"Unity"

[Mac-7]

Just like whites never turned down the more than 1 quinitilion dollars the government has handed them since America started to this very second.

I’m not shilling for unearned money from the government the way blacks are demanding reparations

 

[Curried Goats]

Yet here you are, begging us for scraps.

You're only critiquing your own frail fantasy there, Marvin. How impressed should anyone be by it?

What I advocate for is economic justice for the people who helped build your country and who you're too frail to look in the eye. Hence all the make believe.

 

[marvin martian]

You're only critiquing your own frail fantasy there, Marvin. How impressed should anyone be by it?

What I advocate for is economic justice for the people who helped build your country and who you're too frail to look in the eye. Hence all the make believe.

Who in this country today "built" something and didn't get compensated for it?

Not you, you've never done jack shit except beg me for my table scraps.

 

[Curried Goats]

I’m not shilling for unearned money from the government the way blacks are demanding reparations

It isn't unearned. What was unearned were the benefits white society experienced through the exploitation of Black American society. That you have to pretend this didn't happen is what makes your lot frail.

 

[eagle1462010]

That's okay, I fully understand what I'm dealing with.

I just try to keep things as simple as possible for you folks.

 

[Curried Goats]

Who in this country today "built" something and didn't get compensated for it?

Not you, you've never done jack shit except beg me for my table scraps.

Every Black American over the age of 65 and their families. You have heard of segregation right? Or did your educators think you to frail to learn about it?

 

[Harry Dresden]

I make a simple point Harry….you Unkotare , purple hair people, woke white guilt wackos and the rest of those who proclaim to cherish dark people are holding them down by not having the balls to talk about their culturally induced plight.
NO problem has ever been solved by refusing to talk about it.

you cherish dark people more than i do...thats why you cant stop talking about them.....your problem is you have never had any interaction with dark people like at work or sports or the military....you only know what you hear or some other in the same predicament tells you...

 

[Mac-7]

It isn't unearned. What was unearned were the benefits white society experienced through the exploitation of Black American society. That you have to pretend this didn't happen is what makes your lot frail.

For blacks alive today any handouts are unearned

 

[Curried Goats]

For blacks alive today any handouts are unearned

Because you're so uneducated you think segregation was how long ago?

 

[Curried Goats]

Segregation way back when does not entitle you to free money today

Ok, I hear you

Your going go donate your share to the Che Guavarra Charty

Its not free money Dipshit. Learn to logic.

When you economically disenfranchise people you are robbing from them. It's white America who robbed generation after generation of hard earned Black wealth. Wanting that wealth back in form of reparations isn't a hand out, that's called justice. The fact that you don't know this is just a testament to your shit white education.

 

[Mac-7]

Because you're so uneducated you think segregation was how long ago?

Segregation way back when does not entitle you to free money today

Ok, I hear you

You’re going to donate your share to the Che Guevara Charity Abortion Clinic

But I’m doubtful about that

 

[Curried Goats]

Segregation way back when does not entitle you to free money today

Ok, I hear you

You’re going to donate your share to the Che Guvuara Charity Abortion Clinic

But I’m doubtful about that

Again, not free money. How dumb are you whites that you don't understand what segregation was?

 

[tahuyaman]

Folks begging for free shit voted for Trump.

Lol.

 

[ThisIsMe]

The original Constitution allowed for human chattel slavery of men, women and children. Why do you frail fuckers fantasize about it like some inherently restrictive document? It and the men who wrote it were happy to use the power of government and society to restrict freedom and rights in people they didn't find deserving of them.

Uh huh? And what about now? See , you want to dwell on the bad, and the horrible stuff, that's all you look at. We got rid of those things in our constitution.

And yes, i like that it's restrictive, that's the whole point. To keep the power of the federal government in check. The cotus was supposed to keep our government small, but over the years, we've allowed it to get way too big, mostly by people who want it to have more power than it should have. It creates new beaurarcrasies all the time, and the people never question it. They just think that's what it's supposed to do. Hell, we even have people who think that the federal government is supposed to be all powerful and rule over everyone.

That's not what the cotus intended it to be.

 

[initforme]

Who in this country today "built" something and didn't get compensated for it?

Not you, you've never done jack shit except beg me for my table scraps.

Those making $50 per hour doing construction. That's basically not getting paid.

 

[Curried Goats]

Uh huh? And what about now? See , you want to dwell on the bad, and the horrible stuff, that's all you look at. We got rid of those things in our constitution.

The only thing I'm dwelling on here is your hilarious fantasy about the restrictive powers of the original Constitution.

And yes, i like that it's restrictive, that's the whole point.

How restrictive is a document that allows for human bondage of children, really?

To keep the power of the federal government in check. The cotus was supposed to keep our government small, but over the years, we've allowed it to get way too big, mostly by people who want it to have more power than it should have. It creates new beaurarcrasies all the time, and the people never question it. They just think that's what it's supposed to do. Hell, we even have people who think that the federal government is supposed to be all powerful and rule over everyone.

Again, how much is the government really being held in check by a document that allowed for some to use the power of government to protect their ownership of others as property?

That's not what the cotus intended it to be.

Because you say so? Based on what? Your fantasies about who the Founders were rather than the reality?

 

[ThisIsMe]

The only thing I'm dwelling on here is your hilarious fantasy about the restrictive powers of the original Constitution.

How restrictive is a document that allows for human bondage of children, really?

Again, how much is the government really being held in check by a document that allowed for some to use the power of government to protect their ownership of others as property?

Because you say so? Based on what? Your fantasies about who the Founders were rather than the reality?

The only thing I'm dwelling on here is your hilarious fantasy about the restrictive powers of the original Constitution.

It's no fantasy. The cotus was very deliberate in it's scope

How restrictive is a document that allows for human bondage of children, really?

It does? Show me that in the cotus....

Again, how much is the government really being held in check by a document that allowed for some to use the power of government to protect their ownership of others as property?

In the past, stop living in the past. It no longer says that today.

Because you say so? Based on what? Your fantasies about who the Founders were rather than the reality?

No, based on article 1 section 8, and then the 10th ammendment.

 

[Curried Goats]

It's no fantasy. The cotus was very deliberate in it's scope

That's not a very clear argument. They were clear that it was okay for some to own others as property. I wouldn't characterize that as particularly restrictive myself, but maybe we're grading on separate curves.

It does? Show me that in the cotus....

The part that allowed slave masters to count non free persons towards their voting power, for example.

In the past, stop living in the past. It no longer says that today.

I'm arguing today about your hilarious interpretation of the past. Be less of a bitch about it. If you're able.

No, based on article 1 section 8, and then the 10th ammendment.

What do either of those have to do with how the Constitution allowed for human chattel slavery?

 

[dblack]

That's not a very clear argument. They were clear that it was okay for some to own others as property. I wouldn't characterize that as particularly restrictive myself, but maybe we're grading on separate curves.

You seem to be missing the point. Deliberately, I'm sure. But it weakens your argument.

 

[Curried Goats]

You seem to be missing the point. Deliberately, I'm sure. But it weakens your argument.

What point? Maybe make one instead of alluding to one so I know what you're talking about.