Well I do see quite abit more blacks walking around with their pants hanging down below their rear than any other race but whether or they are sad or gay I couldn't tell ya.
Taking offense at flags
- Thread starter LDB
- Start date
Oh, so it's not just about what they do with their pants in general, it's about how they wear them in public. Got it. So, if blacks dress in a manner in which you approve, you'll advocate removing a racist symbol offensive to blacks.
Kind of like giving a preforming monkey a treat, isn't it?
I see what your saying but I believe it's more along the line of what offends others, The confederate flag offends most blacks (and you shouldn't call them monkeys thats not nice Turtle)and from most of the people I talk to black, white, yellow, and green they are offended by seeing someone with their pants half down. Even some Pitsburgh Steelers fans were quite offended by it and we all know about them.
How about you? does it bother you?
whether they are white, black or yellow...I don't like the fashion.....But then again in history some didn't like bell bottom jeans, washed out jeans, the tube tops...or muscle shirts....
But a black guy can wear purple and be cool.....I'd be called gay....LOL
I was thinking more on this.....
a white 65 year old grandmother wearing cut off jeans and a halter top covered in tattoos....now that bothers me.....
I see alot of that being the Wally worm that I am.....
a white 65 year old grandmother wearing cut off jeans and a halter top covered in tattoos....now that bothers me.....
I see alot of that being the Wally worm that I am.....
Oh....Gotta get that image out of my mind NOW!!I was thinking more on this.....
a white 65 year old grandmother wearing cut off jeans and a halter top covered in tattoos....now that bothers me.....
I see alot of that being the Wally worm that I am.....
does that bother you?......LOL
I know. What you're saying is you want to hold hostage one offensive thing that offends most blacks for another offensive thing that you find offensive.
That would imply that I called blacks monkeys. I did not. I called a performing monkey a monkey. If I had said 'Kind of like giving a performing dolphin a treat, isn't it?" would you say is not nice to call them dolphins?
Not even a little bit. Nor do I find it offensive. I can't imagine in what way wearing one's pants around their knees is supposed to be a display of hate towards any group at all, much less towards whites.
Women's peep toe winter boots bother me a little, though. What's up with that?
you need counselling for your toe fetish buddy.....
She left "all that history" out because it's highly likely she's unaware of it. I'll bet she and hundreds of thousands of high school and college graduates from the past twenty years would give you a blank stare if you asked them who the Dixiecrats were and the part they played in American political history. It's highly unlikely any of this is taught in public schools, and you sure don't see it mentioned on the MSM, or primary news sources for people her age like Slate or on The Daily Show. This subject would reflect badly on the Democrat party, since most of the Segregationist icons of the past were indeed Democrats who fought against the civil rights act tooth and nail. They don't want to bring that up during an election year.
Maybe your right.........or maybe not
In a related effort to remove offensive symbols, the Memphis city council has recently voted to change the name of Forrest Park, disinter the bodies of Nathan Bedford Forrest and his wife buried at that location and remove his statue to sell it to the highest bidder.
http://www.localmemphis.com/story/d...rd-forrests-rema/12440/x-aa6bzx80iy91LMR_yQ-g
With that in mind, wouldn't it be appropriate for WV residents and state political officials demand that memorials honoring former senator Robert C. Byrd be removed or have their name changed? Byrd after all, was also a Dixiecrat and more contemporary member and leader of the KKK in addition to being an avowed segregationist until this position became politically unfavorable. At this point in his career, he renounced the Klan as did Forrest at a later point in his life.
http://www.localmemphis.com/story/d...rd-forrests-rema/12440/x-aa6bzx80iy91LMR_yQ-g
With that in mind, wouldn't it be appropriate for WV residents and state political officials demand that memorials honoring former senator Robert C. Byrd be removed or have their name changed? Byrd after all, was also a Dixiecrat and more contemporary member and leader of the KKK in addition to being an avowed segregationist until this position became politically unfavorable. At this point in his career, he renounced the Klan as did Forrest at a later point in his life.
One would think WV political leaders and the Congressional Black Caucus would be concerned about the memorialization of such an influential figure who fought so strenuously against the civil rights of black Americans.
A lot of it would depend on why Byrd was honored. The reasons why Nathan B. Forrest was moved to the park and the statue created in the first place were purely racist. All monuments to the past are never about the past, they're about the present. That's why they go up when they do, and that's why they come down when they are no longer relevant in the present.
that would be akin to tearing down the rest of the Coloseum a tribute to Rome in the glory days
maybe tearing down the rebuilt death camps of the Final Solution....just make history disappear..
maybe tearing down the rebuilt death camps of the Final Solution....just make history disappear..
The Coleseum isn't a tribute to the past, it actually is history. Removing a monument to something isn't the same as removing history. Monuments, generally speaking, are created to commemorate a famous person or event. But the monument is not the person or event itself. Removing the monument doesn't remove what it commemorates.
The first thing that came down after Saddam Hussein's regime was toppled, were the monuments of Saddam Hussein. The history of Saddam remains. The first things that came down with the fall of the Soviet Empire were the monuments of Lennin. The history remains.
The monument to Nathan B. Forrest was created by KKK members as a tribute to it's founder, and as an in-your-face reminder to blacks that they'd better behave themselves. The monument itself serves no historical purpose other than as a breathtaking display of racism, and when removed the history of it all will remain.
The first thing that came down after Saddam Hussein's regime was toppled, were the monuments of Saddam Hussein. The history of Saddam remains. The first things that came down with the fall of the Soviet Empire were the monuments of Lennin. The history remains.
The monument to Nathan B. Forrest was created by KKK members as a tribute to it's founder, and as an in-your-face reminder to blacks that they'd better behave themselves. The monument itself serves no historical purpose other than as a breathtaking display of racism, and when removed the history of it all will remain.
food for thought right there..... Thanks
Thanks
