KKK endorses McCain: "A black President would go against just about everything we stand for"

[panamania79 2]

I'm sorry but who exactly gives a ** what those morons say?

THANK YOU !

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

The question is why do those "black colleges" exist in the first place. History will dictates the answer to that question. By the by, those "black colleges" accept students of all backgrounds, eventhough their consider as "black colleges". Are those monthly "black employees" or "hispanic employees" meetings advertised that way...?

Why do they exist? They were probably created by people who wanted to study with their own people. Seems like racism to me. I haven't heard of many white applying to black colleges. The fact that it's called a black college should be enough evidence.

Yes, there are posters by the elevators and in the cafeteria announcing the next event. It specifically states what specific race of people are invited to a luncheon seminar or whatever. There is even an organization in my company called BEAM "Black Employees at McGraw-Hill". (Seems very inviting to white employees. )

Wow, I am guessing you don't know a lot about US history?

:whistle:

[Eric-Pris 1,606]

I've yet to see a "white employees" meeting.

It's called the board of directors. You just aren't invited, that's all.

Blacks are allowed to be part of the board of directors, they're not excluded by race. A white guy can't go to a black employees meeting because they EXPLICITLY exclude non-blacks.

So do you want to start white groups and attend black meetings just because you are upset by the fact that one exists and the other one does not? To make a point? I just don't get it...

I don't want to start anything, I couldn't care any less about these work meetings. I'd like to know why nobody thinks it's wrong to have "black meetings". If somebody would write "white employees" there would be protests.

[Eric-Pris 1,606]

The question is why do those "black colleges" exist in the first place. History will dictates the answer to that question. By the by, those "black colleges" accept students of all backgrounds, eventhough their consider as "black colleges". Are those monthly "black employees" or "hispanic employees" meetings advertised that way...?

Why do they exist? They were probably created by people who wanted to study with their own people. Seems like racism to me. I haven't heard of many white applying to black colleges. The fact that it's called a black college should be enough evidence.

Yes, there are posters by the elevators and in the cafeteria announcing the next event. It specifically states what specific race of people are invited to a luncheon seminar or whatever. There is even an organization in my company called BEAM "Black Employees at McGraw-Hill". (Seems very inviting to white employees. )

Wow, I am guessing you don't know a lot about US history?

Why don't you educate me since you seem to know it all.

Besides, who cares what happened 150 years ago. Racism is racism any way you slice it.

Edited May 14, 2008 by kid brooklyn

[Empress of Groovy 373]

Your right. Proof of that is the reelection of a scum bag like Marion Barry. This is what I love about America. How certain races, well one in particular actually, has no problem voting in a thug like Marion Barry again, because of the color of his skin, but whenever anyone addresses race that is white, then they are ignorant, bigot, racist etc etc etc etc...

There is a huge double-standard in this country when it comes to race. Why are there "black colleges" and no "white colleges"? God forbid someone starts an organization with the word "white" in it... you'd have protests and that moron Al Sharpton would be blocking traffic again.

My company has these gatherings monthly. It's always "black employees" or "hispanic employees". I've yet to see a "white employees" meeting.

The question is why do those "black colleges" exist in the first place. History dictates the answer to that question. By the by, those "black colleges" accept students of all backgrounds, eventhough their consider as "black colleges". Are those monthly "black employees" or "hispanic employees" meetings advertised that way...?

I'm reminded of an interesting article from a few years ago, Black College Diversifies, Luring Russian Town

[chri'stina 190]

kid brooklyn:

Are you the USC or not?

If you are, then why don't you know that black colleges were created due to the fact that black people were not allowed to enroll in white universities back in the day? They wanted to study, they were not allowed to, so they had to start their own. Maviwaro said it too but I don't want you to miss the point. If you are not the USC, now you know why.

[HAL 9000 96]

Those too ignorant to know their history are condemned to repeat its consequences.

[Eric-Pris 1,606]

I am the USC.

Are they still not being admitted to certain colleges (based on race, not economics)? I don't think so.

Edited May 14, 2008 by kid brooklyn

[HAL 9000 96]

I am the USC.

Are they still not being admitted to certain colleges (based on race, not economics)? I don't think so.

Show us a current university that openly discriminates based on race and maybe we'll lend you an ounce of credibility. In the meantime you'll continue flaunting your unfortunate ignorance of history as a USC.

Affirmative action does not count.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I am the USC.

Are they still not being admitted to certain colleges (based on race, not economics)? I don't think so.

Hmmm... At a guess I'd imagine the term "historical legacy" comes into play somewhere here...

[chri'stina 190]

I am the USC.

Are they still not being admitted to certain colleges (based on race, not economics)? I don't think so.

I don't think so either. But they(black colleges) were started in the early 1900's, not recently, and by the time they(the people) would be more easily accepted into mainstream univs(60 or more years later) they had already established great colleges, so why shut them down? And as other people wrote, they do not exclude white people from attending.

Edited May 14, 2008 by stina&suj

[DeadPoolX 9]

I can understand what Kid Brooklyn is getting at here. There seems to be a number of concessions in numerous areas of life that are for the explicit use of those labeled as minorities. Perhaps some of these practices were a good idea and made sense years ago, but today, it makes very little practical sense.

Why create something such as an "African American meeting" or a "Hispanic American meeting" since all that does is further alienate the "minority" employees from those who aren't considered minorities and worse yet, tends to breed resentment among the ranks. Kid Brooklyn is right in that if such a thing called a "White meeting" were to take place, there'd be lawsuits popping up all over the country due to "discriminatory practices." Why are the rules so very different for minorities?

I can't imagine it'd be because minorities in these positions need a "helping hand." They've obviously gained a decent level of education and work-related training. In addition, many meetings are reserved for those employees who're higher up in the corporate hierarchy. If a minority reaches these levels, I sincerely doubt he or she would truly require a "hand out."

I've often considered the subject of "hate crimes" to be a similar issue. While not all criminal activity is due to hatred, those that are tend to be reserved for minorities placing the sole blame on non-minorities (i.e. white men, and to a lesser degree, white women). If an African American or Hispanic American man murders a white man -- and does so out of some sort of impassioned hatred for him -- that homicidal act still wouldn't be categorized as a "hate crime" since it wouldn't fit neatly into the extremely narrow definition we've designed for ourselves.

[HAL 9000 96]

I can understand what Kid Brooklyn is getting at here. There seems to be a number of concessions in numerous areas of life that are for the explicit use of those labeled as minorities. Perhaps some of these practices were a good idea and made sense years ago, but today, it makes very little practical sense.

Why create something such as an "African American meeting" or a "Hispanic American meeting" since all that does is further alienate the "minority" employees from those who aren't considered minorities and worse yet, tends to breed resentment among the ranks. Kid Brooklyn is right in that if such a thing called a "White meeting" were to take place, there'd be lawsuits popping up all over the country due to "discriminatory practices." Why are the rules so very different for minorities?

I can't imagine it'd be because minorities in these positions need a "helping hand." They've obviously gained a decent level of education and work-related training. In addition, many meetings are reserved for those employees who're higher up in the corporate hierarchy. If a minority reaches these levels, I sincerely doubt he or she would truly require a "hand out."

I've often considered the subject of "hate crimes" to be a similar issue. While not all criminal activity is due to hatred, those that are tend to be reserved for minorities placing the sole blame on non-minorities (i.e. white men, and to a lesser degree, white women). If an African American or Hispanic American man murders a white man -- and does so out of some sort of impassioned hatred for him -- that homicidal act still wouldn't be categorized as a "hate crime" since it wouldn't fit neatly into the extremely narrow definition we've designed for ourselves.

Of course you can't imagine it... you're not African American.

As for the hate crime bit... I'd like for you to prove it please. I believe the legislation is pretty clear in being a two-lane highway for that kind of thing. Maybe I'm wrong.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Ok, so we've debunked that the NAACP is like the KKK, right? Bottom line is are we surprised at all by this endorsement? There are many people that won't vote for Obama purely based on skin color, which is just sad to me.

I agree its just plain stupid that people would make comparisons with the KKK and NAACP. It just makes you look stupid, so people please quit it.

What is equally sad is that people will vote for Obama purely based on his skin color.

White pride, this gets to me how can you be proud of something you have no control over. Go feed a starving kid, become a person of great character. That is something to be proud of.

Who cares what color the person was that started NAACP or if there is white people employed with the NCAAP. Hell even the occaisonal white person gets helped out by the organization(the expecption to the rule). The over all message is to advance color people, well there is a fair share of trailer parks that could need to be advanced.

[HAL 9000 96]

"White pride, this gets to me how can you be proud of something you have no control over. Go feed a starving kid, become a person of great character. That is something to be proud of."

AMEN