I said
less than 1%. And we don't know how much less. It could be 0.5% or 0.1%.
Your idea of "considerable diversity" is laughable. Since when was two black faces considerable?
Well that's a random sample of the crowd. If it's 2 faces in 200 people, that 1%. The examples, from the photos you supplied, suggest a percentage higher than that. And even 1% of the total population would represent a large fraction of the total black population. More than voted for Obama. If you can't handle statistics 101, I guess I can't do anything about that except
.
Well considering i'm black I can honestly say I did no such thing.
Then perhaps you are just one of the victims of the democratic party and black leadership over the years … and don't even realize it.
It's not "liberals" that create failure in schools.
Who else should we blame when it's liberals who've been in control of the education system for the past 4 or so decades as it's gone downhill?
It's unstable homes, lack of ambition and living without a clear goal in life.
Far poorer people than the majority of those in the black community in this country are full of ambition, have stable homes and clear goals in life. My grandparents came to this country with NOTHING but the shirt on their backs. Not even speaking any English. Into a country that wasn't always friendly to immigrants. But still managed to become quite successful. Again, you are just pointing to problems that are, in large part, self-made, or fostered by the leadership that the black community has freely chosen for itself the last 4 to 5 decades.
Who do you think created the current 72% (!) out of wedlock birth rate for blacks (
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29754561 )? Whites didn't do that, but democrat-pushed welfare and social agendas did. And unfortunately, those same agendas are now starting to affect the white community as well, leading to almost 30 percent out of wedlock birth rates there. Rates which were unheard of before liberal social agendas and welfare entitlement *changed* America. Hate to tell you and Obama, but *change* isn't always the wonderful thing it's cracked up to be.
The #1 predictor for success in life is marriage. This is an uncontestable fact. Yet marriage is the very institution that liberals have been openly attacking for decades. In 1970, near the start of the democrat instigated War On Poverty, only 13% of families in the US were headed by single parents. By 1996, over a quarter of all children in the US lived in single parent homes. Now 40% of all babies are born to unwed mothers. Democrat agendas have bread dependancy, bad decision making, and because of the feelings of entitlement they've fostered, victimhood.
And the black public education system has never succeeded.
You sure? Look at literacy rates:
http://www.arthurhu.com/index/literacy.htm . In 1947, 11% of blacks age 14 and over were illiterate (compared with 1.8% of whites). Amongst blacks in the 14-24 age group it was 4.4%. By 1959, illiteracy of blacks had dropped to 7.5% (the rate dropped 0.2% amongst whites). It was down to just 1.2% in the critical 14-24 age group. Blacks had made huge gains in education, long before modern day liberals/socialists entered the picture in 1964. You know the current literacy rate for blacks is? Well this Washington Post article from 2005 might give you a clue:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/24/AR2005122400701.html
Literacy experts and educators say they are stunned by the results of a recent adult literacy assessment, which shows that the reading proficiency of college graduates has declined in the past decade, with no obvious explanation. … snip … Only 41 percent of graduate students tested in 2003 could be classified as "proficient" in prose -- reading and understanding information in short texts -- down 10 percentage points since 1992. Of college graduates, only 31 percent were classified as proficient -- compared with 40 percent in 1992.
The fact is that literacy rates in public school and college age children began dropping after the advent of modern, mostly liberal controlled, public education. Think there might be a connection?
Also I don't believe it's any liberal policies or Democrats that cause blacks to feel victimized.
I guess you never listen to the speeches of democrat leaders and the leaders in the black community.
They are full of statements telling blacks how they've been victimized. Or look at the speeches of the folks who have been running the NAACP. Or Acorn. Or the curriculum in public schools (which more and more promotes the concept of "social justice", especially in schools that are predominantly black).
Rather than just dismiss, folks like you really should listen to what Larry Elder has to say. For example, he points out (
http://townhall.com/columnists/Larr...embraces_harmful_left-wing_policies/page/full ) that despite progress towards Reverend Martin Luther King's vision of a color blind society, Julian Bond, who has been Chairman of the NAACP from 1998 to 2010, said "we want [the NAACP] to be a social justice organization … snip … Our mission is to fight racial discrimination and provide social justice … snip … It is popular to say that we are in a post civil rights period, but we don't believe that." As Edler said, by "beast", he "wasn't referring to issues that today threaten the prosperity, safety and integrity of the 'black community' like high urban dropout rates; the opposition to vouchers, which allows the continued near monopoly of underperforming inner-city government schools; the inability of workers to deposit their Social Security contributions into personal savings and investment accounts; teen pregnancy; never-wed fathers and never-wed mothers dependent upon government, the misguided endorsement of race-based college admissions, which lead to a dispropotionately high dropout rate; and crime". By "beast", Bond meant "anti-black racism".
As Elder noted, "In 1911, Booker T. Washington said: 'There is [a] class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs - partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs. … There is a certain class of race-problem solvers who don't want the patient to get well, because as long as the disease holds out they have not only an easy means of making a living, but also an easy medium through which to make themselves prominent before the public." Bond is one of them. Are you? Because, Juniversal, I think that's exactly what it looks like we are now seeing in the NAACP and democratic party.
It's simply a matter of being ultra sensitive to any hint of discrimination or racism thanks to it being so deeply ingrained into the American psyche and culture. Afterall it did shape our society and social heirachy.
You really need to get over it and "move on" if you hope to achieve anything. Wasn't that a phrase democrats chanted not too long ago? "Move on"?
:
I would say having to agressively fight for equal rights in the face of opposition had a larger role in creating the victim status as opposed to Democrats or Liberals making us believe we were victims.
As Elder notes in his book "Showdown: confronting bias, lies, and the special interests that divide America",
In April 2001, a Cincinnati police officer shot and killed a nineteen-year-ol unarmed black suspect. Several days of riots followed, with graphic images in the media of black thugs beating whites. Black Cincinnati defense attorney Ken Lawson, who specializes in police brutality cases, said the rioting "gave whites a better understanding of what it feels like to be a random target of violence just because of the color of your skin." Oh, if only whites saw blacks' pain!
Predictably, NAACP President Kweisi Mfume jetted to Cincinnati. "I'm here because there's Cincinnatis in every state of the union. Every state of this union!" Bullhorn in hand, Mfume called for the grand jury investigating this matter to act swiftly, "Because without any justice there's not going to be any peace."
That April 2001 shooting brought the total number of blacks killed by Cincinnati cops since 1995 to fifteen. But in six of the cases, guns were drawn on officers; in four, officers were threatened with other instruments; and one case resulted in a Cincinnati officer being killed with two others being injured. The police actions seem, if not entirely defensible, certainly far short of clear-cut police brutality, racial profiling, or "random targeting.
… snip …
In the three months following the riots and during the intense scrutiny and federal investigation focused on the police department, there were seventy-five gunshot victims -- most of them black -- compared to eleven in the same three months the previous year. One analyst said "The city's cops, fearful of being accused of racism, have simply pulled back from aggressive policing. Arrests are down 50 percent since mid-April."
Still, Cincinnati activists chant the victicrat party line. The Reverend Clarence Wallace said, "They have created the criminal culture. We have asked for help in these pockets of the city and so far we have heard nothing. We know it will not be a quick solution, but until some of these communities are strengthened, you are going to have this crime." The reverend also noted that lawlessness would subside when the city's black community is given financial help."
Money? Lack of opportunity? The previous summer, an amusement park just outside the city imported one thousand young Eastern Europeans for summer jobs because two few locals applied. Still following the violence, leaders demanded the creation of thousands of summer jobs to forestall another rampage.
Memo to Reverend Wallace: Which causes the bigger problem for the black community -- The "absence of financial help" or the absence of black fathers?"
Got an answer to that question, Juniversal?
I don't know if it's paticularly realistic to believe the poverty rate would have continued to decline at a steady rate if it wasn't for welfare programs. The structural segregation and poverty the black community suffers alone works as a road block to completely overcoming poverty as a whole.
Perhaps the black community should head this message, instead of your victicrat one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhPqmJynQPU&feature=player_embedded#! "Victicrat (Damn it Feels Good to be a Victim)"
Attacking someone because of their political allegiances doesn't make one racist.
But calling them the "N-word" just before you attack them does. In fact, courts of law in the US have ruled that voicing a racial term before an attack is evidence of a racist hate crime. And implying that a black man shouldn't be selling anything that doesn't support Obama is also evidence. Especially, when afterwords, the attackers accuse the person they attacked of being an Uncle Tom. That's most certainly a racist sentiment.
And by the way, what was Sherrod doing when she said
I haven't seen such mean-spirited people as I've seen lately over this issue of health care. Some of the racism we thought was buried resurfaced. Now we endured eight years of the Bushes and we didn't do the stuff these republicans are doing because you have a black President.
other than accusing republicans of being racist merely because of their political allegiance and dislike of socialist health care. Sound like you have a double standard, Juniversal.
And Gladney selling Obama buttons is not proof that he's not a conservative.
But yet you seem to think that his selling Tea Party buttons is proof of just the opposite? Why is one proof and the other not?
It seems you have some great knowledge none of these conservative blogs have because most label him a "black conservative".
Well, in this case, it appears most didn't dig deep enough. Or they'd like him to be conservative because that makes the story seem better. I can only deal with the facts, and the fact is that Gladney was selling Obama buttons at events where Obama spoke just a few months before the Tea Party event. I'd call that evidence that he was a-political and more interested in feeding his family than anything else. Of course, after the beating he received, he might be more inclined to call himself a conservative now or let himself be called a conservative without objecting.
Beaten badly enough to be heavily sedated and placed in a wheel chair but didn't have nary a scratch or limp during the confrontation?
Have you never hurt yourself … especially a back injury … and not realized it at the time of the injury? Have you never experienced what a dose of adrenaline will do? Why you're a lucky person.
This conservative blog actually has a nice dissection of the conference.
So you prefer them being "terrorists" to "racists"? Suit yourself.
He claims he called him a negro.
But we already know McCowan is a serial liar. His first claim was that he was walking to his car and Gladney out of the blue assaulted him. Which clearly doesn't fit the facts or statements of eyewitnesses. So why do you believe McCowan just because he now claims he *just* called Gladney a "negro"? And besides, do you think "negro" would be any less racist a term when the video from the NAACP event has the speaker saying
I was really struck by a front page picture of this guy, which we called, a Negro, i mean that we call him a Negro in the fact that he works for not for our people but against our people. In the old days, we call him an Uncle Tom.
with McCowan standing next to him laughing the whole time?
It may be hard to find them now as google is awash with the recent examples.
