment come from situations I would never expect.

And I would say, if you think they WOULD cause the breakdown of the family, tell me how. Obviously, I think differently. You assume that what you believe is self evident, I don't, but I don't think you're retarded because you do. So let's talk about it. I begin from the position that a strong family, when attacked from the outside, strengthens its bonds. If the police are targeting young men, for example, I would maintain that their fathers would insist that their boys stay as squeaky clean as possible. If drugs are injected into a community, the community should fight to keep them out. That's MY experience. So what happened?

 

[ClosedCaption]

I believe that the entire effort is packaged dishonestly. Did they REALLY want a discussion on race, or did they just want yet another platform from which to lecture white America about guilt they are supposed to be feeling? The former, a good thing. The latter, not so much.

Why is understanding or enlightenment never the issue with whites. The only options they ever see is

1. Dont talk about race

or

2. Talk about it and a supposed guilt is involved

Instead of you know, increasing awareness and stuff. You act as if information is supposed to have an emotional reaction

Take the recent white cop/black suspect interactions that have everyone hot and bothered. One side wants to talk about how they feel they are unfairly targeted for police scrutiny. That's a fair subject to talk about, and needs to be addressed.

Thats how white people address it tho. They say "Fair point, that should be discussed" and then move to another point lol.

When a white cop, however, has his life destroyed as a racist even though he did things by the book and isn't racist, something's wrong. Even today, if you ask some people if "hands up, don't shoot" actually happened, they will say it did and be very angry about it. So yes, information DOES provoke emotional reactions.

The report never dealt with whether his hands were up or not. I wish you guys would stop saying that because it flat out not true. The only thing you can say is that some witness said his hands werent up but another witness says they were.

Yes, people are very angry about it. You see, you think this is about a slogan. You stepped right over the body to complain about a slogan. People were so offended by stores being looted more than they were by a dead teenager. So yes, people are angry but not from the slogan, from actual events you choose to ignore

Again, is a white barrista allowed to open a racial conversation with a black customer, expressing traditionally "white" views in order to bring understanding and enlightenment to the black customer, or are only white customers supposed to get "understanding and enlightenment"?

Dude, do you want to pretend that whites are some misunderstood people? Or that your plight should be shared with minorties? Ok, thats fine but heres a question for you.

Why? The only answer you can possibly have is revenge.

These are valid questions, and your likely immediate reaction to reading this ought to tell you something about how you're approaching the subject.

Again. The reasons blacks feel this convo is needed is because many whites have no idea the issues or problems that exist in the black community. Tell me, What issues or problems do whites have that blacks dont know exist?

When you cant answer that question that shows how that conversation isnt wanted, needed or required by anyone. Its just a slick comeback. Its like I give a dog a bone and you say "Why cant I have one?"

You dont really want it, you're just complaining

1. Forensics support "hands up, don't shoot" didn't happen.

No it didnt, but you can keep saying it hoping it flies one day

2. If the Justice Department didn't find those witnesses credible, why should we?

The JD didnt do credibility tests on the hands up part. Now you are seriously just making up shit and wondering why people are angered at your lying.

3. It angers me that people will use a false narrative to further a political goal. There IS a dead suspect, and there IS a cop whose life is basically ruined. He can never again be a cop, and will have a difficult time simply living a normal life.

Its not false. If it was you wouldnt keep typing it and would link to it. Boo ******* hoo....Lets list the things you care more about so far than a dead teen.

1. Slogans
2. Wilson not being a cop

4. Your response illustrates exactly what I was talking about. You DO believe that only whites need to gain understanding and be enlightened. That's not a true conversation, that's a one-way "you did this to me", complaint fest. The better way to do it is to allow both sides to explain why they feel certain ways. White people have attitudes for reasons. It would help them to hear first hand from a black person what issues they have, and it would help the black person to hear why they think they way they do as well. It sounds like you have no intention of looking at that.

No I asked you what issues or problems do you feel whites think blacks need to know? You cant answer that question because you didnt think that far into you jealous response. Like I said, you're complaining that I gave the dog a bone when you dont really want a bone in the first place.

When I see my dauther-in-law's family mocking her for acting "white" because she married my son, what do YOU think I should feel?

I hope you feel more than you do about a dead unarmed teen being shot down

Shame, because she should have married a black man? Anger, because I know how awesome she is and she shouldn't have to put up with that kind of outdated, racist attitude, especially from her own family? Tell you what, here's your chance to contribute to a racial conversation. How do YOU think it should be handled?

Thats a personal situation that brings no assistance to anyone but you and your daughter in law. See? I'm discussing entire communities. Your come back is about 1 person and how you should feel.

 

[Mac1958]

.

This whole idea was a ridiculous blend of narcissism and naivete.

Which is the problem with much of our national discourse.

.

 

[hadit]

I believe that the entire effort is packaged dishonestly. Did they REALLY want a discussion on race, or did they just want yet another platform from which to lecture white America about guilt they are supposed to be feeling? The former, a good thing. The latter, not so much.

Why is understanding or enlightenment never the issue with whites. The only options they ever see is

1. Dont talk about race

or

2. Talk about it and a supposed guilt is involved

Instead of you know, increasing awareness and stuff. You act as if information is supposed to have an emotional reaction

Take the recent white cop/black suspect interactions that have everyone hot and bothered. One side wants to talk about how they feel they are unfairly targeted for police scrutiny. That's a fair subject to talk about, and needs to be addressed.

Thats how white people address it tho. They say "Fair point, that should be discussed" and then move to another point lol.

When a white cop, however, has his life destroyed as a racist even though he did things by the book and isn't racist, something's wrong. Even today, if you ask some people if "hands up, don't shoot" actually happened, they will say it did and be very angry about it. So yes, information DOES provoke emotional reactions.

The report never dealt with whether his hands were up or not. I wish you guys would stop saying that because it flat out not true. The only thing you can say is that some witness said his hands werent up but another witness says they were.

Yes, people are very angry about it. You see, you think this is about a slogan. You stepped right over the body to complain about a slogan. People were so offended by stores being looted more than they were by a dead teenager. So yes, people are angry but not from the slogan, from actual events you choose to ignore

Again, is a white barrista allowed to open a racial conversation with a black customer, expressing traditionally "white" views in order to bring understanding and enlightenment to the black customer, or are only white customers supposed to get "understanding and enlightenment"?

Dude, do you want to pretend that whites are some misunderstood people? Or that your plight should be shared with minorties? Ok, thats fine but heres a question for you.

Why? The only answer you can possibly have is revenge.

These are valid questions, and your likely immediate reaction to reading this ought to tell you something about how you're approaching the subject.

Again. The reasons blacks feel this convo is needed is because many whites have no idea the issues or problems that exist in the black community. Tell me, What issues or problems do whites have that blacks dont know exist?

When you cant answer that question that shows how that conversation isnt wanted, needed or required by anyone. Its just a slick comeback. Its like I give a dog a bone and you say "Why cant I have one?"

You dont really want it, you're just complaining

1. Forensics support "hands up, don't shoot" didn't happen.

No it didnt, but you can keep saying it hoping it flies one day

2. If the Justice Department didn't find those witnesses credible, why should we?

The JD didnt do credibility tests on the hands up part. Now you are seriously just making up shit and wondering why people are angered at your lying.

3. It angers me that people will use a false narrative to further a political goal. There IS a dead suspect, and there IS a cop whose life is basically ruined. He can never again be a cop, and will have a difficult time simply living a normal life.

Its not false. If it was you wouldnt keep typing it and would link to it. Boo ******* hoo....Lets list the things you care more about so far than a dead teen.

1. Slogans
2. Wilson not being a cop

4. Your response illustrates exactly what I was talking about. You DO believe that only whites need to gain understanding and be enlightened. That's not a true conversation, that's a one-way "you did this to me", complaint fest. The better way to do it is to allow both sides to explain why they feel certain ways. White people have attitudes for reasons. It would help them to hear first hand from a black person what issues they have, and it would help the black person to hear why they think they way they do as well. It sounds like you have no intention of looking at that.

No I asked you what issues or problems do you feel whites think blacks need to know? You cant answer that question because you didnt think that far into you jealous response. Like I said, you're complaining that I gave the dog a bone when you dont really want a bone in the first place.

When I see my dauther-in-law's family mocking her for acting "white" because she married my son, what do YOU think I should feel?

I hope you feel more than you do about a dead unarmed teen being shot down

Shame, because she should have married a black man? Anger, because I know how awesome she is and she shouldn't have to put up with that kind of outdated, racist attitude, especially from her own family? Tell you what, here's your chance to contribute to a racial conversation. How do YOU think it should be handled?

Thats a personal situation that brings no assistance to anyone but you and your daughter in law. See? I'm discussing entire communities. Your come back is about 1 person and how you should feel.

WHICH IS THE ENTIRE FREAKIN POINT OF HAVING A ONE ON ONE DISCUSSION. Otherwise, you might as well just pull out a handful of talking points from your favorite race pundit and wave them around. You get precisely nowhere.

 

[ClosedCaption]

WHICH IS THE ENTIRE FREAKIN POINT OF HAVING A ONE ON ONE DISCUSSION.

we can have a one on one discussion about anything. That doesnt mean that we have to have one about your daughter in law and for some reason thats more important than discussing race relations.

I know you're the star in your own movie and everything and sees your plight as being greater than everyone elses but its not. So instead of a discussion on race hadit would rather

1. Start a fake discussion on white issues that he cannot identify yet

2. Start a discussion about his daughter in law being teased.

 

[Asclepias]

I would disagree with your view of the issue and point out that shit rolls downhill which affects the people at the bottom of social ladder more adversely than anyone else even if its not being done intentionally which is still racism.

You do know, don't you, that prior to the Civil Rights era, the black family was much stronger than it is today, even though they were kept at the bottom of the social ladder to a much greater extent than today, and deliberately so?

I find that people talking in public have a tendency to be way more polite as in the case of my talk with the guy that was in the KKK. After talking to him I found out the reason he was in the KKK was because one of his aunts married a Black guy that beat his cousins all the time.

Of course public conversations are more polite, that's not the point. The point is, as I said, it this a real conversation where all viewpoints are valid, or are some more valid than others?

You do know prior to civil rights that the Black population was kept under control legally by Jim Crow? Once Jim Crow was dismantled a new way of controlling the Black population was needed. Fast forward today and you can see the effects of increased policing, discriminatory incarceration rates, introduction of drugs into the Black community etc etc.

Those things would not cause the family to break down. As for incarceration rates, you have to account for the entire panoply of effects, not just assume racism caused it. Of course, there has been residual racism. I wouldn't dispute that because attitudes don't change overnight. BUT, they DO change, and to continually approach white Americans as if they all still have the attitudes of white Americans from decades ago is no better than white Americans assuming every black man they see is a thug.

Actually that was the point. You claimed there would be ugly reactions. Why wouldnt it be a real conversation? I would tell you exactly the same thing I would tell you here online.

Such conversations are necessary, let there be no doubt about that. Having one with a person who has control over the quality of your coffee is not the best place way to accomplish it.

See this is why its important to have these conversations. I am astounded you actually said increased policing, drugs, and higher incarceration rates would not break down families. At this point I would question your intellect and probably assume you were racist.

Its a starting place and you actually have no clue on what is best or not. Some of my best ideas and enlightenment come from situations I would never expect.

And I would say, if you think they WOULD cause the breakdown of the family, tell me how. Obviously, I think differently. You assume that what you believe is self evident, I don't, but I don't think you're retarded because you do. So let's talk about it. I begin from the position that a strong family, when attacked from the outside, strengthens its bonds. If the police are targeting young men, for example, I would maintain that their fathers would insist that their boys stay as squeaky clean as possible. If drugs are injected into a community, the community should fight to keep them out. That's MY experience. So what happened?

And I would say you lack an understanding of the basic human dynamics of a family. Your family immediate takes a hit when your males are incarcerated. A father in prison cannot caution his son on how to deal with intentionally racist policing, drugs, women life etc. That son is going to be angry and rebel. The point your are missing is that the very fact that he has to stay cleaner than a white boy who is doing worse things than he is creates anger as well. Whites have just as large or larger problem with drugs but are not policed or incarcerated at the rate Blacks are.

 

[Stephanie]

for sure. lets talk a bout race and just who are the hatful frikken bigots on top of it
Ebony Editor Says Nothing Says Let's Kill Muslims Like Country Music

 

[ClosedCaption]

OH NOES!! NOT COUNTRY MUSIC!!!!!

This is all you have to complain about? Must be nice

 

[hadit]

You do know, don't you, that prior to the Civil Rights era, the black family was much stronger than it is today, even though they were kept at the bottom of the social ladder to a much greater extent than today, and deliberately so?

Of course public conversations are more polite, that's not the point. The point is, as I said, it this a real conversation where all viewpoints are valid, or are some more valid than others?

You do know prior to civil rights that the Black population was kept under control legally by Jim Crow? Once Jim Crow was dismantled a new way of controlling the Black population was needed. Fast forward today and you can see the effects of increased policing, discriminatory incarceration rates, introduction of drugs into the Black community etc etc.

Those things would not cause the family to break down. As for incarceration rates, you have to account for the entire panoply of effects, not just assume racism caused it. Of course, there has been residual racism. I wouldn't dispute that because attitudes don't change overnight. BUT, they DO change, and to continually approach white Americans as if they all still have the attitudes of white Americans from decades ago is no better than white Americans assuming every black man they see is a thug.

Actually that was the point. You claimed there would be ugly reactions. Why wouldnt it be a real conversation? I would tell you exactly the same thing I would tell you here online.

Such conversations are necessary, let there be no doubt about that. Having one with a person who has control over the quality of your coffee is not the best place way to accomplish it.

See this is why its important to have these conversations. I am astounded you actually said increased policing, drugs, and higher incarceration rates would not break down families. At this point I would question your intellect and probably assume you were racist.

Its a starting place and you actually have no clue on what is best or not. Some of my best ideas and enlightenment come from situations I would never expect.

And I would say, if you think they WOULD cause the breakdown of the family, tell me how. Obviously, I think differently. You assume that what you believe is self evident, I don't, but I don't think you're retarded because you do. So let's talk about it. I begin from the position that a strong family, when attacked from the outside, strengthens its bonds. If the police are targeting young men, for example, I would maintain that their fathers would insist that their boys stay as squeaky clean as possible. If drugs are injected into a community, the community should fight to keep them out. That's MY experience. So what happened?

And I would say you lack an understanding of the basic human dynamics of a family. Your family immediate takes a hit when your males are incarcerated. A father in prison cannot caution his son on how to deal with intentionally racist policing, drugs, women life etc. That son is going to be angry and rebel. The point your are missing is that the very fact that he has to stay cleaner than a white boy who is doing worse things than he is creates anger as well. Whites have just as large or larger problem with drugs but are not policed or incarcerated at the rate Blacks are.

Wait, I thought you said drugs were introduced into BLACK communities to cause problems for them. White people buy and use the drugs, sure. Where does most of the drug-related violence take place? You can't ignore the violence component to incarceration rates.

 

[Stephanie]

You do know prior to civil rights that the Black population was kept under control legally by Jim Crow? Once Jim Crow was dismantled a new way of controlling the Black population was needed. Fast forward today and you can see the effects of increased policing, discriminatory incarceration rates, introduction of drugs into the Black community etc etc.

Those things would not cause the family to break down. As for incarceration rates, you have to account for the entire panoply of effects, not just assume racism caused it. Of course, there has been residual racism. I wouldn't dispute that because attitudes don't change overnight. BUT, they DO change, and to continually approach white Americans as if they all still have the attitudes of white Americans from decades ago is no better than white Americans assuming every black man they see is a thug.

Actually that was the point. You claimed there would be ugly reactions. Why wouldnt it be a real conversation? I would tell you exactly the same thing I would tell you here online.

Such conversations are necessary, let there be no doubt about that. Having one with a person who has control over the quality of your coffee is not the best place way to accomplish it.

See this is why its important to have these conversations. I am astounded you actually said increased policing, drugs, and higher incarceration rates would not break down families. At this point I would question your intellect and probably assume you were racist.

Its a starting place and you actually have no clue on what is best or not. Some of my best ideas and enlightenment come from situations I would never expect.

And I would say, if you think they WOULD cause the breakdown of the family, tell me how. Obviously, I think differently. You assume that what you believe is self evident, I don't, but I don't think you're retarded because you do. So let's talk about it. I begin from the position that a strong family, when attacked from the outside, strengthens its bonds. If the police are targeting young men, for example, I would maintain that their fathers would insist that their boys stay as squeaky clean as possible. If drugs are injected into a community, the community should fight to keep them out. That's MY experience. So what happened?

And I would say you lack an understanding of the basic human dynamics of a family. Your family immediate takes a hit when your males are incarcerated. A father in prison cannot caution his son on how to deal with intentionally racist policing, drugs, women life etc. That son is going to be angry and rebel. The point your are missing is that the very fact that he has to stay cleaner than a white boy who is doing worse things than he is creates anger as well. Whites have just as large or larger problem with drugs but are not policed or incarcerated at the rate Blacks are.

Wait, I thought you said drugs were introduced into BLACK communities to cause problems for them. White people buy and use the drugs, sure. Where does most of the drug-related violence take place? You can't ignore the violence component to incarceration rates.

I believe they got that from Obama's mentor and Reverend of twenty years. the Rev. Wright.
Jeremiah Wright controversy - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[Asclepias]

You do know prior to civil rights that the Black population was kept under control legally by Jim Crow? Once Jim Crow was dismantled a new way of controlling the Black population was needed. Fast forward today and you can see the effects of increased policing, discriminatory incarceration rates, introduction of drugs into the Black community etc etc.

Those things would not cause the family to break down. As for incarceration rates, you have to account for the entire panoply of effects, not just assume racism caused it. Of course, there has been residual racism. I wouldn't dispute that because attitudes don't change overnight. BUT, they DO change, and to continually approach white Americans as if they all still have the attitudes of white Americans from decades ago is no better than white Americans assuming every black man they see is a thug.

Actually that was the point. You claimed there would be ugly reactions. Why wouldnt it be a real conversation? I would tell you exactly the same thing I would tell you here online.

Such conversations are necessary, let there be no doubt about that. Having one with a person who has control over the quality of your coffee is not the best place way to accomplish it.

See this is why its important to have these conversations. I am astounded you actually said increased policing, drugs, and higher incarceration rates would not break down families. At this point I would question your intellect and probably assume you were racist.

Its a starting place and you actually have no clue on what is best or not. Some of my best ideas and enlightenment come from situations I would never expect.

And I would say, if you think they WOULD cause the breakdown of the family, tell me how. Obviously, I think differently. You assume that what you believe is self evident, I don't, but I don't think you're retarded because you do. So let's talk about it. I begin from the position that a strong family, when attacked from the outside, strengthens its bonds. If the police are targeting young men, for example, I would maintain that their fathers would insist that their boys stay as squeaky clean as possible. If drugs are injected into a community, the community should fight to keep them out. That's MY experience. So what happened?

And I would say you lack an understanding of the basic human dynamics of a family. Your family immediate takes a hit when your males are incarcerated. A father in prison cannot caution his son on how to deal with intentionally racist policing, drugs, women life etc. That son is going to be angry and rebel. The point your are missing is that the very fact that he has to stay cleaner than a white boy who is doing worse things than he is creates anger as well. Whites have just as large or larger problem with drugs but are not policed or incarcerated at the rate Blacks are.

Wait, I thought you said drugs were introduced into BLACK communities to cause problems for them. White people buy and use the drugs, sure. Where does most of the drug-related violence take place? You can't ignore the violence component to incarceration rates.

What do you mean by "wait"? I'm not ignoring the violence component. Show me where more Blacks are arrested due to violence and drugs than whites. If you look you will find most if not a vast majority of Black people are incarcerated for drugs is due to possession and usage.

 

[hadit]

Those things would not cause the family to break down. As for incarceration rates, you have to account for the entire panoply of effects, not just assume racism caused it. Of course, there has been residual racism. I wouldn't dispute that because attitudes don't change overnight. BUT, they DO change, and to continually approach white Americans as if they all still have the attitudes of white Americans from decades ago is no better than white Americans assuming every black man they see is a thug.

Such conversations are necessary, let there be no doubt about that. Having one with a person who has control over the quality of your coffee is not the best place way to accomplish it.

See this is why its important to have these conversations. I am astounded you actually said increased policing, drugs, and higher incarceration rates would not break down families. At this point I would question your intellect and probably assume you were racist.

Its a starting place and you actually have no clue on what is best or not. Some of my best ideas and enlightenment come from situations I would never expect.

And I would say, if you think they WOULD cause the breakdown of the family, tell me how. Obviously, I think differently. You assume that what you believe is self evident, I don't, but I don't think you're retarded because you do. So let's talk about it. I begin from the position that a strong family, when attacked from the outside, strengthens its bonds. If the police are targeting young men, for example, I would maintain that their fathers would insist that their boys stay as squeaky clean as possible. If drugs are injected into a community, the community should fight to keep them out. That's MY experience. So what happened?

And I would say you lack an understanding of the basic human dynamics of a family. Your family immediate takes a hit when your males are incarcerated. A father in prison cannot caution his son on how to deal with intentionally racist policing, drugs, women life etc. That son is going to be angry and rebel. The point your are missing is that the very fact that he has to stay cleaner than a white boy who is doing worse things than he is creates anger as well. Whites have just as large or larger problem with drugs but are not policed or incarcerated at the rate Blacks are.

Wait, I thought you said drugs were introduced into BLACK communities to cause problems for them. White people buy and use the drugs, sure. Where does most of the drug-related violence take place? You can't ignore the violence component to incarceration rates.

What do you mean by "wait"? I'm not ignoring the violence component. Show me where more Blacks are arrested due to violence and drugs than whites. If you look you will find most if not a vast majority of Black people are incarcerated for drugs is due to possession and usage.

What I mean by "wait" is that, even though you seem to believe that drugs were deliberately introduced into black communities because racist whites wanted to "keep the black man down", you also state that white people use those same drugs to the same or a greater extent than black people do. If they were intended to cause problems in black communities, it backfired, no?

And I don't deny that most black people are incarcerated for non-violent offenses, but is it not true that most drug related violence is done by young black men?

 

[Asclepias]

See this is why its important to have these conversations. I am astounded you actually said increased policing, drugs, and higher incarceration rates would not break down families. At this point I would question your intellect and probably assume you were racist.

Its a starting place and you actually have no clue on what is best or not. Some of my best ideas and enlightenment come from situations I would never expect.

And I would say, if you think they WOULD cause the breakdown of the family, tell me how. Obviously, I think differently. You assume that what you believe is self evident, I don't, but I don't think you're retarded because you do. So let's talk about it. I begin from the position that a strong family, when attacked from the outside, strengthens its bonds. If the police are targeting young men, for example, I would maintain that their fathers would insist that their boys stay as squeaky clean as possible. If drugs are injected into a community, the community should fight to keep them out. That's MY experience. So what happened?

And I would say you lack an understanding of the basic human dynamics of a family. Your family immediate takes a hit when your males are incarcerated. A father in prison cannot caution his son on how to deal with intentionally racist policing, drugs, women life etc. That son is going to be angry and rebel. The point your are missing is that the very fact that he has to stay cleaner than a white boy who is doing worse things than he is creates anger as well. Whites have just as large or larger problem with drugs but are not policed or incarcerated at the rate Blacks are.

Wait, I thought you said drugs were introduced into BLACK communities to cause problems for them. White people buy and use the drugs, sure. Where does most of the drug-related violence take place? You can't ignore the violence component to incarceration rates.

What do you mean by "wait"? I'm not ignoring the violence component. Show me where more Blacks are arrested due to violence and drugs than whites. If you look you will find most if not a vast majority of Black people are incarcerated for drugs is due to possession and usage.

What I mean by "wait" is that, even though you seem to believe that drugs were deliberately introduced into black communities because racist whites wanted to "keep the black man down", you also state that white people use those same drugs to the same or a greater extent than black people do. If they were intended to cause problems in black communities, it backfired, no?

And I don't deny that most black people are incarcerated for non-violent offenses, but is it not true that most drug related violence is done by young black men?

Of course it backfired and provided the proof of intent. If whites were convicted at the same rate as Blacks are over drugs then we could claim there was no racism.

No its not true. What does that have to do with conviction and incarceration anyway?

 

[hadit]

And I would say, if you think they WOULD cause the breakdown of the family, tell me how. Obviously, I think differently. You assume that what you believe is self evident, I don't, but I don't think you're retarded because you do. So let's talk about it. I begin from the position that a strong family, when attacked from the outside, strengthens its bonds. If the police are targeting young men, for example, I would maintain that their fathers would insist that their boys stay as squeaky clean as possible. If drugs are injected into a community, the community should fight to keep them out. That's MY experience. So what happened?

And I would say you lack an understanding of the basic human dynamics of a family. Your family immediate takes a hit when your males are incarcerated. A father in prison cannot caution his son on how to deal with intentionally racist policing, drugs, women life etc. That son is going to be angry and rebel. The point your are missing is that the very fact that he has to stay cleaner than a white boy who is doing worse things than he is creates anger as well. Whites have just as large or larger problem with drugs but are not policed or incarcerated at the rate Blacks are.

Wait, I thought you said drugs were introduced into BLACK communities to cause problems for them. White people buy and use the drugs, sure. Where does most of the drug-related violence take place? You can't ignore the violence component to incarceration rates.

What do you mean by "wait"? I'm not ignoring the violence component. Show me where more Blacks are arrested due to violence and drugs than whites. If you look you will find most if not a vast majority of Black people are incarcerated for drugs is due to possession and usage.

What I mean by "wait" is that, even though you seem to believe that drugs were deliberately introduced into black communities because racist whites wanted to "keep the black man down", you also state that white people use those same drugs to the same or a greater extent than black people do. If they were intended to cause problems in black communities, it backfired, no?

And I don't deny that most black people are incarcerated for non-violent offenses, but is it not true that most drug related violence is done by young black men?

Of course it backfired and provided the proof of intent. If whites were convicted at the same rate as Blacks are over drugs then we could claim there was no racism.

No its not true. What does that have to do with conviction and incarceration anyway?

I contend that greater rates of violence lead to greater police attention, which leads to higher arrest rates. Now, if you can demonstrate that white people commit more drug related violent crimes than black people do, I'll have to change what I think.

 

[Asclepias]

And I would say you lack an understanding of the basic human dynamics of a family. Your family immediate takes a hit when your males are incarcerated. A father in prison cannot caution his son on how to deal with intentionally racist policing, drugs, women life etc. That son is going to be angry and rebel. The point your are missing is that the very fact that he has to stay cleaner than a white boy who is doing worse things than he is creates anger as well. Whites have just as large or larger problem with drugs but are not policed or incarcerated at the rate Blacks are.

Wait, I thought you said drugs were introduced into BLACK communities to cause problems for them. White people buy and use the drugs, sure. Where does most of the drug-related violence take place? You can't ignore the violence component to incarceration rates.

What do you mean by "wait"? I'm not ignoring the violence component. Show me where more Blacks are arrested due to violence and drugs than whites. If you look you will find most if not a vast majority of Black people are incarcerated for drugs is due to possession and usage.

What I mean by "wait" is that, even though you seem to believe that drugs were deliberately introduced into black communities because racist whites wanted to "keep the black man down", you also state that white people use those same drugs to the same or a greater extent than black people do. If they were intended to cause problems in black communities, it backfired, no?

And I don't deny that most black people are incarcerated for non-violent offenses, but is it not true that most drug related violence is done by young black men?

Of course it backfired and provided the proof of intent. If whites were convicted at the same rate as Blacks are over drugs then we could claim there was no racism.

No its not true. What does that have to do with conviction and incarceration anyway?

I contend that greater rates of violence lead to greater police attention, which leads to higher arrest rates. Now, if you can demonstrate that white people commit more drug related violent crimes than black people do, I'll have to change what I think.

BS. The Black community had very low rates of violence prior to the increased police presence. You obviously havent done your research.