Da furk?? "Latinos" in adverts??? This is laughable. Seriously man, just, good grief. Giant guffaw.Shhhhhh! You are not allowed to make observations unless you want to be called a racist!
,
Last edited:
Da furk?? "Latinos" in adverts??? This is laughable. Seriously man, just, good grief. Giant guffaw.Shhhhhh! You are not allowed to make observations unless you want to be called a racist!
,
Da furk?? "Lationos" in adverts??? This is laughable. Seriously man, just, good grief. Giant guffaw.
You replied to the wrong person. Never mentioned Lationos (sic).
Yeah so my typo means you didn't endorse the idiotic idea that Hispanics aren't represented in advertising? Is that what you're going with? SMH.
Edit: OBTW, the jaw-dropping stupidity of a bunch of white anglo dudes sitting around going, "You know, I'm bothered that there are too many blacks and not enough Hispanics present in contemporary media."
Lol.
I don't think you know the difference between de jure segregation and de facto segregation.Seemed semi-rational enough at first, but was bound to fall on it's face at some point. Here it is, for me:
"The problem is that when the work of the civil rights legislation was done—when de jure segregation was stopped. . . "
If he believes that de jure segregation has stopped, he needs to get out of his ivory tower more. Maybe go do some shopping in Stop Six, then in Rivercrest.
The New American Constitution-The Civil Rights Act of 1964. The roots of our partisan divide.
https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/roots-partisan-divide/
So separate but equal was a better system?
*sarcasm*
The Civil Rights Act gave the Courts the ability to strike down racist legislation.
To force employers to pay workers based on the job and not race, color, or creed.
I'm sure I'm missing Paint's point because having "colored sections" in restaurants, buses, and bathrooms is kinda tough to defend.
But I'm listening while shaking my head.
The book, whose title states the widely recognized position that America is in the midst of a deep partisan divide, attempts to explain cause and effect. Early on the author states that he is not offering any sort of defense of segregation or racism. He called out the "sham democracies of the South," and he points out that most of the book's criticism comes from those who have not read it. ( I don't think you took the time to read the article...did you? ) The book doesn't per se criticize the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The book illustrates that the law moved power away from the normal constitutional and democratic process. (a second constitution). Democratic decisions were moved to judges and bureaucrats from the people. He then asks the question and illustrates the consequences of ruling society via fiat versus the intended constitutional democratic process. In my opinion this is what happens when we think some extra-constitutional LAW is going to fix everything. Read the article...better yet, go buy the book.So separate but equal was a better system?
*sarcasm*
The Civil Rights Act gave the Courts the ability to strike down racist legislation.
To force employers to pay workers based on the job and not race, color, or creed.
I'm sure I'm missing Paint's point because having "colored sections" in restaurants, buses, and bathrooms is kinda tough to defend.
But I'm listening while shaking my head.
FYI, I went to work everyday in Stop Six. I was invited into countless homes in the Stop Six neighborhood everyday to do my work. I've driven through Rivercrest. I think I attended a luncheon there once, many years ago. I've never been invited inside anyone's home in that area. Is your weak point that the Rivercrest and Stop Six neighborhoods inherently illustrate segregation? If so, you might examine your racist card for full membership.Seemed semi-rational enough at first, but was bound to fall on it's face at some point. Here it is, for me:
"The problem is that when the work of the civil rights legislation was done—when de jure segregation was stopped. . . "
If he believes that de jure segregation has stopped, he needs to get out of his ivory tower more. Maybe go do some shopping in Stop Six, then in Rivercrest.
FYI, I went to work everyday in Stop Six. I was invited into countless homes in the Stop Six neighborhood everyday to do my work. I've driven through Rivercrest. I think I attended a luncheon there once, many years ago. I've never been invited inside anyone's home in that area. Is your weak point that the Rivercrest and Stop Six neighborhoods inherently illustrate segregation? If so, you might examine your racist card for full membership.
I don't think you know the difference between de jure segregation and de facto segregation.
You suggested visiting those neighborhoods would magically open someone’s eyes to segregation. And, if you believe that, then you are an unabashed bigot. I simply acknowledged that I have been to both neighborhoods. Have you?Ridiculous. Pretty close to saying, "I can't be racist I have a black friend."
And by saying, "I worked there," is like a brown or black worker catching a bus to clean house in Rivercrest, or to cook for the members at Shady Oaks and taking that to mean those places aren't segregated.
I lived in both actually, and have been all around the world in between. The times and places are no longer the same. IMO...today is so much better...with work to be done. There most likely always will.Young folks...Come back with me to live during segregation in small town east Texas, and then come back to today, and tell me what you think...
GO FROGS!
BEAT EVERYBODY!
Spit Blood ~~<~<and fok baylor!!
And sometimes it isn’t. What you posted above is pure sophistry.My con law prof would beg to differ. When the US Supreme Court rules that Texas redistricting plans are per se racist with the specific intention of weakening minority votes which has the effect of perpetuating
segregation, I'm pretty sure that's de jure. Maybe you don't think the Texas Leg is involved in making laws
Sometimes the correct answer to a question is more than you can draw from a bubbled letter on a scantron sheet.
I think the Telemundo has some of the better Presidential coverage. The Democrats have to go there and they actually get real questions. Not the cnn softballs.We notice this, too, and wonder why some of the "investigating" and "crusading" national journalists don't notice it, and say something about it. And where are the Latinos? They make up 50% more of the US population than blacks so, excuse me, Blacks do, (12%-18%), but when do you ever see Latinos in advertisements? Strange.
. . . The book illustrates that the law moved power away from the normal constitutional and democratic process. (a second constitution). . . .
My next door neighbor for a few years went to Hillsdale. Probably around your age. He was teaching history and getting his PhD at tcu. Awesome guy. And something uncommon in academia, he was actually very conservative. He’s now on faculty at the US Army War college in Carlisle Barracks, PA.Hillsdale! I almost went to school there--did not know there was anyone else out there who knew it existed.