Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 6 votes

Obama pulls a Bill Cosby


  • Please log in to reply
440 replies to this topic

#406 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,298 posts
  • LocationMontford

Posted 24 May 2013 - 11:13 PM

so instead of corporate buzz words remove the huddle buzz words?

 

i'm down with that.



#407 googoodan

googoodan

    Memberest

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,648 posts
  • LocationBayside

Posted 24 May 2013 - 11:19 PM

Common sense tells you it'll never work since both sides constantly do it

#408 SZ James

SZ James

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,767 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 11:36 PM

Common sense tells you it'll never work since both sides constantly do it

Urge to kill...rising

#409 Kevin Greene

Kevin Greene

    _Is it 1996 Yet?_

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,948 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 11:37 PM

http://nativeamerica...ian-Slavery.htm

In case people didn't know...

 

Anyone have stats for the number of Native American Indians slaughtered vs those sent to slavery.?

Those silly 17th/18th Century Europeans thought of Indians more as Buffalo than people me thinks.



#410 PhillyB

PhillyB

    that jungle football

  • ALL-PRO
  • 19,826 posts
  • Locationthird spur east of the sun

Posted 24 May 2013 - 11:45 PM

well until pope paul 3 issued a papal bull in 1537 banning the enslavement of the native americans by declaring that they were, in fact, human beings, they were counted as the spawns of satan (literally) and therefore worthy of death because theological understandings at the time suggested that shem, ham, and japheth's lineages were accounted for in europe, asia and africa, and since the bible is literally true where could those brown people have come from other than beezlebub himself? duh

 

of course that didn't stop anyone from treating them pretty much like buffalo anyway but i guess it wasn't officially sanctioned by the church anymore if that makes anyone feel any better



#411 googoodan

googoodan

    Memberest

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,648 posts
  • LocationBayside

Posted 24 May 2013 - 11:57 PM

well until pope paul 3 issued a papal bull in 1537 banning the enslavement of the native americans by declaring that they were, in fact, human beings, they were counted as the spawns of satan (literally) and therefore worthy of death because theological understandings at the time suggested that shem, ham, and japheth's lineages were accounted for in europe, asia and africa, and since the bible is literally true where could those brown people have come from other than beezlebub himself? duh

of course that didn't stop anyone from treating them pretty much like buffalo anyway but i guess it wasn't officially sanctioned by the church anymore if that makes anyone feel any better


It was annulled a year later but only applied to those who converted to Christianity

#412 PhillyB

PhillyB

    that jungle football

  • ALL-PRO
  • 19,826 posts
  • Locationthird spur east of the sun

Posted 25 May 2013 - 12:10 AM

well european hegemony and exploitation of meso and south america wasn't harmed by it, nor was similar treatment of native americans early on, or later on even

 

good thing for manifest destiny huh



#413 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,506 posts

Posted 25 May 2013 - 12:22 AM

from sea to shining seaaaaa.



#414 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,115 posts

Posted 25 May 2013 - 01:47 AM

 

 

 

Not to be rude, but Zod, you realize you just said "interesting read" to the very paper you posted earlier in this thread?

 

And the very quote Floppin just pasted was the quote Godspin pasted a couple pages ago?

Zod's post of the article: http://www.carolinah...19#entry2240725

 

Godspin's Quote: http://www.carolinah...osby/?p=2241273

 

Edit: tbh, threads like this make me wonder how the Tinderbox would go if we were all forced to post anonymously :P

 

 

lmbo

 

i heavily insinuated that he didn't read it because the conclusion actually aligns with my argument

 

then this dude had the nerve to go "interesting read!"

 

im dying



#415 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,115 posts

Posted 25 May 2013 - 01:49 AM

 

so are black ppl more likely to be a part of the "welfare culture"



#416 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,115 posts

Posted 25 May 2013 - 01:50 AM

Native Americans didn't sell their own to the highest bidder. Very distinct dif in the two.

 

 

no. YOU guys are the ones jumping to conclusions and its very disturbing to be painted as a racist without the mere attempt to get more to the post. at least mav dug and tried to see where i was coming from.

 

you can pin me on stuff when im wrong etc. i have no problems ever admiting I'm wrong.

 

but to come across with this self righteous piety racial doberman gang chintzy punk garbage is for 14 year olds.

 

follow the topic and the posts. i said what i said.mav comes in and goes do what? i respond to give more details and thats it.

 

hahaha

 

getout.gif



#417 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,115 posts

Posted 25 May 2013 - 01:54 AM

You still don't get it. You are so eager to find racism and paint it with that brush that you are willfully ignoring the actual conversation. It's lazy.

 

*sees paper he cited in defense of his unfounded position that actually contradicts his argument*

 

Interesting read, thanks!



#418 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,115 posts

Posted 25 May 2013 - 01:59 AM

Zod: "Are blacks capable?"

 

 

You: "As a whole, no."

 

This is a great message for someone who rehabilitiates inmates to espouse, which I believe I've read you mention is your job. Make sure you let them know that the system is racist (but only towards them). Few more generations of folks learning this message and we'll pity ourselves right out of this situation altogether.

 

not my job, just know the ppl who ran the organization until the sequester killed their funding. also they don't "rehabilitiate" (sic), they help to reintegrate. there's a difference.

 

also you're still posting a straw man. tell me, are you always this resistant to the scientific process? or is it only when literature fails to support lew rockwell's gut feelings?

 

e: oh and i'm the only one in this thread who has advocated actual intervention, yet the straw man you're attacking just wants to "pity ourselves right out of this situation altogether"



#419 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,115 posts

Posted 25 May 2013 - 02:41 AM



Mainly because everything you have posted, while legitimate social issues, fails to address the question at hand.

 

you literally defended yourself with an article that suggests that these "legitimate social issues" are at the heart of the unreasonably high single-parent home rate.

 


Also, only a complete paranoid race obsessive person would assume it came from stormfront. Its everywhere in the media. You should calm down and not assume everyone has a white hood in their closet. I had never heard of stormfront before so I googled it the other day. Spent about thirty seconds on their site, shook my head, and haven't been back. Its sad such ignorance has such a large following.

 

 

so when they blame black ppl for their problems, how is that different than when you blame black ppl for their problems?

 


 

All of your stances have come undone by the simple fact that things are worse now than they were from 1890-1960 when there was more racism, more oppression. more poverty, and less government programs. If anything it is a testament of how strong black families are, being able to survive much tougher times a century ago.

 

"all of your stances have come undone"

 

*posts statistics that he cannot even begin to interpret*

 

*poses false dichotomies rather than articulate his position*

 

*posts articles in defense of his stormfront bullshit that actually argue against his own fuging position llllooooollllll*

 


 

Yet you say today they are not capable of living lawful lives and raising strong families because of today's racism/oppression/effects of slavery. I don't accept that. History tells us not to accept that.

 

 

whose history? white history?

 


 

So what factors have caused a nose dive in minority marriages since 1960? I have no clue, but I know it is not the things you list because history tells us.

 

 

no poo

 

also this is equivalent to saying "i have no clue about physics but i do know that string theory is bullshit." do you have no clue, or are you reluctant to post what you actually believe?



#420 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,115 posts

Posted 25 May 2013 - 02:41 AM


 

One theory is that welfare has contributed to the breakdown of not just black families, but all poor families. Black families are affected disproportionately because they are more likely to be in poverty, which I can certainly accept has to do with systematic racism/oppression/etc. 

 

 

i assume you're using "theory" in the colloquial sense because this is treading dangerously to welfare queen bullshit, and completely fuging ignores studies showing just how much harder it is for black ppl to get a job

 


 

 

This guy is the one that brought this to my attention. Someone had posted it this video in an article discussing the issue on a news site. I found it much more plausible than the things you are saying, which doesn't hold up in a historical context.

 

thomas sowell is of the chicago school of economics. you want to talk about historical context? read up on chile and bolivia. i appreciate the effort you exerted in finding a black person who has a history of spewing the same dumb bullshit, but it's still dumb bullshit.

 

the best part is when he's all "you're assuming there's a predestined amount of unemployment" as if full employment would ever exist in a capitalist society. capitalists LIKE unemployment; it drives down wages, raises productivity (remember how productivity has been increasing for decades but wages have stagnated in that time period) and keeps people from striking. his arguments (chicago school economics) are entirely idealistic and unattainable, because they rely on the belief that there can actually be a market where none of the assumptions of free markets are violated; that government intervention is never necessary. it's fantasy poo that should not be applied to the real world (i would say "cannot be applied to the real world" but the southern cone of south america shows that these dipshits really are True Believers).

 

further, he employed the exact same tactic that you, and others, have consistently resorted to in the tinderbox: insinuate a causal relationship without substantiation, and dismiss evidence in favor of dumb gut feelings. in other words, “Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”

 

tbh i never pegged you as a right winger but welp here we are, debating the validity of chicago school economics

 


It also makes sense in a historical sense as welfare became more prevalent in the 60's, exactly when poor families of all colors started to break down. Could government money have replaced the need for fathers of all colors in the home? I have no idea, but I am willing to listen, as long as it makes sense and is backed up by data.

 

"i have no idea, but let me tell you about how correlation=causation"

 


I also think of it in terms of my own family. As I have said, I have family in this same situation. Poor, teen mothers, on government assistance, doesn't want to be married. I have to ask myself if there was no government assistance, would she be more likely to get married? I think she would have to. It would not be possible to be young, uneducated, and a mom on her own. It would require two parents in the home. I don't see how they could survive otherwise.

 

you can't be bothered to read a single peer-reviewed article, yet you expect me to give a poo about your anecdotes? what's worse is, this isn't even an anecdote; you're describing an imaginary situation.

 


So what I am considering now is that the answer isn't just about black families, but families of all colors living in poverty. Could government assistance negated the need for women to be married and raise children. replacing the bread winner with itself? Maybe so. Is welfare needed? I think it is. So I have no idea how to go about fixing this issue.

 

the article you defended yourself with, the "interesting read, thanks!" article, concluded that economic uncertainty significantly contributes to the single parent home rate in black families. meanwhile, you're arguing in favor of GREATER economic uncertainty (despite the chicago school's bullshit: cut welfare -> ??? -> profit!). jesus fuging christ where exactly does this type of argument fly?

 

I know I know... racist, stormfront

 

lol




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com