Jack Bauer said:

---

They better take the security tags off of flat screen TVs and unlock the razors too now.

Quote:

---

Walmart will no longer place "multicultural hair care and beauty products" in locked cases in any of its stores, the company confirmed Wednesday.

The practice, which Walmart says was only in place "in about a dozen" of its 4,700 U.S. stores, has received criticism for the implication that the customers who buy these products, largely people of color, can't be trusted. The cases must be unlocked by a store associate, and the products are usually then taken to the front of the store for purchase.

CBS Denver reporter Tori Mason was the first to disclose the change, after receiving an email from Walmart in response to her story highlighting a situation that people of color have long faced.

---

---

They had better unlock the spray paint too.

D. C. Bear said:

---

Flaming Moderate said:

---

List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?

---

He asked a legitimate question:
"Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

---

Yes the question is legitimate depending on the audience but you don't think that Flaming Moderates response to Booray at 8:14am 6/10 answered this clearly enough.

Furthermore Booray's response of "Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

was a direct example of what Flaming Moderates said is a patter in that post at 8:14. "There is a pattern in all of these vague accusations that make sweeping claims but do poor jobs of really supporting in the details. Any question is met with the indignant, "so you don't believe there is racism?" "Are you denying racism exists?""

The calls for the Washington and Jefferson monuments to come down are getting louder.

Oh good, Hollywood has made another self-serving twitter ad.

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Flaming Moderate said:

---

List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?

---

He asked a legitimate question:
"Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

---

Yes the question is legitimate depending on the audience but you don't think that Flaming Moderates response to Booray at 8:14am 6/10 answered this clearly enough.

Furthermore Booray's response of "Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

was a direct example of what Flaming Moderates said is a patter in that post at 8:14. "There is a pattern in all of these vague accusations that make sweeping claims but do poor jobs of really supporting in the details. Any question is met with the indignant, "so you don't believe there is racism?" "Are you denying racism exists?""

---

In response to, "penniless immigrants do fine!" It is a good question, and the answer is not, contrary to what a lot of people want us think, readily apparent.

Similarly, the call to list five racist institutions makes me think he doesn't think they exist.

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Flaming Moderate said:

---

List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?

---

He asked a legitimate question:
"Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

---

Yes the question is legitimate depending on the audience but you don't think that Flaming Moderates response to Booray at 8:14am 6/10 answered this clearly enough.

Furthermore Booray's response of "Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

was a direct example of what Flaming Moderates said is a patter in that post at 8:14. "There is a pattern in all of these vague accusations that make sweeping claims but do poor jobs of really supporting in the details. Any question is met with the indignant, "so you don't believe there is racism?" "Are you denying racism exists?""

---

In response to, "penniless immigrants do fine!" It is a good question, and the answer is not, contrary to what a lot of people want us think, readily apparent.

Similarly, the call to list five racist institutions makes me think he doesn't think they exist.

---

In regarding "penniless immigrant do fine!" it may be a good question but the question was a part of a entire response to "Flaming Moderate said: What are other, real, tangible things occurring today that have "very real impact of racism on the black community?""

and didn't relate in that point of time to "penniless immigrants" because that question had not been posted.

Flaming Moderates
"List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?"

Was a general statement not a response.

Does your perception of Flaming Moderates beliefs matter regarding in providing a list as requested?

You can choose to list institutions that you believe are racist or not. If you can, you possibly weaken Flaming Moderates argument if you cannot you possibly strength Flaming Moderates argument.

Why not ask direct follow up questions to see if your "he doesn't think they exist" is true?

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Flaming Moderate said:

---

List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?

---

He asked a legitimate question:
"Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

---

Yes the question is legitimate depending on the audience but you don't think that Flaming Moderates response to Booray at 8:14am 6/10 answered this clearly enough.

Furthermore Booray's response of "Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

was a direct example of what Flaming Moderates said is a patter in that post at 8:14. "There is a pattern in all of these vague accusations that make sweeping claims but do poor jobs of really supporting in the details. Any question is met with the indignant, "so you don't believe there is racism?" "Are you denying racism exists?""

---

In response to, "penniless immigrants do fine!" It is a good question, and the answer is not, contrary to what a lot of people want us think, readily apparent.

Similarly, the call to list five racist institutions makes me think he doesn't think they exist.

---

In regarding "penniless immigrant do fine!" it may be a good question but the question was a part of a entire response to "Flaming Moderate said: What are other, real, tangible things occurring today that have "very real impact of racism on the black community?""

and didn't relate in that point of time to "penniless immigrants" because that question had not been posted.

Flaming Moderates
"List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?"

Was a general statement not a response.

Does your perception of Flaming Moderates beliefs matter regarding in providing a list as requested?

You can choose to list institutions that you believe are racist or not. If you can, you possibly weaken Flaming Moderates argument if you cannot you possibly strength Flaming Moderates argument.

Why not ask direct follow up questions to see if your "he doesn't think they exist" is true?

---

What is his argument?

BTW, he didn't ask me to list said institutions.

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Flaming Moderate said:

---

List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?

---

He asked a legitimate question:
"Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

---

Yes the question is legitimate depending on the audience but you don't think that Flaming Moderates response to Booray at 8:14am 6/10 answered this clearly enough.

Furthermore Booray's response of "Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

was a direct example of what Flaming Moderates said is a patter in that post at 8:14. "There is a pattern in all of these vague accusations that make sweeping claims but do poor jobs of really supporting in the details. Any question is met with the indignant, "so you don't believe there is racism?" "Are you denying racism exists?""

---

In response to, "penniless immigrants do fine!" It is a good question, and the answer is not, contrary to what a lot of people want us think, readily apparent.

Similarly, the call to list five racist institutions makes me think he doesn't think they exist.

---

In regarding "penniless immigrant do fine!" it may be a good question but the question was a part of a entire response to "Flaming Moderate said: What are other, real, tangible things occurring today that have "very real impact of racism on the black community?""

and didn't relate in that point of time to "penniless immigrants" because that question had not been posted.

Flaming Moderates
"List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?"

Was a general statement not a response.

Does your perception of Flaming Moderates beliefs matter regarding in providing a list as requested?

You can choose to list institutions that you believe are racist or not. If you can, you possibly weaken Flaming Moderates argument if you cannot you possibly strength Flaming Moderates argument.

Why not ask direct follow up questions to see if your "he doesn't think they exist" is true?

---

What is his argument?

BTW, he didn't ask me to list said institutions.

---

I don't know because I am not him.

I don't understand. "BTW, he didn't ask me to list said institutions" and why you bolded.

In my response I "quoted" the response and I identified it as a general statement. You can choose to respond to the general statement or not. It doesn't have to be specifically addressed to you.

What was your thinking to add that?

Also to be clear. I am not suggesting that a lack of response is in anyway a supporting a position. I am saying it could possibly be support for a position.

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Flaming Moderate said:

---

List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?

---

He asked a legitimate question:
"Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

---

Yes the question is legitimate depending on the audience but you don't think that Flaming Moderates response to Booray at 8:14am 6/10 answered this clearly enough.

Furthermore Booray's response of "Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

was a direct example of what Flaming Moderates said is a patter in that post at 8:14. "There is a pattern in all of these vague accusations that make sweeping claims but do poor jobs of really supporting in the details. Any question is met with the indignant, "so you don't believe there is racism?" "Are you denying racism exists?""

---

In response to, "penniless immigrants do fine!" It is a good question, and the answer is not, contrary to what a lot of people want us think, readily apparent.

Similarly, the call to list five racist institutions makes me think he doesn't think they exist.

---

In regarding "penniless immigrant do fine!" it may be a good question but the question was a part of a entire response to "Flaming Moderate said: What are other, real, tangible things occurring today that have "very real impact of racism on the black community?""

and didn't relate in that point of time to "penniless immigrants" because that question had not been posted.

Flaming Moderates
"List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?"

Was a general statement not a response.

Does your perception of Flaming Moderates beliefs matter regarding in providing a list as requested?

You can choose to list institutions that you believe are racist or not. If you can, you possibly weaken Flaming Moderates argument if you cannot you possibly strength Flaming Moderates argument.

Why not ask direct follow up questions to see if your "he doesn't think they exist" is true?

---

What is his argument?

BTW, he didn't ask me to list said institutions.

---

I don't know because I am not him.

I don't understand. "BTW, he didn't ask me to list said institutions" and why you bolded.

In my response I "quoted" the response and I identified it as a general statement. You can choose to respond to the general statement or not. It doesn't have to be specifically addressed to you.

What was your thinking to add that?

Also to be clear. I am not suggesting that a lack of response is in anyway a supporting a position. I am saying it could possibly be support for a position.

---

You said if I listed 5 racist institution it could possibly weaken his argument. Now, if you don't know, or think you know, what his argument is, why do you think it would weaken his argument rather than strengthen it?

I added that he didn't ask me to list five institutions because you asked if my "perception of Flaming Moderates beliefs matter regarding in providing a list as requested."

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Flaming Moderate said:

---

List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?

---

He asked a legitimate question:
"Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

---

Yes the question is legitimate depending on the audience but you don't think that Flaming Moderates response to Booray at 8:14am 6/10 answered this clearly enough.

Furthermore Booray's response of "Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

was a direct example of what Flaming Moderates said is a patter in that post at 8:14. "There is a pattern in all of these vague accusations that make sweeping claims but do poor jobs of really supporting in the details. Any question is met with the indignant, "so you don't believe there is racism?" "Are you denying racism exists?""

---

In response to, "penniless immigrants do fine!" It is a good question, and the answer is not, contrary to what a lot of people want us think, readily apparent.

Similarly, the call to list five racist institutions makes me think he doesn't think they exist.

---

In regarding "penniless immigrant do fine!" it may be a good question but the question was a part of a entire response to "Flaming Moderate said: What are other, real, tangible things occurring today that have "very real impact of racism on the black community?""

and didn't relate in that point of time to "penniless immigrants" because that question had not been posted.

Flaming Moderates
"List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?"

Was a general statement not a response.

Does your perception of Flaming Moderates beliefs matter regarding in providing a list as requested?

You can choose to list institutions that you believe are racist or not. If you can, you possibly weaken Flaming Moderates argument if you cannot you possibly strength Flaming Moderates argument.

Why not ask direct follow up questions to see if your "he doesn't think they exist" is true?

---

What is his argument?

BTW, he didn't ask me to list said institutions.

---

I don't know because I am not him.

I don't understand. "BTW, he didn't ask me to list said institutions" and why you bolded.

In my response I "quoted" the response and I identified it as a general statement. You can choose to respond to the general statement or not. It doesn't have to be specifically addressed to you.

What was your thinking to add that?

Also to be clear. I am not suggesting that a lack of response is in anyway a supporting a position. I am saying it could possibly be support for a position.

---

You said if I listed 5 racist institution it could possibly weaken his argument. Now, if you don't know, or think you know, what his argument is, why do you think it would weaken his argument rather than strengthen it?

I added that he didn't ask me to list five institutions because you asked if my "perception of Flaming Moderates beliefs matter regarding in providing a list as requested."

---

I don' t know his argument.

Currently, I am under the perception that he is attempting to require specificity of racist institution and believes that others do poor jobs of supporting evidence. I based this off his earlier posting in this thread.

"I do not think anyone disagrees with you, but these conversations always break down when the required specificity is probed or solutions proposed. They usually morph into something that has nothing to do with race."

"There is a pattern in all of these vague accusations that make sweeping claims but do poor jobs of really supporting in the details."

Why do I think it would weaken his argument rather than strengthen it?

If you or other posters provided a list of said institution it would weaken his "poor jobs of really supporting in the details." If you do not provide a list is would support there has been a "poor jobs of really supporting in the details" argument.

Now your turn. How did you come to the conclusion based on postings in this thread that "he doesn't think they exist"?

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Flaming Moderate said:

---

List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?

---

He asked a legitimate question:
"Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

---

Yes the question is legitimate depending on the audience but you don't think that Flaming Moderates response to Booray at 8:14am 6/10 answered this clearly enough.

Furthermore Booray's response of "Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

was a direct example of what Flaming Moderates said is a patter in that post at 8:14. "There is a pattern in all of these vague accusations that make sweeping claims but do poor jobs of really supporting in the details. Any question is met with the indignant, "so you don't believe there is racism?" "Are you denying racism exists?""

---

In response to, "penniless immigrants do fine!" It is a good question, and the answer is not, contrary to what a lot of people want us think, readily apparent.

Similarly, the call to list five racist institutions makes me think he doesn't think they exist.

---

In regarding "penniless immigrant do fine!" it may be a good question but the question was a part of a entire response to "Flaming Moderate said: What are other, real, tangible things occurring today that have "very real impact of racism on the black community?""

and didn't relate in that point of time to "penniless immigrants" because that question had not been posted.

Flaming Moderates
"List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?"

Was a general statement not a response.

Does your perception of Flaming Moderates beliefs matter regarding in providing a list as requested?

You can choose to list institutions that you believe are racist or not. If you can, you possibly weaken Flaming Moderates argument if you cannot you possibly strength Flaming Moderates argument.

Why not ask direct follow up questions to see if your "he doesn't think they exist" is true?

---

What is his argument?

BTW, he didn't ask me to list said institutions.

---

I don't know because I am not him.

I don't understand. "BTW, he didn't ask me to list said institutions" and why you bolded.

In my response I "quoted" the response and I identified it as a general statement. You can choose to respond to the general statement or not. It doesn't have to be specifically addressed to you.

What was your thinking to add that?

Also to be clear. I am not suggesting that a lack of response is in anyway a supporting a position. I am saying it could possibly be support for a position.

---

You said if I listed 5 racist institution it could possibly weaken his argument. Now, if you don't know, or think you know, what his argument is, why do you think it would weaken his argument rather than strengthen it?

I added that he didn't ask me to list five institutions because you asked if my "perception of Flaming Moderates beliefs matter regarding in providing a list as requested."

---

I don' t know his argument.

Currently, I am under the perception that he is attempting to require specificity of racist institution and believes that others do poor jobs of supporting evidence. I based this off his earlier posting in this thread.

"I do not think anyone disagrees with you, but these conversations always break down when the required specificity is probed or solutions proposed. They usually morph into something that has nothing to do with race."

"There is a pattern in all of these vague accusations that make sweeping claims but do poor jobs of really supporting in the details."

Why do I think it would weaken his argument rather than strengthen it?

If you or other posters provided a list of said institution it would weaken his "poor jobs of really supporting in the details." If you do not provide a list is would support there has been a "poor jobs of really supporting in the details" argument.

Now your turn. How did you come to the conclusion based on postings in this thread that "he doesn't think they exist"?

---

Common rhetorical device. Based on his others posts on this thread, I do not think he is interested in taking those five institutions and discussing the details of how they are racist!

There is, however, almost always a very weak link between the problems and solutions offered. Interestingly enough, the solution for racism and the solution for global warming are the same: higher taxes!

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Flaming Moderate said:

---

List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?

---

He asked a legitimate question:
"Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

---

Yes the question is legitimate depending on the audience but you don't think that Flaming Moderates response to Booray at 8:14am 6/10 answered this clearly enough.

Furthermore Booray's response of "Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

was a direct example of what Flaming Moderates said is a patter in that post at 8:14. "There is a pattern in all of these vague accusations that make sweeping claims but do poor jobs of really supporting in the details. Any question is met with the indignant, "so you don't believe there is racism?" "Are you denying racism exists?""

---

In response to, "penniless immigrants do fine!" It is a good question, and the answer is not, contrary to what a lot of people want us think, readily apparent.

Similarly, the call to list five racist institutions makes me think he doesn't think they exist.

---

In regarding "penniless immigrant do fine!" it may be a good question but the question was a part of a entire response to "Flaming Moderate said: What are other, real, tangible things occurring today that have "very real impact of racism on the black community?""

and didn't relate in that point of time to "penniless immigrants" because that question had not been posted.

Flaming Moderates
"List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?"

Was a general statement not a response.

Does your perception of Flaming Moderates beliefs matter regarding in providing a list as requested?

You can choose to list institutions that you believe are racist or not. If you can, you possibly weaken Flaming Moderates argument if you cannot you possibly strength Flaming Moderates argument.

Why not ask direct follow up questions to see if your "he doesn't think they exist" is true?

---

What is his argument?

BTW, he didn't ask me to list said institutions.

---

I don't know because I am not him.

I don't understand. "BTW, he didn't ask me to list said institutions" and why you bolded.

In my response I "quoted" the response and I identified it as a general statement. You can choose to respond to the general statement or not. It doesn't have to be specifically addressed to you.

What was your thinking to add that?

Also to be clear. I am not suggesting that a lack of response is in anyway a supporting a position. I am saying it could possibly be support for a position.

---

You said if I listed 5 racist institution it could possibly weaken his argument. Now, if you don't know, or think you know, what his argument is, why do you think it would weaken his argument rather than strengthen it?

I added that he didn't ask me to list five institutions because you asked if my "perception of Flaming Moderates beliefs matter regarding in providing a list as requested."

---

I don' t know his argument.

Currently, I am under the perception that he is attempting to require specificity of racist institution and believes that others do poor jobs of supporting evidence. I based this off his earlier posting in this thread.

"I do not think anyone disagrees with you, but these conversations always break down when the required specificity is probed or solutions proposed. They usually morph into something that has nothing to do with race."

"There is a pattern in all of these vague accusations that make sweeping claims but do poor jobs of really supporting in the details."

Why do I think it would weaken his argument rather than strengthen it?

If you or other posters provided a list of said institution it would weaken his "poor jobs of really supporting in the details." If you do not provide a list is would support there has been a "poor jobs of really supporting in the details" argument.

Now your turn. How did you come to the conclusion based on postings in this thread that "he doesn't think they exist"?

---

Common rhetorical device. Based on his others posts on this thread, I do not think he is interested in taking those five institutions and discussing the details of how they are racist!

There is, however, almost always a very weak link between the problems and solutions offered. Interestingly enough, the solution for racism and the solution for global warming are the same: higher taxes!

---

when meta-narratives are offered in the face of a real problem (like police brutality resulting in death of a man in custody), one can be certain that the real problem is being hi-jacked by ideologues.

There are so many levels of needed reforms - training on de-escalation, training on the inherent life-threatening nature of choke holds & laying handcuffed people face down, cross training in EMT techniques, redeployment of forces to include quicker access to EMT resources, restructuring union contracts to make it easier to weed out bad cops....and all that's before we get to the issue of over-policing, changing criminal code to make it a helluva lot shorter. One need not accept the meta-narrative to find a ton of common ground for improvement. I served on one grand jury and simply could not wrap my mind around the amount of resources we were devoting to policing minor marijuana crimes. If we accept all of the arguments for retaining criminalization of that substance, it's still not worth the social cost we pay to police it.

But, ideologues need to demonstrate they can apply their dogma in order to feel good about themselves, so here we are.....

whiterock said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Flaming Moderate said:

---

List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?

---

He asked a legitimate question:
"Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

---

Yes the question is legitimate depending on the audience but you don't think that Flaming Moderates response to Booray at 8:14am 6/10 answered this clearly enough.

Furthermore Booray's response of "Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

was a direct example of what Flaming Moderates said is a patter in that post at 8:14. "There is a pattern in all of these vague accusations that make sweeping claims but do poor jobs of really supporting in the details. Any question is met with the indignant, "so you don't believe there is racism?" "Are you denying racism exists?""

---

In response to, "penniless immigrants do fine!" It is a good question, and the answer is not, contrary to what a lot of people want us think, readily apparent.

Similarly, the call to list five racist institutions makes me think he doesn't think they exist.

---

In regarding "penniless immigrant do fine!" it may be a good question but the question was a part of a entire response to "Flaming Moderate said: What are other, real, tangible things occurring today that have "very real impact of racism on the black community?""

and didn't relate in that point of time to "penniless immigrants" because that question had not been posted.

Flaming Moderates
"List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?"

Was a general statement not a response.

Does your perception of Flaming Moderates beliefs matter regarding in providing a list as requested?

You can choose to list institutions that you believe are racist or not. If you can, you possibly weaken Flaming Moderates argument if you cannot you possibly strength Flaming Moderates argument.

Why not ask direct follow up questions to see if your "he doesn't think they exist" is true?

---

What is his argument?

BTW, he didn't ask me to list said institutions.

---

I don't know because I am not him.

I don't understand. "BTW, he didn't ask me to list said institutions" and why you bolded.

In my response I "quoted" the response and I identified it as a general statement. You can choose to respond to the general statement or not. It doesn't have to be specifically addressed to you.

What was your thinking to add that?

Also to be clear. I am not suggesting that a lack of response is in anyway a supporting a position. I am saying it could possibly be support for a position.

---

You said if I listed 5 racist institution it could possibly weaken his argument. Now, if you don't know, or think you know, what his argument is, why do you think it would weaken his argument rather than strengthen it?

I added that he didn't ask me to list five institutions because you asked if my "perception of Flaming Moderates beliefs matter regarding in providing a list as requested."

---

I don' t know his argument.

Currently, I am under the perception that he is attempting to require specificity of racist institution and believes that others do poor jobs of supporting evidence. I based this off his earlier posting in this thread.

"I do not think anyone disagrees with you, but these conversations always break down when the required specificity is probed or solutions proposed. They usually morph into something that has nothing to do with race."

"There is a pattern in all of these vague accusations that make sweeping claims but do poor jobs of really supporting in the details."

Why do I think it would weaken his argument rather than strengthen it?

If you or other posters provided a list of said institution it would weaken his "poor jobs of really supporting in the details." If you do not provide a list is would support there has been a "poor jobs of really supporting in the details" argument.

Now your turn. How did you come to the conclusion based on postings in this thread that "he doesn't think they exist"?

---

Common rhetorical device. Based on his others posts on this thread, I do not think he is interested in taking those five institutions and discussing the details of how they are racist!

There is, however, almost always a very weak link between the problems and solutions offered. Interestingly enough, the solution for racism and the solution for global warming are the same: higher taxes!

---

when meta-narratives are offered in the face of a real problem (like police brutality resulting in death of a man in custody), one can be certain that the real problem is being hi-jacked by ideologues.

There are so many levels of needed reforms - training on de-escalation, training on the inherent life-threatening nature of choke holds & laying handcuffed people face down, cross training in EMT techniques, redeployment of forces to include quicker access to EMT resources, restructuring union contracts to make it easier to weed out bad cops....and all that's before we get to the issue of over-policing, changing criminal code to make it a helluva lot shorter. One need not accept the meta-narrative to find a ton of common ground for improvement. I served on one grand jury and simply could not wrap my mind around the amount of resources we were devoting to policing minor marijuana crimes. If we accept all of the arguments for retaining criminalization of that substance, it's still not worth the social cost we pay to police it.

But, ideologues need to demonstrate they can apply their dogma in order to feel good about themselves, so here we are.....

---

Nailed it.

Never interfere with an enemy while he's in the process of destroying himself.

The radical left is a gift to Trump and an extreme motivator for centrists to vote for him to escape their insanity.

Jack Bauer said:

---

---

Yet they wouldn't allowed to sit at the table with the Gone With the Wind cast and people. She had to sit at a small isolated table far off to the side of the room, until her name was called. She almost wasn't allowed to attend at all. David O. Selznick had to call in favors for her to even be allowed to attend the ceremony, which was held at Coconut Grove Club in the Ambassador Hotel.The hotel was a white's only hotel until 1959, 19 year after she won the award.

whiterock said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Bruce Leroy said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Flaming Moderate said:

---

List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?

---

He asked a legitimate question:
"Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

---

Yes the question is legitimate depending on the audience but you don't think that Flaming Moderates response to Booray at 8:14am 6/10 answered this clearly enough.

Furthermore Booray's response of "Do you really think that 300+ years of oppression has not had a "very real impact" on the black people living today?"

was a direct example of what Flaming Moderates said is a patter in that post at 8:14. "There is a pattern in all of these vague accusations that make sweeping claims but do poor jobs of really supporting in the details. Any question is met with the indignant, "so you don't believe there is racism?" "Are you denying racism exists?""

---

In response to, "penniless immigrants do fine!" It is a good question, and the answer is not, contrary to what a lot of people want us think, readily apparent.

Similarly, the call to list five racist institutions makes me think he doesn't think they exist.

---

In regarding "penniless immigrant do fine!" it may be a good question but the question was a part of a entire response to "Flaming Moderate said: What are other, real, tangible things occurring today that have "very real impact of racism on the black community?""

and didn't relate in that point of time to "penniless immigrants" because that question had not been posted.

Flaming Moderates
"List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?"

Was a general statement not a response.

Does your perception of Flaming Moderates beliefs matter regarding in providing a list as requested?

You can choose to list institutions that you believe are racist or not. If you can, you possibly weaken Flaming Moderates argument if you cannot you possibly strength Flaming Moderates argument.

Why not ask direct follow up questions to see if your "he doesn't think they exist" is true?

---

What is his argument?

BTW, he didn't ask me to list said institutions.

---

I don't know because I am not him.

I don't understand. "BTW, he didn't ask me to list said institutions" and why you bolded.

In my response I "quoted" the response and I identified it as a general statement. You can choose to respond to the general statement or not. It doesn't have to be specifically addressed to you.

What was your thinking to add that?

Also to be clear. I am not suggesting that a lack of response is in anyway a supporting a position. I am saying it could possibly be support for a position.

---

You said if I listed 5 racist institution it could possibly weaken his argument. Now, if you don't know, or think you know, what his argument is, why do you think it would weaken his argument rather than strengthen it?

I added that he didn't ask me to list five institutions because you asked if my "perception of Flaming Moderates beliefs matter regarding in providing a list as requested."

---

I don' t know his argument.

Currently, I am under the perception that he is attempting to require specificity of racist institution and believes that others do poor jobs of supporting evidence. I based this off his earlier posting in this thread.

"I do not think anyone disagrees with you, but these conversations always break down when the required specificity is probed or solutions proposed. They usually morph into something that has nothing to do with race."

"There is a pattern in all of these vague accusations that make sweeping claims but do poor jobs of really supporting in the details."

Why do I think it would weaken his argument rather than strengthen it?

If you or other posters provided a list of said institution it would weaken his "poor jobs of really supporting in the details." If you do not provide a list is would support there has been a "poor jobs of really supporting in the details" argument.

Now your turn. How did you come to the conclusion based on postings in this thread that "he doesn't think they exist"?

---

Common rhetorical device. Based on his others posts on this thread, I do not think he is interested in taking those five institutions and discussing the details of how they are racist!

There is, however, almost always a very weak link between the problems and solutions offered. Interestingly enough, the solution for racism and the solution for global warming are the same: higher taxes!

---

when meta-narratives are offered in the face of a real problem (like police brutality resulting in death of a man in custody), one can be certain that the real problem is being hi-jacked by ideologues.

There are so many levels of needed reforms - training on de-escalation, training on the inherent life-threatening nature of choke holds & laying handcuffed people face down, cross training in EMT techniques, redeployment of forces to include quicker access to EMT resources, restructuring union contracts to make it easier to weed out bad cops....and all that's before we get to the issue of over-policing, changing criminal code to make it a helluva lot shorter. One need not accept the meta-narrative to find a ton of common ground for improvement. I served on one grand jury and simply could not wrap my mind around the amount of resources we were devoting to policing minor marijuana crimes. If we accept all of the arguments for retaining criminalization of that substance, it's still not worth the social cost we pay to police it.

But, ideologues need to demonstrate they can apply their dogma in order to feel good about themselves, so here we are.....

---

We also need to train our criminals better.

Naw man, we are gonna go ruin teenagers' lives for their Tik Tok videos instead...

Bill Clinton: "I'll tell you what it (being in the KKK) means. He was a country boy from the hills and hollers of West Virginia, he was trying to get elected. And maybe he did something he shouldn't have done, and he spent the rest of his life making it up. And that's what a good person does. There are no perfect people. There are certainly no perfect politicians."

Matt James, a former Wake Forest wide receiver, was named Friday as the next star for ABC's reality series "The Bachelor."

He'll be the first black man to star in the role in the show's history.

Jack Bauer said:

---

Matt James, a former Wake Forest wide receiver, was named Friday as the next star for ABC's reality series "The Bachelor."

He'll be the first black man to star in the role in the show's history.

---

How nice that debased TV is now integrated.

Jack Bauer said:

---

Matt James, a former Wake Forest wide receiver, was named Friday as the next star for ABC's reality series "The Bachelor."

He'll be the first black man to star in the role in the show's history.

---

whitetrash said:

---

Jack Bauer said:

---

Matt James, a former Wake Forest wide receiver, was named Friday as the next star for ABC's reality series "The Bachelor."

He'll be the first black man to star in the role in the show's history.

---

---

Flaming Moderate said:

---

List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?

---

Couple of things here. First, sorry for the delay-I have been busy with work.

Second, you are not my professor. Any fool can win a debate if he or she gets to set the terms.

Third, you are missing the point of institutional racism. For instance, the manner in which the criminal justice system attacked the crack/cocaine epidemic was racist. Black men sent to prison for long terms, white men sent to rehab centers for abusing the same substance. But I don't which institution to call "racist" there; it was the result of poor policy decisions more than intentional racism and it came from a variety of places. So it is much more complicated than "give me a list."

But if you must have a list of institutions that perpetrate white privilege:

Country clubs
Elite private elementary and secondary schools
The college Greek system
Which ever government entities that won't run payday lenders out of business
The president's intern program

Booray said:

---

Flaming Moderate said:

---

List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?

---

Couple of things here. First, sorry for the delay-I have been busy with work.

Second, you are not my professor. Any fool can win a debate if he or she gets to set the terms.

Third, you are missing the point of institutional racism. For instance, the manner in which the criminal justice system attacked the crack/cocaine epidemic was racist. Black men sent to prison for long terms, white men sent to rehab centers for abusing the same substance. But I don't which institution to call "racist" there; it was the result of poor policy decisions more than intentional racism and it came from a variety of places. So it is much more complicated than "give me a list."

But if you must have a list of institutions that perpetrate white privilege:

Country clubs
Elite private elementary and secondary schools
The college Greek system
Which ever government entities that won't run payday lenders out of business
The president's intern program

---

what about the institution that presumes that some, by virtue of the color of their skin, can understand everything, while others, by virtue of the color of their skin, can understand nothing?

Isn't such thinking structurally racist?

whiterock said:

---

Booray said:

---

Flaming Moderate said:

---

List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?

---

Couple of things here. First, sorry for the delay-I have been busy with work.

Second, you are not my professor. Any fool can win a debate if he or she gets to set the terms.

Third, you are missing the point of institutional racism. For instance, the manner in which the criminal justice system attacked the crack/cocaine epidemic was racist. Black men sent to prison for long terms, white men sent to rehab centers for abusing the same substance. But I don't which institution to call "racist" there; it was the result of poor policy decisions more than intentional racism and it came from a variety of places. So it is much more complicated than "give me a list."

But if you must have a list of institutions that perpetrate white privilege:

Country clubs
Elite private elementary and secondary schools
The college Greek system
Which ever government entities that won't run payday lenders out of business
The president's intern program

---

what about the institution that presumes that some, by virtue of the color of their skin, can understand everything, while others, by virtue of the color of their skin, can understand nothing?

Isn't such thinking structurally racist?

---

I don't know if you need the word "structurally" in that question.
Which particular institution are you thinking of?

whiterock said:

---

Booray said:

---

Flaming Moderate said:

---

List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?

---

Couple of things here. First, sorry for the delay-I have been busy with work.

Second, you are not my professor. Any fool can win a debate if he or she gets to set the terms.

Third, you are missing the point of institutional racism. For instance, the manner in which the criminal justice system attacked the crack/cocaine epidemic was racist. Black men sent to prison for long terms, white men sent to rehab centers for abusing the same substance. But I don't which institution to call "racist" there; it was the result of poor policy decisions more than intentional racism and it came from a variety of places. So it is much more complicated than "give me a list."

But if you must have a list of institutions that perpetrate white privilege:

Country clubs
Elite private elementary and secondary schools
The college Greek system
Which ever government entities that won't run payday lenders out of business
The president's intern program

---

what about the institution that presumes that some, by virtue of the color of their skin, can understand everything, while others, by virtue of the color of their skin, can understand nothing?

Isn't such thinking structurally racist?

---

Yes

I wish...if we can ban Cops and Gone with the Wind, we can bury this word in all its forms for good.

Black.woman under fire for telling kids not to loot and riot but instead to earn an education.

In 2020, this is now a controversial message above anything else. Good luck staying employed, Terry.

When is FDR getting cancelled?

I would think internment camps for American citizens is far greater sin than Eskimo Pie.

And why is Robert Byrd's statue standing undisturbed in the US Capital?

Booray said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Booray said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Booray said:

---

Lets not pretend that racism doesn't exist:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/naval-academy-alumni-board-member-163638287.html

I was in a store last Friday afternoon. Guy I don't know is in line with me and asked if I had "seen what they did in Washington D.C.?" Told him that a lot of things had happened in D.C. lately, which one was he talking about? "Painting the street; that is vandalism, how are they not arrested?" When I told him that it was unlikely that a city paint crew acting on the mayor's orders would get arrested, i thought he was going to have a heart attack.

After regaining his composure he looks at me and says-loud enough for others to hear: "When white people get hurt they don't act like this. They don't act like a bunch of jungle bunnies." Last sentence was verbatim.

Told him we disagreed on the subject and maybe he needed to tone it down.

Racism is a real thing still, as much as you wish it wasn't.

---

I don't think anyone is saying racism doesn't exist. It still does, undoubtedly, and I say that as a conservative.

But the issue raised above is a good one. Too many times we have a loud and sometimes violent mob of young people that play the race card every time an authority figure does something they don't like. We have seen several of those stories posted on this board, like the college professor who is surrounded, yelled at and demeaned by a mob of students because he did something they didn't like. When he tried to respond, he was shouted down and chased out of his own classroom. It is like the professor who the mob is trying to get fired for not agreeing to give preferential treatment on final exams to black students right now.

And we are even seeing the spread of cancel culture in the media. When you have a group of young New York Times employees up in arms that their employer - supposedly one of the most reputable news organizations in the world - allowed a conservative senator to publish an op ed in its otherwise daily deluge of Trump bashings, resulting in the editor who allowed the story to run "resigning," you know there is a serious threat to free speech rights in the world today. When you have respected conservative journalists having their opeds reviewed for "sensitivity" by young editors, and being forced into "re-education" classes for daring to opine differently than the mob, you know there is a serious problem. I am sure some of these people would be fine with gulags and re-education camps for those who dare have a different train of thought.

When even stalwart liberals like Bill Mahr and Ricky Gervais are decrying the lack of respect for free speech rights, you know it's bad. As a moderate and reasonable individual, I think you would agree,

---

I definitely agree.

What I was pointing out is the right's tendency to 1) use stories like you mentioned to imply that all complaints of racism are of the snowflake variety and/or (2) argue that minorities are wrong to attach yesterday's sins to today's more open and accepting culture. African-Americans are not crazy to believe that a significant segment of whites harbor racist beliefs; and specifically that many whites believe African-Americans are intellectually inferior and lacking in character/discipline by reason of their race.

Other commentators make the point that African-Americans and people of all races hold racist beliefs, which I am sure is true. None of those beliefs, however, have the impact of the negative stereotypes propagated by some whites about blacks.

I am all for melting the snowflakes, but at the same time we need to quit minimizing the very real impact of racism on the black community.

---

Don't necessarily disagree, though I think we would probably disagree about the percentage of Americans who are racist. It's getting better (or at least was) with each passing generation, IMO. That said, given the current brand of identity politics now being propagated by the Democrat Party, it does make me wonder what the future holds for my white sons. It seems some people would like for the pendulum to swing the other direction.

---

It was getting better. Hopefully we will return to that trajectory.

Its not like I don't see the inequities of racial politics. My daughter just went through the med school application process and I was amazed at the games played to equalize the playing field. One of the saddest things about all this is that when overt racism is recognized, it gives a toehold to radical responses.

I have said this before but those who say we become a better society by working hard to eliminate systemic racism are right. And those who say we become a better society by creating a culture of personal responsibility in communities of color are right. Its not an either or thing, but we treat it like it is.

---

The phrase "personal responsibility" is racist, according to folks on the Left.

https://www.democraticunderground.net/10026817050

When white liberals want to help but don't know how, part #327.

"Kids, we're going to the movies to watch "Spiderman".

He is going to reflect on his internal misogyny, unconscious bias and white privilege and then march against transphobia. Sound like fun???"

D. C. Bear said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Booray said:

---

Flaming Moderate said:

---

List five racist institutions today (proper noun) - with evidence.

And explain how penniless immigrants make in less than one generation?

---

Couple of things here. First, sorry for the delay-I have been busy with work.

Second, you are not my professor. Any fool can win a debate if he or she gets to set the terms.

Third, you are missing the point of institutional racism. For instance, the manner in which the criminal justice system attacked the crack/cocaine epidemic was racist. Black men sent to prison for long terms, white men sent to rehab centers for abusing the same substance. But I don't which institution to call "racist" there; it was the result of poor policy decisions more than intentional racism and it came from a variety of places. So it is much more complicated than "give me a list."

But if you must have a list of institutions that perpetrate white privilege:

Country clubs
Elite private elementary and secondary schools
The college Greek system
Which ever government entities that won't run payday lenders out of business
The president's intern program

---

what about the institution that presumes that some, by virtue of the color of their skin, can understand everything, while others, by virtue of the color of their skin, can understand nothing?

Isn't such thinking structurally racist?

---

I don't know if you need the word "structurally" in that question.
Which particular institution are you thinking of?

---

Post-modernist theories on social justice.