# United States A Nation of Cowards??



## MA-Caver (Feb 18, 2009)

> *Holder: US is nation of cowards on racial matters*
> 
> By DEVLIN BARRETT, Associated Press Writer        Devlin Barrett, Associated Press Writer               1 hr 8 mins ago
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090218/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/holder_race
> ...


I don't know if this guy is going to win any popularity contests or not. I can understand his message but it's still a slap in the face either way. Seems what he's asking for is a total lifestyle choice of desegregation on the whole of the populace. I'm sure there are many who wouldn't have a problem inviting a different race person into their home for social stuff and I'm sure that many do on a regular basis. 
Seems he's using to broad of a knife to paint the picture as "fine, I'll work with them but won't associate with them off the clock!" 
It does happen, maybe not as broadly as this guy wants it to happen but it does happen and more frequently than in the last 10-15 years. But the stigma of racism is a hard thing to get rid of and it'll take time, it'll take at least, IMO, another generation or two to break the self-imposed barriers even further. 
Calling us a nation of cowards -- racially speaking is kinda stupid I think, we DID elect a Black man for president didnt' we? Oh wait... he's half black and half white... BIG difference <sarcasm> .


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Feb 18, 2009)

Interesting comments.  I don't know if we're a nation of cowards or not, but I agree that we often tend to avoid frank, open, and honest discussions about race.  I'm generally not comfortable discussing it, and I feel comfortable about discussing many things.


----------



## MA-Caver (Feb 18, 2009)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Interesting comments.  I don't know if we're a nation of cowards or not, but I agree that we often tend to avoid frank, open, and honest discussions about race.  I'm generally not comfortable discussing it, and I feel comfortable about discussing many things.


Well the question is WHY are we? 
Is it because we may accidentally step on a nerve? 
That the "N-word" might slip out during the conversation?
That our real prejudices may show through during the course of the conversations?


----------



## Kreth (Feb 18, 2009)

As long as we have things like Black History Month, and universities have a (using an example from today's local rag) Department of African and Latino Studies, segregation will be an issue.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Feb 18, 2009)

MA-Caver said:


> Well the question is WHY are we?
> 
> 
> > That is the question, yes.  I think the answer, if there is one, is multi-dimensional and deeply buried.
> ...


----------



## grydth (Feb 18, 2009)

Yeah, well the guy who rolled over on the pardon of billionaire Marc Rich doesn't need to be lecturing others on cowardice.

Another thing.... what's he know about who our friends are and what we talk about? Sounds like stereotyping and nasty overgeneralizing to me.


----------



## Nolerama (Feb 18, 2009)

I think the term "cowards" was a little too harsh. However, it did bring us on the subject of race so in that light, it's successful.

I think Americans, generally speaking, are over-involved with the topic of race. Our concepts of "cool" is dictated at least in part due to race. We live, breathe, and eat racial stereotypes every day. Our media stream is saturated with racial flotsam and jetsam.

Americans aren't cowards, or are afraid to "talk about race." We're just sick and tired of something like that being the premise of the issue at hand, because it always leads to something like "it's because I'm [insert nationality here]"

When will American leaders finally kick the nasty habit of bringing race to the forefront? It's a sad, belittling, stereotypical defense mechanism that Americans of all races fall back on; primarily due to leaders urging folks to rely on that wobbly crutch.

You can't bring up race without bringing up racism, and how it applies to you, and how you apply it to others. Everyone is racist to a degree; our media dictates it. However, it takes a measure of hatred to keep on bringing up Americans' inherent racism and act upon it as a bigot. There are a lot of people out there that can't make that distinction.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Feb 18, 2009)

> (Holder) urged people of all races to use Black History Month as a chance for honest discussion of racial matters, including issues of health care, education, and economic disparities.



I agree. From my perspective as a teacher in Canada, Black History Month is an opportunity to observe history through different lenses. This type of exercise can take students in a couple of different directions:

1. There's a comedian who appears on the _Daily Show_ as the African-American corespondent. He did a funny bit last year about BHM, something like: _In exchange for 500 years of bondage, we get twenty-eight days of trivia._ A lot of the early material I ran across as a beginning elementary teacher looked like this: http://afgen.com/proud.html



> Theo's job was to sweep the floor. He swept and swept and swept. When he reached for the dustpan, it was not there. You see, Lloyd P. Ray, a Black man, invented the dustpan. So he swept his pile of dirt over in the corner and left it there. He then decided to mop the floor, but the mop was gone. You see, Thomas W. Stewart, a Black man, invented the mop.



God, how I loathe this little article, which you can find published on countless websites. It prattles on for pages about black people inventing combs, hair dryers, and vacuum cleaners. Nobody spends this much time talking about Thomas Edison and the light bulb, or Alexander Graham Bell and the telephone. Once you've read the whole thing a hundred times, as I have, you conclude the whole point was to say: _You see, Black folks are really quite clever_.

The other thing that grew a tiresome was the endless parade of black sports heroes. You cannot surprise a kid at any grade level with tales of Jackie Robinson anymore, and to do so is to revive an era in which African Americans were permitted prominence in the arenas of sport and entertainment only.

If this is the cut-and-thrust of Black History Month, I would have divested myself a long time ago. However...

2. Having come through all of that, new materials and new ideas are breaking through. I can now teach children about _Africville_, Nova Scotia, an extraordinary tale of early African American settlers to Canada, a story that was unavailable during my elementary education. Or I can direct them to a wealth of information at http://blackhistorycanada.ca/theme.php?id=2

I'm gradually accumulating literally stacks of books on this subject that did not exist a few years ago.

This is exciting to me as a teacher because eight years ago, when I transitioned from teaching adults to teaching kids, none of this stuff was available in a format that I could present to children. If it existed, I didn't know about it because no one ever taught me. The same is very much the case in the USA as a once little known celebration (BHM) has driven a demand for literature, music and art to revive old stories that were unknown to many and only explored at the higher academic levels. It is an expansion both market and intellect.

The point of my long-winded diatribe is that through this singular focused effort of Black History Month, history gets bigger. A thoughtful teacher will be able to impart to students that just perhaps there is more to history than what we read or hear at any given moment.


----------



## Archangel M (Feb 18, 2009)

Because if a white person is critical of any other race the "race card" gets dropped on the table.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Feb 18, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> Because if a white person is critical of any other race the "race card" gets dropped on the table.


Question "Black History Month", get called a racist.
Been there, have the links to prove it.

If the answer isn't "because the white man is keeping the black man down", you're a bigot.

I'll gladly talk about the issue, soon as people stop making excuses for their failings, and using the actions of a dutch ship captain who died 200+ years ago as a crutch.

Until then, I'll keep quietly celebrating "National White Man Day" the same time I do every year. February 30th.


----------



## elder999 (Feb 18, 2009)

Kreth said:


> As long as we have things like Black History Month, and universities have a (using an example from today's local rag) Department of African and Latino Studies, segregation will be an issue.


 

I posted my opinion on Black History Month in this thread, four years ago, in the aftermath of Morgan Freeman's well meant but somewhat misguided comments. I think I'll quote it in its entirety, since it still seems appropriate:



			
				el Brujo de la Cueva (that's me!!) said:
			
		

> Does Black History Month actually separate us as Americans?
> 
> Not if it&#8217;s done right.
> 
> ...


 
As to the greater issue of the original post-Holder is right and wrong. We're having the conversation, but right here and now _most of us are  actually having a conversation about *the* conversation_-and the responses in that regard are telling. There are people who post here who are _never_ going to say exactly how they feel about blacks and poverty, or blacks and crime, or the (non)issue of reparations, or any number of things, for fear of being labeled "racist." There are posters here who aren't going to say anything about any of those things because they know that they *are* racists. There are people who will try to talk about any number of "racial" issues, but try to ignore that there are real and legitimate differences between people-that our country has developed with distinct cultures that influence each other, and have for centuries.

Oh, well....


----------



## Carol (Feb 18, 2009)

I spend a good part of my job interacting with people of another race/language/culture.  I'm not truly bilingual but I'm functional enough to be able to work and communicate with Spanish speaking people and not have to switch to English when speaking with them.  In addition to juggling the professional differences, I often have to juggle differences of personal perceptions of the different cultures as well.

My friends have brought up race and racial issues in a discussion before, and have done so recently.  I won't necessarily shy away from the subject.  However, I may not be one to start the conversation either.  Because...its a lot like work.  I don't always want to think about work when I have some precious free time.


----------



## Archangel M (Feb 18, 2009)

We are not a "Nation of Cowards"..we are a nation of people who have been told that there will be consequences if our opinions don't "toe the party line".


----------



## Gordon Nore (Feb 18, 2009)

elder999 said:


> I posted my opinion on Black History Month in this thread, four years ago, in the aftermath of Morgan Freeman's well meant but somewhat misguided comments. I think I'll quote it in its entirety, since it still seems appropriate...



Alas, I wasn't here to rep you four years ago, and the thingy won't let me rep you now, so I'm just going to thank you for sharing this again.


----------



## girlbug2 (Feb 18, 2009)

MA-Caver said:


> That our real prejudices may show through during the course of the conversations?


 
I don't know about anybody else, but I have been made hyperaware my whole life of how "racist" I must be if I even mention another person's race when describing him/her. "See, you described him as Asian, that proves you're really bigoted, why didn't you just say he was dark haired and brown eyed" for instance.

In our overly PC modern culture, anything you say with regards to race can and will get used against you. So, yes, I am afraid to be "outed" as a closet racist if I talk about a person's race at all.


----------



## elder999 (Feb 18, 2009)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Question "Black History Month", get called a racist.
> Been there, have the links to prove it.


 
Not from me-we both have the links (right here!) to prove it. :lol:




Bob Hubbard said:


> If the answer isn't "because the white man is keeping the black man down", you're a bigot.


 
See above. :lol:




Bob Hubbard said:


> I'll gladly talk about the issue, soon as people stop making excuses for their failings, and using the actions of a dutch ship captain who died 200+ years ago as a crutch.


 
No "excuses" from me-see above :lfao:




Bob Hubbard said:


> Until then, I'll keep quietly celebrating "National White Man Day" the same time I do every year. February 30th.


 
Get down with your bad self, Bob! 

Is there a "National White _*Women*_ Day?" 

Or am I playing into a stereotype by even asking???:lfao::lfao::lfao:


----------



## Deaf Smith (Feb 18, 2009)

Aw comeon Eric Holder....

Go look at the rest of the world.

Japan is totaly raceist.

Africa is totaly raceist. Hey, they STILL HAVE SLAVERY!!

Europe? Show me any black or Jewish prime ministers or even MPs.

China? Hahahaha. Go see how many gringos are over there.

India? Ever here of the caste system? Try being Jewish in Pakistani.

Holder knows all this, but well he's a Democrate liberal so what do you expect.

Rhetoric trumps logic any day with these guys.

Deaf


----------



## Archangel M (Feb 18, 2009)

girlbug2 said:


> I don't know about anybody else, but I have been made hyperaware my whole life of how "racist" I must be if I even mention another person's race when describing him/her. "See, you described him as Asian, that proves you're really bigoted, why didn't you just say he was dark haired and brown eyed" for instance.
> 
> In our overly PC modern culture, anything you say with regards to race can and will get used against you. So, yes, I am afraid to be "outed" as a closet racist if I talk about a person's race at all.



Exactly. The media here wont even describe a crime suspect as a "black (or white) male" anymore.


----------



## elder999 (Feb 18, 2009)

Deaf Smith said:


> Aw comeon Eric Holder....
> 
> Go look at the rest of the world.


 
Well, that's somewhat disingenuous. He's the Attorney General of the *United States of America.* His _opinion_ is about the place where he lives and works. Let's have a look, though:



Deaf Smith said:


> Japan is totaly raceist.


 
And has a thousand some-odd year history of being almost completely culturally and racially homgeonous, as well as isolated. More's the pity, but it's not like they can help it.



Deaf Smith said:


> Africa is totaly raceist. Hey, they STILL HAVE SLAVERY!!


 
Africa is a _continent_, not a country. It's comprised of many different races. When you say "Africa," do you mean that Egyptians hate Sudanese and Nigerians, or that Zulus hate white South Africans?




Deaf Smith said:


> Europe? Show me any black or Jewish prime ministers or even MPs.


 
England had a Jewish Prime Minister before the 20th century named Benjamin Disraeli, you can read about him here.




Deaf Smith said:


> China? Hahahaha. Go see how many gringos are over there.


 
There are, in fact, a great many Americans working in China. Additionally, the "native" populace of that very, very large country is composed of a variety of ethnicities that aren't really "Chinese." 

Of course, that doesn't make them not racist, any more than the U.S. isn't because of the diversity of our population.




Deaf Smith said:


> India? Ever here of the caste system? Try being Jewish in Pakistani.


 
India? See "China" in reference to diverse population. Sure, their caste system sucks. Jesw in Pakistan? Jews have been in Pakistan for a long, long time, though today most Jews in Pakistan are mistaken for Zorastrians.




Deaf Smith said:


> Holder knows all this, but well he's a Democrate liberal so what do you expect.


 
Of course, _maybe_ he knows all of it, but it's hardly relevant, so what do you expect?




Deaf Smith said:


> Rhetoric trumps logic any day with these guys.
> 
> Deaf


 
_Pot?_*Kettle?*


----------



## elder999 (Feb 18, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> Exactly. The media here wont even describe a crime suspect as a "black (or white) male" anymore.


 
What state are you in? They do here in New Mexico all the time.....especially if they haven't been apprehended, and they're......_describing_ them.


----------



## Thesemindz (Feb 18, 2009)

elder999 said:


> I posted my opinion on Black History Month in this thread, four years ago, in the aftermath of Morgan Freeman's well meant but somewhat misguided comments. I think I'll quote it in its entirety, since it still seems appropriate:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I'll talk about it happily.

I've worked with black people, and native americans, and japanese people, and homosexuals, and even canadians. In my experience, some people are bastards, and others are decent human beings. So far, I haven't noticed any correlation between heritage and behavior.

What I have noticed is a correlation between education and behavior, and poverty and behavior, and life experience and behavior.

Getting a poor education _can_ lead to people being ignorant pricks. Unfortunately, our government schools do a lousy job of educating people.

Being poor _can_ lead to people being hateful pricks with no hope. Unfortunately, our economy is causing a lot of people to be poor.

Having little or no life experience _can_ lead to people being ignorant, hateful pricks. Unfortunately, when you're poor and uneducated you tend to be lacking in life experience.

But while those things _can_ lead to that kind of behavior, they don't have to. I've known poor, uneducated people who've never left the state who are kind god fearing neighbors.

Do black people face these problems? Sure. In some parts of the country. But you can find poor, uneducated people in other parts of the country who are white too. 

One of my coworkers grew up in Chicago, and he used to complain about how the black people would move into a neighborhood and ruin it and drive all the whites out of town. Then they'd move into the next neighborhood over and the whole process would begin again. They'd drive down house values, and leave junk vehicles on their lawns, and do drugs and drink alcohol in public. He thought this was because they were black. I tried to explain to him that it had more to do with education and poverty than melanin, but he wasn't listening.

You can look around the city I live in, and find lots of white people who are uneducated, ignorant scumbags. They are a fine example of all the worst humanity has to offer. Drug abuse. Child abuse. Spousal abuse. Self abuse. And they're white through and through.

I get pissed when someone tells me I'm a racist because I take part in a system that's "inherently racist," or, "built on racism." I wasn't given an option to not take part in this system.

I get pissed when someone tells me that blacks, or asians, or muslims, or homosexuals are "the problem." That's crap. Personally, I think government is the problem.

I get pissed when people try to find excuses for their struggles in life instead of trying to find ways to work harder and do better. We've all got problems. Get over it. Get a second job like everybody else.

I get pissed when people use the terms bigotry, racism, and prejudice interchangably. They are seperate terms with seperate meanings. Bigotry is an irrational hatred of others because they are different. Racism is the belief that one race is genetically superior or inferior to another. Prejudice is a predetermined decision made about a subject without sufficient experiential knowledge. If I hate black people, I'm a bigot. If I think white people are smarter than black people, I'm a racist. If I think black people are all thieves, I'm prejudiced. 

Life's hard. I'm sure it's even harder when you're black, or homosexual, or arab, or british when you live in America. I know it's hard when you're fat, or have long hair, or wear hand me down clothes.

Most of the people I've known don't really care about race or ethnicity. Some do. They're usually losers. 

As to how I feel about blacks and crime, or blacks and poverty, I think the second qualifier is a lot more important than the first. Criminals are scum, poor people are struggling. Does it matter what their skin tone is? That's more a matter of demographics than one of cause and effect.


-Rob


----------



## searcher (Feb 18, 2009)

We are  nation of cowards that fought like h3ll to give him the right to speak his mind, but if he thinks I would stand up to defend him, he had better think again.   I swore my oath to protect this The Constitution and the people of this country, not its politions.


----------



## Empty Hands (Feb 18, 2009)

To my fellow white people: *stop whining*.  Seriously, it's just embarrassing.  You should know damn well why Black History Month is probably a good idea, while White History Month would just be dumb.  You know why the BET network is OK, while the WET would not be.  You know why the NAACP and the UNCF is just dandy while the NAAWP and the UWCF would be protested.

*Stop being disingenuous.

*It's all part of the cowardice that Holder is addressing.  America has a history of racism with blacks and other minorities that still has effects today.  Racism is a problem for blacks and other minorities today.  Pretending we are all equal now or that protestations of racism is "playing a card" or "whining" or "using a crutch" is part of that cowardice and unwillingness to address reality.  Racism is an ongoing institutional problem that can only be addressed by constantly talking about it and moving forward as a people.  Pretending it doesn't exist will just make it all worse, as the previous example of the French experience exemplifies.  We've been getting steadily better on this score; let's not allow that progress to halt.

I could post all of the actual data that proves me right, like the studies about resume callbacks with "black" names.  Like usual in these threads though, the actual evidence would just be ignored in favor of what everyone already "knows."  So I will end with just a simple plea: find some actual black people and ask them about their experiences.  Maybe you'll think they're just "whiners", but you might also be surprised and shocked about some of the crap they have to go through.  I certainly was.


----------



## MA-Caver (Feb 18, 2009)

girlbug2 said:


> I don't know about anybody else, but I have been made hyperaware my whole life of how "racist" I must be if I even mention another person's race when describing him/her. "See, you described him as Asian, that proves you're really bigoted, why didn't you just say he was dark haired and brown eyed" for instance.
> 
> In our overly PC modern culture, anything you say with regards to race can and will get used against you. So, yes, I am afraid to be "outed" as a closet racist if I talk about a person's race at all.


That's the whole crux right there. Racial stereotyping but forced labeling. Instead of Black History Month why aren't they calling it African American History Month (what? takes too long to say it? doesn't have quite the same ring?) doesn't it mean the same thing??

I've mentioned this before... that we (whites) HAVE to use the terminology of African American to indicate those of darker skin, dark eyes and whose (now ancient) ancestors were native to the continent of Africa, is just plain ridiculous. If they're born here and their fathers and grandfathers were born here... they're American... just ... like... me. 

If they're going to gripe about stereotyping then they need to stop doing it themselves. 
Why is it NOT offensive to call me white/Caucasian? Why not call me Irish American? Why is it bad (for me) to use the moniker "black man/woman" ?? I use it anyway... in-so-far I've yet to have a black person stand up look at me belligerently and asking in that high-pitch "SAY WHAT?!!?" when I say oh that black guy over there told me this or that, (because he's standing in a mixed crowd)... 

Either way I've been working REAL hard, personally to even get rid of "noticing" a man's skin-color. Yes I can *see* the difference in pigmentation but I try not to acknowledge it, or not prioritize it. 
I am trying hard to not say African American man or black man but instead just say a man. No different, no better, no worse than I am. Only their ACTIONS will determine their differences, better or worse character than mine. Their skin color don't have a damned thing to do with it in my book. 
I'm not perfect in that but I'm really working hard on it. 
When doing sign-language interpreting of a college basketball game for my dad I don't see 4 black players and one white player on a particular team I just see a bunch of guys all wearing the same color jerseys and working towards the same goal of winning the game. 

But my dad does... he asks me ... "is the team all black?" (remember he's not only deaf but also blind)... and I tell him yes or no. But then he's 82 yrs. old. he grew up in the real segregated south as a child, his father figure was bigoted so it passed on to him... he witnessed first-hand the riots in Washington D.C. when Dr. King was assassinated... all the rioters were black and not a mix of outraged blacks and whites over the loss of a great man. So what other opinion is he supposed to have. 
What opinion am I supposed to have... my own and my own struggle to break free of the ones he's tried to hand down to me. 

I've had blacks save my life before on the streets when I should've been stabbed or shot, I've been invited by a black friend to attend a family picnic and I'm the only white there, I've roomed with 7 other recovering alcoholics and all of them were black... SO WHAT? In my mind I scream SO WHAT? They're just people. ... just like me. Same applies to Asians, Hispanics, Indians, Arabs, Aborigines and whatever other races there might be.


----------



## Empty Hands (Feb 18, 2009)

MA-Caver said:


> I've mentioned this before... that we (whites) HAVE to use the terminology of African American to indicate those of darker skin, dark eyes and whose (now ancient) ancestors were native to the continent of Africa, is just plain ridiculous.



No we don't.  I can only remember actually using "African-American" once.  The rest of the time it's "black."  No one looks twice.



MA-Caver said:


> Why is it bad (for me) to use the moniker "black man/woman" ?? I use it anyway... in-so-far I've yet to have a black person stand up look at me belligerently and asking in that high-pitch "SAY WHAT?!!?" when I say oh that black guy over there told me this or that, (because he's standing in a mixed crowd)...



See, you don't have to use "African-American."  No one really cares.



MA-Caver said:


> Either way I've been working REAL hard, personally to even get rid of "noticing" a man's skin-color. Yes I can *see* the difference in pigmentation but I try not to acknowledge it, or not prioritize it.



That just ends up being pathological.  This is part of why white folks are so bent out of shape about this issue.  The color of someone's skin is a noticeable trait.  Same as being tall, or female, or blonde.  You don't have to refuse to acknowledge someone's hair color in order to feel they have the same rights and value as everyone else.  Same with skin color.  You can say "oh, that black guy over there" without thinking he is less.  I promise you, almost no one will care.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Feb 18, 2009)

searcher said:


> We are  nation of cowards that fought like h3ll to give him the right to speak his mind, but if he thinks I would stand up to defend him, he had better think again.   I swore my oath to protect this The Constitution and the people of this country, not its politions.



Clarifications on the following, please...

"that fought like h3ll to give him the right to speak his mind"
When and where? Did he forget to send a thank-you note or something?

"I swore my oath to protect this The Constitution and the people of this country, not its politions"
What oath? Did it say politicians 'are not people of this country.'


----------



## Hand Sword (Feb 18, 2009)

MA-Caver said:


> Well the question is WHY are we?
> Is it because we may accidentally step on a nerve?
> That the "N-word" might slip out during the conversation?
> That our real prejudices may show through during the course of the conversations?


   Because for a couple of generations now, it's been drilled about being colorblind and PC. Now, that's exactly what happens when PC is the status quo--avoidance of the issues.


----------



## Carol (Feb 18, 2009)

Empty Hands said:


> That just ends up being pathological.  This is part of why white folks are so bent out of shape about this issue.  The color of someone's skin is a noticeable trait.  Same as being tall, or female, or blonde.  You don't have to refuse to acknowledge someone's hair color in order to feel they have the same rights and value as everyone else.  Same with skin color.  You can say "oh, that black guy over there" without thinking he is less.  I promise you, almost no one will care.



I think there's more of an issue when subtle (or even not-so-subtle) prejudice works its way in to the conversation.  If I'm a newbie to a martial arts class and someone says "Mark will work out with you today", and I respond with a confused look, I don't think its insulting anyone if I was told "Mark is the black fellow over there holding the focus pads." 

Where I do think there is an issue is if someone says in a denigrating tone "I had to work out with the black guy today" instead of "I had to work with a guy that kicked my butt on the mat".  Or if race is used to punctuate a story, as in "...we were lost and trying to find our way back to the subway when all of the sudden this black guy comes up to us from out of nowhere," as if being approached by a person that was black made the unnerving experience (of being lost) even scarier.  (Maybe it did?)


----------



## Marginal (Feb 18, 2009)

He offered fairly mild rhetoric all things considered. It's not a one sided issue. It's not like one race or ethnicity is busy building cross cultural bridges. 

(Half expected the thread to be about Ann Couture's new book about the last election or something.)


----------



## jarrod (Feb 19, 2009)

elder999 said:


> Is there a "National White _*Women*_ Day?"
> 
> Or am I playing into a stereotype by even asking???:lfao::lfao::lfao:


 
oh, lawdy, no! its always ok to bring up dem lovely white ladies.  ah, lawdy! i love me dem white wimmin.



Archangel M said:


> Exactly. The media here wont even describe a crime suspect as a "black (or white) male" anymore.


 
i don't mind it in the media, but it bugs the hell out of me when i'm watching boxing.  

"jones in the black trunks with the white trim.  smith also in black trunks, with sort of a yellow fringe on it..."

it'd be nice if they could just say "jones is the black guy.  smith is the white guy."  

jf


----------



## elder999 (Feb 19, 2009)

MA-Caver said:


> I've mentioned this before... *that we (whites) HAVE to use the terminology of African American* to indicate those of darker skin, dark eyes and whose (now ancient) ancestors were native to the continent of Africa, is just plain ridiculous. If they're born here and their fathers and grandfathers were born here... they're American... just ... like... me.


 
Well, no, you don't. We were black before we were "negroes"; we were black before we were "Afro-Americans," we were black before we were "African American."

I'm _still_ *black.*-don't even get me started on the excrable "Native American"-I'm still an *Indian* :lfao:



MA-Caver said:


> .
> Why is it NOT offensive to call me white/Caucasian? Why not call me Irish American? Why is it bad (for me) to use the moniker "black man/woman" ?? I use it anyway... in-so-far I've yet to have a black person stand up look at me belligerently and asking in that high-pitch "SAY WHAT?!!?" when I say oh that black guy over there told me this or that, (because he's standing in a mixed crowd)...


 
Interestingly, most "white" Americans of whatever descent typically refer to themselves that way: _Scotch-Irish, Italian, polish, Irish,_ etc. No hyphens involved...:lol:


As for the rest of it-stop trying so hard. When my son was about three years old and playing with his crayons, he made the observation that there were "pink people and brown people." Having relatives with hues from both spectra was a big contributor to that, of course. :lol: Today, he's an award winning slam poet, and his poem "Pink and Brown," talks about that very thing-and the state of race relations in his corner of the U.S.:



> ......... a city favorite by the name of Cuffee graced the stage and delivered again a story about racial inequalities and the struggles of racism experienced in his childhood. Aaron Cuffee is of mixed race; his poem &#8220;Pink and Brown,&#8221; tells the story of how he never understood the concept of black and white as a child, but instead referred to everyone, as either &#8220;Pink or Brown.&#8221; The poem itself recounts an incident in an airport where Aaron&#8217;s dad is discriminated against because he is black, and the flight attendant calling for Aaron&#8217;s parents over the PA system, not believing that he is in fact Aaron&#8217;s father. The poem takes on an angry and frustrated tone, but ends with the realization that Cuffee himself has none of these discriminatory thoughts towards those that discriminate against him, that he in fact loves, he loves pink and he loves brown.


 
Seen Here I can't quote the whole poem, because it's in a book(and, even though it has my name on it, it's not *mine* :lol: )-but that's the country and the world we live in: people see differences, and make judgements based upon them, for good or ill.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Feb 19, 2009)

elder999 said:


> Interestingly, most "white" Americans of whatever descent typically refer to themselves that way: _Scotch-Irish, Italian, polish, Irish,_ etc. No hyphens involved...:lol:


 
Quite so. If, for instance, I were to self-identify as Norwegian or Scandinavian, that would go largely unchallenged, nor would it be interpreted as an act of disloyalty to my Canadianism.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 19, 2009)

At the risk of being called jingoistic again&#8230;. 



Deaf Smith said:


> China? Hahahaha. Go see how many gringos are over there.


 
Gringos I wouldn&#8217;t know but there are an awful lot of yáng gu&#464;zi, gu&#464;l&#462;o, and hóng máo gu&#464;zi there



elder999 said:


> And has a thousand some-odd year history of being almost completely culturally and racially homgeonous, as well as isolated. More's the pity, but it's not like they can help it.


 
Very true and through in a reference to Shinto and you got it



elder999 said:


> There are, in fact, a great many Americans working in China. Additionally, the "native" populace of that very, very large country is composed of a variety of ethnicities that aren't really "Chinese."


 
Unless your Han people you just are not real Chinese in the eyes of the Chinese (Han people). And there are a whole lot more in China than Han people

Hàn Zú, Zhuàng Zú, M&#462;n Zú, Huí Zú, Miáo Zú, Wéiwú&#283;r Zú, T&#468;ji&#257; Zú, Yí Zú, M&#283;ngg&#468; Zú, Zàng Zú, Bùy&#299; Zú, Dòng Zú, Yáo Zú, Cháoxi&#462;n Zú, Bái Zú, H&#257;ní Zú, H&#257;sàkè Zú, Lí Zú, D&#462;i Zú, Sh&#275; Zú, Lìsù Zú, G&#275;l&#462;o Zú, D&#333;ngxi&#257;ng Zú, G&#257;osh&#257;n Zú, L&#257;hù Zú, Shu&#464; Zú, W&#462; Zú, Nàx&#299; Zú, Qi&#257;ng Zú, T&#468; Zú, Mùl&#462;o Zú, Xíbó Zú, K&#275;&#283;rkèz&#299; Zú, Dáwò&#283;r Zú, J&#464;ngp&#333; Zú, Màonán Zú, S&#462;lá Zú, Bùl&#462;ng Zú, T&#462;jíkè Zú, &#256;ch&#257;ng Zú, P&#468;m&#464; Zú, Èw&#275;nkè Zú, Nù Zú, J&#299;ng Zú, J&#299;nuò Zú, Déáng Zú, B&#462;o&#257;n Zú, Élu&#333;s&#299; Zú, Yùgù Zú, W&#363;z&#299;biékè Zú, Ménb&#257; Zú, Èlúnch&#363;n Zú, Dúlóng Zú, T&#462;t&#462;&#283;r Zú, Hèzhé Zú, Luòb&#257; Zú

And that is just the minorities of China not including the westerners and others that live there.

Are they racist? About as racist as everyone else on the planet I guess. 



elder999 said:


> Interestingly, most "white" Americans of whatever descent typically refer to themselves that way: Scotch-Irish, Italian, polish, Irish, etc. No hyphens involved...


 
A lady I worked with who was from Germany pointed that out to me awhile back and she thought it was pretty damn funny


----------



## jetboatdeath (Feb 19, 2009)

I don&#8217;t think it is a &#8220;Black/Brown/Yellow/Red thing it is culture.
When immigrants came to this country they were expected to assimilate to American culture, sure they could stay in the China towns but not much was offered to them because they were not truly part of the American culture.
But now we Americans are expected to assimilate to accommodate the immigrants, Spanish only driving manuals, English as a second language in schools.
They came to America for a reason to better themselves and God bless them for it, but they are the ones that need to except that there will be hardships like learning a new language and some of their culture will not be accepted in the United States. I spent a few years overseas mainly in Germany. I did not see an English driving manual, English menu (not even McDonalds) no special provisions were made for me because of my language or culture. I learned the culture of the Germans and had the time of my life.
We are all Americans and more now than ever we need to use that to our advantage. But I will put on my tin foil hat for this one.
They don&#8217;t want us to be a huge group of likeminded like cultured Americans, that would put the power back where it belongs in the hands of the American people. 99% of the blacks know nothing of the African culture other than what they have read in books or heard from TV. They are Americans just as you and me. If I were black if someone called me African I would stand proudly and say nope I am American..
And don't fly the flag of your nation in America that is an insult not to mention illeagle. The only foreign flags I saw in Germany was at the bases.


----------



## MA-Caver (Feb 19, 2009)

jetboatdeath said:


> I don&#8217;t think it is a &#8220;Black/Brown/Yellow/Red thing it is culture.
> When immigrants came to this country they were expected to assimilate to American culture, sure they could stay in the China towns but not much was offered to them because they were not truly part of the American culture.
> But now we Americans are expected to assimilate to accommodate the immigrants, Spanish only driving manuals, English as a second language in schools.
> They came to America for a reason to better themselves and God bless them for it, but they are the ones that need to except that there will be hardships like learning a new language and some of their culture will not be accepted in the United States. I spent a few years overseas mainly in Germany. I did not see an English driving manual, English menu (not even McDonalds) no special provisions were made for me because of my language or culture. I learned the culture of the Germans and had the time of my life.
> ...


Agreed, it was appalling to have the flag-desecration wrought on by illegal immigrants and Mexican Americans to get away with it (I believe) and the bassackawards way of viewing what it means to be an American. 

Which is why those who immigrate here to the U.S. and swear that oath of citizenship should leave their countries and culture behind or minimize it enough to say "yes I'm from there but now I'm an American!" and BE American and as American citizens be willing to go and fight in a war that happens to be against their home country, Italian Americans and Japanese Americans did it in WWII, even the children of German immigrants went and killed Germans.  

... but this is veering off topic and should be another thread I think.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Feb 19, 2009)

jetboatdeath said:


> I dont think it is a Black/Brown/Yellow/Red thing it is culture.
> When immigrants came to this country they were expected to assimilate to American culture, sure they could stay in the China towns but not much was offered to them because they were not truly part of the American culture.
> But now we Americans are expected to assimilate to accommodate the immigrants, Spanish only driving manuals, English as a second language in schools.



What, precisely, is your concern about English as a Second Language?




> They came to America for a reason to better themselves and God bless them for it, but they are the ones that need to except that there will be hardships like learning a new language and some of their culture will not be accepted in the United States. I spent a few years overseas mainly in Germany. I did not see an English driving manual, English menu (not even McDonalds) no special provisions were made for me because of my language or culture.



So, perhaps, America is guilty of offering a welcoming hand to newcomers




> They dont want us to be a huge group of likeminded like cultured Americans, that would put the power back where it belongs in the hands of the American people. 99% of the blacks know nothing of the African culture other than what they have read in books or heard from TV.



First, who's "they." Second, is there a problem with people reading about their ancestry?


----------



## Deaf Smith (Feb 19, 2009)

elder999 said:


> Africa is a _continent_, not a country. It's comprised of many different races. When you say "Africa," do you mean that Egyptians hate Sudanese and Nigerians, or that Zulus hate white South Africans?


 
All the above. And most hate whites..... And most do hate different tribes.



elder999 said:


> England had a Jewish Prime Minister before the 20th century named Benjamin Disraeli, you can read about him here.


 
Clearly you don't know much about the Muslims in England. And clearly you don't know much about English colonialism in the 19th century.



elder999 said:


> There are, in fact, a great many Americans working in China. Additionally, the "native" populace of that very, very large country is composed of a variety of ethnicities that aren't really "Chinese."


 
And you think these other ethnicities just love each other? Any idea what happened in the Cultural Revolution (1965-75)? What happend to the Han Chinese? Or what happend to Christians under Mao?



elder999 said:


> Of course, that doesn't make them not racist, any more than the U.S. isn't because of the diversity of our population.


 
But wait... Eric Holder just said we were!



elder999 said:


> India? See "China" in reference to diverse population. Sure, their caste system sucks. Jesw in Pakistan? Jews have been in Pakistan for a long, long time, though today most Jews in Pakistan are mistaken for Zorastrians.


 
Clearly you don't know about all the ethnic bombings.. Muslim .vs. Hindu. Or do you even know WHY Pakistan became Pakistan to begin with... Go read up on it. Oh, just Google it man.



elder999 said:


> Of course, _maybe_ he knows all of it, but it's hardly relevant, so what do you expect?


 
I have no doubt Holder was just doing an Obama sound bite. Just like today's 'we love NAFTA' when he was in Canada (but campained against NAFTA while running for president.)

Deaf


----------



## jetboatdeath (Feb 19, 2009)

> What, precisely, is your concern about English as a Second Language?


 
Other than teaching it in English speaking schools nothing. Go to Mexico and see if they hold a special class to teach you English.You are expected to know the language before you atend class. 



> So, perhaps, America is guilty of offering a welcoming hand to newcomers


 
We always have been. But untill recently we have not made special provisions for them.



> First, who's "they." Second, is there a problem with people reading about their ancestry?


 
1st What??
2nd Nothing at all, but thats not the point of my post now is it?


----------



## Archangel M (Feb 19, 2009)

Theodore Roosevelt on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN


_"In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."_


Theodore Roosevelt 1919


----------



## elder999 (Feb 19, 2009)

Deaf Smith said:


> All the above. And most hate whites..... And most do hate different tribes.


 
Most don't "hate" anyone. They're too busy _*starving.*_




Deaf Smith said:


> Clearly you don't know much about the Muslims in England. And clearly you don't know much about English colonialism in the 19th century.


 
Benjamin Disraeli was Jewish. *You* said there were no Jewish heads of state in Europe. One thing has nothing to do with another, and the only thing that one can see clearly is that you don't know what you're talking about.



Deaf Smith said:


> And you think these other ethnicities just love each other? Any idea what happened in the Cultural Revolution (1965-75)? What happend to the Han Chinese? Or what happend to Christians under Mao?


 
Dont' care. Don't think about it much. Don't see how it's relevant.




Deaf Smith said:


> But wait... Eric Holder just said we were!


 
And, in fact, *we are*.



Deaf Smith said:


> Clearly you don't know about all the ethnic bombings.. Muslim .vs. Hindu. Or do you even know WHY Pakistan became Pakistan to begin with... Go read up on it. Oh, just Google it man.


 
Know quite a bit about it. Still don't see how it's relevant. Still doesn't mean that there aren't any Jews in Pakistan. No synagogues since the 80's, of course, but that's not what you said. Once again, the only thing we can see clearly is that you're confused: ethnic terror in Pakistan doesn't negate a history of racism in the U.S.



Deaf Smith said:


> I have no doubt Holder was just doing an Obama sound bite.


 
Neither do I. *That's his job, after all.*:lfao:


----------



## elder999 (Feb 19, 2009)

Archangel M said:


> Theodore Roosevelt on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN


 

Teedie might be the last of those of his generation I'd accuse of being racist-my family shipped a great deal of his father, Theodore Sr.'s glass into the U.S. However:



> Theodore Roosevelt, in his_ The Winning of the West_:
> 
> *The settler and pioneer have at bottom had justice on their side; this great continent could not have been kept as nothing but a game preserve for squalid savages.*
> 
> ...


 
On the other hand, you are _when you are_. He also said:



> "the only wise and honorable and Christian thing to do is to treat each black man and each white man strictly on his merits as a man."


 
Additionally, Roosevelt said, while speaking to a heavily-armed crowd in Butte, Montana during his 1903 Western tour:



> "I fought beside colored troops at Santiago [Cuba], and I hold that if a man is good enough to be put up and shot at then he is good enough for me to do what I can to get him a square deal."


 
I dig Teedie a *lot*, but one should pay attention to *everything* he said and did-even if one agrees with it. On that one, I sure do-yeah, people who live here should learn to speak English, but they shouldn't forget where they came from, or the languages of their fathers and mothers, any more than his family did-he did, after all, speak Dutch, as most of his family still did, in addition to the German and French he studied in school.


----------



## jarrod (Feb 19, 2009)

part of why many white americans refer to themselves as scottish, irish, german, etc. is because i think many of us feel that we gave up a somewhat more interesting culture in order to be perceived as mainstream americans.  it worked; white people still sit atop the social heirarchy, but it has been at the price of culture or a sense of connection to our history.  you can see this in any wave of white immigration: irish, italians, germans, et al all had to largely seperate themselves from their native language, clothing, customs, & culture in order to fit into american society.  so i suspect that deep down some of us feel a little jealous that we had to give it up & others don't by "refusing to assimilate".  personally i like multi-culturalism, it makes things more interesting, & this country is big enough to accomodate all different types.

jf


----------



## Archangel M (Feb 19, 2009)

You are correct, you are WHEN you are. 

It leaves one to wonder what the USA would look like now if the settlers had our modern sensibilities? As to enjoying your heritage..I don't think Teddy was saying you had to forget ALL of your roots. However I think the point we draw from his speech TODAY is quite clear. Which is more important to you? Where do your allegiances lie?


----------



## jetboatdeath (Feb 20, 2009)

> personally i like multi-culturalism, it makes things more interesting, & this country is big enough to accomodate all different types.


 
I agree it is nice, but if your culture is something that is looked down on by the country you live in and not the norm... don't cry faul and pull the race card. Agian this is America.
And if I don't agree with your culture don't force me to.
We as Americans have a our own culture it's called freedom..
but thats slowly being changed....


----------



## jarrod (Feb 20, 2009)

jetboatdeath said:


> I agree it is nice, but if your culture is something that is looked down on by the country you live in and not the norm... don't cry faul and pull the race card. Agian this is America.
> And if I don't agree with your culture don't force me to.
> We as Americans have a our own culture it's called freedom..
> but thats slowly being changed....


 
well it depends on what it is being looked down on for.  often immigrants have been looked down on for keeping their native language, even if they speak english as well.  now if someone is pissed off because they're a polygymist & can't practice that here, too bad, that's the law of the land for right or wrong.

to my mind, freedom isn't really a culture so much as an ideal, & one that we have not been very comfortable with in recent decades.  more specifically we are not always very comfortable with how some people choose to exercise their freedom.  for instance in your post (& i'm not picking on you here, this is something pretty common to our society's way of thinking) you have simultaneously criticized some for failing to fall in line with the norm, while claiming freedom as the basis of american culture.  the message is sort of "come to america where you can be free...but use your freedom just like everyone else...".  we seem to place equal value on the opposing attributes of group conformity & individualism.    

jf


----------



## jetboatdeath (Feb 20, 2009)

> come to america where you can be free...but use your freedom just like everyone else...".


 
You have some good points and don't ever be afraid of offending me my skin is a tad thicker than others on here.
Yea maybe freedom as culture was a bad match, but i don't think it realy changes the basic idea of my post. After all we are not as free as we think we are.


----------



## jarrod (Feb 20, 2009)

jetboatdeath said:


> You have some good points and don't ever be afraid of offending me my skin is a tad thicker than others on here.
> Yea maybe freedom as culture was a bad match, but i don't think it realy changes the basic idea of my post. After all we are not as free as we think we are.


 
i'm not afraid of offending, i just wanted you to know that i wasn't singling you out.  i understand what you're saying, i was raised in a rural area & freedom was instilled as the highest american ideal from as early on as i can remember.  & that still has a huge impact on me today.  however these very same people often encouraged denying freedoms to homosexuals, minorities, different religions, or just anyone that was weird.  freedom is something we should all strive for, but everyone should get to come along for the ride.  that includes gays, redneck gun nuts, women & their reproductive rights...everyone.  

jf


----------



## Carol (Feb 20, 2009)

jetboatdeath said:


> I don&#8217;t think it is a &#8220;Black/Brown/Yellow/Red thing it is culture.
> When immigrants came to this country they were expected to assimilate to American culture, sure they could stay in the China towns but not much was offered to them because they were not truly part of the American culture.
> But now we Americans are expected to assimilate to accommodate the immigrants, Spanish only driving manuals, English as a second language in schools.
> They came to America for a reason to better themselves and God bless them for it, but they are the ones that need to except that there will be hardships like learning a new language and some of their culture will not be accepted in the United States. I spent a few years overseas mainly in Germany. I did not see an English driving manual, English menu (not even McDonalds) no special provisions were made for me because of my language or culture. I learned the culture of the Germans and had the time of my life.
> ...



It is also a matter of volume.  There are a couple of stores near the area where I lived in MA where people mostly speak Khmer, yet the Registry of Motor Vehicles does not offer materials in Khmer.  I don't think that is because the Cambodian people are particularly gifted at learning English. 1 out of every 10 households in the U.S. is Latino, the number of Cambodian households is nowhere near that level.  By the same token, while I don't have my hands on census numbers from Germany or Mexico, I'm confident that people of American heritage do not make up for one out of every 10 households in either country.  There are however, a significant number of English-speaking people in Germany, particularly in areas where English-speaking people are likely to be, including the the areas around US military bases:  my company has a significant number of installations throughout Kaiserslautern and Ramstein, we had no trouble at all finding prospective local talent that spoke English. The homepage for the city of Kaiserslautern is published in German and English, with the English page focusing more on what there is to learn and do in the city.

It is unlikely that one will find an English-language driver's license manual in Mexico. However, one will find one in Belize, a country with a large number of English-speaking people...much like one will find one in the indiginous language Quechua in many South American countries, particularly in the heart of the Andes.

According to the U.S. Census bureau, approximately 75 percent of Latino families speak Spanish at home. So if 1 in 10 families are Latino, then 75 out of 1000 are families that speak Spanish at home.  Teaching English as a second language so non-English speaking students don't degrate the pace of a standard English class can make sense.  Having government materials available in Spanish so the non-bilingual folks at government offices can spend less time trying to explain something to a person without command of English may also mean that person that person who draws a taxpayer-funded salary can work more efficiently.  I'm sure most folks would rather their RMV didn't run any slower than it already does.  :lol:


----------



## elder999 (Feb 20, 2009)

jetboatdeath said:


> And don't fly the flag of your nation in America that is an insult not to mention illeagle. The only foreign flags I saw in Germany was at the bases.


 

Just to clarify: there is no law against flying a foreign flag. The flag code prohibits flying one higher than the U.S. flag if both are displayed on U.S. soil, but there is no prohibition whatsoever against flying a foreign flag on its own-though a few municipalities have passed ordinances to that effect, the legality of those ordinances themselves, as a jurisdictional matter, has been disputed.


----------



## jkembry (Feb 20, 2009)

MA-Caver said:


> Well the question is WHY are we?
> Is it because we may accidentally step on a nerve?
> That the "N-word" might slip out during the conversation?
> That our real prejudices may show through during the course of the conversations?


 Why...Because political correctness had impeded honest and open discussion....because when people become involved in such discussions broad statements or opinion are taken personally when they don't have to be.

Oh...yeah we got that way because the legal system allows for people to file suit on just about anything.  People are afraid to discuss there opinion because they don't want to end up in court.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 20, 2009)

Again, at the risk of being called jingoistic



Deaf Smith said:


> And you think these other ethnicities just love each other? Any idea what happened in the Cultural Revolution (1965-75)? What happend to the Han Chinese? Or what happend to Christians under Mao?


 
Do you have any idea what happened during the Cultural Revolution?

it was 1966 - 1972 and it was ALL religions, ALL Chinese and rather nasty time in China. 

People close to Mao where "cleansed" or imprisoned (thing Deng Xiaoping) and there was a major push to destroy Chinese history and if it were not for some of Mao's cronies it would have been. Zhou Enlai saved the forbidden city from destruction but I am sure he did other nasty things during that time. People who had land or who were considered educated or who were examples of old ways (think artisans and martial artists) were targets of Mao and his Red guard. There was starvation and death and a lot of atrocities committed against both Han and non-han peoples.

But China today is a far cry form China During the Cultural Revolution. There is not a whole lot of ethnic conflict in China these days between the people all westerners label as Chinese and to be honest they are there are just subdivisions of that; Han and non-Han. 

Is there racism sure but I have seen more between countryside and city folk than Han and non-Han group. The only outright hostility I have heard of on an ethnic level tends to be when China and any other country on the planet have an issue. There are times it is better to not be a westerner and be in China

But as already mentioned, I am not sure how this is relevant to the conversation


----------



## elder999 (Feb 20, 2009)

Xue Sheng said:


> But as already mentioned, I am not sure how this is relevant to the conversation


 
Not at all-unless one is trying to make the case that "the conversation" should not or doesn't need to take place.


----------



## Carol (Feb 20, 2009)

I don't think Mr. Holder was talking about racial dynamics around the world.  He was definitely indicating that there is more healing and more growing to be done within the U.S. and wasn't isolating one race in particular when he made that statement.

I can see where its an issue close to his heart.   His sister-in-law was Vivian Malone Jones:







...one of the first two black students to attend the University of Alabama, she earned her degree and went on to a fine civil rights career in her own right.

Unfortunately she was lost to a stroke before seeing President Obama elected or seeing her brother-in-law appointed to AG.  :asian:


----------



## Gordon Nore (Feb 20, 2009)

Carol Kaur said:


> I don't think Mr. Holder was talking about racial dynamics around the world.  He was definitely indicating that there is more healing and more growing to be done within the U.S. and wasn't isolating one race in particular when he made that statement.



Let's see...

The headline...



> Holder: US a nation of cowards on racial matters



What Holder said...



> Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial *we* have always been and I believe continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards.



The use of the word, "we," has been overlooked, I think. Holder essentially said, 'we Americans are cowards,' when it comes to discussing race, not simply 'Blacks.' It was a broadly inclusive statement, which people will disagree with or not, but he didn't say, 'Whitey's a coward.' In referencing 'the melting pot,' a metaphor for the immigrant experience in America, there is a broader racial appeal than simply Black/White.

It remains a controversial statement, no doubt, but not a narrow indictment of one group or race.

Balanced against Holder's strong personal connection to a key event in the history of civil rights, it's quite astonishing.


----------



## Deaf Smith (Feb 20, 2009)

Xue Sheng said:


> But China today is a far cry form China During the Cultural Revolution. There is not a whole lot of ethnic conflict in China these days between the people all westerners label as Chinese and to be honest they are there are just subdivisions of that; Han and non-Han.
> 
> Is there racism sure but I have seen more between countryside and city folk than Han and non-Han group. The only outright hostility I have heard of on an ethnic level tends to be when China and any other country on the planet have an issue. There are times it is better to not be a westerner and be in China
> 
> But as already mentioned, I am not sure how this is relevant to the conversation


 
I guess the Communist party just loves Tibet monks, right? Or do you know where the Dalai Lama is or, more importantly, were he was when the Communist came?

Thing is, all around the world there is racism now. Far far more raceism than in the U.S. (how many tribes in Africa behead villagers of other tribes now and what is happening to the Chiapas in Mexico now.)

And that is what seems to get lost in the breast beating over raceism in the U.S. We are not perfect, the most of the world is actually worse off.

Deaf


----------



## Carol (Feb 20, 2009)

Deaf Smith said:


> We are not perfect, the most of the world is actually worse off.



That's a statement that could apply to many snapshots of U.S. history.

As a nation, we would not be what we are had we been content with shrugging our shoulders and saying the rest of the world is worse.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Feb 20, 2009)

Carol Kaur said:


> As a nation, we would not be what we are had we been content with shrugging our shoulders and saying the rest of the world is worse.



You know what, Carol, I'm actually a fan of the USA in many ways. To me, it's your upstarts that make your country great. The fierce individuals who stand up and say, "I love this country, but it's got to do better." The part of recent US history that moves me most and continues to stir my imagination is the sixties era of the civil rights movement which was when I was growing up. I look at that time in history, and, yeah I see the hate and misery and the equivocation, but I also see these huge triumphs against complacency.


----------



## elder999 (Feb 21, 2009)

Deaf Smith said:


> I guess the Communist party just loves Tibet monks, right? Or do you know where the Dalai Lama is or, more importantly, were he was when the Communist came?


 
He was in Tibet. He *ran*, quite famously. The China's grab of Tibet was just that, a land grab. THey didn't care about the Tibetans, except that they claim them as "Chinese," under some ancient imperial boundaries. Being who they are, they will continue to try to exert control over the region through the monks to the extent that the government will probably try to determine who Tenzin Gyatso's successor is, as they have with other lineage holders in Tibetan Buddhism......in any case, their actions aren't motivated by racism.( And what about what Hillary said this past week about China? The _fire Hillary clock_ officially started ticking....:lol



Deaf Smith said:


> Thing is, all around the world there is racism now. Far far more raceism than in the U.S. (how many tribes in Africa behead villagers of other tribes


 

I'm tempted to say "none." However, beheadings do occur in Africa, principally from Muslim believers against non-Muslims and Muslim criminals, and have for centuries in Africa now. THere was a wave of _]jihad_ against the various Coptic shrches in Mauritania, Mali, Nigeria, Chad, Kenya, etc......there is inter-tribal warfare, and has been for centuries, and when one examines it thoroughly, the conflict between Tutsi and Hutu in Rwanda is absurd in the level of hatred that is generated between two artificial classes-artificial classes that were generated by European colonists, btw-the Tutsis and Hutus in Rwanda were essentially the same people before the Europeans came. The conflicts in Chad and Sudan are another special case, in that their primary cause is the most basic and probably the first cause of warfare: a lack of resources, brought on by extended drought, though they are often divided along idelogical and ethnic lines, as human nature is wont , apparently, to do.In any case, if beheadings have occurred elsewhere in Africa, they have been part of general warfare, like the civil war in Congo, and not inter-tribal conflict.



Deaf Smith said:


> now and what is happening to the Chiapas in Mexico now.)


 
I actually own property in Mexico.I've go there regularly, and have gone several times not to vacation, but to build houses, churches and community centers. I've been to Chiapas. The problems there have a wide-range of causes that cannot simply be ascibed to "racism," though that might be an easy, knee-jerk sort of answer. In fact, the principal causes are economic. 



Deaf Smith said:


> And that is what seems to get lost in the breast beating over raceism in the U.S. We are not perfect, the most of the world is actually worse off.
> 
> Deaf


 
You know, I've said, time and time again, that my parents (and I, though I guess I was only 3 and really don't remember) marched on Washington, D.C. during the civil rights era. That my parents-without me-marched on Selma, and put their lives on the line more than once. Mind you, we lived in New York, where there was "racism" when I was a kid, and racism when I was an adult, and where there is racism *now*. Of course, living in New York, my parents and I might have been "better off" in that regard than people living in Selma or other parts of the deep south-I don't know. THere's something to be said for the more honest and overt racism of "No Coloreds" to the blurry and "secret" ones that I grew up with in New York.My parent, though, didn't have to go to Selma to be able to vote-they went so that others could, because they believed, as I do, that if _one of us is kept in chains, then *none* of us are free._ Previous generations, though, had to eliminate the same sorts of problems in New York in order for my parents to be ready and able to offer others help. 

Of course, "a lot of people around the world are worse off than in the U.S." *because there are a lot more people around the world* than there are in the U.S. _Their_ problems are often worse, and we do offer what help we can, but it's not as though we don't have problems of our own.

In any case, "a lot of places are worse off" is not only disingenuous (again, Holder is the *U.S. *Attorney General, not _Secretary of State_) but seems to be some sort of lame excuse-an offer to dismiss the very real problems that exist here, or a plea to not have the discussion., and, as I said elsewhere, _I never knew a problem of this nature to go away by *not talking about it.*_


----------



## Deaf Smith (Feb 21, 2009)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...d-Guadeloupe-rioters-turn-white-families.html

Britons flee French island of Guadeloupe as rioters turn on white families

If you read it you will see the islanders don't like white people. But... since most are leaving they will soon find out what a zero cash economy will be like.

Nah, there ain't no racism in the world except the U.S.

ops...

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2005/07/14/tribes-050714.html

http://www.globalissues.org/article/429/rwanda

http://www.sudanvisiondaily.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5601

http://www.boloji.com/wfs5/wfs677.htm

http://tibet.dharmakara.net/ictracism.html (Racism: China's Secret Scourge)

http://www.axt.org.uk/antisem/archive/archive1/yugoslavia/yugoslavia.htm  (remeber the Serbs and Croats?)

In fact gang, just google 'racism xxxx' and fill in xxxx with whatever country you desire and presto, you will find some intresting articles.

Only in the U.S. we ain't *beheading* people, *necklacing* people, *stavring* people, *mass executions*, and the like.

Oh, and about Tibet... what did the Chineese communist do to the Budist monks when they took over? Any thoughts?

Deaf


----------



## Xue Sheng (Feb 21, 2009)

Deaf Smith said:


> I guess the Communist party just loves Tibet monks, right? Or do you know where the Dalai Lama is or, more importantly, were he was when the Communist came?
> 
> Thing is, all around the world there is racism now. Far far more raceism than in the U.S. (how many tribes in Africa behead villagers of other tribes now and what is happening to the Chiapas in Mexico now.)
> 
> ...


 
My last post on this topic and in this thread since this has VERY little to do with the topic United States A Nation of Cowards??  Since Both China and Tibet are not the United States

Since you did now throw in the Dalia Lama who had little to do with my previous post I can only guess you know little of the events in China during 1966-1972 and since the Dalia Lama left Tibet prior to that I am again guessing you know little of the Cultural Revolution. 

If you missed it the first time in my previous post; 1966 to 1972 was bad for ALL religions and ALL people in China at that time. As for today it is very different than it was between 1966 and 1972. 

I will waste no further time here

My best to you


----------



## elder999 (Feb 21, 2009)

Deaf Smith said:


> Nah, there ain't no racism in the world except the U.S.
> 
> In fact gang, just google 'racism xxxx' and fill in xxxx with whatever country you desire and presto, you will find some intresting articles.
> 
> ...


 

I suppose, then, that we shouldn't talk about the everyday very real problems here, that effect us *here, in the U.S.?* Because "racism is everywhere," does that mean we can't-or _shouldn't_ do anything about it? I don't get what you're trying to say at all.......of course, all of those things *have* happened in the U.S.

BTW:



Deaf Smith said:


> Britons flee French island of Guadeloupe as rioters turn on white families
> 
> If you read it you will see the islanders don't like white people. But...* since most are leaving they will soon find out what a zero cash economy will be like.*


 
You might want to explain that-to some, who don't bother to read the article, it might sound _racist_.


----------



## Deaf Smith (Feb 21, 2009)

elder,

Holder called the nation a coward. Our problem of race is a very minor one compaired to the racism in the world (has I have shown.) 

We had a civil war over this race thing (slavery.) 

We then had much needed civil rights legislation 40 years ago. 

We then had 'affirmative action' for oh, 30 or so years.

We have had different races as represeatives, senators, mayors, govenors, billionares, actors, CEOs, etc.... even a President now.

Now compare that to the world and it's racism and what those countries do, or not do.

Do that and well..... this 'coward' business is just BS. It's an insult. Its grandstanding and not worth consideration.

Deaf


----------



## elder999 (Feb 22, 2009)

Deaf Smith said:


> elder,
> 
> Holder called the nation a coward. Our problem of race is a very minor one compaired to the racism in the world (has I have shown.)


 
Holder said _"We're all cowards"_While that would include *him*, I think his statement was largely rhetorical, _and your protestations do nothing but prove his rhetoric to have substance._



Deaf Smith said:


> We had a civil war over this race thing (slavery.)


 
Had a civil war over a lot of things, _least_ of all "this race thing."



Deaf Smith said:


> We then had much needed civil rights legislation 40 years ago.


 
Nearly 50 years ago, but who's counting? It's really just part of the conversation, rather than proof that the conversation is unecessary.



Deaf Smith said:


> We then had 'affirmative action' for oh, 30 or so years.


 
WHich could really be another part of the "conversation," rather than evidence that it's not necessary.



Deaf Smith said:


> We have had different races as represeatives, senators, mayors, govenors, billionares, actors, CEOs, etc.... even a President now.


 
Doctors, lawyers, Indian chiefs :lol:-generals, _millionaire nuclear physicists, engineers_,people in national security positions.....Nearly all of whom would say that there is racism in the U.S., and that a conversation is necessary.....



Deaf Smith said:


> Now compare that to the world and it's racism and what those countries do, or not do.


 
Why would I do that? I *live here*. I've always lived here. I've been all over the world-even "stayed" in other countries for a long period of time, and experienced racism in a variety of ways, and a variety of places. Heck, try and be black in Japan for a year. :lol: Racism exists everywhere, sure.

_It's never hurt me _more_ than it has right here._At home, where it* counts*



Deaf Smith said:


> Do that and well..... this 'coward' business is just BS. It's an insult. Its grandstanding and not worth consideration.
> 
> Deaf


 
Then maybe you should just stay out of the conversation....you obviously either don't think that it's necessary, or you're....a ....._"scaredy-cat?"_ :lol: 

I mean, I dunno-why not just talk about racism in the U.S.? *What are you afraid of?* :lfao:


----------



## Thesemindz (Feb 22, 2009)

Let's talk about whether or not we are a nation of cowards. Warning, there is some offensive language contained within this post. It is there to prove a point. Whether or not you get offended by it is your prerogative.

I know white people who are afraid to be around black people because they are afraid they are criminals, or prone to violence, or at best, poor and uneducated.

To be fair, I've known black people who were criminals, and prone to violence, and about whom "poor and uneducated" were as close to compliments as anyone could offer.

Of course, to be fair, I've known far more poor, uneducated, violent, criminal white people. That's probably a result of the local demographics. I live in a city of mostly white citizens.

I also know white people who don't have any problem what so ever with black people, but are afraid to even have a conversation in the same room as them, because they don't want to say the wrong thing and be thought of as racist. People who are almost incapacitated by their fear of social censure and the stigma attached to being a racist. Decent, open minded people, who are so frozen by that fear that they shut up completely, and then are thought of as racist anyway because of their odd behavior.

I've worked with black people who get irritated by the racism they see in their own culture and in other black americans. I've also worked with a black guy who said, "The reason you people drag brothers behind trucks is all this damn country music you keep listening to." I've also worked with black guys who see racism in every bad tip, and every lost promotion, and every bad interview, and every person who cuts them off in traffic.

I've heard affirmative action described as racist, fairness, reparations, and punishment for the sins of white people most of us aren't related to and wouldn't agree with. I've talked with white and black guys both who felt either way.

I've worked with white people who think that Barack Obama is a black guy, an arab, a muslim, a christian, a socialist, a communist, or an operative for a foreign government. I've worked with black people who think he's a white guy, a sell out, a tool for the white man, the answer to their prayers, or payback for slavery.

For me, it keeps coming back to the same business, and mellanin don't enter into it. It's about three things, poverty, education, and life experience. If you're poor and uneducated and ignorant, you spend a lot more time hating and blaming. If you have money and education you have better things to do with your time, and if you have exposure to lifestyles and ideas other than your own you tend to see them as aspects of people, instead of descriptions of monsters.

As long as we're talking about racism, why not mention religious persecution, or homophobia, or sexism, or martial arts fascists. See, to my mind, it's all the same stupid garbage. It's ignorance, wrapped in group think, with a hint of violent pretention. It doesn't have much of a basis in reality, but then, it doesn't need one. After all, bigots tend to hang around with bigots. Their ideas get constant, one sided reinforcement, and they rarely if ever associate with the object of their derision, so how could they learn the error of their ways?

Do we have racism here? You bet. Is it propogated and perpetuated by those in power to keep us divided against one another instead of focused on fixing the problems that plague our society? You better believe it. They want us pissed at the darkies, and the fags, and the towelheads. Pissed at outsider isn't pissed at powerful. It's no different than all that R and D crap they use to keep half the country at the other half's throats.

But it doesn't just come from the top. It comes from the bottom too. Strength in numbers right? So we stick to our comfort zone. White people don't want to be thought of as racist, so they just hang out with other white people where it can't come up. And black people don't want all the dirty looks and judgement, so they hang out with other black people who can relate. And homosexuals, and muslims, and mexicans, etc. etc. all stay with their own kind because it's more comfortable. And maybe it's safer too.

But that doesn't help the problem. As long as Tae-Kwon-Do guys don't hang out with Kenpo guys, they'll both think they have the best technique. It isn't until we all get together and throw it down that we find out what the truth is.

So I say, let's get all the pissed off black people, and the homophobes, and the white elitists, and the fundamentalist you-name-its in one room together and get them to agree on one thing.

Everybody hates the taxman.


-Rob


----------



## jarrod (Feb 22, 2009)

Thesemindz said:


> It's about three things, poverty, education, and life experience.


 
nailed it.

jf


----------



## searcher (Feb 22, 2009)

How did we go from a a cowards debate to a race debate in only 5 pages?


----------



## jarrod (Feb 22, 2009)

that's a very cowardly white man's question, jon.

:roflmao:

jf


----------



## elder999 (Feb 22, 2009)

searcher said:


> How did we go from a a cowards debate to a race debate in only 5 pages?


 

The excellent _Merriam Webster Collegiate Dictionary_ defines _"cowardice,"_ thusly:



> _Ignoble fear in the face of danger or pain. _


 
Though that "pain" might just be emotional, or social. "Cowardice" can be thought of as a perceived failure to demonstrate sufficient bravery in the face of an adverse situation. Cowards are usually seen to have avoided or refused to engage in a confrontation or struggle which has been deemed good or righteous by the wider culture in which they live.

Well, Deaf seems to be saying that we don't have to talk about racism, because it's everywhere-or, at least, that "we're not cowards, because they're worse than we are in Africa." 

_I'd bet Mr. Holder would use him as an example of what he's talking about. _

On the other hand, this particular conversation that we've been having in this thread has touched on a variety of topics that people are just downright afraid to talk about, either for fear of being callled racists, or because they know they *are* racists. Bob Hubbard seems to agree with Mr. Holder: 



Bob Hubbard said:


> Question "Black History Month", get called a racist
> Been there, have the links to prove it.
> 
> If the answer isn't "because the white man is keeping the black man down", you're a bigot.
> ...


 
THe original poster seems to disagree:



MA-Caver said:


> Calling us a nation of cowards -- racially speaking is kinda stupid I think, we DID elect a Black man for president didnt' we? Oh wait... he's half black and half white... BIG difference <sarcasm> .


 

then agree, somewhat:



MA-Caver said:


> Well the question is WHY are we?
> Is it because we may accidentally step on a nerve?
> That the "N-word" might slip out during the conversation?
> That our real prejudices may show through during the course of the conversations?


 

And some were smart enough to recognize Mr. Holder's statement for what it was: a bit of rhetoric designed to stimulate conflict and converstation:



Bill Mattocks said:


> Interesting comments. I don't know if we're a nation of cowards or not, but I agree that we often tend to avoid frank, open, and honest discussions about race. I'm generally not comfortable discussing it, and I feel comfortable about discussing many things.


 


Nolerama said:


> I think the term "cowards" was a little too harsh. However, it did bring us on the subject of race so in that light, it's successful
> I think Americans, generally speaking, are over-involved with the topic of race. Our concepts of "cool" is dictated at least in part due to race. We live, breathe, and eat racial stereotypes every day. Our media stream is saturated with racial flotsam and jetsam


 
and some seem to have a legitimate gripe, though others might call it "racist":



Archangel M said:


> Because if a white person is critical of any other race the "race card" gets dropped on the table.


 
Of course, we're not a "nation of cowards" when it comes to anything, so far, but we do tend to avoid what is a very painful conversation, and, it's like I've said-_I've never known a problem to go away by not talking about it._ Though, perhaps this isn't the place for such a discussion. Or maybe it is.....

For those who would say that racism isn't a problem in this country, take a look over on the Stormfront once or twice, if you have the stomach for it. Literally thousands of white supremacists, all proud to call themselves racists. They're not all ignorant or uneducated-they come from all walks of life:lawyers, doctors, ministers, policemen, soldiers, hell, some of them even work at National Labs.....

Of course, there are a variety of related topics that will stir controversy, and make people uncomfortable, whichever side of the issue they're on:

_Affirmative action, racial profiling,black crime statistics, housing demographics,black music, rap music, music, food, self-segregation, bussing, murder rates, hate crime legislation, employment quota systems, educational quota systems, the "N" word, racial scholarship funds,racial beauty "decorating" with nooses, decorating with a Confederate flag, the Confederate flag, Black History Month, "African American studies," pageants, BET, professional sports, reparations for slavery, a national apology for slavery,welfare,welfare reform, welfare queens, "Obamas whole campaign is* 'vote for me, I'm a black guy'"*_

Any one of those things has been enough to stir the pot here on MT and other forums-things people have strong feeling about, and sometimes feel that they can't discuss without being improperly labeled "racist." Or don't want to discuss, and hide behind that old "you can't understand, because you're white." Or won't discuss because they know that their feelings, or values, or beliefs, or thoughts on the issue *are* racist-and all of these, this last especially, can be applied to both blacks and whites and all races-sometimes Indians -you should see the prejudice that's sometimes directed towards me by some of my native brothers for my mixed heritage, never mind whites and blacks-try spending a whole life being asked, as I have, quite boldly_, What *are* you?? _

Of course, I always answer that question truthfully, but it depends upon what day it is: sometimes, I'm just _"black,"_ and sometimes it gets the whole story, and a lot of the time, well.....
_.......I'm a *human being*._

Of course, no one who asks that question is ever satisfied with that answer.........


----------



## Deaf Smith (Feb 22, 2009)

elder999 said:


> Of course, no one who asks that question is ever satisfied with that answer.........


 
I'm pretty sure they will never be satisfied with the answers. Could have sworn we were supposed to be 'color blind'. Yet as things improve, at least here, they try instead to paint all conversations in the light of color.

So tell me, want some discussion on race?

Let's try 'affirmative action'? Is it still needed? Is it simply racism in reverse? Just what is 'affirmatve action' in the light of the first black president being elected? Can it now be justified?

Deaf


----------



## Thesemindz (Feb 22, 2009)

Deaf Smith said:


> Could have sworn we were supposed to be 'color blind'.


 
Personally, I think this color blind crap is part of the problem. 

If I say I don't see you're race, then I'm denying an important part of who you are. I'm denying your ancestry, your culture, and everything you've endured and benefited from because of your race.

How about instead of _pretending_ we can't see color, we just allow people to be whatever color they are and judge them based on whether or not they're pricks instead?


-Rob


----------



## MA-Caver (Feb 22, 2009)

Thesemindz said:


> Personally, I think this color blind crap is part of the problem.
> 
> If I say I don't see you're race, then I'm denying an important part of who you are. I'm denying your ancestry, your culture, and everything you've endured and benefited from because of your race.


 True, it does make a statement and those who would take the time to study the history of the people could find an appreciation for the individual based on his ancestor's experiences ... good or bad. However it STILL by no means says ANYTHING about the individual themselves... particularly if they're born and raised in this country... where ancestral values aren't always passed on from one generation to the next... not always these days. Or if they are... they aren't as revered or treasured as per my experience with non-white youths I've met. That or they look at _me_ and see what *my* race has done to _theirs _and invariably hold that against me. 



Thesemindz said:


> How about instead of _pretending_ we can't see color, we just allow people to be whatever color they are and judge them based on whether or not they're pricks instead?
> -Rob


 That's basically how I try to "judge" a person I meet for the first time... on their individual character traits. Just because they're a prick doesn't always mean the next one I meet will be the same, I've had to learn that the hard way. I known plenty of white pricks to last me a while.


----------



## searcher (Feb 22, 2009)

Deaf Smith said:


> So tell me, want some discussion on race?
> 
> Let's try 'affirmative action'? Is it still needed? Is it simply racism in reverse? Just what is 'affirmatve action' in the light of the first black president being elected? Can it now be justified?
> 
> Deaf


 
Not really on #1, with the election it has been beat to death.

 OK, lets talk affirmative action, the reason why I could not get into Medical School.

_Needed?_   NO!!!

_Racism in reverse?_   Yes, bigger than life itself.

_What is it?_   A waste of government money.

_Can it be justified?_   Depends on how many lawyers you have in one room together.    You have enough people in one area and I am sure there will be hundreds of cases of how it works.    And hundreds of how it does not.


----------



## elder999 (Feb 22, 2009)

searcher said:


> OK, lets talk affirmative action, the reason why I could not get into Medical School.
> 
> _Racism in reverse?_ Yes, bigger than life itself..


 
There is no "_racism in reverse,_ or _reverse racism._

There's just _racism_, and if you want to say that "affirmative action is racist," then that's what you should say.....because *it is*.

As for why you couldn't get into medical school, it always boils down to two things: either you weren't "qualified" or you didn't try hard enough. Someone told you a lie-that is to say, "_never_-and you believed it.



Deaf Smith said:


> Could have sworn we were supposed to be 'color blind'.




Well, no, we're not supposed to be "color blind." The French tried that-as in "we're *all* French," and then they tried to deny any differences. In the end, all they've reaped from it is discontent, and a kind of de facto segregation and discrimination that led to a growing sub class of society feeling increasingly discontent, unrecognized and marginalized-and, finally, just plain easy to piss off.  

Recognition of differences without any pre-judgement is the first step to any kind of understanding.


----------



## Thesemindz (Feb 22, 2009)

elder999 said:


> Recognition of differences without any pre-judgement is the first step to any kind of understanding.


 
Exactly. Thank you. 


-Rob


----------



## Gordon Nore (Feb 22, 2009)

elder999 said:


> There is no "_racism in reverse,_ or _reverse racism._



Damn straight. What I don't like about the notion of reverse racism or reverse discrimination is that they are somehow worse than racism or discrimination.


----------



## Empty Hands (Feb 23, 2009)

searcher said:


> OK, lets talk affirmative action, the reason why I could not get into Medical School.



Most everyone who tries, black or white, doesn't get into med school.  You weren't good enough, sorry.  You won't get good enough either if you continually cling to racial resentment to explain your failings instead of doing the hard work of making yourself better.


----------



## Carol (Feb 24, 2009)

If "affirmative action" was the conclusion of a pre-med advisor based on your application package, then find another pre-med advisor right away.


----------

