Butrflynet wrote:Quote:Now tell me, do you believe that it is far fetched to believe that an Obama loss will result in social unrest within the black community? This is irrespective of whether or not there may be any justification for this unrest. Is it far fetched to believe that the defeat of a black candidate in a national election will result in social unrest in the black community?
Does this mean that if Hillary loses, it will result in social unrest in the female community? Is it as far fetched to believe that a defeat of a female candidate in a national election will result in social unrest and perhaps no nookie in the bedrooms and no home cooking in the kitchens of America? Are we women expected to take to the streets and riot if Hillary loses? Do you expect female business executives to resign their jobs in protest?
If not, why the double standard?
Is there any relatively recent history of a wide community of females reacting to a political or social event with sudden social unrest? Is there any history of a wide community of female riots comparable to those that followed the assassination of MLK or the acquittal of the cops in the Rodney King cases?
Of course not.
Is there any history of a wide community of African-Americans reacting to a a political or social event with sudden social unrest.
Absolutely.
To suggest that there is a double standard is to suggest that the female and black experience in America is identical. As much as Liberals would like to claim that it is, clearly it is not.
If Hillary loses, the chances of social unrest by female Americans is slim to nil.
If Obama loses, the chances of social unrest by African Americans is something greater. How much greater will depend upon how much gasoline is thrown on the fire by so called black leaders like Al Sharpton.
I fully appreciate that the narrow minded members of this forum believe that in these comments I have revealed myself to be a racist.
Fine. I know I am not.
To the extent that the black community reacts differently than any other to this or any other political event is not because of their race, but because of their experience. This doesn't mean that all of their reactions are appropriate, just, or well reasoned, but chances are they are all understandable in terms of tracking cause and effect.
This is the truth without value judgment.
Blacks have, recently, rioted within the cities of America. Females have not, and neither have Buddhists, Amputees, Calvinists, Libertarians, Librarians, Estonians, or the Obese. Whites did at one time, but when was the last time that happened?
Put aside whether or not black riots were justified. They happened. As a result, it is not far-fetched to assert that should Obama lose blacks will riot again.
In my opinion they will not happen unless agitators make a point of inciting them, but it is simply silly to assert that their likelihood is on a par with the likelihood of female, war veteran, evangelical, et al riots.
Nothing is to be gained by ignoring fact and probability in preference to PC sensibilities.
You racist Finn.