Black Rednecks and White Liberals (by Thomas Sowell)

No no, the onus is on you to support your statements, not me to refute what hasn't even been substantiated. Good, good, now we're starting from a position of reality. Yes, in the US, black people are economically and educationally disadvantaged. Since we've agreed that black people aren't any dumber, or whatever - there's no inherent physical disparity - the difference, then, must be systemic, endemic obstacles to the success of black people. Except that they don't, as I've proven. I'll remind you - black people are half as likely to be called in for job interviews as white people with identical qualifications.They don't have the same chance, for a variety of reasons: endemic racism in the workplace, limited access to quality education. Plus, your average black person inherits less than 10% of the wealth from their parents that the average white person does.Some of that is racism. Some of that is the self-perpetuating results of racism. I thought we had agreed that these attitudes were equally prevalent among white people. If it's the attitude that's responsible for disadvantaging blacks, how do you explain that? That's proof of the systemic racism I'm talking about. Yes, culture is responsible - a culture of racism systemic to the US. What about a nickname? I'm sure William Robert doesn't have any trouble with his resumes, NJ. Show me. Because I've looked, and what they say is "we're not racist, we're just better than black people."Denial of being racist is universal among racists. It's the first thing they do. Hell even the KKK will tell you that they're not racists. "Some of my best friends are black." Coded language for racism. I mean you'll never hear the Minutemen talk about hating "spics", but they're racist, nonetheless. (Why aren't they up protecting the equally-porous Canadian border, otherwise?) Sure. Who said black people couldn't be racist? But they'll deny that they're racist, just like the "melanin scientists" will. They'll even deny that they're anti-semetic.All bigots deny bigotry, NJ. Don't you ever talk to them? Don't you seem them on the news trying to look respectable? Trying to dress up their racism in the most legitimate-sounding terms? How do you think they find new members? Who's giving them a pass? The thing is - black people don't generally have the power to be effective racists. Systemic racism against blacks essentially prevents systemic racism by blacks. Compared to the damage caused by systemic racism towards blacks, black racism isn't exactly a priority for social justice. And anyway, when we eliminate the racism against blacks, I imagine that'll go a long way towards eliminating any racism among blacks.Top to bottom, American society is stacked against black people. Whatever racism exists among black people is simply pushback from that. Which is still idiotic. The antebellum South was renown for its good manners, not poor manners. That's my point - it refers to the coarse mannerisms and poverty conditions of those who typically do field labor.The people who owned slaves were not laborers of any kind. They were a genteel leisure class renown for good manners, traditional values, quasi-European architecture, cuisine that blended local crops with Old-World techniques, and, of course, crushing disregard for anyone not a member of their restrictive social class.They weren't rednecks, and any person of that class you referred to as a redneck would be greatly offended. (And they settled such matters at dawn, with pistols.) Did they make ostentatious, conspicuous purchases? Sure, that's a universal feature of having wealth.But coarse manners and poor financial habits? You've got no idea what you're talking about, which is how I know you've never lived in the South.

Er, it can't be sociological. You just said it pervades overal society.Look, your argument doesn't make a lick of sense. You're saying that there's this attitude that pervades society and doesn't have anything to do with race - and that's why black people are disadvantaged.What the fuck? If it doesn't have anything to do with race, then it can't be an explanation. What's endemic to American sociology is racism - people don't think a black person is as good as a white person.It really is just that simple, NJ. It's the simplest explanation in the world, but you're too busy blaming the victims to see the real problem. And quite frankly, we're all getting a little tired of your racism. Accountable for what? The systemic racism that they're the victims of?Yeah, accountable. And you know what? Somebody should start holding all those robbery victims accountable. And murder victims too. (Of course, rape victims have been held to your perverted "accountability" for pretty much all of history.)Look, NJ, it's not a mystery what's going on. You're wondering why black people get the shaft in America, and rather than face your uncomfortable responsibility for your part in it, you prefer to blame the victim. You sleep a lot better thinking that black people are poor because they deserve to be poor; not because (for instance) employers are half as likely to call a black person back for an interview compared to a white person with the same qualifications.Blaming the victim is common, and it's no surprise to see you suffering from it. That doesn't make it any less dispicable or racist.

Randman, could you comment on the research I linked to upthread? The fact that a black person is less than half as likely to be called back for an interview as a white person with identical qualifications would seem to me to be a very significant barrier to success, indeed. And, no, that's not a problem "black people themselves have to solve." Systemic racism is a problem we all need to have a hand in dealing with (although blaming the victim, again, makes it pretty easy to abdicate one's responsibility thereof.)I'm not familiar with any research that suggests adultery is any more prevalent among black people than among anyone else, so could you provide some kind of evidentiary support for that?As for the rest - black on black violent crime, drug use, etc - these are sociological conditions well-known to stem from conditions of crushing poverty. When the systemic racism that economically disadvantages black people is removed, these problems will abate as a function of the increasing wealth of black people. You're simply mistaking the symptoms for the disease.

You tell me, Randman, I'm not required to substantiate your statements. Do your own homework. What I asked you to do was substantiate your claim that adultery was higher among black people, because I do not believe that this has been established by research. So I'm asking you, again, to present your data.As I said, violence among blacks isn't any higher than one would expect for a poverty-stricken group, so when the economic disparities that result from systemic racism against blacks are abated, those crimes will abate along with them. No. What causes crushing poverty is a lack of access to education and employment. And the reason for that is because of dilapidated schools in black communities and the fact that your average employer is less than half as likely to call a black person back for an interview as a white person with identical qualifications.The symptoms are not the disease. The disease is poverty caused by systemic racism. Plenty. But the plural of "anecdote" is not "data." I'm sure "some of your best friends are black", Randman, but how much research have you seen on this subject? None? It sure sounds like it. Why don't you respond to the research I linked to NJ, upthread? No. Again, the huge problem is that a black person is less than half as likely to be called back for an interview as a white person with identical qualifications, because of systemic racism in the workforce. And they're a lot less likely to have those identical qualifications in the first place, because of the disparities in quality of education.It all comes back to poverty, Randman, and it's the economic disparities that are a function of systemic racism that are responsible. Everything else is merely symptoms of that.

If you don't understand why it's racist to have the "White Panthers", or "White Entertainment Network", or "White History Month", or a "White Pride March", then you're either absolutely committed to not thinking about these issues very carefully, or you're such a hopeless racist that it's impossible for you to think about race in a socially just way.The privileged race doesn't need a channel especially for their race - because every channel is especially for their race. They don't need a month to celebrate their history - because their history is celebrated every month. They don't need to march in pride of their race - because society gives them reasons to be proud at all times.Whites are "up." Blacks are "down." Hopefully that's simple enough language for you to understand. The answer to addressing that disparity isn't to push everybody up at the same time, but to push the down people up. You don't balance the teeter-toter by pushing up on both sides. It doesn't work. It doesn't even make sense. Trying to offset white privilege with the scantest of bones thrown to minorities isn't racism. I mean, for god's sake. Black people are less than half as likely to be called back for an interview as white people with identical qualifications, and your beef is that there's a TV channel called "BET"?What the fuck is wrong with you? If you don't want to watch BET, don't. If you want to watch the "Privileged White People Channel", that's every other channel on the TV.The point is that there is real racism that represents real, unfair obstacles to the progress of black people - and then there's this shit in your post, which is nothing more than racist whining at the slightest erosion of white privilege.

What sense does it make to have "Fox News" now that Republicans lost Congress?It's not like the government created BET, NJ, or Martin Luther King, Jr. The market supports BET (on cable, BTW) because it offers programming that appeals to its demographic in a way that meanstream, white-oriented programming doesn't. If it didn't, they wouldn't be on the air. Simple as that. You mean AZN? I watch that all the time. That channel and Cartoon Network are the only one who run any anime. Yes. Because it's racist, not to mention redundant. If you want to watch TV for whites, turn to any other channel. Fox News, especially. Yeah, the privileged race. You're privileged, for instance, by being part of what is considered the "normal" race. You're privileged by being twice as likely as an identically-qualified black guy to be called back for a job interview, for instance. How can it be nonsense? You've already admitted that it's true. Look, you've already said that black people face obstacles that others don't. You gave a lot of examples of how black people don't seem to do as well in America as they should.Well, look at the flip side of that. What does that say about you? That you don't face the same obstacles. That American society doesn't hold you back. What else should we call that besides privilege?You can walk into any department store in the nation and find the stuff you need to take care of your hair. That's a privilege. Yeah. The white race.Look. Turn on the TV and watch the programs. If you see a program that, to you, doesn't seem to have anything to do with race - that's a program made especially for white people. That's why you don't see the racial component - it's your race. It's transparent to you. Why wouldn't it be?Think about it for a minute. List to yourself the stereotypes about white people. Now, think about where you first heard those, what the source of those stereotypes is. Minority comedians, almost certainly. Don't you find it odd that you can't think of a single white stereotype that a minority didn't come up with? Isn't it odd that all the stuff they say about white people - have to get drunk to dance well, get sleepy from turkey and wine, talk like they're from the suburbs - seem totally normal to you?You're white. So, naturally, white-oriented stuff seems normal or raceless to you. That's how you know it's white-oriented! Everywhere. Every history book has the history of white people. Every channel talks about the accomplishments of white people. Every magazine that isn't explicitly minority-oriented is about white people.How many white people are on the cover of Time every month? How many minorities? Actually, every one of those people did have it bad, thanks to racism. That they overcame it to some degree is irrelevant. And, look at your examples. Bill Gates makes a lot more money than Opera. Condi still reports to George Bush.I mean it's not even clear to me what you think you've proven with these examples. See, this is racism. You're a racist. Your assumption is - whenever a minority gets a job over a white, it's "affirmative action", because there's no way a shiftless nigger could be more qualified than a white person. But, of course, you get CBS, ABC, NBC, and all the rest of the broadcast channels - which are white-oriented programming. (And, again, the way that you can detect this is for you, a white guy, to sit down and watch those channels and, if you can't detect a racial orientation to the programming - it's white-oriented, obviously.) I have no idea what you're talking about, and this charge is simply false. I've offered no "unwaivering support" for anybody at all simply because of their race.But any idiot can take a look at a situation where employers choose white people over equally-qualified black ones and see - that's racist. And it's going on - it's prevalent. Endemic.And the people who stand up for that racism system - like you - are racists. And you're sitting there blaming the victim because it's easier than discharging your responsibility - your complicity for taking advantage of a system that rewards you at the expense of black people.Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.

It's not surprising to me to see NJ lampoon the idea of "white privilege" since he's pretty clearly racist, but I see enough other people disagree with the obvious fact of white privilege that I think the concept merits some explaining. Once I do I think you'll agree that the phenomenon of white privilege is nothing more than the flipside of systemic racism against non-whites.Imagine that we're talking about the society of, say, 19th-century Georgia, where blacks are slaves. Now, if you're a black man, you can't:1) Vote
2) Own anything
3) Marry a white person
4) Decide where you want to worketc. Everybody understands what it means to be a slave.But flip it. As a white person, you can:1) Vote
2) Own things
3) Marry a white person
4) Make decisions about your employmentand so on. You have privileges:

quote:

---

White privilege is a term denoting purported rights, advantages, exemptions or immunities enjoyed by white persons in Western countries beyond what is commonly experienced by nonwhites in those same nations. It has been described as "an invisible package of unearned assets which I [as a white person] can count on cashing in each day, but about which I was 'meant' to remain oblivious" (McIntosh, 1989).

---

White privilege - WikipediaTo you, these seem like things you're just "supposed" to have. Even if you support slavery, these are just part of your white "birthright." These are your "human rights."But if you don't have them, they don't seem like human rights at all. They seem like gifts to white people - special privileges, in other words.White privilege is very real. It doesn't mean that white people get a check every month, or that they're guaranteed to have easy lives or something ridiculous. Those are just ridiculous strawmen of a very real phenomenon.When a white person is twice as likely to be called in for interviews as an identically-qualified black person, that's a privilege. When the first guy your boss accuses of stealing from the till is anybody but the white employee, that's white privilege. Receiving lighter sentences for the same crimes is a privilege white people have.When you turn on the news and see nothing but stories about important white people delivered by white reporters, that's white privilege. When the news media, the movies, the TV shows all make it seem like being "white" means being "normal", and being "non-white" means being a "minority", that's a privilege. When the culture consistently heralds the accomplishments of white people, but other races only get a token level of praise, that's privilege.When the music of white people is considered "culture" but the music of other races is considered "ethnic", that's privilege.

quote:

---

White privilege may be subtle or "invisible" to those who benefit from it. McIntosh (1989) and Jensen (1998) suggest some less obvious privileges that attach to being white in America:

​

* Whites can turn on the television or read the newspaper and expect to see members of their own race widely represented;
* Whites can expect their children to read books and materials in school that affirm and discuss the history of their race;
* Whites can swear, dress in second-hand clothes, or not answer letters, without having others attribute these behaviors to the bad morals, the poverty, or the illiteracy of their race;
* Whites can speak their opinions without being asked to speak for their race;
* Whites can do well without being called credits to their race;
* Whites easily locate books, greeting cards, toys, and magazines prominently featuring members of their race;
* Whites do not have to wonder whether they are being singled out because of their race when being approached by the police;
* Whites can take jobs without accusations that they were hired as part of racial quotas;
* Whites are most often evaluated by members of their own race;
* Whites do not appear threatening to those of the dominant culture.

---

White privilege isn't really invisible; it just appears "normal." In theory these are all things that all humans should enjoy from each other. In practice, these are things largely enjoyed only by whites. That's why they represent privilege.As you can see, there's nothing nonsensical or unreasonable about what I'm saying. White privilege isn't in the form of a check you get every month. It comes in the form of little perks you've been taught are just the normal way white people are supposed to be treated. White privilege simply can't be denied without denying that people of minorities are mistreated and systematically disadvantaged by our society. Obviously, if non-whites are disadvantaged, whites must be advantaged. That's just simple logic.The logic of white privilege is inescapable and can't be denied, though plenty of white people do, because they aren't getting a check in the mail or their own life situation isn't as good as some black person they know about. That sort of race envy is, of course, racist at its heart; it's nothing more than anger at "uppity niggers" who dare to be more successful - or even just plain luckier - than less successful whites. It's an expression of racist privilege, the assumption that no black person should have anything unless a white person decides to give it to them. And it's anger at the slightest suggestion that the privileges of whites has been eroded.Well, get over yourselves. Sure, you probably don't make as much money as Oprah. Oprah's success, though, didn't magically get rid of racism or make a black man more likely to be called back for an interview than a white person with the same resume plus a felony conviction. (Having your felony record not count against your chances of employment as compared to a black person with the same felony, or even no felony, is a privilege.)

In fact, we know that the exact opposite is the case, and that a black person is much more likely than a white person to be a student at a dilapidated, failing school.In fact that's such an obviously true statement that I really have to question anybody who would offer the reverse claim. In NJ's case, though, I've provided ample reasoning and sufficient justification for my conclusion that his remarks stem from inherently racist attitudes, so please refer to those posts if you think I'm unfairly characterizing him that way. He's certainly made exactly the same claim about me, but in his case, he's provided no evidence or example of it. NJ's statement has been proven completely false by my evidence, and by the evidence of others - black people do not have the same chance to succeed because significant obstacles are placed in their paths, obstacles that whites simply don't have to deal with.The only people passing the blame are those who, rather than face their complicity in a racist society, choose to blame the victims of racism rather than the perpetrators. Such an attitude is inherently racist and should be called so whenever it arises, for instance in the case of NJ.

To the extent that it is a particular problem for black people (a contention that, after several requests, you have still not provided any evidence for, thus confirming my earlier characterization of your posting habits), it is the result of poverty, which is the result of racism, as I've proven. (See the evidence I've referred to you at least three times now.)

What, are you kidding? Do you not watch the channel, or what? Everything you think is just "normal" tv. Sitcoms about white people who live in the suburbs. Entertainment news about white celebrities. Country and pop music videos. Travel shows about America and Europe. Cooking shows about traditionally white cuisine.Everything that doesn't seem "racial" to you. You don't detect the racial orientation because it's your race. AZN? You can't figure out what "Ahs-zhi-en" has on its network? Soap operas from China. Japanese-produced period dramas. Korean-produced animation. Cooking shows about asian cuisine. Travel shows about Thailand.You know, stuff that asian people might want to watch because it's relevant to their culture - in the way that every other channel shows programming relevant to white people's culture. Because white people have white-oriented programming on all channels. Incresing white privilege, when whites are already privileged, is racist. Then refute it. How much black-oriented programming does Fox News run?Is Bill O'Reilly a black person? Are Sean Hannity and Alan Colmes black or white? How aboutShow me the programming on Fox News that's black or minority-oriented. Otherwise your assertions to the contrary have no support. I've explained how you are. Until you're prepared to deal with message 86, your assertions to the contrary are irrelevant, unsubtantiated arguments that are contrary to the forum guidelines. No, obviously not, but that's irrelevant - you live in Oregon. You don't live where whites are the minorities, you live where they're privleged by society - thus, you are privileged.I mean you really need to be thinking through your arguments, NJ. How soon they forget. Did you, or did you not write these words:

quote:

---

Its a matter of statistical fact that American blacks do more poorly than anyone else in the United States. However, Caribbean or African blacks and other minorities fare much better and are among some of the upper crust as far as it relates to scholarship.

---

Those are your words, NJ, or, at the very least, you offered them as your words. (That you can't now recall them casts some doubt on the authenticity of your authorship.) "Blacks do more poorly than anyone else." Conversly, it's known that whites do better as a whole than anybody else.That's the privilege of whites - doing better, as a whole, than anybody else. It's the flip side of blacks doing worse than anybody else. If one side of the teeter-totter is down, the other side is up. In this case, it's a teeter-totter with a lot of sides, but white people are still pretty much up - that's the privilege. Mostly blacks, but hispanics and asians too. Everybody who isn't white, essentially.It's not a conspiracy. It's individual people in power making decisions from stereotypes about race. "I'm not going to call La Fawndah back because black people don't work as hard as white people." There's no need for a conspiracy to disenfranchise minorities - a sufficient number of the people in power are doing it anyway, because they all share identical prejudices against minorities. That you even bring it up is racist. What, you're so smart that it's not possible a black person could be more qualified than you?Of course not. How could a "shiftless nigger" know more about your job than you? Individual bad choices wouldn't explain it. That's random noise in the statistics.Unless your contention is that a black person is more likely to make "bad choices" than a white person. That contention, of course, would be racist - as well as disproven by the evidence you yourself have referred to.Bad choices that have nothing to do with race might explain why an individual fails to succeed in our society. But bad choices don't explain why minorities as a whole fail to succeed in our society, unless, again, your contention is the racist argument that white people just make better choices in general, because they're smarter or something. No, I'm not, and this is nothing more than a smokescreen assertion designed to direct attention away from your failing, racist arguments and portray me as a bigot. Of course, it's completely transparent. You don't understand that black people need special hair-care products to take care of their hair? That hair stylists have to be specially trained to style black people's hair, and that a lot of them don't have sufficient practice or training to do it successfully?No, of course you don't - you're white, so naturally, stores stock all the hair products you need, and barbers and stylists have no problem cutting and styling your hair. You've never even considered the possibility that you could go into a barber or a hair stylist and the person literally wouldn't know how to cut or style your hair.That's privilege. It's a privilege black people don't have. You don't think being white is a race? Jesus, NJ, look at a census form sometime. What do you think the listing of "caucasian" means? "White."How is it that you think you can talk about race when you don't even know what race you are? No, of course that's not true. I was talking about stereotypes, not saying that the stereotypes are true. Try to pay attention, ok?Surely you're aware that there are stereotypes about white people, right? How can you even talk about race if you're so ignorant about it?Why do you think all the stereotypes are made up by minorities? Why do you think it is that you, a white person, can't come up with a single stereotype about being white on your own? Yes, I am. No, that's called "racism." The fact (that you accepted) that black people have the least success, as a group, in our society - and whites have the most - is racism. What else would it be? How would you know? What, I'm supposed to believe that employers are calling you back and telling you that they're hiring a black guy, and then they're telling you how much less qualified he is?Bullshit, NJ. Employers rarely call people they aren't hiring, and they certainly wouldn't open themselves to a lawsuit by admitting to any kind of racial discrimination, especially after a number of successful such lawsuits in the '80's. These are myths propagated by racists. The vast majority of businesses aren't under any kind of racial quota or affirmative action in the first place. Affirmative Action, for all it's vaunted racism, is a boogeyman. It's hardly ever employed in the US. Yes, I'm telling you that shows like CSI: Miami, with a nearly all-white cast set in one of the most minority-populated cities in the US, is white-oriented. I'm telling you that your average national news program, with a nearly all-white lineup of anchors, is white-oriented.And the proof of this is that you see no racial orientation to these shows. Obviously you don't - you're white! It's your race. Again, these are falsehoods, and there's absolutely no statement of mine you can quote to substantiate them (which is why you didn't even try.) Who's asserted that? You're grappling with strawmen. (Probably black ones.) Who said that it was? I did, as you'll recall, assert that I found Malcom X as racist and anti-semetic as anybody else.You're grappling with strawmen. When are you going to be able to address my arguments? At the same time that you defend white privilege and racism? I doubt you even know the meaning of the word "equality", NJ.

Yeah, I watch Fox. Why wouldn't I? Unlike conservatives I have no trouble exposing myself to views that aren't exactly like mine.I bet neither one of you listen to NPR on a regular basis, though. Or watch much Keith Olbermann? No? Color me not surprised. But that's the point. The only minority faces on Fox News are guests brought in as stand-ins for their entire race. But nobody expects Sean Hannity to be speaking for all white people, do they? Hannity has the privilege of his remarks not reflecting on his race. Fox News' black guests aren't afforded the same privilege.Thanks, Buz, for another great example of white privilege.

So, because there's not slavery anymore, racism is a thing of the past?Who exactly lives under a rock, here? I'm not talking about legal rights, I'm talking about privileges. We're not talking about rights, we're talking about privileges - things you get, or don't have to worry about, because of your race. Except that they aren't, and we're not. How many times do I have to prove it? I've proven it over and over and over again, but it just doesn't make an impression on a racist, does it? Who said otherwise? The problem is, there's a long way to go before equality. But rather than push towards that future, you'd rather engage in victim-blaming to assuage your guilt. Yeah, yeah, "some of your best friends are black." Racists always say that. It's coded language for "I'm about to say something racist, but I don't want to be called out as racist for it." Great. So what? Who ever said a black man couldn't be a good carpenter, except you who's absolutely certain that any time you've been passed over for a job for a minority, it's "affirmative action" and not simply you being out-competed in the workforce? How do your stats disprove my assertion? They don't seem to have anything to do with it. Moreover, your stats prove that black people are disproportionately more likely to recieve the death penalty than whites (hint: you need to compare the ratio of blacks to whites on Death Row vs. the ratio of blacks to whites in the population as a whole, and additionally to the ratio of blacks to whites charged with capital crimes.) But your stats prove racism. What are you talking about? Wha...? No, of course they're white. That's what we're talking about, NJ! White people!What is wrong with your reading comprehension today? Are you even paying attention to what you're writing? How many world-renown composers from history can you think of?How many of them are white? How many of them are black? How many classical composers can you think of that are black? How many of them are white? Why do you think we call their music "classic" and not "European"? You don't live in those countries, NJ. Do you not even know where you live?Why should I continue having a discussion with someone who doesn't even remember what country he lives in? Seriously? Who's a liberal? Who should blame what?Seriously, NJ.What the fuck are you even talking about?Honestly this post of yours makes even less sense than usual. I suggest you go back, re-read what I wrote, and try to respond again. Absolutely nothing you've said bears any indication you understood my plain statements in English, that you know how to construct a rebuttal, or that you even know what country you live in and what race white people are. How can you possibly expect to take part in a discussion when apparently the most basic facts are a complete mystery to you?

Perhaps perhaps perhaps, but we all know those scenarios are pretty unlikely. We all know that cops treat white people differently than minorities. Getting the benefit of the doubt is a white privilege. Being assumed guilty until proven innocent is how minorities are treated by police. Nobody's saying it's unusual - being racist is the most natural thing in the world. It's the flip side of kin selection - we're inclined to be charitable to those who look like us (which are most likely our relatives) and less so to humans who look different.But just because racism is the most natural thing in the world doesn't make it the right way to live, and it's astounding that you would suggest that it is, Buz. It's quite surprising how quickly you came out in support of racism, but nobody who'd ever seen the crushing effects of racism on the human spirit would ever suggest that racism was anything but awful.Bad show, Buz. I'd had some respect for you as a moderator but I can't respect someone who stands up for racism.

Standing up for that tendancy, though is racist.We have a natural tendancy to lie, cheat, and steal, too; but you don't see me standing up for those, do you? You have an idiosyncratic reading of the Bible.And, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, note the coded language flags of the racist:

quote:

---

Crash, I've had a number of friends over the years and still do,

---

"Some of my best friends are black"

quote:

---

Most agree about their own children whether or not they would say so.

---

"I'm just saying what everyone is thinking"The truth of the matter is, Buz, you're way out on your own on this. People simply aren't as racist as you are - or, if they are, at least most people have the decency not to defend those tendancies. You're just desperately hoping that your daughter doesn't marry a black man, is all. Alan Keyes the racist homobigot? Shocking.Look, people, this isn't hard. If you think black people are just fine over there but God forbid one try to work at your workplace, or eat at your lunch counter, or drink from your fountain, or marry into your family - you're a racist. It's amazing that an adult has to be told that in the 21st century.

In fact the exact opposite is true - complaints against cops for racism are almost always immediately dismissed.