LMAO Holder throws race card...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

On the other hand, I can't recall the last time I walked into a privately-owned businesses that refused to serve someone because of their race. I don't think I've ever seen a "Whites Only" sign (except in the context of an historical exhibit) in my life.

---

That's thanks largely to Title II of the Civil Rights Act.

... And the fact that you probably live in San Antonio, and most "businesses" would not survive long without hispanics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

People are pissed off at Holder for being fucking incompetent and a liar, not because he is black.

---

Like I said in another thread, if you look for racism, you can find it. It doesn't need to exist, but you can always find it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

Sure seems to be quite a bit of specific "smoke" detailed for there not to be fire...I won't believe it without further independent confirmation but if it turns out that OKC WAS another Holder sting gone bad it's going to be hard for him to dig his way out...

---

No shit. Give him the death penalty too, if it really happened as alleged.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Like I said in another thread, if you look for racism, you can find it. It doesn't need to exist, but you can always find it.

---

You can also be blind to it as well by saying it doesn't exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoeChalupa

You can also be blind to it as well by saying it doesn't exist.

---

I don't think anyone says that. There are still some Neanderthals out there. I am only saying that people are too sensitive, and shouldn't be looking for it where it isn't intended.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoeChalupa

Oh, it is true but since his remarks keep listeners listening and making money..that is all that matters. IMUS was not on Rush's network if I'm not mistaken.

---

Sorry, not just taking your word for it, Joe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMX7

That's thanks largely to Title II of the Civil Rights Act.

---

That's largely due to the entire Act removing government's ability to engage in racism and protect racists from the natural consequences of their racism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMX7

... And the fact that you probably live in San Antonio, and most "businesses" would not survive long without hispanics.

---

I've never lived in San Antonio but doubt any (not even most) "businesses" would survive if they engaged in such practices today -- unless, of course, they're racism were protected by the government.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

...and protect racists from the natural consequences of their racism.

---

Oh, I see... So those signs would have never existed because the racists would be victims of the "consequences" of their own racism. People would not be receptive to such overt racism; and therefore they would deny those businesses their business and those businesses would go out of business.

That's a great theory except those racists in the 1960's (and before) were not victims of the consequences of their racism - which is exactly why they could survive as overt racists in the first place.

I have no doubt you would NOT see those signs here in San Antonio with or without CRA of 1964, but I also have no doubt you WOULD see those signs in Alabama or Mississippi without CRA of 1964.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMX7

Oh, I see... So those signs would have never existed because the racists would be victims of the "consequences" of their own racism. People would not be receptive to such overt racism; and therefore they would deny those businesses their business and those businesses would go out of business.

---

Those signs existed because government allowed it, condoned it, and participated in racial discrimination.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMX7

That's a great theory except those racists in the 1960's (and before) were not victims of the consequences of their racism - which is exactly why they could survive as overt racists in the first place.

---

Because they were protected by the law.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMX7

I have no doubt you would NOT see those signs here in San Antonio with or without CRA of 1964, but I also have no doubt you WOULD see those signs in Alabama or Mississippi without CRA of 1964.

---

I simply disagree.

How are you distinguishing between government protecting racism in private practice and government "leaving racism alone"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMX7

How are you distinguishing between government protecting racism in private practice and government "leaving racism alone"?

---

When government practiced racism itself, it also gave license to individuals to do the same.

And, with the force of government behind them, racists felt comfortable exhibiting their despicable hatred.

Believe it or not, the vast majority of Americans, prior to 1964, weren't racist. But, in the face of a government that was, that majority was diluted with people too chicken to stand up for minorities that were being abused.

Once government was removed for the equation, that silent majority set about rectifying the situation. "Whites Only" signs weren't made illegal by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 but, they started disappearing after it was passed, nonetheless.

Aren't Holder's comments somewhat inaccurate since Obama is bi-racial?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jacob1983

Aren't Holder's comments somewhat inaccurate since Obama is bi-racial?

---

No, it's mostly because they're not true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoeChalupa

Rush Limpballs throws out racist remarks almost daily which keeps racism alive.

---

So does Mike Epps but both do it in hyperbole. that is not racism, but comedy.

Desperation card

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

When government practiced racism itself, it also gave license to individuals to do the same.

And, with the force of government behind them, racists felt comfortable exhibiting their despicable hatred.

Believe it or not, the vast majority of Americans, prior to 1964, weren't racist. But, in the face of a government that was, that majority was diluted with people too chicken to stand up for minorities that were being abused.

---

Nothing I’ve said has implied that the vast majority of Americans were racist prior to 1964. The racism was obviously greatest in the south, and I wouldn’t agree with you that the vast majority of people living in segregated southern towns were actually closet civil rights activists that just wanted to stand up for minorities that were being abused but couldn’t .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

Once government was removed for the equation, that silent majority set about rectifying the situation. "Whites Only" signs weren't made illegal by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 but, they started disappearing after it was passed, nonetheless.

---

Actually, Title II did in-effect make those signs illegal for many businesses. Title II - through the use of legal force - changed the culture of overt racism is private practices (e.g., “Whites Only” signs) in the South, not the "silent majority". Just ask the owner of this place:


http://georgiainfo.galileo.usg.edu/t...ta%20Motel.jpg

http://georgiainfo.galileo.usg.edu/t...ta%20Motel.jpg

holy SHIT!

Talk about a sign of the times...to hell with racism...when was the last time you saw a ten meter platform at a HOTEL POOL?

Lawyers and insurance companies banned those in the sixties too...

that and the fucking examiner. wtfbbq!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4cc

daily caller :sleep

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

that and the fucking examiner. wtfbbq!

---

Uhh guys...original quote was in the New York Times...they just quoted the quote and it was attributed in the short article...

Here's the original source...says the same thing...

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/18/us...pagewanted=all

"Headwinds"

Joe. You're the perfect follower. GO BLUE!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

http://georgiainfo.galileo.usg.edu/t...ta%20Motel.jpg

holy SHIT!

Talk about a sign of the times...to hell with racism...when was the last time you saw a ten meter platform at a HOTEL POOL?

Lawyers and insurance companies banned those in the sixties too...

---

It looked like a cool place tbh, too bad about its history.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

Uhh guys...original quote was in the New York Times...they just quoted the quote and it was attributed in the short article...

Here's the original source...says the same thing...

---

the examiner is still a piece of crap

and so is the daily caller

It was just a link I hit from another site...trust me...I'm not going to the Daily Caller and Examiner every day to get my only news...