tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post1389191317659068350..comments2024-03-16T05:00:38.826-04:00Comments on Egnorance: Segregation was liberal policymregnorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11431770851694587832noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-41505810717329944692012-10-25T21:18:37.707-04:002012-10-25T21:18:37.707-04:00“Obama won despite being black”.
You're kiddi...“Obama won despite being black”.<br /><br />You're kidding, right. Obama wouldn't even be in politics if he were white. He is the least qualified person elected president in US history. His whole con depends on his race. He won because he convinced enough white people that they will feel better about themselves if they vote for him. <br /><br />[The laws should be colorblind when society is color blind. As long as white privilege exists the laws should level the playing field.]<br /><br />Society will never be colorblind, because human beings aren't perfect. <br /><br />The law can be colorblind, however, and should be. You are the one who endorses racism in law. mregnorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11431770851694587832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-91805778806658704632012-10-25T16:58:39.139-04:002012-10-25T16:58:39.139-04:00“Obama won because he’s black” is a racist stateme...“Obama won because he’s black” is a racist statement, because only in the racist’s mind is it the black man who gets all the advantages. A more accurate, non-racist statement would be, “Obama won despite being black”.<br /><br />I object to anyone sitting in a pew for 20 years. The person they are listening too is invariably full of shit.<br /><br />The laws should be colorblind when society is color blind. As long as white privilege exists the laws should level the playing field.<br /><br />-KW<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-42709065764020025892012-10-25T13:07:37.961-04:002012-10-25T13:07:37.961-04:00@KW:
While we're on the topic of racism, answ...@KW:<br /><br />While we're on the topic of racism, answer this:<br /><br />Should the law be color-blind?mregnorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11431770851694587832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-67851485769063909102012-10-25T12:21:41.097-04:002012-10-25T12:21:41.097-04:00Oh the raaacism!
How about this racism:
The rea...Oh the raaacism! <br /><br />How about this racism:<br /><br />The reason Obama was elected is that he's black. That's his whole con-- if he were are white community organizer who never held a regular job with a record of not showing up in the state legislature, he wouldn't have been elected dog-catcher.<br /><br />And since you are soooo sensitive to raaaacism, could you point me to your objections about Obama sitting in the pews of his foaming racist/anti-semite preacher/spiritual advisor/best friend for 20 years?mregnorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11431770851694587832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3555199390227912207.post-14266020178486080242012-10-25T11:43:22.812-04:002012-10-25T11:43:22.812-04:00Another trip in the way back machine to find “libe...Another trip in the way back machine to find “liberal” racism. I put liberal in quotations because the people Egnor is talking about where socially conservative Democrats who soon switched to the warm embrace of the Republican Party.<br /><br />If you want to find racism today look no farther than the political leaders and pundits of the modern right. Why just a few days ago Mark Sanford said Obama will “throw a lot of spears” during the debate, and Sarah Palin referred to Obama’s “Shuck and Jive" on Libya.<br /><br />-KWAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com