The House is Set to Apologize to African Americans | 32 comments (32 topical, 0 hidden)
dick (none / 0)

I wish I could come up with a better response to your statement, but with all my college education, that's all I can think of.

So it doesn't matter about all of the horrible things we did to a young African American's hundreds of family members that preceded him/her.  Your content that they may have a better life now then they would in Africa.

by BlueInTexas on 07/30/2008 11:36:58 AM EST

Fool (none / 0)
Most African Americans grow up with significant disadvantages, be it a single parent, low access to quality health-care and education, unsafe, drug/gang/crime infested neighborhoods and of course general racism.

I'm sure you think poor people are all poor because they choose to be, but the facts aren't on your side.

PS---I'm not for race based affirmative action. I think it should be reformed to be based on socioeconomic status rather than race, so that poor people of all races would be included.

by Tom Hanc on 07/30/2008 12:56:21 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Of course (none / 0)
There should be personal responsibility. At the same time the Mexican Americans are coming from a very different culture, history and perspective.

While there are some similarities there are many differences you are completely glossing over.

Hell, the Civil Rights Act wasn't until 1964 which really wasn't all that long ago.


And growing up in a poor rural area (which has great challenges of course) is not the same as growing up in a dense urban area full of gangs and other challenges.


PS---Again, see my previous comment WRT affirmative action.

by Tom Hanc on 07/30/2008 01:28:31 PM EST

[ Parent ]
KenTX and other morons (none / 0)
I've been listening to theYoungTurks for about 3 years now, and I've never posted anything until now.  I may never say anything else, but I feel like it's necessary to ask.  Why do people that post on this sight regularly let KenTX shape any of the discussions?  He's a clown-ass white supremecist who's just trying to annoy people who aren't stupid enough to think the way he does.  Most of the people on here are participating in honest debate about issues.  But KenTX is an idiot.  I could understand if he had some power or something, but he doesn't.  So just ignore him.  I've been skipping his ridiculous posts for months and can't figure out why anyone here reads them.

by DStroyer4 on 07/30/2008 03:36:29 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I usually do (none / 0)
But since he often raises a cliche republican response I sometimes like to shoot it down, as do others I'm sure.

And look, we need to work together on our framing and responses to common conservative arguments. Even if we know how to argue not everyone reading necessarily does.

by Tom Hanc on 07/30/2008 03:50:20 PM EST

[ Parent ]
my guess (none / 0)

I hear you.  But if his posts are just left without comments, will that help or hurt?  At a site with a lot of commenters, he could be easily ignored.  But when there are so few forum posts and commenters, there might be the danger of people assuming that his ideas are accepted and supported if nobody argues against them.  I'm interested in what people think about that hypothesis. 

I sometimes try to draw Ken into real discussion, but it does seem useless--he is a mouthpiece for the Republican party and Big Oil and doesn't seem to have many interests apart from amassing capital and dismissing anyone who doesn't have money at the top of their personal value system.

I don't bother reading any of his linked nonsense, but the responses have provided me with good material to fight republican talking points.

by desertpear on 07/30/2008 04:37:20 PM EST

[ Parent ]
It surely strokes ken's ego (none / 0)
to read these discussions. I'm with pear on this (surprise surprise) as I've written elsewhere he makes for a good punching bag and seems to be a good sport about it most of the time. Try to draw him into a substantive conversation about anything and you'll hear crickets (just check out this thread). Most of the time he'd rather just spar. That's fine. And frankly, even though he seems confined to talking points, let's face it--that's the nature of our opposition these days. So we might as well use the opportunity he provides to craft our responses. He made this very point to me shortly after I started posting regularly and I've come to agree. I occasionally find that I learn from more from others' clever responses to his nonsense than from Cenk even on the same topics.

by hazmat on 07/30/2008 06:02:31 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Those are good points... (none / 0)
Well, that's why I asked.  Those are solid reasons for responding to that clown.  I won't be reading his nonsense, but I now why you guys do.

One thing to remember about Cenk, that dude voted for McCain 8 years ago.  There was no excuse for a knowledgeable adult to vote Rebublican as late as 2000 (which is why Dave was all over him about it).  I'm 28, and that party has been fraudulent my entire life.  The Democrats are horrendous, but the Republicans are decidedly worse.  So, one has to wonder, "What the hell was he doing still voting Republican?"  With that in mind, he seem like a pretty cool dude and, of course, I love his show.

Really though, brothas always wonder why anyone who isn't white would even consider voting Republican.  I remember seeing a poll a while back saying that Bush's approval rating was 2% amongst black people.  The first thing I thought was, "The margin of error is +/-3%; how do they know his approval rating isn't 0%?"

by DStroyer4 on 07/30/2008 11:41:06 PM EST

[ Parent ]
You have to forgive and forget (none / 0)
Sure, Cenk was mistaken, but for the most part he realizes the error of his ways (although he STILL doesn't realize just how competely terrible Reagan was and he STILL is wrong on "free trade").

But seriously, think about Arianna Huffington. She was hard-core Republican for a long time.  Now she gives us a great progressive website, Huffington Post (Bonus: it's Dave's favorite!).

by Tom Hanc on 08/01/2008 10:48:24 AM EST

[ Parent ]
I tend to agree (none / 0)
But I have to recommend Ken's links.  They are hilarious.  They almost always prove he's wrong.

by ProfRich on 07/31/2008 11:47:23 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I don't know how I missed this comment, (none / 0)
but that's exactly how I've always looked at it.

by Spencer on 08/01/2008 04:10:45 AM EST

[ Parent ]
what evidence (none / 0)
other than his own statements do you have that he is a big contributer?

by hazmat on 07/30/2008 05:55:07 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Mark Luther (none / 0)
Great post Ken. Who doesn't love this guy? I've wondered what your motives are for a long time, but this is making much more sense.

I first heard the young turks as guests on Al Franken when they made an appearance in sept '06 (I think?) shortly after they joined AA (what an unfortunate acronym) and decided to give'em a shot. Al Franken's show was the only one I liked (although hearing Mark Maron reruns makes me wish he was still on--the guy was genius--showmanshipwise), but TYT blew Franken out of the water. I continued to listen to him until he left, but mainly out of loyalty. Just about everything else on air america except for ring of fire sucked balls. Your point about attracting conservative listeners seems especially salient.

by hazmat on 07/31/2008 01:15:54 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Why doesn't this make me angry? (none / 0)

I see your point of view ken. Let's set aside 40 acres and a mule for a second. Given that something like 50% of young urban black males are unemployed, you must draw one of two conclusions, that they're born stupid and lazy, or that structural problems prevent them participating as citizens. The two views aren't mutually exclusive but I wonder if your view in a little more detail.

 

by hazmat on 07/30/2008 12:58:43 PM EST

[ Parent ]
always the prick (none / 0)

"after attending the best colleges wit hout paying for it, and after achieving a high paying career with more than a little help from affirmative action"

Why do these "facts", like so many other "facts" that you post, smell like you pulled them out of your ass?  You know this how?  She graduated cum laude from Princeton.  If it was "affirmative action", then I'd say score a point for the affirmative action program - they chose the right person.  Looking at the evidence I'd put my money on her getting there on a scholarship and you being full of shit.  

by bfaul on 07/30/2008 02:33:50 PM EST

[ Parent ]
laughable (none / 0)

From your own linked article -

"she graduated with departmental honors and was accepted to Harvard Law School." - man, honors from her department and accepted to harvard law, she was obviously unqualified.

"She resolved to leave the law firm and mentor young people from the neighborhood she grew up in. But she was daunted by how little money she would make, and feared she would not be able to pay back her sizable student loans." - so who paid for her education?

So, she had loans she had to pay off and she graduated with departmental honors, so she performed well while there. So what exactly is your point, KenTX?

Don't talk about religion or politics, my ass!

by TheRob91 on 07/30/2008 09:12:32 PM EST

[ Parent ]
He made it pretty clear (none / 0)

Here is the paragraph immediately following the one you quoted:

"Michelle recalls things differently. A campaign spokeswoman says she had an edge getting into Princeton not because of affirmative action, but because her older brother was there as a scholar athlete. She was a "legacy," just like any other applicant with family ties to Princeton. Her aides say Michelle earned her way into Harvard on merit by distinguishing herself at Princeton."

In other words she did it just like the white people do,  just like George W Bush did, except that his dad was wealthy and he was a C student.  I suppose if she had been wealthy instead of having to borrow the money to go to Princeton she would be above reproach for people like you. 

You have a disdain for the poor folks that sounds almost neurotic.  Was your dad poor?  Did you resent him for it? 


"It's so easy. Effortless, really."

Yeah, I can tell it's "effortless". You clearly don't bother to read what you post.  Read the whole article and it won't be quite as "effortless".   

Why don't you just admit it?  You don't like her because you don't agree with Obama's politics and you smear her because you don't really have a hell of a lot to smear Obama with.  It also doesn't help that she's black, she's a woman,  and she's not a pushover, she doesn't know her "place".    Your candidate is weak and he doesn't excite anyone but the buzzards circling above his head, so you can't sell him on his own merit.  Spit it out, you'll feel so much better.

by bfaul on 07/31/2008 03:34:53 PM EST

[ Parent ]

The House is Set to Apologize to African Americans | 32 comments (32 topical, 0 hidden)