Yes. And people have said, "Why are you calling us racists?" I say, "No, I'm not calling the party racist. I'm just saying, if you look at it, you will see that there's some in the party who practice a level of intolerance that is not good for the party and is not consistent with American values."
September 7, 2015
"Do you still see a dark vein of intolerance inside the Republican party today?" Chuck Todd asked Colin Powell...
... on "Meet the Press" yesterday. Without any hesitation, Powell said "Yes":
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
99 comments:
No. Powell does not "know some in the party" this needs to be slapped down and stomped. Name names cite examples. I don't tolerate Obama. Nothing to do with the shade of his skin, its his radiacal anti Americanism that I don't tolerate. Screaming racism just silences the debate. That's the true agenda here.
Fuck that asshole.
Did Chuck as Colin why black people are slaughtering other black people at the highest level in history?
Straw man ass kicking is the easiest ass kicking.
Colin is a Bushista all the way down. Politics and truth shall never mix. To do so is UN-bushistic.
"there's some in the party who practice a level of intolerance that is not good for the party and is not consistent with American values"
Like iowan2 said, names please.
I would assume within any sufficiently large organization, including, say, the Democratic Party, there are jerks and assholes.
This seems like yet another of the "have you stopped beating your wife" criteria that only ever gets applied to certain portions of the country and not others.
donald said...
Fuck that asshole.
Did Chuck as Colin why black people are slaughtering other black people at the highest level in history?
Apparently, Althouse loves the smell of hysteria in the morning.
Dark vein of intolerance?
Sounds mysterious.
Kind of makes you wish for the good old days when you could just look for who's got a lawn jockey out front.
"Dark vein of intolerance? Sounds mysterious."
Sounds racist — dark.
"A DARK VEIN OF INTOLERANCE"
I call RACISM on Chuck Todd.
I call wimpy answer on Colin Powell.
For Todd's question to make sense, it should have been if Powell knew anyone in the Party that uses the Party for "intolerant" (I guess this is short for "discriminates against Blacks, right?) purposes.
Condoleezza says she became a Republican because her father was one, and her father became one because the Republican Party in Birmingham, AL would register him to vote, and The Democrat Party would not.
Powell disgraced himself as he made one last effort at racial solidarity before Obama's Iran deal goes wrong. The Iranians are laughing at us but it has become a leftist badge of groupthink to support it. Look at HuffPo, as I do most days, to see how the only reason Republicans oppose the disastrous embrace of the mullahs is because they hate "black people."
The white left is marching in solidarity but there is no thought behind it. I forget if it was Solzhenitsyn who said that communists required the people to prove their acceptance of ridiculous concepts as way to humiliate them and force them to proclaim loyalty to ideas that made no sense. The more foolish the precept, the more the people were required to proclaim loyalty to it.
The nice thing about crying "racism" is there is no need for a factual basis, plus you can paint with the broadest of brushes.
Crying "racism" is a freebie for minorities and liberals. There is no downside to the utterance. They get to claim the high moral ground without the hard work of actually being moral and consistent. The word allows inconvenient facts and logical contradictions to be dismissed offhand.
For many of those being called "racist" the term is a badge of honor. It is a marker that indicates you have dared to search for truth or that you have taken an unauthorized position.
The corresponding sexual term is "homophobe".
Tolerance is code for any idea favored by the Left. So by definition intolerance is only practiced by the Right.
Michael K wrote:
"I forget if it was Solzhenitsyn who said that communists required the people to prove their acceptance of ridiculous concepts as way to humiliate them and force them to proclaim loyalty to ideas that made no sense."
Vaclav Havel?
A real conservative would have immediately told Todd that his idea of "intolerance" appears to be faulty.
Powell has no issue with calling racism within the Republican party, which is what he said when you strip away the politic code words, but he just can't say whether HRC did anything unseemly with just her emails - never mind her general lying-ass, profiteering behavior overall - while SOS, because, you know, there are several pending investigations, and he wouldn't want to inflict his personal opinions upon that sacrosanct process and all.
Oh, BS. To the degree this man had any credibility left with conservatives, it's fading away, just like those fictional non-nuclear Iran mullahs.
Did you hear that?
That was the sound of the Republican bus backing up to run over Colin Powell again. He was their guy until he mentioned some inconvenient truths.
I would be quite an astonishing thing to see an honest Democrat acknowledge that intolerance exists in that party. Don't hold your breath though.
I'm curious whether if you think that the average US black IQ in the US is 86, if you are racist.
It fits the definition of racist, anyway if you take "superiority" to mean IQ.
I take it that the makers of IQ tests go to huge pains to avoid cultural and educational effects, because they want to measure IQ as innate. So I'd take it as true. Just as Asians and Ashkenazi Jews measure higher than 100.
But racist seems to mean remarking on stuff outside the narrative, which itself exists only to make remarking impossible.
I wonder what would happen if the MSM gave a place to the 86 thing in their narrative.
Would solutions change?
Perhaps to stress good character as the key to happiness, which it is.
A fact that blacks don't seem to hear anywhere. It would help.
Just a horrible leading question. From the network that, to this day, continues to give Al Sharpton- a man with a past that includes racism, virulent anti-semitism, a call for violence that led to the death/murder of others- his own TV show. Chuck Todd is a numbskull. He's had years to get better at this, but he still couldn't hold Tim Russert's car keys. On the other hand, he's the best they've got at NBC.
In other news….Europe is blowing up. The Middle East is churning down into the dark ages. Sweden is asking themselves if too much diversity is maybe a bad thing. And sharks still bite things that move in the water. And, oh yeah, President Obama has eating a cinnamon roll this morning. Still making history at every step.
There's no question that there is intolerance in the GOP. And they are proud of it. It's the white male party.
Mark said:
"He was their guy until he mentioned some inconvenient truths."
Welcome to the debate........oh wait, your just like Powell, make the smear, forget citing facts.
You have no intellectual capacity to join the debate, just fling feces from behind the wall.
There's no question that there is intolerance in the GOP. And they are proud of it. It's the white male party.
Spoken like a member of the party of slavery, Jim Crow, KKK, Bull Conyers, as well as the Trail of Tears and Japanese internment camps. It has always been the racist party, and continues to be so to this day, hiding their racism, sexism, etc within this pretense of "tolerance".
I had a thought last night after reading an article that suggested that the only way that the left can succeed isif they keep pushing racial and ethnic solidarity for all those outside the white European descended majority, but deny this to that group. Which, of course is racist. The goal is to deny the white majority the power over our culture that they should have. And that thought was that one reason that Obama went around telling people that they didn't build this is because we really did, and he was trying to deny us the just rewards from having done so. Jude's-Christian culture really is superior in so many ways over Islam. Almost all the technology that makes life so convenient was developed by white males. Etc.
One of the facets of that article involved assimilation, or the opposite, refusal to assimilate by these Minority groups. Intolerance is attributed to those who continue to push assimilation. But what is the real problem with assimilation? I would suggest the answer is that the Dem party has built its power by playing groups off against each other. And, yes, it is very rational to believe that the country would be better over all, materially, in terms of race relation, etc, if our minority and/or immigrant polulations were still required to assimilate.
So, my response to the previous poster is that, yes, we did build it, and claiming anything else is an attempt to steal what that party (and their ancestors) didn't build.
rhhardin: I'm curious whether if you think that the average US black IQ in the US is 86, if you are racist.
You might be able to acknowledge (not bring it up yourself), very carefully, and in exactly the right context and company, that the average US black IQ in the US is 86, and not be called a racist.
But only if you immediately assert that the number is a consequence of white privilege.
I wonder what would happen if the MSM gave a place to the 86 thing in their narrative.
Would solutions change?
So, no.
Sunsong:
"[The GOP is] the white male party."
Well, you need it to be, right? And that's why when someone on the right comes along who is not white, not male, or (God help 'em) neither, the left feels perfectly justified, indeed righteous, going for the jugular, and pouring hate on them in terms that are explicitly racist or sexist, whatever fits.
"Vaclav Havel?"
Could be. It seems more recent than Solzhenitsyn.
"It's the white male party."
No, it's the achievement oriented party. The black guy leading in the polls is all about achievement. So is Clarence Thomas and Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams. That why you lefties hate them so much.
The left is all about Virtue Signaling.
“The most savage, bilious, self-righteous rants are from people living affluent self-pleasing lives in comfortable homes, doing lucky and rewarding jobs with like-minded friends. What they are doing (I risk losing a friend or two) is “virtue-signalling”: competing to seem compassionate.
That's you and Mark.
Haha. Dark vein. Get it?
If Chuck keeps probing, I'm sure he'll get to the throbbing artery of hate as well.
There's no question that there is intolerance in the GOP. And they are proud of it. It's the white male party.
I prefer to view it that there are makers and takers in this country, and the Republican Party is the party of the makers, while the Democratic Party is the party is the part of takers. The claims of intolerance are just a smokescreen to hide this.
The claims of intolerance are just a smokescreen to hide this.
And, yes, so that white liberals can feel good about supporting takers over makers, as they buy votes (and thus power) with money and wealth taken from the makers in our country.
And they are proud of it. It's the white male party
Spoken like a true racist.
There's no question that there is intolerance in the GOP. And they are proud of it. It's the white male party.
Has anyone told Carly and Ben?
They're in for quite the surprise.
I find that I am becoming increasingly unwilling to tolerate the dishonesty, bigotry and hatred of people like Chuck Todd and Colin Powell.
I'm beginning to assess the advisability of punching back twice as hard.
I actually think Chuck Todd is as good as Russet was. People have forgotten that Russet was a political hack and had quite a bit to do with the persecution of Scooter Libby. And yes, that was not misspelled.
Todd calls in and does interviews with Hugh Hewitt all the time and I listen or read the transcript since the idiot radio station in LA replaced Hewitt with Mark Levin who I cannot listen to.
He seems a reasonable guy although, of course, he has the DC mentality.
sunsong: There's no question that there is intolerance in the GOP. And they are proud of it. It's the white male party.
You're about one-third right, in the sense that whites (with the exception of the sub-demographic of single white women) vote GOP, so the GOP is (or has been) the "white party" in the same way that the Dems are the "black party" or "the Asian party". And as I am sure you have no objection to the latter examples of racial-bloc voting, you surely did not mean to be inconsistent and imply that there was something wrong per se with being "the white party". (You can drop the "male", since a majority of white women have also been voting GOP.)
However, the GOP is, contrary to your assertion, deeply ashamed of being "the white party". As should be obvious by now (to anyone more observant and less slogan-stoned than sunsong), the GOP establishment doesn't like middle- and working-class whites any more than the Dems do. So now they've found themselves in a dilly of a pickle, still needing the votes of those uncool rayciss white people, but desperately longing to spend all their valuable time smooching the butts of Vibrant-Americans and acting as if they believe that Lincoln's observation - that you can't insult a man into voting for you - just isn't true when it comes to white Americans.
Powell rode the Reagan Revolution until the intel made him look bad. Republicans made him rich and famous. Then The Smile came along. Like lots of our betters, he jumped on the Obama Hope and Change Wagon. You know, "... articulate and bright and clean..." You know, ...light skinned ... with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one." You know, "Say Teddy, a few years ago this guy would have been getting us coffee." Talk about a dark vein!
Colin is now richer and famouser because he is the go-to Republican demonizer. He is just a blatant opportunist. It ain't that complicated.
rhhardin,
"I take it that the makers of IQ tests go to huge pains to avoid cultural and educational effects, because they want to measure IQ as innate."
Do you think they succeed?
I would argue that differences in IQ test scores are meaningful when differentiating among children who are similarly educated and come from similar backgrounds. However conscientious and meticulous the test writer is, if the test includes words or concepts that a child simply hasn't had the chance to pick up, the child is going to appear less intelligent as a result.
Slightly off-topic, Thomas Sowell was once on a tear (as he often has been) against facile cause-and-effect reasoning with respect to racism and material disadvantage. He adduced a statistic that I'll assume, for the sake of argument, is true: That on average, blacks from families that hold at least one library card made as much money as whites from families with at least one library card. [This was in the pre-widespread-internet age.] He pointed out witheringly that racists don't care whether a given black person holds a library card or not.
I'm going to guess there are significant differences in IQ scores between blacks from families who had library cards, back in the day, and those from families who didn't - and that those differences aren't just the result of self-sorting (i.e., smarter people from any race will be most of those who read books and seek library membership). I'm further going to guess that Ben Carson might have scored very much lower before his mom's stringent reading/report-writing requirements had been in place for awhile.
You point out that Asians and Ashkenazi Jews score on average above 100. Both groups - both cultures - are notably aggressive in pushing their kids toward intellectual achievement from an early age. Coincidence?
Horse apples.
Spinning, spinning, spinning. Democrats boo #alllivesmatter and the media label Republicans as racist.
I'd love to see someone respond to the Republican racism question like this:
"Racism has lost its oomph as an insult. Everyone, it seems, is racist, no matter one's beliefs, actions, background, color, ethnicity, religion and so on. So everyone is either evil or racism is meaningless as defined today. I'm going with the latter, as I believe in the inherent goodness of people."
Wonder if the same could be done to the tropes that Republicans want to starve school kids, push granny off a cliff, and kill all the brown people overseas. Because those big lies are still out there running strong, just like cries of racism.
Flip this question - do you seek a dark vein of intolerance in the Democratic Party? Answer accordingly.
----I actually think Chuck Todd is as good as Russet was. People have forgotten that Russet was a political hack and had quite a bit to do with the persecution of Scooter Libby.
Talk about damning with faint praise. Let me flesh that out. Chuck Todd proves himself an imbecile propagandist for asking the same guest the same question and getting the same answer IN THE SAME WORDS that was given TWO YEARS AGO.
http://dailywitness.com/colin-powell-gop-is-racist/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2261796/Colin-Powell-says-Republican-attacks-Obama-racist.html
Lets talk about Racism.. Real violence breeding racism... in the corpus of Louis Farrakhan who said...
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/08/04/farrakhan-calls-for-retaliation-against-whites-who-kill-blacks/
Now lets look at a picture of Colin Powell spending time with the nation’s leading violent racist.
http://www.rollingstone.com/music/pictures/jamaica-marks-50th-anniversary-of-independence-20120808/colin-powell-louis-farrakhan-and-miss-world-lisa-hanna-0399636
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A6QZmpDCEAAf3_u.jpg
And since Mchael K mentioned Scooter Libby and Russert, lets also look at the WORLD CLASS backstabbing by Colin Power in regarding Valerie Plame. Colin Powell KNEW that his aide had outed Plame early in the scandal and rather than honestly report it to the President who appointed him to his post, kept it a secret and politically damaged Bush and sent his coworker to jail by his silence.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/opinion/item/10903-the-truth-about-the-valerie-plame-case-finally-emerges
Richard Armitage, the deputy secretary of state under Colin Powell, was the first to reveal that Wilson's wife was a CIA employee. He blabbed carelessly to Bob Woodward of the Washington Post, then to columnist Robert Novak, who mentioned it in a July 2003 column. Armitage, after admitting this to the FBI in October 2003, stood by silently year after year as Vice President Cheney, Cheney's chief of staff Scooter Libby, Karl Rove, and other White House officials were blamed for what he had done, and President Bush suffered politically. Loyalty is not Armitage's strong suit
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-plame-blame-games-real-culprits/
THAT”S CBS!!!!
And lets not talk about ending the 100 hour war too early....
What a scheming viper this Powell fellow is.
There is no such thing as an IQ test because there is no agreement ast what "intelligence" consists of.
Which is why the SAT was re-labeled as the "Scholastic Assessment Test," because it assesses how well the student is acquainted with the American public schools system and what is taught there.
Thus, I scored less on the Army "IQ test" (or whatever it was called then) because I had been in this country only a year and my knowledge of English was largely literary, i.e. I did not know the English names of many everyday items that does not happen to be much written about, such as commonly used tools like awls, etc.
On the subject of racial differences in "intelligence" (and we all know what is meant, though it is not defined and can't be measured), I would say my Army experience was enlightening, even if anecdotal, since the draft brought in individuals from every background and distributed them in a rather random fashion, and I have never been able to note any difference in "native intelligence" between ethnic groups.
Michael K said...
replaced Hewitt with Mark Levin who I cannot listen to.
You probably should have though, because then Trump would not have been such a surprise to you.
or any other grouping. It is an individual thing.
While we are on the subject of Trump - a spectacular meltdown from Jonah Goldberg who apparently resents Trump adding some reality to the fantasy world Goldberg has been spinning for years.
Key phrase: 'my career will suffer'.
I have no idea why Colin Powell identifies as a Republican. he takes every opportunity to attack Republicans and praise Democrats.
Gahrie:
The paychecks are better as a Republican-attacking Republican. It is all supply and demand.
JPS: However conscientious and meticulous the test writer is, if the test includes words or concepts that a child simply hasn't had the chance to pick up, the child is going to appear less intelligent as a result.
Not all IQ tests are verbal. I believe it's also the case that, no matter what kind of test psychometrician's come up with, they end up with the same relative group distributions.
You point out that Asians and Ashkenazi Jews score on average above 100. Both groups - both cultures - are notably aggressive in pushing their kids toward intellectual achievement from an early age. Coincidence?
Does prizing intellectual achievement make one intelligent or does being intelligent make one prize intellectual achievement?
Does pursuing artistic excellence make one artistically gifted or does being artistically gifted drive one pursue artistic excellence?
Does prizing athletic excellence make one athletically gifted or does being athletically gifted drive one to pursue athletic excellence?
I'm no IQ absolutist, but I don't think the data supports the view that "it's all about upbringing". The IQ mean of East Asian kids adopted by whites is at the East Asian, not the white, mean. That for black kids adopted by whites is at the black, not the white, mean. White kids in the lowest socio-economic division get higher standardized test scores than black kids in all but the top sec division, etc.
There's no question that there is intolerance in the GOP. And they are proud of it. It's the white male party.
Then explain to me why the Republicans elect minority candidates from majority White districts, while Democrats only elect minorities from Gerrymandered majority-minority safe districts?
Denying that there are more problematic, intolerant racist attitudes among Republicans is just par for the course for a party that also denies that humans can impact the environment, or that economic interests don't change the laws of the natural universe, or that tax cuts for hedge fund managers don't improve economic prospects for the country at large, or that militant bellicosity doesn't solve every global challenge, or that poverty is largely not a choice, or that Saddam Hussein wasn't behind 9/11.
Or that FOX News is not accurate reporting.
Does prizing intellectual achievement make one intelligent or does being intelligent make one prize intellectual achievement?
Both. Especially when reinforced over many, many generations.
That was the sound of the Republican bus backing up to run over Colin Powell again. He was their guy until he mentioned some inconvenient truths.
Tell that to Joe Lieberman.
Although I agree that IQ tests (or most standardized tests of "intelligence") are misguided due to:
1. Our lack of understanding of every single mental trait that could foreseeably be agreed to constitute "intelligence".
2. The fact that these tests are predictably misused to drive surreptitious political and social agendas. Agendas that are better addressed openly and without resort to the phony excuse of appeals to intelligence.
Denying the impact of their party's own racists is just another component of the Republican denial of reality.
Anglelyne said...
I'm no IQ absolutist, but I don't think the data supports the view that "it's all about upbringing". The IQ mean of East Asian kids adopted by whites is at the East Asian, not the white, mean. That for black kids adopted by whites is at the black, not the white, mean. White kids in the lowest socio-economic division get higher standardized test scores than black kids in all but the top sec division, etc.
This is overstating things, and not consistent with the actual data. Even Steve Sailor puts the nature/nuture balance at 50:50. The Flynn effect calls into question the entire idea of IQ being linked to genetics.
There are more white men who vote Democratic than black men who vote Republican. Blacks take pride in racial solidarity. Whites take shame........Powell has had a much more comfortable life since he came out for Obama and started criticizing Republicans. Well, maybe he took note of what happened to Cosby after he riffed on black life styles. If Powell should ever criticize the Black Lives Matter crowd for a strain of intolerance, you would hear a great deal about his war crimes. You can only get to be a distinguished elder statesman by criticizing white Republicans..
The Flynn effect calls into question the entire idea of IQ being linked to genetics.
Frankly I don't care if it is genetic or cultural. The fact that there is a real world difference, and the problems that creates, is all that matters to me.
Re: Black kids and nurturing IQ, I think early childhood development is what's most neglected. As with sight, there are probably crucial development windows for improving intellectual capability later on. If one's eyes aren't exposed to light early in infancy, a child will go blind, and I think it's safe to assume that a kid from age 2 to 6 who gets no intellectual stimulation will fail to grow up with much love for seeking it out later. But that would be a discussion that Republicans would loathe even more than the current race discussions. Democrats give it lip service under the guise of encouraging "early childhood development", but that's about as far as the discussion goes, as I'm sure it would involve a steady government commitment that far surpasses even what Republicans are currently able to tolerate when it comes to public education or parental leave.
Well, maybe he took note of what happened to Cosby after he riffed on black life styles.
Um, nothing that I can recall.
Colin Powell, the ultimate ingrate, who rose to power and acclaim, in part, because of Republican colorblindness, rises up, once again, to bite the hand that fed him.
And the dim lefty trolls rally round without giving a thought to Todd's failure to follow up with a question about Democrat racism.
Predictable as well as insensate, isn't it?
ARM: This is overstating things...
How is stating that IQ differences cannot be entirely explained by upbringing "overstating things"?
...and not consistent with the actual data.
Everything I said is consistent with the actual data. What you made up in your head about what I said about the data may be inconsistent with the data, but that's not my problem.
Even Steve Sailor puts the nature/nuture balance at 50:50.
Nothing I said is inconsistent with that view. Even a higher percentage of intelligence being attributable to upbringing would not be inconsistent with a view that group differences in IQ distribution can be explained by genetics. You do understand that, don't you?
The Flynn effect calls into question the entire idea of IQ being linked to genetics.
The Flynn effect calls into question "the entire idea of IQ being linked to genetics" only for people who get their information about research in intelligence from NPR.
Next up: ARM is going to tell us that "epigenetics calls into question the entire idea of IQ being linked to genetics".
Have you actually read Flynn's book? I suggest you give it read before you make foolish snark. You are not stupid, why act that way?
----Um, nothing that I can recall.
Dumber than dirt that R&Bellz
THE SELF-HATE CRIMES OF BILL COSBY
by Lee Roy Rouge
http://risparty.org/Cosby.htm
Last night at his late night show at the Trocadero, comedian Hannibal Buress did an extended bit about Philadelphia native Bill Cosby, calling him a rapist. Cosby has been accused of drugging and sexually assaulting multiple women, including Barbara Bowman in Philadelphia magazine. He has not, however, ever been criminally charged with rape (the legal definition of which varies by jurisdiction).* The above recording starts about 15-20 seconds into it.
Read more at http://www.phillymag.com/ticket/2014/10/17/hannibal-buress-bill-cosby-rapist/#v8ClVJhwP7qlSURs.99
Hmmm, just like Hermann Cain and Clarence Thomas when the left wants to destroy a Black Man its always about Sex and Rape.
-----Denying that there are more problematic, intolerant racist attitudes among Republicans is just par for the course for a party
Yada yada yada. I get it, The DNC which this week embraced the racial-anachists of BLM needs a shiny toy to distract from this enormously dangerous political sockpuppet AND to distract from Trump getting 25 percent support from Blacks.
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=d950cadf-05ce-4148-a125-35c0cdab26c6
Those are gravestone facts that require RandCowbellz utmost spewing efforts !!!!!1!
Oh, and Hillary sending Top Secret emails directly to the Russians and Chinese via her sooper sekret server!!!
But that would be a discussion that Republicans would loathe even more than the current race discussions.
You haven't been listening. We've been having that (Black kids being neglected due to inner city culture) conversation since at least 1965 when one of the few good Democrats, Daniel Patrick Moynihan first released his report.
It's the Left who has ignored that report and refused to even acknowledge the problem, much less discuss fixes.
Not surprising that a guy who has to call himself "Unknown" pretends that no consequences for bitching about pants around the knees confuses that with no consequences for being a serial rapist. Neverminding the fact that white victims of Cosby had no reason for being "offended" that he'd complained about black behavior.
How retarded. How Republican.
You haven't been listening. We've been having that (Black kids being neglected due to inner city culture) conversation since at least 1965 when one of the few good Democrats, Daniel Patrick Moynihan first released his report.
It's the Left who has ignored that report and refused to even acknowledge the problem, much less discuss fixes.
I think the one who "isn't listening" is the one who pretends that there can only be unacceptable anti-black racism (especially by racist cops) OR cultural/social failings perpetuated within the black community. Both things can be true.
But allowing two things to be simultaneously true would destroy the credo of the conservative cause: To make intractable, one-sided wars out of every social issue, in order to ensure a protracted, destructive battle out of it and to make sure that the problem never gets resolved.
I know you lefties hate not being able to freeze your opponent by naming them. Ohhh hate hate hate!!! Balls!!!!
Your first sentence is incoherent by the way. Par for the course.
Its all about destroying a strong black man by the Leftist power structure. It was only a matter of time for Cosby once he called on Blacks to be more than tools for Lefty power till a parade of sex accusations would emerge.
---But allowing two things to be simultaneously true
Is the hallmark of psychosis which now characterizes the left.
Colin Powell, the ultimate ingrate, who rose to power and acclaim, in part, because of Republican colorblindness,
The fact that "elle hombre" resents being shown "insufficient gratitude" for merely being fair and not racist certainly betrays no sense of privilege on his part.
Maybe slaves weren't sufficiently grateful, either. Many a Confederate-sympathizer these days like to tell us of how well blacks were treated under slavery, as well as under segregation. Lynchings were only the "tough love" of concerned correction.
Well, elle hombre, if blacks aren't appreciating your lack of racism you can always go back to being the full-on racist underneath that you're repressing. It's obvious that's the veiled threat in your shitty little rant.
There's an illiterate dipshit above who believes that this fallacy of rational thought is the hallmark of sane thinking. How cute.
We need to get the Republican that said this....
Retaliation! If the federal government won’t intercede in our affairs, then we MUST rise up and kill those who kill us; stalk them and kill them and let them feel our pain.
Oh, wait, its a lefty minority leader!!!!! Nevermind.
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/08/04/farrakhan-calls-for-retaliation-against-whites-who-kill-blacks/
---But allowing two things to be simultaneously true
Is the hallmark of psychosis which now characterizes the left.
This slippage of leaky non-thought (like a leaky bowel) is actually pretty funny. It's an admission on the RWA's part of his inability to even think.
After all, why see the world in black-and-white, even? Maybe there should just be one color: Black OR white. Make up yer minds! Both colors can't exist! Two things can't be simultaneously true!
Once we get rid of red, green, yellow and blue, we'll rid the world of black. And then white. Otherwise they'll be at war with each other.
The earth can't simultaneously be a globe that orbits the sun AND a planet with a satellite moon of its own! MAKE UP YOUR MINDS! Only one of those things can be true at the same time!
Psychotic schizophrenics!
Here’s another Racist Republican belittling a black politician....
Bill Clinton helped sink his wife's chances for an endorsement from Ted Kennedy by belittling Barack Obama as nothing but a race-based candidate.
"A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee," the former president told the liberal lion from Massachusetts, according to the gossipy new campaign book, "Game Change.”
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/bill-clinton-told-ted-kennedy-obama-coffee-years-game-change-article-1.197492
---After all, why see the world in black-and-white, even? Maybe there should just be one color: Black OR white. Make up yer minds! Both colors can't exist! Two things can't be simultaneously true!
Yeah, I worked in a locked psych ward. Why don’t you just calm down a little?
Speaking of color confusion, here’s the Washington Post saying that Jindal isn’t Indian (Brown) enough.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420272/washington-post-bobby-jindal-not-indian-enough-mark-antonio-wright
Bill Clinton's quip, as impolite as it might sound, was basically an acknowledgement of how much progress had been made when it came to race, which "Unknown" obviously resents. Either that, or a sign of how quickly Obama's own career had progressed, and nothing to do with race.
But look at him go. He's foaming at the mouth, desperate to complain about every little thing that he can't understand.
How mysterious Democrats must seem to him. They're like the enigmatic Jooz, or something. Must be something evil afoot with those folks.
Why don’t you just calm down a little?
You don't need to tell me what to do. After all, I'm just responding to your own psychotic little whines and noting how little sense they make.
But it's funny to respond to someone who uses "Unknown" as an alias. Paranoid, much?
------was basically an acknowledgement of how much progress had been made when it came to race, which "Unknown" obviously resent
Ha ha ha. Great try. Bill was from Arkansas and inherited DEMOCRAT George Wallace’s legacy.
http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/george-wallace/13/
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1998-09-16/news/9809150633_1_george-wallace-bill-clinton-segregation
As well as his mentor’s
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._William_Fulbright
its there in his blood stream, and you share it Balls!
----You don't need to tell me what to do. After all, I'm just responding to your own psychotic little whines and noting how little sense they make.
Projection is a very telling symptom cluster in your disease. Really calm down.
-----Hey, liberals.... what does this mean????
(Leftist Democrate) Fulbright signed The Southern Manifesto in opposition of the Supreme Court's historic 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision.[9]
Clinton’s mentor...
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/choice/bill/purvis.html
rhhardin said...
"I'm curious whether if you think that the average US black IQ in the US is 86, if you are racist."
Yes. You are. At least, you will be called racist, and there is no defense that will keep the charge from sticking. So, your choice is, deny what everyone who has ever looked into the matter knows to be true, or admit that you are a racist.
Me, I'm a racist.
R&B: "Well, elle hombre, if blacks aren't appreciating your lack of racism you can always go back to being the full-on racist underneath that you're repressing. It's obvious that's the veiled threat in your shitty little rant."
Poor Ritmo Montanus. Your sock puppetry is unsuccessful because - as illustrated above - your inability to engage in critical thinking and your slobbering malice toward Republicans and your adversaries is easily recognizable.
And how odd for you, the intellectual pygmy who holds the undisputed record for using numerous aliases on this blog, to be castigating "Unknown" for ... using an alias.
Sooooo, who's calling people like Ben Carson, Clarence Thomas, Tim Scott, Mia Love and Condoleeza Rice "Uncle Toms" and "House Negroes"? Other Republicans? That would be no. Reaction from Colin Powell? zzzzzzzzzzzz
Why ask Powell? What has he done in the past ten years except talk shit about people?
So Democrats "inherited" Dixiecrats like Wallace but I guess Republicans didn't "inherit" Dixiecrats like Strom Thurmond, a man who ran for president on a segregationist ticket, impregnated his black housekeeper and paid off her daughter while they kept silent about it. A guy who another Republican leader said would have left the country better off if his segregationist bid for president had been successful.
Let's not say anything about all that. Embarrassment and confessions are verboten in the Republican party of shameless narcissism. Or maybe you guys really did prefer segregation and then, like now, refused to admit what you really stand for.
ARM: Have you actually read Flynn's book? I suggest you give it read before you make foolish snark. You are not stupid, why act that way?
Which one, ARM? Perhaps you can jog my memory about where in his œuvre Flynn claims that the eponymous effect challenges the idea that IQ is in any way linked to genetics, because I don't remember him claiming any such astoundingly stupid thing. I'll wait. I'm not picky, any book or paper of his will do.
[ARM thumbs furiously through copy of Flynn book that came with his NPR pledge tote, finds passage that has nothing to do with his claim, copy-pastes irrelevant passage with a flourish, hoots triumphantly.]
It's hilarious watching you try to extricate yourself from your own shit with this same old squirrel! act, over and over. Dude, it's not like nobody can scroll up and see for themselves who said what. You're like some not too bright toddler constantly getting caught with cookie crumbs all over his face, who's sure that everybody is still totally buying his story that Jimmy from next door did it.
But I'm a charitable gal, so I'll cut you some slack and assume that what you really meant to say was "the Flynn effect calls into question the idea that group differences in IQ distribution are genetic (and not subject to environmental amelioration)". Yes, it does raise questions about that claim. Does it disprove it? No. (A Flynn effect can be flynning away while a gap in group scores is maintained.) Does it explain away contrary data (twin/adoption studies)? No. Is it the sort of thing that gets thrown about a lot by people who don't know what they're talking about but desperately want to believe that science had proved that group differences are strictly environmental? Yes indeed.
Anyway, a guy who thinks that demonstrating a 50/50 nature/nurture explanation for IQ would prove that group differences can't be genetic, is probably in over his head trying to read Flynn.
...the undisputed record for using numerous aliases...
Hey. At least my aliases are creative. You, on the other hand, changed names simply from "el hombre" to "hombre" (talk about uncreative) because your masculinity was too weak to handle hearing it ridiculed as "elle hombre".
And it's funny to hear you complaining about "malice toward adversaries." Whatever respect with which you pretend to treat Democrats is betrayed by your barely concealed mouth-foaming hatred toward their constituents: Liberals, blacks and gays.
R&B: "And it's funny to hear you complaining about "malice toward adversaries." Whatever respect with which you pretend to treat Democrats is betrayed by your barely concealed mouth-foaming hatred toward their constituents: Liberals, blacks and gays."
There you go again, Ritmo! What is that? "I Know you are, but what am I? Nya-nya-nya!" Are you PeeWee Herman today?
I'm not complaining about your "malice toward adversaries." Why would you imagine that? It defines you and thwarts your sock puppeting. Critical thinking! Critical thinking! I know it's excruciating, but try it, PeeWee.
Someone should ask Powell if it was racist of him (and Rice) to vote for Obama.
What I find distinctly odd in these debates is that right wingers, who normally disdain any and all social science theories (not entirely without good reason), are so anxious to wrap themselves in the flag of IQ - one of the most poorly determined of all social science constructs. Why is this?
Whatever the reason, it indicates a complete absence of understanding of both evolutionary genetics and neurobiology.
As Flynn has shown, whatever IQ measures it is not strictly measuring genetically determined intelligence, whatever that might be. I have spent time with my grandfather and great aunts and other members of that generation and I have also spent more than my fair share of time with my sons and their friends. If my son's cohort were really 40 IQ points smarter than my grandfather's I would have noticed. Evolution works extremely slowly, imperceptible over a lifetime. A change of 40 IQ points would be quite obvious, if it captured something real. Obviously it doesn't. As usual, a little commonsense is required in applying ideas from the world of science to everyday thinking.
Colin Powell, clown.
Anglelyne said...
Anyway, a guy who thinks that demonstrating a 50/50 nature/nurture explanation for IQ would prove that group differences can't be genetic, is probably in over his head trying to read Flynn.
I, of course, did not say this. Angry people, out of their depth, almost invariably feel the need to distort the arguments of others in order to make themselves feel better. Sad, but very human at the same time.
"What I find distinctly odd in these debates is that right wingers, who normally disdain any and all social science theories (not entirely without good reason), are so anxious to wrap themselves in the flag of IQ - one of the most poorly determined of all social science constructs. Why is this?"
Probably it's just contrariness stemming from the knowledge that left-wingers who undoubtedly score lower on IQ tests than they think they should are committed to discrediting that particular "construct."
"I take it that the makers of IQ tests go to huge pains to avoid cultural and educational effects, because they want to measure IQ as innate."
Do you think they succeed?
I would argue that differences in IQ test scores are meaningful when differentiating among children who are similarly educated and come from similar backgrounds. However conscientious and meticulous the test writer is, if the test includes words or concepts that a child simply hasn't had the chance to pick up, the child is going to appear less intelligent as a result.
I don't do the analysis, just report. Being statisticians, the probably know and control for all that stuff. That is, do as you say, and compare similar groups.
They're interested in genetics, not racism. They don't seem malevolent. They can't do what they're interested in unless they control all that stuff out.
And why wouldn't the IQs of groups that breed separately for a long time come to differ? What are the odds that they'd be the same? About zero. Okay, what's the amount? Who knows.
The two significant take-aways are
1. Solutions ought to account for the possibility of average IQ differences
2. Good character turns out to be more important than IQ by a long way.
Good character is learned.
It's whatever you're taught to admire as a kid.
Critical thinking! Critical thinking! I know it's excruciating,...
It sure is excruciating for you, isn't it? Why?
Well, you're good at being critical. It's the thinking part that you suck at.
@Ritmo (9:00): Really? Is that all you've got, PeeWee? 😄
Perhaps, but Colin Powell also saw weapons of mass destruction in the Iraqi desert, so maybe he's just good at seeing things that aren't there.
Post a Comment