quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

So the Sons of Norway is a racist organization?   As would be the Maids of Athena, the society of Hispanic Professional Engineers, and so on.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

Any group that bases itself on race is racist, plain and simple, and yes many advocacy groups do fall into that category. And you are wrong I DO take into consideration the relative amounts of power each group has (or hasn't). I never said that the NAACP was a bad organization, or that it didn't do a huge amount of good. It is a good and needed advocacy group, but it is also racist...it is an advocacy group that discriminates on the basis of race...it can't be made more simple than that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

Of course. We have lots of them, WV being a blue state and all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: MissAsylum

for obama to be the democratic nomination, people still had to vote. meaning the same 12.8%(subtracting the 1 or 2% that may have voted for McCain) voted for him the same as they did in the actual election. the SAME group of people. i didnt live in the US when that happened, at at this point, it doesnt matter- considering neither of them are currently in office. however, since the black/african-american population was slightly larger at that time(13%, 2004), it wouldnt have mattered if they showed up in larger numbers since bush won by a landslide.

Obama beat Clinton by 3.7% of the pledged delegates. Assuming 13% of blacks voted in the primaries (their turnout for the general) and they went 95% for Obama as in the general, he received 11.7% of the total vote from blacks. If they had been split 50/50 in a non-racial vote pattern, he would have received 6.5%, or 5.2% less = a 1.5% loss. (In fact it probably would have been more skewed toward Clinton than 50/50 because she would mostl likely have picked up a disproportionate piece of the female black vote if she faced a white male).

Then there are the support and momentum factors.


Bill Clinton to Ted Kennedy: "the only reason you are endorsing him is because he's black. Let's just be clear."

Geraldine Ferraro: "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."

Welcome to the US.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: MissAsylum

for obama to be the democratic nomination, people still had to vote. meaning the same 12.8%(subtracting the 1 or 2% that may have voted for McCain) voted for him the same as they did in the actual election. the SAME group of people. i didnt live in the US when that happened, at at this point, it doesnt matter- considering neither of them are currently in office. however, since the black/african-american population was slightly larger at that time(13%, 2004), it wouldnt have mattered if they showed up in larger numbers since bush won by a landslide.

Obama beat Clinton by 3.7% of the pledged delegates. Assuming 13% of blacks voted in the primaries (their turnout for the general) and they went 95% for Obama as in the general, he received 11.7% of the total vote from blacks. If they had been split 50/50 in a non-racial vote pattern, he would have received 6.5%, or 5.2% less = a 1.5% loss. (In fact it probably would have been more skewed toward Clinton than 50/50 because she would mostl likely have picked up a disproportionate piece of the female black vote if she faced a white male).

Then there are the support and momentum factors.


Bill Clinton to Ted Kennedy: "the only reason you are endorsing him is because he's black. Let's just be clear."

Geraldine Ferraro: "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."

Welcome to the US.

From now on I am going to assume that everything you put in quotation marks is made-up, since you seem to be unable to ever provide a source.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: MissAsylum

for obama to be the democratic nomination, people still had to vote. meaning the same 12.8%(subtracting the 1 or 2% that may have voted for McCain) voted for him the same as they did in the actual election. the SAME group of people. i didnt live in the US when that happened, at at this point, it doesnt matter- considering neither of them are currently in office. however, since the black/african-american population was slightly larger at that time(13%, 2004), it wouldnt have mattered if they showed up in larger numbers since bush won by a landslide.

Obama beat Clinton by 3.7% of the pledged delegates. Assuming 13% of blacks voted in the primaries (their turnout for the general) and they went 95% for Obama as in the general, he received 11.7% of the total vote from blacks. If they had been split 50/50 in a non-racial vote pattern, he would have received 6.5%, or 5.2% less = a 1.5% loss. (In fact it probably would have been more skewed toward Clinton than 50/50 because she would mostl likely have picked up a disproportionate piece of the female black vote if she faced a white male).

Then there are the support and momentum factors.


Bill Clinton to Ted Kennedy: "the only reason you are endorsing him is because he's black. Let's just be clear."

Geraldine Ferraro: "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."

Welcome to the US.

From now on I am going to assume that everything you put in quotation marks is made-up, since you seem to be unable to ever provide a source.

Assume whatever the fuck you want. I dont make up any quotes, and if you want to claim I do go ahead and pick one and I'll embarass you with your stupidity again.

Hint: search for the quote in your favorite search engine.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster


Ain't up to me to verify the trash you post, Gomer. It's up to you to prove it was actually said or written by someone other than yourself. Otherwise, it's either self-generated dung or a probable copyright violation.

I'm sure you wouldn't want to violate a copyright, since you Rethuglinazis are so big on Law n Order.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster


Ain't up to me to verify the trash you post, Gomer. It's up to you to prove it was actually said or written by someone other than yourself. Otherwise, it's either self-generated dung or a probable copyright violation.

I'm sure you wouldn't want to violate a copyright, since you Rethuglinazis are so big on Law n Order.

Its not up to me to do anything. I could give a flying fuck if you dont want to believe something I quote or verify it for yourself. Its so easy to to discredit the libs on this board with the truth, going to the effort of making something up would be pointless.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster


Ain't up to me to verify the trash you post, Gomer. It's up to you to prove it was actually said or written by someone other than yourself. Otherwise, it's either self-generated dung or a probable copyright violation.

I'm sure you wouldn't want to violate a copyright, since you Rethuglinazis are so big on Law n Order.

Its not up to me to do anything. I could give a flying fuck if you dont want to believe something I quote or verify it for yourself. Its so easy to to discredit the libs on this board with the truth, going to the effort of making something up would be pointless.

So you're OK with stealing intellectual property from others, right?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

Tho I tease a bit,I love our neighbors to the north.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

Don`t quite your day job.[:D]

quote:

There have been a couple people, including myself, who have provided you with dictionary definitions of racism.

In those definitions it is clear there is a distinction between racial advocacy and racism.