What you screamin', w-diddy? Nobody can trip on you like that.
And you know that I have your back on that one.
There shall be no mercy.
101 things that the Mozilla browser can do that Internet Explorer cannot.
Posted on 11/22/2002 7:25:25 PM PST by where's_the_Outrage?
NASHINGTO- Teddy Roosevelt, sitting proudly on his oil-W painted horse in the White House room with his name, must have been horrified at Dr. Condoleezza Rice.
As President Bush's national security advisor, she should have known better. She wasn't supposed to say that. Not in a White House peopled with conservative Republicans. Not to a group of black columnists representing major newspapers from around the country.
Not in the Roosevelt Room.
''Race matters in America,'' Rice said. ''It has, it always has. Maybe there will be a day when it doesn't, but I suspect that it will for a long time to come.''
For the record, Rice didn't stutter or backtrack at the end of her interview with the Trotter Group. Instead, she did something that black conservatives aren't known for: She publicly acknowledged the reality and validity of the race question.
Now before you right-wingers get your boxers in a bunch, take a breath. She didn't go Al Sharpton on us, pledging to support reparations. She didn't say that Bush would apologize for the U.S. government's role in the slave trade.
But Rice did increase her credibility with us by affirming her place in the continuing cultural and political struggle that black people in the United States are engaged in - and she did it on her own terms.
Black conservatives, take note: It's OK to admit that race is still a problem in this country. You don't have to sink into denial. The sky won't fall down. The ground won't swallow you up.
It doesn't mean that you have to join Jesse Jackson's Rainbow Coalition, take Congresswoman Maxine Waters to lunch or join the NAACP.
It's safe to take your heads out of the sand and face the truth: While the United States has made tremendous progress on race, it still has a long way to go.
The December 2002/January 2003 edition of Savoy magazine has an extensive article on a class-action discrimination lawsuit that has been filed against Xerox. The plaintiffs contend that sales territories are segregated, promotions are race-based and harassment can take the form of hanging nooses being displayed in some Xerox facilities.
Xerox denies any discrimination, but there is plenty of reason to doubt its denial. According to Savoy writer Marjorie Whigham-Desir, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission dismisses about 80 percent of the complaints lodged by citizens against employers believed to be discriminatory. But Whigham-Desir reported that the EEOC has affirmed the group and individual complaints against Xerox, finding that ''reasonable cause exists to believe'' the charges that the plaintiffs have made.
And in case you Bill Clinton-haters out there are wondering, this is the 2002 Bush EEOC, not that old, tired Clinton-era model.
So maybe Rice isn't alone in the Bush White House. Maybe the GOP is slowing veering away from the Republican Party of 1964, which dealt a fatal blow to race relations during the GOP Convention led by Sen. Barry Goldwater's Cow Palace Republicans in San Francisco. These Republicans were so hostile toward blacks that Hall-of-Famer and convention attendee Jackie Robinson said: ''I now believe I know how it felt to be a Jew in Hitler's Germany.''
At least we can take comfort in knowing that the Bush administration, whatever it's other faults may be, doesn't buy into the lies that have blocked qualified blacks from serving at the highest levels of government. Certainly, it's a good sign that Rice and Secretary of State Colin Powell hold two of the top four slots in the Bush White House, a point not lost on Rice.
''I think it says to people that there aren't boundaries in which black Americans are not supposed to play,'' she said. ''I think that's an extremely important message to the rest of the world.
''I am African American and proud of it,'' Rice said later. ''I wouldn't have it any other way. I do not believe that it has limited who I am or what I can become.''
Conservative or not, I can respect that. And frankly, it's easier to respect people with whom you disagree when you know you share an appreciation for your common experiences. And so under Teddy Roosevelt's watchful, if skeptical gaze, Condoleezza Rice - a fan of Motown, Clarence ''Gatemouth'' Brown and Kool and the Gang as well as Brahms - gave and gained a lot of respect last week.
David Person's column appears each Friday on the Commentary page. E-mail: davidpe@htimes.com; phone 532-4362.
Your acts very much fit the bill for a Limosuine Liberal Lady, right down to the reference to "American Negros" and your obvious prejudice against regular white folks. Do you pat the "good little Negros" on the head as you drive by and "tsk, tsk" us white worker bees for our silly thoughts and desires?
And since you brought it up, I'll tell you about my family's money. Part of it went up in flames when Gen. Sherman's troops torched the Floyd plantation. Part of it vanished in the depression in attempting to raise a family without steady work. Part of it is sitting in several older relative's bank-accounts. Part of it is tied up in a start-up investment in a closely held firm. Its tough to inherit when you are only 28. And there's nothing wrong with discussing your family's past unless you've got something to be ashamed of, like your grandfather being a Democrat or Child Molester something similarly heinous. I'm not preening - just discussing. Okay?
Oh, and don't worry about me becoming your neighbor. From your slight description of where you live, it doesn't appear that you actually have what normal people would call neighbors because you apparently don't live in something resembling a neighborhood. Neighbors, if you recall, are people you can actually interact with every day, not some guy living over yonder behind that hill. I don't reccomend your trying to get one. I don't think you'd do to well with them.
And I'm soooo glad to here that you were soooo eager to get down south to help with Civil Rights, but was soooo sad to then read that your mean old mother stopped it. You know, when I was in college, if I wanted to do something, I simply spent my own money that I had earned and did it. I didn't need mommy's permission. My mom did the same thing when she put herself through Northwestern. How desperate where you to really go down there if you couldn't bring yourself to round up $100 to do so? The City of New Orleans wasn't that expensive a way to travel, and it would take you right to the center of the action. Perhaps it is good to be free of wealth so you can do as you please?
One last disjointed thought about your comment on your not wanting to live in a slum. I don't either, and never have (well, except for two years in Lowell, MA), unless of course, you consider an integrated upper-middle class neighborhood to be a slum. That does seem highly likely from what you've said, but I could be wrong.
The Irish are one of the three reliable legs holding up the Rat party - the other being the Blacks and the Jews.
The Italians have become Republican, the Germans, the Yugoslavs. But not the Irish. They still vote 2 to 1 Rat.
If anything, I think my mother's prophecy will come to pass. Americans' will eventually accept in Hispanics as white and get back to their age old business of keeping the blacks down and out.
I understand your need to justify your own existence, but you really shouldn't sweat it. You are what you are. You don't need to fall for utter nonsense about genetic diversity that is spouted nowadays. I'd encourage you to google this "more diversity within ethnicities than between" them silliness that we hear all the time now and try to track down its origin. I think you'll find its a bunch of hogwash. Especially since it originated years before the human genome was fully mapped (was it even? the two teams don't even agree on how many genes there are).
If God really intended everybody to just breed together at will, He certainly could have helped things along by not making white people Rhesus factor negative in their blood type. Rh- mothers tend to die rather horific deaths when they have Rh+ babies. Interfertility wouldn't go over too well between Rh- people (found almost exclusviely among whites) and Rh+ people (Blacks and Asians, with many whites today also because of interbreeding) for very long.
You are blinkered, by your own , rather unstable view of things. I am so far away from being a " LIMOSINE LIBERAL LADY " ,as to make your head spin, as in " THE EXCORCIST "; spitting greenpea soup and all.
I say and write " Negro " , since that's what they liked to be called, as I was growing up. Then, it went to " black ", African-American , back to black, and on and on. Not all of us , here, are 28. BTW, your prejorative aaabstractions and projections and YOU need a lot of help !
How desperate " where " ( sic ... he who is without typo and/ or misspellings, is the ONLY one, who should even attempt to critque my, or anybody else's posts, dear. YOU LIVE IN AN ALAL GLASS HOUSE, boyo ! )you ( I ) to go ? Desperate isn't quite the correct word, kiddo, and my health and saftey, was my mother's concern. Rightly so, dear. And yes, I did earn money, which I used to buy books and clothes and other school supplies. Since you don't seem to have any familiaarity with those much above poverty level, it just may confuse you to learn, that even upper middle class kids are taught the value of a dollar, have to earn some of their own way, and DO take into consideration what their parents' desires and wishes for them are.
I really wish that you weren't so bloody obtuse. Oh well, I shan't go into my personal, REAL LIFE situation ; however, IF you had ever paid any attention, in school ( public, was it ? ), you just might have learned some reading comprehension. I said that I don't have that many neighbors; I don't. People here ( and it's not in ssome holler , live on rather large tracts of land. Ergo, there aren't many " close by " neighbors.
It's difficult to believe that you're all of 28, when you post like a 12 year old with no manners, a terrible upbringing, and keep attempting to obfuscate others' posts, with your own, decidedly peculiar ravings.
As far as your being " wrong " goes, you haven't been correct about much of anything at all. LOL
You are incorrect about the Irish and their voting habits. Perhasps it's due to your experience in Mass. ? Even THAT seems to be changing though. Mit Rommney just got elected Governor, dear. Do try to keep up with the times.
A mother, who is RH negative and is carrying an RH+ baby, is NOT going to suffer terribly / die. What old wives tales ( or did you just make that up ? ) are you getting this from ? Neither is aan RH+ mother, carrying an RH negative baby, going to suffer terribly / die.
Oh and an " ethnicity " refers to a person / persons from ddifferent places ( i.c. Sweden, Germany, Austria, England, America,etc. ) and NOT race, per se.
and I reply: too easy - because He can, and He likes variety, unique creations, just like each snow-flake is unique - God has lots of paintbrushes and colors - infinite, we are all different shades, shapes and sizes
Are you saying it is racist to think God had different purposes in mind for different races when he made them, and that He didn't intend for humans to go about trifling with them by uniting them again physically in anything as they tried at Babel, but only to unite in the Christian Faith?
uh, no...that, too, was easy; and how do you know they were separated by race at that time? as I read, it was by languages which are made up of sounds which are colorless, and he forbade their unified opposition, and does in fact intend to unite those of true "Christian's Faith" which by definition is not in opposition to Him, "I do not my own works, but the will of my Father" duh!
But wait! Isn't that what God clearly did with Israel by singling them out as His Chosen People, and ordering them to remain seperate from all other peoples?
yes and no. Yes, he singled them out, but not by race. They were Jews because they followed Abraham in believing God, and not simply by birth - consider Ishamael and Esau, and especially not by skin color. Rahab was counted righteous and she was a harlot from another country - why? because she believed you ignorant one. Melchizadek was another declared righteous, and not of Jewish Birth, and Abraham paid tithes to Him. Dear dear man, you must read to be educated! God looks on the circumcision of the heart, not of the foreskin or skin color. The sons of Korah and many Jews were kicked to the curb for their opposition and unbelief. So, God gave some "born" jews the boot! And if you read Deuteronomy, you will read in the Law about the requirements to accept strangers, and how they become Jews by living within their precepets and believing in God as further described in much detail by Paul in the book of Romans. Ask any Jew if a person can become a Jew by marriage and by birth to a "mixed" marriage. The answer is yes. So out goes the separtism of God accusation.
Doesn't that make the Bible the story of a racist God and a racist people
no, see above
(at least up to the time of Christ! so did God change in your view, and we have a "God of the Old Testament" and a "God of the New Testament"?)
nope, same God - he doesn't change, nor does he answer to you or any man
who refused to mix with others and were forced by their leaders to put away their strange wives AND CHILDREN when they did, like Ezra made them do (that would be Chapters 9 and 10 of Ezra).
that was for their unbelif and liberal ideas, not because of their skin color. Where does it say God gave Ezra direction to select out all those with slightly darker or paler slightly different olive complexions with slightly BS! - how skilled are you at telling the difference between and Arab and a Jew's skin color? So, Mr. Skin color expert, what color were those "stangers" eh? I can't find the reference to skin color. hmmm... seems like it just didn't matter, did it?
Oh, and try taking Acts 17.26-27 out for a test-spin on St. Paul.
uh, yeah and? so what? He made all nations. I don't see the words "black" "white" "aisian" etc. - your point? Of course he made all nations - he made all men, and all nations are a subset. You make the first man - you make em all.
Your Christian teaching regarding race is a post-1850's fad.
no, it's not, you just haven't read anything pre-1850, or only selectively, and definitely not the scriptures - remember a true Christian believes and seeks to follow and adapt to the teachings of God's Word
It has no real basis in anything Christians believed before that advent of Unitarianism and Universalism.
uh, no, again, it's in the scriptures, which means from the earliest: Check out Colossions 3:11 "Here there is no Greek or Jew, circumcised or uncircumsised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all." and what about the Egyptians that left with the Hebrews in the Exedous? and what about the Ethipian that Phillip in Acts 8:40 witnessed to? Ever seen a non-black ethiopian? What about Simon the Magician and Samaritan? Acts 8:9 Remember the parable of the Good Samaritan? Jesus' point was that the Jews were in opposition to the Samaratins, but He said they were neighbors. Simon was a Samaratin and he believed. Now, they were definitely of a different race and belief, and definitely not white anglo saxon, and yet became Christians.
The the Apostles accepted these truths is easily proved by the various and sundry diverse Christian Rites they created to fit each culture - the Latin, the Coptic, the Syraic, the Byzantine, the Ethiopic, the Chaldeaic, the Armenian, the Indo-Malabar, the Gallic, the Mozarabic, etc. - each rite in the Church specifically created to suit the temperment and needs of that people.
nope. wrong. What is the link besides your mental leap between the apostles themselves as they are written about in the Bible and the denominations you list (denominations means divide - man made, not God made - remember no individual Christian is perfect, so not all their decisions are either)
And the Church followed this system for centuries, creating along the way ever more new rites as needed, such as the Slavonic.
and some who called themselves christians even murdered others peoples, even other christians who disagreed with them, in Jesus name, like in the Spanish Inquisition, the Spanish Colonies, some of the Anabaptists etc. But not all of those who wore that name committed these atrocities. Individual decisions, individual merit or infamy, and Christ's name was sullied as He warned it would be - see John 16:1-3 where he forwarns that people will believe they are doing God service by killing those who believe in Jesus Christ. And read the scriptures and Jesus abolishes "rites", but man throughout the ages re-established them - but that is not His fault.
Much of the world's problems today are from Liberals trying to pretend everybody is all equal and the same, and therefore forcibly smothering out anything that smacks of differences because those difference might make someone feel bad since differences lead to judgements of better and worse. The extremist Catholic Latin Rite partisans are among the worst offenders in this regard.
I agree. We are all equally bad - all have sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God. The real separtor is those who acknowledge their unworthiness and His worthiness and those who don't. The second set is further divided by all shades of beliefs of who is better and why, from the beginning in the Garden of Eden, dying on the fruit of the knowledge of Good and Evil as if mankind was ever really qualified to declare it so on any particular case completely - as though any one of us is omnipotent - being like God in His unique Most Highness. The only thing I am sure about, is what He has said. The rest is speculation - human wrangling - all equally devoid of whole truth, and equally deceptive. All men at some time in their life past the age of accountability, think they know it all. Some come to the realization they don't. Some come to the realization He does. And there are no statistics on these groups based on race. And the numbers change from day to day, so they wouldn't help if you knew. But God does, and He's not willing that any should perish, of any race. But some do, by their own choice. God Bless!
And sheets are something you'd know about.
The Bible records one Adam and one Eve. And one Noah. Obviously, it was the ordained by God that races devoloped after that, or else it wouldn't have happened. Likewise, interracial marriage is ordained by God, for the same reason. Why? Because it was His will.
I wonder if preachers in the old south, when they preached on that incident in which Aaron and Mariam got leprosy, tried to contort it to not say what it said the way liberal preachers do with the parts about homosexuality.
Or the way Arminians try to contort Romans 9.
If you want on (or off) of my black conservative ping list, please let me know via FREEPmail. (And no, you don't have to be black to be on the list!)
Extra warning: this is a high-volume ping list.
What you screamin', w-diddy? Nobody can trip on you like that.
And you know that I have your back on that one.
There shall be no mercy.
101 things that the Mozilla browser can do that Internet Explorer cannot.
AFA my daughter marrying a black man: Educated black man - no problem. Pimp- big problem.
There is also no denying the fact that should they have children, society will ostracize the children. Especially Black society.
Moving in a mixed neighborhood: Only if they maintain and improve their properties.
Have a day.
Isn't is a give-away? An incredible, accomplished human being who happens to be a woman and of dark complexion, is first assumed to be a traitor, just because her life is based on universal ideals and focused on something other than bashing whites. That is the starting point. Thenceforward, she has to prove herself and now she has done so. Never mind her academic acheivements, multiplicity of talents, leadership qualities she shows in the White House --- now she jas increased her cridibility.
In this slip of the pen, the author shows that he is a looser that hides his envy behind a patronizing attitude. People like Rice will soon eclipse those like this author.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.