Racial Tension in the U.S.

[Wrathe]

EXACTLY! Things aren't equal between races in this country. If two people grew up on the same street with the same income but one is white and one is black, they are still going to have different perspectives on life in this country because race is a factor.



As if people don't? You keep saying this as if nobody has presented solutions when racial problems come up.



I don't know what this is referring to. I assume affirmative action or something? Nobody has proposed anything here that aligns with this defense.

If this is the case for race being an issue, then race will always be an issue, because race will exist and be a distinguishing factor.

Anyways, sorry if I've missed them, what were some of the solutions? I mean, I sincerely want to know, I've not seen much of anything suggested (that's not to trivialize if something was, just meaning I've not seen it). What, in your opinion, would "solve" the racial crisis. What's it take to put this to bed and move on to other issues?

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

EXACTLY! Things aren't equal between races in this country. If two people grew up on the same street with the same income but one is white and one is black, they are still going to have different perspectives on life in this country because race is a factor.

And honestly, it seems as though the BLM/privilege side believes that one of those perspectives is correct, and one of them isn't. And I've never understood why that is.

You cannot have a truly informed opinion on the disparity in treatment of blacks/whites unless you have an accurate understanding of how both races are treated. And the (flawed) assumption seems to be that blacks have an accurate understanding of how whites are treated, but that whites don't have an accurate understanding of how blacks are treated. How is that possible?

I don't know what this is referring to. I assume affirmative action or something? Nobody has proposed anything here that aligns with this defense.

That "here" is a pretty important word, because there are plenty of very public arguments/statements/positions taken outside this message board on the issue of "privilege" that go well beyond what you guys are arguing. That's a good part of the disconnect.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

It's not though. No one is saying that white people are all automatically elevated above everyone else. But all things being equal, race is still a factor in this country.

But all things are rarely equal among individuals.

So because there are also poor white people we'll ignore the country's history of racism and the effect it has on the socio-economic status of races across the country?

First, what is the relevance of "socio-economic status" in this context, because that's going well beyond the issue of fair treatment by police that supposedly is all that "white privilege" is about.

Second, what specific actions do you propose to take into account the effect of race in terms of socio-economic status?

Barack Obama did have it easier than a lot of people, but he had it harder than a lot of his peers I bet. And he had more hurdles to jump as a black politician than his white counterparts.

I don't believe for a millisecond that he would have been nominated or elected if he hadn't been black.

For instance, as stated before, the Ted Cruz shit DOES NOT excuse the fact that the Birther Movement is and was racist. Pretending it had nothing to do with race is, simply put, stupid.

Some of it unquestionably did. Some did not. But consider this - not a single GOP member of Congress publicly endorse birtherism. They wanted to run away from the topic every chance they got. It was the left and Obama's supporters who gleefully talked about birthers as much as they possibly could. And that was because Birtherism alienated a lot of ordinary people, and likely was a net advantage to Obama politically.

Ted Cruz was born in Canada. We know that because he says so and the records prove it. So they latch onto the conspiracy theory that he isn't American. This does not excuse the way our first black president was treated with NO evidence.

So what? There have been and always will be racists, of all colors. But the vast majority of Americans didn't buy it, and were actually repelled by it. How many Birthers did we have here? It was the left delightedly pointing at a bunch of fringies and trying to taint anyone who didn't like the guy for other reasons as a closet racist.

 

[-Akronite-]

But all things are rarely equal among individuals.

Hence it being such a complex topic.

First, what is the relevance of "socio-economic status" in this context, because that's going well beyond the issue of fair treatment by police that supposedly is all that "white privilege" is about.

White privilege is not just about police... What?

Second, what specific actions do you propose to take into account the effect of race in terms of socio-economic status?

I don't have all the answers. One thing that I think would be effective is de-segregating schools. There is a massive disparity in schooling between black and white neighborhoods. We're still massively segregated in this country, even if it isn't the law anymore. There was a very interesting story on This American Life about the effectiveness of bringing races together in this way that lifted up students/communities that otherwise would struggle, because simply throwing money at a situation or imposing certain standards doesn't fix it. Of course, people saw the disadvantaged school as violent and pushed back against letting these kids come to their school (but of course this had nothing to do with race because they kept yelling that over and over).

I don't believe for a millisecond that he would have been nominated or elected if he hadn't been black.

A young, attractive, eloquent, liberal senator with a vision of change to follow-up 8 years of war and Bush economic fuckery? Not even for a millisecond? Christ. Love that you won't even acknowledge the endless racism he faced as a major political candidate.

Some of it unquestionably did. Some did not. But consider this - not a single GOP member of Congress publicly endorse birtherism. They wanted to run away from the topic every chance they got. It was the left and Obama's supporters who gleefully talked about birthers as much as they possibly could. And that was because Birtherism alienated a lot of ordinary people, and likely was a net advantage to Obama politically.

OH SO WE SHOULD THANK THEM FOR THEIR RACISM! GOT IT!

Kinda laughable to come to the defense of the enabling GOP when Trump is in the White House. Come on dude.

So what? There have been and always will be racists, of all colors. But the vast majority of Americans didn't buy it, and were actually repelled by it. How many Birthers did we have here? It was the left delightedly pointing at a bunch of fringies and trying to taint anyone who didn't like the guy for other reasons as a closet racist.

BECAUSE ONE OF THEM IS IN THE WHITE HOUSE. In fact, I bet quite a few are in the White House now. Donald Trump became politically relevant BECAUSE of Birtherism and you're going to pretend it's merely some fringe outsiders that have no effect on anything.

"There have been and always will be racists, of all colors."

Quit with this cop-out bullshit. Apparently we can't get passed the false equivalence long after the fake news thread dies.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Hence it being such a complex topic.

But that's not the point in noting that those other things are rarely equal. The point in doing that is showing that deciding equality/policy based on race is almost certainly going to ignore other factors that may be equally or even more important/relevant. It's why you can't have race-based "remedies" in the vast majority of cases.

I don't have all the answers. One thing that I think would be effective is de-segregating schools. There is a massive disparity in schooling between black and white neighborhoods.

Why is that? If it is a funding issue, then why not approach it from that perspective, and not bring race into it at all?

A young, attractive, eloquent, liberal senator with a vision of change to follow-up 8 years of war and Bush economic fuckery? Not even for a millisecond? Christ. Love that you won't even acknowledge the endless racism he faced as a major political candidate.

Say what? I openly acknowledged that he faced racism. That is not the same thing as saying that his race was a net disadvantage.

Donald Trump became politically relevant BECAUSE of Birtherism and you're going to pretend it's merely some fringe outsiders that have no effect on anything.

I stated facts that your response did not address. Please list for me the GOP members of Congress who openly supported birtherism. Why didn't they do it if they believed that it was a popular argument among their constituents? Why did the pro-Obama media constantly talk about it? Shit, it is uniformly the lefties that bring up birtherism even here? Why is that? Why do you keep bringing it up, if not because you think it makes your side look better than your opponents?

Quit with this cop-out bullshit. Apparently we can't get passed the false equivalence long after the fake news thread dies.

You don't believe there are racists of all colors?

 

[-Akronite-]

But that's not the point in noting that those other things are rarely equal. The point in doing that is showing that deciding equality/policy based on race is almost certainly going to ignore other factors that may be equally or even more important/relevant. It's why you can't have race-based "remedies" in the vast majority of cases.

You're acting as if race plays no role in how people end up in poverty or inequity. There are reasons that blacks generally are worse off in this country. We can't pretend it's not a factor when we approach these things because it affects people negatively every day.

Why is that? If it is a funding issue, then why not approach it from that perspective, and not bring race into it at all?

Why did you cut off the rest of my quote when it answers your question? Funding is not strictly the issue, because more money didn't solve the problem for school districts. The solution that WAS seen was de-segregation, because whether legally enforced or not, separate but "equal" does not work. When they enacted this policy it got positive results.

Say what? I openly acknowledged that he faced racism. That is not the same thing as saying that his race was a net disadvantage.

When? And just to throw this out there, there is a big difference between voting for someone because they are black and voting against someone because they are black, so let's not equate those.

I stated facts that your response did not address. Please list for me the GOP members of Congress who openly supported birtherism. Why didn't they do it if they believed that it was a popular argument among their constituents? Why did the pro-Obama media constantly talk about it? Shit, it is uniformly the lefties that bring up birtherism even here? Why is that? Why do you keep bringing it up, if not because you think it makes your side look better than your opponents?

1) I recognize that liberals push the Birther thing into the spotlight. It's a black eye on conservatives and they should smell their shit. Liberals wouldn't be able to bring this shit up if it wasn't a real movement.

2) While not openly endorsing it, there were plenty of GOP lawmakers that remained complicit and enabling with this shit. And most of them went on to endorse Donald Trump, a birther, for president.

3) "Shit, it is uniformly the lefties that bring up birtherism" UNLESS we want to talk about the current president of the United States and many of his supporters who STILL believe he's a Muslim from Kenya.

Stop pretending that Birtherism was no big deal when, AGAIN, Donald Trump is president as a result of it. Address that why don't you. Just a reminder, and sorry if I'm not being politically correct, but Donald Trump is a racist and anyone that voted for him is complicit in his racism.

You don't believe there are racists of all colors?

Centuries of slavery, followed by Jim Crow and segregation, followed by disproportionate police brutality, imprisonment, and continued racist government policies... Then a black man becomes president and his heritage is questioned, by his successor no less, and for some reason we should stop bringing it up because black people can be racist too? WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU ON ABOUT?

That is a cop-out that doesn't address anything and you know it.

 

[Cassity14]

OF COURSE there are racists of all colors. Hate breeds hate.

That doesn't excuse any of it.

Back to reading...

 

[Wrathe]

I don't have all the answers. One thing that I think would be effective is de-segregating schools. There is a massive disparity in schooling between black and white neighborhoods. We're still massively segregated in this country, even if it isn't the law anymore. There was a very interesting story on This American Life about the effectiveness of bringing races together in this way that lifted up students/communities that otherwise would struggle, because simply throwing money at a situation or imposing certain standards doesn't fix it. Of course, people saw the disadvantaged school as violent and pushed back against letting these kids come to their school (but of course this had nothing to do with race because they kept yelling that over and over).

Interesting. Well, from a rural standpoint, there's 1 school. Hell, where I grew up, our graduating class was 50, hehe. To integrate that school, well, I guess have more Black families live in rural districts. Inner city wise, I guess the few times I was in those school districts (Akron mainly), it was pretty diverse. I can imagine in some cities it being divided based off of who lives where. Do you really think those parents were yelling about race? Don't bring in the black people? Or are they concerned about the problems from those schools following the children into their new locations? Assuming it's a bunch of racists and not people concerned about their child's welfare doesn't scream objectivity. You're demonizing an absolutely natural reservation.

A young, attractive, eloquent, liberal senator with a vision of change to follow-up 8 years of war and Bush economic fuckery? Not even for a millisecond? Christ. Love that you won't even acknowledge the endless racism he faced as a major political candidate.

I trust when you poll black communities and the majority dismiss the "white guy running for President" automatically, you assess them all as racists in your statistics, right?

I mean, it was what, 97% of African American's voted Obama. Yup. No race issues! That's fine though, I don't mind. Vote for your guy. Hell, I just want the same freedom, because if an election went down where 97% of White people voted AGAINST a Black guy. Whew. Imagine the accusations of "Whitelash" there!

Did Obama suffer from racial backlash? I'm sure. There are stupid people out there. With that said, I think racially, he made out ok. There's more black people who vote than racists who vote.

 

[The Oi]

Donald Trump is a racist and anyone that voted for him is complicit in his racism.

Ugh. This bullshit?

Let me ask you a question...is everyone that votes for anyone complicit in all of the ideals of the person they vote for?

 

[Wrathe]

And just to throw this out there, there is a big difference between voting for someone because they are black and voting against someone because they are black, so let's not equate those.

What?

If someone was asked in 2008, why they voted for McCain and their response was, "I voted for McCain because he's White", that this would be accepted? The fire and brimstone that would come down on this individual would be magnificent.

But if I change the color of the statement from White to Black and McCain to Obama, it's OK?

I say again. What?

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

You're acting as if race plays no role in how people end up in poverty or inequity.

No, I'm not. And quit telling me how I'm "acting" -- that's such a cop-out in a discussion Try quoting my statements if you're going to claim I'm taking a certain position. I never said it was not a factor. I simply said that it was not the only factor, and not even the most important factor. For example, how wealthy/educated your parents are has an enormous influence on your changes of ending up in poverty.

There are reasons that blacks generally are worse off in this country. We can't pretend it's not a factor when we approach these things because it affects people negatively every day.

And you've said this isn't about affirmative action. Okay, then why not get specific about your proposed solutions that don't involved affirmative action? Because I'm telling you that an awful lot of people who pimp "white privilege" outside this form advocate affirmative action and similar things as a matter of course.

Why did you cut off the rest of my quote when it answers your question? Funding is not strictly the issue, because more money didn't solve the problem for school districts.

Then what is the issue? What is/are the causes of those school districts, and why does bringing in white kids solve it.

When? And just to throw this out there, there is a big difference between voting for someone because they are black and voting against someone because they are black, so let's not equate those.

Actually, I don't see much of a difference at all.

1) I recognize that liberals push the Birther thing into the spotlight. It's a black eye on conservatives and they should smell their shit. Liberals wouldn't be able to bring this shit up if it wasn't a real movement.

But what kind of "movement" is it that nobody pays attention to unless it's opponents publicize it? It was a fringe movement -- that's why almost nobody in a position of prominence would support it. What made it big was the left deliberately promoting it.

2) While not openly endorsing it, there were plenty of GOP lawmakers that remained complicit and enabling with this shit.

Who? We had hundreds of elected GOP members of Congress -- name those who were complicit with Birthirism.

Stop pretending that Birtherism was no big deal when, AGAIN, Donald Trump is president as a result of it. Address that why don't you.

Okay, I think that is batshit crazy, and I can't even fathom an argument for how Trump is President "as a result" of Birthism.

Centuries of slavery, followed by Jim Crow and segregation, followed by disproportionate police brutality, imprisonment, and continued racist government policies... Then a black man becomes president and his heritage is questioned, by his successor no less, and for some reason we should stop bringing it up because black people can be racist too? WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU ON ABOUT?

I have never said you shouldn't bring up racism. I have asked, repeatedly, exactly what it is you advocate as a remedy to "white privilege so I can understand the purpose of why you want to use the term. All I've gotten so far is that putting white kids in schools make black kids smarter. Anything else?

That is a cop-out that doesn't address anything and you know it.

Oh, it actually addresses a lot. See, I believe that we should look at people as individuals, not by the color of their skin. I think problems occur because that does not happen. I'm also trying to illustrate the injustice of race-based remedies without regard to individual circumstances, which includes some very privileged black kids, and some very underprivileged kids of other ethnicities.

You are deliberately trying to avoid specifics about your proposed solutions.

 

[-Akronite-]

Ugh. This bullshit?

Let me ask you a question...is everyone that votes for anyone complicit in all of the ideals of the person they vote for?

The ideals they run on? Totally. I think an Obama voter, especially for re-election, shouldn't skirt the fact that they voted for drone strikes and increasing the debt. We are all free to disagree with people we vote for and state whether we support or condemn certain ideals and policies, but I don't see anybody calling out Trump for racism aside from his critics. Because why would you admit you voted for a racist?

Interesting. Well, from a rural standpoint, there's 1 school. Hell, where I grew up, our graduating class was 50, hehe. To integrate that school, well, I guess have more Black families live in rural districts. Inner city wise, I guess the few times I was in those school districts (Akron mainly), it was pretty diverse. I can imagine in some cities it being divided based off of who lives where. Do you really think those parents were yelling about race? Don't bring in the black people? Or are they concerned about the problems from those schools following the children into their new locations? Assuming it's a bunch of racists and not people concerned about their child's welfare doesn't scream objectivity. You're demonizing an absolutely natural reservation.

I'm not saying you need to ship black people out to farms to desegregate. In areas where there is a strong divide on what race goes to what school, this has been utilized successfully. The example here focuses on a St. Louis area school that was failing.

There is a section where you can hear the parents at the school meeting. Yes, their concern is about safety, but where does that fear come from? The parents themselves are making it loud and clear "this isn't about race" because they don't feel it is. But that doesn't make it so. They are afraid that the kids from this worse school are going to come in and ruin their school. We're talking about children and they want to keep them divided, essentially by their race, because they are afraid. Again, you don't have to wear a white hood to do or say something racist.

I trust when you poll black communities and the majority dismiss the "white guy running for President" automatically, you assess them all as racists in your statistics, right?

I mean, it was what, 97% of African American's voted Obama. Yup. No race issues! That's fine though, I don't mind. Vote for your guy. Hell, I just want the same freedom, because if an election went down where 97% of White people voted AGAINST a Black guy. Whew. Imagine the accusations of "Whitelash" there!

I'm not saying it's a good thing that someone would vote for Obama based solely on his race. I am saying that this isn't as bad as voting against him because of his race. Imagine you're a black man in this country and the shit you've seen, experienced, felt, and learned your whole life. There is distrust with law enforcement and perhaps a feeling of helplessness that you and your community are doomed to poverty because after centuries of racism there is too much ground to make up. Then a black man is a major candidate for president. This might be your only chance for a long time to see someone like you in the White House, and for the first time ever. I feel that race should not be the only factor that goes into a vote, obviously, but are we gonna equate that with someone deciding that Obama is unfit cause he's black? ... or maybe he's not even from here...

Did Obama suffer from racial backlash? I'm sure. There are stupid people out there. With that said, I think racially, he made out ok. There's more black people who vote than racists who vote.

One of those stupid people is now president, which is what I'm getting at. Doesn't stop at votes by the way, the way many people talked about Michelle is fucking atrocious.

 

[-Akronite-]

No, I'm not. And quit telling me how I'm "acting" -- that's such a cop-out in a discussion Try quoting my statements if you're going to claim I'm taking a certain position. I never said it was not a factor. I simply said that it was not the only factor, and not even the most important factor. For example, how wealthy/educated your parents are has an enormous influence on your changes of ending up in poverty.

Waiting on that rollseyes rep still.

And you've said this isn't about affirmative action. Okay, then why not get specific about your proposed solutions that don't involved affirmative action? Because I'm telling you that an awful lot of people who pimp "white privilege" outside this form advocate affirmative action and similar things as a matter of course.

Okay, well I gave you one that shouldn't be that controversial and you dismissed it without thought. So fuck off.

Then what is the issue? What is/are the causes of those school districts, and why does bringing in white kids solve it.

Well, it was the opposite actually. Taking black kids to white schools. The issue is complex, but essentially by creating this separation and hoping that black schools will just catch up because of a shift in funding or something doesn't fix the problem. Whereas if we actually put these kids together and offer the same education, we see better results.

Actually, I don't see much of a difference at all.

And I find that idiotic.

But what kind of "movement" is it that nobody pays attention to unless it's opponents publicize it? It was a fringe movement -- that's why almost nobody in a position of prominence would support it. What made it big was the left deliberately promoting it.

A FRINGE MOVEMENT THAT THE PRESIDENT SUPPORTED ARE YOU SERIOUS?

Who? We had hundreds of elected GOP members of Congress -- name those who were complicit with Birthirism.

Bill Posey introduced a bill requiring birth certificates in response to the Obama controversy.

Awaiting your response about how this is just one isolated thing and it's actually has nothing to do with Obama because everyone would need to provide a birth certificate. The goal posts will move for me but you'll get a 10 in mental gymnastics so who cares?

Okay, I think that is batshit crazy, and I can't even fathom an argument for how Trump is President "as a result" of Birthism.

He led the birther movement and gained political prominence that way. It kept him relevant and established his racist trash base. Ignoring this is willful ignorance.

I have never said you shouldn't bring up racism. I have asked, repeatedly, exactly what it is you advocate as a remedy to "white privilege so I can understand the purpose of why you want to use the term. All I've gotten so far is that putting white kids in schools make black kids smarter. Anything else?

You see this shit? You ask for something, I give it to you, and you dismiss it without any actual critical thought. I'm pretty frustrated at this point because you aren't offering fuck all but want all the answers from me. I mean, this is really your response to a successful solution that could be more widely utilized? It's not even controversial or attacking white people, it's just a fucking solution and you still write it off. So what's the point in talking to you?

Oh, it actually addresses a lot. See, I believe that we should look at people as individuals, not by the color of their skin. I think problems occur because that does not happen. I'm also trying to illustrate the injustice of race-based remedies without regard to individual circumstances, which includes some very privileged black kids, and some very underprivileged kids of other ethnicities.

What injustice? All you've said is that you don't like affirmative action. So what?

You're not addressing shit you're just pretending the problem doesn't exist.

You are deliberately trying to avoid specifics about your proposed solutions.

While you offer nothing at all.

Honestly, I've gone from baffled to heated so I'm gonna probably just let up on debating you for a while. I can understand not agreeing with what I offer here but you're just dismissive when I fulfill your requests and in my eyes you have zero credibility when the Donald is the point of discussion.

 

[CleveRocks]

EXACTLY! Things aren't equal between races in this country. If two people grew up on the same street with the same income but one is white and one is black, they are still going to have different perspectives on life in this country because race is a factor.



As if people don't? You keep saying this as if nobody has presented solutions when racial problems come up.



I don't know what this is referring to. I assume affirmative action or something? Nobody has proposed anything here that aligns with this defense.

OR Things aren't equal between heights in this country. If two people grew up on the same street with the same income but one is tall and one is short, they are still going to have different perspectives on life in this country because height is a factor. #tallpriviledge

The real solution is to teach people that we all have biased perception, a notion that Immanuel Kant (Critique of Pure Reason (Kritik der reinen Vernunft, 1781),


We have to accept this about ourselves and actively work to push through our biases and make humane decisions.

If you are looking at the world through your own particular lens (and why would you do otherwise) You are limited to seeing the world in only one way, and hence solutions only one way. Break the mirrors and you can be free.

https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/jimihendri294475.html

 

[Wrathe]

The ideals they run on? Totally. I think an Obama voter, especially for re-election, shouldn't skirt the fact that they voted for drone strikes and increasing the debt. We are all free to disagree with people we vote for and state whether we support or condemn certain ideals and policies, but I don't see anybody calling out Trump for racism aside from his critics. Because why would you admit you voted for a racist?

I'd say in this political climate, it's silly to assume everyone is complicit in their vote. It's just another way of attacking the person and not the message, IMO. And that applies both ways. We have so little control over what they do, and come election time, we're trying to find folks who represent us and vote along those lines. Do you REALLY think Hillary and Trump was a good representation of our nation? No, most everyone I knew was disgusted w/ their choices. But you gotta pick! So you vote party lines if that's your thing. Personally, I voted Johnson and "threw my vote way".

There is a section where you can hear the parents at the school meeting. Yes, their concern is about safety, but where does that fear come from? The parents themselves are making it loud and clear "this isn't about race" because they don't feel it is. But that doesn't make it so. They are afraid that the kids from this worse school are going to come in and ruin their school. We're talking about children and they want to keep them divided, essentially by their race, because they are afraid. Again, you don't have to wear a white hood to do or say something racist.

They're saying it's not about race, IMO, because as a white person, I feel I have an obligation to over qualify what I say so that someone won't take offense (to which someone naturally takes offense). They're trying to set the tone so someone won't just be like, "hrmm, these some racist mother fuckers", to which you've heard it and declared, "hrmm, these some racist mother fuckers", proving qualifying statements and PC are worthless because white people are racist when they have an opinion. I digress.

They're afraid the PROBLEMS that the other school suffers from will seep in. Why wouldn't they be? The failing school is proof that whatever protocols are in place at a state educational level are inadequate to address the issues. Diluting the populace doesn't fix it, it just raises the mean test scores. The real issue w/ these schools aren't the children. It's not the teachers. It's the parents. It's the homefront, and sadly, no matter what school these kids go to, the problem is they go home at the end of the day. If Mom and Dad aren't there, or aren't supportive, that child will suffer in ways school can't fix. I don't want to preach about the value of family units, that's another thread.

I'm not saying it's a good thing that someone would vote for Obama based solely on his race. I am saying that this isn't as bad as voting against him because of his race. Imagine you're a black man in this country and the shit you've seen, experienced, felt, and learned your whole life. There is distrust with law enforcement and perhaps a feeling of helplessness that you and your community are doomed to poverty because after centuries of racism there is too much ground to make up. Then a black man is a major candidate for president. This might be your only chance for a long time to see someone like you in the White House, and for the first time ever. I feel that race should not be the only factor that goes into a vote, obviously, but are we gonna equate that with someone deciding that Obama is unfit cause he's black? ... or maybe he's not even from here...

I get it, it's an inspiring story. It's still racist though.

Don't get me wrong, when McCain lost (I voted for him) my first hope was for stronger racial relations. Appreciated the "first" nature of it all and hoped in 4 years we'd have better luck (we didn't). I unfortunately saw over the next 8 years, what feels like a decline.

One of those stupid people is now president, which is what I'm getting at. Doesn't stop at votes by the way, the way many people talked about Michelle is fucking atrocious.

You're really hung up on the Birther thing. It was stupid politics and personally, I've said as much the whole time. Didn't Trump finally even denounce it during his running?

"Oh my gosh, they claimed he's a Muslim because he's black, that's racist!"

Maybe partly because he's black, but if it were on a pie chart, I'm pretty sure it'd mostly be, the "Barack Hussein Obama" name that might have made them look that way.

If we ever have a guy named Hitler run for office, feel free to check his ancestry page, I won't fault you.

People said ugly shit about Michelle, yup. Racist shit even. What's the relevance of this, though? People say ugly shit about Melania too. I've seen awful memes of her, of oh, what's the kids name. The one who seems to have inherited the hair. Anyways, him, I've seen awful crap on him. People are assholes man. Go on the internet and you'll find even more assholes than you thought there were. It's never OK, IMO, to bring in folks family into it. They're always just cheap personal attacks.

On that, I see this embraced and supported by Hollywood. I think it's sad. "No, it's just satire, we're just entertainment!" Nah, I feel like it's more a ratings driven race to the bottom of humanity. SNL sucked for the last 8 years because they had no nuts to make fun of that administration (they'd be called racist). Now they suck because their lack of objectivity just dwarfs anything they're trying to do, as an example.