DC Tom Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Its Jim in Anchorage. Strike two Anchorage is in Alaska, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 (edited) Its Jim in Anchorage. Strike two LMAO Edited June 21, 2011 by Booster4324 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 I guess I haven't paid much attention to Dave's history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 (edited) http://frontpagemag.com/2011/06/16/why-race-matters/ The war on Poverty has been a colossal failure. Dave maybe you should look at US historical crime rates especially violent crimes. here first- check the crimes per 100,000 My link and then here My link You should also check historical US birthrates. Also compare U.S. birthrates, crime rates,and poverty rates with countries with both greater and lesser degrees of social spending. Tell me what you find. Because to me that article is nonsense, not only can't the author prove causation he can't even prove correlation . Edited June 21, 2011 by ....lybob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 No doubt about the existance of a number of other significant factors, but we've had almost no constructive dialogue about race in this country because the first thing anyone does when they hear something they don't like is scream 'racism'. I guess I haven't paid much attention to Dave's history. I can tell you one way not to start a serious debate about race is to paint blacks as welfare thugs & killers, like the article did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveinElma Posted June 21, 2011 Author Share Posted June 21, 2011 I can tell you one way not to start a serious debate about race is to paint blacks as welfare thugs & killers, like the article did. Did you even read the article? I think you'd be more comfortable discussing this issue here. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/06/21/987175/-Nearly-1-in-6-Black-People-%28Officially%29-DONT-HAVE-A-DAMNED-JOB!!!!?via=siderec Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 I can tell you one way not to start a serious debate about race is to paint blacks as welfare thugs & killers, like the article did. Was it painting blacks as welfare thugs & killers, or painting welfare thugs & killers as black? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Was it painting blacks as welfare thugs & killers, or painting welfare thugs & killers as black? Couldn't tell you, I obviously didn't read the article. Don't have time either, I'm late for the Young Marxists meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Couldn't tell you, I obviously didn't read the article. Don't have time either, I'm late for the Young Marxists meeting. I don't believe you're young. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 I don't believe you're young. Someone has to teach the neophytes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 I can tell you one way not to start a serious debate about race is to paint blacks as welfare thugs & killers, like the article did. Sometimes you gotta call a spade, er, nevermind. I knew you were arch conservative, but simply wow. Moi? Just what goes into 'arch' conservatism these days anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Sometimes you gotta call a spade, er, nevermind. Moi? Just what goes into 'arch' conservatism these days anyway? Evidently it means you will take what is said on a contemptible website like that at face value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Who said that? Isn't his point that we have more poor people than ever despite the gumbint wasting billions/trillions of dollars? You should see what it's like to feel sorry for people that can't understand the difference between cursing the poor and cursing backward government policies. I know the concept is way too difficult for you to grasp, but it's quite likely that we'd have fewer poor people if we had fewer gov't handouts. But maybe only hard line right wingers like Daniel Patrick Moynihan think that way. Pathetic. ***Waaahhhhh, I'm going to ignore the issue and just call you a racist!!!!*** I'm sure Jesse and Al would be proud of you. So what would your government policy be to end poverty? It's easy for losers like you to whine and moan and rub your little spot, but what's your solution? No, I'm Dave! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Frankly, my "rep" on this board will be decided on what I say not by the brush you are trying to paint me with. Regardless, I don't give a damn. Oh no...booster and his imaginary friends on this board have already determined your rep. Didn't you know that? Booster is such an obvious liberal: the dismissive smugness, the superior tone...with absolutely nothing, in word or deed, that justifies either. It's like a veiled form of Moslon_Golden's old "being a liberal makes me an intellectual" shtick. Remember that? So the crazy rate of out-of-wedlock births that occurs in the black community is responsible for black high school graduates not being able to get a job? That's the real problem here: People running around with nothing but one corollary/statistic to make their point, and nobody with a hint of data that supports any sort of causal relationship. People emoting at an Oprah level, and, a-holes trying to score political points, on both sides, on the backs of black people. Here's some things I think we all can agree on: If your "culture" celebrates bad behavior, it is indefensible. Therefore, using your culture as a defense for your bad behavior is retarded. If your culture sucks, it's time to get a new one. If your culture celebrates bad behavior, and mine locks you up for it, and more people subscribe to mine, don't be shocked if your azz ends up in prison with nobody giving a flying F about you or your awful culture. Why should we? You are an assclown who celebrates bad behavior. I don't see how telling a black person that based on national stats, they are less able, individually, therefore, entitled to more "help", but not more or less than any other individual black person, because they are the same as every other black person...can in any way define "judging men based on the content of their character". Whose character? The man's or the entire demographic's? Isn't defining an entire race's character...as homogeneous....the very definition of prejudice? The entire point has been missed: creating a one size-fits-all government solution for black people sucks exactly as much as creating one for white people. Once again, we see that despite the noblest of motives, the method fails...to the degree that the motive becomes irrelevant. Same old pattern. Time to improve/remove the method. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Maybe if the dems and corporations (yes, mostly repubs) didn't encouraged the importation of poverty from Mexico in the form of illegal immigration and a dirt cheap labor force, there'd be a lot of real jobs out there for the poor (this of course includes, but is not exclusive to, inner city youth). The illegals started taking over the labor force in the LA/Southern California area way back when and quickly took over many of American's jobs and livelihood which turned the manual labor wage scale into a complete joke. It's time to weed out the illegals (in the form of cracking down on businesses with heavy fines) and start giving the disadvantaged Americans of this country be they black, brown or white (basically anyone who's here legally) a stepping stone into the American dream. Lack of real jobs and real wages is one of the biggest things holding this country back. Why can't businesses have the freedom to hire whoever they want? I hate this anti-free market xenophobic movement in the country. Racism is bad for business Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Oh no...booster and his imaginary friends on this board have already determined your rep. Didn't you know that? Booster is such an obvious liberal: the dismissive smugness, the superior tone...with absolutely nothing, in word or deed, that justifies either. It's like a veiled form of Moslon_Golden's old "being a liberal makes me an intellectual" shtick. Remember that? That's the real problem here: People running around with nothing but one corollary/statistic to make their point, and nobody with a hint of data that supports any sort of causal relationship. People emoting at an Oprah level, and, a-holes trying to score political points, on both sides, on the backs of black people. Here's some things I think we all can agree on: If your "culture" celebrates bad behavior, it is indefensible. Therefore, using your culture as a defense for your bad behavior is retarded. If your culture sucks, it's time to get a new one. If your culture celebrates bad behavior, and mine locks you up for it, and more people subscribe to mine, don't be shocked if your azz ends up in prison with nobody giving a flying F about you or your awful culture. Why should we? You are an assclown who celebrates bad behavior. I don't see how telling a black person that based on national stats, they are less able, individually, therefore, entitled to more "help", but not more or less than any other individual black person, because they are the same as every other black person...can in any way define "judging men based on the content of their character". Whose character? The man's or the entire demographic's? Isn't defining an entire race's character...as homogeneous....the very definition of prejudice? The entire point has been missed: creating a one size-fits-all government solution for black people sucks exactly as much as creating one for white people. Once again, we see that despite the noblest of motives, the method fails...to the degree that the motive becomes irrelevant. Same old pattern. Time to improve/remove the method. What are you talking about???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 So what would your government policy be to end poverty? It's easy for losers like you to whine and moan and rub your little spot, but what's your solution? No, I'm Dave! First, I wouldn't be as stupid and arrogant as you and the politicians who think we can "end poverty". Second, I wouldn't continue to enable and encourage poverty by providing cradle-to-grave handouts to people who are able minded and able bodied enough to provide for themselves. Especially when those handouts are at a level that almost ensures those people will remain in poverty and not have an opportunity to lift themselves out. If anything, assistance needs to be greater than it is now. But it can't be endless. Third, I'd eliminate a significant portion of the endless government bureaucracy that controls this area. We probably need four different 'poverty' programs, not 400 or 4,000 or however many exist. We flush billions down the toilet on government paper shuffling. Fourth, I'd fix the schools by outlawing teacher's unions, reinstalling standards of conduct and discipline and establishing curriculums based on the basics. Focusing on 'promoting self esteem' for kids that don't know how to read, write or add is pretty !@#$ing stupid. Fifth, I'd change the tax code so that baby making wasn't an means to generate income. (I'd change just about everything else in the tax code too). Finally, I'd continue to laugh at your foot-stamping angry liberal routine because no matter what, you'd still spew unoriginal ignorance and cry about something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Third, I'd eliminate a significant portion of the endless government bureaucracy that controls this area. We probably need four different 'poverty' programs, not 400 or 4,000 or however many exist. We flush billions down the toilet on government paper shuffling. Except that each state has at least three of their own, each of which is overseen and partially funded by departments of the federal government, in addition to many municipal programs... Not that I'm disagreeing; the bureaucracy serving the "war on poverty" is obscenely excessive, self-serving, and counter-productive. But so would the solution be, I'm afraid. Focusing on 'promoting self esteem' for kids that don't know how to read, write or add is pretty !@#$ing stupid. Judging by Dave's self-esteem, it works... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 Except that each state has at least three of their own, each of which is overseen and partially funded by departments of the federal government, in addition to many municipal programs... Not that I'm disagreeing; the bureaucracy serving the "war on poverty" is obscenely excessive, self-serving, and counter-productive. But so would the solution be, I'm afraid. I was going to write "decide if it's a federal or state problem and completely eliminate the infrastructure for the other one" but got tired of editing. If it's a state issue, than let each state tax to fund it. The whole 'federal funding' for state/local issues is a huge cluster!@#$ that has resulted in enormous duplication of efforts at every level of government. Somehow it takes 5,000 people at the US DOE to figure out how to divy up federal grant monies to 50 states? Insane. Just !@#$ing insane. Judging by Dave's self-esteem, it works... I bet he got an A in "Appreciating Diverse Cultures" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted June 22, 2011 Share Posted June 22, 2011 (edited) What are you talking about???? Does affirmative action give money/placement based on individual achievement, or does it simply treat every black kid who gets through high school the exact same? How does a black kid who's parents are high net worth from suburban Atlanta(who I know)....end up being treated the exact same affirmative action-wise, as a black kid from a single parent home in gangland(who I also know)? If they both ended up with the same test scores which one worked harder to get there? Answer: wrong, no matter what you said, because you don't know either kid, do you? Which one has more ability? Which one has more needs? I could fill a convention center with the things you don't know about these kids....but yet you think affirmative action, and all the other poor(read: targeted towards blacks)/social justice programs are wonderful one-size-fits-all methods for solving the problem. How many more decades of your failing methods must we endure? You know? I don't know why I even bother. You have no idea that they are completely different people, do you? To you they are just "black kids we have a moral obligation to care for", aren't they? Edited June 22, 2011 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts