Originally posted by Nygdan
Firstly, there IS a 'white caucus', its called CONGRESS.

When Congress explicitly excludes blacks from membership because of their race, then I'll agree with you.

Originally posted by origin
so in other words blacks get more options then whites...

Racism exists. To deny that black on white racism exists is the same as denying white on black racism exists. It goes both ways. Whether blacks have 'more options' than whites is arguable, but there are certainly black racists as well as white.

Originally posted by missed_gear
If their "core mission" is truly to do as above…this caucus must realize to attain their goal whites must eventually be included in their caucus.

Hear! Hear! Good job, mg! I totally agree with you. It would appear that the black caucus is going against its own mission statement.

We just need an all caucasion only caucas dedicated to furtherment of white america! problem solved.

What people are failing to realize is that up until less than 30 years ago, black people were second class citizens. Their great grandparents were OWNED by white people. Even after the abolition of slavery, blacks were disproportionately underprivilaged. Even up thru the civil rights movement, there was in no way an even playing field. Entire generations of people not able to get a proper education, nor build up the kind of family wealth many white families have had for many generations. Now we are in todays time, and the black population is still disproportionately underprivillaged. Sure there are ways for certain people to make something of their lives, however more needs to be done. The black caucaus is not to "exlude" whites, rather to ensure that they are fulfilling the needs of people in their communities. If there ever is a day in america when most of our major cities dont have "black" parts of town, or when racism finally takes a back seat to progress, THEN and only then will the need for a black caucaus be eliminated. It makes me laugh to see white people call racism when a group of people are trying to better the lives of their fellow community. Yes, we are all americans, but we are hardly playing on an even field - no matter how much you spin it.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Racism exists. To deny that black on white racism exists is the same as denying white on black racism exists. It goes both ways. Whether blacks have 'more options' than whites is arguable, but there are certainly black racists as well as white.

True true, however this instance is not reflective of racism. There are fundamental things in our society that need to be changed. Why is it that the poorest areas of every city are usually majority black? The civil rights movement was but a generation ago. The fact that we haven't instituted programs to bring poor black communities up from poverty is institutionalized racism at the core - and we pay for it with our tax dollars. Sure you have your poster people such as atheletes and actors, or even Colin Powell, and you have very successful black people as well. However, there are MANY who dont have the same opportunities. You cannot expect a whole culture to just adjust the instant you say "ok, we will stop hanging and discriminating against you". Much of this discrimination still exists to this day.

[edit on 24-1-2007 by LogansRun]
``````````````````````
fixed quote

[edit on 25/1/07 by masqua]

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
We just need an all caucasion only caucas dedicated to furtherment of white america! problem solved.

Um, we have had one since July 4th, 1976. It was called the foundation of this country. The furtherment of white america?! I realize this was a joke, but how ignorant of a statement!

HOW would anyone know WHO was 'black' ?

WHO is 100% 'black' ?

WHAT determines eligibility ?

Are you 'black' if you're only 15% 'black' ?

What of those 'blacks' who are actually 25%, or 55% 'black' ?

What ARE they ------- 'black' or 'white' or ........ PART 'Black' ....... OR 'Part WHITE' ?

Is entry based MERELY on VISIBLE PIGMENTATION of the skin ?

Or, is entry based on 'feeling 'black' when you're actually almost 'white' ?


WHERE IS THE LINE THAT MAKES SOMEONE 'Black' --- when one of their parents is 'white' or Latino or Polish or Spanish ?

* IF * entry is based merely on VISIBLE SKIN COLOUR -------- how DARK must that skin BE, in order someone may qualify as 'black' ?

Is Oprah Winfrey 'black' ? She looks more 'tan'.

Is Beyonce 'black' ? Swedes look darker than her when they've been on holiday to Spain.

Are they going to have a COLOR CHART against which 'blacks' seeking entry must compare their skin against ?

Will entry requirements be based on a graduated color chart -- for instance, if you're only a bit brown, you go to the back of the queue. If you're quite dark, then your application is automatically accepted. And if you're really dark almost black skinned ------- you're automatically in ?

Is that how it will work ?

Because many who claim to be 'black' are actually more than 50% 'white'.

So WHY do they categorise themselves as 'black' ?

If they're half or more than half white or French or Italian or Spanish or Cuban or Mexican ---------- WHY don't they refer to themselves as 'Italian', or 'French' or 'Cuban' ???????????????????

If someone is NOT 100% black, why are they posing as 'black' ?

And WHY are they choosing to deny their other ethnicity ?

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
We just need an all caucasion only caucas dedicated to furtherment of white america! problem solved.

Im sorry man, but I dont get you. You're acting like a little kid going, "oh poor me, Im white and everyone else has more opportunities than me!"

Let me ask you a question, how does a Black Caucus negatively effect you in any way at all? Or are you just going to ignore my questions for you like you've done the last two times in this thread?

Originally posted by Mezzanine
XPhilesPhan, I seriously suggest that you reconsider your opinions on this subject. The one thing that I think is worse than racism is the belief that the world is color blind. Ignoring that racism still exists is practically condoning its practice in my eyes.

Originally posted by LogansRun
The black caucaus is not to "exlude" whites, rather to ensure that they are fulfilling the needs of people in their communities.

Then why shouldn’t a representative who is interested in fulfilling the needs of black people in his community be allowed, even encouraged to join this caucus?

Originally posted by LogansRun
If there ever is a day in america when most of our major cities dont have "black" parts of town, or when racism finally takes a back seat to progress, THEN and only then will the need for a black caucaus be eliminated.

No one is calling for the elimination of the caucus. In fact, I think it's a good idea because I do believe that generally, black people in this country could benefit from some leveling of the playing field. I'm just saying that excluding a white man from membership because of his race is the same racism that the black caucus professes to be against.

Originally posted by LogansRun
Why is it that the poorest areas of every city are usually majority black?
...
Much of this discrimination still exists to this day.

I'm not denying that at all. As I said, racism exists.

Originally posted by mrwupy
I just watched the state of the union address and what struck me was how white it was. I finally picked out Barak Obama and he looked like a raisin on a plate of marshmellows.

That is exactly what I told my husband also, funny how you get to notice this littler ditails.

Bringing in to question how can a black man make into the presidential seat in America.

Taking into consideration that the majority of votes in our nation comes from the hard land and bible belt.

And guess what . . . without been racist I have point out that in those states reside the most middle age white men in our nation and the most actives voters also.

So they are the ones that get actually get to decided. Funny he.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

No one is calling for the elimination of the caucus. In fact, I think it's a good idea because I do believe that generally, black people in this country could benefit from some leveling of the playing field. I'm just saying that excluding a white man from membership because of his race is the same racism that the black caucus professes to be against.

You make a very good point here, and I agree with you. Perhaps there is still understandable resentment based on their treatment. Remember, many of the people who make up the caucus most likely lived before and during the civil rights movement. There are still wounds that aren't healed. Perhaps within a generation or two, things will be different. If you spent your young life being told you were a lesser being due to the color of your skin, it would affect your attitude toward the other color later in life - regardless of what laws are in place to protect you. I dont blame them for being wary.

[edit on 24-1-2007 by LogansRun]
```````````
fixed quote

[edit on 25/1/07 by masqua]

Originally posted by marg6043
That is exactly what I told my husband also, funny how you get to notice this littler ditails.

If more minorities are going to serve in the US Senate then term limitations are going to have to be put in place. A majority of senators have been around since before or during the civil rights movements and can easily remain for life.

Hell, people won’t even vote off the throne a known corrupt DWI murder…

Originally posted by marg6043
Bringing in to question how can a black man make into the presidential seat in America.

The first thing to do is not become a senator.

Only Warren Harding and John Kennedy went from the senate to the US presidency. So white, black, male, female, yellow, pink, green or orange your chances are historically extremely low in becoming president after serving in the US Senate…

Originally posted by marg6043
And guess what . . . without been racist I have point out that in those states reside the most middle age white men in our nation and the most actives voters also.

So they are the ones that get actually get to decided. Funny he.

C’mon now....really who’s at fault? If even what you claim is remotely true (AARP will have some issues with your point) would it be the “middle aged white mans” problem?...

But pointing the finger at “middle aged white men” voter turn-outs does not clear the 'remaining demographics' which apparently are far too lazy to get off their collective fat arses to get involved and/or vote?


mg

Originally posted by Spawwwn
oh whatever you white people need to quit your whining.

'White people' here:
I've expressed my annoyance at all forms of racism. That is not 'whining'.. this is called reasonable. Biggotry is a cancer in our society.

i have officially adopted the "**** whitey" attitude.

"Whitey"..?

they need to be more angry with the whites because its still shadow racism that's going on,

I take it that 'the whites' means 'the enemy'/all people with pale skin? What were you saying about shadow racism? What about your overt racism? Back in the days when "blacks" were legally segregated 'whites' used to come up with similar flimsy exuses to justify their racism too.. though I doubt you'd consider yourself in good company..

i used whatever man i'm done with this i'm glad theres no whites on that commitee and i hope it stays that way.

Sorry but I don't see anything good about condoning segregation.

[edit on 24-1-2007 by riley]

Originally posted by missed_gear


But pointing the finger at “middle aged white men” voter turn-outs does not clear the 'remaining demographics' which apparently are far too lazy to get off their collective fat arses to get involved and/or vote?


mg

Oh no, is not pointing fingers at all, but the fact that young people are not very interested voting, women tend to vote their husbands choices and the most voting group is the middle age group.

Bringing the white males and middle age into consideration.

Originally posted by LogansRunUm, we have had one since July 4th, 1976. It was called the foundation of this country. The furtherment of white america?! I realize this was a joke, but how ignorant of a statement!

Well isnt that the pot calling the kettle black, how ignorant is this? you dont even know when the United States was founded. I believe you are the ignorant one.

you should try about 1776ish

`````````````````````````
trimmed quote

(civility, please)

[edit on 25/1/07 by masqua]

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
you should try about 1776ish

Im sure you've never made a typo

Not to mention avoiding his point, which I suppose is rather typical from what I've seen in this thread.

[edit on 24-1-2007 by Mezzanine]
`````````````````
edited triple nested quote

[edit on 25/1/07 by masqua]

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
Well isnt that the pot calling the kettle black, how ignorant is this? you dont even know when the United States was founded. I believe you are the ignorant one.

you should try about 1776ish

I am very well aware the date our country was founded, it is called a typo. I was posting in another thread about when the global temperatures started to spike - 1976.

Back to the topic at hand, my typo doesn't negate the ignorance of your previous statement one bit, it only gave you a SMALL piece of ammo. Is that all you had to contribute to this thread?

PEOPLE - give it a generation or two and you will see racism start to fade. People are STILL alive that lived prior to and during the civil rights movement. How can you just forget the bigotry that was shown them? They have every right not to trust white people. For over 200 years they lived under INSTITUTIONALIZED HATE. We change some laws that say they can drink from the same fountain, ride anywhere on the bus & vote and we expect everything to be hunky dorey? I think not.

Logansrun I don't think any black person should hate me because of what other white people have done. And I'm not going to let my kids grow up thinking a black persons feelings come before theirs just because of action by whites before them that is just WRONG. And NO it shouldn't be aloud that there is a black caucus nor should there be a national association for the advancement of colored people. The very existance of such groups is racist

Originally posted by Scrub
Logansrun I don't think any black person should hate me because of what other white people have done. And I'm not going to let my kids grow up thinking a black persons feelings come before theirs just because of action by whites before them that is just WRONG. And NO it shouldn't be aloud that there is a black caucus nor should there be a national association for the advancement of colored people. The very existance of such groups is racist

These people were raised in a world that told them they were lesser beings because of the color of their skin - people who are still alive today. You will never understand what that would feel like. There has not been nearly enough done to promote the black community to bring them up to the same level as everyone else. As I said in an earlier post, the poverty level in black communities is disproportionate to every other demographic in our county, meaning the percentage of black people living in poverty is highest. No one said that black peoples feelings come before white peoples - dont put words in my mouth or in anyone elses. The purpose of the black caucus is to ensure that the black communities have the FULL ATTENTION and support of the black caucus. The country is overwhelmingly geared toward white people. We still have politicians in power TO THIS DAY that want to repeal the civil rights act and undo the last 30+ years of progress. Step down from your self appointed morally high ground and see the facts for what they are.

The NAACP is very much needed. If white people are in positions of power and racism still exists today, then people are discriminated against based on the color of their skin. As I said before, give it a generation or two.

And dont give me some crap boo hoo story about your kids, I bet good money your kids have a better leg up in society than many people in the black community. Why is it when public funds are cut to schools, it is always the poorest blackest schools that are cut first? Dont you dare bring your kids into this discussion - that is pety and has no bearing in here. Nothing that is being done in regards to the black caucus will hamper their progress in ANY way.

Originally posted by Scrub
Logansrun I don't think any black person should hate me because of what other white people have done.

To clarify this point, no they should not hate you. However it is understandable if they mistrust you. As I said, we as a nation haven't done enough for the black community to level the playing field. Until we do, we will have to accept the resentment toward the rest of the country. When there isn't a staggering percentage of black people in poverty, perhaps then we wouldn't need the NAACP or the black caucus. WAKE UP MAN! The whole damn country is catered to white people!

You will never understand what that would feel like.

I may not know what it feels like to be black and be hated for the color of my skin but I sure know how it feels to be hated for being white. Your doing alot of typing about the government tending to only whites which is totally wrong but isn't also wrong to tend only to blacks what I'm saying is that it should be government for the PEOPLE that right all people