Congressional Black Caucus: Judging by color of skin not content of character

CBC’s Cleaver: We would be ‘marching on the White House’ if Obama weren’t president


I don't think this admission surprises anyone.

:exactly: Love this from the comments section.

Also the CBC should be thankful Obama is only half white....because if was all white + really hated them the black unemployment rate would be 34 percent!

None of this matters anyway....they will all still vote for him!

Shouldn't make a damned bit of difference if he's Bill Clinton, Barak Obama, or Mr. Magoo. Step up to the pump or else us honkies out here will think the racism lies firmly in your camp.

Asshole!

Imagine the outrage if a group of people came out and said, "we're really concerned about the amount of white people that are unemployed."


Anyways is the high unemployment amongst blacks because of the NBA lockout? Good thing the NFL got their shit together otherwise this would be catastrophic!

Yeah, 2012 could get tricky. Obama loses the election some will say that the election was "stolen" like in 2000 and 2004. Not a good time to have just bought that loft condo in downtown Augusta - unless you have great fire insurance that is.

Obama wins we get flushed that much further down the shitter.

Now if we had a black Republican or Libertarian.....would most blacks vote skin color or political tradition? That would be one wild ride!

The reaction would probably depend in large part on whether white people were in fact unemployed in larger numbers than any other group.

Obviously unemployment is bad no matter who you are. But identifying gaps based on race or any number of other factors can be a helpful part of finding a solution.

Not that Emanuel "Sugar-Coated Satan Sandwich" Cleaver isn't an idiot.

Imagine the outrage if there were all-white colleges, or a National Association for the Advancement of White People, or a United Caucasian College Fund.

Because history and context don't matter, kids.

Do you find NOW offensive as well?

NOW is offensive because it has no problem throwing women that it doesn't like under the bus nor does it have a problem ignoring the plight of women around the world if it fits their leftist agenda.

Tafkats has a point. That's not to say some of these organization aren't enabling and picks up the way wrong causes to fight in the name of fairness, but a century ago, they existed for a damn good reason.

I'll give the CBC credit for opening up to their double standards. But a shitty president is a shitty president, regardless of skin color.

Imagine if that had been a black guy on the cover...

Was that an actual cover?

Take out the image and look at what is being discussed. Ten Lubak asked what would happen if people were complaining about the amount of white people that are unemployed. I posted a cover about just that. As to what would happen if the cover was about black men, isn't that what this thread was about?

Yes.

Meh, the subscription was free. I like free.

I realized that. I was agreeing wth Lubak as well as saying that there are few if any major publications that would dare post a similar picture of a black man on their cover, IMO.

Not specifically. It's about the double standard Obama has gotten with the Congressional Black Caucus. Heck, even the first black president wasn't given this much of a free ride.

The topic does tangentially refer to the the free pass Obama's getting among blacks because he's half black. They say pretty plainly that a white guy in the White House would've been treated worse.

Or a White History Month.

This subject would come up all the time in our mandatory Army "ethnic appreciation" indoctrination.

The idiots who like to whine about how there isn't a "White History Month" or a "National Association for the Advancement of White People" fail to take into account that these things aren't necessary when you're already in a position of privilege.

Was it sexist that there was a women's suffrage movement in the early 20th century but no men's suffrage movement? No, because men already had suffrage. If you're fighting to advance somebody who's already privileged relative to everyone else, you're not fighting for equality -- you're being a supremacist.

That's just ridicular.

"Black History Month" and the NAACP aren't comparable. While there may have been a need for the latter, the former is exclusionary, and unnecessary. Agreed that those crying for a "White History Month" are making a silly argument, but there are blacks who aren't wild about "BHM" because they they realize that it can contribute to whatever race related issues our culture has.

History is history. If the topic is blacks in this country, it's American history. If it's a study of the their cultures previous to their arrival in this country, it's World history. The subject should be regarded and taught as an integral part of the whole. It doesn't need to have a month any more than any other nationality or ethnicity. It isn't as though contemporary American culture is still failing to embrace the contributions and influences of those who presently or historically laid claim to African ancestry.

It's also interesting to note that often the same voices who will dismiss or deride nationalism will hold ethnocentrism sacrosanct.

That's right, we did. We suffered way more than the women!

Or something like that...

But only when the ethnicity involved is not of white European descent. Otherwise, it's as bad as nationalism.

Which is all too easy to claim, regardless of fact, just because it was once historically true for a small percentage of whites.

Spend 10 uninterrupted minutes in any part of rural Virginia, then come back and tell us how "privileged" those 26-fingered toe-headed cracker assholes are. Maybe before you say one more god damned word about racism, you should reflect on the phrase, "Physician, heal thyself."

To expand on that last point: With the political correctness venom having been steadily seeping into this country's educational system for, bare minimum, the last 30 years, absolutely yes we need a "white history month." Fellas like Thomas Edison, Alexander Graham Bell, Henry Ford, et al., absolutely should be emphasized as having been white. Why? Because, for one thing, white Americans have done more to drive modern civilization farther, faster, than any other ethnicity. That's a stone cold bitch-it's-in-your-face-fucking-take-it fact. If there's going to be racial separatism in our educational system, which I frankly don't agree there should be, then it at least ought to be accurate.

Want another? Do ya? Here you are, then:

George Washington Carver. Black inventor. Of...

Fucking peanut butter.

Werner Von Braun. Inventor of the V2 rocket.

Sammich.

Manned American space program.

Sammich...

First man on the fucking moon.

FUCK yo' sammich.

Every XMas we take part in a program to send poor Appalachian single parents basic items for a decent holiday. Not bragging, just encouraging others who might be interested in such a program.

Gotta agree with John Castle there - the concept that Denzel Washington's son is less privileged than a Appalachian Coal Miner's kid is patently absurd.

Indeed, there's only one group that's legally discriminated against now in this country. And while it's true that the average white middle class person has several perceptional advantages over the average insert minority here, many white's aren't advantaged in any way. The perception of being white trash is just as limiting in your career development and earning potential as being a minority.

The difference is, said white trash can be legally discriminated against, and doesn't have the same protections (unless of course it's female white trash) because of a need to adjust our society to be equal in other ways.

And this part I disagree with. They are already emphasized in American history because of this, and of course racism was far more prevalent then compared to today, so they weren't playing on a level playing field with competitors from minority groups.

Doesn't take away from their accomplishments which were tremendous, but it does point out the hypocrisy of saying 'You guys didn't do any of this shit.'