BK>>>>>>  A black woman told me that night, "My
grandfather was born a
 BK>>>>>>  slave, my parents grew up under Jim Crow, and
I have lived to
 BK>>>>>>  see a black man elected president of the
United States."

 EH>>>>> It's all about feelings with you, eh?

 BK>>>>  Without feelings there is no purpose to life.

 EH>>> No one said any different.

 BK>>  Then your comment was meaningless.

 Meainingless comment deleted.

 BK>>>>  So, you are saying you are unfeeling?

 BK>>>>  What else was Elder's entire story about? If you don't
 BK>>>>  understand the feelings involved you must be completely
 BK>>>>  unfeeling.

 EH>>> No it isn't. It's about the hard work his father went
 EH>>> through to make his family's lives better and how his
 EH>>> father wrote a letter to his eldest son telling him not to
 EH>>> settle for failure, but to keep on working until he
 EH>>> succeeds.

 BK>>  If that were all it was about then all he needed to say was, "
 BK>>  My father went through hard work to make his family's lives
 BK>>  better and my father wrote a letter to his eldest son telling
 BK>>  him not to settle for failure, but to keep on working until he
 BK>>  succeeds."

 EH> That's basically what he said, ...

 If so, then all he had to do was write that one paragraph, moron.

 BK>>  If you actually understood what he wrote you know that was not
 BK>>  all it was about.

 EH> I read what he wrote. You didn't. Or at least you didn't
 EH> understand it.

 You are deluding yourself.

 BK>>>>>> She had tears in her eyes. She had been crying
for a long time
 BK>>>>>> after the announcement of the election being
called for Obama.

 EH>>>>> And?

 BK>>>>  If you do not understand it you are not completely human.

 EH>>> A lot of people cried that night. Some in excitement and
 EH>>> some in fear. I did neither.

 BK>>  Neither did I, but I understood those who did. Those rejoicing,
 BK>>  and the bigots who cried in fear.

 EH> It is now bigoted for someone to fear the policies of the
 EH> president-elect? Do tell.

 See, your comprehension problem rears it's head.

 EH>>> Obama isn't going to be the harbinger of change his
 EH>>> handlers have tried to make him out to be.

 BK>>  He has already been a harbinger of change.

 EH> What change?

 Uhh... the one that led Elders to write his commentary, that you
 didn't understand.

 BK>>  Just what change the future brings will be dictated by what happens in
 EH> the future.

 EH> You should put that on a t-shirt or bumper sticker.

 Too long.

 EH>>>>>>> It is a caricature of America that, pre-Obama, major
 EH>>>>>>> obstacles blocked achievement. It is
equally a caricature
 EH>>>>>>> that Obama's win suddenly creates
opportunity that did not
 EH>>>>>>> exist before.

 BK>>>>>>  It is true that Obama's win probably does not
create much
 BK>>>>>>  opportunity that did not exist before. It is
also true that
 BK>>>>>>  there are still obstacles that block achievement.

 EH>>>>> There are obstacles for everyone regardless of skin color.

 BK>>>>  Non-sequitor. Blacks face greater obstacles. That is the
 BK>>>>  important part.

 EH>>> They face different obstacles. To say their obstacles are
 EH>>> greater than those of someone else merely because of their
 EH>>> skin color is racist.

 BK>>  To deny their obstacles are greater because of the prejudice
 BK>>  against their skin color is what is racist.

 EH> Huh? Did you proof read that before posting it?

 Yes. Did you have something to actually say?

 BK>>>>>>  The median salary for a black person with a
high school diploma
 BK>>>>>>  is equal that that of a white high school
dropout. The median
 BK>>>>>>  income for a black bachelor's degree holder
equals that for a
 BK>>>>>>  white high school graduate. For a black
master's degree holder
 BK>>>>>>  the median income is equal to that of a white
bachelor's degree
 BK>>>>>>  holder. It's only at the PHD level that the
salaries equalize.

 EH>>>>> That isn't the fault of any perceived racial obstacles.

 BK>>>>  No, that is the fault of real racial obstacles, not just
 BK>>>>  perceived racial obstacles. Your ignorance of the subject is
 BK>>>>  appalling.

 EH>>> Some of the richest Americans are black. Tell me how hard
 EH>>> it was for them.

 BK>>  Some of your best friends are -     - fill in the blank.

 EH> All of my best friends are great people regardless of their
 EH> skin color.

 Doubtful. And doubtful you disregard skin color.

 BK>>  Again, because some make it you insist there is no real
 BK>>  obstacle. Ask them how it was. Some probably inherited their
 BK>>  wealth, just like so many whites. Some probably went through
 BK>>  hell few whites ever know.

 EH> I did not deny they had obstacles.

 Then your comment above was a non sequitur.

 EH> The majority of those you consider wealthy have become
 EH> wealthy on their own without inheriting anything from their
 EH> parents.

 Non sequitur.

 EH> Your insistence that those who are wealthy have become so
 EH> through inheritance

 Lie. No where did I say all those who are wealthy inherited
 their wealth.

 EH> begs the question of how did their parents become wealthy?

 No it doesn't. Then again, I doubt you have ever identified a
 cases of begging the question.

 BK>>>>>>  The unemployment rate for blacks is twice that
for whites.

 BK>>>>>>  The infant mortality rate for blacks is twice
that for whites.

 BK>>>>>>  Above from the statistical abstract of the US.

 EH>>>>> Did you look at why that might be? Did you investigate
 EH>>>>> beyond the statistics?

 BK>>>>  Yes, that is why I know more about it than you do.

 EH>>> All you know is statistics.

 BK>>  And you dismiss statistics as if a few thousand deaths don't
 BK>>  matter because you don't know them.

 EH> Say what? Now *that* is a non-sequitur.

 Now it is obvious, you not only do not know what is begging the
 question, but you don't know what a non sequitur is.

 BK>>>>>>  Aprox 23% of crimes of violence in this
country are committed by
 BK>>>>>>  blacks, according to the DOJ's report Criminal
Victimization in
 BK>>>>>>  the United States.

 EH>>>>> They are 12% of the population.

 BK>>>>  And twice that percentage of the poor. The crime rate tracks the
 BK>>>>  poverty rate quite well.

 EH>>> Crime is not a product of poverty.

 BK>>  Yes, AAMOF it is. If it wasn't the crime rate would not go up
 BK>>  with poverty, and go down as poverty goes down.

 EH> The crime rate does not go up with poverty. Poverty today
 EH> is lower than it was 10 years ago yet crime has not gone
 EH> down. Especially violent crime.

 Well, you try to cherry pick your data. Clinton inherited a
 poverty rate that had increased since 1980. It had dropped by
 2000. In 2007 the poverty rate was aprox 1 percentage point
 higher than in 2000.

 However, the poverty rate and crime rate had both declined by
 2000, so the lack of a decrease since then merely reflects the
 previous decline.

 Those numbers from the current Stat Ab, in the census website,
 except for 2007 numbers which are from the census bureau's
 website report on poverty.

 ...

BOB KLAHN bob.klahn{at}sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

... Race is an idea whose time has passed. 
 * Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a