Colin Kaepernick 49ers QB Bad Move

[StumpyJoe]

I certainly can doubt the analysis from Prager U, which is not a well recognized or accredited "university". I've never heard of that institution, what facts are their analysis based upon...is Prager pushing an agenda.

 Assuming the facts are true, it does not explain what I've seen with my own eyes.  Over the past several years I've  seen children of color shot by police, body slammed to the ground by police at local swimming pools and even at their schools, men obviously subdued and shot in the back.  I for one have not seen this happen to white children.  This issue is not about black on black crime, it's police use of excessive force against blacks.

i just don't agree on the pensions issue. These MOUs and side letter agreements between govts and unions that span over 20-50 years certainly should be subject to renogiation.  These policemen and firemen make a lot of money, well after they retire on pensions alone.  Dont get me wrong they provide a great service to our communities but I'm still amazed at how much they make well after their employment ends with their respective departments.

Enjoy your holiday folks..and may the discussion continue.

 

 

I hope you and everyone else on the forum is enjoying the Labor Day weekend...even if you don't reside in the US...you deserve a break.

Let's jump back into it.

"I certainly can doubt the analysis from Prager U, which is not a well recognized or accredited "university". I've never heard of that institution, what facts are their analysis based upon...is Prager pushing an agenda."

1. I did not say "you could not doubt the analysis from Prager U"...I pointed out in your earlier post that you associated Prager U to Phoenix and Trump, this was not true and was a form of guilt by association. It's clear you do not hold either Phoenix or Trump in high regard and by associating both with Prager U was an attempt to discredit it by equating them with each other.

2. You are correct, Prager U is not an accredited University. The 5 minute course I linked did not earn anyone any college credit. Sorry to everyone that figured there was one less elective class you had to take by watching a 5 minute video. The "about" page on the website outlines what they are about and that they are not an accredited University. At the same time...I don't believe Universities are the sole source of information, facts, opinions, or wisdom.

I am not surprised that you had never heard of the institution, most people haven't heard of them either...that's why I linked the video. I appreciate that to have a good discussion requires hearing different sides of an argument. I can attest that I have heard the arguments from the Black Lives Matters movement...it is perhaps the largest media talking point at their moment; dare I say more than the upcoming presidential election. The linked video was an attempt to bring up a different perspective...perhaps one not heard by as many as have heard the BLM arguments.

3. The facts as discussed in the video link quote their facts and sources in the video itself. Is Prager pushing an agenda? Yes. However, I would caution that all organizations have agendas...the NAACP has their agenda in their name.

Dennis Prager has a radio talk show. In the last 2-3 years he helped create a website "Prager U" which has 5 minute "courses" on a great many different topics. I found his perspectives interesting and arguments intriguing...to the point that many times he made me think a second time (that's an allusion to his first book). The other pleasant thing about his radio program, and Prager U as well, is that all manner of topics are covered...if it was just politics I would bore quickly. To all Brothers and Sisters of the Leaf I would recommend you give his show, or Prager U for that matter, a shot.

"Assuming the facts are true, it does not explain what I've seen with my own eyes.  Over the past several years I've  seen children of color shot by police, body slammed to the ground by police at local swimming pools and even at their schools, men obviously subdued and shot in the back.  I for one have not seen this happen to white children.  This issue is not about black on black crime, it's police use of excessive force against blacks."

1. If I had any suspicion that the facts supplied in the video were false I would not have linked it. That is my promise to you.

2. That is true, it cannot explain what you've seen with your own eyes because you cannot be in all places at all times. That's why statistics can be useful, because it can grant us a more complete understanding of an issue rather than isolated incidents; a small sample group can cause a conclusion that a large field of testing would refute.

3. I am assuming that what you have seen over the past several years include a great number of incidents as covered by the media and not necessarily what you have been an eye witness to. I have seen the same. The media continues to cover these stories at an alarming rate. However, as I indicated in item #2, the media is selecting a small sample group of stories which must contain certain parameters for a story to be run. There are currently 485 homicides in Chicago. Most of the victims are black...and unfortunately most of the suspects in those homicides are black as well. To date there have been 6 officer involved shootings which resulted in the suspect being killed. Look at the numbers...485 and 6. And I am not doubting you have not seen this happen to white children...the media doesn't run those stories. Just like them glossing over the 485 victims of Homicide in Chicago.

4. Then this is my misunderstanding and I apologize. I thought the issue was about BLM...to stop the senseless killing of young black men. You state that the issue is excessive force by police against blacks. 485 and 6.

The greatest excessive force against black men in the US is perpetrated by black men. That is what BLM means to me. Perhaps BLM should change its name to End Police Excessive Force Against Blacks...that would be a more accurate description of the organization. But if that is the main goal of the organization, then also come to the understanding that the natural result will be that the real cause of why so many young black men are being murdered is not being addressed...and will go on being unaddressed and not fixed...resulting in untold more homicides. If we stopped the 6...we are still left with the 485.

Lastly, the pension issue.

1. If you want to tell a police/firefighter candidate that they will have to run into a burning building, run towards gunshots, attempt CPR on an infant only to have that infant die in their arms, to work Homicide crime scenes which involve morbidly decomposing bodies for 5-19 hours at a time, to make notifications to family members that their son lost control of their vehicle and died while trapped and the car went up in flames, attend countless autopsies, hand out moving violations tickets which are proven to make traffic safer for everyone (because everyone is so pleasant when they get a ticket)...and that they can expect to do all this with a 401k and retire at 62...consider what level of candidate you will have apply. And when you call 911...do you want a 60 year old cop/firefighter to show up at your door?

2. Would you apply for the above job for anything less than a pension? Police and Fire do a job that the vast majority of us don't want to do...we want someone else to handle the problem...we don't want the risks that come with the job...whatever the reason...but I would caution that you do not equate Police and Fire as a regular job. They are not. The solace of Police and Fire is that there will be a pension at the end of #1. And if they die, because there is the risk of death or serious injury, that their families will be taken care of financially in their absence.

3. Everyone knows there is a lot of waste in government...let's not lump police and fire into it at the beginning.

I am still amazed that politicians who are "fighting for you" in wiping out Police/Fire pensions are the heroes. What they are promising citizens is this...

A. We are going to defraud police/fire, we had them do a dangerous thankless job and then we're not going to pay them what was promised.

B. Once this were to happen, who in they're right mind would become a police officer/fire fighter in the future? So the promise is the politicians are going to deliver horrible emergency services in the future.

C. And after we make all the monetary savings...we will forever be responsible with the public funds (your tax dollars).

All these points I have brought up are not to "win" an argument. I don't like having arguments with friends. I do like having open dialogs where we can both express ourselves and convey our beliefs and feelings to one another...isn't that what friendship is about? With that said, please do not look at my points as challenges, rather a conversation.


May God Bless you, your family, the United States of America, and all our Brothers and Sisters of the Leaf.

Now fire one up!!!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[jeht]

On Saturday, September 03, 2016 at 7:05 PM, hjmclain22 said:

Kap has every right to espouse his disgust for what he sees as injustice of black and other colored folks by police officers just as much as the white men who've never even been subjected to discrimination have the right to stand on their soap box and bad mouth a guy who actually is utilizing his celebrity/forum to discuss an issue.  I'll remind you that Ali was not regarded as a hero by the majority when he began engaging in civil disobedience.

 Seems to me like some of you have not even taken the time to actually listen to Kap's views on the issue, not to mention his respect for men and women in military service.  Plus the guy can still play NFL QB.  He will replace Gabbert by game 4 or 5.  

^^^ THIS! NOt reading the whole thread, but ppl can stand up for whatever they want. And if you've never been subjuected to the things hes talking about then there is a good chance you will bad mouth what he is doing.  And for the others that say, just be quiet and play (in so many words)... where would we be if everyone did that?? HIdden racism, and prejudice is real. But, don't tell some in america that

[jeht]

OH, and obviously some didnt listen to what he said. he said he's using his platform to speak for those that don't have a voice(or wouldnt be heard because they're not in front of the media). POwerful stuff considering its putting his career on the line

[forgop]

3 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

more seriously, and recognising that most of our law enforcement officials are decent people, i completely concur with colt's last sentence.

I think *most* are good people, but the bottom line is you have to treat every encounter in law enforcement as the lowest common denominator in the same way they will approach your car for a traffic violation with their hand on their gun.  The cops certainly CYA and you'd be foolish not to record any discussion with them outside of a friendly discussion.  

I never advocate for violence against police, but much of the grief they receive is brought upon themselves and it's not just a matter of a couple of black unarmed people being shot.  We're talking about police officers harassing people and intimidating people to give up constitutional rights for fear of going to jail.  Just because a cop says something doesn't mean it's the law and he/she cannot force you to obey an unlawful order.  If you ever want to see a conversation turn south, refuse to answer any of their questions and record the conversation.  

Additionally, it's time for police to be held to the same laws the rest of us are.  Whether in the line of duty or off the clock, they demonstrate time and time again to be held to a different set of standards.  Without the availability of video recording, how many cops would ever be charged for nothing short of murder on the job?  How about a cop that is at fault and hits a lady in his police car and files a false report of how the accident happens and charges her for DUI?  She eventually is cleared from a video showing him hitting her and as a result, he is suspended for like 10 days IIRC.  Guys like that need to be criminally charged and serve jail time in addition to being fired.  After all, if we file a false police report, we can be held criminally liable.  

[StumpyJoe]

1 hour ago, hjmclain22 said:

This may be the funniest thing I've read all day.  

Hogwash is right!!! You must regularly watch Ancient Aliens too.   

1 hour ago, hjmclain22 said:

This may be the funniest thing I've read all day.  

Hogwash is right!!! You must regularly watch Ancient Aliens too.   

Best drinking game ever!!!

[hjmclain22]

1 hour ago, NSXCIGAR said:

 

The racism dog just doesn't hunt. It can be easily argued that racism toward Asians was far greater than blacks from 1900-1960, yet they have thrived in the US. Ethnic and religious groups have been subject to all sorts of discrimination in the US for centuries, from the Asians and Irish Catholics to the Italians and the Polish. Yet they somehow overcame it. It might be more than racism or discrimination that relegates certain groups to a given socio-economic status.

I just don't buy this argument.  No other minority group was subjected to the level of injustice as black Americans for the length of time, including slavery, post civil war, Jim Crow, segregation.  These other groups you contrast to the plight of blacks had one significant trait that no black could attain...assimilation by virtue of the color of their skin.  Your reference to blacks being better off during Jim Crow is a slap in the face, as blacks were forced to subsist within a nation proclaiming a policy of separate but "equal".  

I will submit to you that nowadays socioeconomic status is determined by a multitude of factors yet racism/discrimination is the bedrock for much of issues many persons of color, mainly blacks, encounter daily.  Surely it's not as overt as in the past but it is latent in many aspects of our ways of life. I believe the term is disparate impact.

 

[topdiesel]

This has been a fascinating thread and great points have been made expressing several different perspectives.  Many folks hear Black Lives Matter and tune out or jump to a conclusion-good or bad.  The name of the organization does not portray the need for law enforcement reform.  Then, for another huge segment of the population the mention of Law Enforcement Reform also causes another huge segment to tune out.

I attempted to learn what the BLM recommendations were to improve the situation.  I went to the BLM website and it did not clearly portray any plan (to me at least and the images chosen for the site seemed divisive).  It seemed to be more activism than problem solving.  So I asked around and tried to discover what types of solutions were being proposed and I was directed to the site linked below.

http://nulwb.iamempowered.com/policies/civil-rights/10-point-justice-plan

The 10 point plan makes a lot of sense.  A majority of the proposed reform seems like it would make communities safer and weed out bad officers without negatively impacting good officers.  That said, 7 & 9 appear to be a little overreaching for the federal gov.  I am a small gov kinda guy.

 

 

[NSXCIGAR]

2 hours ago, hjmclain22 said:

I just don't buy this argument.  No other minority group was subjected to the level of injustice as black Americans for the length of time, including slavery, post civil war, Jim Crow, segregation.  These other groups you contrast to the plight of blacks had one significant trait that no black could attain...assimilation by virtue of the color of their skin.  Your reference to blacks being better off during Jim Crow is a slap in the face, as blacks were forced to subsist within a nation proclaiming a policy of separate but "equal".  

I will submit to you that nowadays socioeconomic status is determined by a multitude of factors yet racism/discrimination is the bedrock for much of issues many persons of color, mainly blacks, encounter daily.  Surely it's not as overt as in the past but it is latent in many aspects of our ways of life. I believe the term is disparate impact.

 

I disagree that Asians were subjected to any less skin color or appearance-based discrimination. And the Asians were discriminated against for over 150 years, same as blacks in the US, and MUCH more recently than the blacks. Blacks were never considered enemies of the state as Asians were, and I would argue that internment camps were far more intrusive than slavery as well. Sure, blacks got it worse overall, but the Asians were not far behind, and yet they have done far better as a whole than the blacks over a much shorter period of time.

Also, because you claim that blacks weren't better off by many metrics during Jim Crow doesn't make it so. By nearly every possible socio-economic indicator, they were--and they were improving every year--despite the tremendous mainstream racism which simply does not exist today. The plain fact is that racism was indeed present but it was not keeping the average African-American from pulling themselves out of poverty, gaining employment and maintaining intact families. Segregation was very unpopular--that's why the states needed laws to enforce it. Trust me, the bus company did not want Rosa Parks in the back of that bus. It wasn't up to them--it was the law. Most private people didn't care. Only the Dixie-cratic party elite did. 

I'm not sure what kind of racial discrimination is going on in 21st century America outside of some of these questionable police encounters and possibly the criminal court system. There are so many laws on the books and given this litigious society, there are so few successful racial discrimination lawsuits I cannot even recall one. Who on earth would not give a job to an African-American today if they were the most qualified applicant? I just cannot believe that is happening to any significant degree today. These daily encounters of racism and discrimination you cite--where are they? Why aren't they being recorded and posted everywhere? I have not seen one instance of this anywhere online, in the news, or anywhere else. If this is the main cause of African-American blight, why aren't we seeing it caught? Again, aside from these handful of questionable police encounters.

[cigcars]

14 minutes ago, NSXCIGAR said:

I disagree that Asians were subjected to any less skin color or appearance-based discrimination. And the Asians were discriminated against for over 150 years, same as blacks in the US, and MUCH more recently than the blacks. Blacks were never considered enemies of the state as Asians were, and I would argue that internment camps were far more intrusive than slavery as well. Sure, blacks got it worse overall, but the Asians were not far behind, and yet they have done far better as a whole than the blacks over a much shorter period of time.

Also, because you claim that blacks weren't better off by many metrics during Jim Crow doesn't make it so. By nearly every possible socio-economic indicator, they were--and they were improving every year--despite the tremendous mainstream racism which simply does not exist today. The plain fact is that racism was indeed present but it was not keeping the average African-American from pulling themselves out of poverty, gaining employment and maintaining intact families. Segregation was very unpopular--that's why the states needed laws to enforce it. Trust me, the bus company did not want Rosa Parks in the back of that bus. It wasn't up to them--it was the law. Most private people didn't care. Only the Dixie-cratic party elite did. 

I'm not sure what kind of racial discrimination is going on in 21st century America outside of some of these questionable police encounters and possibly the criminal court system. There are so many laws on the books and given this litigious society, there are so few successful racial discrimination lawsuits I cannot even recall one. Who on earth would not give a job to an African-American today if they were the most qualified applicant? I just cannot believe that is happening to any significant degree today. These daily encounters of racism and discrimination you cite--where are they? Why aren't they being recorded and posted everywhere? I have not seen one instance of this anywhere online, in the news, or anywhere else. If this is the main cause of African-American blight, why aren't we seeing it caught? Again, aside from these handful of questionable police encounters.

      *In 2010 a University of Hawaii study found that major employers in the U.S. were more likely to hire Whites with felony convictions in their records than they were to hire Blacks with clean records.

      *In 1994-5, thanks to some conscientious board member successfully bringing a recording device into a closed door Texaco Corporate headquarters meeting, was able to record one of the executives describing their employees as "Jellybeans", and then snickering, that " the black jellybeans are stuck at the bottom!" and guffawing with glee. This taping was broadcast to public media and Texaco company spokesmen were falling all over themselves trying to distance themselves, disavow themselves of, and otherwise try to cover up for that tidbit of information getting out to the public. In fact, inner city minority high schools in the state of Texas were so neglected that they were still using outhouses all the way up into the 1970's.

    *Those jobs that start out at over $80,000 a year and higher, I mean $110,000 on average...Black folks don't get those jobs. No matter how many college degrees, technical institute diplomas - no matter how highly they graduate; sum cum laude, Italian titles - they don't get those jobs. Edward Snowden, of that government snooping leakage accusations, was a high school drop out - making $235,000 a year. Again, Black folks don't get those jobs. My best friend's sister and a cousin of mine kept going through school getting higher and higher degrees until they now both have Doctorates. And now they DEFINITELY can't get work because "they're too over-qualified", or more likely they'll be a threat to the high school drop out who's making six figures a year to just show up "for work", breathe, and go home.   *There's plenty more, NSX but this is just to answer your question thus far.

[hjmclain22]

You must not get down to the SD Hall of Justice to often.  I'm aware of at least five pending matters.  They will likely settle as most of them do these days which may account for why you don't hear about them.  We can agree to disagree about who had it worse Asians or Blacks, although I can't  believe you're even attempting to make the argument.  It truly is offensive to me.  And just because you don't hear about don't mean it doesn't happen.  Denied Leasing applications, prolonged probationary periods, loan applications denied, overlooked promotions, resumes discarded...my favorites longer waits at restaurants for seating and service, seating towards the back of restaurants.  there are more but I don't have the time.  

[NSXCIGAR]

38 minutes ago, cigcars said:

      *In 2010 a University of Hawaii study found that major employers in the U.S. were more likely to hire Whites with felony convictions in their records than they were to hire Blacks with clean records.

      *In 1994-5, thanks to some conscientious board member successfully bringing a recording device into a closed door Texaco Corporate headquarters meeting, was able to record one of the executives describing their employees as "Jellybeans", and then snickering, that " the black jellybeans are stuck at the bottom!" and guffawing with glee. This taping was broadcast to public media and Texaco company spokesmen were falling all over themselves trying to distance themselves, disavow themselves of, and otherwise try to cover up for that tidbit of information getting out to the public. In fact, inner city minority high schools in the state of Texas were so neglected that they were still using outhouses all the way up into the 1970's.

    *Those jobs that start out at over $80,000 a year and higher, I mean $110,000 on average...Black folks don't get those jobs. No matter how many college degrees, technical institute diplomas - no matter how highly they graduate; sum cum laude, Italian titles - they don't get those jobs. Edward Snowden, of that government snooping leakage accusations, was a high school drop out - making $235,000 a year. Again, Black folks don't get those jobs. My best friend's sister and a cousin of mine kept going through school getting higher and higher degrees until they now both have Doctorates. And now they DEFINITELY can't get work because "they're too over-qualified", or more likely they'll be a threat to the high school drop out who's making six figures a year to just show up "for work", breathe, and go home.   *There's plenty more, NSX but this is just to answer your question thus far.

1) Perhaps blacks are not as qualified as the felonious whites for those jobs or the whites were willing to work for lower wages. Cannot rule that out and that stat doesn't tell the whole story.

2) One incident in 1995? Come on now. And as far as the schools, the TX government runs them. And yes, the terrible public (not private) education system has contributed to poorly educated people, many of whom happen to be inner city blacks. But don't the inner-city whites and hispanics suffer equally?

3) You're telling me blacks don't get high-paying jobs when they are qualified? A black with an MIT doctorate can't get a high-paying job? Are you sure you don't want to rethink that claim? And yes, people seeking too much money for lower-skilled jobs frequently get told they're overqualified. I know many whites that have been told the same thing. If there are no positions available due to economic circumstances that's what happens. Perhaps they pursued degrees in fields that are not in demand. Hard to see how there is a racial element.

30 minutes ago, hjmclain22 said:

You must not get down to the SD Hall of Justice to often.  I'm aware of at least five pending matters.  They will likely settle as most of them do these days which may account for why you don't hear about them.  We can agree to disagree about who had it worse Asians or Blacks, although I can't  believe you're even attempting to make the argument.  It truly is offensive to me.  And just because you don't hear about don't mean it doesn't happen.  Denied Leasing applications, prolonged probationary periods, loan applications denied, overlooked promotions, resumes discarded...my favorites longer waits at restaurants for seating and service, seating towards the back of restaurants.  there are more but I don't have the time.  

Five pending matters in a city of over 1 million is pretty sparse. And because something is settled means little. Settlement is often the cheapest and best option when one is accused publicly of racism--falsely or otherwise.  Also, is there no possibility an overlooked promotion or loan application denial (which are very closely monitored for racial bias by the Federal gov't) was based on non-racial factors? Longer probationary periods for blacks? That's quantifiable, and lawsuits should be flowing in! Leasing applications are prohibited from even asking about race and are often reviewed off-site. I find these claims extraordinary. If these things honestly happened to you personally, well, they did, but then I advise you to stop wasting time on here get yourself a lawyer immediately and collect your winnings. 

As for restaurant waits, doesn't anyone remember Denny's getting the pants sued off them some years back? That stuff is caught quickly and is dealt with swiftly. Please, tell me which restaurant makes blacks wait longer and I'll hire a lawyer for you myself. Someone would have to be utterly insane to try and pull that off in this day and age.

The claim simply does not comport with the facts. If one is to blame the blacks' socio-economic situation on pervasive racism, then surely their conditions would have been worse in an environment with more racism, and that has not been the historical record. I don't know why it's unacceptable to blame the real culprits--the welfare state, the war on drugs and government education, but since there's very little evidence of wide-spread systemic racism in America today, it seems futile to continue to latch onto it.

[RijkdeGooier]

I wondered about wether there was a study done to asses ecenomic development while controlling for skin color in a control group. 

Lo and behold Yale University gave me this:

https://www.library.yale.edu/~fboateng/akata.htm

Apparently African immigrants, while black, do better than African-Americans. 

It seems skin color is not the determining variable?

[Bohn007]

I, one time ago had the opportunity of having dinner with Joe DiMaggio and Tommy Lasorda with another friend. They spent a lot of time talking about what it was like to be baseball players back in the 1950's. When you walked into the stadium, you wore a tie. You showed respect to your uniform and your team. I have no issue with free speech. However, this player is an employee of a company and more importantly part of a team. When he walked into the stadium, he represents his team. When he put on the uniform, he represents his team to even a higher degree. Any company has the right to control the way an employee, on company time, presents himself to the public. His position is not necessarily the same of his teammates and should be presented somewhere else. On the field, there is no "I" in team. This is actually why, according to him, that Tommy Lasorda gave up coaching the Dodgers. He was tired of players not having respect to team and believing that it was all about them as individuals. This guy is no different. 

[hjmclain22]

25 minutes ago, NSXCIGAR said:

1) Perhaps blacks are not as qualified as the felonious whites for those jobs or the whites were willing to work for lower wages. Cannot rule that out and that stat doesn't tell the whole story.

2) One incident in 1995? Come on now. And as far as the schools, the TX government runs them. And yes, the terrible public (not private) education system has contributed to poorly educated people, many of whom happen to be inner city blacks. But don't the inner-city whites and hispanics suffer equally?

3) You're telling me blacks don't get high-paying jobs when they are qualified? A black with an MIT doctorate can't get a high-paying job? Are you sure you don't want to rethink that claim? And yes, people seeking too much money for lower-skilled jobs frequently get told they're overqualified. I know many whites that have been told the same thing. If there are no positions available due to economic circumstances that's what happens. Perhaps they pursued degrees in fields that are not in demand. Hard to see how there is a racial element.

Five pending matters in a city of over 1 million is pretty sparse. And because something is settled means little. Settlement is often the cheapest and best option when one is accused publicly of racism--falsely or otherwise.  Also, is there no possibility an overlooked promotion or loan application denial (which are very closely monitored for racial bias by the Federal gov't) was based on non-racial factors? Longer probationary periods for blacks? That's quantifiable, and lawsuits should be flowing in! Leasing applications are prohibited from even asking about race and are often reviewed off-site. I find these claims extraordinary. If these things honestly happened to you personally, well, they did, but then I advise you to stop wasting time on here get yourself a lawyer immediately and collect your winnings. 

As for restaurant waits, doesn't anyone remember Denny's getting the pants sued off them some years back? That stuff is caught quickly and is dealt with swiftly. Please, tell me which restaurant makes blacks wait longer and I'll hire a lawyer for you myself. Someone would have to be utterly insane to try and pull that off in this day and age.

The claim simply does not comport with the facts. If one is to blame the blacks' socio-economic situation on pervasive racism, then surely their conditions would have been worse in an environment with more racism, and that has not been the historical record. I don't know why it's unacceptable to blame the real culprits--the welfare state, the war on drugs and government education, but since there's very little evidence of wide-spread systemic racism in America today, it seems futile to continue to latch onto it.

Their conditions would have been worse in an environment with more racism...right.   Goodnight dude.  You keep on believing that. 

Why don't you chew on this.

 

http://prospect.org/article/collapse-black-wealth

[Bohn007]

1 hour ago, hjmclain22 said:

....loan applications denied, 

I have tried to not take too strong of a position on this thread but I can not sit by and ignore blatant lies to be encouraged. As someone who is a 25 year veteran of the mortgage banking industry, having owned a mortgage bank covering half the country and having personally overseen the origination of over a billion in mortgage loans, I can tell you without question that neither I, not anyone that I have ever encountered in the industry has ever turned down an application due to race. I can't speak personally to some of your other accusations but that is one that I know. We are in the business to lend money and do not care about the color of who pays it back. 

[hjmclain22]

This thread has changed focus quite a bit away from Colin Kaepernick's actions in a sense.   Now we have white folks telling black folks whether or not race discrimination exists in the US these days.  Actually I think some of what was discussed patterns the research in this article.http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/06/27/key-takeaways-race-and-inequality/  

it has been interesting to see everyone's views etc. to say the least.  In any event, good to know we can all try to work toward a better tomorrow for all of us.

[NSXCIGAR]

37 minutes ago, hjmclain22 said:

Their conditions would have been worse in an environment with more racism...right.   Goodnight dude.  You keep on believing that. 

Why don't you chew on this.

 

http://prospect.org/article/collapse-black-wealth

I'm sorry, but the statistics from 1900-1970 regarding the socio-economic status of the blacks tell the opposite story . Racism was ostensibly worse, yet blacks had higher employment, faster movement out of poverty and more intact families. Those are the plain facts, but you seem to not be willing to acknowledge them.

Also, you never did confirm whether those instances of discrimination you mentioned actually happened to you personally or are secondhand accounts. I'd be genuinely interested to know.

I'm not sure what your article is trying to support--the housing crisis affected many more whites than blacks nationwide and offers no evidence of how or why blacks would be affected to a greater degree than any other race. 

Here's a few for you to check out as well, and I also encourage you to read Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell, renowned black economists whose work in the area is nearly unrivaled.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1672

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/262726/how-liberal-welfare-state-destroyed-black-america-john-perazzo

http://www.nationalcenter.org/P21PR-WarOnPoverty_010814.html

http://www.pennlive.com/opinion/2015/05/poor_blacks_looking_for_someon.html

http://atlantablackstar.com/2014/12/24/ways-war-poverty-destroyed-black-fatherhood/

http://www.city-journal.org/html/black-family-40-years-lies-12872.html

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420807/slavery-didnt-cause-todays-black-problems-welfare-did

https://www.press.umich.edu/pdf/9780472068319-ch4.pdf

[NSXCIGAR]

5 minutes ago, hjmclain22 said:

This thread has changed focus quite a bit away from Colin Kaepernick's actions in a sense.   Now we have white folks telling black folks whether or not race discrimination exists in the US these days.  Actually I think some of what was discussed patterns the research in this article.http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/06/27/key-takeaways-race-and-inequality/  

it has been interesting to see everyone's views etc. to say the least.  In any event, good to know we can all try to work toward a better tomorrow for all of us.

I appreciate your posts as well, but I really have to tell you that as someone who finds racism repugnant, it shouldn't matter who's telling who racism is or isn't prevalent. I want facts and truth. And by the way, in my experience, most true racists aren't ashamed of it, and many embrace it. This new theory of closet racism simply isn't consistent with the behavior of racists over the decades, particularly in this country. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and I frankly haven't seen it.

[Ken Gargett]

something else we can blame kap for - this entire thread.

[PatrickEwing]

2 hours ago, NSXCIGAR said:

I disagree that Asians were subjected to any less skin color or appearance-based discrimination. And the Asians were discriminated against for over 150 years, same as blacks in the US, and MUCH more recently than the blacks. Blacks were never considered enemies of the state as Asians were, and I would argue that internment camps were far more intrusive than slavery as well. Sure, blacks got it worse overall, but the Asians were not far behind, and yet they have done far better as a whole than the blacks over a much shorter period of time.

I am having a rough time following this subsection. I understand I'm parsing out a few words of a long discussion, but can you expand on this? Blacks may have never been considered enemies of the state per se, but they were considered PROPERTY of the citizens of the state. If I own something, I don't make enemies with it because then my property won't do the things I want it to do. For instance, my lawn mower won't work if I shoot it, or leave it locked up in a garage by itself or fail to give it fuel. If slaves are your enemies and are not housed and not clothed and not given just enough sustenance to remain alive, then they will not produce your cotton or cut your sugar cane or mate so that you can have more property. Essentially the same thing except one is a weekend diversion and the other is the basest example of the evil humans can devise, exploit and justify over the course of centuries. The internment of American Asians in the '40s was a horrendous act. It's rather not worth attempting to compare one heinous Consitutional act versus another. Nobody won in either case (except plantation owners - they did ok), but I find it quite a reach to claim temporary jailing of a subsection of a group of people could exceed (or be less intrusive) the systemic destruction of both a people's physical freedom and their own internal identity and standing in the world. Just as we are quick to point out a man does not get awarded a triple for being born on third base, we should also be cognizant to the fact that it's far easier to strike out in life when you're born with an 0-2 count. 

As to the original post, I've long thought Kaepernick to be an immature clown, but he is free to say his piece like anyone else just as we are free to pick apart and debate his words as we do on this forum. The NFL can decide what they will of their employee and then he must weigh the consequences. Real questions do exist, real lives are being impacted every day. Any discussion of these questions is a good thing ultimately, just not always in the manner and direction we hope for. 

[hjmclain22]

1 hour ago, NSXCIGAR said:

I appreciate your posts as well, but I really have to tell you that as someone who finds racism repugnant, it shouldn't matter who's telling who racism is or isn't prevalent. I want facts and truth. And by the way, in my experience, most true racists aren't ashamed of it, and many embrace it. This new theory of closet racism simply isn't consistent with the behavior of racists over the decades, particularly in this country. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and I frankly haven't seen it.

there is extraordinary evidence about as well.  Take a look at the EEOC or DFEH's website for statistics on recent cases of note.

https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/initiatives/e-race/caselist.cfm

[NSXCIGAR]

30 minutes ago, hjmclain22 said:

there is extraordinary evidence about as well.  Take a look at the EEOC or DFEH's website for statistics on recent cases of note.

https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/initiatives/e-race/caselist.cfm

Looks like many of these cases are people subjected to racial slurs and "harassment" and very few, if any, demonstrable acts of discrimination. And a few dozen over a decade. Far from systemic issues keeping 13% of the entire US population down. 

In the below case, for example, it appears Pepsi did absolutely nothing wrong except screen out for criminal arrest records, and lo and behold, it resulted in more blacks being excluded because, as we've established, blacks commit more crime per percentage of the population. But Pepsi had to fork out $3.13 million--for what? The real travesty here is the virtual extortion perpetrated on PepsiCo. 

In January 2012, Pepsi Beverages Company, formerly known as Pepsi Bottling Group, agreed in a post-investigation conciliation to pay $3.13 million and provide training and job offers to victims of the former criminal background check policy to resolve an EEOC charge alleging race discrimination in hiring. "The EEOC's investigation revealed that more than 300 African Americans were adversely affected when Pepsi applied a criminal background check policy that disproportionately excluded Black applicants from permanent employment. Under Pepsi's former policy, job applicants who had been arrested pending prosecution were not hired for a permanent job even if they had never been convicted of any offense." Additionally, "Pepsi's former policy also denied employment to applicants from employment who had been arrested or convicted of certain minor offenses. The use of arrest and conviction records to deny employment can be illegal under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, when it is not relevant for the job, because it can limit the employment opportunities of applicants or workers based on their race or ethnicity

The government attacking anyone who lobbies a complaint is not proof of systemic racism among American society. And again, these settlements are often nothing more than a shakedown that large corporations are foolish not to pay for economic and PR reasons in today's over-sensitive climate.

1 hour ago, PatrickEwing said:

I am having a rough time following this subsection. I understand I'm parsing out a few words of a long discussion, but can you expand on this? Blacks may have never been considered enemies of the state per se, but they were considered PROPERTY of the citizens of the state.

 While I would agree blacks were considered inferior for longer, most people didn't feel threatened by them as many did in the 1940s. Asians had never been accepted into American society to the degree that blacks had at that time and were subjected to as much or more actual discrimination as blacks for many decades.  The history of Asian racism in the US is quite striking. Arguably, blacks were far more accepted in society than Asians in the postwar period, and the blacks were also more successful as a group at that time relative to the Asians. How does one explain the overtaking of blacks by the Asians in nearly every socio-economic category between 1970-1990? African-Americans had a huge head start. Nobody was alive that had even seen black slavery, and the average person was born after Jim Crow. Yet the blacks' impressive decades-long upward movement suddenly stagnated and declined between 1965 and 1970, but the Asians somehow thrived. 

I do not know how it is even possible to claim that blacks weren't better off as a group from a socio-economic standpoint during Jim Crow when looking at employment, crime rates and intact family statistics. This isn't even debatable. Sure, it would have been even better without the racism, but the only conclusion that can reasonably be drawn is that the blacks were improving and rapidly catching up with the white majority despite the racism, and that as long as there is freedom of opportunity under the law (no laws barring a group from attaining any economic position), racism is largely a non-issue in terms of socio-economic indicators, as was precisely the case with the Asians who did not fall victim to the terrible welfare state and the other real causes of the decline of minorities in the US.

While a Jim Crow environment isn't anything I would desire for anyone, I can tell you that I would rather live under those circumstances with high employment, low crime, and intact families than in today's war zone inner-cities no matter what my race. Ideally, neither would be my choice. 

[DrunkenMonkey]

Wow. Quite a thread. Just my 2 cents on the original topic:  I think it's interesting that many of the people who I know who are most outraged by Kaepernick's protest are the same people who had nothing to say after they saw a video of cops choking a guy to death for selling cigarettes. The same people who voiced no outrage when they saw the video of the cop planting a weapon on the man he had just murdered. If you aren't really disturbed about a pattern we seem to have of some police murdering our fellow citizens, but are outraged by a quarterback's protest, then I think you're sort of making his point.

[forgop]

I worked at a UAW plant that had a lot of racial issues going around. A number of employees werr constantly filing racial harassment grievances because of racial slurs being written in bathroom stalls. Securty rounded every bathroom stall every hour trying to catch when stuff was written and narrow down who was doing it. Take a wild guess who was behind racial slurs being written in the stalls?

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[DrunkenMonkey]

12 minutes ago, forgop said:

I worked at a UAW plant that had a lot of racial issues going around. A number of employees werr constantly filing racial harassment grievances because of racial slurs being written in bathroom stalls. Securty rounded every bathroom stall every hour trying to catch when stuff was written and narrow down who was doing it. Take a wild guess who was behind racial slurs being written in the stalls?

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
 

Was it you?