ADVERTISEMENT

A thought on the State of the Union

This has nothing to do with having black friends or blacks you respect. You're basically parroting FoxNews talking points that intentionally misinform you into believing that just teaching history, as it acually happened, is making white kids hate themselves. History aint always pretty but that doesn't mean we should suppress the truth so kids can feel more comfortable.

At its baseline, the hysteria over CRT and groomers is just an influence campaign to scare people into voting Republican. That's it...
I am NOT parroting any talking points, you are totally wrong. Speak for yourself and quit stating what you think are other people’s motives.
 
Lol what in the world is all this? What school or curriculum is teaching children that white people are oppressors? And before you link me to some random college curriculum from Oberlin or some other crunchy campus, consider that a college is the one specific place where a class SHOULD be about that so you can foster healthy debate and learn.

The problem is the olds and simpletons who guzzle RW media think every Tom, Dick, and Jane teaching K-12 is teaching their poor children that they’re to blame for everyone’s problems in this country. Are there bad teachers who say shit like that? Sure, of course there are, and they should be canned. Just like the RW Texas middle school teacher who went on a rant explaining how he believed white people were superior to every other race.

There are always going to be bad apples, but despite Tucker and the rest of the opinion show brigade barking about this being a problem (and it gets parroted by MTG, Gaetz, and the rest of the dregs of Congress) you can rest assured knowing it actually isn’t as pervasive a problem as you think.
I have seen and heard it with my eyes and ears. You have no right to dispute that. This is not about Tucker or anybody else, it has nothing to do with them.
 
I have seen and heard it with my eyes and ears. You have no right to dispute that. This is not about Tucker or anybody else, it has nothing to do with them.
You have seen and heard what? I would be curious to know what you heard that you believe to be "CRT"
 
  • Like
Reactions: yoshi121374
Sigh...

Maybe one day. Have at it tribes. Maybe we should just organize a weekend where everyone can go to the Rose Bowl and kill each other since people they disagree with " are just bad." I mean that's where we're headed so by all means let's just be expeditious about it and organize an event to get it done in the most effective way possible. We as a nation will have to decide we're done being stuck on stupid. We're also going to have to stop justifying what we do by the actions of the other side. That's a cowards argument and it's intellectually and morally bankrupt.

Dear Willance

Couple months ago I made the joke about the defund the police mantra.

Probably should not have but to a group of people I jokingly said maybe we are going at this defund the police and gun control wrong

My idiot joke was we fund all gang members with lots of guns and ammunition and let have a battleground set up like people do on those paint ball sets and let them shoot and shoot till they killed each other off

Crime solution solved

If course in that conversation I meant it totally as a stupid joke like some of the policies the government follows now

The funny thing was some people took it serious

Had to explain that it was intended as a ridiculous joke

The funny part to me is that crime is so bad people will do and try anything as they are si desperate at this point to moderate crime
 
You have seen and heard what? I would be curious to know what you heard that you believe to be "CRT"

Watch the new Disney Woke Cartoon

Really great hate mongering indoctrination, oops I mean entertainment for 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 year old children
 
Watch the new Disney Woke Cartoon

Really great hate mongering indoctrination, oops I mean entertainment for 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 year old children

Should i pop open Disney+ and search for "Disney woke cartoon" or what?
 
I love it, call my take stupid. If someone does not agree with you, they are stupid. You can be rude all day, I hope you are happy with yourself.

Plenty of people I disagree with are intelligent and thoughtful. Trying to argue that race doesn't make his accomplishments in early 1900s America more significant is, objectively, stupid.
 
Plenty of people I disagree with are intelligent and thoughtful. Trying to argue that race doesn't make his accomplishments in early 1900s America more significant is, objectively, stupid.
First of all-his accomplishments were in the 1930 and 1940s. You know nothing about the gentleman or what he did. His race had nothing to do with his accomplishments
 
There have been 0 good faith attempts at compromise from the Republicans. I understand your intent and agree with it, but understand the context here.

They blocked Obama from electing a supreme court judge for over a year. PURELY political, they stacked the court.
They created the CRT outrage in a think tank and astro turfed it to school boards across the nation. The motivation here is to make our schools worse and to weaken the publics opinion of them so that they can PRIVATIZE them and make money off it while indoctrinating the children with Christianity and of course leave out any history or information that challenges the wrong people and outlook.
They literally attempted to subvert the election by creating FAKE electorates... They gaslit the nation for months and months claiming the election was stolen.
There was a thing called Jan 6th. It happened and the leaders in the Republican party haven't even condemned it.


They are heckling a president's SOTU....

The GOP is out of control. The solution isn't that the Democrats need to be understanding and kind and empathetic, thats already been found to not work at all. The solution is to be better at politics.

I an going to point out one thing on your comments.

The literacy rates in America are so bad in those schools that based on that children in many districts would be better off attending third world jungle or desert schools.

Education in America is being destroyed by social engineering instesd of teaching literacy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls
CRT as an issue was completely fabricated by a think tank. If you don't know that then you are not informed.

Sounds like the 1619 Project which was likely a idea of a drunken party of liberal left wing Democrats who all said what hair brained crazy theory can we add to the other crazy hair brained
ideas instead of focusing on building a future for all people
 
Should i pop open Disney+ and search for "Disney woke cartoon" or what?

Not sure where I opened it , but was disappointed in the way the message was handled

In your face does not convince me of anything other than you are in my face and I will not listen to the message until it is better presented

Will do some research and see where it is at

I have Disney Plus for my grands but saw this in its entirety on some other channel

It was surprising as most businesses particularly like a Disney avoid being in controversial messages that will antagonize potential sales

Recently sold all Disney stock along with others as Disney has been taking a huge beating in value

I have an investment strategy of go woke go broke and sell stock in any company going woke

so far it has been a huge profit maker

Sell short or buy puts on go woke
 
First of all-his accomplishments were in the 1930 and 1940s. You know nothing about the gentleman or what he did. His race had nothing to do with his accomplishments

What argument do you imagine I'm making here?

What I'm saying is that his accomplishments and the challenges and barriers he overcame are much more significant because he was a black man. That's an objective truth in 1930s and 1940s American. Surely you aren't arguing against that statement?

I don't understand what you are arguing against? Especially given the bolded above.
 
Plenty of people I disagree with are intelligent and thoughtful. Trying to argue that race doesn't make his accomplishments in early 1900s America more significant is, objectively, stupid.

Consider George Washington Carver

The Peanut King
 
Consider George Washington Carver

The Peanut King

Consider what? He's a successful black man who overcame systemic racism and oppression to make a major impact on the world.

These things (systemic racism etc) objectively existed during his time. No serious person could possibly make a good argument otherwise. Is that what you guys are trying to say here?
 
What argument do you imagine I'm making here?

What I'm saying is that his accomplishments and the challenges and barriers he overcame are much more significant because he was a black man. That's an objective truth in 1930s and 1940s American. Surely you aren't arguing against that statement?

I don't understand what you are arguing against? Especially given the bolded above.
The man had Zero barriers, not every great accomplishment by anybody was because they overcame barriers because of the color of their skin. His tremendous work on blood matters was not enhanced or limited by the color of his skin. You know nothing about this great American.
 
The man had Zero barriers, not every great accomplishment by anybody was because they overcame barriers because of the color of their skin. His tremendous work on blood matters was not enhanced or limited by the color of his skin. You know nothing about this great American.

Yikes.
 
Consider what? He's a successful black man who overcame systemic racism and oppression to make a major impact on the world.

These things (systemic racism etc) objectively existed during his time. No serious person could possibly make a good argument otherwise. Is that what you guys are trying to say here?

Sorry I should have been more definitive

I perceive you are jumping to the conclusion I am belittling his accomplishments and the man because he was of color

Far from that as I am singing his praises as a person NOT because of his skin color but because he made great contributions to mankind

Great man with amazing discoveries to be remembered in history as that way and not a great man because he was a black man who also happened to make amazing discoveries

I think sometimes in an effort to publicize the success of black individuals with that very over the top extra effort to point it out because the person is black that in a bizarre ways belittles the amazing success of the person
 
  • Like
Reactions: loveoysters
To be a bit more clear I was PRAISING George Washington Carver for his singular accomplishments

I was not talking about the other guy who I have no idea who he is but plan to look up and read about as you can never know too much

Like having too much Money, Health or Tupperware

You can never have to much knowledge
 
Sorry I should have been more definitive

I perceive you are jumping to the conclusion I am belittling his accomplishments and the man because he was of color

Far from that as I am singing his praises as a person NOT because of his skin color but because he made great contributions to mankind

Great man with amazing discoveries to be remembered in history as that way and not a great man because he was a black man who also happened to make amazing discoveries

I think sometimes in an effort to publicize the success of black individuals with that very over the top extra effort to point it out because the person is black that in a bizarre ways belittles the amazing success of the person

No. I wasn't assuming anyone here was belittling him.

Other guy already said that he believes a black man in early 1900s America "faced Zero barriers". That's what I'm arguing against.

Because, of course, that's an utterly insane suggestion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flotiger
No. I wasn't assuming anyone here was belittling him.

Other guy already said that he believes a black man in early 1900s America "faced Zero barriers". That's what I'm arguing against.

Because, of course, that's an utterly insane suggestion.

If I am totally honest with myself yet pay due respect to everyone who lived at that time it was dam difficult for everyone especially in the South

I had stories told to me passed from my ancestors that are white but were definitely NOT privaledged

I really cannot even begin to fathom or understand the difficulty of life for any person or culture through all of American history as we see the different phases we went through

We live a very privaledged life today and I will argue myself that included every person in the
US

Some of us do better than others and some less

It’s the consequences of equality
 
No. I wasn't assuming anyone here was belittling him.

Other guy already said that he believes a black man in early 1900s America "faced Zero barriers". That's what I'm arguing against.

Because, of course, that's an utterly insane suggestion.
Insane? Again you do not know the situation. Dr. Charles Drew had no limitations due to his race that prevented him from becoming an unbelievable man that’s work with blood saved so many lives.
 
The man had Zero barriers, not every great accomplishment by anybody was because they overcame barriers because of the color of their skin. His tremendous work on blood matters was not enhanced or limited by the color of his skin. You know nothing about this great American.

You seriously believe that his race during the 1940's in America wasn't a challenge for him to overcome? How freaking clueless are you?
 
You seriously believe that his race during the 1940's in America wasn't a challenge for him to overcome? How freaking clueless are you?

Had no idea this was something anyone would try and argue. Wild.

And the guy was born in 1904 or something too.

Wild.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yoshi121374
Insane? Again you do not know the situation. Dr. Charles Drew had no limitations due to his race that prevented him from becoming an unbelievable man that’s work with blood saved so many lives.

No limitations due to his race? What other description could you possibly give for the obstacles called out in this American Chemical Society biography of his life?

Below are just a few relevant excerpts from the article. (The article also includes a quote from Dr. Drew on the very subject of race in the medical field.)

A native Washingtonian, Drew was an average student but gifted athlete recruited in 1922 on a football and track and field scholarship by Amherst College in Massachusetts. He was one of only 13 African Americans in a student body of 600, where the racial climate exposed him to hostility from opposing teams. His own football team passed him over as captain his senior year even though he was the team’s best athlete.

Drew’s interest in transfusion medicine began during his internship and surgical residency at Montreal Hospital (1933-1935) working with bacteriology professor John Beattie on ways to treat shock with fluid replacement. Drew aspired to continue training in transfusion therapy at the Mayo Clinic, but racial prejudices at major American medical centers barred black scholars from their practices. He would instead join the faculty at Howard University College of Medicine, starting as a pathology instructor, and then progressing to surgical instructor and chief surgical resident at Freedmen's Hospital.

In 1938, while earning a doctorate at Columbia University, Drew won a fellowship to train at Presbyterian Hospital in New York with eminent surgeon Allen Whipple. Instead of following the traditional path of residents to gain experience in surgical pathology and bacteriology, surgical laboratory research, outpatient clinic, operating rooms and surgical wards, Whipple assigned Drew to work under John Scudder, who was granted funding to set up an experimental blood bank. This would prevent him from privileges afforded to his white peers, especially direct access to patients.


The program became a model for the Red Cross pilot program to mass-produce dried plasma in New York in February 1941, with Drew as assistant director, and later for the National Blood Donor Service. Among his innovations were “bloodmobiles” — mobile blood donation trucks with refrigerators. The work sealed his reputation as a pioneer and earned him the title, “father of the blood bank.”
Ironically, the Red Cross excluded African Americans from donating blood, making Drew himself ineligible to participate in the very program he established. That policy was later modified to accept donations from blacks, however the institution upheld racial segregation of blood, which throughout the war Drew openly criticized as “unscientific and insulting to African Americans.”


In October 1941, Drew returned to Howard University, where he remained for the next nine years serving as Head of the Department of Surgery and Chief of Surgery at Freedmen's Hospital. His mission was to “train young African American surgeons who would meet the most rigorous standards in any surgical specialty” and “place them in strategic positions throughout the country where they could, in turn, nurture the tradition of excellence.” This he believed would be his “greatest and most lasting contribution to medicine.” He also campaigned against the exclusion of black physicians from local medical societies, medical specialty organizations, and the American Medical Association.
 
You seriously believe that his race during the 1940's in America wasn't a challenge for him to overcome? How freaking clueless are you?
You have no knoweledge of the man and know nothing about him, I am not clueless. He was given every opportunity to accomplish the wonderful things he accomplished with blood and he was not hindered in any way on accomplishing that.
 
No limitations due to his race? What other description could you possibly give for the obstacles called out in this American Chemical Society biography of his life?

Below are just a few relevant excerpts from the article. (The article also includes a quote from Dr. Drew on the very subject of race in the medical field.)

A native Washingtonian, Drew was an average student but gifted athlete recruited in 1922 on a football and track and field scholarship by Amherst College in Massachusetts. He was one of only 13 African Americans in a student body of 600, where the racial climate exposed him to hostility from opposing teams. His own football team passed him over as captain his senior year even though he was the team’s best athlete.

Drew’s interest in transfusion medicine began during his internship and surgical residency at Montreal Hospital (1933-1935) working with bacteriology professor John Beattie on ways to treat shock with fluid replacement. Drew aspired to continue training in transfusion therapy at the Mayo Clinic, but racial prejudices at major American medical centers barred black scholars from their practices. He would instead join the faculty at Howard University College of Medicine, starting as a pathology instructor, and then progressing to surgical instructor and chief surgical resident at Freedmen's Hospital.

In 1938, while earning a doctorate at Columbia University, Drew won a fellowship to train at Presbyterian Hospital in New York with eminent surgeon Allen Whipple. Instead of following the traditional path of residents to gain experience in surgical pathology and bacteriology, surgical laboratory research, outpatient clinic, operating rooms and surgical wards, Whipple assigned Drew to work under John Scudder, who was granted funding to set up an experimental blood bank. This would prevent him from privileges afforded to his white peers, especially direct access to patients.


The program became a model for the Red Cross pilot program to mass-produce dried plasma in New York in February 1941, with Drew as assistant director, and later for the National Blood Donor Service. Among his innovations were “bloodmobiles” — mobile blood donation trucks with refrigerators. The work sealed his reputation as a pioneer and earned him the title, “father of the blood bank.”
Ironically, the Red Cross excluded African Americans from donating blood, making Drew himself ineligible to participate in the very program he established. That policy was later modified to accept donations from blacks, however the institution upheld racial segregation of blood, which throughout the war Drew openly criticized as “unscientific and insulting to African Americans.”


In October 1941, Drew returned to Howard University, where he remained for the next nine years serving as Head of the Department of Surgery and Chief of Surgery at Freedmen's Hospital. His mission was to “train young African American surgeons who would meet the most rigorous standards in any surgical specialty” and “place them in strategic positions throughout the country where they could, in turn, nurture the tradition of excellence.” This he believed would be his “greatest and most lasting contribution to medicine.” He also campaigned against the exclusion of black physicians from local medical societies, medical specialty organizations, and the American Medical Association.
And he was not hindered at any point on being able to develop the program for plasma and their products. Yes, black physicians were limited and yes they were excluded from local medical socities-but Dr Drew was not limited in any way, shape or form in being able to accomplish the great things he did with blood products.
 
You have no knoweledge of the man and know nothing about him, I am not clueless. He was given every opportunity to accomplish the wonderful things he accomplished with blood and he was not hindered in any way on accomplishing that.

And he was not hindered at any point on being able to develop the program for plasma and their products. Yes, black physicians were limited and yes they were excluded from local medical socities-but Dr Drew was not limited in any way, shape or form in being able to accomplish the great things he did with blood products.

by nonsensically making this argument you are actually diminishing his accomplishments.
 
And he was not hindered at any point on being able to develop the program for plasma and their products. Yes, black physicians were limited and yes they were excluded from local medical socities-but Dr Drew was not limited in any way, shape or form in being able to accomplish the great things he did with blood products.

I'm not sure what point you are trying to argue. He was a black man who was able to achieve great accomplishments, in spite of obstacles and challenges due to being an African American in the pre civil-rights era in the US.

This in no way diminishs him, it is in fact lauding him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fcctiger12
To add to amazing people I always laugh about the stuff regarding Hedy Lamarr

Invented the guidance system for the torpedo

Now she definitely was not impeded as she had lots of advanatages which she took advantge of, but I always thought what motivated a gorgeous actress to invent torpedo guidance systems based on advance mathematics instead of just eat cavier and drink fine wine
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls
I'm not sure what point you are trying to argue. He was a black man who was able to achieve great accomplishments, in spite of obstacles and challenges due to being an African American in the pre civil-rights era in the US.

This in no way diminishs him, it is in fact lauding him.

this is the point he's arguing.

The man had Zero barriers
 
Thank you for making my point. That's why you're part of the problem not the solution. The good news is you can always choose to change how you approach things. I won't hold my breath but I'm going to hope for the best with you. What I learn from your comment is there's not much difference between your thoughts and those of Mao and Stalin. I'm not so sure that's the company you want to keep my friend.
There’s no point in attempting good faith discussion with the MTGs of the world. And don’t fool yourself. The GOP leadership hasn’t repudiated her ilk, not in the slightest. I won’t be compared to Mao for refusing to deal with insurrectionists. If you want to normalize dialogue with them, that’s on you. The more scumbags like Stewart Rhodes are thrown in prison, the better. Let these people get away with it, and they’ll continue to shift the environment to the direction you claim to oppose
 
The other unfortunate part is that you're seeing this one way. The President and his advisors crafted a speech to tempt such a response. They got what they wanted. This isn't a partisan matter. Both sides are currently hell bent on doing whatever it takes to enrage the other. Until people stop seeing it in one direction, this will continue.
That's the only way THEY will ever see it (one way). Pick any issue you choose. Sane people will try to reach a common ground on any subject. The progressives have a different agenda. Progressives will not stop until this is a communist country using ANY/ALL means to get there.

The sad part is, the ignorant people who support this crap will be the first ones on the train.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls
Not sure where I opened it , but was disappointed in the way the message was handled

In your face does not convince me of anything other than you are in my face and I will not listen to the message until it is better presented

Will do some research and see where it is at

I have Disney Plus for my grands but saw this in its entirety on some other channel

It was surprising as most businesses particularly like a Disney avoid being in controversial messages that will antagonize potential sales

Recently sold all Disney stock along with others as Disney has been taking a huge beating in value

I have an investment strategy of go woke go broke and sell stock in any company going woke

so far it has been a huge profit maker

Sell short or buy puts on go woke
Had Disney+ for the grands as well. Will never be in this house again unless they change course.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls
I have very close friends who are conservative, that used to be Trump supporters and we fight like cats and dogs sometimes, but I still love them. I know it may not come across that way on here but I absolutely believe in bridging the divide before the friendship is harmed. A difference in political leanings should not be all that defines us, but I'm not gonna lie, the last six years have pushed me to my limits of understanding. Misinformation and lies have about broken this country and I've made it my mission to address them whenever and wherever I can. After Jan 6th, we can't just pretend those things don't matter anymore. The harm they cause is real and insidious and I can't just ignore them.

The problem is there are a number of things that you say in post which are demonstrably false. The source is you're using to combat what you feel is misinformation and lies are parroting their own misinformation and lies. How does that help the problem? If you do decided you wanted to be an arbiter of truth and be a light to help illuminate all the falsehoods going around then you would realize it doesn't all come from one direction. Many other greatest abominations in history have come from people believing they were entirely in the right and those they oppose their entirely in the wrong.

I have no illusions about the right wing loons. I have no illusions about the cult of Trump. And I have no illusions about how many thousands of people have perverted and distorted The Bible for the purposes of gaining power over others and condemning that which they don't agree with. Sin permeates this world. It always will.

Overtime on this board you've assigned a lot of things to me that are not true. Hence the reason once I realized you live in Atlanta I have invited you to lunch on more than one occasion. Perhaps you will decide to take me up on that at some point. I'm not a crazy man and I would welcome the conversation. If you want to bridge gaps start with people that you know are willing to bridge them with you. Just a thought...
 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT